Star Wars: Can J.J. Abrams course correct with Episode IX?

Star Wars: Episode II – Attack of the Clones (2002, ‘Ep2’) – $302 million

Star Wars: Episode III – Revenge of the Sith (2005, ‘Ep3’) – $380 million

Sequel Trilogy: (Gross, not including reissues)

Star Wars: The Force Awakens (Episode VII, 2015, ‘TFA’) – $936 million
Star Wars: The Last Jedi (Episode VIII, 2017, ‘TLJ’) – $620 million

So, by the numbers, 2019’s Episode IX should outdo its predecessor. But can it surpass its first leg of the trilogy – The Force Awakens – and truly break the mold?

HOLLYWOOD, CA – DECEMBER 14: Director, producer and writer J.J. Abrams attends the premiere of Walt Disney Pictures and Lucasfilm’s “Star Wars: The Force Awakens” at the Dolby Theatre on December 14, 2015 in Hollywood, California. (Photo by Ethan Miller/Getty Images)

J.J., where were you?

The original trilogy was completely overseen by Star Wars creator George Lucas. He did not direct all three films, but he did lay down the stories and the path of the protagonist (Luke Skywalker). This worked well in some cases (Vader being Luke’s father), and not so well in other cases (Luke and Leia being twins). We will get back to that second one, but for now, the point is that Lucas was along for the ride every step of the way.

Of course, this is also true for the prequels, but that ride was much bumpier.

So, why did J.J. Abrams, who was the executive producer on The Last Jedi, not oversee the writing of the second leg of this sequel trilogy? It is the most frustrating thing to think about as a Star Wars fan. Abrams set up the new world for this trilogy in Episode VII, and then he has nothing to do with the writing of Episode VIII. This created an uneven story between VII and VIII, and this may be Abrams greatest challenge in bringing the trilogy to a close with IX.

This is not an attack on director/writer Rian Johnson. ‘The Last Jedi’ is a decent film, although it is not one of my favorites. But would a co-written script by Abrams and Johnson have resulted in a less jarring experience for Star Wars fans?

Even to this day, there are still stories trying to confirm Luke’s path of being ‘anti-Jedi’ in The Last Jedi – by looking at the concept art for Episode VII. The funny thing is that Luke’s refusal to fight isn’t even the biggest problem with the film, but it is the first thing that gets brought up when criticizing The Last Jedi.

Look, Star Wars fans – especially at my age: I was about 6 months old when Star Wars: A New Hope was first released, so my age always coincides with the film’s age – love Luke Skywalker. My favorite figure from the original Kenner toy line is by far and away the “Luke Skywalker – Jedi Knight” on the Return of the Jedi card. Luke is one of the great protagonists of my childhood, and it was hard to watch him turn his back on being the hero in ‘TLJ.’

But, I get it. Johnson took Luke to his lowest point, so that he could resurrect him back to the hero at the end of the film. The entire reason that Luke only gets a cameo at the end of ‘TFA’ is that Luke would take over the story, as screenwriter Michael Arndt explained with his interview by the Writer’s Guild of America (WGA) back in 2015:

"“It just felt like every time Luke came in and entered the movie, he just took it over. Suddenly, you didn’t care about your main character anymore because like, “Oh f***, Luke Skywalker’s here. I want to see what he’s going to do.” This was like a huge thing. I feel so bad for J.J. because it was like, “The good news is you get to make a Star Wars movie, but the bad news is…” We had long conversations about this, and J.J. so much wanted to have Luke Skywalker in his movie. But to finally say, again, any time Luke showed up, it suddenly became his movie.”"

Johnson made a choice, and while I’m not a fan of it, it did create drama for the film. And it did attempt to keep the investment of the audience with the new protagonist of this trilogy (Rey). While this choice was not equal to Vader telling Luke, “I am your father” in Empire, it certainly was something new. And Johnson deserves credit for that.

But then all these burning questions about Rey’s parentage (and if she has some Skywalker in her blood), and Snoke’s origins (which have had some pretty crazy theories that range from the Emperor to Mace Windu all the way to Jar Jar Binks) are just sort of skipped over by Johnson. Rey is no one special (if that is the truth via villain Kylo Ren), and Snoke’s origin matters very little because he is killed off so quickly.

This is where Johnson starts to get into trouble. Star Wars fans love the interconnected nature of this universe. And it is a place that Abrams could have provided answers (at least for what he saw in writing The Force Awakens), and maybe a better story could have been born. The other troubling thing is that Abrams would have liked to make a movie about Luke, but as soon as he arrived at that point, he handed off the baton.

