Why Did "Solo" and "Rogue One" Feel Like RPG Sessions?

If you saw the two most recent "Star Wars Story" movies--Solo or Rogue One--a common refrain is that they feel like how Star Wars role-playing game sessions play out. The reason has a lot to do with a shift in franchise-building philosophy and what kinds of stories role-playing games are good at telling.

If you saw the two most recent "Star Wars Story" movies--Solo or Rogue One--a common refrain is that they feel like how Star Wars role-playing game sessions play out. The reason has a lot to do with a shift in franchise-building philosophy and what kinds of stories role-playing games are good at telling.

[h=3]The War That Never Ends[/h]Before selling Lucasfilm to Disney in 2012, George Lucas was working with Lawrence Kasdan on a standalone Solo film, with two others announced later (Rogue One and a third about Boba Fett). These films were first known as "anthology films" and later, "Star Wars Stories," are distinctive in that they lack an opening crawl like the trilogies. The exploration of these side stories is a tradition that Star Wars helped create:

As with most aspects of the modern blockbuster, franchise expansion got its big-screen start with “Star Wars,” which used novels, comic books and TV movies to create a so-called ‘Extended Universe,’ before gaining speed in the 2000s, thanks principally to superhero pictures, or borderline superhero pictures, like “Catwoman,” “Elektra,” and “The Scorpion King” (though “Supergirl” and “U.S. Marshals” are two unsuccessful examples of early universe-expansion before that).

But why now? Disney's success with interweaving Marvel stories -- something long-established in comics -- is certainly part of it:

Studio executives see their jobs as minimizing risk, and movies based on established, proven properties are seen as less risky than original material, and thus less likely to get them fired if they don’t work. The extended universe is seen to be a way of not just building on a franchise through sequels, but by linking seemingly stand-alone pictures and allowing them to crossover. Why take a gamble on an original script when you can squeeze in a spin-off or prequel instead? If you have a proven franchise asset, as most of these studios do, it’s seen as responsible business to maximize it by getting as much product out of it as you can. Whereas the old studio system would put their biggest stars in as many films as possible, now the properties themselves are the stars.

Two factors are coming together to make this kind of storytelling popular. Millennials are interested in storytelling and the Internet's fondness for mashups:

The of idea continuing a successful movie goes beyond just striking gold with the same idea. Studio executives see their jobs as minimizing risk, and movies based on established, proven properties are seen as less risky than original material, and thus less likely to get them fired if they don’t work. The extended universe is seen to be a way of not just building on a franchise through sequels, but by linking seemingly stand-alone pictures and allowing them to crossover. Why take a gamble on an original script when you can squeeze in a spin-off or prequel instead? If you have a proven franchise asset, as most of these studios do, it’s seen as responsible business to maximize it by getting as much product out of it as you can. Whereas the old studio system would put their biggest stars in as many films as possible, now the properties themselves are the stars.

It's probably no coincidence that Dungeons & Dragons is experiencing a rise in popularity too. And that's at least in part due to the fact that role-playing games do storytelling and mashups very well.
[h=3]RPG's Strength Stat[/h]Traditional RPGs in the vein of D&D can still tell exciting stories, but they don't lend themselves to the epic, sweeping narratives that are narrowly focused on one character's destiny--a staple of Star Wars.

There are reasons for this: randomization; an attempt to balance play for all players so they have fun; leveling and improvement systems so that all characters have an incentive for self-improvement; and multiple independently-minded player characters who may not follow the plot as dictated by the game master. Steven Ray Orr explains:

As a writer, I knew that storytelling was an isolated affair that involved ruthlessly stealing ideas from friends, family, and anyone else that happened upon my path, but Dungeons & Dragons is the antithesis of such selfishness and best understood as method of crafting a communal narrative. Just as the limitations of genre, form, and style bind written stories, so too are there rules in D&D that confine what is possible, but role-playing removes the absolute authorial control that comes with solitary storytelling.

