Well yeah. That's pretty obvious. Don't forget Disney can knock out their animations for a nice $1bn here and there, too. And Pixar. They're really printing money nowadays.I think marval is a bigger brand then star wars now
Well yeah. That's pretty obvious. Don't forget Disney can knock out their animations for a nice $1bn here and there, too. And Pixar. They're really printing money nowadays.I think marval is a bigger brand then star wars now
Just as junk.
That's a very kind article. It doesn't cover the full detail and instead just says tickets = profit. Try reading this article for a bit more detailed analysis. https://practicaleconomics.org/disney-star-wars-the-finances/ I'm not saying it's accurate but I don't think things are as rosy at Disney as they'd like us to believe. I guess more info will come out when the financial reports are issued. Don't forget that Galaxy's Edge reportedly cost $1B to build and it's lack of success has been well reported.Where do you get this nonsense from? Disney made back the $4bn after Solo, and that's not including all the franchising, theme parks and home ent products which are probably more than the global box office anyway; https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/30/six...sfilm-disney-has-recouped-its-investment.html
Try reading this article for a bit more detailed analysis. https://practicaleconomics.org/disney-star-wars-the-finances/ I'm not saying it's accurate but I don't think things are as rosy at Disney as they'd like us to believe.
This analysis is complete nonsense. It's complete nonsense because it assigns a value of $0 to LucasFilms. Disney don't need to "recoup" the $4bn spent on LucasFilms because they acquired an asset worth $4bn when they purchased it.
This film was amazing. Absolutely loved it. Even with people telling me why I shouldn't like it
I'm not going to get into the economics of it because Hollywood accounting is well known for being particularly confusing and misleading. Plus I know nothing about it. However, I work at one of Disney's main competitors and trust me, besides the critical/creative arguments regarding SWs, and staff upheaval with regards to the Fox takeover - as far as making money goes - it is very rosy. You can argue that Solo lost X amount of TLJ 'only made X amount' but at the end of the day as a business with their hands in many, many pots (re. franchises), they are absolutely fine. If I go to trade shows there are two recurring gossip points... 1 is Netflix and 2, is how much money Disney are making.That's a very kind article. It doesn't cover the full detail and instead just says tickets = profit. Try reading this article for a bit more detailed analysis. https://practicaleconomics.org/disney-star-wars-the-finances/ I'm not saying it's accurate but I don't think things are as rosy at Disney as they'd like us to believe. I guess more info will come out when the financial reports are issued. Don't forget that Galaxy's Edge reportedly cost $1B to build and it's lack of success has been well reported.
Then you could argue you could set up kamikaze ships before your assault and it comes back to why isn't everyone doing it again. JJ's reason was **** too but the fact he had to somehow fix it in the first place is is worse.The flimsy reason not to do the "Holdo maneuver" was also pretty laughable, that it was a 1 in a million shot. Hmm, put smaller ship in front of larger ship and go to hyperspeed, how mind numbingly hard. They could have at least said something about it taking too long to disable safety protocols on the hyperdrive or something like that, would make sense there would be some sort of anti collision program for hyperspeed.
Then you could argue you could set up kamikaze ships before your assault and it comes back to why isn't everyone doing it again. JJ's reason was **** too but the fact he had to somehow fix it in the first place is is worse.
You could do but their attack was hastily arranged so at least in that sense it makes sense that there was no time to do it for the ships. It's at least a better explanation than saying "it was a 1 in a million shot" which it clearly wasn't.
I think the worst part was, if that had ever worked at all everyone would just be slapping warp drives to asteroids.
Why even build a Death Star or similar in that case? Even if it WAS difficult to land a shot, hitting a planet wouldn't be difficult given their orbits are easily predicted by us, let alone civilizations with technology at that level. You'd just find a big enough rock floating about and fit it with a warp drive.
In the events of TLJ sure, but any Star Wars media past and present would have to answer the question "Why didn't they just fire a hyperdrive ship into it" or "Why didn't they have a kamikaze ship setup ready to holdo it" if they went with something like you suggested. JJ's reason is dumb AF but it at least it retcons it into oblivion.You could do but their attack was hastily arranged so at least in that sense it makes sense that there was no time to do it for the ships. It's at least a better explanation than saying "it was a 1 in a million shot" which it clearly wasn't.
That's what happens when a literal nobody like Rian Johnson somehow gets to direct a movie that's looking to rake in a billion plus.
He's fine as a director, he directed a number of highly rated Breaking Bad episodes, but as a writer he's shaky at best and shouldn't be given free reign with an established franchise.I actually enjoyed Looper, seems like a fluke on his behalf though. I've yet to see anything else by him that hasn't either bored me to tears or been utter crap.
Did I miss something at the end of the last one. I know in the trailer for ep9 that Palpatine could be heard but in the start to ep9 it says there is a broadcast of his voice.
This seem like a huge leap to me of story and confusion..