Kathleen Kennedy survives!

[Immortal Weapon]

Yah I agree. TLJ was a huge misstep, just because of the level of risks they undertook with it. I know there are people who loved it, but the endurance and intensity of the hate engendered by it would have made Emperor Palpatine proud. People were definitely feeling it still when Solo rolled around, and still are.

The release of Solo should have been delayed until December. It was a pretty weak month for film, imho, that could have used something so prominent.

December wouldn't have a good month for Solo. It would have to go against Spider-Man, Aquaman and Bumblebee. It wouldn't have been a clean sweep this year.

[TomServofan]

She is a cancer to the studio, she needs to go badly!

[Scott Taylor]

December was not the greatest month for movies this year, It was the first my family did go for the after Christmas mover in a long time. SOLO also came out with Deadpool 2 still fresh so it had that against it.

As for the production problems the average mover goer really doesn't pay that much attention such things, I think the biggest "news" of it that got around to most what that Lando was "pan-sexual" and that may have turned some people off it.

TLJ got a 45 audience score on rotten tomatoes, a 4.5 user score on Metacritic, a 7.2 on IMDB CNET reported a 57%. It is funny that the DC movies bombed it was said that it was Disney fault because that "ran" the rating site... then when a Star Wars move does not do that well with fans is some kind of Troll/Russian/mad fan boy conspiracy. Yes there are people that liked it but were are more that didn't like it than people would like to admit.

Star Wars is possible the most valuable intellectual property in entertainment (maybe other that core Disney and that is a big maybe) and the reason being it that it makes 4 times in merchandise than what it makes in the movies. From that you would conclude that buying patterns of the merchandise would be just as much as an indicator as audience scores.. Merch sells for TLJ were abysmal compared to even the prequels, the best selling were the stuffed porgs that is right the thing people wanted the most were birds that had nothing to do with the plot of the movie
... I don't think it was internet trolls or some Russian hackers that caused the dip in the interest in that. I've been dealing with (buying and selling) Star Wars merchandise for almost 25 years and TLJ was the worst after movie market of any of the movies before it and that has to say something.

I might have bought a milkable space-cow-walrus if they marketed that! The only Porg that I would have bought is one that came with its own rotisserie.

[WebLurker]

Saying the hatred for Last Jedi is a myth is burying your head in the sand.

As Sacred Knight pointed out, I'm not saying that people didn't hate it. That can certainly be proven by poking around the web. What I meant was that it was a myth that the majority of viewers hated the movie. We can look at the records and see that TLJ was the biggest movie of the year world-wide. Certainly movies with a foul reputation can still make the big bucks like Transformers shows (although there are outliers, like The Last Knight, which did badly despite earning similar reviews like the more profitable predecessors; or Bumblebee, which has earned a great deal of praise but is still struggling at the box office). You also get people who are opposed to it but still buy the ticket either out of completeness sake or in order to discuss it later.

That said, when you get that kind of success, it seems safe to say that most viewers in general were, at worse, okay with the film. Besides, most of the TLJ hate, justified or otherwise, seems to mostly come from the Star Wars fandom, which is only one part of the larger audience in general. To say that the movie was well-liked or not, you have to look at the big picture, not just the smaller one. The web acts as a megaphone and minority factions can use it to sound louder then they really are.

The film is a commerical success. There is no disputing that. However, it does stop the movie from being absolute crap.

The majority of critics would disagree with that. I have to disagree; I think it was this generation's answer to Empire Strikes Back. We'll have to wait and see what it's legacy is, although I think history will vindicate it.

It's merchandise sales were in the toilet, it's blu-ray sales were half of what Force Awakens made.

I've heard people claim that, but they never cite sources and usually base it on anecdotal evidence. If memory serves, the BluRay actually did pretty decent, esp. for a movie that supposedly everyone but the Disney shills hated, but I forget the exacts or even where I got that, so don't quote me on it.

It definitely had an impact on Solo. It was released 6 months after Last Jedi which was still fresh in fans minds.

