Star Wars: The Acolyte cancelled

Brian G Turner

Fantasist & Futurist
Staff member
Supporter
Joined
Nov 23, 2002
Messages
26,691
Location
UK
No season 2 for Star Wars: The Acolyte:

It's sad to see so much braying about this on Twitter, not because the plot was seen to be crap but because the series attempted to be more socially inclusive.

Still, the Pitch Meeting video is pretty damning about the story, and I watched a trailer showing an early few minutes, when Marshal was fighting in a bar - but it wasn't a Star Wars fight, it was something from The Matrix, with Trinity doing hand-to-hand combat that looked directly lifted from the film. I couldn't understand why a franchise about Jedi's having lightsabers and mind powers couldn't focus on those. Nothing wrong with pushing boundaries, but it just looked so inconsistent with what has already been established.

Andor manages to push boundaries while being consistent.
 
I can't say that i am surprised at this news. I haven't seen any of this show, but it looked to be not very well done. Just a series of "wouldn't this be cool".
 
Star Wars is in a worse position than Star Trek because at least the latter was based around an exploration concept--they have a blueprint to follow (even though it's a rather tired concept). It started in series tv. But in the Star Wars universe-cinematic in origin--it isn't about exploration, the whole universe is mapped and people (in the story) aren't shocked by giant space slugs. Aliens are everywhere, robots are everywhere. The expectation is to do something about Jedi knights since the Force is central to it, although there is also the space pirate and western element.
Even if you had the best possible production staff, it was never intended to be a series. Not like Star Trek. SW is rooted in the cinema experience of being exposed to visuals and action more so than character situations.
A Vulcan nerve pinch = a light saber swooshing around. They are different kinds of cool.
 
Still, the Pitch Meeting video is pretty damning about the story, and I watched a trailer showing an early few minutes, when Marshal was fighting in a bar - but it wasn't a Star Wars fight, it was something from The Matrix, with Trinity doing hand-to-hand combat that looked directly lifted from the film. I couldn't understand why a franchise about Jedi's having lightsabers and mind powers couldn't focus on those. Nothing wrong with pushing boundaries, but it just looked so inconsistent with what has already been established.

Is it inconsistent, though? It's a big - BIG - galaxy, so isn't it likely that there were a lot of different styles of fighting out there, and that some of them may have been embraced by Jedi? I mean if we want to talk consistency - compare the lightsaber fights in the OT with the PT. Obi Wan was older, sure - but he was definitely no older than Dooku was meant to be when he was flipping about.

I agree that it was a bit Matrix-y, but I also think adding stuff like this contributes to the breadth and depth of the universe, while sticking with 'lightsabers and mind powers' just keeps giving us the same old same old.

I can't say that i am surprised at this news. I haven't seen any of this show, but it looked to be not very well done. Just a series of "wouldn't this be cool".

I think the show runner came at this from a place of both respect for the material (its quite clear she's not just a fan but immersed in the lore) and a desire to introduce something new and fresh to the canon. It didn't work out, but I don't think it's fair to reduce her motivations to 'wouldn't this be cool'.

Star Wars is in a worse position than Star Trek because at least the latter was based around an exploration concept--they have a blueprint to follow (even though it's a rather tired concept). It started in series tv. But in the Star Wars universe-cinematic in origin--it isn't about exploration, the whole universe is mapped and people (in the story) aren't shocked by giant space slugs. Aliens are everywhere, robots are everywhere. The expectation is to do something about Jedi knights since the Force is central to it, although there is also the space pirate and western element.
Even if you had the best possible production staff, it was never intended to be a series. Not like Star Trek. SW is rooted in the cinema experience of being exposed to visuals and action more so than character situations.
A Vulcan nerve pinch = a light saber swooshing around. They are different kinds of cool.

Have you seen Andor? Because that show is basically what you are describing it's impossible for Star Wars to do - a well-written and produced series that is focused on character development rather than big set piece space battles or lightsaber fights.
 
Have you seen Andor? Because that show is basically what you are describing it's impossible for Star Wars to do - a well-written and produced series that is focused on character development rather than big set piece space battles or lightsaber fights.
No I haven't but it I wonder--is using the universe as a backdrop for a personal drama kind of a crutch---would the show be less interesting (or more interesting) if it made up its own universe?
There are lots of things they could do--a series about a family stranded on Hoth or the daily routine of a droid-making factory or what it is like to be a TIE fighter mechanic...but it feels like leftover Bantha foodoo to me because making such scenarios in the SW universe shackles them to cheap expectation and fan service.
The first idea--spaceship stranded on Hoth--seems to me that there would so much expectation around the trappings (when are we going to see a tauntaun? When is a wampa attack going to happen? Will we see evidence of a rebel base..?)
I just think it is cheap and restrictive.
Do we really need or deserve a series set on Hoth?
If it was a non-Star Wars universe, wouldn't it offer a lot more creative possibilities?
That's how I look at it.
 
