Kathleen Kennedy to step down from Lucasfilm (after 2021)?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Kathleen Kennedy to step down from Lucasfilm?

I dunno. I think TLJ sank on tone issues as much as anything.

When people don't like the tone of a movie they still mostly bring up specific things to complain about. But if the tone had been better they would have been less bothered by the specific rough spots.
 
Re: Kathleen Kennedy to step down from Lucasfilm?

Reminds me of how Nichols Meyer handled Wrath of Khan. When asked how he made such a successful Star Trek movie. He said that he ignored the fans, and simply set out to make a good movie. A movie he'd would like to see. He point out that if he'd bowed to the fans wishes, Spock would have never been killed.

You missed the part about him and Harve Bennett wanting Spock to stay dead, but people were so bummed after the test screenings that they quickly did reshoots to include the photon tube scene at the end of the film....

Nick Meyer also watched every single episode of TOS and wrote his screen play based on his summation that the best episodes always revolved around the triumvirate of Kirk, Spock and McCoy and stayed true to the core of each character - logic (Spock), emotion (McCoy) and the brashness of youth (Kirk).

He just turned it on its head a bit with Kirk grappling with getting old.

The main problem I personally have have with the new trilogy - aside from whether or not the films themselves are good/enjoyable/etc. or not - all stem from TFA and was carried through in TLJ is that all of the heroes that we grew up watching all became epic failures after ROTJ.
 
Re: Kathleen Kennedy to step down from Lucasfilm?

You missed the part about him and Harve Bennett wanting Spock to stay dead, but people were so bummed after the test screenings that they quickly did reshoots to include the photon tube scene at the end of the film....

Nick Meyer also watched every single episode of TOS and wrote his screen play based on his summation that the best episodes always revolved around the triumvirate of Kirk, Spock and McCoy and stayed true to the core of each character - logic (Spock), emotion (McCoy) and the brashness of youth (Kirk).

He just turned it on its head a bit with Kirk grappling with getting old.

The main problem I personally have have with the new trilogy - aside from whether or not the films themselves are good/enjoyable/etc. or not - all stem from TFA and was carried through in TLJ is that all of the heroes that we grew up watching all became epic failures after ROTJ.

I'm totally fine with my heroes having failures. It makes them more relatable. You have to have conflict somewhere. And there's nothing in a 'they lived happily ever after'. That is from the end of fair tales. But if you want the story to continue, you got to dump the fairy tale ending.
 
Re: Kathleen Kennedy to step down from Lucasfilm?

I'm totally fine with my heroes having failures. It makes them more relatable. You have to have conflict somewhere. And there's nothing in a 'they lived happily ever after'. That is from the end of fair tales. But if you want the story to continue, you got to dump the fairy tale ending.

I'd argue that 'relatable' isn't something that you're exactly going for in a Star Wars film. You don't go see Captain America because you can relate to a 100 year old super soldier that slings around a aerodynamic defying unbreakable shield. It goes to follow that you don't go see a Star Wars film because you can relate to a farm boy who grew up on a desert planet that can wield a mystical power and was trained by a 900 year old gnome.

And 'happily ever after' doesn't mean without conflict or even perfection. The first Thrawn trilogy of books by Timothy Zhan I think is a good example. The New Republic is on the verge of flying apart due to infighting, Han and Leia have a strained marriage, Luke doesn't have a clue where to begin to establish a new Jedi Order and the remnants of the Empire are threatening to upend everything.

But Luke still has his farm boy earnestness, Leia still has her strength and conviction, and Han is still the rogue with the heart of gold....

None of those qualities, save maybe with Leia, are found anywhere in the first two films of this new trilogy...
 
Re: Kathleen Kennedy to step down from Lucasfilm?

I'm totally fine with my heroes having failures. It makes them more relatable. You have to have conflict somewhere. And there's nothing in a 'they lived happily ever after'. That is from the end of fair tales. But if you want the story to continue, you got to dump the fairy tale ending.

The problem is HOW they fail.

