Surely everyone has finally woken up and opened their eyes by now...right?
shareI loved the TLJ a great deal; and I have no problem saying that the negative response to it from so many fans is what hurt Solo at the box office.
[none]
It probably didn't help that they released Solo so soon after the last SW movie, either.
shareI really don't see that as a valid excuse.
Black Panther and Avengers: Infinity War were released much closer together than Last Jedi and Solo were.
Is there some financial issue for Star Wars fans that they can't save up enough pocket money to see another Star Wars movie unless they are a year apart?
The problem as far as I see it is its to do with the deaths of the original characters.
Everyone knows that Harrison Ford wanted out, and wanted Solo killed off in Jedi, so to most fans, Solo dying in Force Awakens was not as big a deal as it could have been.
But then they killed off Luke Skywalker in The Last Jedi, and we already know that Carrie Fisher has died, so whilst Fishers death is out of Lucasfilms hands, their intention was to kill off Luke in Last Jedi regardless, and now all three main characters from the original trilogy are gone.
I'm pretty sure the reason why Solo failed is because the promises to respect the characters of Star Wars, specifically the comments made by Kathleen Kennedy that she would respect George Lucas' legacy.......... was bollocks.
So all the original main characters are dead, and Lucasfilm expects people to get excited about a movie based on a character they already killed off?
It's not a financial issue. But SW is no longer a guaranteed hit, I think because they release a movie a year. They are no longer an event. What's the old saying? Absence makes the heart grow fonder?
Marvel movies aren't guarenteed hits either. I'd say Black Panther and Avengers did well because they were very good movies, and the previous films had been pretty good too.
Sorry, its only since Solo that Star Wars is no longer a guaranteed hit. Every single Star Wars movie before it made money...... lots of it.
The abstinence excuse is just that, an excuse. For that to be true, Marvel would have movies failing left right and centre, but ever since they started, there has been a consistent increase in box office for each successive movie, and thats with the formula of releasing 3 a year.
And yes, Marvel Studios movies absolutely are guaranteed hits, because every single one since Iron Man in 2008 has been a hit, every single one has made a profit.
I could list the box office for each Marvel Studios movie, but I don't need to, because EVERYONE knows that every single one of them has made a profit, and each sequel has made more money.
How much more proof do you need that Marvel movies are guaranteed hits?
The difference there is that the Marvel movies have been good, and you're wrong that some of them haven't failed. When they haven't been as good, like the Fantastic Four for example, they haven't succeeded. Putting Marvel characters in a movie is not a guarenteed hit.
Again, key difference: the Marvel movies you mentioned were popular with critics and fans alike.
In the question of 'fatigue' there's a crucial difference between Marvel and Star Wars:
The Marvel films build on each other, they use characters from one story to add to their other stories, this is why they can release Black Panther and IW back to back and have them both be huge hits. Now Star Wars has been doing just the opposite. The Star Wars movies *steal* from each other, they use well loved characters from the past to prop up the terrible characters of the present. It might have been a big hit but did TFA improve upon Han's character? Plus they even fail to tie together films in any meaningful way. VII completely undoes the previous films, VIII ignores VII, SOLO brings [spoiler]brings back a character from the dead that has already been rekilled off in the tv shows.[/spoiler].
So with marvel we have cooperation and synergy, and with Star Wars we have a kind of parasitic behaviour. So little wonder one is thriving while the other dies.
I'm not wrong that no Marvel Studios movie has failed since Iron Man. You don't seem to know your movies very well.
Fantastic Four - Fox
Fantastic Four Riser of the Silver Surfer - Fox
Fantastic Four - Fox
The Hulk - Universal
Spider-Man - Sony/Columbia
Spider-Man 2 - Sony/Columbia
Spider-Man 3 - Sony/Columbia
TASM - Sony/Columbia
TASM2 - Sony/Columbia
All were licenced FROM Marvel, none are a Marvel Studios movie.
The only flop they have had was The Incredible Hulk which wasn't just Marvel Studios.
But since their first sole movie in 2008 which was Iron Man, MARVEL STUDIOS has NOT had a flop and every single movie made a profit and is a guaranteed success.
There is NO key difference, if Marvel Studios can release upto 3 movies a year and still see profit improvements with every release, any excuses for Star Wars releasing another movie 5 months later are irrelevant.
Well said. Yes, the redundancy of this prequel is definitely one issue.
The bottom line is this: It's not just the fact that the Big 3 is gone--it's the MANNER of which Disney dispatched them. It was so callous and disrespectful of the characters, Lucas and us fans. Those characters deserved better than that--WE deserved better than that.
It's as if they wanted to spite the fans. They turn Luke, Han and Leia into three miserable people with completely destruction in their lives and then END their lives without any alleviation of their perils. They die failures.
That's insulting.
There's plenty still deep in denial, unfortunately.
shareThe worst part is that yes, Solo was released now, in May, rather than at Christmas, which has NO Star Wars showing this year. Stupid mistake by Disney for those remaining fans, but I don't care at this time.
Do you realize that May is Star Wars' month, and the entire OT/PT were released in May? "May the 4th be with you"
You apologists come up with the most ridiculous excuses.
I know that, but the most recent SW movies have been released at Christmas instead. Doesn't seem to make any difference, as far as I can see. Maybe Solo didn't do as well at the box office because people were used to seeing new Star Wars movies in December? Releasing on Memorial Day weekend doesn't help, neither.
If people want to watch a movie, they will. I’m not sure why releasing the movie in December would have changed anything. The OT and PT were late spring/early summer.
shareYeah, as I just said and they completely ignored. Sigh. Endless excuses, even if they make zero sense. "But but... December... um... May is literally the month of Star Wars but... um... December?"
shareYeah, May is more of a traditional month for Star Wars releases than December. The first six movies of the series were released in May.
shareYou think people are that autistic ? That they only want to watch Star Wars in December? Thats bullshit. You either like a franchise and want to watch the movie, or you don't. I never thought to myself, wow that movie looks awesome! oh wait, its not December yet, lets skip it.
shareMy point is, there is no Star Wars movie this December, unlike previous years. You would think that would worry the Disney economists, with no income then.
Enough Disney movies get released all year long. No Star Wars in December doesn't matter. They would have made just as much money then as now.
shareMary Poppins Returns is Disneys big movie for December, I guarantee it will utterly annihilate the box office for Solo.
sharePrevious years? You mean ONLY the last three years. Otherwise, all Star Wars movies have been released in May, starting in 1977.
shareThe Force Awakens killed it.
share