# (Rumor) Disney Stars Wars Could Be Removed from Canon (or simply ignored)



## Mercurius (Jul 9, 2020)

Read all about it here.

Its a rumor, so don't get your panties in a wad, Disney Star Wars fans.

The interesting -- and more possible/likely -- part is this:



> "However, he does indicate there might have been a decision made to render the sequel trilogy moot. He details, “What I also hear that while officially and formally all out striking the Sequel Trilogy from canon may be a long shot, the decision to effectively render it moot may already have been decided higher up in the food chain.”
> 
> He elaborates, “Allegedly, the higher-ups have examined the numbers and reportedly don’t feel the sequel trilogy provided the necessary foundation to build anything more upon. Because of that we are unlikely to be seeing any stories taking place in the aftermath of Rise of Skywalker anytime soon.”
> 
> ...




I have no problem with this (though the Veil stuff sounds a bit silly). I'm, at best, lukewarm on the Disney films. They were relatively fun, but felt like somewhat soul-less fan-fic to me and got progressively worse, imo. By the end of Rise, I was left with the feeling that one of the most iconic stories of my childhood had been tarnished. Woe is me.

But it makes sense to build up the time between RotJ and TFA, ala the Mandalorian, and kind of ignore the Disney films, letting them recede into the rear-view, perhaps off-handedly declaring them as "one possible future."


----------



## Levistus's_Leviathan (Jul 9, 2020)

I'd be for this. I mostly disliked the Force Awakens, Last Jedi, and Rise of Skywalker. 

I doubt this would happen, but I think it should happen.


----------



## Zardnaar (Jul 9, 2020)

Doomcocks not the most reliable FYI.

Only time he was somewhat accurate he was reporting after spoilers on Reddit


----------



## FitzTheRuke (Jul 9, 2020)

I'm okay with that but only if we also make the Prequels non-cannon. We can replace them by putting some of the earlier comics and novels back into canon. Oh and Mandelorian is totally allowed in too. Now I am happy. I don't know what any of that has to do with reality, but the thought is nice.


----------



## Immeril (Jul 9, 2020)

“And if The Terminator franchise taught us anything it is that the future is not set.”: using a Terminator reference to satisfy unhappy fans is nothing more than pandering. Time travel has always been an integral part of Terminator, not so much in Star Wars.
In creating the Legends imprint, Disney wanted to rewrite the continuity while still being able to profit from earlier works. If they had done some minimum of market research, they could have expected backlash from existing fans for disregarding characters such as Mara Jade and Kyle Katarn.


FitzTheRuke said:


> I'm okay with that but only if we also make the Prequels non-cannon. We can replace them by putting some of the earlier comics and novels back into canon. Oh and Mandelorian is totally allowed in too. Now I am happy. I don't know what any of that has to do with reality, but the thought is nice.



AFAIK the prequel trilogy didn't create (major) continuity issues with comics like Tales of the Jedi, or are you (using the word 'earlier') referring to the Marvel comics and the Archie Goodwin newspaper strips?
However, the sequel trilogy disregards Young Jedi Knights, The New Jedi Order, Legacy I and II, ...
It isn't limited to the sequels. Rogue One (even though it was a better movie than any of the sequels) disregards Dark Forces.


----------



## Morrus (Jul 9, 2020)

Sounds a bit far fetched. Companies aren’t in the habit of writing out billion-dollar films (or $2B in the case of TFA).


----------



## Eilathen (Jul 9, 2020)

Yeah, I don't think that will happen. I mean I'd love for it to happen (I really hate the final Skywalker trilogy, it's pure and utter garbage, storywise), but that more or less would be the equivalent to Disney admitting they produced naughty word material and i can't see that happening.

Although, after they did that with a lot of EU stuff (that is/was a 1000 times better than almost everything Disney did since they bought the franchise), maybe they give Eps7-9 to another "parallel universe" to make it "un-canon"? Why not


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (Jul 9, 2020)

I mean, sure, this makes perfect sense ....

assuming that Disney already hadn't spent all that money building attractions at theme parks based on the movies, and selling merchandise, and that these movies made billions, and everything else. 

But sure.


----------



## Plageman (Jul 9, 2020)

Well, what they can do is phase out the importance of the events of the new trilogy and re-focus themselves on other events in the SW universe. That shouldn't be a problem for them since none of the "new generation" is interested in returning for an _encore_.

They can just make a nice time jump and forget turn it history's notebook footnote.


----------



## Eilathen (Jul 9, 2020)

Plageman said:


> Well, what they can do is phase out the importance of the events of the new trilogy and re-focus themselves on other events in the SW universe. That shouldn't be a problem for them since none of the "new generation" is interested in returning for an _encore_.
> 
> They can just make a nice time jump and forget turn it history's notebook footnote.