I think you could have shown the OT heroes facing a failure without it undoing their key triumphs from the OT. Luke shouldn’t fail when facing the darkside, he passed that test where no one else could. But if he failed to raise another generation of Jedi, that could be of use. Like if all his students flipped and became the Knights of Ren he failed as a teacher, not in facing the darkside. There’s ways that could have done it.

I think Rian was right to challenge our ideas of the OT heroes, but the way he chose to do it was misguided.
 
Re: Kathleen Kennedy to step down from Lucasfilm?

I agree with a lot of what you are saying— yes TLJ divided the fanbase, yes Solo bombed, and I’ve said repeatedly in this thread that the ONLY thing we can honestly critisize Kennedy for is that her job is to hire the right people for the job, and her track record at that is not great.

As for how much money is lost— it’s too early to tell. The ep9 take has to be considered. SW is a mega brand and has multiple revenue streams. Box office alone isn’t a determining factor. Technically only Solo was a bomb. Every studio has bombs.

Rian’s trilogy is not career suicide. There’s no evidence of that. There’s still not concrete proof the ant-Rian crowd isd anywhere near as big as angry fans think it is if you look at mass-movie going public opnions and box office.

But the point of my post was, you said he WANTED to alienate half the audience, and that is crazy.

That old video of Rian has him saying he’d rather half the audience hate his film than be unintersted. As a filmmaker, you can’t play it safe. If you want to make a movie that truly is remembered and spoken about, you have to make bold choices and do the unexpected. Ask anybody creative in any field and they will tell you playing it safe and doing what has been done before is not rewarding, nor will it have an impact.

His point is, as a filmmaker you need to take chances, swing for the fences, and not worry that you may alienate half your audience. Especially when we’re talking about something with giant fandom. There is literally no way to please everyone. Every thread on this site proves that. So don’t shoot for ther lowest common denominator.

Now, was his risk worth it? Probably not, because he didn’t pull it off. I fully understand why he chose to deconstruct Luke, and I maintain it would have worked had he made Luke return to himself at the midpoint instead of the very end.

It was a risk he took to try and make a movie that would be different and stand out and be remembered, especially in the wake of TFA, of which the biggest criticism was it was too much like ANH.

The fact he said what he said fresh out of film school with no relation to Star Wars makes it clear— he’s talking about making bold movies. That’s a far cry from sitting down with Kennedy and them laughing and wringing their hands and saying “OMG let’s totally RUIN this franchise!”

Exactly. The point is that you can make boring, "safe" films which are ultimately forgettable and bland, or you can take risks and try to make films that people may really really enjoy...or they may strongly dislike it. Basically, he's saying that he'd rather that you either love or hate his film, but that he never wants you to "nothing" his film. Like, I "nothing" a ton of films. I can count on one hand the number of times since seeing it that I've bothered to think about, say, Jupiter Rising. I "nothing" that film. I don't hate it. I don't love it. It was...you know...fine for the 2-ish hours I spent watching it, but I mostly don't remember it and I largely don't care about it one way or another. I thought the visual weirdness and the kind of strangeness of the core ideas was interesting and risky, but at the end of the day....meh. Whatevs.

That's what Johnson doesn't want people to do with his films. Loathe it or love it, but don't "nothing" it. And to do that, you have to make films that are...interesting. Challenging. Different from what's expected, or at least different in important ways.

Making a movie for the fans is such a deep deep pit.

Let's say they were to sit down and make a film for the fans. It sounds great on paper. But which fans do they make the film for? Fans of the OT? Fans of the PT? What one Star Wars fan dislikes another likes. So who should they make the film for?

Or would it be a better idea to simply make the best film they know how. If one group of fans doesn't like it, that's to bad. If one group likes it, great! Let's move one to the next project.

For that matter, let's suppose they even settle on which era of fans. Let's say they want to make films for OT fans. Great! What's that mean? Well, for most OT fans it means endlessly reiterating the OT, hitting the same beats, making the same callbacks, etc. Except, wait, that's not what fans want. They want it to be different. But the same. But, like, new. But also familiar.

