Disney Wants To Produce 2 To 3 Star Wars Movies Per Year. Yes, You Read That Right.

fb share tweet share

When it was first announced that Disney was planning to release Star Wars: Episode VII in 2015, and that it was going to be the launching point of a new trilogy, it was clear that the House of Mouse had big plans for their newly acquired franchise. As it turns out, those plans are even bigger than we suspected. Hang on to your restraining bolts, people, because Disney is planning to release two or three Star Wars movies per year.

Now before any of us start having a rage-stroke and screaming about Disney diluting the franchise, let’s all calm down and figure out what that “2 to 3 per year” claim actually means. Screen Crush reports that those ambitious plans were attributed to new Lucasfilm head Kathleen Kennedy, during the new Star Wars-focused issue of Entertainment Weekly. Unfortunately the interview hasn’t been posted online yet, but here’s the relevant bit:

Lucasfilm’s co-chairman and soon-to-be president, Kathleen Kennedy, has told employees she wants the company to produce two or three films a year (it’s averaged fewer than four per decade), and first up is Star Wars: Episode VII for 2015.

As you can see, that isn’t a direct “2 to 3” mandate straight from Kennedy’s lips, but rather the scuttlebutt among Disney employees. But what exactly do those numbers mean?

Obviously, this doesn’t mean we’ll be getting Episodes VII, VII, and IX all in the same year. Instead, it most likely means that Star Wars is going to expand on the big screen in the same way it has in books, games, comics, and other media. Consider they way Marvel Films has worked since the buyout. They’ve created a coherent, unified universe that has allowed second-tier characters such as Thor and Iron Man to become blockbuster successes, and finally to realize that enormous potential in the form of Joss Whedon’s The Avengers. We can probably expect to see Disney treat the Star Wars franchise in much the same way.

So we’ll get the new trilogy we’re all hyped about. But we might get more than that. Maybe a movie focusing on Boba Fett or the other bounty hunters. Maybe movies set in the Old Republic era. Hell, we might even get to see some of the more popular Star Wars Expanded Universe books adapted into films. The bottom line is, we’re going to get new Star Wars, and lots of it.

It’s easy to freak out about this deluge, simply because there’s a lot happening and we haven’t seen what a Disney Star Wars movie will look like, so they’re an unproven commodity at this point. However, taking into account the monstrous success of Disney’s Pixar and Marvel properties, I think the Mouse has more than earned the benefit of the doubt. By and large, their strategy has been to find people who know and are passionate about the material, then get out of their way and let them play. The result? The Avengers has earned $1.51 billion worldwide.

Worst case scenario, there are some ambitious missteps along the way, but let’s be honest: they can’t be any worse than Episode I. But if these bold plans do go forward, and do succeed, we could see the cross-media shared Star Wars universe bloom to a degree that rivals or dwarfs the cinematic Marvel universe. And that’s pretty damned exciting to consider.


  1. Aaron Smith says:

    I predict an alternate timeline where Luke DOES make it to Toshi station to pick up some power converters. It’s gonna be crazy!

  2. bhak1 says:

    I still would like a gritty Star Wars anime (kinda like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tBM2ZfncoU ). I think it would be a great format for stories like Shadows of the Empire, the Thrawn Trilogy and Dark Empire since you could still have a young Luke, Leia and Han without an obviously different actor.

  3. Therealeverton says:

    Again with the myth that somehow Marvel Studios didn’t exit before Disney bought them in 2009 (A year after they had released Iron Man & The Incredible Hulk, when they were already making Iron Man 2 and cementing the MCU – Road to the Avengers ad had planned to release Thor, Captain America AND The Avengers. But apparently they wouldn’t have done a thing if not for Disney? Also not being massively well known to the general public is NOT the same thing as being a 2nd tier character.

    • How exactly is saying that Marvel Studios has done well since the Disney buyout the same as saying they were doing shitty before? I said the former, didn’t even hint at the latter. And when it comes to the average, non-comic-reading moviegoer, Iron Man and Thor were absolutely second-tier characters, right up until Marvel blew the doors off the theaters with their respective movies.

      • Therealeverton says:

        You’ve missed the content of what I was saying there mate. If that’s to do with the style of writing then I apologise, but you have missed the content. I never said that you said they were doing shitty never even came close to saying you were going there.. I said that you, alongside many others in the “media” give the impression that Marvel Studios were not making their own films before Disney and that it is BECAUSE of of the buyout that we have these films. Quote…

        “Consider they way Marvel Films has worked since the buyout. They’ve created a coherent, unified universe that has allowed second-tier characters such as Thor and Iron Man to become blockbuster successes” The implication there is clearly that Marvel have done this since the buyout thanks to Disney not, as is the case, that Marvel had a release strategy and Disney left them alone to continue that strategy. Add in the fact that you are using them as an example of how Disney could treat the Star Wars Universe in the same way,you’re suggesting (no stating explicitly) that Disney could make the same shared universe style movie structure that Disney made with Marvel Studios. The problem being that Disney did not make that structure. If that isn’t what you’re trying to say then you do need to rephrase, asI can assure you I am by no means the only person who read your article in this way.

        As for the second tier character thing. I clearly made a distinction between the wider public and “reality”. Plenty of people believe that there is no smoke without fire, that doesn’t make them right does it. I simply stated that t Thor &Iron Man (Iron Man especially) were not second tier characters the fact is that they were not. Just because they weren’t well known to the wider public, didn’t make them 2nd tier, it made “unknown”. There’s a difference. The X-Men were very much “unknown” before their film in the year 200, that didn’t make them 2nd tier – they were the biggest comic book characters on the planet. Given the nature of the website that this is on I expected that distinction to be made; it’s a “you should know better” kind of thing.

        So I hope that clears that up and

  4. I’m so NOT on board if John Williams doesn’t score them…but my only hope for using the EU? The Han Solo trilogy by A.C. Crispin. Three books, chock full of backstory for many characters..even tie-ins with those horrid Lando Calrissian books. We’ll see.

  5. David VIlla says:

    Star Wars anime? Expanded Universe on the big screen? Maybe even a Topher Grace-style remake? Count me in!

  6. Sleeper99999 says:

    This says that Lucasfilm will produce 2-3 films a year. Not 2-3 STAR WARS films. Very misleading headline.

  7. mp says:

    star wars 23: the phantom franchise.