Which is kind of a shame, imo. The Skywalker Saga could have been such a great Saga. Maybe they should have the guts to just say something like "You know what, Eps 1-3 and Eps 7-9 we can do better (or: is just one of the stories they tell of that time) and we will..." . And then, with what is possible in todays TV, do a several season TV-series deep dive into the material that was so unlovingly handled in Eps 1-3 and Eps 7-9. Do an "Ultimate Skywalker Saga" with more focus on the fall of Anakin and the conclusion of the Saga after Luke with more fresh ideas and more love for the old characters and storyarcs.

But maybe that's just me...


----------



## Plageman (Jul 9, 2020)

Eilathen said:


> Do an "Ultimate Skywalker Saga" with more focus on the fall of Anakin and the conclusion of the Saga after Luke with more fresh ideas and more love for the old characters and storyarcs.



Anakin's story has already been expanded greatly through the Clone Wars tv series. Heck you could even roll in Rebels with its Darth Vader arcs. Luke and Leia could still be part of a "cinematic" universe through the same sort of initiative; TV Series, comics and novels can fill that gap.

However...

With where we find these characters in the Force Awakens makes it complicated to create something interesting since they are set for a "failure" narrative with no greater story to tell (there is nothing akin to the clone wars in the time gap).

Still what I noticed with The Mandalorian, Star Wars Rebels, and even with Resistance, it's that these days SW stories are more interesting when not seen through the eyes of the "movie" protagonists. Since we have no idea of what their arcs are going to be you can genuinely be intrigued by their journeys...


----------



## Umbran (Jul 9, 2020)

I liked Episodes 7-9.  I am not a fan of 1-3.  I don't think "erasing from canon" is a step they'd take with anything that's actually hit the screen (big or small).  I think setting aside the Expanded Universe was actually a good idea.  Not that there weren't good stories in there, but having _so much_ canon that the overall mass market isn't familiar with is problematic for storytelling.

If we take for granted for a moment that they are making decisions about what period of Star Wars continuity is going to get more attention, I am by no means convinced that reception of the most recent movies is (or should be) the main driver.  

I think the main driver is that the new trilogy (while I liked it) doesn't do much to set up _future story_.  It is simply easier to find interesting story hooks in the gaps between the trilogies.


----------



## Eilathen (Jul 9, 2020)

Plageman said:


> Anakin's story has already been expanded greatly through the Clone Wars tv series. Heck you could even roll in Rebels with its Darth Vader arcs. Luke and Leia could still be part of a "cinematic" universe through the same sort of initiative; TV Series, comics and novels can fill that gap.




Agreed. But what I'm saying is just wish full thinking anyway. But i still like to dream  And when i dream, I'm not satisfied with even the Clone Wars development (although i admit that imo, the two animated series Clone Wars and Rebels, is some of the best SW we have seen so far, period!) and its depth. Because the main focal point and most interesting part of Anakin's journey was not done in CW, unfortuantely. It was canceled too early. I always wonder what could have been if Disney hadn't shown up and we had seen a "natural" conclusion to the CW instead of the stunted one we got now.
But as said, my dream would be for a real life tv series done for the Anakin arc and then a continuation of the Skywalker story after that is done.


----------



## Istbor (Jul 9, 2020)

I am not sure I would ever take information from a person with such a dumb name as sound. 

Even if I did, I think that opens a box of really terrible precedent. I don't really want time travel in Star Wars. I REALLY don't want them to be able to just hand-wave some force option to invalidate any of the cannon they are building.

And personally if there were to be a whole trilogy blotted out by Force-time stuff... it would be the Prequels. Dear god, get rid of the prequels, but then that invalidates everything that came after. So it is dumb, and will probably just end up making more people disheartened. 

They put out some movies people didn't universally enjoy. Deal with it. I dealt with it too when they three I thought were rubbish came out, and I still remained a pretty staunch fan.


----------



## Cadence (Jul 9, 2020)

Can we go back to the original versions of 4-5, add something like the ewoks cooking up stormtroopers at the end in 6, keep Rogue 1, and then nuke the rest?  (Not a fan of 1-3 or 7, 8 was ok, didn't see 9). 

In general, as an Avengers fan since 1981, I'm used to treating stories I don't like as apocryphal.  If nothing else, I'll continue to do that with these.


----------



## Cadence (Jul 9, 2020)

Ooops.


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (Jul 9, 2020)

Cadence said:


> Can we go back to the original versions of 4-5, add something like the ewoks cooking up stormtroopers at the end in 6, keep Rogue 1, and then nuke the rest?  (Not a fan of 1-3 or 7, 8 was ok, didn't see 9).
> 
> In general, as an Avengers fan since 1981, I'm used to treating stories I don't like as apocryphal.  If nothing else, I'll continue to do that with these.




If you think about it, the entire Star Wars movie canon is pretty much just an odd-numbered Star Trek movie.


----------



## Undrave (Jul 9, 2020)

I think it's very likely they won't touch the era. Declaring the movies 'non-canon' would be a waste of time, because only nerds care about canon. 

Canon is overrated anyway.



