Lets talk all things Star Wars
- Status
Appreciated. I see gatekeeping too from people (not you specifically) who dismiss any criticism and use the "true fan" argument to try and shame others for not liking things with the logo, though I recognize it goes both ways. People can go too far in either direction.
This thing is a buffet with plenty of variety to choose from. All are welcome.
This thing is a buffet with plenty of variety to choose from. All are welcome.
So what gave me food poisoning? Jake Skywalker, Deadbeat Solo, Death Star III, and Palpatine 2.0. It's a meal I regret, and I was in the emotional toilet for weeks! Talk about a cover band singing the greatest hits!
But that's just me. No judgment of folks who like those interpretations.
But that's just me. No judgment of folks who like those interpretations.
Rawktrooper
Well-Known Member
there really has not been a generational story that has lasted like science fiction type things. Star Wars and Star Trek, Dr Who and you could argue a little for Galactica.. maybe others.. Avengers?.. eh.. nothing else has really lasted the generational gap. Shows disappear, and even though there is sindication or replays from DVD, there is not "new" breathed into them very often.
Sure, fans may want certain things to come back.. Firefly or maybe a couple other short lived shows.. but decades later it wont be the same thing they fell in love with.
And, yes, different shows have pushed different systems of value or whatever.. but its been the universes they have created that have succeeded the test of time. Its been the technologies, or the ability to span time, or the setting of a time before we existed, or a time after. Its been certain characters or situations or story arcs that really speak to someone.
I never watched Star Wars for the values or the virtue or compassion of the show. I dont even get that. I grew up liking the characters and situations and the lightsabers and lasers. I would argue that Trek and Wars are very different value systems.. but i never thought about that as a kid.. i just didnt like the Trek world which was much different than the Wars universe. Trek felt like it was cheaper and closer to home.. which... it was.
Whenever you hit the goals of the characters, a show will disappear or the fans will lose interest.
Thats even true in sitcoms. When characters get married they are forced to change.. they have kids.. more change.. people tend to lose interest when the situation that created the show changes. The Empire is destroyed at the Battle of Endor.. guess what... that arc is now over. The situation is now different.. the same characters have to change so that part of the story is over.
Take Galactica.. when the travellers raced the cylons and made it to the lonely planet known as Earth... what was left for them to do? Fans quickly lost interest even though the cylons were still around.. but they tried new enemies from Earth or around Earth and that did not work.
The technologies did not mix. One season of finding Earth killed the show. Granted the characters were different then too. IT was a generation later.
So they had to reboot decades later and retell the original story with new breath... some loved it and others hated it. Arguably, that "universe" was much smaller than the galaxy of Star Wars.. they literally followed a dozen human ships across the stars so there was not a massive story to tell. It was only a galactic chase scene. But the major theme was there and had been changed for the "values" of the generation they wanted to pass it on to.. it was somewhat acclaimed and celebrated, but the older generation who saw the original didnt care for it as much. Its a very short story to tell.
So how do you successfuly bridge the generational gap? It seems that using the same characters is a no-no. It might be nostalgic but the original generation usually doesnt approve. It causes rifts. The new generation might like it.
They brought back Spock in the Trek reboots. But some werent too pleased with the service there either. But not as many i dont think. And i believe the reason for that is because his character did not really change. Whereas Luke did dramatically. But they had introduced a time element to that series too so they could do it. Now if you take TNG they solved that riddle with the holodeck. Now they can go anywhere at any time and tell stories with new characters and new worlds or old ones or ones from books or whatever.
Star Wars is trying that with this new Jedi bubble thing.. introduced in Rebels and continued here in some weird fashion. It doesnt seem that is going super well either. its not really defined and its not understood or even used in a consistent way.
The major factor in the SW failure is the story. They built a huge following, they added to the universe by expanding it to books and stories and graphic novels and they were all burned by Disney to start fresh.. instead of taking a loved and already successful book or series and turing it into a near guaranteed box office blast. They then rebooted the series with new characters by telling the same story in a worse way in the future of the already existing universe. Fans immediately saw it on screen and could almost recite what was coming next. And still can.
that is why the Disney ownership of this franchise has failed. And they continue to make blunder after blunder with the new shows, which, by all intents and purposes, should be hits across the spectrum. And many want them to be!
Im sure i missed some things.. but thats my take in a small contained reactor.
Sure, fans may want certain things to come back.. Firefly or maybe a couple other short lived shows.. but decades later it wont be the same thing they fell in love with.
And, yes, different shows have pushed different systems of value or whatever.. but its been the universes they have created that have succeeded the test of time. Its been the technologies, or the ability to span time, or the setting of a time before we existed, or a time after. Its been certain characters or situations or story arcs that really speak to someone.