Now, Abrams gets a chance to work with the Luke character a bit more, but only as a Force ghost (most likely). Abrams probably isn’t looking to change anything about The Last Jedi, but the movie may not fully fit with his vision for these characters. And the bigger problem with The Last Jedi – and what makes a course correction so daunting – is the handling of General Leia (or Princess Leia: “to me, she’s royalty”).

LONDON, ENGLAND – MAY 12: Wax figures of Star Wars characters Princess Leia and Jabba The Hut on display at ‘Star Wars At Madame Tussauds’ on May 12, 2015 in London, England. (Photo by Stuart C. Wilson/Getty Images)

The first Leia problem

In the original trilogy, Princess Leia is a force (no pun intended) unto herself. She will always be one of my first images when it comes to strong female presence in any kind of action film. This is especially true in Star Wars, but becomes less evident as the films progress. It just seemed like Leia got less to do as the original trilogy unfolded. And that is regrettable because the character is so terrific and the sky was the limit story-wise.

But the real undermining moment for Leia in the original trilogy was when her ‘square peg’ was smashed into the ‘round hole’ of being Luke’s twin sister. All of a sudden this very strong character, who fought with every fiber of her being for the Rebellion became just another person with “super powers.” As noted, I love Luke Skywalker. He is a very powerful Jedi, but Leia’s power did not come from the mystical Force, but purely from herself.

It is one of the most nonsensical moments in the original trilogy. Especially considering how much time her now father (Darth Vader) spent with Leia during the first film – even some of that time torturing her to extract information. It really doesn’t make any sense, and anyone trying to argue otherwise is just trying to make the pieces fit.

Star Wars and Empire Strikes Back producer Gary Kurtz was definitive about that prospect of Luke and Leia being siblings in an interview by Chris Gore (from March of 2000):

"“So the story was quite a bit more poignant and the ending was the coronation of Leia as the queen of what was left of her people, to take over the royal symbol. That meant she was then isolated from all of the rest and Luke went off then by himself. It was basically a kind of bittersweet ending. She’s not his sister that dropped in to wrap up everything neatly. His sister was someone else way over on the other side of the galaxy and she wasn’t going to show up until the next episode.”"

The ‘neatness’ of Leia being Luke’s sister actually created a huge misstep in the series. Some of which related to a now incestuous relationship between Luke and Leia. Everything in the film could have still worked with an off-camera sister being saved for an eventual sequel. Even Vader’s threat to find the sister and have her join the dark side would still work. Who the sister is doesn’t really matter – it is just her existence that Vader uses against Luke. But it is my belief that Abrams and Kasdan tried to correct this sibling mistake (somewhat) in The Force Awakens.

ESSEN, GERMANY – JULY 27: Actress and novelist Carrie Fisher, best known for her performance as Princess Leia in the original Star Wars trilogy, attends the Star Wars Celebration at Messe Essen on July 27, 2013 in Essen, Germany. (Photo by Sascha Steinbach/Getty Images)

The second Leia problem

In ‘TFA,’ Leia showed no signs of being a Jedi. Honestly, I thought we would see her progress in some way, as thirty years had passed between Return of the Jedi and The Force Awakens: wielding a lightsaber, maybe some force pushes. If I were Jedi, I would be moving stuff all over the room and playing Jedi mind tricks on most of my family – because it only works on the weak-minded.

Instead Abrams talked about focusing on Leia as a General (not a Jedi):

"“One of the answers was that it was simply a choice that she made. That her decision to run the Rebellion and, ultimately, this Resistance and consider herself a General as opposed to a Jedi, it was simply a choice that she took. Not that there’s any regret that she could have (become a Jedi) and didn’t.”"

Now, of course, this doesn’t erase her being a Skywalker. And The Force Awakens has her son (Ben Solo) being the Skywalker that has gone bad (Kylo Ren). So, she absolutely is Luke’s twin. But, in my opinion, Lawrence Kasdan (who had co-written the screenplays for ‘Empire’ and ‘Jedi’) and Abrams were taking Leia to her true position of power.

Leia is a leader, and someone that chose to be leader even with the risks to her own safety. As the Empire has now become the First Order, Leia has now formed the Resistance to replace her former Rebellion. And in both cases, she appears outgunned. But she chooses to lead despite that. It is the root of the character going back to Star Wars. Leia is a leader, even without powers to lean on for her own safety.