Zardnaar said:


> Doomcocks not the most reliable FYI.
> 
> Only time he was somewhat accurate he was reporting after spoilers on Reddit




He usually pretty upfront about rumours being unsubstantiated, at least. He's just trying to get views for his Youtube channel.



Eilathen said:


> The Skywalker Saga could have been such a great Saga.




Instead it's now the Palpatine Saga. 



Snarf Zagyg said:


> I mean, sure, this makes perfect sense ....
> 
> assuming that Disney already hadn't spent all that money building attractions at theme parks based on the movies, and selling merchandise, and that these movies made billions, and everything else.
> 
> But sure.




Apparently it was Kathleen Kennedy's idea to build Galaxy's Edge in the Sequel era. Business wise it wasn't a bad plan, since you'd imagine getting tons of new fans. And for what its worth, the place itself is pretty era-agnostic, you just need to change out the First Order Storm Troopers and maybe the satellite dish on the Falcon and boom! You can be in a different era. Heck, they started to parade Darth Vader there. The rides themselves are actually pretty popular, regardless of the popularity or not of the movie (Rise of the Resistance is an incredible piece of dark ride technology and I want to ride it one day!). Galaxy's Edge had a rough start but it's actually a success, probably the best thing to come out of the sequel trilogy really. 

The movies made money but we don't know how much PROFIT they made, since we don't know how much the reshoots for Rise of Skywalker cost. 

And the merchandise? Yeah it's not selling that well. There's barely any demand for Sequel Merch.


----------



## Undrave (Jul 9, 2020)

Cadence said:


> In general, as an Avengers fan since 1981, I'm used to treating stories I don't like as apocryphal. If nothing else, I'll continue to do that with these.




Agreed. Canon is overrated.


----------



## Eilathen (Jul 9, 2020)

Undrave said:


> Agreed. Canon is overrated.




If that's really your opinion, what are you even doing on a forum like this....


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (Jul 9, 2020)

Undrave said:


> Apparently it was Kathleen Kennedy's idea to build Galaxy's Edge in the Sequel era. Business wise it wasn't a bad plan, since you'd imagine getting tons of new fans. And for what its worth, the place itself is pretty era-agnostic, you just need to change out the First Order Storm Troopers and maybe the satellite dish on the Falcon and boom! You can be in a different era. Heck, they started to parade Darth Vader there. The rides themselves are actually pretty popular, regardless of the popularity or not of the movie (Rise of the Resistance is an incredible piece of dark ride technology and I want to ride it one day!). Galaxy's Edge had a rough start but it's actually a success, probably the best thing to come out of the sequel trilogy really.




....the whole massive and spectacular Rise of the Resistance ride, not the mention all the first order stuff ... that wouldn't be easy to re-tool! But I look forward to a day when we can all go to themeparks again without worrying about, you know, dying.


----------



## Istbor (Jul 9, 2020)

Eilathen said:


> If that's really your opinion, what are you even doing on a forum like this....




What are you talking about?  D&D is all about picking what you like from books and stirring it up into your own homebrewed stew of deliciousness. 

This is exactly how I view canon as well.


----------



## Undrave (Jul 9, 2020)

Eilathen said:


> If that's really your opinion, what are you even doing on a forum like this....




I LIKE canon, but I'm not gonna lose sleep if it changes. I'm also far more likely to just accept 'it's a different continuity' as an excuse and just move on. 

Like, people here get bent out of shape because of adding the Magic settings to the 'DnD Multiverse' messes with both 'canon' and I'm just here like "Oh cool, Theros!",


----------



## Undrave (Jul 9, 2020)

Snarf Zagyg said:


> ....the whole massive and spectacular Rise of the Resistance ride, not the mention all the first order stuff ... that wouldn't be easy to re-tool! But I look forward to a day when we can all go to themeparks again without worrying about, you know, dying.




I don't think they need to retool Rise of the Resistance. No one's gonna mind except pedantic nerds. They can have whatever walk around characters they want, maybe even doing a daily rotation. You can meet Darth Vader and Kylo Ren on the same day already


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (Jul 9, 2020)

Undrave said:


> I don't think they need to retool Rise of the Resistance.




I agree! That's why I think the whole theory linked-to by the OP is BS. 

At this point, more young people are fans of Baby Yoda and Rey than care about fidelity to the movies from the 70s and early 80s, which will probably get warnings slapped on them anyway (caution: May contain distrubing images of proto-incest and slavery, among other problematic issues, not to mention racist stereotypes depicted by aliens and problematic gay stereotypes with C3P0).


----------



## Undrave (Jul 9, 2020)

Snarf Zagyg said:


> I agree! That's why I think the whole theory linked-to by the OP is BS.
> 
> At this point, more young people are fans of Baby Yoda and Rey than care about fidelity to the movies from the 70s and early 80s, which will probably get warnings slapped on them anyway (caution: May contain distrubing images of proto-incest and slavery, among other problematic issues, not to mention racist stereotypes depicted by aliens and problematic gay stereotypes with C3P0).