I never watched Star Wars for the values or the virtue or compassion of the show. I dont even get that. I grew up liking the characters and situations and the lightsabers and lasers. I would argue that Trek and Wars are very different value systems.. but i never thought about that as a kid.. i just didnt like the Trek world which was much different than the Wars universe. Trek felt like it was cheaper and closer to home.. which... it was.
Whenever you hit the goals of the characters, a show will disappear or the fans will lose interest.
Thats even true in sitcoms. When characters get married they are forced to change.. they have kids.. more change.. people tend to lose interest when the situation that created the show changes. The Empire is destroyed at the Battle of Endor.. guess what... that arc is now over. The situation is now different.. the same characters have to change so that part of the story is over.
Take Galactica.. when the travellers raced the cylons and made it to the lonely planet known as Earth... what was left for them to do? Fans quickly lost interest even though the cylons were still around.. but they tried new enemies from Earth or around Earth and that did not work.
The technologies did not mix. One season of finding Earth killed the show. Granted the characters were different then too. IT was a generation later.
So they had to reboot decades later and retell the original story with new breath... some loved it and others hated it. Arguably, that "universe" was much smaller than the galaxy of Star Wars.. they literally followed a dozen human ships across the stars so there was not a massive story to tell. It was only a galactic chase scene. But the major theme was there and had been changed for the "values" of the generation they wanted to pass it on to.. it was somewhat acclaimed and celebrated, but the older generation who saw the original didnt care for it as much. Its a very short story to tell.
So how do you successfuly bridge the generational gap? It seems that using the same characters is a no-no. It might be nostalgic but the original generation usually doesnt approve. It causes rifts. The new generation might like it.
They brought back Spock in the Trek reboots. But some werent too pleased with the service there either. But not as many i dont think. And i believe the reason for that is because his character did not really change. Whereas Luke did dramatically. But they had introduced a time element to that series too so they could do it. Now if you take TNG they solved that riddle with the holodeck. Now they can go anywhere at any time and tell stories with new characters and new worlds or old ones or ones from books or whatever.
Star Wars is trying that with this new Jedi bubble thing.. introduced in Rebels and continued here in some weird fashion. It doesnt seem that is going super well either. its not really defined and its not understood or even used in a consistent way.
The major factor in the SW failure is the story. They built a huge following, they added to the universe by expanding it to books and stories and graphic novels and they were all burned by Disney to start fresh.. instead of taking a loved and already successful book or series and turing it into a near guaranteed box office blast. They then rebooted the series with new characters by telling the same story in a worse way in the future of the already existing universe. Fans immediately saw it on screen and could almost recite what was coming next. And still can.
that is why the Disney ownership of this franchise has failed. And they continue to make blunder after blunder with the new shows, which, by all intents and purposes, should be hits across the spectrum. And many want them to be!
Im sure i missed some things.. but thats my take in a small contained reactor.
Rawktrooper - I completely agree. If you're going to reuse original characters, I think you have to either not change them, or logically expand them. Both are hard, because it requires the new creators REALLY empathize and identify with what it was that made those characters work so well in the first place. Even Lucas couldn't do that (see Patton Oswalt's bit on a fictionalized meeting with George Lucas below.)
I find myself thinking, "Han Solo would never say that, but someone's caricature of Han Solo might."
(salty language and some prequel hate in this video)
I find myself thinking, "Han Solo would never say that, but someone's caricature of Han Solo might."
(salty language and some prequel hate in this video)
Last edited:
ScourgiousJinx
Master Member
Idk maybe worry less about what others think? The truth is is that those who judge others based on their love of Star Wars (or anything else) or particular parts of Star Wars aren't really worth a moments thought. Human beings seem to love using easy overly simplistic labels. I don't have to justify or explain my fandom to anyone, neither do you.
Maybe some who you might think of as "brand loyalists" don't really fit that in the same way you aren't the all inclusive "Star Wars guy."
Many of your criticisms of the new content itself are on point IMO. That doesn't mean everyone else agrees or that everyone uses the same criteria to decide whether or not to consume it.
ScourgiousJinx
Master Member
I must have misunderstood. I thought you meant you were annoyed at the association with "brand loyalists." My apologies.
Solo4114
Master Member
This one doesn't really work.
I mean, take whatever attitude you have with respect to the new films, but the "message" that seems to be implied by the meme (i.e., "It was better in the good old days, and now because the films got bad, look how the toy aisles have shrunk!") just doesn't hold water if you know anything about the environment in '99 or if you have even a passing understanding of what the 2019 toy aisle is actually showing you.
