1. Due to the increased amount of spam bots on the forum, we are strengthening our defenses. You may experience a CAPTCHA challenge from time to time.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Notification emails are working properly again. Please check your email spam folder and if you see any emails from the Cantina there, make sure to mark them as "Not Spam". This will help a lot to whitelist the emails and to stop them going to spam.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. IMPORTANT! To be able to create new threads and rate posts, you need to have at least 30 posts in The Cantina.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Before posting a new thread, check the list with similar threads that will appear when you start typing the thread's title.
    Dismiss Notice

Potential problems with the spinoffs, in general

Discussion in 'Rogue One' started by Kabe, Dec 16, 2014.

  1. Kabe

    Kabe Rebelscum

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2014
    Posts:
    82
    Likes Received:
    147
    Trophy Points:
    1,212
    Credits:
    860
    Ratings:
    +222 / 2 / -0
    First of all, I don't intend for this thread to have a negative vibe, but I couldn't think of a better thread title.

    I personally am stoked for the spinoffs! I think they will be most likely be well-made, enjoyable films in and of themselves.

    What I'm worried about is Disney's potentially overly-ambitious release schedule. Even for us hardcore fans, do you think with a new Star Wars movie every year for the next 6 or more years, we will get over-saturated, desensitized, etc.? Would you rather see things a little more spaced out? Don't we need time between theatrical releases to buy the DVDs, etc?

    I worry that the "event status" of a Star Wars release will get diluted if it happens every single year.

    The other thing I wonder about is confusion for the general movie viewer. Episode VII will come out next year, then a year later there will be another Star Wars movie in theaters. But it won't be a continuation of Ep VII, and it may even take place in a completely different era relative to the ST. It seems this would confuse the average Joe-ticket-buyer. Disney will have to engage in careful explanatory marketing and make the overall concept of spin-offs vs. main trilogy crystal clear.

    I think somehow the release and presentation of these spin offs has to be approached differently than the core trilogies. As crazy as it sounds, I wouldn't mind seeing the spin-offs premier on a premium cable network or something like that.

    I'm not complaining. It's like a dream come true to think there will be so much Star Wars after so long without. But you have to admit there are some consequences to the coming avalanche.
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Wise Wise x 3
    • Great Post Great Post x 1
  2. Rebo

    Rebo Nearsighted Whill Guardian
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2014
    Posts:
    2,500
    Likes Received:
    4,603
    Trophy Points:
    14,747
    Credits:
    6,071
    Ratings:
    +7,328 / 99 / -40
    A couple of years ago I would have agreed with you. But, they pulled it off with Marvel, which is far more confusing than 1 stand alone, 1 non. Its 4-7 standalones with crossovers occasionally and then a team up. If they can keep the nose picking public up to speed on those, SW should be doable.
     
    • Wise Wise x 5
    • Clouded Clouded x 1
  3. Duke Groundrunner

    Duke Groundrunner Rebel Official

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Posts:
    1,056
    Likes Received:
    2,577
    Trophy Points:
    8,884
    Credits:
    5,380
    Ratings:
    +3,507 / 67 / -30
    I guess you could say Marvel "pulled it off" but i expect better quality for Star Wars movies than i do Marvel movies. Also, for the spin off movies i don't want them to make some all connected thin narrative tie in for the spin offs. At that point it just feels like you're watching a commercial for another movie that won't come out for years "Ironman 2" .
    As for over-saturated i don't think it will effect the average moviegoing audience but it will start effect the fans, i'm already burnt out on Marvel, If the Star Wars movies are really good it will take longer but it will eventually catch up to me.
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Wise Wise x 2
  4. John Crichton

    John Crichton Rebel Official

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2014
    Posts:
    1,376
    Likes Received:
    1,834
    Trophy Points:
    6,587
    Credits:
    3,002
    Ratings:
    +2,597 / 18 / -12
    I'll mirror Max Rebo's comment about Disney not really having that issue with the Marvel universe, but with this added: Star Wars has always been special in that non-fans seem to always have a difficult time understanding even just the OT-PT release schedule. I can't tell you how many times I've had to say something like "We'll watch the first ones... well, not the first ones, but the first ones made" or "These movies come before the others, but the others came first." It boggles everyone's mind it seems.