D&D itself is a mashup of a wide variety of influences:

The different classes of character you can play as—barbarian, druid, wizard, etc.—are pulled from mythological and literary sources, from pre-Christian Celtic traditions to the character of Aragorn in the LOTR universe. Geographical planes where one can play, magical spells and weapons one can use, and monsters one might fight stem from sources as disparate as Pliny’s Natural History, Paradise Lost, and Arabian Nights. This kitschy mix of every fantastic invention or story we know of makes the texture of D&D campaigns collage-like and chaotic. Since so many ideas are being reused at once, one inevitably creates a new Frankenstein’s monster of a campaign every time.

D&D and RPGs in general have always told great stories, and the geeky nature of fandom encourages detail-oriented worldbuilding. The Star Wars Story films are an attempt to fill in those gaps. In a way, the sensibilities of the expanded universe ofthe Star Wars franchise has come full circle, reaching the big screen that spawned it. It's a new form of storytelling that has been prevalent on TV, and not everyone is happy about it.
[h=3]A New Form of Storytelling[/h]The expansion of Hollywood universes into a web of movies that contribute to a larger narrative has shifted the focus of a film's success away from its stars and good storytelling to worldbuilding, which can only be fully appreciated by consuming all of the media:

When movies were mostly one-offs—and not spinoffs, sequels, reboots, or remakes—they had to be good...No matter how well executed, commercial success for such a film was never guaranteed. Laying out an enormous sum of money on a product whose creation depends upon a harmony of massive egos, and whose final appeal is the result of intangibles, is a terrible basis for a commercial enterprise...Today, the major franchises are commercially invulnerable because they offer up proprietary universes that their legions of fans are desperate to reënter on almost any terms. These reliable sources of profit are now Hollywood’s financial bedrock.

The latest Avengers: Infinity War movie leaned heavily on the audience's knowledge of the other movies and was therefore its success was nearly inseparable from the entire Marvel oeuvre. Joshua Rothman of the New Yorker explains how this transition affects Star Wars:

It used to be a “saga”—a story told in the epic mode, in which the fate of the world is inextricably tied to the souls of cosmically important and irreplaceable individuals. It’s becoming a “universe,” in which atomized and interchangeable people embark on adventures that are individually exciting but ultimately inconsequential.

Add all this together and it's no wonder that movies are now starting to tell the same stories that RPGs have always been telling:

When the universalization of “Star Wars” is complete, it will no longer be a story but an aesthetic. We’ll be able to debate which actor played Han Solo best, just as we weigh the pros and cons of different James Bonds. We’ll keep up with the new movies not because we want to find out what happens—the plot, if one exists, will be an impenetrable trellis of intersecting arclets—but because we like their vibe, their look, and their general moral attitude.

If the box office receipts of Star Wars and the Marvel movies are any indication, fans are finally coming around to the kinds of stories we've telling with our RPGs for decades.

Mike "Talien" Tresca is a freelance game columnist, author, communicator, and a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to http://amazon.com. You can follow him at Patreon.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Michael Tresca

Michael Tresca

Eltab

Lord of the Hidden Layer
But why now? Disney's success with interweaving Marvel stories -- something long-established in comics -- is certainly part of it:
-Quotation 1-
Two factors are coming together to make this kind of storytelling popular. Millennials are interested in storytelling and the Internet's fondness for mashups:
-Quotation 2-
Were these quotations intended to be so similar?

Disney seems to be doing better 'filling in the blanks' of the Star Wars universe than in writing all-new stuff. Hopefully they can learn from experience faster than Lucas did with the prequels.

A thought-provoking piece. I'm going to have to digest this for a while.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Bagpuss

Legend
Incidentally, the Star Wars Roleplaying Game (FFG) is a narrative-based game.

I wouldn't go that far. It has strong narrative elements, but it is pretty crunchy compared to what I would call a narrative game. It is pretty complex combat wise, at least as much so as say D&D.
 


