https://buy-zithromax.online buy kamagra usa https://antibiotics.top buy stromectol online https://deutschland-doxycycline.com https://ivermectin-apotheke.com kaufen cialis https://2-pharmaceuticals.com buy antibiotics online Online Pharmacy vermectin apotheke buy stromectol europe buy zithromax online https://kaufen-cialis.com levitra usa https://stromectol-apotheke.com buy doxycycline online https://buy-ivermectin.online https://stromectol-europe.com stromectol apotheke https://buyamoxil24x7.online deutschland doxycycline https://buy-stromectol.online https://doxycycline365.online https://levitra-usa.com buy ivermectin online buy amoxil online https://buykamagrausa.net

On the Forever Franchise of "Star Wars"

Frankly, if they are all (or even mostly) as good as "The Force Awakens, " I have no problem with an endless series of Star Wars movies. Or Marvel movies. Or whatever.

I mean, we don't have problems with a TV show being 13 or 26 episodes in a single year, or of shows being renewed for another season. Nobody says, "OMG, another episode of that show this week, too? Why can't Hollywood give us different stand-alone TV shows each week, instead of endless sequels? Where is their creativity?"

Aside from the time spans involved, it's much the same thing with a movie series. And if they start to suck, the box office will drop and they'll stop making them.

There's nothing evil about a movie franchise, even if it includes associated one-off movies in the shared universe. And if a given franchise is not your cuppa, well, it's not like there is a shortage of entertainment out there to watch (or read, or listen to, or play) instead.




You Won’t Live to See the Final Star Wars Movie | WIRED
If the people at Disney have anything to say about it, the past four decades of Star Wars were merely prologue.

View on Google+

69 view(s)  

3 thoughts on “On the Forever Franchise of "Star Wars"”

  1. One of the things Netflix is good for is reminding you of just how many movies and TV shows you've never heard anything about are made each year. Of course, there's usually a good reason you've never heard of them, but some of them are diamonds in the rough.

  2. Considering I've seen ever Bond movie over the past 50 years (some rewatched more then others), I don't see how a long term franchise is that big of a deal.

    It's a way better idea than rebooting a character from origin, through a 3 movie arc and doing over again like the keep doing on the DC side.

  3. +Stan Pedzick To be fair, Sony and Fox have done the same with Spider-Man and the X-Men.

    The major difference with movies, vs TV, is, as I said, the time frame. While sometimes it's gratuitous (Sony), often it's also a matter of the star(s) aging out of the role. At that point you can:

    1. Recast and reboot.
    2. Recast and not reboot. [He just has a different face]
    3. Recast and just have a timeless series that never seems to acknowledge the tonal and plot and protagonist inconsistencies over the decades. [Bond]
    4. Stop.

    The only TV show I can think of that's really faced that challenge and finessed it well is Doctor Who. That said, most movie series never get that far, either. Those that do (Bond being the classic example) are further hampered by not really having a long-term showrunner or by assuming that audiences don't care about the differences.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *