Discussion Dave Filoni’s Star Wars Film (It’s Heir to the Empire, folks. I know it, you know it!)

They would have to of actually seen the film to get to know him as the character. Marketing wouldn't do that.

KK has gone on record of saying they will not be recasting. Now the issue with Alden is that he plays Han very close to Harrison fords age when he first played Han, so its hard to see him as a younger version. So he is pretty much a recast. And I honestly do believe the film affected how they looked at recasting.

So alot of people say oh Alden should just play Han post episode 6. Lets be honest, they ain't doing that.

 

Her firing began pre-production in 2017, and is scheduled for release in 2035.

 

one of these days Kennedy will take off her mask and we'll all see she was a Scooby Doo villain all along

 

This is from Variety… ironically she said this whilst promoting the Obi-Wan Kenobi show, a show that’s entirely based on a recast character… duh!!! Perhaps, maybe, you’ll understand why I don’t believe a word she says…

Lucasfilm president Kathleen Kennedy told Vanity Fair that the company has learned never to recast iconic “Star Wars” characters following the flop that was “Solo: A Star Wars Story.” The Ron Howard-directed 2018 movie cast Alden Ehrenreich as a younger version of Han Solo, the hot-shot space pilot famously brought to life by Harrison Ford. Many critics and fans felt Ehrenreich just couldn’t capture Ford’s magic.

“There should be moments along the way when you learn things,” Kennedy sad. “Now it does seem so abundantly clear that we can’t do that.”

 

It seems that she certainly thought it was a factor (which they probably still believe given how they’ve portrayed Luke) but combined with what else we know of their thoughts about the flop, I’m not sure we can say she pinned it on the recasting. That’d be an exaggeration.

 

I think we can certainly say that in the Variety interview I quoted, she seems to be pinning it on the recasting. Whether she actually believes that, or means that, (which I suspect she doesn't), is another question.

 

No, we can’t certainly say that. She’s certainly saying it’s a factor, but since Variety provided no full original quote, nor do they even say it’s the main thing she blames for the flop, we can’t say that. Especially since we know the rest of their perspective from other sources.

It certainly seems like an overreaction, since I think Han is a unique case of being inextricably linked to Ford, but there’s probably some merit to it being a factor in less enthusiasm around the film (as well as overestimating how much excitement general audiences really feel for Han Solo the character as opposed to Han Solo as played by Harrison Ford).

 

I believe the study they commissioned noted that a potentially significant factor was that the tiny marketing period of only three months or so wasn’t enough time to get audiences to accept, appreciate and anticipate a new actor, Alden, as Han.

 

With all respect, you can read the full interview over on the Vanity Fair website. Not once is Kennedy quoted as saying "it was a factor"... those are not her words. You are just replacing her actual words with your own (which I understand, and I agree with, because you're trying to discuss the bigger picture of it). But her quotes are directly in relation to a question about lessons learnt from Solo. Not once does she try and defend the casting by acknowledging other factors. She stated quite emphatically, in terms of casting a different actor as a younger version of Han, "Now it does seem so abundantly clear that we can’t do that.”. And, in relation to casting a new actor, she states, “Maybe I should have recognized this before. We would never make Indiana Jones without Harrison Ford.". So the issue here is how Kennedy frames it. She wouldn't have said that if Solo had been a smash it... which is why she's reenforcing what was seen as the issue (even if you or I don't agree that it was). And I certainly didn't hear/see her having the same issue with Ewan McGregor whilst promoting the OWK show in the same interview... which is exceedingly telling.

 

See that would make more sense for a lesser-known franchise. But 400 mil is terrible for Star Wars. the lack of marketing would put a film like this to at least 700 mil. Not 400 mil. the marketing wasn't THAT bad.

 

She was Lucas all along. The jokes on us.

 

I’m not going further run the weeds in this, so I’ll just post this and be done with it.

I did read the original article just before posting - the only direct quotes are the one’s you provided. In context however, we also know that Iger stated that his failure to delay was another factor, and that Kennedy was right to want to delay it. That context suggests Kennedy doesn’t actually believe it was mostly the recasting, and that what she is describing in the article is but one factor. She’s also later clarified her statement to make it less emphatic that they would never recast, which she wouldn’t do if she thought the box office flop was mostly to do with recasting.

 

I know certain SW characters are iconic. But so is James Bond, and that character is iconic as well. The problem with Solo wasn't the recasting, it was poor and unneeded story telling. It took me three tries to get through it. SW made us believe in jedi, the force and lightsabers, a magic that has enthused generations. If there is great writing, and admirable acting recasting can work.

 

In my opinion Filoni should be Brave and kill Ahsoka already in the Mandoverse Movie Ahsoka still being Alive during the First Order Era would be ridiculous but if some Character Dies im sure it will be Din or Thrawn when Rey hears the Voices of the Jedi in Rise of Skywalker all the other Jedi except Ahsoka are dead so there is a High Chance that Ahsoka is already dead during the events of Rise of Skywalker

 

Personally I don’t think there’s a high chance of Din or Ahsoka dying in this film.

And that’s not going to upset me at all, especially since they’re relatively “new” to the live action story.

 

As long as they don't kill Grogu, I'll cry, but life will go on.

 

Hold on, Grogu. I don’t know what I’d do without you. I’d probably move on, find a new cute Star Wars character. But there would be a ten minute window there where I’d be completely inconsolable.

 

This Movie being called the End of the Mandoverse makes me think Din will Die or Retire im sure after this Movie Mandalorian will not have more New Seasons since this Movie is the End of Din and Grogu Story maybe an Adult Grogu will appear in Rey Movie

 

Maybe, but also maybe not. They haven’t even confirmed that Din is in the film, so I think you’re getting ahead of yourself trying to suggest that he’s definitely going to be killed off.

 

Im Sure this Movie will have Din and Grogu

 

Probably, but we don’t know to what degree or what their function in the plot would be. So saying that it’s going to feature Din’s death or retirement seems very premature to me.

 

Who’s calling the movie the end of the Mandoverse?

 

I think they used the term 'culmination' which can mean end.

 

I wish we could end using the term “Mandoverse” because it’s dumb.