Holy bantha poodoo, Disney is making more Star Wars prequels

In what might be the most bombad idea of the year, a Disney executive has revealed that those Star Wars stand-alone movies that have been discussed will be prequels — specifically, origin stories, potentially focused on characters like Han Solo, Yoda, or that guy on Cloud City with the ice cream maker.

Here's the money quote from the Variety article about the investor conference call held by Walt Disney Co. chief financial officer Jay Rasulo:

Rasulo also noted that one “Star Wars” trilogy film or “origin story film” would also appear on the release schedule each year, starting with the seventh installment in the “Star Wars” saga that J.J. Abrams will direct and Disney releases in 2015.

If I may, I'd like to quote a bit of Patton Oswalt's classic, yet still disturbingly relevant bit on the original prequels: "I DON'T GIVE A SHIT WHERE THE STUFF I LOVE COMES FROM! I JUST LOVE THE STUFF I LOVE!" (I'll spare you the bit about ballsacks.)

Goddammit, we don't need to know the backstory of every single character in the original trilogy, okay? Lucas tried that with the prequels, and it turned out the more we learned about Yoda, Anakin, Obi-Wan, the Emperor, Boba Fett, and pretty much everybody else, the lamer they got. As it turns out, badass bounty hunter Boba Fett as a little kid kind of sucks. Even younger Yoda did nothing but suck the majesty and mystery out of the character, because he looked like a green bouncy-ball holding a lightsaber while high on PCP. I definitely don't want to hear about him in high school or whatever the hell he did when he was young.

Sure, it's entirely possible that with a director other than George Lucas in charge, we could get an origin/prequel movie that actually enhances these characters, that reveals things — well, good and/or interesting things — about them that makes them more compelling. But it's really hard, because you're competing against the nebulous but always phenomenal backstories we've created in our heads. We had an idea of how badass Yoda could be before Attack of the Clones, but when we saw him in action, it was still a let-down.

That's what most prequels are. They're let-downs. They're also fluff, getting characters and things ready for the real story to be told in a movie that's already been made. Han Solo's adventures with Luke? That's a story. How Han got to the Mos Eisley Cantina? That's a prologue, no matter how long you make it.

And honestly, I'm not saying this out of Jar Jar hate. It's true of almost all prequels — knowing that everything's hunky-dory at the beginning The Lord of the Rings robbed The Hobbit of most of its agency. Certainly X-Men Origins: Wolverine didn't do Logan any favors. And there's never been a horror prequel that ever made thing scarier than the original. There's a difference between stories and back-stories, guys, and one is infinitely more compelling than the other.

You guys have an entire galaxy far, far away to explore. You have countless planets, different eras, and and infinite amount of aliens and cultures to tell stories about. You seriously don't have to keep talking about the same six people, okay?