>>120101036>Star Wars failed because Disney is a rotten megacorporation that genuinely believed using the Marvel model on Star Wars would be marketableEven THAT'S not really the problem. Imagine if they'd given even one more year between each main movie. Like, you know, even Lucas himself did. Guy was like a machine: each movie came out in May, almost to the exact same day, every three years during the OT and PT releases. But no, for some godforesaken reason, Disney thought it knew better and the way to go was have it be only two years and make the second director begin shooting before the first director was even done with the first movie. Fucking brilliant. Oh and then just let the second director do whatever and then the first director comeback with a chip on his shoulder to do whatever again. Genius.
Meanwhile their two spinoff movies were a fucking direct prequel to ANH and a Han Solo movie. Both basically treated exactly like they were just another Star Wars movie, except a bit more one off. They also kinda sucked, but that's a bit beside the point: they couldn't hack having big budget, huge marketing Star Wars movies every year, which wasn't really what Marvel did either: Marvel had a few different characters with different appeals that could hold their own in their own movies and then sort of get together to punch a lot of robots every few years. Quality is again not the debate here, it's all about being able to manage multiple properties with different movie priorities and then get them together once in awhile. Not just grind out one movie after another will similar demographic appeals and tones and goals. Marvel movies weren't spectacular in their variety, to be sure, but it was still enough.
Literally the only thing they've sort of managed to do well, at least in terms of sustainability, is their Mandolorian show. Which actually fits the bill as expanding the universe in a different way that makes sense with the nature of Star Wars as a franchise.