Halliwax

Legendary Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
I really don’t think KK would purposely sabotage the show.. it’s her job for the company to make money, if it’s not making money she loses her job

She just has a outlook that doesn’t make what the original fans see or believe..

The only way to make a statement towards KK and Disney is to cancel Disney plus, and not watch anything they put on it
 

ScourgiousJinx

Sr Member
Each time a show or movie is watched on any streaming service it's counted and the higher the view count the more successful a show or movie is. So if you're sharing a friend or family member's account but watching content on your own time or rewatching things over and over on it you're still contributing to the perceived success of content. Or so I've been told.
 

Halliwax

Legendary Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Each time a show or movie is watched on any streaming service it's counted and the higher the view count the more successful a show or movie is. So if you're sharing a friend or family member's account but watching content on your own time or rewatching things over and over on it you're still contributing to the perceived success of content. Or so I've been told.
Exactly why I gave up watching Kenobi after the second episode

Watching junk only tells them I like it
 

batguy

Sr Member
really don’t think KK would purposely sabotage the show.. it’s her job for the company to make money, if it’s not making money she loses her job

IIRC she specifically vetoed a Han/Luke/Leia reunion in the sequel trilogy. She seems pretty capable of creative acts of sabotage.
 

Joek3rr

Master Member
IIRC she specifically vetoed a Han/Luke/Leia reunion in the sequel trilogy. She seems pretty capable of creative acts of sabotage.
Eh that sounds like YouTube click bait crap. Harrison said that when George called him, he mentioned that Han could be killed off in the first film. And Michael Arndt, said that he had troubles integrating Luke into episode 7s story. Even going back as far as when he was working with George. That eventually led to decision to push Luke all the way to the end of episode 7. So even before George had sold, a big reunion of the three wasn't looking good.
 

blewis17

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Making a creative decision we might disagree with is not the same thing as deliberately trying to make a project fail.
Exactly right. But it's the ultimate outcome, the "20/20 hindsight" results that many of us here take issue with. I've said it before...these modern SW films are NOT made for us RPFers. In many ways, they are targeted at the middle of the road and non SW public. Trying to get the broadest appeal, hence the broadest $$$$ base, across all demographics.

We obsess over these issues BECAUSE the original trilogy was so solid and its own sustained narrative. We are different than 95% of people who enjoy the SW universe... like the difference between someone who enjoys a good beer with the game, versus someone who has a climate controlled wine cellar in their basement. I'm not trying to be elitist here (and I am sure I probably sound like I am) but many of us here enjoy and experience SW on a MUCH deeper level of scrutiny than your average Disney+ or movie going fan.

So, when creative decisions are made to story that don't "click" with our level of involvement, we feel personally offended by the decision, whether it be KK, JJ, Lucas, Favreau, Filoni or Rian.


P.S. Does anyone remember the episode of Friends sitcom, when Jon Favreau played rich guy Pete Becker? Chandler asked Pete if he had one of the "Don Post" life-sized stormtrooper statues. When Pete said that he actually has TWO of them, Chandler asked if he and Joey could come over, put on the suits and play SW?

star wars dancing GIF
 
Last edited:

Joek3rr

Master Member
Boggles my mind how it would be hard to fit Luke Skywalker into the first movie of the final Skywalker trilogy.
Not saying I necessarily agree or disagree, but this is what Michael Arndt had to say.

"Early on I tried to write versions of the story where [Rey] is at home, her home is destroyed, and then she goes on the road and meets Luke. And then she goes and kicks the bad guy’s ass. It just never worked and I struggled with this. This was back in 2012. It just felt like every time Luke came in and entered the movie, he just took it over. Suddenly you didn’t care about your main character anymore because, ‘Oh f–k, Luke Skywalker’s here. I want to see what he’s going to do."
 

Malibu139

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
I am just saying if your calling it the Skywalker trilogy and Luke is not the main character , there is a disconnect. I get they needed new characters and a new direction, but if your problem is LUKE Skywalker is taking over the Skywalker trilogy movie then maybe you are writing the wrong movie.
 

