Kathleen Kennedy Planning to Exit Lucasfilm at the End of 2025

[ShardWarrior]

Kathleen Kennedy, the longtime president of Lucasfilm, is expected to step down at the end of 2025.  She intends to retire after her current contract ends, according to a source with knowledge of her plans.

 

https://variety.com/2025/film/news/star-wars-kathleen-kennedy-exit-lucasfilm-1236319794/

 

There are some reports that contradict this story, however it appears to be legit.  Time will tell.  Given the current state of the Star Wars IP, this is not a bad thing in my personal opinion. 

[PeregrineFalcon]

50 minutes ago, ShardWarrior said:

There are some reports that contradict this story, however it appears to be legit.  Time will tell.  Given the current state of the Star Wars IP, this is not a bad thing in my personal opinion.

Yeah. People online have been saying "Oh, she's gonna get fired any day now!!!" for 8 or 9 years at this point. I hope she does but, after 3 movies that had 'meh' box office performance, which should have done way better than they did. A line of Star Wars toys that flopped and took the entire Toys R Us company down with it. And several Star Wars spin off series that have been very hit and miss.

 

I said many years ago that she had something on someone in the C-Suite at Disney or she would have been fired long ago. And I stand by that. She's literally cost Disney billions of dollars, possibly tens of billions of dollars. The fact that she hasn't been fired and sued after all of that just reinforces my belief that she has some blackmail material on a C-level exec.

 

So will she really leave Disney at the end of the year? Or will this turn out to be yet another article promising that "oh, she's really gone this time"? We'll see I guess, but I wouldn't hold your breath.

[El D]

Speculation is that should she step down then Dave Filoni will take over, possibly with more involvement from Kevin Feige, too. Whether or not that's a good thing depends on personal assessment of the MCU and current Star Wars efforts, which is a pretty fair mixed bag by this point. Filoni certainly seems to capture a strong amount of Lucas' original spirit for the franchise though and at minimum those two wouldn't go into another film trilogy without some kind of overall outline. The Mandalorian movie will probably be the make or break starting off point.

[Techwright]

22 hours ago, El D said:

Speculation is that should she step down then Dave Filoni will take over, possibly with more involvement from Kevin Feige, too. Whether or not that's a good thing depends on personal assessment of the MCU and current Star Wars efforts, which is a pretty fair mixed bag by this point. Filoni certainly seems to capture a strong amount of Lucas' original spirit for the franchise though and at minimum those two wouldn't go into another film trilogy without some kind of overall outline. The Mandalorian movie will probably be the make or break starting off point.

I would not be for Kevin Feige getting involved.  The MCU post-Endgame has not been resume-worthy material for such a role.  Additionally, I found his handling of the TV "MCU" projects to be underhanded, and at times downright rude.  Admittedly, there's been a bit of a make up for that, by reintroducing characters and actors from the Daredevil TV show.

 

While I love Dave Filoni's devotion to Star Wars, I have to wonder if placing him in the executive seat would necessitate curtailing what he contributes best: story writing.  In equal measure, he's the go-to resource, admitted by the other directors, for lore knowledge.  That admittedly would serve him well in the executive seat.   Dave is also untapped in regards to the other Lucasfilms works, especially the Indiana Jones franchise.  While I realize Harrison Ford's days are done, and Spielberg believes in not recasting, I think there can be a future for the franchise even if it is in something like animated works for a while, or a reboot of the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles.  I'm fine if it turns out to be Dave, I only hope his writing doesn't suffer, and that he's up to the challenge of the full Lucasfilms.  Admittedly, I don't think that mark was met with the previous leadership.

 

I find it curious that another name wasn't bandied around:  Jon Favreau.  The man has been on-target with most things he's done since the original Iron-Man.  His name is right up there beside Dave Filoni in regards to Star Wars, and he's gold in the MCU, which to me means he could handle the rest of Lucasfilms well.  Additionally, I've seen evidence that Favreau has a heart for giving people a chance to develop their directorial skills, and for freely giving guidance.  That speaks to me of one who will see beyond their own position and towards the future generation.

[El D]

1 hour ago, Techwright said:

I find it curious that another name wasn't bandied around:  Jon Favreau.  The man has been on-target with most things he's done since the original Iron-Man.  His name is right up there beside Dave Filoni in regards to Star Wars, and he's gold in the MCU, which to me means he could handle the rest of Lucasfilms well.  Additionally, I've seen evidence that Favreau has a heart for giving people a chance to develop their directorial skills, and for freely giving guidance.  That speaks to me of one who will see beyond their own position and towards the future generation.