I think it's BS to think Disney would ever come out and say their movies were non-canon... But as a marketing strategy, focusing on stuff like the Mandalorian and ignoring the sequel era? That totally makes sense to me. Just like the MCU totally ignores that one Hulk movie but never went out of its way to expunge it from canon (to say nothing of various retcons over the years). You promote your success and ignore the flubs and move on.

I think the 'non-canon' thing is more of a philosophy for a certain faction from LucasFilms, more than anything else.

And Baby Yoda is popular yes, but Rey? Eeeh... I dunno how much...


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (Jul 9, 2020)

Undrave said:


> I think it's BS to think Disney would ever come out and say their movies were non-canon... But as a marketing strategy, focusing on stuff like the Mandalorian and *ignoring the sequel era? That totally makes sense to me.* Just like the MCU totally ignores that one Hulk movie but never went out of its way to expunge it from canon (to say nothing of various retcons over the years). You promote your success and ignore the flubs and move on.
> 
> I think the 'non-canon' thing is more of a philosophy for a certain faction from LucasFilms, more than anything else.
> 
> And Baby Yoda is popular yes,* but Rey? Eeeh... I dunno how much...*




These movies that certain elements of the fanbase think are so unpopular? They are:

Nos. 4, 14, and 32 all-time in box office.

TFA is no. 10, all-time adjusted for inflation. 

These are incredibly popular movies, even if the last one underperformed. And that's considering that they don't do that well in China.

And from my anecdotal experience, Rey is insanely popular with children and young teens.

Plus Disney has already invested heavily in major theme park attractions based on this. So, I mean, sure. Some mean fanboys on the internet could be right. Or maybe they are completely, 100% totally wrong, like they always are.


----------



## ccs (Jul 9, 2020)

Beyond lamenting the $ wasted on tickets for the Force & Last (I saw Rise for free - well, I bought the popcorn, but I would've done that for whatever movie we'd seen) I don't really care what they do concerning #7-9.  
And since I'm unlikely to ever go to a Disney park I have no real concern what they do with their SW rides.


----------



## Gladius Legis (Jul 9, 2020)

FitzTheRuke said:


> I'm okay with that but only if we also make the Prequels non-cannon.



The prequels were just fine in terms of actual story and lore continuity*. Where those movies failed was in _execution_.

The sequels were just a bad idea. Those movies were _conceptual_ failures.

* Except midichlorians, of course.


----------



## Undrave (Jul 9, 2020)

Oh, and if we're gonna complain about canon, I want to complain that the Ewoks movies were erased too.



Snarf Zagyg said:


> These movies that certain elements of the fanbase think are so unpopular? They are:
> 
> Nos. 4, 14, and 32 all-time in box office.
> 
> ...




James Cameron's Avatar sat at #1 of the box office for a LONG time and yet nobody was collecting Avatar merchandise. Everybody went to see that movie and yet it left almost no footprint on pop culture except blue alien jokes. Box office scores are good (though it depends on how much you spent to begin with, and Star Wars probably has a HUUUUGE marketing budget), especially if you want bragging rights, but my own experience is that sequel merchandise is just a lot of pegwarmers.

But I'm glad kids enjoy Rey! That's good! Kids deserve their own heroes too.


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (Jul 9, 2020)

Undrave said:


> James Cameron's Avatar sat at #1 of the box office for a LONG time and yet nobody was collecting Avatar merchandise. Everybody went to see that movie and yet it left almost no footprint on pop culture except blue alien jokes. Box office scores are good (though it depends on how much you spent to begin with, and Star Wars probably has a HUUUUGE marketing budget), especially if you want bragging rights, but my own experience is that sequel merchandise is just a lot of pegwarmers.




Have you been to Animal Kingdom? They have a whole, gorgeous Avatar land. 
Did you know that he has four sequels coming?

I'm just pointing out that most people would kill for this kind of failure. 



> But I'm glad kids enjoy Rey! That's good! Kids deserve their own heroes too.




They do. Although it's still kind of weird to me that there is a certain generation that grew up watching Star Wars cartoons that think of Stormtroopers as the heroes. That is just wrong.


----------



## Retreater (Jul 9, 2020)

The article's source comes across as a whining fanboy in his videos (and I've seen many of them), regularly using politically-charged and sexist criticisms in his statements. He is an unreliable troll.
That said, I personally ignore what I don't like in any hobby or fandom. I don't prefer the prequel trilogies, Clone Wars, or much of the Disney-era Star Wars. I just don't watch them. I'll put on the original trilogy whenever I want and be happy. I'll play my WEG d6 Star Wars RPG and ignore the Fantasy Flight stuff I don't like either. 
I encourage everyone else to enjoy the parts of the fandom they like and make Star Wars their own. I don't care what Lucasfilm says is canon, retcons, etc.


----------



## Undrave (Jul 9, 2020)

Snarf Zagyg said:


> Have you been to Animal Kingdom? They have a whole, gorgeous Avatar land.
> Did you know that he has four sequels coming?
> 
> I'm just pointing out that most people would kill for this kind of failure.