No I haven't but it I wonder--is using the universe as a backdrop for a personal drama kind of a crutch---would the show be less interesting (or more interesting) if it made up its own universe?
There are lots of things they could do--a series about a family stranded on Hoth or the daily routine of a droid-making factory or what it is like to be a TIE fighter mechanic...but it feels like leftover Bantha foodoo to me because making such scenarios in the SW universe shackles them to cheap expectation and fan service.
The first idea--spaceship stranded on Hoth--seems to me that there would so much expectation around the trappings (when are we going to see a tauntaun? When is a wampa attack going to happen? Will we see evidence of a rebel base..?)
I just think it is cheap and restrictive.
Do we really need or deserve a series set on Hoth?
If it was a non-Star Wars universe, wouldn't it offer a lot more creative possibilities?
That's how I look at it.

I don't understand your point at all. What if this show wasn't set in the Star Wars universe? We have those shows already - it's everything that isn't set in the Star Wars universe.

Andor would not be Andor if it wasn't set in the Star Wars universe, because it's narrative is inherently intertwined with the Galactic Civil War. It could be picked up and placed in another universe, but you'd then have to establish a different civil war, and do the legwork of making an audience understand who's who, why these guys are bad, why these guys are good, why these guys are grey, what the history is between everyone. Which is fine, if you want to do that - that's what other shows do, to varying levels of success. But you get Rebel Moon, more often than not.

You can't just reduce Andor to using the background setting as a 'crutch', because it does so much more within the universe that has been established. It deepens the audience's understanding of the conflict and the established players and contributes a depth that enhances the other media that surrounds it - all while telling a personal story that is steeped in character development. There is a little bit of fan service, admittedly, but it's incidental rather than the focus.

I don't know, maybe watch it before deciding it's cheap and restrictive?
 
I don't understand your point at all. What if this show wasn't set in the Star Wars universe? We have those shows already - it's everything that isn't set in the Star Wars universe.
I am not sure in this time that you could make a show that isn't attached to a corporate brand universe. Rebel Moon is a brand--the show creator is the brand but it is basically a Star Wars clone--there's nothing unique to it from what I can see. The issue there is whether the cast is appealing enough to tune in. I am not intrigued by the cast.


I did watch the pilot of the Mandalorian--as a short SW fan film idea it is ok, but I had no interest in watching more based on that.

Casting has a lot to do with it--I bailed out on ST-Enterprise after a few episodes because the cast and concept was dull for me. But it was also a prequel.


Prequelitis is a serious condition and I think it should be treated with compassion and anti-biotics.

It may be worse than sequelitis or ripoffitis in how it stunts creativity.
 
I am not sure in this time that you could make a show that isn't attached to a corporate brand universe. Rebel Moon is a brand--the show creator is the brand but it is basically a Star Wars clone--there's nothing unique to it from what I can see. The issue there is whether the cast is appealing enough to tune in. I am not intrigued by the cast.


I did watch the pilot of the Mandalorian--as a short SW fan film idea it is ok, but I had no interest in watching more based on that.

Casting has a lot to do with it--I bailed out on ST-Enterprise after a few episodes because the cast and concept was dull for me. But it was also a prequel.


Prequelitis is a serious condition and I think it should be treated with compassion and anti-biotics.

It may be worse than sequelitis or ripoffitis in how it stunts creativity.

Then there's reboot syndrome which also quite serious.:D
 
Andor would not be Andor if it wasn't set in the Star Wars universe
Completely agree. I'm not even a Star wars fan, but Andor benefited massively from the weight of the Empire that we've "lived with" for decades hanging over the characters. If that's a "crutch" it's only in the same sense as what a WW2 film gains over one set in an imaginary conflict.
 
Is it inconsistent, though? It's a big - BIG - galaxy, so isn't it likely that there were a lot of different styles of fighting out there, and that some of them may have been embraced by Jedi? I mean if we want to talk consistency - compare the lightsaber fights in the OT with the PT. Obi Wan was older, sure - but he was definitely no older than Dooku was meant to be when he was flipping about.
Yeah, that's the thing - on the one hand, sure, there's an argument that a mix of fighting styles might be embraced, but Jedi using hand to hand combat itself doesn't really make much sense when you have a big fecking laser sword and the ability to throw people about with your mind. :D

If there's going to be a mix of fighting styles I would presume there must be different weapon fighting styles and psychic attacks they might employ. Not doing so makes about as much sense as mediaeval knights on horseback charging to battle, then at the last moment jumping from their horses, putting their weapons away, then putting their fists up and inviting their opponents to box.
Star Wars is in a worse position than Star Trek because at least the latter was based around an exploration concept--they have a blueprint to follow (even though it's a rather tired concept).
Star Wars is its own galaxy to explore, and shows like Andor show that it's perfectly capable of exploring it in a fresh and interesting way.

IMO the biggest problem with the Disney Star Wars material is that it's trying to appeal to the tens of thousands who read the books or comics or watched the cartoon series, rather than the tens of millions who were blown away by the original trilogy. I mean, seriously, it's reached the point where the original trilogy is no longer seen as canon and takes second place to newer stuff. IMO that is clearly the tail wagging the dog.
Prequelitis is a serious condition and I think it should be treated with compassion and anti-biotics.
For Star Trek, definitely - the whole concept of that franchise is about moving forward, not looking back!
 
