Hazel Motes

10 movies and theres still only 3 that are worth a damn to me. I really don't care what happens with this franchise to be honest. Making a brand new trilogy outside of the 9 episodes has a higher chance of success than anything that has come after Return of the Jedi. There's not nearly as much that can be fucked up if there's not a vested interest in existing characters. I didn't like Last Jedi almost entirely because of the films that came before it. It was actually a fairly good movie taken at face value. It's just it besmirched almost all the characters that already existed in other films. I dunno, I'm not too worried whether or not this thing happens.

DthRdrX

Just like Solo right?

DthRdrX

Very true, and what bugs me is seeing the mainstream media blame Solo's BO failures on "fatigue" or even throwing it on the lead actor for not being Harrison Ford.

What IS interesting is when you compare the development/release of SOLO and TLJ. Both films were produced in and around the same time period, but TLJ employs radical changes in tone/structure while Solo's is similar to all all other SW properties. Solo's production was known to be micromanaged by Lucasfilm, after the reshoot expense of Rogue One, hence the behind the scene drama. TLJ had no such production problems we are aware of, almost as if RJ was allowed to do whatever he wanted without interference. How are you "franchise building" with two completely different products coming out within months of each other? This is Lucasfilm's fault.

Obi-Wanma

Solo was bland shit.

story

Is that for sure? Bummer.

DJariya

Solo was a very expensive box office bomb for Disney/Lucasfilm

It lost a lot of money

Jay G.

Well, I wouldn't say never, since Tron got a sequel decades later. But as DJariya pointed out, Solo lost Disney/Lucasfilm money, so they're not going to be in a rush to follow it up.

RichC2

I've read in a few spots that it lost between $50m and $60m for the Mouse. That is negligible at best for them, so they'll probably keep an eye on the waters.

That said, I don't know how the accountants came to that number. $392m worldwide gross on a $275m budget + P&A? There had to be a lot of post-theatrical run deals happening there.

lopper

I wonder if that 275M is total for the original shoot plus the Ron Howard stuff. It sure doesn't look like a movie with a budget that high, so I'd imagine it does. With a budget like that, I don't see how it wouldn't lose money.

And that movie is dull trash anyway. No sequels please.

RichC2

I always figured most of the $$ spend on these movies was in post, so I still don't see how the budget could be that high even with the reshoots.

But then again, Wreck It Ralph 2 doesn't look like a $175m movie either.

Sonny Corinthos

I enjoyed Solo, but I would be fine if it never had a sequel. As far as a new trilogy, I find it hard to believe that someone or something didn't pop up from the Skywalker saga. Chewie's great Uncle, Lando's Grandson or something of that nature is bound to make an appearance.

Mike86

TGM

Solo had a sequel. It's called A New Hope.

TomOpus

Josh-da-man

Shannon Nutt

Only because they wound up re-shooting most of the film. Otherwise they would have turned a profit. I've heard the movie that Howard shot came in at less than $100 million.

story

I kind of like that.

Josh-da-man

Mike86

DJariya

The butt hurt that some of these toxic Star Wars "fans" still have towards Rian Johnson 2 years later is so

I follow a movie pundit on YouTube who is a big Star Wars fan and he called out all those idiots who are still angry at Rian Johnson on his Twitter feed, and he got a lot of nasty responses to his post by those "fans" before he deleted his tweet.

stvn1974

The Last Jedi being 2 years old doesn't diminish its shittyness.

Mike86

DJariya

That's fine and dandy if you didn't like his movie. But, to constantly troll and abuse him on social media and then send him death threats and racial insults to his actors? That's fucking pathetic. Even 2 years later these people still exist.

It's like these "fans" took it personally when they didn't get the movie they wanted.

Those are the toxic fans, not the ones who were disappointed with or didn't like the movie.

Jay G.

Except Howard's shoot wasn't done in a vacuum. The cast was already hired, the sets were already built, etc. It also likely doesn't factor in all the post production work. So while his "shoot" was that much, if he had been the director from the beginning, the cost still would've been higher than that.

Still, Disney/Lucasfilm may be considering the production issues the film faced when looking at how it performed and considering a sequel that (hopefully) wouldn't have a tumultuous a shoot. However, even factoring out the additional production costs, Solo didn't do great. It had a really low overall domestic gross, and did even worse worldwide. Rouge One grossed about $1 billion worldwide, Solo did about a third of that.
https://www.the-numbers.com/movies/f...rs#tab=summary

Also, the critical and audience reaction seems to collectively be, "meh." It's not generating much buzz or excitement that could help drive demand for a sequel. Austin Powers got a sequel based largely on how it did on home video, but while you may personally like Solo, it's not really generating any traction. There's also the perception that it was a bomb, so people aren't going to be primed to see the sequel, especially if they never got around to watching the first one.

coli

I don't condone any of these idiots who go at anyone personally on Twitter, but you make it sound like its a large segment of the SW fanbase? There is always a tiny minority of idiots/trolls (or whatever you want to call them) on Social Media and it's best to either block or ignore. It's no different than sports fans at a game (especially football because of tailgaiting), in that there is always a few drunks who act like complete idiots, but the other 60,000 people aren't like that.