The importance of the characters at their roots also applies to Luke. I think Kasdan and Abrams problem with Luke is that they only envisioned him as the unrelenting hero. They couldn’t have him in the first film because he would outshine this new cast of characters. The idea is for Luke to be the Obi-Wan Kenobi and mentor the next generation. But the truth is (at any age), Luke is the great and fearless Jedi that never hesitates when it comes doing the right thing. Any problem in the universe, Luke can handle it.

That particular take on Luke does not only exist in the mind of the writers and the audience, but also in the mind of the actor himself. Mark Hamill had this to say about the path of Luke in The Last Jedi:

"“I said to Rian, I said, ‘Jedi don’t give up. I mean even if he had a problem, he would maybe take a year to try and regroup, but if he made a mistake he would try and right that wrong.’ So right there we had a fundamental difference, but it’s not my story anymore. It’s somebody else’s story, and Rian needed me to be a certain way to make the ending effective.”"

Hamill has since backed off on these comments, but the fact remains he saw The Last Jedi going away from the core of the character from the original trilogy. Not to say they can’t grow, or struggle, or question their path. But, this is Star Wars. It is beloved, and this is what people see when it comes to these characters.

For Johnson, it is bold to challenge the notions of the audience, and again he should be given credit. He is trying to create something new, while also trying to elevate a new generation of characters. But, with Leia, Johnson went a step too far.

Courtesy Nerdist/Image by Warner Bros.

The final Leia problem (aka, The Superman problem)

The moment that Leia’s ship blew up in The Last Jedi, my eye caught her being swooped out into space, and I could feel my stomach turn. And it wasn’t because I thought she would die, but because I thought there would be some convoluted way in which she survived.

That convolution was the Force. As Leia, ‘Mary Poppins-ed’ herself back to safety either by ‘using’ or ‘being protected by’ the mystical power, it shattered my enjoyment of the movie. I did not want Leia to die, and the death of actress Carrie Fisher (who plays Leia) before the release of ‘The Last Jedi was heartbreaking for me. But this went against everything in The Force Awakens.

Suddenly, Leia not only displays a Force power, despite the fact that she clearly is not practicing as a Jedi, but she also displays a power that is beyond anything seen on screen before this moment. It is a lazy bit of screenwriting on the part of Johnson to have made this choice. He expanded the Jedi powers to well beyond where they need to be.

This scene was meant to be a nice moment in which the audience feels they lost Leia (and Carrie Fisher in real life). And then, moments later, the audience realizes Leia is still with us (and by extension Fisher will remain with us too). I get it. It’s very poignant. But this entire sequence creates a ‘Superman problem’ for the film.

So, what is the ‘Superman problem’? It is best described by one of the most prolific writers to ever handle the Superman character: Bruce Timm, who happens to be one of my personal favorites when it comes to storytelling and world building. Timm spoke of the ‘Superman problem’ in an interview done for “American Masters: Volume Three” (TwoMorrows Publishing, 2012):

"“Superman’s a hard character to do, period, because he’s so strong. You don’t want to de-power him to the point where he’s not Superman anymore, but at the same time, if he’s too strong then the stories don’t make sense. If he can turn back time and undo anything horrible that’s happened, there’s no drama. If he’s so fast that no one can ever sneak up on him, or so powerful that no one can ever knock him down, then again, there’s no drama, no conflict.”"

Leia’s new power in The Last Jedi destroys the drama of the story. If a Jedi can survive an explosion and float through space without air and somehow live, then what can’t they survive? Johnson expanded the powers so far out that he made the Jedi virtually invincible.

Where is the drama in that moment? The Force essentially turns back time and makes the destruction of Leia’s ship mean nothing in terms of the story. Leia cannot be killed because Johnson takes her power to an extreme.

But, as if this weren’t bad enough, Johnson doubled down with Luke. He expanded his powers as well with this new ‘force projection’ for the final battle of the film. And while this is another example of power expansion, it is also another moment of lazy writing. Luke decided not to go with Rey earlier in the film, and there should have been consequences for that choice.

Instead, this new power allows Luke to help the Resistance and Leia get away, but he doesn’t have to face the consequences of a bad choice – a choice that Johnson wanted Luke to make in the first place. His hesitation, even if he now changed his mind, should have meant sacrificing something.

Yes, Luke’s life is lost (at least by all indications), but the whole Force ghost thing already takes the sting out of it. While dying is a noble sacrifice, sometimes the sacrifice is for the hero to lose something other than their own life.

Luke’s actions should have dealt him a blow much worse than death, which might have been arriving too late to help his friends. Both Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi show how important his friends/family are to him. Arriving too late could have been a great failure for the character.

