Star Wars Episode IX: The Rise of Skywalker (spoilers obviously)

This. People claim fatigue when bad things come out, and then forget those claims entirely when good things come out - as the problem was never fatigue in the first place, it was the poor installments themselves.

It's the nature of these things. There's a big "what have you done for me lately" vibe to responses to big name failures, especially in universes or pop culture heavy franchises.

Edited by KnownUnknown on Sep 27th 2020 at 8:59:34 AM

I understand why TROS was a flawed film. They had to deal with a sudden director swap, lack of communication at multiple levels, trying to placate the fanbase who in some cases were now literally calling for blood, starting the entire plot over midway through writing due to a real-life death...

Was the mid-way start over because of Carrie Fisher's death? I thought the removal of the Coruscant plot and the original plan with Kylo and all that was was simply because they wanted to rebrand the movie to be about Palpatine, and also to capitulate to fan demands about Kylo and so on.

Edited by KnownUnknown on Sep 27th 2020 at 9:04:02 AM

The announcement of the swap from Trevorrow to Abrams occurred in September 2017, 9 months after Carrie Fisher's death and 3 months before The Last Jedi was released.

Edited by Tuckerscreator on Sep 27th 2020 at 9:07:17 AM

Except Palpatine would be connected to Coruscant. That's where he got his political emergency powers in the first place. Honestly, I think the real reason we never see Coruscant is because of Abrams' insistence to use real locations as settings for planets... and Coruscant requires CGI to be a reality.

I've heard rumors that Hosnian and the "movable capital" thing in general came about because Abrams asked the Story Group permission to destroy Coruscant and was refused. No idea if it's true but I've seen it attested more than once.

Yeah, I've heard that too.

I hope not cause if JJ honestly thought that was a good idea.

"Yes lets have blatant Middle finger to Lucas and the PT crowd that will go over well"

that would make him as tone deaf as all his detractors claim he is

Edited by FrozenWolf2 on Sep 27th 2020 at 11:37:31 AM

I don't see how Coruscant would require any more CG and sets than Kijimi or Takodana did. There were plenty of locations in the ST that were largely sets and greenscreen. I doubt "real locations only" was ever a mandate. A priority, sure, but not a rule.

Edited by Tuckerscreator on Sep 27th 2020 at 9:37:25 AM

As bad as throwing in a planet nobody had time to know or care about in front of a death laser to be destroyed for quick drama ended up being, doing the same thing to something the audience does have attachment to but which still has no actual role in the story would have been even worse.

Basically the same thing that happened when Batman V Superman / Snyder decided to kill off Jimmy Olson in a throwaway fashion. "I have no use for this character, so let's just shoot him for drama" is never a good idea.

I mean, retroactively with the Starkiller Base, they did kinda throw something to the wolves that the audiennce cared about, with it being Ilum and all.

I would say that franchise fatigue is a real thing, it has limitations as a defense but it's also a flawed argument to say "Just make better stuff" as though that's the missing key. It's kind of hard to ignore when a franchise starts floundering with good/decent material positioned as the follow up to more renowned stuff.

The thing about Rogue One was that I think audiences were still glowing in the aftermath of TFA and were more forgiving of some of its issues. If the same movie was released after TLJ I think the response would have been a bit more tepid. It took The Mandalorian and its commitment to the Space Western to unite the fans again.

Yeah, but that's typically They Changed It, Now It Sucks! and a function of nostalgia, and not specifically fatigue. In several situations, that can and has happened to media that is created years after the previous installment.

I think it's rather difficult to justify a claim that people didn't actually like Rogue One or think it was any good, but that it's positive critical and audience reception was actually just from people riding the high of a different movie.

Edited by KnownUnknown on Sep 27th 2020 at 11:16:18 AM

I mean, that's exactly what we are talking about, speculating about the way things would have turned out if the situation was a little different. After Solo came out several media sources claimed it was the limited advertising window that sabotaged it from getting closer to Rogue One numbers, but it's the exact same type of speculation.

That first statement had nothing to do with They Changed It, Now It Sucks!, it's about a natural ebb and flow of popularity. A TV show could improve in critical response every single season but still watch audience ratings steadily decline. Why does that happen? There is simply a limited window of innovation and freshness before other media can catch up and imitate them. Neither changing nor staying the same can regenerate that first spark of "We got a hit."

I'm also not sure "all theories and conclusions about sales patterns are equally as speculatory" is particularly justifiable either.

I can't get behind equating "Solo didn't have a strong marketing presence, and thus didn't get the market share it could have" with "people only thought they liked Rogue One because they were excited about TFA."

They aren't even speculation about the same aspects of media reception, and the latter stands in contrast to the actual information we have about the film's reception in the first place.

That depends heavily on the show, and the situations surrounding its decline. You would need an example - especially if you're trying to use it to prove a universal.

Generalizing as "well, people just weren't into it any more" isn't going to work as conclusion from that, because... well... there's nothing to actually imply that that was a cause without information, especially in a hypothetical. Going "it's all opinions anyway" as a justification has its limits, especially with opinions are based around engaging as little with the actual situation being opined on as possible.

Edited by KnownUnknown on Sep 27th 2020 at 11:51:56 AM

[1]

It doesn't help that Jimmy tends to get written out of or around in adaptations with all his aspects going to Lois or he is just Lois's sidekick.

Genres do fall out of fashion, but I thought that was more because of a Genre-Killer and a host of bad stories in that genre than sheer audience fatigue.

I found this video by a Youtuber called the Gold Man. He seems like a really chill guy who knows what he is talking about.

THANK YOU!

Like look, Rey has writing problems, but a Mary Sue she ain't. Neither is Luke.

Personally. I always treat that term as a sign that I might as well not bother continuing a discussion because the other person isn't willing to engage in good faith.

Rey has nothing on the likes of Jenna Silverblade, Ariana Black, and well... you know.

Who ?

I don't know who these people are.

I imagine fanfiction Mary Sue characters.

But yeah, Rey is definitely not a Mary Sue. She fails at a lot of the stuff she tries. She only just barely beats Ren in the first movie, fails at turning him to the light side or at saving the Resistance in The Last Jedi (and doesn't get Luke to train her), and is in real danger of falling to the Dark Side in Rise of Skywalker. She also can't let go of wanting to know who her parents are even when it would be better for her to.

It's largely male nerd sexism keeping the sue accusations circulating.