    All this time that I've heard of spin-offs, and I haven't seen any word or thing that would make me think it had to inherently be released in a theater. I kind of figured Disney would do them as a TV movie they premier on XD or another Disney-owned channel and then eventually release to DVD/Blu-ray.

    Though that said, it would make me worry about the quality of the films. Not being made for the theater could make them sub-par for the series (think all the Ewok movies). Perhaps over-saturation in the theater isn't necessarily a bad thing, though it does seem incredibly ambitious.


    Not sure about that. It might burn out the general movie-goer pretty quickly. The thing with Marvel is that they have a bunch of different story-lines with different characters to portray. I mean, I could go to see The Guardians of the Galaxy and not feel like I was watching The Avengers or any of the constituent character films (Iron Man, Thor, etc.), and even the bulk of those character films are essentially independent of the others (from a certain point of view).

    Star Wars has a hurdle in that the spin-offs will inherently be much more connected to the main series if not simply due to the fact that the bulk of Star Wars films are all in that one story arc. It'd be more difficult to get something "fresh" in the way Marvel can, at least to the point of view of the Average Joe.

    I agree with you on the fans part though. Even if that rumor of "a movie every year until 2030" proved true, it might take me a loooong time to get burnt on it if I find them all enjoyable. I mean, it's Star Wars. :p
     
    #4 John Crichton, Dec 17, 2014
    Last edited: Dec 17, 2014
    • Wise Wise x 3
    • Like Like x 2
  5. Rebo

    Rebo Nearsighted Whill Guardian
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2014
    Posts:
    2,500
    Likes Received:
    4,603
    Trophy Points:
    14,747
    Credits:
    6,071
    Ratings:
    +7,328 / 99 / -40
    I was more referring to their marketing and ability to keep audiences apprised on the continuity and plots of each movie even when they are releasing upwards of 3 per year.
    However, I agree that quality has been inconsistent, but disagree that a overarching plot is a bad idea.

    Every franchise is going to have mis-steps. IM2, Thor 2 were bland forgettable movies this is true. But this is unavoidable. No matter how much talent they bring in, some movies will not measure up. Its the risks of an artistic medium. Sometimes they will miss the mark. I always look at Alien: Resurrection for this point. Jeunet and Whedon, two extreme talents, combined for one awful movie. Whatever the reason (conflicting vision, studio tampering, etc..) it happened. So, it will happen with SW as well (just as it did with Marvel, Nolan's Batman, Bond, and any other number of franchises that run for long times)

    So, while I may never feel the need to see Moonraker again as a misstep in the Bond legacy, I do throw on IM2 every once an a while. The only reason? The Avengers sub-plot (and also that awesome Sherman Brothers song at the end but that is besides the point). That through line makes even the mediocre movies essential viewing if you want to take in the whole. I feel that SW would be wise to follow that model so that they are better equipped to survive a the inevitable misfires that will occur. It works well to keep viewers invested through the dark times. Otherwise they may tune out. And when they tune out, sometimes they don't come back.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Wise Wise x 1
  6. Kabe

    Kabe Rebelscum

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2014
    Posts:
    82
    Likes Received:
    147
    Trophy Points:
    1,212
    Credits:
    860
    Ratings:
    +222 / 2 / -0
    For what it's worth, here's a bit from Wikipedia about the spinoffs:

    Kathleen Kennedy explained that the stand-alone films will not crossover with the films of the sequel trilogy, stating, "George was so clear as to how that works. The canon that he created was the Star Wars saga. Right now, Episode VII falls within that canon. The spin-off movies, or we may come up with some other way to call those films, they exist within that vast universe that he created. There is no attempt being made to carry characters (from the stand-alone films) in and out of the saga episodes. Consequently, from the creative standpoint, it's a roadmap that George made pretty clear."[86]

    and:

    Disney CFO Jay Rasulo has described the stand-alone films as origin stories.[85]

    So it sounds like they really won't be intertwined crossovers as the Marvel films are. Obviously they will deal with characters and worlds which appear in the main trilogies, but based on the small bits of official information we've heard, I think they will be independent stories that basically stand on their own.
    That said, something like a Han Solo origin story still seems like a hard sell to a general audience not steeped in Star Wars lore; so this addresses none of the problems that I mentioned above.
     
    • Informative Informative x 3
  7. John Crichton

    John Crichton Rebel Official

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2014
    Posts:
    1,376
    Likes Received:
    1,834
    Trophy Points:
    6,587
    Credits:
    3,002
    Ratings:
    +2,597 / 18 / -12
    I remember a discussion somewhere on here in which the question posed was "Do any of the Big Three die in VII?" It got around to the rumor that Han is the one who bites it, and I brought up speculation that the rumored release time of the Solo film could point to when they could potentially kill off Han.

    That rumor still seems to persist, and honestly I could somewhat see them using his death in one of the films (I think we determined it might be in VIII) as a vehicle to fuel interest from both existing fans and newcomers alike at a story revolving around him. Aside from that, I'd figure they'd be banking on fans like us to drum up mainstream support for any spin-off. Could work, might not.

    I'd also have the imagine they might try to style it as more adventurous and somewhat lacking most of the seriousness of the main series. The mood they go for as well as what actor they settle on will play a large part in any general interest in the film.
     
  8. DEKKA129

    DEKKA129 Professional Slinger of Balderdash

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2014
    Posts:
    768
    Likes Received:
    1,577
    Trophy Points:
    8,249
    Credits:
    2,685
    Ratings:
    +2,454 / 24 / -4
    Is it just me, or does this appear to be saying two completely different and potentially conflicting things?

    Seems to me that either the spin-off films will not carry characters in and out of the saga episodes, OR they can be origin stories. Both at the same time? Not so much.

    Personally, I hope they avoid origin stories altogether. I thought that those were some of the weakest aspects of the PT (did we really need to see Boba Fett and Darth Vader as mop headed little tykes?) and I just cringe at the thought of an entire movie revolving around a Muppet Baby version of Han Solo. Even if they avoid showing him as a kid, I just think that there are far too many opportunities to screw up Han's character and far too little potential for a compelling story for it to be worth the gamble.

    If they were to simply take the world that George Lucas created and create new stories and new characters that exist parallel to the events of the core saga rather than as a direct tie-in, I think there's a lot more potential there for something engaging and memorable. As much as I think that the Rebels cartoon is as dull as day old dishwater, I like the general idea of creating new characters and setting them loose in the GFFA.

    What about the GFFA version of an old-school private eye? I always thought they should have incorporated somebody like that as the more worldly "Han" character in the PT, but since they didn't then why not go for it with a stand-alone film?

    IMHO, they have a great opportunity here to do more than just the usual cross-pollination thing like they've done with the Marvel films. Stand-alone films that truly stand alone can easily take off into series of their own if they happen to hit on something that resonates with the audience. I'm all for continuity between the core saga trilogies. It makes a great deal of sense to include older versions of characters from the previous trilogy in the new trilogy to pass the torch. But I don't think that the stand-alone films necessarily need to all be just stories that are ancillary to the core saga. Why not try to pave out new hyperspace lanes rather than just using the same one over and over again?

    (As always, your mileage may vary...)
     