Bagpuss

Legend
So...hows that working out for ya, exex's? ;)

I dare...no, I double-dog dare anyone to go on Youtube and search for "Solo Star Wars review" and watch a half-dozen fan reviews. Go on. Actually, I better warn ya...they are not safe for work, nor are they going to be pretty.

Here's something from Vanity Fair: https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2018/06/solo-star-wars-box-office-flop

Solo getting harsh critic reviews but is getting much better audience reviews than the Last Jedi did (which got steller critic reviews). I think the main reason it hasn't done well at the box office is people feeling burned by The Last Jedi. Plus no Harrison Ford.
 


Koloth

First Post
Ah you're one of those people that pretends The Last Jedi never happened.

A "Star Wars Story" isn't the same as "Star Wars: Episode xxx" Solo was a 'Story', Last Jedi was an 'Episode'. Solo also doesn't have the normal Episodic opening text crawling into space.

Disclaimer - haven't seen Last Jedi yet. Not a SW fanatic. First viewing of many of the last movies have been either cable or disk. Have seen Solo, decent movie but somewhat predictable as noted in my previous comment.

Still wondering if Qi'ra's "From a Dragon" comment was an Emilia Clarke adlib or a scripted line.
 

LOL!



So...hows that working out for ya, exex's? ;)

I dare...no, I double-dog dare anyone to go on Youtube and search for "Solo Star Wars review" and watch a half-dozen fan reviews. Go on. Actually, I better warn ya...they are not safe for work, nor are they going to be pretty.

Here's something from Vanity Fair: https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2018/06/solo-star-wars-box-office-flop

It seems that, really, only those completely clueless about Star Wars, or "critics" (who get free tickets and pre-showings) are saying anything remotely positive. The VAST majority of Star Wars fan plop it firmly into the "bantha-poo-doo" bucket. Same goes for The Last Jedi, and Rogue One.

This, uh, "News Review"?...gives me a bit too much of the "Disney told me I had to say this" vibe. Truth is, there is not enough "Star Wars History Building" and too much "Going to try something really different". People are fans of Star Wars because it has a shared history, "canon", basically. When a writer/director comes in and says "Naaa...we're going to just ignore all that history stuff and make the film WE want, not what the fans want"...well, I wonder why they are surprised at how poorly it's doing.

With the way things are going nowadays with actors and movies being speakers and platforms for their particular "view and outlook on what is the 'right' way to behave and think", well, I don't see the future getting any better for our beloved franchises. :(

TL;DR The writer is incorrect. Solo sucks. The Last Jedi sucks. The Force Awakens sucked a bit less than those. Disney (and Kathleen Kennedy and Ram Bergman, along with Rian Johnson are pretty much single-handedly destroying Star Wars as a franchise; the Fans are NOT happy...and based on tweets and interviews with how those three folks feel about the "True Star Wars Fans", I don't see a rosy future. :(

^_^

Paul L. Ming

Alt-right guys whine about "forced diversity/feminism" in New Star Wars... in other news, water is wet.

A few screeching neckbeards does not constitute a significant majority. Yep, you guys sure spammed Rotten Tomatoes with vice-signaling user reviews. Still won't kill the franchise if Jar Jar/Prequel Anakin couldn't.
 



As a Star Wars fan since age 6 when I saw the original film in 1977, I enjoyed both The Last Jedi and Solo, and find that contemporary SW fans are becoming a really weird bunch. It really helps that I see these movies with my 6 1/2 year old son who helps serve as an important reminder that Star Wars is best enjoyed in proper context.

The Last Jedi was impressive for being a meticulous deconstruction of the franchise. Solo was equally impressive for being an affirmation of the story's core conceits. That they both worked despite being so opposite in terms of underlying structure strikes me as an impressive range of achievement for a franchise that started as an homage to Flash Gordon serials.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top