Gay Romance In Next ‘Star Wars’ Movie Could Be A Bad Move By J. J. Abrams

“J.J. Abrams: Gay Characters Coming to Star Wars,” was the headline from a Daily Beast article last Friday. At a recent event Abrams spoke about inclusivity in regard to gay characters in the upcoming Star Wars: Episode VIII.

The Daily Beast summarizes, “By Abrams’ logic, the sprawling Star Wars universe couldn’t possibly exist without a gay populace—even if we haven’t seen a single character identified as gay thus far.”

“So it seems insanely narrow-minded and counterintuitive to say that there wouldn’t be a homosexual character in that world [Star Wars],” Abrams was quoted.

The problem here is that it seems Abrams is trying to be inclusive for the wrong reasons, mainly because it is the “in thing” to do. Despite what he declares as his reason, he appears to be wishing to alter an already established mythology and doing so purely for the purpose of personally displaying that he is cool with the gay community. It is somewhat akin to adding unicorns to the Lord of the Rings mythology, just for the sake of pleasing a niche group of unicorn enthusiasts. Sure unicorns can exist in Middle Earth, but what would they add to the story?

We have yet to see how Abrams will incorporate the gay narrative into the Star Wars franchise, but he would be wise not to make it too much of a focal point. There have been elements of love interests in the previous Star Wars films, Han Solo and Princess Leia, Anakin and Padmé. However, with he exception of Star Wars: Episode II, those themes were subtle subplots that took a backseat to the main narrative, so much so that the backseat may as well have been in the trunk.

The consensus among the rumors is that the romance is likely to involve John Boyega’s character, Finn, and Poe Dameron, portrayed by Oscar Isaac. In Star Wars Episode VII, there were subtle hints that these two characters were becoming closer than just good war buddies. This subtleness is acceptable, and even expanding it a little more would be suitable as well, but there is a fine line regarding how much time to devote to developing this romance. Step over the line, and you ruin the film.

A perfect example is Star Wars Episode II. Many have panned the film as boring.

Kotaku notes, “Dull, dull, dull. There were some bright spots — namely the action scenes, which were far more inspired than any of the dialogue.”

The flaw arises because too much time was spent attempting to establish a love story between Anakin and Padmé, while the action sequences for which the franchise is famous were almost an afterthought. The love story subplot was an attempt to establish a critical plot point that had already been revealed in the previous Star Wars movies. Too much of the film was spent developing a lesser narrative that the viewers were already aware existed. Viewers of the previous films already knew Anakin (aka Darth Vader) would come to be Luke Skywalker’s father. Who the mother of his child would be was an irrelevant point and could have been established with a five-minute love scene. So if a subplot that was intended to reveal the origin of a critical future event in the mythology left viewers flat, what would an unnecessary one do? What would a homosexual romantic subplot bring to the table? How would it help the narrative?

JJ Abrams wants gay #StarWars characters — could he mean Poe and Finn? https://t.co/tOPjyQ48OS pic.twitter.com/S3dJCaT5Ns

— Screener (@screenertv) February 28, 2016

Spending too much time developing a romance between Poe and Finn, or any other characters, especially when it serves no real purpose, might be a crucial mistake. A departure from the established narrative will not only result in bad reviews and lower box-office totals but may also turn away longtime fans of the Star Wars films and reduce the desire to see another sequel. There is already a well-established rule of diminishing returns on sequel films. Not many films are successful after the third or fourth iteration. Star Wars will be on it’s eighth. Now is not a time to test new waters on a beloved mythology.

I’m all for the adage, “to each his own.” If someone is gay, black, transgender, or any mixture of classes and he or she wants to come to my church, I’m all for that. If a writer wishes to include any of these classes in his or her film or story, I have no problem with that either as long as it adds substance to the narrative and does not detract from the central theme. That is being inclusive. However, what Abrams appears to be talking about here is inclusivity for the sake of making himself look inclusive in the gay community, and that does not make for a good story.

[Photo by Jesse Grant/Getty Images for Disney]