This is, in my opinion, a nearly impossible task. It's why remakes are so often either an IP glaze on an otherwise very different product, or an "embiggening" of the popular elements from the previous films. Similar story with sequels.

I see Star Wars fans who complained about how TFA was just a boring rehash of ANH with a gender-flipped protagonist. I think there's more to it than that, but it definitely felt like it played things too safe. I accepted a lot of that as just setting the stage for future films, but I was personally hoping we'd move beyond the confines of the OT instead of reheating a bunch of elements from it.

To my way of thinking, the only way to break the cycle of just repeating what happened in the other films is to firmly plant your flag and go in a different direction. Johnson did that. Might have pissed off a lot of fans, but I'm hoping that JJ doesn't/can't just whip a re-do of ROTJ on us for the next film after the state of affairs at the end of Ep. VIII.

Exactly.

Whether Rian made the right choices or not will be debated for at least another 30 years, and there's plenty to be critical of. But his intent was noble enough. I never want a movie to play it safe.

I think it's the right choice if only because it's the only one I really ee that offers a respite from endless iterations of what came before. And no, I don't think that's the point or that "they should rhyme" is the be-all/end-all of storytelling. Certain elements may be common in the stories, but that doesn't mean we should just repeat everything ad infinitum.

I dunno. I think TLJ sank on tone issues as much as anything.

When people don't like the tone of a movie they still mostly bring up specific things to complain about. But if the tone had been better they would have been less bothered by the specific rough spots.

I don't think it's "tone" exactly. I mean, I get what you're saying -- when people generally like a movie, they gloss over the stuff they didn't like, and when they dislike it, they start to pick it apart. But I'm not sure if "tone" is exactly the right word for what was different here.

You missed the part about him and Harve Bennett wanting Spock to stay dead, but people were so bummed after the test screenings that they quickly did reshoots to include the photon tube scene at the end of the film....

Nick Meyer also watched every single episode of TOS and wrote his screen play based on his summation that the best episodes always revolved around the triumvirate of Kirk, Spock and McCoy and stayed true to the core of each character - logic (Spock), emotion (McCoy) and the brashness of youth (Kirk).

He just turned it on its head a bit with Kirk grappling with getting old.

The main problem I personally have have with the new trilogy - aside from whether or not the films themselves are good/enjoyable/etc. or not - all stem from TFA and was carried through in TLJ is that all of the heroes that we grew up watching all became epic failures after ROTJ.

I think that's more of a function of the business decision of bringing back the old heroes at all. Like, imagine if they'd set the film 200 years after the battle of Endor. The Republic is re-formed, it's stood for this whole time, and now a new threat (whatever it is) rises. Our new heroes might look back to the heroes of an earlier age for examples, but the old heroes aren't in the film as active characters except maybe Luke as a blue glowie. Would fans have liked it? I dunno. It would have preserved the old heroes as having ridden off into the sunset, living happily ever after...but you wouldn't have gotten to see them again at all.

If you actually give them their happy ending, then you don't set up a ton of conflict for the story, or you have to spend your entire first film building the conflict to the point where the war actually breaks out. Or at least the first half of your first film. Instead, JJ decided to drop everyone in the middle of everything, provide very little context, and just let you kinda muddle through it as you go along except for the LOOK HERE IS A MYSTERY hints he leaves for you to manufacture faux engagement with the story. At that point...what can ya do? Where do you go? You can't un-ring that bell if you're Rian Johnson. Debate his take on Luke all you want, but he couldn't have Luke turn out to be a perfectly happy guy who has no idea what Jedi temple massacre you're talking about and just decided to come to Ach-To because he heard it was great fishin'.
 
Re: Kathleen Kennedy to step down from Lucasfilm?

The problem is HOW they fail.

I think you could have shown the OT heroes facing a failure without it undoing their key triumphs from the OT. Luke shouldn’t fail when facing the darkside, he passed that test where no one else could. But if he failed to raise another generation of Jedi, that could be of use. Like if all his students flipped and became the Knights of Ren he failed as a teacher, not in facing the darkside. There’s ways that could have done it.