If anything, Johnson did finally de-power Luke by killing him. But if his sister can survive ship explosions because of her power expansion, then it is hard to accept that this form of meditation (the Force projection) ended Luke’s life.

If anything, both Skywalker twins have now shown that they have taken the Force to a new level. Yet the film ends on the note that the galaxy is full of potential Jedi, and the Force will live on – even if Luke (the greatest Jedi) is now dead.

These are the mixed signals that The Last Jedi sends. On one hand, Luke and Leia can do extraordinary things that make them impervious to either death (Leia) or to the consequences of their choice not to fight (Luke). On the other hand, the Skywalkers are being left in the rear-view as characters like Rey are strong with the force, but have no familial connection. A choice that feels more along the lines of corporate greed by Disney to tell more Star Wars stories without any Skywalkers – because they can constantly reset the cast of the films and not have to rely on any particular actor or actress. But maybe that’s just a cynical reading of that choice.

HOLLYWOOD, CA – MARCH 08: Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford and George Lucas attend the ceremony honoring Mark Hamill with A Star on The Hollywood Walk of Fame held in front of El Capitan Theatre on March 8, 2018 in Hollywood, California. (Photo by Michael Tran/Getty Images,)

Final thoughts

Can Abrams course correct with the final film? Well, if the first goal of course correction is to make more money than The Last Jedi, then I think Abrams will follow suit with the previous two trilogies – increasing box office from the second to the third leg. Could he possibly pass the first leg (The Force Awakens)? I doubt it.

The uneven nature between VII and VIII leaves little to work with in IX. This will look even worse if the third film tries to go back on previous questions like Rey and Snoke. But I doubt that it will. It will just make the second film look all the more out of place, and I’m sure Disney does not want that – especially with an impending new trilogy by Johnson still in the works.

The funny thing is that Abrams is a fantastic storyteller. Honestly, a better storyteller than Johnson, and that is not meant as an insult. There are very few guys that are as elite at weaving narratives as Abrams.

On top of the many shows he has created, Abrams has rebooted three huge franchises in his career. Of course, Star Wars with The Force Awakens. But Abrams also did a fantastic job of rebooting Star Trek as well. I actually love the Kelvin timeline Star Trek movie from 2009, but probably because it feels more like Star Wars in its delivery.

Then there is Abrams’ reboot of Mission: Impossible with the third installment: Mission: Impossible III. Brad Bird’s fourth installment (Ghost Protocol) was also good (but not as good as Abrams’ III). But what Abrams did in Mission: Impossible III laid the groundwork for the last two Mission Impossible films (Rogue Nation and Fallout), which were overseen by Christopher McQuarrie and are absolutely fantastic – maybe even better than the Abrams’ installment.

Abrams is good at creating strong narratives, which is why it is puzzling that he didn’t oversee this entire Star Wars trilogy. His return to do IX is even more puzzling (but also welcome).

But it all starts with the original question of can Star Wars be course corrected? And here is the answer:

This universe can provide many narratives. Some of them will be good and some of them will be bad (probably just average to be fair). But there is one achievement that will never happen. There will never be anything to match that original trilogy.

That first trilogy has its imperfections (most of them in the third installment), but it is one of the greatest narratives ever put to film. And that is the reason why Star Wars will live on in many other forms. It will never achieve that greatness again, but does that really matter?

What George Lucas created lives on because it was so damn good. Not many people get to say that. I’m always upset when I would see George fire back about hating how fans treated him over the prequels. Not because I was mad at George for firing back, and not because of my own issues with the prequels, but because of one simple thing:

George created Star Wars.

That is enough for his biography to be held in great regard. But he also created Indiana Jones, and that also has three great films under its belt – and a pretty terrific series about ‘Young Indy.’ That’s two amazing franchises in one lifetime. Both of which could be telling stories for many decades to come. An amazing achievement.

Here’s what Lucas told Vanity Fair back in 2015 as to why he was no longer making Star Wars films:

"“You go to make a movie and all you do is get criticized, and people try to make decisions about what you’re going to do before you do it. Y’know, it’s not much fun. And you can’t experiment. You can’t do anything. You have to do it a certain way. I don’t like that, I never did.”"

I hope George knows how much he has meant to so many people because of his immense creativity. It has probably been hard to get criticized so much, but it really is a reflection of how much Star Wars has meant to an entire generation.

So, for Abrams, who has also seen criticism with his Star Wars trilogy, there is no need for course correction. The original trilogy cannot be replicated, so just go out and make another good film (and hopefully a great film). Abrams is certainly capable. And, as a Star Wars fan, that should be enough.