    • Like Like x 3
  9. Echo-07

    Echo-07 Rebel Official

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2014
    Posts:
    1,250
    Likes Received:
    1,891
    Trophy Points:
    6,164
    Credits:
    3,515
    Ratings:
    +2,730 / 17 / -9
    Three words:

    Marvel Cinematic Universe
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Great Post Great Post x 1
  10. DEKKA129

    DEKKA129 Professional Slinger of Balderdash

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2014
    Posts:
    768
    Likes Received:
    1,577
    Trophy Points:
    8,249
    Credits:
    2,685
    Ratings:
    +2,454 / 24 / -4
    The thing about the Marvel Cinematic Universe is, they're springboarding off of an existing canon in which everything revolves around The Avengers. Guardians of the Galaxy stepped outside of that box, but my understanding is that they're still talking about eventually tying that storyline in with The Avengers. (And BTW, I think this approach has worked very well for the MCU.)

    If LFL is actually looking to make the Star Wars spin-off films true stand-alone films, though, then it's my hope that they take a slightly different approach and don't feel the need to tie everything in with the core saga storyline. It would allow for a lot more freedom to tell new stories, and would balance out the rather hamfisted "what a small universe!" approach that Lucas took with the PT, where Anakin/Vader built Threepio, Boba Fett's father was Grandpappy Stormtrooper, Yoda and Chewie were old war buddies, and so on.

    IMHO, it would be fun to see storylines develop with characters who never end up crossing paths with the core saga characters, but whose lives are affected by the same galactic events. It would create a lot more breathing room for the franchise, and could end up making Star Wars that much richer an overall experience.
     
    #10 DEKKA129, Dec 19, 2014
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2014
    • Like Like x 3
    • Wise Wise x 2
  11. Pastor Barndog

    Pastor Barndog Force Attuned

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2014
    Posts:
    4,391
    Likes Received:
    5,585
    Trophy Points:
    16,317
    Credits:
    6,685
    Ratings:
    +9,458 / 246 / -104
    I don't disagree I would love to see new characters and other aspects of the galaxy. But I love how they tied the Fetts in and I don't really see the problem with Yoda meeting Chewie. Even if I wanted a different treatment of the Fett man. Isn't he one of the characters that is and always has been red meat for a spin off. Good Lord the adventures of Han Solo would be epic.
     
    • Great Post Great Post x 1
  12. DEKKA129

    DEKKA129 Professional Slinger of Balderdash

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2014
    Posts:
    768
    Likes Received:
    1,577
    Trophy Points:
    8,249
    Credits:
    2,685
    Ratings:
    +2,454 / 24 / -4
    If I NEVER see another "Muppet Babies" version of a classic Star Wars character, it will be too soon.

    I certainly never needed to see Darth Vader or Boba Fett recast as precocious young children, and the fact that we came so close to seeing Han Solo as a little kid raised by Wookiees in ROTS still sets my skin on edge to this day.

    Please, no more origin stories for classic SW characters! There is SO much to be done in that world, so many new worlds to explore, new people to meet and new adventures to go on. Why get hung up in all these origin movies for established characters? It'd just end up looking like a cheap cash grab.

    A bounty hunter adventure? Why not? It wouldn't be anything earth-shattering, but it could be fun if it's done right. But Han Solo as a kid? Oy... At that point I'd start getting a wee bit concerned that the next spin-off flick would be Star Wars: That Time When Yoda and Chewbacca Went to the Pod Races On Malastare With Zany, Madcap Results.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  13. Shawshank

    Shawshank Rebel General

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2014
    Posts:
    599
    Likes Received:
    653
    Trophy Points:
    4,137
    Credits:
    1,156
    Ratings:
    +1,289 / 48 / -65
    I'll say it again: it's going to be very difficult to market "Star Wars: A Brand New Made Up Character Nobody Knows" as opposed to "Star Wars: Han Solo" etc.
     