I'm sure it was a factor for some people, but I think that the poor marketing and bloated budget were the primary reason. I mean, think about it, it did open as the highest grossing movie of the week. Had the movie stayed within budget, it would've had a higher profit margin. It's hard to say what would've needed to have happened to make the movie better received, but there it is.

I think though, we do need to draw a distinction between viewers who had already closed their minds to the series and hate everything made by Disney on default (e.g. the "Soylo" crowd) and those who had franchise fatigue for other reasons. The former were never going to give it a fair chance and would've been already written off in terms of the projections of box office sales.

[Immortal Weapon]

The majority of critics would disagree with that. I have to disagree; I think it was this generation's answer to Empire Strikes Back. We'll have to wait and see what it's legacy is, although I think history will vindicate it.

I put no value on what critics think. I saw the movie myself so I can form my own opinion it.

I've heard people claim that, but they never cite sources and usually base it on anecdotal evidence. If memory serves, the BluRay actually did pretty decent, esp. for a movie that supposedly everyone but the Disney shills hated, but I forget the exacts or even where I got that, so don't quote me on it.

Here's what I found about Last Jedi toy sales after some basic googling.
https://cosmicbook.news/star-wars-la...toy-sales-tank
https://www.forbes.com/sites/luketho.../#5048c71554e5
https://www.syfy.com/syfywire/despit...-movie-fatigue

Those articles list different reasons for the decline but a decline is a decline. As for blu-ray sales
https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/St...ab=video-sales

It did decent on home video but it was half of what TFA made and slight below Rogue One.

I'm sure it was a factor for some people, but I think that the poor marketing and bloated budget were the primary reason. I mean, think about it, it did open as the highest grossing movie of the week. Had the movie stayed within budget, it would've had a higher profit margin. It's hard to say what would've needed to have happened to make the movie better received, but there it is.

I think though, we do need to draw a distinction between viewers who had already closed their minds to the series and hate everything made by Disney on default (e.g. the "Soylo" crowd) and those who had franchise fatigue for other reasons. The former were never going to give it a fair chance and would've been already written off in terms of the projections of box office sales.

The bloated budget is why the movie didn't make a profit but it wasn't the reason why it didn't put butts in seats. It's opening weekend was the weakest of the Disney era Star Wars and it had a sharp decline in it's second weekend. The idea of fatigue is what sounds like a myth to me. The general audience isn't gonna care how much Star Wars they get as long as they enjoy what they get. Marvel releases 3 movies a year with some of them being a few months apart and still bring in billions. The Conjuring universe films does the same on a smaller scale.

[WebLurker]

I put no value on what critics think. I saw the movie myself so I can form my own opinion it.

Fair enough.

Here's what I found about Last Jedi toy sales after some basic googling.
https://cosmicbook.news/star-wars-la...toy-sales-tank
https://www.forbes.com/sites/luketho.../#5048c71554e5
https://www.syfy.com/syfywire/despit...-movie-fatigue

Those articles list different reasons for the decline but a decline is a decline.

Is that the movie's fault, though, or something hinging on the toy industry?

As for blu-ray sales
https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/St...ab=video-sales

It did decent on home video but it was half of what TFA made and slight below Rogue One.

Wonder if the decline is just because more people didn't buy the movie period or because there was an increase in digital sales? Either way, in the black is in the black.

The bloated budget is why the movie didn't make a profit but it wasn't the reason why it didn't put butts in seats. It's opening weekend was the weakest of the Disney era Star Wars and it had a sharp decline in it's second weekend. The idea of fatigue is what sounds like a myth to me.

I think bad marketing has more to do with that then with TLJ hate; this is anecdotal, but it seems like a common opinion was that Solo was a movie few people were excited for and felt they didn't need (I was one), irregardless of whether they were pleasantly surprised or let down by the final product. I'm also pretty sure that competition from stuff like Infinity War didn't help. That could be wrong, but Occam's razor and all that.

The general audience isn't gonna care how much Star Wars they get as long as they enjoy what they get. Marvel releases 3 movies a year with some of them being a few months apart and still bring in billions. The Conjuring universe films does the same on a smaller scale.