I think Rian was right to challenge our ideas of the OT heroes, but the way he chose to do it was misguided.

I guess this where I differ with a lot of fans. Did Luke overcome the Darkness within himself? Yes. But why does that give him a 'get out of Dark Side free card'?

Think of it like this. What was reason Luke has to face Vader? He had to in order to become a Jedi Knight. In essence Luke went through his Jedi Trials. Which is something every Jedi has to do in order to become a full fledged Jedi Knight. Now here's the bug is the system. Anakin also went through the Trials, he faced and overcame the darkness within himself. Yet he would go on to fall completely to the Dark Side.

So I don't think it's completely unrealistic to think that Luke could still be tempted by the Dark Side.
 
Re: Kathleen Kennedy to step down from Lucasfilm?

I guess this where I differ with a lot of fans. Did Luke overcome the Darkness within himself? Yes. But why does that give him a 'get out of Dark Side free card'?

Think of it like this. What was reason Luke has to face Vader? He had to in order to become a Jedi Knight. In essence Luke went through his Jedi Trials. Which is something every Jedi has to do in order to become a full fledged Jedi Knight. Now here's the bug is the system. Anakin also went through the Trials, he faced and overcame the darkness within himself. Yet he would go on to fall completely to the Dark Side.

So I don't think it's completely unrealistic to think that Luke could still be tempted by the Dark Side.

Luke defeating Vader and the dark side in himself was a personal victory but also a thematic one. As the original planned ending, all evil was vanquished and Luke's hope/love/goodness was all powerful.

To be fair, I disliked most of the EU because they also never knew how to handle Luke after this point.
 
Re: Kathleen Kennedy to step down from Lucasfilm?

Luke defeating Vader and the dark side in himself was a personal victory but also a thematic one. As the original planned ending, all evil was vanquished and Luke's hope/love/goodness was all powerful.

To be fair, I disliked most of the EU because they also never knew how to handle Luke after this point.

So this an interesting idea. This guy on YouTube explained Luke being tempted to kill his nephew like this.

This guy, says that Luke's reaction to Ben is very Jedi like. After all the Jedi teach that they shouldn't have any attachments. No fathers, brothers, sons. No mothers, daughters, sisters. No nieces or nephews. So Luke's reaction to Ben's turn is because of Jedi teachings. A interesting thought. Not sure if I agree with it, but interesting none the less.
 
Re: Kathleen Kennedy to step down from Lucasfilm?

Theres no deep philosophy in the sw movies.

It's a whiny farmboy who grows up a little fights the big bad then is proclaimed to be the greatest hero in all of the land.



And what happens to heroes eventually?

They fall from grace. And that's how Luke was written.

*IF* you want to look at it that way - fine. They still blew it, just differently. The biggest problem with Anakin's 'fall' in the prequels was there was no build up. There was the sand people camp scene, and then 2-3 years later, killing off Dooku. Then, at the end, going from unsure about whether to let Mace take down the emperor to hacking off his arms to killing a large group of kids (like 5 year olds as well) in a matter of seconds. No build, just up/down/over.

The problem with Luke in that regard is even worse. Anakin's build was minimal, Luke's was non-existent. If you wanna take someone to that edge and push them off, you have to earn it. That wasn't earned. The explanation they try and give fails. He had visions where lots of people would be killed. Wow...whooppee. Luke damn well knows visions aren't necessary literal, or definitive. Unless you've been teetering for a very long time, you don't just up an sneak up your sleeping nephew and bring yourself within 2 feet of killing him in his sleep.

It. Just. Doesn't. Happen. Period.
 
Re: Kathleen Kennedy to step down from Lucasfilm?

So this an interesting idea. This guy on YouTube explained Luke being tempted to kill his nephew like this.

This guy, says that Luke's reaction to Ben is very Jedi like. After all the Jedi teach that they shouldn't have any attachments. No fathers, brothers, sons. No mothers, daughters, sisters. No nieces or nephews. So Luke's reaction to Ben's turn is because of Jedi teachings. A interesting thought. Not sure if I agree with it, but interesting none the less.
Referencing anything on YouTube with any sort of implication of truth is like watching live broadcasts of the national enquirer.