 

Agreed! Jon Favreau would also be a very good option, especially given how involved he already is with writing and being an executive producer. Even the weaker aspects of his Star Wars content (certain sections of The Mandalorian and a hefty chunk of The Book of Boba Fett) are solid enough foundations to keep building with and showed how willing he was to work with other directors and performers. He also seems to align with Filoni in the aptitude for bringing in older Expanded Universe content, which is also a major plus.

[Voltor]

 

Filoni, George Lucas, Favreau, George Lucas, Ron Howard, Steven Spielberg, James Cameron, did I mention George Lucas?

 

Any of the above can take over and I suspect many Star Wars fans would be happy.

 

Step 1: the sequels are now LEGENDS and disregarded. note that I said that sequels NOT the Mando and Ahsoka series

 

Step 2: time jump the saga to say 50 years after ROTJ, Luke is still around but Han and Leia are deceased. Their kid or kids are Jedi,  Chewie still lives, the droids are around and we get a sequel series that is superior to the dreck that we received.  Modified THRAWN WAR perhaps?

 

We then toys for a movie don't sell you know you failed.

 

[PeregrineFalcon]

Kathleen Kennedy just did an interview where she said: "The truth is, and I want to just say loud and clear, I am not retiring. I will never retire from movies. I will die making movies."

 

And: ". . . I’m continuing to stay at Lucasfilm . . ."

 

Now before you jump in and "Holy shit! Peregrine Falcon was right, again." Well, not quite.

 

She then goes on to equivocate ". . . we have every intention of making an announcement months or a year down the road."

 

https://deadline.com/2025/02/kathleen-kennedy-clarifies-lucasfilm-exit-star-wars-future-1236304421/

[ZacKing]

This sounds like trying to stave off any investor panic type statement.  Star Wars isn't the powerhouse it used to be.  It's not bringing in the money for Disney, and she may not want to retire, but she absolutely can be shown the door.  Best thing to ever happen to the Star Wars IP will be the day she leaves.

[Techwright]

6 hours ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

She then goes on to equivocate ". . . we have every intention of making an announcement months or a year down the road."

 

 

I may not care for a person occupying a specific role, but I cannot argue with the foresight for a succession plan, especially with a multi-billion franchise.  That's just good business.  I've seen first hand the chaos that happens when a person dies in office or suddenly leaves, and there's no notes or person trained to replace them.

[PeregrineFalcon]

38 minutes ago, Techwright said:

I may not care for a person occupying a specific role, but I cannot argue with the foresight for a succession plan, especially with a multi-billion franchise.  That's just good business.  I've seen first hand the chaos that happens when a person dies in office or suddenly leaves, and there's no notes or person trained to replace them.

In theory I definitely agree with you. However, in this specific instance, I don't think I do. I think that if Disney is really interested in rehabilitating Star Wars in the eyes of the fans the best thing they could do is to fire Kennedy immediately. After all, what exactly is she going to teach her successor? How to ruin a franchise? How to insult the fans of an IP on social media?

 

Of course I don't think that Disney leadership is trying to rehabilitate Star Wars, or any of their once popular franchises, in the eyes of their fans. I think they're going to stick with their "we know better than you do" attitude. And they're going to continue to either lose money, or not make nearly as much money as they'd like, for the next couple of decades. Star Wars losing money didn't teach them. Marvel movies losing money didn't teach them. A state taking away their tax-exempt status away, thus adding tens of millions to their overhead, didn't teach them.

 

At this point I no longer think it matters when Kennedy leaves. Because whoever replaces her will be just as bad, if not worse.

[Troo]

On 2/25/2025 at 12:15 PM, PeregrineFalcon said:

after 3 movies that had 'meh' box office

 

Correct me if I am completely wrong, which ones were meh?

 

Star Wars: Episode 7 - The Force Awakens (2015) ($2,071,310,218)

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (2016) ($1,058,684,742)

Star Wars: Episode 8 - The Last Jedi (2017) ($1,334,407,706)

Star Wars: Episode 9 - The Rise of Skywalker (2019) ($1,077,022,372)

 

I want to understand where you are coming from because, to me, it doesn't look like they are losing money. 

