5 Reasons Disney Should Split The Next 'Star Wars' Into 2 Movies

There’s a fun new rumor floating around the web concerning Disney and Lucasfilm debating whether to have J.J. Abrams’ Star Wars Episode IX be by-far the longest Star Wars movie of all time or to cut the movie in half and release it as Episode IX and Episode X. Now I normally wouldn’t comment on a rumor that I don’t necessarily believe, but well, I kind of like this one. Whether it’s true or not, the notion of splitting the last Star Wars movie into the last two Star Wars movies actually makes a certain amount of sense, both in terms of artistic and financial potential. And if you look at the brand as it exists now, it’s almost a win/win scenario. Without getting into contract negotiations or potentially needing more production time to add more footage to what may now be two movies instead of one, here are a few reasons why…

History shows that the whole “split one movie into two movies” works pretty well (says me).

I cannot proclaim that Star Wars IX and Star Wars X would, as two movies, be better than merely one overlong Star Wars IX. As far as the whole “split one movie into two” thing goes, it’s actually a pretty a pretty decent track record. I’m the idiot who thinks Warner Bros./Time Warner Inc.’s The Matrix Reloaded is the best movie in the Matrix trilogy, and I’m even the moron who thinks Warner Bros.’ Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part I is the best Harry Potter movie. Wait, it gets worse. I like the last two Hunger Games movies (Mockingjay part I and Mockingjay part II) more than the first two. And, bloat notwithstanding, I don’t hate Gore Verbinski’s Dead Man’s Chest or At World’s End.

In those cases, the extra movie allowed the filmmakers to spend more time on pure character development and character work as opposed to trying to cover as much plot as possible in the allotted running time. Okay, so maybe the last Twilight book didn’t need to be two movies, but that didn’t make the first and last 30 minutes of Breaking Dawn part II any less enjoyable, and it didn’t make the finale’s gonzo bananas action climax any less awesome. Yes, Lionsgate’s Divergent was a catastrophe, but all three of those films were varying degrees of “not good,” so that it was Divergent and Insurgent’s fault that Allegiant crashed-and-burned. Because if folks like “part 1 of 2,” they will show up for “part 2 of 2.”

If audiences like part 1 of 2, then they will absolutely show up for part 2 of 2.

As noted back when Walt Disney’s Avengers: Infinity War revealed itself as “part 1 of 2,” The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn part I made more than any prior Twilight movie worldwide ($712 million) and about as much ($281m) as the first two sequels ($296m and $300m). Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part I earned just over/under ($295m) the last three Harry Potter sequels ($290m in 2005, $292m in 2007 and $302m in 2009. It’s the third-biggest Harry Potter film worldwide. Hunger Games: Mockingjay part I made more worldwide ($755m) than the first Hunger Games while Mockingjay part II earned $653m. Artistic integrity notwithstanding, it would be corporate malfeasance not to break up the final book in a popular YA franchise into two movies if possible.

You think Lionsgate would rather have one Mockingjay movie that earned $755 million worldwide or two Mockingjay movies that made $1.409 billion at double the cost? It wasn’t the cliffhanger endings that marred the reception to The Matrix Reloaded or Back to the Future part II (my pick for the best cliffhanger in modern cinema history). Breaking Dawn part II topped $812m worldwide. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part II earned $1.34 billion six months after Deathly Hallows Part I. If audiences like part I, cliffhanger or not, they’ll show up for part II. If J.J. Abrams’ Star Wars Episode IX pleases audiences and fans in Dec. of 2019, those folks won’t mind showing up for Star Wars Episode X in Dec. of 2021.

Turning a trilogy into a quadrilogy will bring balance to the timeline.

Artistically speaking, there is value in turning this specific three-part saga into a four-part saga. Force Awakens and Last Jedi all take place within about a week. But, by all accounts, Episode IX will be getting a time jump of sorts. That’s fine, especially if you think (as I do) that The Last Jedi is essentially a series finale for the Star Wars saga. The Last Jedi is the climax of the whole nine-film Skywalker/Solo saga, while Episode IX is the epilogue. But cutting Episode IX into two movies allows you to essentially have a four-part saga where the first half takes place in one specific moment in time while the second half (not just the last third) takes place in another moment in time.

It would avoid, pardon the digression, the minor annoyance of Matrix taking place in one time and then Matrix Reloaded and Matrix Revolutions taking place six months later in a single 72-hour period. Ditto Pirates of the Caribbean which had one stand-alone original and then two “takes place months or years later” sequels that unspooled within a very brief moment in time. But that’s just a personal (and very minor) pet peeve of mine. Come what may, I like that the Brendan Fraser Mummy movies all take place around ten years after each other, which makes them feel (even with the missing cast members in the lesser third flick) like three key chapters in Rick’s adult life. But that’s just my own nitpicky thing.

It would buy Lucasfilm time to map out the post-Skywalker/Solo Star Wars saga while offering a Star Wars or an Avatar every Christmas.

The real (financial) reason to potentially split the movie into two parts is that it buys Disney some extra time to figure out what to do with the Star Wars brand once the Skywalker/Solo saga comes to an apparent end. We know that the under-$400 million worldwide box office for Solo: A Star Wars Story (which, it should be noted, received decent reviews and was mostly enjoyed by those who showed up) has left Disney understandably skittish about Star Wars Story spin-offs. We also don’t know how serious Lucasfilm is about the already announced (in theory) stand-alone trilogies from Rian Johnson and the Game of Thrones guys (David Benioff and D.B. Weiss). So going this route puts that decision off until December of 2023.

That’s because, as noted last week, Disney’s purchase of Fox now gets them James Cameron’s four Avatar sequels. As I noted at the time, it would be… all too easy… for Disney to play release date musical chairs and slot a Star Wars movie for Dec. 2019. 2021, 2023 and 2025. Meanwhile, they could slot Avatar sequels in December of 2020, 2022, 2024 and 2026. That would put less pressure on the Star Wars franchise to be the mother of all blockbuster IP. And splitting Star Wars IX into two movies (and scheduling them two-years-apart) would buy them lots of time to workshop and develop whatever is going to come next in the post-Skywalker/Solo Star Wars universe. At this juncture, they have nothing to lose.

Disney has nothing to lose.

At the very least, going this route would give Disney two Star Wars movies that earn over/under $1.1 billion worldwide each instead of one Star Wars movie that earns around $1.3b to $1.6b worldwide. Unless Star Wars IX is terrible to the point where it sours interest in Episode X, general audiences will show up for the last two Star Wars movies in cumulatively greater numbers than they would have for a single finale. Hardcore fans would complain about it, industry analysists would dissect it and the bloggers would decry it, but history has shown that splitting a long chapter into two chapters means more money. As John Hurt says in Contact, why have one when you can have two for twice the price?

Moreover, if this doesn’t work out and the last two films aren’t good, then, quite frankly, Disney is at no more of a dead-end than they would be with one good (or not-so-good) Star Wars episode in terms of figuring out where to go next. Whether or not it will be as artistically rewarding as Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Kill Bill or Avengers 3/Avengers 4, there is actually very little downside to going this route, at least in terms of box office precedent. Splitting the finale into two parts presumably gets you twice the grosses for twice the budget, while buying time to figure out what comes next and more easily creating an odd/even annual Christmas schedule with Avatar. It actually makes sense.

Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2018/08/10/5-reasons-disney-should-split-the-next-star-wars-into-two-movies/#770cb8ef6a76