Safe is good enough for 'Star Wars'

J.J. Abrams writing and directing “Star Wars: Episode IX” is a good thing, regardless of what some unhappy Force fanatics say about it on the internet.

Abrams, who directed the first installment of the new trilogy, “The Force Awakens,” replaced Colin Trevorrow, the “Jurassic World” director who left the project last week, much to the relief of even more frenzied “Star Wars” fans.

There are two major takeaways with this news: 1) Hardcore “Star Wars” fans complain a lot and 2) Disney wants a safe, satisfactory product that will appeal to the broadest possible audience.

I’m not against “Star Wars” playing it safe. Better to have a competent, vanilla director now than Disney having to fix an ambitious failure in the editing room later.

That’s what happened to last year’s “Rogue One,” a movie that plays like a strange mash of director Gareth Edwards’ lofty ideas and Disney’s insistence on crowd-pleasing blockbuster beats. The third act of the movie, which was largely reshot a few months before the release date, never really gels with what came before it, and the ending doesn’t really earn its attempt at an emotional punch.

Nevertheless, it seemed like plenty of “Star Wars” fans preferred “Rogue One” over “The Force Awakens,” even though “Force Awakens” broke records and earned stellar reviews from both critics and audiences in its theatrical run. Those “Star Wars” fanatics saw it multiple times in theaters, then sometime around the Blu-ray release, the internet gave “Force Awakens” the standard-issue online vitriol.

I don’t think “The Force Awakens” is a great movie, but Abrams did so much right with the project, especially in its first hour. The new characters are dynamic and share a ton of chemistry, and the tone and feel of the movie match more with the original trilogy than with George Lucas’ CGI-overloaded prequels.

Most of the hate for “Force Awakens” stems from the second half, which cribs too much plot and action from “A New Hope.” The whole Han Solo-Kylo Ren confrontation doesn’t work either, though it always seemed to me as something Harrison Ford insisted on doing.

I said all this in my original review of the movie, and even with those reservations, I’d rather have Abrams return to close out the trilogy than risk another tumultuous production.

Though we’ll never know the whole story, it’s apparent Edwards struggled somewhat on the set of “Rogue One.” Meanwhile, the Han Solo-solo movie recently fired its directors several weeks into filming and replaced them with Capital V-vanilla veteran Ron Howard.

The original directors, Phil Lord and Christopher Miller of “The Lego Movie” and the two recent “21 Jump Street” movies, sounded like an exciting proposition at first. They might have been going for a tone that made Disney uncomfortable, or they might have just been out of their depths. Only Lucasfilm president Kathleen Kennedy and a few others know for sure, and the rest is just palace intrigue.

It seemed like fans never warmed to the idea of Trevorrow, and his most recent pre-“Star Wars” project, this summer’s barely released “The Book of Henry,” didn’t help ease concerns. Apparently the guy who made velociraptors join a motorcycle gang in “Jurassic World” is just too goofy for a universe with Wookies and beep-bopping ball robots.

Rian Johnson, the director of December’s “Episode VIII: The Last Jedi,” is probably the most-liked director with fans, in part because of his excellent track record (“Brick,” “Looper”), but mostly because nobody has yet seen the “Star Wars” movie he’s made. The internet can only complain about the trailers, for now.

Even if his movie is well-received, Johnson was probably never a realistic choice to direct part three anyway, especially since Disney wants “Episode IX” to come out in 2019. Johnson will be promoting his installment for months, and these lightsaber hijinks take a full two years to make.

From Disney’s perspective, Abrams brings less (off-camera) drama to the director’s chair. Say what you will about “The Force Awakens,” but at least it feels coherent and made by a single creative team. I don’t want to spend time trying to guess who is responsible for the things I like and don’t like about a “Star Wars” movie. I did that with “Rogue One,” and it’s most definitely going to happen again with the Han Solo project.

Abrams has also made some good movies — his “Super 8” is an excellent riff on ’80s-era Spielberg sensibilities, and his “Star Trek” reboot thrives on an incredible cast he worked to assemble. He’s produced many successful and satisfying blockbusters too, so he knows how to execute broad-appeal entertainment.

There’s plenty of time for experimentation in the “Star Wars” universe, and once Disney finishes the current trilogy, I would hope it allows for riskier creative choices. It won't stop making “Star Wars” movies. Ever. So I can see the importance of re-establishing the core storyline and forever wiping away what went wrong with the prequels.

In “Star Wars” fandom, there’s no getting around the complaining. At least Disney understands the franchise belongs to many more than the loudest of detractors. New “Star Wars” also belongs to casual fans and old fans who don’t worry so much about whether Greedo shot first.

It belongs to new and young moviegoers too — to a generation who saw their first Jedi as a strong, resourceful woman named Rey rather than a whiny farm boy named Luke. Abrams started the “Star Wars” journey for those audiences, so there’s nothing wrong with betting on the safe choice to stick the landing.

If it all goes wrong, don’t worry. You can always complain about it.

- A special note about the box office sensation “It” ...

I didn’t see it.

- • •

Tyler Wilson can be reached at twilson@cdapress.com