Yeah I know about Pandora.

I just think there's a difference between making money at the box office and _creating a fandom_. Those are two different kind of success if you ask me that don't automatically correlate to one another.



Snarf Zagyg said:


> They do. Although it's still kind of weird to me that there is a certain generation that grew up watching Star Wars cartoons that think of Stormtroopers as the heroes. That is just wrong.




Clonetroopers and Stormtroopers are different though!



Retreater said:


> I encourage everyone else to enjoy the parts of the fandom they like and make Star Wars their own. I don't care what Lucasfilm says is canon, retcons, etc.




Yes!


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (Jul 9, 2020)

Undrave said:


> Yeah I know about Pandora.
> 
> I just think there's a difference between making money at the box office and _creating a fandom_. Those are two different kind of success if you ask me that don't automatically correlate to one another.




Mmm.

I think that we often hear loud voices of people on the internet, and tend to discount other factors. Personally, I would have done a million things differently with the new movies. But I also respect the fact that there is a segment that will always be unhappy, and that the joy of young children who get to meet Rey at a Disney park overshadow the concerns of some b***-hurt 60 year old angry that Disney didn't follow his script. 




> Clonetroopers and Stormtroopers are different though!




NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

They got to you too!


----------



## Undrave (Jul 9, 2020)

Snarf Zagyg said:


> Mmm.
> 
> I think that we often hear loud voices of people on the internet, and tend to discount other factors. Personally, I would have done a million things differently with the new movies. But I also respect the fact that there is a segment that will always be unhappy, and that the joy of young children who get to meet Rey at a Disney park overshadow the concerns of some b***-hurt 60 year old angry that Disney didn't follow his script.




Sure... at the same time, I've seen people who enjoyed both Force Awakens and The Last Jedi be disappointed by Rise of Skywalker and the box office drop is still pretty significant for a movie that should have been a big deal. A big corporation like Disney won't outright state when stuff is underperforming or a disappointment. They'll just move on. I think what they'll do next with Star Wars will, if nothing else, be interesting. I don't think we'll truly know how well the Sequel Trilogy did for them and what the impact were for MANY years. We can just speculate at this point. We'll have to see when the Sequel memes show up and all the variations on 'They Fly Now.' we get  (see: "Hello There!")

And my point earlier was that Jame Cameron's Avatar made banks but I don't think it created a fandom per se. For one thing, I don't think Pandora in Animal Kingdom has character greetings . That might change if the sequels present an interesting world people will want to explore, however!


----------



## Umbran (Jul 9, 2020)

Undrave said:


> But I'm glad kids enjoy Rey! That's good! Kids deserve their own heroes too.






Undrave said:


> I just think there's a difference between making money at the box office and _creating a fandom_. T




Now, put these two together.

Those kids that like Rey?  They will be paying into Disney pockets for decades longer than you or I will at this point.  Old people are not the future of fandom.

If we older fans had thought it was perfect, an the kids didn't like it... that would be a problem for the future of the franchise.


----------



## Undrave (Jul 9, 2020)

Umbran said:


> Now, put these two together.
> 
> Those kids that like Rey?  They will be paying into Disney pockets for decades longer than you or I will at this point.  Old people are not the future of fandom.
> 
> If we older fans had thought it was perfect, an the kids didn't like it... that would be a problem for the future of the franchise.




I think it'll be interesting to see in a decade or so what kind of nostalgia there is for these.


----------



## Eilathen (Jul 9, 2020)

Rey is more or less the only thing i like out of Eps 7-9.... even if the uncovering of her..."backstory"...was effing rIdOnKuLoS.


----------



## Ralif Redhammer (Jul 9, 2020)

Yeah, Bounding into Comics isn't exactly a reputable source, nor one without bias.

The chances of the sequels being decanonized are probably less than zero. There's more of a chance of a big-screen adaptation of Droid World happening (which, honestly I'd be all about).



Zardnaar said:


> Doomcocks not the most reliable FYI.
> 
> Only time he was somewhat accurate he was reporting after spoilers on Reddit


----------



## Mercurius (Jul 9, 2020)

Well again, the article and person they're quoting thinks actually officially de-canonizing the Disney films is unlikely, but that what might happen is they focus on the "Mandaloria era" and thus essentially ignore 7-9. They could then build up different regions of the SW universe and never have to refer to the events of 7-9, even if the timeline advances that far.


----------



## Istbor (Jul 9, 2020)

Mercurius said:


> Well again, the article and person they're quoting thinks actually officially de-canonizing the Disney films is unlikely, but that what might happen is they focus on the "Mandaloria era" and thus essentially ignore 7-9. They could then build up different regions of the SW universe and never have to refer to the events of 7-9, even if the timeline advances that far.




That isn't a huge ground-breaking prediction though. They have already said they are hoping to tell other stories in the Star Wars Universe. Many that will not revolve around Jedi, especially of a particular bloodline. What I can't guess at is how much they 'ignore' those newer episodes. That remains to be seen.


