Pressure mounts on Kathleen Kennedy to step down as head of Lucas Film?

Arne_Saknussem

nix wrote: »

Yes i understand that, but i still believe TLJ should have done alot better than it did, considering TFA entire story was about searching for and locating Luke Skywalker, and everybody knew TLJ was going to star and focus greatly on Luke with how TFA ended.

A character nobody has seen return to the screen for over 30 years.. I'm aware we got that also in the prior movie with Solo and Chewie, but Luke was the main focus of the OT and a Jedi. So with that alone, TLJ should have been on par or ahead of TFA financially.

I'd agree with everything here except the highlighted part.

I think it was always going to be behind TFA but everything you've outlined would have led them to project for $1.7bn and above.

Disney would definitely have expected it to be closer to TFA than to Rogue One.

Inviere

faceman wrote: »

FWIW I thought The Last Jedi was the weakest SW film in the series. (Excluding prequels)

So not the weakest of the series then?

I loved TLJ, right up there with Empire imo.

Relikk

Inviere wrote: »

I loved TLJ, right up there with Empire imo.

Nowhere near as good as Empire, IMO. Or ANH, Jedi, Rogue One or TFA for that matter. It's just above the prequels on my list, and that's not saying much considering the contempt I hold for them in terms of film-making, the stories are mostly fine. They're just really poorly executed.

I can't count how many times I sat in the cinema watching TLJ and saying "what the fuck is this shit?" to myself. It was slightly better on the second viewing, but there's still far too many things in there that that ruined it for me and that I'll never like, and that's disappointing as someone who adores the majority of Star Wars, from games, books, comics, collecting memorabilia and of course the original trilogy.

ixoy

Is there any sense that some fans reactions to TLJ matter all that much? They're very vocal - furiously so at times - but what percentage of the film's audience are they? Online polls are hard to judge given they're bombarded often with people who are highly opinionated but not necessarily representative.

I'm not hugely enthusiastic about the SW franchise and I enjoyed TLJ and a lot of the changes didn't bother me. Is my stance unusual or merely what most people felt? Because it's the average film goer who is the most important from Lucas Film's perspective.

While I'm not a Star Wars fan at all I can see some of the issues, especially with TLJ. Luke becomes a murdering teacher (or about to), Snoke killed off with no payoff, hyper drive super weapon.

A lot of its problems stem from TFA and JJ's mystery box nonsense not paying off. Mystery boxes work on TV serial format, not often in films. Also JJ being JJ and just ripping off a previous entry in a franchise in the original SW (just like ST: Into Darkness).

The more I think about it the more I see his influence being a big part of it. He makes great spectacles that look amazing but have no substance.

Inviere

Relikk wrote: »

Nowhere near as good as Empire, IMO. Or ANH, Jedi, Rogue One or TFA for that matter. It's just above the prequels on my list, and that's not saying much considering the contempt I hold for them in terms of film-making, the stories are mostly fine. They're just really poorly executed.

I can't count how many times I sat in the cinema watching TLJ and saying "what the fuck is this shit?" to myself. It was slightly better on the second viewing, but there's still far too many things in there that that ruined it for me and that I'll never like, and that's disappointing as someone who adores the majority of Star Wars, from games, books, comics, collecting memorabilia and of course the original trilogy.

It's mad how polarizing the film has been. While you were scratching your head watching this film, I was utterly gripped by it. Two different people, both long term fans of the franchise, with two completely different experiences of the same thing.

I think a huge problem is that some fans feel a sense of ownership over the franchise so if a film does something that they wouldn't write happening in their little fan fiction then they become enraged.

If you're a 30+ man upset over the story in a film then you really need to take a look in the mirror to see if you aren't still a teenager. I love The Dark Tower books and enjoyed the film but feel that I'm not a real fan as I've not tried to get the producer fired or left abusive message for the director and a supporting cast member to such a nasty degree that they delete their social media cause that's what real fans do

S.M.B.

^ this.

I find it odd that so many people have such big issues with a few plot points in the 9th movie of a franchise.

odyssey06

S.M.B. wrote: »

^ this.

I find it odd that so many people have such big issues with a few plot points in the 9th movie of a franchise.

There wouldn't be 9 movies in the franchise though if it hadn't inspired such, well let's call it attachment rather than oddness.

