Star Wars: The Mandalorian & Grogu: It Was… Fine, I Guess

Star Wars latest entry into the franchise

Over the weekend, my sons and I watched the latest Star Wars franchise entry, The Mandalorian & Grogu, and honestly? My overall review is probably the most dangerous thing a modern franchise can receive:

It was fine. Not great. Not terrible. Not insulting to my childhood. Not a triumphant return to cinematic glory. Just… there. Existing. Like a decorative throw pillow with a Star Wars logo on it.

And somehow that feels stranger than if it had been awful.

The movie looked good enough. The effects were solid. The action moved along. Grogu remained aggressively marketable. The audience, sparse as it was, seemed entertained, which genuinely matters. If you’re eight years old and saw tiny green space wizard baby antics while spaceships and speeders flew by, you probably had a wonderful afternoon.

For adults who grew up with Star Wars, though, the experience felt oddly weightless. Not bad. Just… disconnected. Perhaps it lacked the lore, the continuity, the mythology.

It had sci-fi elements. It had blasters, helmets, droids, hyperspace, and enough merchandise opportunities to fund a small moon. But it rarely felt like Star Wars in the way the original trilogy did. The older films had this strange mix of mythology, grit, hope, decay, and earnestness. There was dirt on the walls. Desperation. Silence. Scale. Characters seemed tired before the story even began.

This movie often felt like it was trying very hard to be pleasant, even in swamps and waterlogged dungeons. And maybe that’s the issue. The movie sacrifices story and continuity for safety.

Somewhere along the line, modern franchise filmmaking started sanding every edge smooth. Every emotional moment gets interrupted by a joke. Every serious scene gets softened by something adorable. Every creature apparently now needs the vocal energy of a caffeinated cartoon sidekick.

At one point, I found myself thinking, “This is less of a space western and more of an expensive Saturday morning cartoon with exceptional rendering.” Again, that does not make it horrible.

I want to be clear here because internet discourse now operates on two settings:

  1. “This saved cinema.”
  2. “This personally ruined my life.”

I’m somewhere in the dangerous middle ground of: “I probably won’t think about this again in three weeks.” That may actually be worse. Vanilla, that’s it, this is vanilla ice cream. No, I’m not turning it down, but no, I won’t recall the ice cream either.

Because the original Star Wars trilogy stayed with people. The music stayed with people. The worlds felt ancient, and the lore felt massive. Even the quieter scenes carried weight. You could feel the loneliness of space and the exhaustion of rebellion. You felt the power of evil and the resilience of hope.

With The Mandalorian & Grogu, I mostly felt like I was watching content. Competently assembled content, certainly. Expensive content. Occasionally charming content. But still content. The media content, toy sales, and tie-ins with all things pop culture and fast-food, it is all clear on the screen.

And perhaps that’s the real challenge facing modern franchises. They know how to produce endless content and over-the-top effects, but they increasingly struggle to create stories that feel like they capture emotional investment and continuity. The machine is so efficient now that everything arrives polished, optimized, focus-grouped, meme-ready, and strangely disposable all at once.

Nothing offended me. Nothing amazed me either. The movie was a decent way to spend a couple hours. I didn’t regret watching it. I also wouldn’t rush to watch it again.

Which leaves me with the most New England possible review of a major blockbuster: “Eh. It was alright.” Not exactly The Empire Strikes Back.

Football Went Streaming—and Fans Are Paying the Price

Before we go any further, a quick clarification:

This is about football.

Not medicine.
Not emergency services.
Not the distribution of clean drinking water.

No one’s life is on the line if Thursday Night Football buffers. (Tempers, maybe. Friendships, occasionally. Lives? No.)

Which makes it all the more impressive how complicated watching a football game has become.

There was a time when watching football required a television, a chair, and a strong opinion about officiating. Today, it requires an internet connection, a budget spreadsheet, multiple subscriptions, and the quiet acceptance that you are paying for the same thing several times.

The New Math of Watching One Game

To watch a single Thursday night NFL game, many fans now need:

  • High-speed internet (mandatory)
  • Amazon Prime (exclusive access)
  • Cable or a live-TV streaming service (because the rest of the league still lives there)

This is not a bundle.
It’s a subscription relay race.

Nothing replaced anything else. Cable didn’t get cheaper. Streaming didn’t simplify the experience. Another bill just quietly appeared and hoped no one would notice.

Paying More, Still Watching Commercials

After paying for internet and Prime, fans are rewarded with commercials.

Full commercial breaks. Sponsored segments. On-screen graphics politely reminding you that a corporation exists and would like your attention during third-and-long.

Traditionally, there was a tradeoff:

  • Free TV had ads
  • Paid services reduced them

Now the model is:

  • Paid services have ads
  • More paid services have… the same ads

At some point, “premium” stops meaning anything.

Streaming Doesn’t Actually Expand Access

The phrase “streaming expands access” sounds convincing until it meets reality.

Millions of Americans:

  • Lack reliable broadband
  • Live in rural areas with unstable connections
  • Are older and don’t want to troubleshoot apps for kickoff
  • Are military families relying on broadcast feeds
  • Are priced out entirely

Broadcast television solved this problem decades ago. It was free, reliable, and worked during bad weather—sometimes especially during bad weather.

Exclusive streaming narrows access. It just does so with better user interface design.

Baseball’s Local Model: Better Intent, Same Friction

Baseball offers a useful comparison.

For years, Major League Baseball leaned on Regional Sports Networks to preserve a local feel. Local announcers. Local narratives. Teams that felt tied to their cities (or in my case, all of New England) rather than national content schedules.

That part worked.

The flaws came later: expensive cable bundles, blackout rules, and fragmented subscriptions. Fans often needed multiple services just to follow one team. The access problem didn’t disappear—it evolved.

So no, baseball’s model isn’t perfect.

But the intent mattered. The goal was to keep the sport rooted locally. The NFL’s streaming exclusivity moves in the opposite direction—away from locality and toward centralized, subscription-first access.

Baseball struggled to modernize without losing its identity. Football risks skipping that struggle and losing the identity outright.

Streaming Isn’t the Villain. Exclusivity Is.

Streaming is fine. Helpful, even. Although most of the time I can’t find a single piece of engaging, original content across the myriad services, over-heating my credit card. But it offers:

  • Better production tools
  • Alternative broadcasts
  • Mobile access
  • Innovation

The problem isn’t streaming—it’s replacement.

Streaming should supplement broadcast access, not eliminate it. This isn’t a radical idea. It’s how the league operated successfully for decades.

A reasonable compromise still exists:

  • Let streaming platforms innovate and produce
  • Keep free over-the-air broadcasts in local markets
  • Preserve national simulcasts for major games

Everyone wins. Fans included.

Perspective Matters

Again, this is football.

Nobody’s life depends on watching a Thursday night game. But culture depends on shared experiences, and football remains one of the few left that still runs on a common clock.

Families watch together. Bars fill up. Towns pause. Military bases gather. That communal rhythm weakens when access turns into a subscription obstacle course.

When following your team starts to feel like managing a phone plan, something has gone wrong.

The Bottom Line

Fans should not have to:

  • Pay for internet
  • Pay for multiple subscriptions
  • And still sit through the same commercials

…to watch a sport that built its popularity on accessibility.

Modernize the delivery. Innovate the experience. Absolutely.

Just don’t confuse stacking paywalls with progress.

It’s football.
Not a space launch.
It doesn’t need to be this complicated.

At this rate, the next evolution of football will just be a free trial.

Chris

Secret Link