----------



## auburn2 (Jul 10, 2020)

Immeril said:


> “And if The Terminator franchise taught us anything it is that the future is not set.”: using a Terminator reference to satisfy unhappy fans is nothing more than pandering.




Espeicially when it is false.  The future may not be set, but the past is and Star Wars happened in the past. It happened a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away to be specific.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jul 10, 2020)

Umbran said:


> I liked Episodes 7-9.  I am not a fan of 1-3.  I don't think "erasing from canon" is a step they'd take with anything that's actually hit the screen (big or small).  I think setting aside the Expanded Universe was actually a good idea.  Not that there weren't good stories in there, but having _so much_ canon that the overall mass market isn't familiar with is problematic for storytelling.
> 
> If we take for granted for a moment that they are making decisions about what period of Star Wars continuity is going to get more attention, I am by no means convinced that reception of the most recent movies is (or should be) the main driver.
> 
> I think the main driver is that the new trilogy (while I liked it) doesn't do much to set up _future story_.  It is simply easier to find interesting story hooks in the gaps between the trilogies.



Idk I think the sequel trilogy sets up a huge amount of new stories. 

What are force users gonna do, now? What new political factions will rise? Etc. 

I mean, it’s even more open, IMO, than it was after RoTJ.


----------



## Imaculata (Jul 10, 2020)

I'm pretty sure we'll see a new Star Wars trilogy in a year or so, without erasing any of the existing movies from canon. It will simply take place in another era, with new characters most likely. Then after that, expect a reboot of the original trilogy.


----------



## Umbran (Jul 10, 2020)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Idk I think the sequel trilogy sets up a huge amount of new stories.
> 
> What are force users gonna do, now? What new political factions will rise? Etc.




You and I may have different ideas of what "set up" means.  You seem to be using it to denote "there is space for a story".  I am using it to mean a rather stronger foundation than just open space.



> I mean, it’s even more open, IMO, than it was after RoTJ.




That's exactly the problem - it is _too open_. 

For example - the First Order is gone.  The New Republic was wiped out.  They do not position _anyone_ to even try to fill that power vacuum.  An author could write anything in there, which means nothing with connection to the previous stories is set up to do so.


----------



## Umbran (Jul 10, 2020)

Imaculata said:


> I'm pretty sure we'll see a new Star Wars trilogy in a year or so...




With the way movies are made, if they aren't already filming, we won't see it in a year or so.


----------



## Zardnaar (Jul 10, 2020)

Umbran said:


> You and I may have different ideas of what "set up" means.  You seem to be using it to denote "there is space for a story".  I am using it to mean a rather stronger foundation than just open space.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




 It's not like they developed either one that much. 

 I read the wiki to figure out what's what in universe.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Jul 10, 2020)

Umbran said:


> You and I may have different ideas of what "set up" means.  You seem to be using it to denote "there is space for a story".  I am using it to mean a rather stronger foundation than just open space.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I think having no obvious bad guy organization is a good thing. Hopefully they don’t ever just do what the EU did, and have the Empire just sort of still be there, but smaller. 

Also, Rey has the Jedi library, and all the knowledge of the Jedi. That is a st up for future stories. Not their fault toxic fandom has the cast less interested in doing more Star Wars.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Jul 10, 2020)

Umbran said:


> You and I may have different ideas of what "set up" means.  You seem to be using it to denote "there is space for a story".  I am using it to mean a rather stronger foundation than just open space.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It's kinda a problem, yes. But I think it was a bigger problem for TLJ and its successor movie, because that was supposed to be trilogy.
It might still be a problem for the future of Star Wars, because... there isn't really anything that could direct us to what the new story would be about.

However... We also had the Knights of the Old Republic era being well recieved, and there wasn't really anything we knew about that era, either, other that there were Jedi and Sith in the past, too. 

I think that could work for the future of Star Wars as well. The biggest problem might be that we don't have a good villain faction. We can easily imagine a return of the Republic or something similar, and the return of the Jedi. But the Sith are supposed to be dead. So who are the new evil force-wielders?

Or do you do without them? But how well could a new trilogy without the force work? Even Rogue One had force wielders, Rebels had even Jedi, Mandalorian has baby Yoda. 
Solo is probably the only movie that went without any direct intervention of force users.
I think there is quite a potential to tell stories without the force in Star Wars... But one might ask what's the point of making it Star Wars? Particularly when you jump forward or backward in time and you alter the look anyway, so no real definite SW trappings still exist?


All that said, I don't beleive in any retcons. I am willing to believe that they might make a new trilogy set some time before or after the existing movies and tell a new Star Wars story there, with the force, with evil and good fighting each other.


----------



## Mallus (Jul 10, 2020)

Ah Doomcock...now there's a name I haven't heard since somebody was wrong about Star Trek.