I don't think the law of averages agrees with that. Besides, look at the big picture; Star Wars has had a three out of four success rate and has a big movie coming out in a year, plus new movies made by a guy who made one of their most critically and financially successful ones, plus whatever additional material they create; Star Wars isn't in trouble yet and is actually in a place that most companies would kill for their franchises to be in.

[Pinsir]

As Sacred Knight pointed out, I'm not saying that people didn't hate it. That can certainly be proven by poking around the web. What I meant was that it was a myth that the majority of viewers hated the movie. We can look at the records and see that TLJ was the biggest movie of the year world-wide. Certainly movies with a foul reputation can still make the big bucks like Transformers shows (although there are outliers, like The Last Knight, which did badly despite earning similar reviews like the more profitable predecessors; or Bumblebee, which has earned a great deal of praise but is still struggling at the box office). You also get people who are opposed to it but still buy the ticket either out of completeness sake or in order to discuss it later.

I don't get why people keep linking a good box office with a positive public opinion of the film. There are very few films I will say I dislike without watching them. Usually I have to watch them to have an opinion of them. I mean I paid to watch TFA in theatres and I think that film is much worse than TLJ due to its world building.

I don't even think hate is the appropriate word to describe how the public feels anyway, I would say there are a lot more people who feel apathetic towards Star Wars now. Financially though, people who are apathetic to a film and people who hate it, might as as count as the same. In a franchise, its usually the film that follows it that will experience a dip if the public didn't care for the first film, which did happen with Solo (R1 made less monies than TFA too but it was still wildly successful, but you could argue we haven't seen a true sequel so maybe my point is moot).

Your Transformers example is another good one as Transformers 1 is probably the best film in the Bay franchise. If you look at Domestic adjusted for inflation, the series peaked at the second film ($475,945,200), as a good film will usually reap greater profits for the sequel. But since the sequel was bad, Transformers 3 made $390,823,700, then we got T4 making $268,216,800, then for T5 we got $128,523,000 and finally got $101,695,000 for Bumblebee. The North American public clearly was losing interest in these films after the second and it just snow balled after more bad films were made.

[WebLurker]

I don't get why people keep linking a good box office with a positive public opinion of the film. There are very few films I will say I dislike without watching them. Usually I have to watch them to have an opinion of them. I mean I paid to watch TFA in theatres and I think that film is much worse than TLJ due to its world building.

Fair enough. However, more accurate polling systems other then Rotten Tomatoes have indicated a more favorable response then those in the dislike would claim. Mileage may vary.

I don't even think hate is the appropriate word to describe how the public feels anyway, I would say there are a lot more people who feel apathetic towards Star Wars now. Financially though, people who are apathetic to a film and people who hate it, might as as count as the same. In a franchise, its usually the film that follows it that will experience a dip if the public didn't care for the first film, which did happen with Solo (R1 made less monies than TFA too but it was still wildly successful, but you could argue we haven't seen a true sequel so maybe my point is moot).

I've seen hate and I've seen apathy and everything in between. I don't think Solo is a good litmus test, given how many problems it had that would account for its poor performance (and the fact that's its not really connected to TLJ). If Episode 9 tanks, I'd find that more believable as an indication that the viewers are rebelling.

Your Transformers example is another good one as Transformers 1 is probably the best film in the Bay franchise. If you look at Domestic adjusted for inflation, the series peaked at the second film ($475,945,200), as a good film will usually reap greater profits for the sequel. But since the sequel was bad, Transformers 3 made $390,823,700, then we got T4 making $268,216,800, then for T5 we got $128,523,000 and finally got $101,695,000 for Bumblebee. The North American public clearly was losing interest in these films after the second and it just snow balled after more bad films were made.

Okay. (Bumblebee has apparently had a decent opening internationally and reportedly has been showing more endurance at the box office then its predecessors. With a smaller budget meaning a larger profit margin, it might make it to the finish line.)