Your better off saying "some guy in his room with a makeshift green screen said"
 
Re: Kathleen Kennedy to step down from Lucasfilm?

I see the opposite. I don't see that he disregard the 7 previous films. And if there's one thing that Hollywood has learned, it's that direct sequels are many times meh compared to the first film. So if anything, pushing your second film to be bold and to take risks is a good thing. Let the first and last films be your cushion for the fandom.

No surprise there! Hollywood has not learned that. It has perpetuated that. Everything gets a sequel now, even 30 year old films.
Star Wars was very probably the first movie to spawn a trilogy because there was a greater story to be told. Hollywood soon realised that if a movie reached a wide audience then a sequel would draw that same crowd back in. By which time, they had already paid their money.
The same mindset is now milking the Star Wars cash cow.
 
Re: Kathleen Kennedy to step down from Lucasfilm?

Referencing anything on YouTube with any sort of implication of truth is like watching live broadcasts of the national enquirer.



Your better off saying "some guy in his room with a makeshift green screen said"

If you must know, it was review of TLJ, I thought the guy made some interesting observations. There's nothing wrong with sharing what another human being said.
 
Re: Kathleen Kennedy to step down from Lucasfilm?

*IF* you want to look at it that way - fine. They still blew it, just differently. The biggest problem with Anakin's 'fall' in the prequels was there was no build up. There was the sand people camp scene, and then 2-3 years later, killing off Dooku. Then, at the end, going from unsure about whether to let Mace take down the emperor to hacking off his arms to killing a large group of kids (like 5 year olds as well) in a matter of seconds. No build, just up/down/over.

The problem with Luke in that regard is even worse. Anakin's build was minimal, Luke's was non-existent. If you wanna take someone to that edge and push them off, you have to earn it. That wasn't earned. The explanation they try and give fails. He had visions where lots of people would be killed. Wow...whooppee. Luke damn well knows visions aren't necessary literal, or definitive. Unless you've been teetering for a very long time, you don't just up an sneak up your sleeping nephew and bring yourself within 2 feet of killing him in his sleep.

It. Just. Doesn't. Happen. Period.

Yeah, but that's a problem in all of the trilogies. ESB and ROTJ aren't much better. In ESB Luke blows it in the cave by bringing his sabre with him and lashing out at the Force image, and then blows it again by confronting Vader and nearly getting himself killed. But prior to that, you don't get any sense that Luke's tempted to go dark side. And it's not even clear that what he's doing is going dark side so much as just being cocky and thinking you can solve your problems by kicking it's ass.

In ROTJ, prior to meeting the Emperor, you don't get much sense that Luke's ready to go evil. In the throne room, there are basically two moments. The first is where the Emperor basically trolls Luke into grabbing his sabre and trying to kill him (which suggests he's learned nothing from ESB), the second is where Luke has again disengaged and is hiding from Vader, at which point Vader trolls him by saying he'll flip his sister, and Luke loses it completely...then backs off.

And based on that we're supposed to assume that he never, ever, ever gave into anger again? That he never had a vision he couldn't shake or a feeling that he had to take action? His failure in ESB is his failure in ROTJ and is his failure in between ROTJ and TFA (revealed in TLJ). It's arguably his critical character flaw: he will on occasion be too focused on controlling the future and will consider violence as the solution to an otherwise intractable problem. Except in TLJ, he actually has grown as compared to ROTJ because he regrets what he did as soon as he does it, but doesn't have a chance to take it back. If we take Luke at his word, he has a moment of weakness -- just one -- and it is the critical moment that destroys everything he's built. It's tragic, sure, but it arises from Luke's character flaw from the OT, which, even if he managed to avoid it in the critical moment of ROTJ, he fails to avoid thereafter.