----------



## Eltab (Jul 11, 2020)

"Golden Era of the Republic" stories - with occasional young Yoda cameos - could show the varying provinces interacting with each other and with Republic officials, solving any of these:

a Sith sighting (see: Bigfoot)
disaster relief
Hutt crime lords
'weird things happening' (untrained Force user)
malicious efforts at causing harm (Corporate Sector Authority standing in for 'bottomless resources and no concern for others')
Romeo and Juliet in space


----------



## Zardnaar (Jul 11, 2020)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> It's kinda a problem, yes. But I think it was a bigger problem for TLJ and its successor movie, because that was supposed to be trilogy.
> It might still be a problem for the future of Star Wars, because... there isn't really anything that could direct us to what the new story would be about.
> 
> However... We also had the Knights of the Old Republic era being well recieved, and there wasn't really anything we knew about that era, either, other that there were Jedi and Sith in the past, too.
> ...




 Sith Spirits and Holocrons exist. You can't really wipe the Sith out. Or Jedi. Even if you kill them all.


----------



## Imaculata (Jul 11, 2020)

Umbran said:


> With the way movies are made, if they aren't already filming, we won't see it in a year or so.




It would surprise me if they aren't already working on a new film (although not filming yet). It may be a while before we see it in theaters, 2 years at least, but I suspect something new is already in the works.


----------



## GreyLord (Jul 11, 2020)

Imaculata said:


> It would surprise me if they aren't already working on a new film (although not filming yet). It may be a while before we see it in theaters, 2 years at least, but I suspect something new is already in the works.




Taika Waititi I believe is directing the next Star Wars movie and it is slated for release (I think) around 2022, or was.  With the recent delays from the Covid-19 it would not surprise me if that's been pushed back to 2023 or 24 at this point.


----------



## Eilathen (Jul 11, 2020)

You know what I would like to see them try? Make an animated movie with the production qualities and form of the cinematic trailers for the SW: TOR games. Those trailers were some of the best Star Wars in-movie-form I have ever watched.
Now give me a whole movie like that (or even several) and I'd be happy. And if they set it in the TOR timeline, even better.


----------



## R_J_K75 (Jul 11, 2020)

Eilathen said:


> You know what I would like to see them try? Make an animated movie with the production qualities and form of the cinematic trailers for the SW: TOR games. Those trailers were some of the best Star Wars in-movie-form I have ever watched.
> Now give me a whole movie like that (or even several) and I'd be happy. And if they set it in the TOR timeline, even better.




Think they are doing an Old Republic trilogy.  

If you watch Ep 1 thru 9 youll see that they nothing more than a cobbled together mess story wise from start to finish.  Even Ep 4-6 are like that although the least offenders.  Unfortunately the only chance they had to get the original cast together they failed completely, shouldve just put them all together from the start of EP 7 and had them all die a heroic fiery death at the end.


----------



## Eilathen (Jul 11, 2020)

I disagree. The jumbled mess started with Eps 7 and went through to 9.

Eps 4-6 was pretty ok in that regard. Sure, it was a classical myth retelling kind-of-sort-of in space, but it was fine. And considering with what they had to work with, it is a master-piece in execution on screen.
Eps 1-3 were just...flat and pretty shallow. But still not a mess at the scale of Disney. Even if similarly disappointing in the end.


----------



## Zardnaar (Jul 11, 2020)

I-III were a mess in execution they were internally consistent. 

 Biggest problem of VII-IX was you had to go outside the movies to figure s few things out. 

  If you have to go read a novel or comic for basic answers well yeah. I used the wiki.


----------



## Imaculata (Jul 12, 2020)

In my opinion, the prequels were a mess due to bad direction, acting and writing. Plus it was a story that did not need to be told. The story of Anakin is fine as a backdrop to the original trilogy, but not as interesting when made into a trilogy of its own. Plus it doesn't help that Anakin is thoroughly unlikeable. The plot is a bit of a mess and even great actors deliver terrible performances. It just doesn't have the right feeling of Star Wars. Also, the reliance on a lot of green screening, makes it feel like the actors never are in a real location, and this affects their performances. While such effects are now a common part of Hollywood films, movies such as many of the Marvel movies don't seem to suffer from this issue as much as the prequels do. You can tell that the actors in the prequels are acting to an empty void.

The Disney trilogy started off pretty strong, with very likeable characters (including the villain). Yes, the story starts off as a rehash of A New Hope, but I feel it was necessary to first nail the feeling of a Star Wars movie and to start on familiar ground. But right after The Force Awakens the plot becomes a complete mess. Plot lines are abandoned or killed off entirely, and with the third movie it becomes clear that there's no righting this ship. Like a beached whale, the plot ends up flopping around aimlessly, making a huge mess. I blame the second movie (The Last Jedi) mostly for this incredible disaster. I feel the mess that is the third movie, is a direct result of the previous movie, which left the plot with nowhere to go to.

I don't know where they will take the franchise next, but perhaps they should focus on first telling a good story in one movie, before focusing on filling some sort of trilogy quota. They need a good screenplay and a director with the right vision.