(I went to Galaxy's Edge and it was amazingly lavish, treat yourself if you haven't gone)

 

Maybe I am naive here, but boards tend to be steady and forward looking. The Kennedy move looks like succession planning. 

Is it that she has dirt on someone, or has been more consistent and successful than almost everyone sans a handful.

"Kennedy has produced films which have earned over $11 billion worldwide, including five of the fifty highest-grossing movies in film history. As a producer, she has received eight Best Picture Academy Award nominations."

[Excraft]

1 hour ago, Troo said:

Correct me if I am completely wrong, which ones were meh?

 

Star Wars: Episode 7 - The Force Awakens (2015) ($2,071,310,218)

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (2016) ($1,058,684,742)

Star Wars: Episode 8 - The Last Jedi (2017) ($1,334,407,706)

Star Wars: Episode 9 - The Rise of Skywalker (2019) ($1,077,022,372)

 

I'm not sure I'd consider those "meh" numbers either.  However, if you compare that to all the other films adjusting for inflation, they aren't that great for the franchise as a whole.

https://screenrant.com/star-wars-movies-box-office-adusted-inflation/

 

Also, it's important to note that your list didn't include Solo.  The box office was definitely on the downward trend for the Star Wars franchise with what you have there. 

 

[PeregrineFalcon]

2 hours ago, Troo said:

I want to understand where you are coming from because, to me, it doesn't look like they are losing money.

I didn't say they were losing money, I said they were "meh." The criticisms of these movies have been posted all over the internet for a decade now and I'm not going to sit here and repeat all of those explanations all over again.

 

And I noticed that you very specifically didn't include Solo, the one Star Wars movie that actually did lose money. Way to cherry pick your examples.

 

Also, ever heard of "Toys R Us"? All of their 1,500 stores in multiple countries were permanently closed. Know why? Because they spent $billions stocking their shelves with Star Wars toys from the new movies. Toys that did not sell. So the entire company collapsed and is no more. Because the fans did not like the movies and did not want to buy the toys from those movies.

 

Disney paid a little over $4 billion for the Star Wars IP and still hasn't recouped that money, because of the quality of those movies. And that's all thanks to Kathleen Kennedy.

[battlewraith]

Wikipedia on Toys R US:

 

While originally considered a category killer,[1] the rise of mass merchants and online retailers cost Toys "R" Us its share of the toy market. The company was further hampered by a significant debt load, the result of a leveraged buyout organized by private equity firms, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts, Bain Capital and real estate firm Vornado.[2] The company filed for bankruptcy in 2017 and 2018, closing all of its stores in the US, UK, and Australia, with the last US stores closing in 2021. Operations in other international markets such as Asia and Africa were less affected, but chains in Canada, parts of Europe and Asia were eventually sold to third parties.

In August 2021, WHP Global announced that Toys "R" Us would be opening over 400 stores within Macy's starting in 2022.[3] The flagship store is located in New Jersey at the American Dream shopping and entertainment complex.[4][5][6] A second flagship store was opened inside the Mall of America in Bloomington, Minnesota, in November 2023.[7]

 

[biostem]

3 hours ago, Troo said:

I want to understand where you are coming from because, to me, it doesn't look like they are losing money. 

You need to start with how much it costs Disney to buy Lucasfilm, then subtract about 50% or more of those earnings numbers to account for what the theaters take, not to mention the production + marketing budget from those numbers, to get the actual profit, if there was any.  That's also assuming they are being honest with all those numbers.  Like the films or not, saying "they reported the film as costing X, and it earned X+Y gross, so the film was profitable" isn't helping to shape an accurate picture of things...

[ShardWarrior]

Take it with a very large grain of salt.  They admit it is a rumor, but given the state of the property, I would not be surprised if this were true.

 

 

[Voltor]

7 hours ago, Troo said:

 

Correct me if I am completely wrong, which ones were meh?

 

Star Wars: Episode 7 - The Force Awakens (2015) ($2,071,310,218)

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (2016) ($1,058,684,742)

Star Wars: Episode 8 - The Last Jedi (2017) ($1,334,407,706)

Star Wars: Episode 9 - The Rise of Skywalker (2019) ($1,077,022,372)

 

I want to understand where you are coming from because, to me, it doesn't look like they are losing money. 

(I went to Galaxy's Edge and it was amazingly lavish, treat yourself if you haven't gone)

 

Maybe I am naive here, but boards tend to be steady and forward looking. The Kennedy move looks like succession planning. 

