Star Wars: The Last Jedi (Rian Johnson, December 15, 2017) Movie • Page 6

In the spectrum of blockbuster film franchises, 2 years is the least amount of time one would generally wait in between films. Post production alone for these effects-driven film can take a year+.

There is also the issue of spoilers. If you film 7,8,& 9 as one production you have to write three scripts and cast characters for three movies. You may film a scene in the first month or two of production that won't appear until episode 9, meaning it would be easier for spoilers to get out there.

With franchises like Harry Potter, Hunger Games, and LOTR this is ok because the books are already out there, spoilers aren't as big of a concern. Fans of the book series more or less know what's going to happen and anyone interest in spoilers can simply read the books.

I don't know why Episode 8 got pushed back. I was actually pretty surprised they originally had it competing with Guardians 2 to begin with, so pushing it back makes sense.

 

^thank you for making an actual post

the rejuvenated star wars franchise is seemingly tiers beyond even lotr or harry potter in terms of budget for production. what is possible because of this could likely cause a paradigm shift with the blockbuster

and beyond production time, there is still the question of release scheduling. TFA did not have to come out last Christmas. RO does not have to come out this Christmas.

 

It makes perfect sense to release in December. You escape the summer blockbuster clutter and have way less competition.

 

I agree with that even if the Star WArs franchise is the single fattest exception to the rule that has ever existed

 

imagine TFA coming out this Christmas, ep 8 next Christmas and then side stories sometime else

crude example

 

Imagine the franchise fatigue.

 

If I remember correctly LOTR was a November/December franchise, and a few Harry Potter movies came out in that timeframe, as did Avatar.

There is a term used called "counter-programming". So during October when all of the studios release their horror movies it's smart for a studio to throw a comedy in the mix to suck up all the non-horror moviegoers. In and around the fall holidays, the market is flooded with prestige or "award-bait" films. At the turn of the millennium studios started seeing the benefit of throwing one or two "event" films during that time period to counter the dramas and period pieces vying for Oscar buzz. Thus, The Fellowship of the Ring gets released in December of 2001. Since then there is usually one tentpole feature that occupies that space. I think the feeling was that Avatar was going to take the mantle from LOTR & Harry Potter but that franchise never really got off the ground.

So why not Star Wars??

 

You realize that, especially in regards to sequels, release schedule is largely dependent on production schedule? Like they can't release a movie that isn't finished. You realize this right?

Imagine being around during the OT and having to wait 3 whole years between movies... the horror.

 

Yes I realize "they can't release a movie that isn't finished"

you haven't added one meaningful thing to this conversation

 

the fatigue will be very real come side movie 3. the first issue is RO as entry 2 in the new franchise

 

Franchise fatigue seems like a weird thing since a lot of people are happy with consuming 26 hours of a single superhero story over a 7 month period.

 

a valid point

 

People talk about franchise fatigue when, in reality, they are in the minority. There are hundreds and hundreds of movies released every year and a very small number of them are part of a franchise. Even if you use the most liberal definition of "franchise film" you would probably come up with 25-30 movies a year that are part of a franchise. That isn't that much.

If you get tired of franchise films you have plenty of other options.

 

Right, so if they were to release these movies more frequently the fatigue would be even more extreme. Staggering each entry into the franchise gives each one more breathing room and a more focused marketing approach.

 

Well, this is pretty much the whole argument against putting out too much of one franchise. There is always another option, so eventually when people get sick of seeing the same thing they'll opt for something new.

 

Maybe. For some, sliding the side story between the first 2 main entries in however many years it's been, pre emptively exacerbates the onset of that fatigue because the audiences investment in it is not congruent with that of the main entries

 

Maybe we are defining "franchise-fatigue" differently. I usually define it as "people are sick of every movie that comes out being a sequel or a remake." I feel like you may be defining it as "people are sick of movies from specific franchises".

 

Yea I'm using the latter. Either way though, the point still stands. People get bored of the same old thing and they will gravitate towards something new.

Okay, but again in your scenario there is a new Star Wars film every six months essentially (saga entry then spin off).

 

I think the goal is that there is something for everyone at all times, and releasing quality products. If the movie are good, you can make them forever and people won't get sick of them.

 

I see what you're saying, but I disagree here slightly. I think it's one of the reasons why art, fashion, and everything else sees change over time. People crave new experiences and if they don't see that in the world presented to them they take it into their own hands and try new things.

 

A myriad of strategic factors influence the release schedule of a movie.

Any studio would obviously wish to translate their unreleased movie into ticket sales as soon as possible, but it's not as simple as bumping up the release date to appease fans. Additional time allowance may be given to complete post-production. A rushed release date that impairs product quality doesn't help anyone. Production time always directly impacts the release schedule because you can't release an unfinished product! Marketing must be allowed sufficient time to garner anticipation among any unaware consumers. Movie ticket sales vary throughout the year, and the studio would be foolish to waste their movie, the product of year(s) of effort, on a weak month.

Goodness.

 

Disney has 2 franchises that are the first of their kind blockbusters financially especially the star wars franchise. It is not congrous to compare them to other the production of other blockbusters. The "that's the way it is" argument completely undersells the gravity of the scenario. The fact that the original schedule for Ep 8 was 1.5 years to begin with, something I did not know prior to starting this conversation, proves those arguments wrong. We will see schedules like that in the future within this franchise and others as the blockbuster is poised to undergo a paradigm shift now that Disney is doing what it is they are doing

 

The release schedule is based on where they can make the most money. As far as the movie itself, the 3 highest grossing movies of all time (Avatar, Titanic, TFA) came out in Dec/Jan and had long runs in the theater because very few big movies come out after that because January/February are mostly a dumping ground so they gain a lot more repeat business. In the summer, there's a lot more competition. Only 1 of the prequels made over $100 million opening weekend (RotS) and that film didn't even break a billion worldwide even though it is known as by far the best of the prequels, all of which were released in May. By releasing in December, they also get tons of money in toy/merchandise sales which have always been a big part of the success of Star Wars. There was a rumor that Disney made over a billion dollars in Merch sales even before TFA was released and that is the time of year most people are buying things as opposed to summer when many families spend money on vacations/activities.

Also while fatigue might not be the best word for it, the general audience may eventual get more selective about what Star Wars films they see if there are too many. Sure the big Saga films are safe in that regard, but to use the Marvel example look at Ant-Man vs Civil War. Civil War made 3x as much opening weekend and while that was always going to be more popular, that's still disappointing for what was a really well reviewed Marvel film in Ant-Man. By making them a full year apart, it gives times for the hype to die for the previous years film and then focus on building up the next one without burning out everyone like the current Marvel films are starting to do. The Saga films are always gonna be popular but this helps the stand alone a by making them events as well instead of potentially skip able affairs as Ant-Man, The Thor Movies, and Doctor Strange are/could be.

 

I hope Kylo Ren is extremely successful in this movie.