The studios are more than happy to feed into the "ownership" sentiment as long as there are bums on cinema seats, merch purchasing, dvd/blu/uhd triple dipping, video games, books, etc.

It's a double edged sword

FunLover18

https://twitter.com/Darren_Mooney/status/1004508573278273536?s=19

Greyfox

[Deleted User] wrote: »

..but feel that I'm not a real fan as I've not tried to get the producer fired or left abusive message for the director and a supporting cast member to such a nasty degree that they delete their social media cause that's what real fans do

Nobody is saying this behaviour is ok, the people who do this are gobsh**es. It's very difficult to block these morons and social media should be doing more to try to block them/remove nasty comments

pixelburp

In a broader sense, Twitter's reputation has taken a heavy beating over the last few years, consistently dropping the ball when it comes to abuse, bullying and hate-speech on its service. It took long enough just to include a simple 'Report' button on posts, but otherwise they and others like Facebook seem unwilling or incapable of grasping the nettle of online abuse. In their defence, it's a difficult needle to thread in some respects - IIRC there was an outcry from the alt-right & American conservatives when numerous accounts lost their 'verified' status - but neither do they seem to want to protect folks from legitimate harassment.

Greyfox

Greyfox wrote: »

Nobody is saying this behaviour is ok, the people who do this are gobsh**es. It's very difficult to block these morons and social media should be doing more to try to block them/remove nasty comments

The issue isn't if it is acceptable to do so or not, (it's not) but rather the fact that so many of the so-called fans are vile racist little twats. It is telling that so much of the hatred directed at the Ghostbusters reboot was aimed at the one nonwhite lead. Likewise, with Star Wars, of the main cast it is a nonwhite member who has come in for the vast majority of toxicity.

pixelburp wrote: »

In a broader sense, Twitter's reputation has taken a heavy beating over the last few years, consistently dropping the ball when it comes to abuse, bullying and hate-speech on its service. It took long enough just to include a simple 'Report' button on posts, but otherwise they and others like Facebook seem unwilling or incapable of grasping the nettle of online abuse. In their defence, it's a difficult needle to thread in some respects - IIRC there was an outcry from the alt-right & American conservatives when numerous accounts lost their 'verified' status - but neither do they seem to want to protect folks from legitimate harassment.

Twitter is horrendous to report anything to, Facebook isn't quite as bad as at least the will investigate reports made. The amount of racist, homophobic trash that both platforms allow is ridiculous and nothing has been done to sort it out.

HandsomeBob

Campia is a dickhead....that's all I really wanted to say.

RDM_83 again

[Deleted User] wrote: »

While I think most of the anti-Kennedy crap spouted is pure misogyny, I feel people are being a bit sly in pointing to the profits made.

Profit is great only when it matches, or exceeds, expectation. Everything I have read would indicate that the past few films have failed to do this.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I know what you mean, the billion dollars or so profit she made on the back of TLJ is very poor.

I don't think it's been brought up in this thread yet but the whole, "shut up 40 year old man , it's been turning a big profit", ignores something important, the film's have to be more than just profitable if they make less returns for investors than simply sticking the billions the IP and production cost into the stock market it's failing, that's the important thing to look at particularly in relation to the current trends.
It's like Trump's thing if you only make as much as you would have with some safe stock market investments your not being a great business person.

Comparisons with Transforms and so on aren't valid as the IP, production and so on have given very healthy returns over the lifespan of the reboot.

Arne_Saknussem wrote: »

Interesting, the older fans i know almost to a man thought TLJ was an awful film. Rogue One had a more even split of like/dislike.

Most haven't seen Solo, the majority would say TLJ related.

I don't think producers should be listening to the ultra hardcore fanbase, they will pay to watch the film's anyway, but I think there is a probably a decent cohort of people like myself who have a fondness for Star Wars but if they here a consensus from friends and audience reviews (rather than critics) won't bother seeing the film's in the cinema, saw the Force Awakens didn't love it but was start of new series so I was curious anyway, heard great things about Rogue One so saw it and liked it a lot, heard at best that the Last Jedi was "ok" or "flawed" so skipped it and doing the same for Solo as it seems pointless.
I know that's just a handful of ticket sales but the massive drop on the 2nd week of the Force awakens sales makes me think this isnt an uncommon thing.

Peatys

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I think a huge problem is that some fans feel a sense of ownership over the franchise so if a film does something that they wouldn't write happening in their little fan fiction then they become enraged.

