New Star Wars Trilogy Announced (Rian Johnson) (1 Viewer)

[Jake Lipson]

But he broke writing's number one rule: show, don't tell.

He showed me enough. As you know, I liked how it was handled, and I think showing an extended flashback would have ground the movie to a halt. But again, that's The Last Jedi we're talking about. This thread is about the new trilogy. While The Last Jedi is obviously tangentially related because Johnson wrote and directed it, how he plotted it does not have any direct relationship to the rumor that @Sam Favate posted tonight about him leaving the new trilogy.

I don't have the energy right now to go another round with you on The Last Jedi, even if we were in that thread. My opinions on it have not changed since the last time we discussed it, so while it's fine that we disagree on it, I just don't see the point in going back over that. We're not going to change each other's minds. So I simply agree to disagree and that's all I have to say about that.

As to whether Johnson directs another Star Wars movie that actually hits the screen remains to be seen.

Well, Kennedy set the project in motion and Johnson says he's still doing it. See my post #136. So that seems to me to settle the matter, unless you're suggesting that Kennedy will change her mind and fire him. I don't think that will happen for reasons I explained above in post #132.

 

[Carabimero]

I don’t really disagree with you Alan but my friend is a professional screenwriter and he does disagree with you.

No one agrees on everything. But I do believe this: Johnson could have accomplished EVERYTHING he wanted in TLJ and not pissed off so many fans if he'd simply taken us, for ten minutes, on Luke's journey. It's not a flashback if you start the movie with it. And it's not rocket science. Johnson just missed it. And for a lot of fans (to say nothing of Mark Hamill), it's very sad it had to happen in that movie with that character.

It's the core reason this very discussion is happening right now, so I think it's extremely relevant.

 

[Bryan^H]

Rian Johnson is a good writer and filmmaker. He simply made a fundamental mistake, telling instead of showing. That he didn't take Canto Bight's screen time, for example, to instead take us on Luke's and Kylo's journey, to show us, blow by blow, what happened to Luke so the majority of fans felt it and believed it, so they could make the character reversal with Luke, is unfortunate. That critical mistake should have been caught and fixed before shooting started. It's one thing to make leaps in time when Luke's character didn't go against type (becoming a stronger Jedi). But reversing that character and making it believable required more screen time than Johnson gave it. It's as simple as that.

An interesting point. I would have liked more time devoted to Luke as well, but I still think what was on screen was fine just the way it is.

I don't want to go off topic, but I sort of felt the way you do about Luke in another film " Return of the Jedi". I think he needed more time with Vader before and during his battle with him on the Death Star. Cutting away to the Forest Moon of Endor broke the momentum of the heart of the OT.

 

[Carabimero]

I don't want to go off topic, but I sort of felt the way you do about Luke in another film " Return of the Jedi". I think he needed more time with Vader before and during his battle with him on the Death Star. Cutting away to the Forest Moon of Endor broke the momentum of the heart of the OT.

You might be right. I always blamed The Ewoks for that.

 

[Sam Favate]

Glad to see Johnson denied the story. Like I said, Star Wars doesn't need that kind of drama again. I'm sure the Lucasfilm people know that too.

BTW, I don't think Johnson is going to *direct* all three movies of his trilogy. I wonder who he will get to do that, assuming he directs the first? I wonder if his trilogy will run concurrently (alternating years) with the Benioff/Weiss trilogy? That could put the "Star Wars Story" stand-alone films on hold for a good while (which would make some people happy, but not me - they have been my favorite Star Wars films of the 4 new ones).

 

[Sam Favate]

I don't want to go off topic, but I sort of felt the way you do about Luke in another film " Return of the Jedi". I think he needed more time with Vader before and during his battle with him on the Death Star. Cutting away to the Forest Moon of Endor broke the momentum of the heart of the OT.

Oh yes. I have said for years that cutting between the three conclusions in ROTJ, especially the antics of the Ewoks, kills the dramatic tension in the confrontation between Luke, Vader and the Emperor. You have this great, tense scene that effectively ends a trilogy of movies and then - cut to Ewoks bonking Stormtroopers on the head or otherwise messing with the most technologically advanced army in the universe. It's another reason that the tone of ROTJ is its biggest problem.

 

[TravisR]

BTW, I don't think Johnson is going to *direct* all three movies of his trilogy. I wonder who he will get to do that, assuming he directs the first? I wonder if his trilogy will run concurrently (alternating years) with the Benioff/Weiss trilogy? That could put the "Star Wars Story" stand-alone films on hold for a good while (which would make some people happy, but not me - they have been my favorite Star Wars films of the 4 new ones).

Speaking of time frames, it seems like none of these movies will be ready for years. Due to other projects, neither Johnson or Weiss/Benioff will probably be working full time on their movies until later this year and I'd imagine it will take at least two years to make them so unless LFL has managed to keep some stuff secret, there won't be a Star Wars movie after Episode IX until maybe 2022.

 

[Jake Lipson]

BTW, I don't think Johnson is going to *direct* all three movies of his trilogy.

I don't thiink they've decided anything about the sequels yet. Johnson will direct the first one for sure, and then I think it depends on how he feels after that. If he wants to direct the whole trilogy, Kennedy would probably let him. If he wants to be involved as a writer and/or producer on the sequels while someone else directs so that he can go do other projects, she would probably be fine with that too. Of course, it also depends on how the first one is received. I think everybody has every intention of making three, but I also think everybody had every intention of making Solo 2.

That could put the "Star Wars Story" stand-alone films on hold for a good while (which would make some people happy, but not me - they have been my favorite Star Wars films of the 4 new ones).

there won't be a Star Wars movie after Episode IX until maybe 2022.

