Rian Johnson to create a new Star Wars trilogy!

Obviously they are showing a lot of confidence here in Rian Johnson and TLJ. In TLJ, Rian is exploring the books... the force tree... the Whills... the first Jedi temple...

My hunch is they REALLY liked his take on all of that and we are about to take a trip way back in time in the GFFA.

 

To answer your question, there are plenty of benefits to ending the Skywalker line. For starters, it enables LF in this new era to continue forward without the weight of the prior legacy holding them back. This isn't me pushing them away. Respect the past, but if you respect it too much, you won't go forward.

And really to answer your point, look at Star Trek. Imagine, if we had gotten more series based on Kirk and the rest of the Enterprise, as opposed to TNG, DS9 etc. It would have grown stale. In other words, an endless loop. Now, for granted; Trek has more complexity and nuance in themes as opposed to Star Wars.

But really my point still stands when one looks at Legends. Much as I support Legends, the material very much during the post ROTJ era leaned a lot on Luke and company. And while I liked some of those stories, I found there was a great degree of staleness. Particularly, post Yuuzan Vong war. It is why I enjoyed Star Wars Legacy so much as Cade Skywalker was a foil examining the dynasty of the Skywalkers and being a commentary on it.

My point is that Star Wars under LF should move past all of that. Keep the core aspects of the adventure scifi elements, but do not rely on the idea of the Skywalkers. KOTOR understood this very well, along with TOR. It took advantage of George Lucas' unique world and crafted a story around it.

LF and RJ should do the same and take inspiration. Because, if Star Wars continues to dig at the idea of the Skywalkers, of Stormtroopers, Rebels etc. it is going to grow stale. Better to future-proof the franchise by expanding it and making into something else.

 

They can continue forward without a skywalker in the story without killing them all off. Killing them all off only limits their future possibilities.

Star Trek isn't a generational story like Star Wars is.

Simply having a Skywalker doesn't grant quality, but a lack of skywalkers don't grant quality or originality either.

I don't think anyone is saying a trilogy without Skywalkers or "Anthology films" are a bad idea, but there is no benefit in ending Episode IX in such a way there is no way for them to return to the core saga and continue the Skywalker story in the future if/when they want too. Why close off possibilities when they don't have too?

 

Star Wars in movie form is a generational, but it doesn't have to be. And really, it cannot continue that way in the same method we are seeing. Because, it will grow stale, especially if LF is continuing to push more movies a year. Because, really your argument in all of this is assuming that creating a new trilogy outside the Skywalker lineage is LF cutting themselves short of story potential.

When in truth, it isn't black and white. Both can exist. The press release stated that RJ new trilogy needed to happen in a different galaxy. For all we know, this story could be going on during the OT or even the ST.

If the main trilogy, that follows the ST, wants to follow the Skywalker saga and continue it, fine. But LF cannot afford to continue to play within the OT or even the PT sandbox when it comes to creating storylines. It will grow stale. LF will need to diversify its brand at some point. This new trilogy is a good start going forward.

And to your point on originality not equaling quality: that's incredibly obvious. And really, given RJ is involved in creating this trilogy, it seems like LF trusts him a lot given TLJ. We won't know until it comes out, but for LF to make this announcement this soon means they are very confident going forward.

 

thats not my argument at all - you've completely missed it.

As for Johnson - they do seem to like/trust him, btu it also seems like Kennedy is only capable of working with him or abrams.

 

Really. Please do tell what your argument is. Because, I want to hear it from the horse's mouth before I make my judgement.


As for your point, that is something we can agree on. KK seems to have had a lot of trouble working with other directors which I argue is a bad trait. She clearly wants SWs to be like Marvel and hence going out there and picking indie names for the sake of it. Rather, than questioning if they are right for the job.

Feige gets this as he picks appropriate directors for his projects in that their style fits a particular genre. Case in point, Lord and Miller who I love but apparently the two weren't clear as to what the project was. So really, I'm not defending KK at all in this instance. Because, she royally screwed up in that department.

And will have problems in the long run, if she is constraining the brand, movie wise, to a few faces. As opposed to diversifiying with different directors who actually fit their projects and aren't style picks.

 

its really not that hard if you read what I've typed - ending the Skywalker Saga definitively, in a way it cannot be continued in 2 years, 10 years or 20 years is of no benefit to Disney and Lucasfilm.

 

Burden of proof in this instance rests on you. A "do your homework" response like what you presented is a non-argument. The onus is on YOU to restate your claims when asked by someone.

That out of the way your argument lies on the crux that SWs in movie form is a generational story based on the Skywalkers.

Which really, is a giant appeal of tradition. Just because something has been done before, doesn't automatically make it correct or better. In the case of SWs, yes, while the Skywalker storyline has been accepted by the mass audience, during the OT; doesn't mean it is the go to method for the entire saga.

You were smart enough to recognize this with conceding that anthology films are this example. But really, if LF decided to kill off the Skywalkers, then I don't see it as an issue. The reason being that if the franchise keeps familiar aspects of a Scifi (or fantasy. Your pick) adventure and the themes, then I don't see an issue.

My evidence rests with something like Knights of the Old Republic: a game that had no Skywalkers at all and yet managed to tell I argue a very beautiful storyline. And this story very much kept the same beats as the OT: Rag-tag group, specialized individuals, powerful Force user, big twist etc. So, really if Legends, what many describe as fan-fiction, can craft a storyline without Skywalkers, and in turn capture the same beats as the OT, then I doubt that LF is hindered in doing the exact same thing.

This being made more evident given how Rogue One was a success and showcased that LF doesn't need a generational SWs story about the Skywalkers to work in the context of the Saga films, should they choose to end the Skywalker Saga.


So to restate your argument: Ending the Skywalker line definitively, in a way that it cannot be continued for 2, 10, or 20 years is no benefit to Disney and LucasFilm.

My counterargument: Your argument is an appeal to authority, predicated that just because the movies had a Skywalker, Star Wars is generational and LF needs to do it because, of that aspect. And that it is wrong because Star Wars, while it has core elements, has been proven to be done well without any instance of the Skywalkers, KOTOR and RO, and those being very successful. The former being a part of its own thing.

And LF can benefit without the Skywalkers being in SWs going forward.

So unless you have a good rebuttal to my argument, beyond "it is just a video game", or something banal like that, then don't bother speaking with me. Because I don't have time dealing with

 

Not when i've made it very clear in multiple posts that are being responded too.

And not thats not my argument, you keep screwing it up even when I've made it clear to you. SW films don't = The Skywalker Saga. Neither Rogue One or Han Solo are part of the saga.

Disney/Lucasfilm can do everything you're suggesting WHILE keeping the Skywalker family around and giving them possibility to return to that storyline IF they want to need too. By killing the family off, they no longer have that option. How is that a better situation for them? The existence of the Skywalkers doesn't prohibit any of their storytelling, killing them off does.


My counterargument: Your argument is an appeal to authority, predicated that just because the movies had a Skywalker, Star Wars is generational and LF needs to do it because, of that aspect. And that it is wrong because Star Wars, while it has core elements, has been proven to be done well without any instance of the Skywalkers, KOTOR and RO, and those being very successful. The former being a part of its own thing.

You don't understand my argument and this completely misses the point. There is no appeal to authority, there is no argument they have to include Skywalker characters in all the movies etc.... And when you have trouble understanding something that has been made clear to you acting arrogantly and saying "i don't have time to deal with you" is ridiculous and embarrassing

 

Ah - I see you don't want to actually deal with what is being said and would rather just strawman.

 

Can't wait to see this trilogy & a new story to be told.