    • Wise Wise x 1
  14. alex

    alex Rebel Official

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2014
    Posts:
    1,378
    Likes Received:
    1,922
    Trophy Points:
    8,097
    Credits:
    3,170
    Ratings:
    +2,985 / 56 / -29
    I think the rabid fans would eat up anything star wars, even if it is wholly original.
     
    • Wise Wise x 1
  15. Shawshank

    Shawshank Rebel General

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2014
    Posts:
    599
    Likes Received:
    653
    Trophy Points:
    4,137
    Credits:
    1,156
    Ratings:
    +1,289 / 48 / -65
    And what percentage of the movie market do you think that probably is?
     
    #15 Shawshank, Dec 30, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 31, 2014
  16. ZebroGodilla

    ZebroGodilla Darklighter Ace

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2014
    Posts:
    865
    Likes Received:
    2,899
    Trophy Points:
    10,802
    Credits:
    5,418
    Ratings:
    +3,383 / 15 / -3
    Personally, I think the spinoffs will be remembered well. If the rumors are true about a bounty hunter team-up+Death Star heist, a Han Solo origins, a Red Squadron film, some Obi-Wan exile year movies, they will add to the canon really well, as most also will add back-story to the OT, which in truth, has very little now, much like the other eras of Star Wars. I don't see these movies making billions, but even if they don't, if they are surprising and well-done like Inception, I see them being in effect much like The Clone Wars or any other Star Wars media.
     
  17. Pastor Barndog

    Pastor Barndog Force Attuned

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2014
    Posts:
    4,391
    Likes Received:
    5,585
    Trophy Points:
    16,317
    Credits:
    6,685
    Ratings:
    +9,458 / 246 / -104
    Other than a few nods here and there to "a much larger world." The MCU is relatively unconnected meaning they share space and some back ground characters or even the occasional McGuffin. If they do Spin-offs they would be relatively unconnected stories that share a galaxy and some characters.

    I mean what degree of separation from the trilogies is enough. Is an astromech going to be R2 fan service? Or if in a bounty hunter movie one or more of the many many bounty hunters from both trilogies are seen is that too connected?
     
  18. SMN

    SMN Rebel Trooper

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2014
    Posts:
    49
    Likes Received:
    43
    Trophy Points:
    132
    Credits:
    663
    Ratings:
    +66 / 2 / -0
    I'm sure I read somewhere that George Lucas planned 12 films, 3 trilogies plus 3 stand alone stories. There's a high chance then that atleast the first three 'stand alone' films are these, especially when you can consider the speed with which the first one has moved, like VII there's a good chance the story already existed in some form. If we're lucky then [cross fingers] they won't be 'random hey lets have a Solo/Yoda/Obiwan story' but something that sheds light onto the main Saga narrative.
     
  19. DEKKA129

    DEKKA129 Professional Slinger of Balderdash

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2014
    Posts:
    768
    Likes Received:
    1,577
    Trophy Points:
    8,249
    Credits:
    2,685
    Ratings:
    +2,454 / 24 / -4
    I will agree that a lightly trained monkey could market a movie that is a rehash of a popular Star Wars character.

    But the notion that the public will only go to see something familiar is ridiculous. Especially for something like Star Wars. Run a trailer showing spaceships, lightsabers, aliens and explosions and slug "STAR WARS!!" at the end of it and you've got people's attention right there.

    Are you seriously telling me that if Disney made, say, a "Knights of the Old Republic" movie, their marketing teams would be pulling their hair out trying to figure out how to sell the public on the thing? ;)
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Wise Wise x 1
  20. Shawshank

    Shawshank Rebel General

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2014
    Posts:
    599
    Likes Received:
    653
    Trophy Points:
    4,137
    Credits:
    1,156
    Ratings:
    +1,289 / 48 / -65
    No no no I think something like that would definitely work, but I think it's going to be more difficult to get the masses to come to a movie about some character the creative team cooked up that has no relation to the other movies and once it's over, that character is basically over.
     
    • Like Like x 1
Loading...

Share This Page