Joek3rr

Master Member
I am just saying if your calling it the Skywalker trilogy and Luke is not the main character , there is a disconnect. I get they needed new characters and a new direction, but if your problem is LUKE Skywalker is taking over the Skywalker trilogy movie then maybe you are writing the wrong movie.
I mean the Prequels don't have Luke until the last few minutes. Luke being the main character of the saga went the way of the dodo bird a long time ago....sadly. Anakin had become the main character. And the Skywalker family has other representation, from Leia and Kylo. Plus Luke is a basically the Macguffin for the film.
 

Malibu139

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Eh , the prequels weren’t sold as “Skywalker trilogy” , and Anakin is, well Anakin Skywalker so those movies make a lot more sense in the overall 9 movie Skywalker series.

I am sure Arndt is talented, all I have seen is Oblivion and I liked that, but only being able to work Luke Skywalker into a Star Wars movie as a Macguffin is weak.
 

ScourgiousJinx

Sr Member
I just think of KK as more of a train wreck who doesn't really know what she's doing with SW or Lucasfilm for that matter. I don't think she was purposefully trying to destroy things, it's just in her nature now. She thinks she's pushing the franchise in a good direction when in fact she's doing just the opposite in a lot of respects.
 

CB2001

Master Member
Eh , the prequels weren’t sold as “Skywalker trilogy” , and Anakin is, well Anakin Skywalker so those movies make a lot more sense in the overall 9 movie Skywalker series.

From what's been reported, George Lucas' treatment for the sequel trilogy would have focused on Leia, as the first two trilogies followed Luke and Anakin. This was the treatment before Disney tossed it.
 

Pepperbone

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
I really don’t think KK would purposely sabotage the show.. it’s her job for the company to make money, if it’s not making money she loses her job

She just has a outlook that doesn’t make what the original fans see or believe..

The only way to make a statement towards KK and Disney is to cancel Disney plus, and not watch anything they put on it
Incompetents never see themselves as anything other than experts.

My subscription's future relies on ANDOR. If that's anywhere near the circus acts I've been watching lately; my time and money will be spent elsewhere.
 

Joek3rr

Master Member
I am just saying if your calling it the Skywalker trilogy and Luke is not the main character , there is a disconnect. I get they needed new characters and a new direction, but if your problem is LUKE Skywalker is taking over the Skywalker trilogy movie then maybe you are writing the wrong movie.
It was marketed as the Star Wars Saga, then later The Complete Saga. The Skywalker Saga started getting added on, with the announcement of The Rise of Skywalker, and probably also to help differentiate other Lucasfilm produced projects. Particularly if there is another film series. Back then, the then to be 6 films was the only Lucasfilm produced Star Wars content. There was no need to have a distinction.

You know Luke's absence is a pretty big thing in TFA. And they kinda set him to be big hero that's going to save the day. But he ends up being kinda of a red herring. As it turns out it's Leia, the other Skywalker, that trains Rey and reaches Ben. Not Luke. And that was intentional. They wanted to try and make good on that "there is another." Did they? Eh, they did the best they could considering the tragic circumstances.
 

Joek3rr

Master Member
From what's been reported, George Lucas' treatment for the sequel trilogy would have focused on Leia, as the first two trilogies followed Luke and Anakin. This was the treatment before Disney tossed it.
That what he claimed to be his plan. That's the one set a few years after ROTJ, where Leia is literally the Chosen One. But it's hasn't been confirmed....or denied if he gave that to Disney. I can't imagine he would have given that away.

The treatment he sold, was the one written by Michael Arndt. And what we know if it, is only from episode 7. It may have only been a treatment for episode 7 alone. There's conflicting reports. One report said it for the whole Sequel Trilogy, another just for episode 7. That treatment is supposed to be the one with Luke in exile being found the young female hero of the story. Or so it's been claimed.
 

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. Your new thread title is very short, and likely is unhelpful.
  2. Your reply is very short and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  3. Your reply is very long and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  4. It is very likely that it does not need any further discussion and thus bumping it serves no purpose.
  5. Your message is mostly quotes or spoilers.
  6. Your reply has occurred very quickly after a previous reply and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  7. This thread is locked.
Top