If you're a 30+ man upset over the story in a film then you really need to take a look in the mirror to see if you aren't still a teenager. I love The Dark Tower books and enjoyed the film but feel that I'm not a real fan as I've not tried to get the producer fired or left abusive message for the director and a supporting cast member to such a nasty degree that they delete their social media cause that's what real fans do

Do you not feel like you're banging your head again the wall?

Arne_Saknussem

RDM_83 again wrote: »

I don't think producers should be listening to the ultra hardcore fanbase, they will pay to watch the film's anyway, but I think there is a probably a decent cohort of people like myself who have a fondness for Star Wars but if they here a consensus from friends and audience reviews (rather than critics) won't bother seeing the film's in the cinema, saw the Force Awakens didn't love it but was start of new series so I was curious anyway, heard great things about Rogue One so saw it and liked it a lot, heard at best that the Last Jedi was "ok" or "flawed" so skipped it and doing the same for Solo as it seems pointless.
I know that's just a handful of ticket sales but the massive drop on the 2nd week of the Force awakens sales makes me think this isnt an uncommon thing.

I'd put a lot of the 2nd week dropoff for TLJ down to hardcore fans not going back for repeated viewings.

I think these fans haven't gone back to see Solo & a lot(but not as much as Solo) won't be going to see Ep IX. Be interesting to see how it turns out.

Bowlardo

Solo wasn’t a bad film at all. Decent cast some annoying bits but good entertainment all round.

The prequels were poor enough but had wonderful music and fight/battle scenes and I though the last one was actually decent

TFA was solid and at the very least got everyone excited about the next installment.

TLJ was horrendous. Snoke death scene was decent but other than that it was the biggest **** show I have ever seen. I can’t get how so much money behind it and such (allegedly) talented people working on it that it made it to the cinema.
There is no excuse for this ,money was no object, the could have got any writer,actors or director they are wanted but made an absolute balls off all of the above. Kylie ren is a god actor but all the new additions are poor enough actors.

Should kk be fired? To quote mace windu “yes she deserves to die and I hope she burns in hell”

Sad Professor

As much as I loved TLJ, I sorta hope Johnson's trilogy doesn't go ahead. I'd rather see him do something original than waste the next 9 years making SW movies. After the smooth production and success of TLJ he could probably do whatever he wanted.

Anyway, apparently The Ankler (a Hollywood gossip newsletter which has gotten a few things right) is suggesting Kennedy may step down in September. She's 65 and tired of the studio fights and bad press, it suggests. Kiri Hart, SVP of Lucasfilm, is the most likely replacement. Pinch of salt etc.

johnny_ultimate

Sad Professor wrote: »

As much as I loved TLJ, I sorta hope Johnson's trilogy doesn't go ahead. I'd rather see him do something original than waste the next 9 years making SW movies. After the smooth production and success of TLJ he could probably do whatever he wanted.

If you look back at the announcement of the trilogy, it suggests Johnson will ‘create’ it and write/direct the first film... it’s carefully worded and doesn’t commit on the rest. That’s what I’d like to see happen - one more film for him, and then hopefully see him off to work on other stuff (although if he can bring the kind of fresh ideas and filmmaking to three more films, I’m not going to complain either). I was always a bit cautious of Johnson taking on SW rather than working on original stuff, but TLJ has only made me more curious about what else he can manage within the framework of the series.

The Last Jedi’s subtext of looking forward (albeit with an affectionate knowledge of the past) was to me a really positive and encouraging message. I’d love to see Johnson have the opportunity to put that into practice away from the Skywalker saga and with something closer to a clean slate. Then maybe hand it over to other filmmakers to carry the torch.

Sad Professor

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

If you look back at the announcement of the trilogy, it suggests Johnson will ‘create’ it and write/direct the first film... it’s carefully worded and doesn’t commit on the rest. That’s what I’d like to see happen - one more film for him, and then hopefully see him off to work on other stuff (although if he can bring the kind of fresh ideas and filmmaking to three more films, I’m not going to complain either). I was always a bit cautious of Johnson taking on SW rather than working on original stuff, but TLJ has only made me more curious about what else he can manage within the framework of the series.