Is it that she has dirt on someone, or has been more consistent and successful than almost everyone sans a handful.

"Kennedy has produced films which have earned over $11 billion worldwide, including five of the fifty highest-grossing movies in film history. As a producer, she has received eight Best Picture Academy Award nominations."

 

You need to add in the merchandise sales as well, Which as I recall for Ep 8 and 9 the toys were not flying off the shelf.

[Troo]

4 hours ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

And I noticed that you very specifically didn't include Solo, the one Star Wars movie that actually did lose money. Way to cherry pick your examples.

 

Oh geez. not everything is manipulated or cherry picked. 

I just happened to parse part of a list for the newer movies (see below) and then individually looked up the movies at boxofficemojo.com

 

Spoiler

• Andor (2022-2025)
• Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (2016)
• Star Wars: Episode 4 - A New Hope (1977)
• Star Wars: Episode 5 - The Empire Strikes Back (1980)
• Star Wars: Episode 6 - Return of the Jedi (1983)
• Star Wars: Skeleton Crew (2024-2025)
• The Mandalorian, seasons 1 and 2 (2019-2020)
• The Book of Boba Fett (2021-2022)
• The Mandalorian, season 3 (2023)
• Ahsoka (2023-2026)
• Star Wars: Resistance, season 1 (2018)
• Star Wars: Episode 7 - The Force Awakens (2015)
• Star Wars: Episode 8 - The Last Jedi (2017)
• Star Wars: Resistance, season 2 (2019)
• Star Wars: Episode 9 - The Rise of Skywalker (2019)
• Star Wars: Visions (2021-2025)*²

 

@biostem I think that Disney / Lucasfilm was half cash and half stock. 

 

@PeregrineFalcon The story below makes it sound like Disney earned the investment back.

That's why I'm asking if I missed something. I'll look at the video linked by ShardWarrior.

 

Spoiler

Disney bought Lucasfilm six years ago today and has already recouped its $4 billion investment

Published Tue, Oct 30 2018

 

"The deal, worth $4.05 billion in cash and stock, was announced Oct. 30, 2012 and marked the start of a new era in the Star Wars franchise. Disney would make back that investment and more in just a few short years. The four Star Wars feature films Disney has produced have grossed more than $4.8 billion at the box office, according to comScore.

 

“This was one of the smartest acquisitions in history,” Paul Dergarabedian, senior media analyst for comScore, told CNBC.

While box office grosses are a solid measure of a film’s success, they still don’t tell the whole story. There are hundreds of millions of dollars of costs that come into play, along with dozens of other “Star Wars” revenue streams."

 

[biostem]

40 minutes ago, Voltor said:

You need to add in the merchandise sales as well, Which as I recall for Ep 8 and 9 the toys were not flying off the shelf.

Also, IIRC, Disney didn't make the toys in-house, so they're either splitting the profits with the toy company or are just collecting a licensing fee.

 

14 minutes ago, Troo said:

I just happened to parse part of a list

It's also important to note that, speaking very generally here, it is the follow-up movie that reflects whether the audience enjoyed the initial film or not;  TFA had the benefit of being the first film in a while, so there was a huge amount of hype.  TLJ built off of TFA's success, but it also became a focal point for those who thought TFA was just a rehash of ANH and not liking the direction Johnson took the saga.  ROS had to attempt to undo/retcon or otherwise account for the drastic change in direction TLJ took, and changing back to Abrams, and wasn't as well-regarded.  Either way, I think we can all agree that had the drop-off between each subsequent movie in the trilogy not been as severe, and had the movies been truly planned to progress the story better from the outset, not to mention having more general appeal/faithfulness to the OT, they probably would have performed better at the box office.

[ThaOGDreamWeaver]

The next one on the slate is the Mando & Grogu movie: it'll be interesting to see whether these two characters can put butts on seats.

(Personally I'd rather have had the full series - well, if Favreau can avoid doing a Jack Black bottle episode again, which was just weird).

 

And then there's the sequel-sequel movie New Jedi Order for 2026: but still no script or anything in the can.

Writer is George Nolfi, which doesn't give me good vibes: his best work was the enjoyably weird Adjustment Bureau, but other than that it's been a weak sequel (Ocean's 12), some light surgery (Bourne Ultimatum), a Netflix oddity (Spectral) and short-lived spy series Allegiance.

