"Star Wars" Franchise Dodges a Bullet

Back in 2005, when "The Revenge of the Sith" was still fresh on the minds of "Star Wars" fans, we got a few hints of new projects conceived for television that would continue the franchise. One was a new "Star Wars" cartoon, which turned out to be the "Clone Wars" CGI action series, that regularly airs on Cartoon Network and spawned a feature film. The other was a live action "Star Wars" series, conceived to fill in some gaps between the first trilogy of "Star Wars" films and the second. Details about the project's development have been scarce over the years, but the story would have focused on new characters from other corners of the "Star Wars" universe. But according to a report from Digital Spy all plans for the show have been put on hold at Lucasfilm, because it's apparently too expensive to produce. I think the franchise just dodged a bullet.

Live action "Star Wars" projects have found their way to the small screen before with mixed success. The notorious "Star Wars Christmas Special" was something even the late, great Bea Arthur couldn't save, though the Internet parodyists have gotten a lot of mileage out ot it. Then there were the two made-for-TV films about the Ewoks from "Return of the Jedi" that were aimed at family audiences. Some fans dislike or ignore them, but they were well-received at the time, and I always thought that they were exactly what a regular "Star Wars" television series would look like: a smaller scale production focused on one or two aspects of the original films, with the occasional reference to familiar events, a cameo here and there, and maybe one or two big effects-heavy episodes at the end of each season. Such was the model for shows like "Stargate," "Buffy the Vampire Slayer," "The Sarah Conner Chronicles," and other genre favorites adapted from feature films.

This doesn't sound like what the folks over at Lucasfilm had in mind. If the new "Star Wars" series is too expensive for them to produce, assuming that this isn't some kind of smokescreen answer, it sounds like they would have been trying to aim for the same level of production quality as their recent films. And frankly, that would have been a terrible mistake. Special effects have advanced to the point where shows with similar premises like "Battlestar Galactica" and "Firefly" could have enough spaceships and extraterrestrial worlds to make them look on par with theatrical features at times, but also get by just fine on TV budgets. When "Firefly" made the jump to the big screen with "Serenity," you could definitely see more money on the screen, but you'd be hard pressed to find any Browncoat who would choose the film over the series due to the quality of the effects.

In fact, one of the biggest problems I had with the "Star Wars" prequels was that they were too concerned with stuffing the screen full of CGI to the detriment of the plot and characters. The effects may have been amazing, but in many cases they were used badly, with the mentality that digital was better than practical, and more was always better. The result was constant visual clutter, chaotic action scenes that were dull to watch, and human characters who seemed adrift in the green screen environs. One Jedi with a light saber was awe-inspiring. A dozen was a mess. A television show would have been a good opportunity to edit down the spectacle and give audiences a better look at the fundamentals of the "Star Wars" universe, but the unwillingness or inability of Lucasfilm to scale back or explore some cheaper options suggests that the live-action television project would have had the same problems as the prequels. And if that's the case, I think it ought to stay on the drawing board.

As the recent history of popular franchise properties has shown us time and again, if something can't be made well it shouldn't be made at all. Everyone salivated for sequels to "The Matrix" until "The Matrix Reloaded" and "The Matrix Revolutions" hit the theaters. A "Star Trek" series set before the days of Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock sounded like a great idea to a lot of "Trek" fans, before "Enterprise" left us all clutching our heads in dismay. "Star Wars" itself should serve as a cautionary example. The prequels were some of the most highly anticipated films in movie geek history, but resulted in disappointment so extreme, someone went and made a movie about it. Frankly, the "Star Wars" franchise does not need to be a live-action TV series, especially one that doesn't understand subtlety or restraint with regard to effects. Something following the lead of the original trilogy, able to take advantage of those films' moments of humanity and spirit might have been worthwhile. But a series in the vein of the prequels? Forget it.

Don't get me wrong. I love "Star Wars." I grew up with "Star Wars." I want the franchise to endure and maintain its place in the popular consciousness for a long, long time to come. But I've learned to be wary of Lucasfilm. The planned live-action series could have been great, but it also could have been another "Star Wars Christmas Special." My guess is that it would have been somewhere in the middle, about on par with the "Clone Wars" CGI series, a shiny, stiff little cartoon that left me underwhelmed. All it really succeeded at was further diluting the appeal of "Star Wars" with its mediocrity, and we really don't need any more of that.