The Last Jedi’s subtext of looking forward (albeit with an affectionate knowledge of the past) was to me a really positive and encouraging message. I’d love to see Johnson have the opportunity to put that into practice away from the Skywalker saga and with something closer to a clean slate. Then maybe hand it over to other filmmakers to carry the torch.

I think I'd rather Johnson opt out altogether than start but not finish a trilogy. I would have been much happier if they had chosen him and not Abrams for IX. Whatever people think about TLJ or TFA, Abrams is really the last person you want finishing up a trilogy.

johnny_ultimate

Sad Professor wrote: »

I think I'd rather Johnson opt out altogether than start but not finish a trilogy. I would have been much happier if they had chosen him and not Abrams for IX. Whatever people think about TLJ or TFA, Abrams is really the last person you want finishing up a trilogy.

If he wants to see out the trilogy, I’d definitely be disappointed about him being stuck to SW for such a long run... but equally curious and excited to see how he takes advantage of such a long form approach to storytelling I am all in for at least one more go for him though.

While I’d have thought Johnson was the right choice for IX initially, I can also see the trilogy being a much more appealing creative opportunity for him - especially if he pitched it in the first place. TLJ to me is a film in which he says A LOT about the characters and story he’s inherited, without holding anything back for another entry (something I’m sure Trevorrow and Abrams have silently cursed )... It’s like The Dark Knight in that respect, and it took Nolan a while to follow that up as he went 100% for TDK. For Johnson, now there’s an opportunity to do his completely own thing. To write it from the ground up, to cast it, to not be as rigidly tied to existing ideas and imagery... If I was in his position, I’d honestly think it was a no brainier if ‘Episode IX’ and ‘new trilogy’ were the choices available!

Definitely concerns about Abrams wrapping up a story for obvious reasons, although I know he can still craft a thrilling and expertly crafted thrill ride so there’s that at least. At the same time, he knows the characters, as he was one of the creators - and he knows the cast, as he cast them. I’m sure with the tight turnaround it was among the most practical options. It would have been nice to see someone new and interesting brought on... but ultimately I’m happier with Johnson having the new series than being stuck with Episode IX.

homerun_homer

I'm not crazy about Johnson managing his own trilogy. The talk around that he plans on focusing on a completely different galaxy has me extra worried.

Sad Professor

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

While I’d have thought Johnson was the right choice for IX initially, I can also see the trilogy being a much more appealing creative opportunity for him - especially if he pitched it in the first place. TLJ to me is a film in which he says A LOT about the characters and story he’s inherited, without holding anything back for another entry (something I’m sure Trevorrow and Abrams have silently cursed )... It’s like The Dark Knight in that respect, and it took Nolan a while to follow that up as he went 100% for TDK. For Johnson, now there’s an opportunity to do his completely own thing. To write it from the ground up, to cast it, to not be as rigidly tied to existing ideas and imagery... If I was in his position, I’d honestly think it was a no brainier if ‘Episode IX’ and ‘new trilogy’ were the choices available!

Yeah, it seems like Johnson might craft a more standalone first entry in a trilogy than Abrams did with TFA, which in many ways resembled a tv pilot. As you said, Johnson didn't hold anything back in TLJ and that made for a far more dramatically satisfying film. Though that's not say I think he left IX without anywhere to go, rather I think he freed it up to be a proper third act. (The fact that many fans can't imagine where the story might go in IX without Luke, Snoke etc is a reflection of their own lack of imagination.) One of the problems with both the OT and the prequel trilogy is that Lucas held back too much with the result that the third films felt like box ticking exercises. Half of ROTJ is taken up resolving loose ends from TESB, and ROTS is very rushed dealing with events that should have happened much earlier in the trilogy.

Relikk

Sad Professor wrote: »

The fact that many fans can't imagine where the story might go in IX without Luke, Snoke etc is a reflection of their own lack of imagination.

I don't get that impression, at all. From my point of view it's not a common point made by Star Wars fans, including myself. The questions are mostly about the characters. The lack of information on Snoke being one of them, and the direction Johnson chose for Luke being the other.

I like the idea of Kylo usurping the leadership, and I like that Luke went out the way he did and I've never come across anyone arguing the contrary. It's about who Snoke is. Where did he come from, how is he so powerful, who trained him, was he a Jedi? Etc. These things are usually hinted at in Star Wars movies. He turned out to be a throwaway character and that's kind of annoying (a bit like Phasma. This supposedly bad-ass stormtrooper commander who gets constantly humiliated, and yes I know part of that is Abrams' fault). And then there's Luke, who abandoned the galaxy to darkness and buggered off to die on an island. That choice of writing is a sin in most Star Wars fans minds. It's nonsense.

