4 ms·

But the article points out that Disney doing that is exactly why Star Wars performance has been lackluster. They're now taking a step back because apparently th

But the article points out that Disney doing that is exactly why Star Wars performance has been lackluster. They're now taking a step back because apparently the public doesn't want a steady drip of Star Wars same-old-same-old

scarface74 7y ago
Star Wars performance “lackluster”? Have you seen the box office returns for them?
- danShumway 7y ago
  Lackluster compared to Disney's expectations. I think it's somewhat absurd too, but part of the point being made in the conversation around this article is that Disney isn't taking risks or making decisions based on creative output -- they're very, very aggressively following market trends. Their first Star Wars release was one of their highest grossing films in something like a decade, but one bad showing from Solo and suddenly Disney is cutting back on yearly releases. They want movies that are safe and predictable. They want to know before they even start production not just that the film will break even, but that it will make a LOT of money. Clearly based on their own statements, they don't feel that confident about a yearly Star Wars release.
  - scarface74 7y ago
    $1.333 Billion for the Last Jedi was below expectations and $2.08 billion was “below expectations”? They made two non trilogy movies. Rogue One was highly rated by both critics and the audience - Solo not so much.
    - danShumway 7y ago
      Don't argue with me, argue with the Disney executives who decided to pull the brakes on their yearly release schedule. Disney has different expectations. If anything, the fact that Disney can look past three high-grossing films and only see the one flop is strong evidence for what people are talking about here. Disney is risk averse, and they look at a 75% success rate as risky.
      - scarface74 7y ago
        They pull the breaks on their offshoots that’s true. But, one bad release out of 5 isn’t indicative of any trend.

scarface74 7y ago

Star Wars performance “lackluster”? Have you seen the box office returns for them?

danShumway 7y ago
Lackluster compared to Disney's expectations. I think it's somewhat absurd too, but part of the point being made in the conversation around this article is that Disney isn't taking risks or making decisions based on creative output -- they're very, very aggressively following market trends. Their first Star Wars release was one of their highest grossing films in something like a decade, but one bad showing from Solo and suddenly Disney is cutting back on yearly releases. They want movies that are safe and predictable. They want to know before they even start production not just that the film will break even, but that it will make a LOT of money. Clearly based on their own statements, they don't feel that confident about a yearly Star Wars release.
- scarface74 7y ago
  $1.333 Billion for the Last Jedi was below expectations and $2.08 billion was “below expectations”? They made two non trilogy movies. Rogue One was highly rated by both critics and the audience - Solo not so much.
  - danShumway 7y ago
    Don't argue with me, argue with the Disney executives who decided to pull the brakes on their yearly release schedule. Disney has different expectations. If anything, the fact that Disney can look past three high-grossing films and only see the one flop is strong evidence for what people are talking about here. Disney is risk averse, and they look at a 75% success rate as risky.
    - scarface74 7y ago
      They pull the breaks on their offshoots that’s true. But, one bad release out of 5 isn’t indicative of any trend.