Discussion Future Anthology Films Possibly On Hold

An example is my brother. He's not really a SW fan, but he loves the SW films. He's also not much of a cinema-goer (mostly watches films on TV), and he also doesn't do any form of social media. Having said that he and his friend have gone to watch all the new SW films in the cinema since 2015 (TFA, RO and TLJ). He didn't go and watch Solo. I asked him why and he replied that he had no idea of its existence until I mentioned it. Now, obviously, I'm not sure for the reason why, but I do wonder how many people out there have a similar story.

 

Exact same scenario for my parents.

 

I heard this from multiple colleagues. Many had no idea it existed. And those that knew, assumed it would be out in December. There was just too little promotion, and too little time, for the market to get saturated with it. I think the subject of the film had little-to-nothing to do with its Box Office reception.

 

Has that been mentioned as a possibility by anyone, in terms of movies on the streaming service? Isn't the Loki thing actually a TV series, and the Winter Soldier thing a limited series that will have several episodes, or at least more than one? It seems to me that the model for modern television (at least for premium cable and streaming) is 8-13 episode seasons, which appears to be something like what The Mandalorian will be. I would very much favor that over one-off lower budget films- 3 or 4 well made live-action SW TV series running along with the annual theatrical release. Whole seasons allow for so much more story and character development.

 

I would tend to doubt they would do both anytime soon; I think they are in a "go slow" mode, but that definitely would be an ideal scenario. I'm sure they will wait and see how the next couple projects go before they lay that kind of money on the line all at once. Netflix is spending that exact amount of money- 150 million- on their next movie.

I think the cancelation of Luke Cage and Iron Fist may have something to do with Disney trying to pull as much content as possible back under their umbrella for their streaming service. There doesn't seem to be any other explanation given for the cancellations, so that is my conspiracy theory. I sure hope Daredevil doesn't get cancelled; that's one of the best shows on TV.

I will be curious to see which model Disney uses for the SW shows- the Netflix/Amazon model of all episodes at once, or the HBO model of one per week. I would tend to think more the HBO model.

 

LFL could even release a one season show with 8-10 episodes about the time Obi-Wan spent on Tatooine between ROTS and ANH.

 

It still doesn't make sense to me in some regards though. Marvel puts out 3 films a year without this issue. I think if they had approached Solo with expectations of it performing like, say, a solo Doctor Strange movie and planned accordingly, they wouldn't be so rattled.

 

I sincerely hope you're right. Really don't want the cinematic anthologies to end.

 

That’s because Marvel is Marvel, and its fans expect that from Marvel. Nobody expected this from Star Wars.

 

The point is, clearly not all Star Wars films can be expected to make a billion. That expectation is what made Solo such a disappointment, not the movie itself.

On a side note, I was pretty much laughed at when I said Aquaman would make more than Solo on Reddit. Who’s laughing now?

Realistic expectations people.

 

I don’t fully agree though. I think if Solo was given a full year of marketing, and was released in December as Kennedy wanted, it could have cleared a billion. So far, I only see evidence of that being a marketing failure. That said, some smaller films like Solo can certainly be made with less money. I suspect that we’re going to get most of that in TV format, anyway.

 

I see what you're saying. I can't decide if I agree or not, but your points make sense.

 

So with a later release date and more marketing, SOLO would somehow add over 600 M$ to it's BO?
That it's total gross would be more than double than what it is?
No, I find this totally unrealistic.

The film had a big opening, over 100 M for the 4-day. Thus far it has the 7th highest opening for the year.
But the film dropped somewhat hard after that, which suggest that WOM was not that great.
And the second weekend did not have any big openings, the total for the new films was about 8 M.

The overseas drop was even bigger than the domestic one and in certain markets, like China, SW has been on a downward trend.
TFA: 124 M
R1: 69 M
TLJ: 42 M
Solo: 16 M.

The film had an uphill struggle, fired directors, massive re-shoots, a lack of interest, recasting a well-known and beloved character and so on.
It is possible that the marketing that we got was not good enough to make people forget those things but the most I can see with a different release date and more marketing is maybe 100-200 M more.

As for this december, it that kill-zone? I think that it would not have helped Solo at all, it might have made it worse.
There is a lot of films opening in a very short window so lots of competition.
Plus Disney has Mary Poppins 2 coming out so they would be competing with themselves.

Will there be a follow up on the streaming service?
Quite possible, they are doing some prequel to Cassian from R1.