You can probably guess how IX is going to go. Rebellion consolidates and reforms with Rey as their talisman. First Order tries to seek them out and annihilate them. Blows are traded, people die, Rey and Kylo say what they have to say, confront each other. Rey tries to turn him back, Kylo says it's too late. They fight, inter-cut with the final battle between the Rebellion and the First Order. Rey defeats Kylo (or they destroy each other seeing as it's strongly hinted that they're equals in the force), if Rey survives she starts a new Jedi academy with what she learned from Luke and the texts she took from Ach-To. Rebellion becomes the New Republic again. The End.

Inviere

Relikk wrote: »

I don't get that impression, at all. From my point of view it's not a common point made by Star Wars fans, the Jedi are evil...

Ahem....

It's about who Snoke is. Where did he come from, how is he so powerful, who trained him, was he a Jedi? Etc. These things are usually hinted at in Star Wars movies. He turned out to be a throwaway character and that's kind of annoying

I too would have liked to know more about Snoke, who he is, his story, and so forth. Primarily because with Palpatine & Vader dead, Luke and Leia were the sole surviving force users. Now it seems that wasn't the case, and we'd like to know why that is. That said, I think the focus is entirely on Kylo...and we don't need to know about Snoke. Sure, we want to, but ultimately, we don't need to. Secondly, we've seen some made force trickery used in VIII. I know we seen Snoke cut in half...but who knows, was he really there? If so, is he really dead? There's the whole Plageuis angle to potentially factor in (the ability to prevent death/create life etc).

And then there's Luke, who abandoned the galaxy to darkness and buggered off to die on an island. That choice of writing is a sin in most Star Wars fans minds. It's nonsense.

I have to disagree with you on that one. For me, it made perfect sense. Luke tried, and failed. His failure brought about the Knights of Ren....the very thing he had fought to rid the galaxy of. He felt responsible, he felt guilty, and felt like a failure; he likely ultimately felt the galaxy was better off without him. VIII was about his redemption, his saving of the rebellion, and stoking the ashes of hope to reignite the resistance. I feel it was perfectly done, and so very meaningful for such a key and well loved character.

You can probably guess how IX is going to go. Rebellion consolidates and reforms with Rey as their talisman. First Order tries to seek them out and annihilate them. Blows are traded, people die, Rey and Kylo say what they have to say, confront each other. Rey tries to turn him back, Kylo says it's too late. They fight, inter-cut with the final battle between the Rebellion and the First Order. Rey defeats Kylo (or they destroy each other seeing as it's strongly hinted that they're equals in the force), if Rey survives she starts a new Jedi academy with what she learned from Luke and the texts she took from Ach-To. Rebellion becomes the New Republic again. The End.

Too predictable, and while you'd be forgiven for thinking the above, there's no way they can make it that simple and predictable.

Relikk

Inviere wrote: »

I have to disagree with you on that one. For me, it made perfect sense. Luke tried, and failed. His failure brought about the Knights of Ren....the very thing he had fought to rid the galaxy of. He felt responsible, he felt guilty, and felt like a failure; he likely ultimately felt the galaxy was better off without him. VIII was about his redemption, his saving of the rebellion, and stoking the ashes of hope to reignite the resistance. I feel it was perfectly done, and so very meaningful for such a key and well loved character.

Of course. I have no problem with his redemption, and his path to Ach-To is understandable. As I said, I'm happy with how he went out. I just have a problem with the Luke that we know actually making a conscious decision to do what he did. Finding more knowledge from the First Jedi Temple? Fine. Understanding the dark side more? Fine. Going there to shut himself off and die? Meh.

Inviere wrote: »

Too predictable, and while you'd be forgiven for thinking the above, there's no way they can make it that simple and predictable.

Oh, I know. It is predictable, but Revenge of the Sith aside, I doubt they're going to have anything melancholic in the last act of a trilogy that's probably the last act of that entire storyline.

Sad Professor

Relikk wrote: »

I don't get that impression, at all. From my point of view it's not a common point made by Star Wars fans, including myself. The questions are mostly about the characters. The lack of information on Snoke being one of them, and the direction Johnson chose for Luke being the other.

