Disney dodged a bullet there, for sure. Can you imagine the disaster those two assholes would perpetrate on the Universe?
QFT. You don’t really even need to alter the time frame. Just move far, far away from the OT. Parsecs away. No, farther than that. Maybe throw in one line of dialog that mentions a rumor about some sort of “Death Star” that somebody heard about somewhere. That’s it.
They can still do that (minus the numbering), and hope they do one day (though by the time that happens JLJ likely will not be around, sadly).
I’d love to see episodes 7, 8, and 9 retconned, but I highly doubt it will happen, and who’s to say it won’t be worse? The Force Awakens was a decent remake of A New Hope with the exception of killing Han Solo just so Kylo could be more edgy. I’m fine with Solo dying, just not to add “depth” to his dopey son. The Last Jedi was an ok movie but a terrible Star Wars movie. Like really bad, worse than Phantom Menace. Rise of Skywalker I enjoyed for some reason even though the plot was not good.
What this new trilogy did was give me more appreciation of the prequels by way of The Clone Wars. The Phantom Menace still mostly sucks but when you watch The Clone Wars it fleshes out what happened between episodes 2 and 3, clarifies Palpatine’s plot and shows how the Jedi lost their way, and introduces and fleshes out many characters, especially Anakin. Clone Wars Anakin is so much better than prequels Anakin. And I now consider Revenge of the Sith to be a good, if flawed, movie.
And I loved The Mandalorian, so if we get more stuff like The Mandalorian I will be very happy with that. I have high hopes for the Obi-Wan series.
I’m pretty sure that was done because Harrison Ford insisted on it 
I was very surprised to read about this whole make-the-most-recent-trilogy-non-canon proposal. I never had the impression that those movies were widely reviled (nothing nearly on the level of the scathing criticism directed at gee-whiz young Anakin, sullen-teen later Anakin, or - shudder - Jar Jar). I also don’t think that the trilogy is so flawed or wrongheaded as to irrevocably close the door to good, entertaining future SW movies.
The secret is in the writing. They need good stories, and for this most recent trilogy, there was nothing really great about the storytelling. At least in the original three you had Luke’s hero journey as the overarching theme along with the redemption of his father. Han and Leia made for a nice side adventure-romance. That kind of simplicity was missing from the last three. It was like they were trying to cram too many stories in there, and none of them were compelling enough on their own.
This place is one of the only places where I get to rant about Star Wars and not have people walk away from me like a weirdo, so I don’t think confirmation bias is it.
While I am willing to believe that your average fresh-off-the-street rube and 12 year old would see little difference between the PT, the OT and the NT they also probably can’t tell you what “the guy with the horns” name was or explain the difference between the Empire and the First Order. I just don’t agree with the POV that all opinions are equal on this.
I agree as well. And I think the reason is the story and the world-building were still compelling, even if the dialogue and the acting were abysmal. You can forgive those technical failures because you’re still interested in learning more about the galaxy and the characters. I’d say that the NT was technically far more competent than the PT, but dear god what a soulless idiotic story.
Rian Johnson may well be a good writer and director (haven’t seen Brick or Knives Out yet, Looper was meh for me) but that’s not what’s needed here. What’s needed is a fantasy world-builder, I do not think these skills are necessarily transferable. Thor: Ragnarok was fun, though personally I find it a little overrated, and Waititi did bring a new energy to the franchise. BUT, he was working inside of the world that was well established with a overarching macro-story that he was not able to change or deviate from. He couldn’t just kill Loki, turn Thor into a villian and redefine what the Asgardian’s powers are. MAYBE Waititi could have gotten us from Ultron to End Game but nothing on his resume says he can. Just like nothing on Rian Johnson’s resume says he can bring the Star Wars main story in for a good landing. PS: Same can be said for Abrams.
Now, there aren’t exactly a lot of people out there with that kind of resume, but Disney missed on finding one badly, multiple times.
Rian Johnson might have been a great choice for Solo…but I really don’t think I’m interested in seeing a new epic from him after the mess he made of TLJ.
This is true, but this isn’t a good place to be. Lucasfilm needs to move a few parsecs away from the Skywalker story because it was butchered to the point of being toxic. The NT was so derivative if retroactively makes the OT suffer.