----------



## Zardnaar (Jul 12, 2020)

Imaculata said:


> In my opinion, the prequels were a mess due to bad direction, acting and writing. Plus it was a story that did not need to be told. The story of Anakin is fine as a backdrop to the original trilogy, but not as interesting when made into a trilogy of its own. Plus it doesn't help that Anakin is thoroughly unlikeable. The plot is a bit of a mess and even great actors deliver terrible performances. It just doesn't have the right feeling of Star Wars. Also, the reliance on a lot of green screening, makes it feel like the actors never are in a real location, and this affects their performances. While such effects are now a common part of Hollywood films, movies such as many of the Marvel movies don't seem to suffer from this issue as much as the prequels do. You can tell that the actors in the prequels are acting to an empty void.
> 
> The Disney trilogy started off pretty strong, with very likeable characters (including the villain). Yes, the story starts off as a rehash of A New Hope, but I feel it was necessary to first nail the feeling of a Star Wars movie and to start on familiar ground. But right after The Force Awakens the plot becomes a complete mess. Plot lines are abandoned or killed off entirely, and with the third movie it becomes clear that there's no righting this ship. Like a beached whale, the plot ends up flopping around aimlessly, making a huge mess. I blame the second movie (The Last Jedi) mostly for this incredible disaster. I feel the mess that is the third movie, is a direct result of the previous movie, which left the plot with nowhere to go to.
> 
> I don't know where they will take the franchise next, but perhaps they should focus on first telling a good story in one movie, before focusing on filling some sort of trilogy quota. They need a good screenplay and a director with the right vision.




 I liked Revenge of the Sith but yeah 2/3 are bad IMHO. 

 Force Awakens to much i
of a rehash IMHO. At least it was enjoyable enough but it doesn't hold up to well on multiple rewatched not with the knowledge of what comes after it. 

 I think to tell a great Star Wars story you need emotion. In the IT it's Luke and Vader plus Han and Leia. 

 They kinda tried with PT and ST but didn't quite get there.


----------



## Imaculata (Jul 12, 2020)

Zardnaar said:


> Force Awakens to much i
> of a rehash IMHO. At least it was enjoyable enough but it doesn't hold up to well on multiple rewatched not with the knowledge of what comes after it.




I think its fine on its own. But yeah, as a part of the entire trilogy it all feels like a collection of dangling unanswered plot threads. Its a shame really, because it had potential, and the cast was fantastic. I hope this doesn't stain the resume of any of them.


----------



## Zardnaar (Jul 12, 2020)

Imaculata said:


> I think its fine on its own. But yeah, as a part of the entire trilogy it all feels like a collection of dangling unanswered plot threads. Its a shame really, because it had potential, and the cast was fantastic. I hope this doesn't stain the resume of any of them.




 I suspect it will. 

 Adam Driver is very good along with Oscar. They'll be the break outs, the rest will have smaller roles.


----------



## Shades of Eternity (Jan 17, 2022)

The Sequals felt like a really well designed clown costume.  It's really amazing how well designed it is until you think about the story and then it really falls apart.  There is a Phantom Edit just waiting to be done with the material.

In contrast, the Prequals are a great fan doc that the author had no idea how to write.  

Thank you for the Clone Saga but it really should have been done first to test it out before he even thought about writing the prequels.

I'm seriously enjoying the Favreau/Filoni/Rodriguez era but it still surprises me Disney didn't do with Star Wars, what they did with Marvel incredibly well and profitable (steal from the sources and put own twists that fit better).


----------



## MarkB (Jan 17, 2022)

Shades of Eternity said:


> I'm seriously enjoying the Favreau/Filoni/Rodriguez era but it still surprises me Disney didn't do with Star Wars, what they did with Marvel incredibly well and profitable (steal from the sources and put own twists that fit better).



Just the fact that they launched into a sequel trilogy without plotting the whole thing out in advance still boggles my mind.


----------



## Shades of Eternity (Jan 17, 2022)

MarkB said:


> Just the fact that they launched into a sequel trilogy without plotting the whole thing out in advance still boggles my mind.




agreed, and what is particularly perplexing is they already put me at ease by essentially doing a proof of concept movie (Guardians of the Galaxy).

but probably my ultimate issue with them is as follows:  they didn't build with the idea that the majority of the original cast were old and they needed to build with that constraint.  We lost at least 2 good people in the filming and it showed and the fact they were surprised showed massive idiocy on their part.

This is J.J. Abrams' sin above all others.

and before you say how can you plan for that, I merely look at Lord of the Rings (where the trilogy was done before it was released) and Marvel (they were smart enough to film all Stan Lee cameos ahead of time).


----------



## Eltab (Jan 17, 2022)

MarkB said:


> Just the fact that they launched into a sequel trilogy without plotting the whole thing out in advance still boggles my mind.



It was like somebody decided "the rules of good movie-making do not apply to me!  Watch this!"  and did whatever they felt like.


----------