I was talking specifically about people who say that Luke and Snoke's deaths shouldn't have happened in TLJ, and that by resolving most of JJ's mystery boxes Johnson screwed up the third movie. It's a criticism which I've seen many, many times, including on this forum quite recently. Much of the early criticism of the film focused on this too.

There is a legitimate criticism to be made that TLJ doesn't leave you with anything to chew on and think that's what a lot of the disappointment over the film is about. Abrams was quite smart this way and threw in enough mystery boxes to distract people from really questioning some of his creative choices. Rey's parents, another emperor, missing Luke etc were presented as if the answers couldn't be straightforward. But JJ uses mystery to disguise lack of plotting.

And then there's Luke, who abandoned the galaxy to darkness and buggered off to die on an island. That choice of writing is a sin in most Star Wars fans minds. It's nonsense.

Just on this point - as I've said before, the creative responsibility for this lies almost entirely at the feet of Abrams rather than Johnson. Abrams wrote Johnson into a corner and I honestly think there was no other way for Johnson to explain Luke's absence from TFA without either retconning TFA or coming up with some very convoluted explanation. I read loads of fan theories during the two year gap and none of them satisfactorily explained what Luke was doing on that island. Many of them even seemed to think that Episode 8 could jump forward in time as if Luke chilling on an island while his friends were being slaughtered could be explained in an offhand bit of dialogue as he finished training Rey 3 years later. As a result, I almost perfectly predicted the broken-spirited, washed up old Jedi direction Johnson took with Luke a full year before the film came out because there seemed to be no other way to go.

Sand

The way criticism of Star Wars has been conflated with a political agenda reminds me of an article I saw in 2004 bemoaning the failure of the Arthur remake (with Russel Brand) and the success of The Incredibles. The author saw Arthur as an avatar of Democrat liberalism, whereas The Incredibles were a family of Republican values. So the failure of one and the success of the other was a signal of the zeitgeist, a harbinger of of a 1000 year Republican Reich.

Of course, there was a much simpler explanation: The Incredibles was a great movie. Arthur was a terrible movie.

In a similar way, Star Wars has been politicised. Lucasfilm and the media have relentlessly characterised critics of the movies as being racist, misogynistic, bitter 40 year old man baby trolls. Of course, down in the 8th paragraph of the tirade, in fine print they'll allow some criticism might be valid, but the 'toxic fans' are always the headline. It is in this context that all criticism of the Star Wars movies is viewed.

What is missed in this political interpretation of criticism is that the recent Star Wars movies are simply bad: poor plots, poor characters, poor dialogue, poor direction.

Kathleen Kennedy has done an objectively poor job. Both Rogue One and Solo required expensive and costly 'rescues'. There is little cohesion between TFA and TLJ. Johnson systematically deconstructed and destroyed every setup Abrams attempted to create. It's very hard to see how episode IX can be rescued from the smoking ruin that was TLJ. Kennedy presided over all of this.

She also presided over an environment of increasing hostility between Star Wars fans and Lucasfilm. This is incredibly foolish. Star War's fans underpin the 4 billion USD franchise Disney purchased. They bought all the merchandise, read all the books, watched all the DVDs, kept talking and talking about the universe. They're fairly easy to keep satisfied: just respect the characters and setting, give them the odd nod to some nerdy SW lore (without compromising the story), but most importantly make a good movie. Its not hard. The Marvel franchise does it effortlessly. Under Kennedy, Lucasfilm is alienating what should be an asset.

And she is also on course to oversee the first Star Wars movie to make a loss. That is incredible. Disney did not pay 4 billion USD for a franchise to make a loss. 'Casual' fans (and I consider myself casual) will not queue up to see bad movies, Star Wars or not. Star Wars had a certain momentum built up when Disney purchased the franchise. TFA was poor. The best part of Rogue One was the trailer. Okay, and Vader's pursuit. TLJ was terrible. Casual fans simply did not go to Solo because the preceding movies were meh to poor. That cant be excused by saying Star Wars is for kids. The Incredibles was a kids movie, but it was a great movie that the parents could enjoy as well as opposed to suffer through.

In any objective world, Kennedy has to go. Nothing to do with politics. Just bad movies leading to increasing disinterest from casual fans like myself. Whoever replaces Kennedy has to refocus on making good movies with interesting characters. Nothing else.