First, the 1999 Phantom Menace toy release was, at least as I've heard, rather a spectacular disaster. Toy stores went in big for the new toys, buying lots of the new stuff to sell to kids...who then didn't show up. As a result, a lot of the Phantom Menace toys released that year just didn't sell well and the stores either sent 'em back or junked 'em. By that point, the Power of the Force line had also dwindled some, with older OT era stuff being phased out by Hasbro. I remember going to a toy store right around that time and picking up a bunch of half-price vehicles (Falcon, AT-AT, Luke's X-wing, Vader's TIE, etc.), all of which now reside in my basement, still sealed.
Anyway, the 1999 toys didn't actually sell all that well, primarily because the film was poorly received.
It's also worth noting how retail toy sales have fundamentally changed in the time shown in the meme. In 1999, Amazon was still just selling books, or at most was juuuuust starting to branch into other items. Toys R Us and KayBee Toy Stores both still existed as going concerns. You'd see entire aisles devoted just to one particular toy line, because that was the only place to get those toys.
By contrast, by 2019, KayBee and TRU are both dead and buried, and online sellers (e.g., Amazon) dominate the marketplace. You can still go to a Walmart or Target and walk thru their toy sections, but those aisles are like a quarter of the length of an old school toystore aisle, and may also have only part of the shelf devoted to a single toy line.
Moreover, kids just...don't play as much with action figures anymore. Which is why what you see on that 2019 wall is Vintage Collection figures which retail for something like $12-16 and are primarily targeted towards the collector market, rather than towards kids.
In other words, if the goal of the meme is to argue that the decline in quality in films between 1999 and 2019 is reflected by the waning popularity of Star Wars action figures and toys...then yeah, it just doesn't hold water. They weren't super popular in 1999 to begin with, and you're as much making an observation about changing tastes in toys and entertainment with kids and larger market forces like the shift from brick 'n' mortar to online sales, as you are about anything else.
On the other hand, if the point of the meme is just to say "Man....stuff's different now," then yeah, dead-on. Stuff's different now!
The Disney-era SW toy lines were also just plain botched. They produced stuff willy-nilly without any broad plan.
In the OT era they had the Kenner 3.75" figures with all the characters & major vehicles. That interchangeability & consistency was HUGE in making the toy lines successful back in the day. Different kids on the block didn't all have exactly the same characters & ships but they could all play together. Any character & ship was available, and it was in an affordable/playable form (not an "adult collectible" with too much size & fragility & high price).
I mean, Hasbro had just done the big all-new Millennium Falcon toy in 2008. Then ep#7 comes out in 2015 with a big central role for the Falcon, and . . . there is no Falcon toy in stores for the ep#7 figures? WTF? Literally all they had to do was give the 2008 Falcon toy a new satellite dish and repackage it. If Hasbro didn't wanna re-release it in 2015 then Disney could have cut them a sweetheart deal on the licensing bill.
In the OT era they had the Kenner 3.75" figures with all the characters & major vehicles. That interchangeability & consistency was HUGE in making the toy lines successful back in the day. Different kids on the block didn't all have exactly the same characters & ships but they could all play together. Any character & ship was available, and it was in an affordable/playable form (not an "adult collectible" with too much size & fragility & high price).
I mean, Hasbro had just done the big all-new Millennium Falcon toy in 2008. Then ep#7 comes out in 2015 with a big central role for the Falcon, and . . . there is no Falcon toy in stores for the ep#7 figures? WTF? Literally all they had to do was give the 2008 Falcon toy a new satellite dish and repackage it. If Hasbro didn't wanna re-release it in 2015 then Disney could have cut them a sweetheart deal on the licensing bill.
Riceball
Master Member
By the time Disney bought Star Wars the toys that we grew up with during the OT just weren't as popular with kids anymore. Action figures had started to become more of an adult collector's thing and big playsets like a Millennium Falcon would be a complete waste of money to produce like they did back when the OT came out. This why Haslabs and Matty Collector exist, to produce limited run items for collectors that would cost the companies if they were to try make them for sale on retail shelves.
I know the generational change is a factor. But IMO the botched toy lines are a factor too. The lateral compatibility of the old toy lines had a big leveraging effect on the toys' popularity.
Adults don't want playable toys, they want a hybrid of a toy and a detailed model. A true TOY is designed for the hands/bodies of children. They are small, cheap, and durable. When you are 8yo you don't care if the Han Solo action figure has black pants instead of dark blue. You care whether you've got enough main characters & ships between your siblings & friends to get together and play Star Wars. You don't care whether the Falcon toy is scale-accurate or not, you care whether you have one or not.