 

One that's flown under the radar a bit. Patty Jenkins left to do Wonder Woman 3 (WHY?) when Lucasfilm ran into scheduling problems in the pandemic. But with the pivot to DCEU, Rogue Squadron is back on the menu. And if it lives up to billing - an action-heavy, mostly-space-wizard-free Top Gun-in-Space deal - I wanna see that.

Edited Saturday at 12:09 PM by ThaOGDreamWeaver

[Techwright]

21 hours ago, ShardWarrior said:

Take it with a very large grain of salt.  They admit it is a rumor, but given the state of the property, I would not be surprised if this were true.

 

 

Large grain of salt taken.  If Disney is selling Star Wars, I'd very much be surprised.  They've sunk a lot into the theme park sections and merchandise, and are continuing to announce projects in the works.  At very least I'd have expected a pause on the projects in anticipation of a sale.  But to be fair, I'm not a market analyst, and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

 

On 2/28/2025 at 1:51 PM, Troo said:

 

Correct me if I am completely wrong, which ones were meh?

 

Star Wars: Episode 7 - The Force Awakens (2015) ($2,071,310,218)

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (2016) ($1,058,684,742)

Star Wars: Episode 8 - The Last Jedi (2017) ($1,334,407,706)

Star Wars: Episode 9 - The Rise of Skywalker (2019) ($1,077,022,372)

 

I want to understand where you are coming from because, to me, it doesn't look like they are losing money. 

(I went to Galaxy's Edge and it was amazingly lavish, treat yourself if you haven't gone)

 

 

Money doesn't necessarily equal "meh" or "not meh".  In these specific cases, there are other variables at play. 

• The Force Awakens at least partially justified its earnings by being the first film to feature the original cast in decades (with the exception of the voice actors).  It had also been leaked that Solo was going down, and fans wanted one last look at their favorite grouchy smuggler.  
• I thought The Last Jedi was rubbish of rubbish.  I'd heard it would be that and I went anyway.  Why?  Like so many others, I'd heard it was Mark Hamil's last foray as Luke Skywalker (or so we thought) and I went to see him off.  Carrie Fisher had died almost 1 year before the film's premier, and fans wanted to see their "princess" one last time.  
• Regarding episode 9, the hype was all about the return of Ian McDiarmid to the role of emperor, and a curiosity as to whether the film could salvage the trilogy.

I would also like to point out that just because a string of profitable films is out there doesn't mean one individual made that success.  While it can happen, it's generally a group endeavor and some times it happens despite the top dogs, because the guys in the trenches know how to work around that to get things done.  There's also the coat tails of the established franchise which can sometimes smooth over rough patches.   Lots o' variables in play.

 

(Oh, and I look forward to Galaxy's Edge.  I've got a non-expiring park hopper pass, which, if I ever use, you'll likely learn who I really am because they'll probably put it in the national news due to how long I've held on to it.  😅 )

[PeregrineFalcon]

I didn't really feel like doing the math myself just so you could refuse to believe me, so I found a video that explains it.

 

On 2/28/2025 at 6:02 PM, Troo said:

The story below makes it sound like Disney earned the investment back.

That's why I'm asking if I missed something. I'll look at the video linked by ShardWarrior.

 

Now this video came out in April 2024, so it's not recent. However, nothing has really happened in between that made $billion$. I point that out because that's seems the most likely rational rebuttal to this video.

 

[Troo]

@PeregrineFalcon so this is about a hotel, not even the movies?!

[PeregrineFalcon]

8 hours ago, Troo said:

@PeregrineFalcon so this is about a hotel, not even the movies?!

It's about the fact that Disney has lost money on the Star Wars IP and that's entirely because of Kathleen Kennedy. You pretending it hasn't, and TTRPGWhiz going through my post history and putting a thumbs down every one of my posts, isn't going to change that.

[Troo]

26 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

You pretending it hasn't

 

On 2/28/2025 at 10:51 AM, Troo said:

I want to understand where you are coming from because, to me, it doesn't look like they are losing money. 

On 2/28/2025 at 7:02 PM, Troo said:

@PeregrineFalcon The story below makes it sound like Disney earned the investment back.

That's why I'm asking if I missed something. I'll look at the video linked by ShardWarrior.

 

You mention movies that were meh and what seemed like a side note of how Star Wars took down Toys R Us. I'm not sure I was supposed to know there was a hotel involved.