I think both of these things -- the drought of new product after Episode IX and putting the Star Wars Story films on the backburner -- are deliberate. After the box office failure of Solo, even Bob Iger admitted there had been too much Star Wars product too quickly. They've got to finish off the current trilogy on time, but after that I think they're going to be taking an "absence makes the heart grow fonder" approach, which is smart. That way, it will make the return of Star Wars a few years down the line into more of an event because we won't have had one for a while. Solo felt like, "Another one? Already?" for a variety of reasons, and I think they're going to be careful not to over-saturate the market again.

And, creatively, after Solo I hope they know they need to be more careful about the Star Wars Story films they put into development. That doesn't mean there shouldn't ever be another one -- I still want the Obi-Wan movie so that Ewan McGroger gets a chance to play that character again with a decent script and director this time -- but I think it does mean that every nook and cranny of the original trilogy doesn't need to be regurgitated into its own full-length feature film. They were not made to sustain that level of scrutiny.

 

[TravisR]

I think both of these things -- the drought of new product after Episode IX and putting the Star Wars Story films on the backburner -- are deliberate. After the box office failure of Solo, even Bob Iger admitted there had been too much Star Wars product too quickly. They've got to finish off the current trilogy on time, but after that I think they're going to be taking an "absence makes the heart grow fonder" approach, which is smart. That way, it will make the return of Star Wars a few years down the line into more of an event because we won't have had one for a while. Solo felt like, "Another one? Already?" for a variety of reasons, and I think they're going to be careful not to over-saturate the market again.

That might not be a bad idea BUT if they've got two trilogies going on simultaneously in a few years, they'll basically be right back to annual SW movies for more than 5 years.

 

[Jake Lipson]

That might not be a bad idea BUT if they've got two trilogies going on simultaneously in a few years, they'll basically be right back to annual SW movies for more than 5 years.

That's an excellent point. Unless they space out the trilogies more like Lucas did and less like the current trilogy. It's something they'll have to figure out.

 

[Sam Favate]

I don't think one Star Wars movie per year is a bad thing, just maybe not one every six months. They did pretty well with movies in December 2015, 2016 and 2017.

 

[Tommy R]

I don’t think Disney will completely allocate Decembers to Star Wars, as it proved to be the smart move to let Mary Poppins Returns take Demeter over Solo in 2018. Perhaps 2-3 movies in consecutive years, wether it’s exactly the same month or not, then perhaps an 18-ish month wait for the following one.

 

[Jake Lipson]

The question mark is what Disney is going to do with Fox, because Fox currently has Avatar sequels scheduled beginning in December 2020, 2021, 2024 and 2025. If Disney sticks with that, it could be an easy "replacement" for Star Wars in terms of a massive franchise tentpole in December, but if they want to put Star Wars there, then Disney is going to have to move Avatar and they'll have to juggle their big franchises. Ah, the perils of content acquisition...

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I imagine that Disney would be content to leave Avatar where it is. They've already been in the Avatar business for several years thanks to their Avatar theme park attractions at Animal Kingdom, so I think they have a vested interest in those films succeeding, and I think December is probably the best chance for success for that kind of film.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

The question mark is what Disney is going to do with Fox, because Fox currently has Avatar sequels scheduled beginning in December 2020, 2021, 2024 and 2025.

I think that will greatly depend on how Avatar 2 performs. If the franchise missed its moment and the sequel badly underperforms, then Disney will probably shift the future movies to a less competitive release day, and maybe consolidate the five movies into three or four.

 

[Tino]

I honestly don’t think this new Johnson trilogy will ever go forward.

And apparently Johnson’s not so sure either.

“ Well we'll see. I'm still talking to Lucasfilm, they're figuring out what they're doing and we'll see what happens. But I'd be thrilled if it happens, and I'm working on my own stuff too.“

Emphasis mine.

https://www.cinemablend.com/news/2481963/wait-is-rian-johnsons-star-wars-trilogy-not-a-sure-thing

 

[JimmyO]

I came to this conclusion immediately following the fan outcry over TLJ, and it was cemented in my mind completely when the title of the next movie was announced.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I don’t think the so called fan outcry has anything to do with it.

I think when Disney purchased Lucasfilm, they believed the market would bear a yearly Star Wars release that could be relied on to automatically gross a billion dollars or more, each and every single year, perhaps even multiple times a year. Since then, two things have happened. The first is that “Solo” showed that the Star Wars brand does not automatically guarantee a billion dollars. The second is that the media landscape has changed drastically in an extremely short period of time, and Disney is now placing a significant amount of their resources into Disney+, which right now means more serialized premium quality shows rather than two hour theatrical releases. Both of the announced live action Star Wars shows have their origins in proposed feature films; Disney clearly feels that streaming is the more important long term venue for these projects.

Compared to the majority of Star Wars projects launched or attempted during the Disney era, Johnson’s film came in ahead of schedule, slightly under budget if memory serves, was released to widespread critical acclaim and grossed over a billion dollars. Johnson isn’t the issue. The issue is that Disney doesn’t quite know what to do with Star Wars long term with the Skywalker story coming to an end, but with an internal requirement that these films all must immediately gross a billion dollars to be worth pursuing.

 

[Bryan^H]

I honestly don’t think this new Johnson trilogy will ever go forward.

And apparently Johnson’s not so sure either.

“ Well we'll see. I'm still talking to Lucasfilm, they're figuring out what they're doing and we'll see what happens. But I'd be thrilled if it happens, and I'm working on my own stuff too.“

Emphasis mine.

https://www.cinemablend.com/news/2481963/wait-is-rian-johnsons-star-wars-trilogy-not-a-sure-thing

I don't want this to be true because all the nasty trolls can now scream "I told you so".

 

[dpippel]

I don't want this to be true because all the nasty trolls can now scream "I told you so".

Best to just not pay any attention to them.