The trend of adult-oriented toys is mixed bag. When it gets over-indulged (like filling half the toy aisle at Walmart with adult stuff), they are worsening their industry's natural decline.
Last edited:
VanPersie
Well-Known Member
How many 8 year olds currently care if they have enough main character toys to play with their friends?
I think there’s the root of the issue though. It’s mainly middle aged men complaining that a plastic figure isn’t what they want, coupled with the nostalgia of memories of decades long gone.
Lmao!!!
I agree there is a market for that now. One that didn't exist decades ago. But it's different from the bread-n-butter market of kids who actually play with toys of current franchises. The industry abandons the latter market to their detriment.
Look at pro sports teams/stadiums. They charge wild ticket prices for seats right now. There are enough older/wealthy adult fans ready to pay it that they can fill a stadium. But they are selling out the sport's future if they indulge that too far. Future generations who never went to games as kids (because their young/working parents couldn't afford it) won't grow into older adult who buy overpriced tickets later on.
That's my point. Kids used to do that, and franchise toys sold more in those days. The design of the old toy lines effectively encouraged siblings & friends to play together and collect more of them.
Randomly making whatever specific toy might sell, without planning out the toy line in a bigger way, is short-sighted thinking. It's poor product planning.
Would Lord Helmet have had that much fun playing with 1 or 2 expensive fragile "collector" figures? No. He needed 5 small cheap durable figures.
George Lucas actually rejected a lot of crappy SW merchandise proposals back in the day. Sure, he wanted lots of SW merch, but he wanted it to be decent quality.)
Last edited:
Riceball
Master Member
Kids used to do that, back when most of us were kids, and they ran around and played outside as well, but times have changed and that no longer has the same appeal as it once did. Face it, kids are more interested in their electronics these days, even very young children are often seen with their parent's phones or a tablet as often, sometimes more often, than some action figure or other toy. Investing heavily in a toy line these days is a losing proposition and no sane toy maker is going to do that these days. Electronics and social media have killed toys for kids for the most part.
As far as quality Star Wars merch, Lucas sold licenses to all kinds of silly things to slap the Star Wars brand on. From what I've seen he was willing to sell a license for just about anything from lip balm to tape dispensers, to perfumes and colognes.
I know that the world has changed since 1983 and kids are never going to play with franchise toys at the same rates they did from the 1970s-90s. But I don't believe the demand for toys is extinct. My argument is that the toy companies are worsening the decline of traditional type toys with bad management of the product lines.
There have always been knockoff imitations of franchise toys. The production costs don't get cheaper just because it's called a 'Star Force Laser Sword' instead of a 'Star Wars Lightsaber'. The knockoff stuff can still be made profitably despite getting a fraction of the real stuff's sales. But somehow Hasbro/Kenner/etc can't afford to make real branded stuff anymore. Does that make sense? "The Force Awakens" comes out and there's no Millennium Falcon toy for the action figures. I bet I could have walked through the toy aisles that same year and found plenty of non-franchise-brand toy items that used as much design & tooling & plastic as it would have taken to make a basic Falcon toy.
I think going for adult levels of detail/accuracy is addictive to the companies. The toys get higher screen-accurate quality, which forces them to gear the line more towards adults to pay for it, which makes them lean even farther in that direction on the next redesign. It's a feedback loop that gradually leads them to stop making kids' toys entirely. If the current attitude had prevailed in the 1970s-80s then Kenner would not have made nearly as much money off the OT Star Wars as they did.
The thing is, 8yo kids aren't into detailed models. They are into playable toys. The industry has gotten the two things pretty conflated at this point. That's where I think they are going wrong.
Look at He-Man in 1982. It was such a monster hit that they were scrambling to get the toys produced & hang a storyline on the characters fast enough. That's what an honest-to-god TOY line looks like. I don't expect that kind of hit to happen today in the electronic era but I'm making a point. Kids and adults are not the same buyers. They don't want the same things.
Going by the modern toy industry's mindset, He-Man should never have been hit material even in 1982. It had no pre-existing show to introduce the characters. The quality/detail was cheap and it was obvious that they were just re-using a lot of the same basic molds with different colors & accessories.
Imagine telling modern Hasbro/etc to mix around some existing molds and make up some all-new SW characters without any screen history. The execs would laugh at you for even floating the idea. I'm not arguing that Hasbro/etc should literally do that today, but I'm saying the toy industry seems out of touch with what their core job is. Maybe they would sell more toys if they put the focus back onto making toys.
- Status
Similar threads