It would be hard, maybe impossible for at least a generation, but reconning away the NT at least gives them the OPTION to revisit the Skywalker storyline someday with something that doesn’t actively alienate people.
Certainly Johnson would have been a great choice for a standalone film.
This is the core problem with 7-9. They aren’t a trilogy they are more like the Indiana Jones films where aside from the main character running around the second movie has nothing to do with the other two. 20 years ago this wouldn’t have been a big deal but the world just watched marvel make a flawless landing over 20 something movies.
I dislike watching 1-3 they are boring movies and the cool things aren’t bug or cool enough to justify the crap. I was in high school when #1 came out and I mostly remember feeling disappointed that they killed Darth maul rather then turning him into another Vader and then it got worse from there. Now, I can look back and say at least there was an overarching story that was just poorly told, acted and with shitty cgi.
The new trilogy is at least fun. I enjoy each movie individually and have watched 7 and 8 repeatedly over the years. They aren’t good movies but they at least brought back the fun that 1-3 tried to kill. I have only watched ROS once since it left theaters and that is because while fun it is a let down, it is a shitty crescendo that is bad enough to reverberate back through two other fun movies. In the end the person in charge of Starwars at Disney should be fired because its their fault.
Going forward, I’m glad the skywalker stuff is done and I don’t want to see another movie about it (I could be talked into a Lando movie with Donald Glover though). I agree they should run off and make cool movies on a cool background but they shouldn’t be allowed to make any trilogies or longer unless they bring in someone who knows how to plot.
The problem from a business point of view is that interest in the universe is fading away. Here is a non-fandom, business assessment from last year.
Disney is losing a large amount of money on Star Wars.
Someone was talking earlier about $5bn in box office takings for the Disney trilogy. This is highly misleading.
Here’s a detailed calculation showing that before The Rise of Skywalker, Disney was running at a $2.3 billion loss on Star Wars. After The Rise of Skywalker they will be currently at a little under a $2 billion loss.
For example, The Force Awakens made US$2.06 billion in box office receipts, but revenues to Disney (we assume after theaters have taken a share) were US$1.56 billion, including home entertainment (DVD, Blu-ray and streaming). After Disney’s production and marketing costs, its net profit becomes US$780 million.
Importantly, there doesn’t appear to be any depreciation or amortization of the intellectual property asset purchased in 2012. This makes it appropriate for the present value cashflow we’re about to perform.
So they are only halfway to recouping their investment and breaking even… and the franchise is slowly dying.
When George Lucas still owned the IP he put all his profits back into the next movie he made. That wasn’t where he was making his obscene wealth. Instead it was the merchandise. And that’s also true for Disney. They are not short of profitability, can afford to take some risks, have tons of things in the pipeline, and have no need to be worried just yet.
It’s true Solo underperformed, and the new Galaxy’s Edge theme park rides are not as blockbuster a hit as they had hoped, but that’s about the worst of it as far as they’re concerned. They can take those hits without a big problem when everything else is working.
So you’re optimistic that some day Disney will manage to break even? 
The article mentions merchandising profits - not large.
It would help your arguments if you had any numbers and cites, rather than guesses.
I don’t really understand Hollywood Accounting, which tends to be a combination of exaggerations, lies, and actor fees of mysteriously large amounts. I admit it is just my gut feeling, but based on things I’ve heard more knowledgeable people than I discuss around the internet.
Hollywood accounting is where a studio can pull in $900 million on a film with a budget of $100 million, claim the film lost money, and no one bats an eye.
Very interesting article - thanks.
I like this analogy. I think the Indiana Jones films are way better stories than anything in the NT, but the sense that they are only connected by the fact that they have the same characters is an apt description.
The first statement is unquestionably true. The latter, far less certain. Nothing from the NT has created any kind of a surge in merchandise buying. BB-8 is popular. Baby Yoda is popular. They sold a bunch of Rey Halloween costumes, but action figures simply aren’t a big thing any more. Lunchboxes aren’t a thing any more. Collectible Cards aren’t a thing anymore. None of the books really made a splash. The only place where they might have made some gains are in Legos and in Videogames, but nothing about the current merchandising landscape parallels what George did.
Disney will be fine financially, and I don’t doubt they are turning a profit on the IP using regular day-to-day accounting, but big picture, that investment is not showing an amazing return and the failure of the NT puts future earnings in doubt.