Yeah, that's the thing - on the one hand, sure, there's an argument that a mix of fighting styles might be embraced, but Jedi using hand to hand combat itself doesn't really make much sense when you have a big fecking laser sword and the ability to throw people about with your mind. :D

...until your lightsaber fails, as it can for various reasons, but most recently canonized via The Acolyte (and brought across from the EU/Legends) by the use of cortosis. Then knowing a little hand-to-hand doesn't look so bad.

And not all Jedi are created equal, or are as strong as others, or share the same skills, so the ability to throw people about with your mind, or perform a mind trick, or do some other fancy Force-telekinesis or telepathy stuff, is altogether relative.

It's just a very boring universe, I think, if everyone is equally capable, using the same weapons, the same moves, and are all as strong as one another. That's not good worldbuilding.

IMO the biggest problem with the Disney Star Wars material is that it's trying to appeal to the tens of thousands who read the books or comics or watched the cartoon series, rather than the tens of millions who were blown away by the original trilogy. I mean, seriously, it's reached the point where the original trilogy is no longer seen as canon and takes second place to newer stuff. IMO that is clearly the tail wagging the dog.

Can't agree with this at all. The fact that they are canning shows like The Acolyte that are set in periods only explored in novels and comics largely in favour of series and movies set immediately before and after the original trilogy, and so featuring characters from those films (Obi Wan, Mon Mothma, Boba Fett, even Luke and Vader) and characters from media intertwined with the original trilogy (Ahsoka) is a fair argument against that.

I think the disconnect is that new content is being made through the lens of current trends and perspectives, which are far removed (almost half a century removed) from the trends and perspectives in which the originals were created, so it doesn't feel the same, and it no longer resonates the way a lot of the older fans want. Disney can't really surmount that, no matter what they do.
 
IMO the biggest problem with the Disney Star Wars material is that it's trying to appeal to the tens of thousands who read the books or comics or watched the cartoon series, rather than the tens of millions who were blown away by the original trilogy. I mean, seriously, it's reached the point where the original trilogy is no longer seen as canon and takes second place to newer stuff. IMO that is clearly the tail wagging the dog.




The franchise approach also makes it difficult for the creators because the more imaginative ones may not be so inspired to play around in something established and would rather do something uniquely theirs.

You could have a writer who is skilled at doing mysteries-Agatha Christie for example-but how inspired would she have been, if told to do stories set in a detective agency one lane over from Baker Street and having to check the canon before writing something?

And this is in addition to the nature of Disney--corporate office--a legion of middle managers and people making decisions. This sort of thing is new in the art-making experience.
The reason the original films appealed to non-SF fans was because it was innovative in the cinema experience--SPFX and design.
People are not easy to WOW anymore--not in the same way.
Not just because almost everything is spfx-related now, but it is very difficult to break new ground in visuals and design- in a way that is as radical as 1977.
The shot of a spaceship moving from screen top to bottom in a realistic manner with no wires attached was jaw-dropping state-of-the-art. Now, an eight-year-old could probably do it on a family computer or phone.
 
I can't say that i am surprised at this news. I haven't seen any of this show, but it looked to be not very well done. Just a series of "wouldn't this be cool".
It was the most expensive series, 750 000 USD per minute. The House of Mickey has now cancelled all that's coming, and they are thinking about moving back to big screen only. Maybe one live-action and one animated series per year, or an overall pause until the current movies are out.
 
The franchise approach also makes it difficult for the creators because the more imaginative ones may not be so inspired to play around in something established and would rather do something uniquely theirs.

You could have a writer who is skilled at doing mysteries-Agatha Christie for example-but how inspired would she have been, if told to do stories set in a detective agency one lane over from Baker Street and having to check the canon before writing something?

And this is in addition to the nature of Disney--corporate office--a legion of middle managers and people making decisions. This sort of thing is new in the art-making experience.
The reason the original films appealed to non-SF fans was because it was innovative in the cinema experience--SPFX and design.
People are not easy to WOW anymore--not in the same way.
Not just because almost everything is spfx-related now, but it is very difficult to break new ground in visuals and design- in a way that is as radical as 1977.
The shot of a spaceship moving from screen top to bottom in a realistic manner with no wires attached was jaw-dropping state-of-the-art. Now, an eight-year-old could probably do it on a family computer or phone.

I saw Star Wars long before I saw 2001 .

I remember in 77 being in awe of that film, I 'd never seen anything like it. It looked grand on the big screen and, it was a fun to watch. Sadly , it really hasn't aged all that well even with added special effects and enhanced scenes . The second time I saw it , years after, when it first came on television , I could see all the flaws . The wooden acting , the awkward stilted dialogued , the two dimensional main characters. Even lines in the film which sounded great when I'd first heard them , now sound stilted, flat and a bit silly. Part of the problem was the writing which , was not all that great and, the other part, was the fact that Lucas wasn't the very the best at directing actors. That said , I still enjoy the film and and watch it when it comes on television. :)
 
Last edited:

Back
Top