The purpose of a film title is two-fold. First, you have to effectively convey, in only a few words, what the film is going to be about, or at least, give enough of a feeling as to what the content of the movie will include. And second, a title should be pretty catchy and highly-marketable. Obviously, you still have to sell a film to audiences, somehow, right? Well, it appears that Kathleen Kennedy and director J.J. Abrams are leaning much more heavily into reason number 2 with the upcoming “Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker.”
Last Friday, the folks at Lucasfilm revealed that the final installment of the Skywalker Saga would be titled ‘Rise of Skywalker.’ The title left fans scratching their heads. Hell, I even wrote 1,000 words about what the title could actually mean. Suffice to say, the title means absolutely nothing, but also could mean everything, which is exactly what Kennedy and Abrams were apparently going for.
“The title feels like it’s the right title for this movie, and I know that it’s provocative and asks a bunch of questions,” Abrams said (via ET). “But I think when you see the movie, you’ll see how it’s intended, what it means.”
Obviously, if J.J. Abrams directed a film, we have to go into it expecting a bit of mystery. And on the surface, there’s plenty of mystery. Maybe too much? However, it sounds like ‘Rise of Skywalker’ had a lot more discussion than previous “Star Wars” titles.
“In the flow of titles, this movie had a very weird responsibility,” the director said. “It had to be the end of not just three movies, but nine movies, and the idea of having to incorporate the stories that have come before strangely is the story of the movie.”
He continued, “Which is to say it’s the characters in the film inheriting everything that’s come before in previous generations, whether it’s sins of the father, whether it’s the wisdom that they’ve acquired. And the question is… up to the task, can they stand up to what they have to? And so in a way, I feel like we coming into this movie have inherited a lot, and the question is can we do it? And that question we ask ourselves every day.”
Kathleen Kennedy, president of Lucasfilm, breaks down the reason for the new title, and why she thinks it’s effective (via Yahoo).
“‘The Rise of Skywalker,’ it doesn’t answer anything. It’s provocative, it asks questions, and it could mean a lot of different things. I think that’s what was important to us,” she explained. “We didn’t want to have a title that felt like it was telling you the story. At the same time, it needs to feel emotional, which is a challenge to figure out what that might be and I think that the word ‘Skywalker’ captures all 40 years of what’s gone before.”
READ MORE: ‘Star Wars’: John Boyega Also Has No Clue What ‘Rise Of Skywalker’ Means
According to the head honcho over at Lucasfilm, the title for the latest “Star Wars” film is supposed to be so mysterious that it literally “doesn’t answer anything.” She went on to say that they didn’t want a title that was “telling you the story,” which is an odd thing to say, as well.
To explain, let’s look at the history of “Star Wars” film titles. When George Lucas was in complete control (Eps. I to VI), the titles weren’t mysterious at all. In fact, you probably could have guessed them well ahead of time. “The Phantom Menace” is a bit opaque but does tell you the film will be about a mysterious, hidden evil, which it, in fact, was about. “Attack of the Clones” and “Revenge of the Sith” are pretty obvious, yeah? “A New Hope,” while not completely obvious does point to the rise of…uhhh, a new hope. Then you have “The Empire Strikes Back” and “Return of the Jedi,” which again, pretty much spell it out.
Those films all have titles that pretty much “tell you the story,” and would have probably been turned down by Kennedy. This is just a way for me to illuminate the fact that this idea of “provocative” and mysterious titles is a relatively new thing to the franchise, specifically dating back to when Disney purchased Lucasfilm.
“The Force Awakens” was absolutely mysterious and vague, just like how Abrams and Kennedy like it. “The Last Jedi,” on the other hand, was pretty obvious and really does harken back to Lucas’ reign. Now, “The Rise of Skywalker” once again adds mystery to the equation, while being so vague that fans have zero clue what it even means.
Judging by the comments, it sounds as if Lucasfilm wanted ‘Skywalker’ in the title and reverse-engineered the rest. That being said, maybe we’ll grow to love the title when the film hits theaters on December 20.
Kathleen Kennedy explains why they called #EpisodeIX "The Rise of Skywalker." ???? @AdamLanceGarcia pic.twitter.com/wLEr0VO79g
— Kevin Polowy (@djkevlar) April 12, 2019