Could be interesting but I also would want them to branch out a bit more, introduce new characters, not just keep reusing old ones.
I think that Solo might have worked better as a series of films, with a new main character and Han is in it but not the main character.
.
Bye for now.
Blackboard Monitor

 

I’m not talking about “belief.” I’m talking about going by the findings of the only professional market analysis done of Solo’s Box Office returns. The short marketing window was identified as the primary culprit.

 

I do think general awareness was a problem for this film.

 

Did that professional say that with proper marketing then SOLO would have grossed over a billion dollars?
If so, that is the first I have heard about that.

There is a difference between saying that the marketing was the primary reason that the film bombed and saying how much the film would have grossed with proper marketing.
Had the film made 200 M more then it would not be a bomb but 600 M is far from the billion you argue.

The BO-projections before the film opened was for a domestic gross about between 350-430 M$.
If we assume R1's domestic/overseas split, then that would have given a total BO of 800-850 M.
Which would have made it a hit to be sure but again you argued a billion.

So did this analysts say that Solo would have made a billion if not for marketing or is the billion number your own belief?

And speaking of R1, that just barely passed a billion at the BO.
TLJ dropped from TFA, so it is reasonable to think that SOLO might drop from R1.
So why would it not drop at all and make about as much as R1?
The reviews for SOLO were not as good as for R1, and while R1 had some behind the scenes trouble, SOLO had far more of that.

In closing, I don't deny that marketing played a part, I just don't think the film would have made more than double it's current gross with better marketing.
Saying poor marketing cost the film over 600 M is far too unrealistic.

Bye for now.
Blackboard Monitor

 

I don't think it would have made a billion, but it certainly would have done significantly better with the marketing and timing improved.

I wouldn't put that as the sole factor though. I still think with SW you want to market interesting concepts rather than OT characters if you are going to use huge budgets. I don't believe the GA is as intrigued by slapping the name of a character and using that as the hook. Fans are, but the GA not so much.

That concept approach looks to be what they are doing with the TV shows- a spy show a la R1 and a show about an unknown Mandalorian (who fans may identify with Boba Fett for, but certainly not the GA; this would have actually been Boba if that is the only appeal that they had intended for it).

IMO (I think this is often overlooked or minimized more than it should be), the difference between SW and Marvel- SW was always an egalitarian movie- no one dominated stardom, whereas Marvel always had their dominant main hero (then cashing in by putting all of them in a movie). You can have SW movies or shows with a main character back story that are a success, but don't drop huge amounts of money and expect the GA to come running for it. T

 

venom just opened up with 111 million in China. Right now I don’t know what to say about Star Wars. Everyone here thinks they know why a movie does good or not and find excuses to validate your points. Star Wars fatigue is not the real problem. The truth is, what George Lucas knew all along. That telling Star Wars stories is not easy. They are complex layered stories that go beyond nostalgia. It’s a complete understanding and unity of the written word, the acting, set design, special effects, sound effects, music, costumes, settings, all coming together by a creative director, producer, executive producer, all the way to the top ceo or manager. The leadership is important. If the stories are true of Gareth Edwards being fired at the end of rogue one, coupled with the Phil lord, Solo movie debacle, along with Colin being fired for episode 9 and of course the super negative rain Johnson issue, it’s a miracle that Star Wars made any money. All this stuff, would ruin any other franchise. There has to be stability and unity at the top, and they need to have a concise plan, which I don’t think they had before. Now, they are probably working on it but at what expense. I’m not really feeling star wars and am worried about it’s future because Star Wars has a formula much like the crabby patty of mr. crabs in spongebob square pants cartoon series. The hamburger isn’t done according to the formula it stops being the crabby patty and becomes something else. Star Wars has a formula and I hope that with all these live action tv series,movies and animation it doesn’t get lost. Star Wars resistance for example has nice animation but after seven episodes is hard to watch and stomach.

 

Kiri Hart obviously no longer with Lucasfilm

 

You talking about this?

http://outerrimnews.com/star-wars/are-high-level-changes-taking-place-at-lucasfilm/

 

I saw it on reddit

 

In addition, James Waugh's bio (he was the story group vp under Hart) has been changed.

It used to say: "James Waugh is the Vice President, Franchise Content & Strategy for the Lucasfilm Story Group."

Now it says: "James Waugh is the Vice President, Franchise Content & Strategy at Lucasfilm."