I think the real problem is that ROTJ ended as "happily ever after" and you basically cannot let that stand if you're going to set the story in a world where the OT heroes are going to remain involved. I actually also wonder how much of Luke's failure is based on the background material developed in the lead up to TFA, and how much of it is pure Rian. Either way, I think it still fits, although I agree that Luke's general demeanor is jarring. The way he talked when he described the sequence, though? That was old school Luke, just an older, more regretful one who had failed at a critical moment.
 
Re: Kathleen Kennedy to step down from Lucasfilm?

Yeah, but that's a problem in all of the trilogies. ESB and ROTJ aren't much better. In ESB Luke blows it in the cave by bringing his sabre with him and lashing out at the Force image, and then blows it again by confronting Vader and nearly getting himself killed. But prior to that, you don't get any sense that Luke's tempted to go dark side. And it's not even clear that what he's doing is going dark side so much as just being cocky and thinking you can solve your problems by kicking it's ass.

In ROTJ, prior to meeting the Emperor, you don't get much sense that Luke's ready to go evil. In the throne room, there are basically two moments. The first is where the Emperor basically trolls Luke into grabbing his sabre and trying to kill him (which suggests he's learned nothing from ESB), the second is where Luke has again disengaged and is hiding from Vader, at which point Vader trolls him by saying he'll flip his sister, and Luke loses it completely...then backs off.

And based on that we're supposed to assume that he never, ever, ever gave into anger again? That he never had a vision he couldn't shake or a feeling that he had to take action? His failure in ESB is his failure in ROTJ and is his failure in between ROTJ and TFA (revealed in TLJ). It's arguably his critical character flaw: he will on occasion be too focused on controlling the future and will consider violence as the solution to an otherwise intractable problem. Except in TLJ, he actually has grown as compared to ROTJ because he regrets what he did as soon as he does it, but doesn't have a chance to take it back. If we take Luke at his word, he has a moment of weakness -- just one -- and it is the critical moment that destroys everything he's built. It's tragic, sure, but it arises from Luke's character flaw from the OT, which, even if he managed to avoid it in the critical moment of ROTJ, he fails to avoid thereafter.

I think the real problem is that ROTJ ended as "happily ever after" and you basically cannot let that stand if you're going to set the story in a world where the OT heroes are going to remain involved. I actually also wonder how much of Luke's failure is based on the background material developed in the lead up to TFA, and how much of it is pure Rian. Either way, I think it still fits, although I agree that Luke's general demeanor is jarring. The way he talked when he described the sequence, though? That was old school Luke, just an older, more regretful one who had failed at a critical moment.

Is it just me or has Luke had always had troubles with learning "your eyes can decive you, don't trust them"?
 
Re: Kathleen Kennedy to step down from Lucasfilm?

Its funny that all things You Tube are reviled by some, is it because there is practically nothing on it that is in defense of TLJ or the present Disney direction? I do get how rumours and theories may frustrate but at the end of the day if it wasnt for them many here would have nothing to react and object to or have a reason to post here. Anyway, back to your Luke theories.
 
Kathleen Kennedy to step down from Lucasfilm?

Oh and not everything everyone e does revolves around tlj.


I have literally not watched any yt videos about tlj except when the trailer dropped.
 
Re: Kathleen Kennedy to step down from Lucasfilm?

Youtube is great, but since RLM, the amount of copycat style vids is out of control.

But there are a few who are actually making great, well thought out and edited content...

"Movies with Mikey" is a great one. Knows his stuff and is an excellent editor.

He also does videos praising what's great about movies so people can learn, rather than neck-beard regurgitating all the same clickbaity complaint crap.


Funny in the end RLM started mocking the clickbaity guys... Nerd Crew and Clickbait vids they do are some of my faves.

Like here's youtube content with something to say...



A lot better than a vid like this:


Which has nothing to say, is barely criticism, and most of these aren't even things that are "wrong" with the flick... like why is the director cutting frames a "sin"?

clicks.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Re: Kathleen Kennedy to step down from Lucasfilm?

Oh and not everything everyone e does revolves around tlj.


I have literally not watched any yt videos about tlj except when the trailer dropped.
Wtf, I lost my the whole previous post trying to edit it.

Meh.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top