[ChrisIII]

Regarding toy sales, the Star Wars line seems to be split between casual toy collectors/kids which have gone down massively in quality (Other Hasbro lines have these problems such as the Marvel line) and stuff of better quality intended mainly for the fans and much more expensive (The Black Series, which is pretty much analogous to Marvel's Legends line). It's less like the 80s and 90s which pretty much had a basic line and that was it.

Not sure how that effects the bottom line though.

[Gray Lensman]

I put no value on what critics think. I saw the movie myself so I can form my own opinion it.



Here's what I found about Last Jedi toy sales after some basic googling.
https://cosmicbook.news/star-wars-la...toy-sales-tank
https://www.forbes.com/sites/luketho.../#5048c71554e5
https://www.syfy.com/syfywire/despit...-movie-fatigue

Those articles list different reasons for the decline but a decline is a decline. As for blu-ray sales
https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/St...ab=video-sales

It did decent on home video but it was half of what TFA made and slight below Rogue One.



The bloated budget is why the movie didn't make a profit but it wasn't the reason why it didn't put butts in seats. It's opening weekend was the weakest of the Disney era Star Wars and it had a sharp decline in it's second weekend. The idea of fatigue is what sounds like a myth to me. The general audience isn't gonna care how much Star Wars they get as long as they enjoy what they get. Marvel releases 3 movies a year with some of them being a few months apart and still bring in billions. The Conjuring universe films does the same on a smaller scale.

Even without the overall decline in toy sales I don't think any of the stuff from TLJ were going to be big sellers. Everything the First Order has is bigger than the OT counterpart (and therefore more expensive), and none of the Resistance stuff actually does anything before getting blown to bits unceremoniously. Exactly the way to make it unexciting for kids.

[ChrisIII]

A lot of the new tech in the film were mainly big ships as well....and Hasbro hasn't really done that much with those apart from small minatures (There was an attempt at a "Collector fleet" kind of similar to what Playmates was doing with the Star Trek ships-there was a Imperial Star Destroyer, a Blockade Runner and the Super Star Destroyer. They're particuarly rare these days).

[WebLurker]

Even without the overall decline in toy sales I don't think any of the stuff from TLJ were going to be big sellers. Everything the First Order has is bigger than the OT counterpart (and therefore more expensive), and none of the Resistance stuff actually does anything before getting blown to bits unceremoniously. Exactly the way to make it unexciting for kids.

Would kids really care about that?

[Enterprise E]

Would kids really care about that?

I would not bet against kids caring about how effective a vehicle is. Kids may think that something looks cool at first, but if they see it just get unceremoniously get blown up before doing anything cool, they may well think, "what use is that thing?" And the Resistance Bombers did not even look all that cool to me, and they didn't even do anything cool, blowing up a dreadnaught at the cost of the whole squadron, and the TIE Silencer never actually went up against any Resistance fighters. It faced practically no resistance whatsoever and, thus, could not prove itself truly effective in combat.

[WebLurker]

I would not bet against kids caring about how effective a vehicle is. Kids may think that something looks cool at first, but if they see it just get unceremoniously get blown up before doing anything cool, they may well think, "what use is that thing?"

Like I said, would kids seriously care about that? It's been quite a few years since I was a kid, but I seem to recall that the toy being cool in and of itself was more important to me then the movie it came from, much less what it did in the movie. (Now, if I get movie toys, it's because they're of characters and other stuff I liked in the movies, but I'm mostly getting them to put on my shelf, not to play with.)

And the Resistance Bombers did not even look all that cool to me, and they didn't even do anything cool, blowing up a dreadnaught at the cost of the whole squadron, and the TIE Silencer never actually went up against any Resistance fighters. It faced practically no resistance whatsoever and, thus, could not prove itself truly effective in combat.

See above. (Agree that I wouldn't buy a bomber toy myself, although I would like a Paige Tico Black figure to go with the Rose one I got.)
0

[Immortal Weapon]

Having a nephew who always asks me for toys, he'll want something he's intimately familiar with then how effective it is shown to be in the source material. All the maincraft toys he asks me to get for him are usually of the minor enemies.