SF&F Questions: Will We Ever See HALF-LIFE 3?

The Basics
The Half-Life series of video games is one of the most influential, critically-acclaimed and biggest-selling in history. More than 30 million copies of the two core games in the series have been sold, and many millions more of the various expansions, DLC and the popular Portal series of spin-off games. However, the core storyline begun in the original Half-Life (1998) stalled in Half-Life 2: Episode Two (2007), which ended on a massive cliffhanger. In the twelve years (and counting) to date, that cliffhanger has not been resolved.

Concept art for Half-Life 2: Episode Three from around 2008.

The Story So Far
Ex-Microsoft employees Gabe Newell and Mike Harrington set up Valve Corporation in 1996. They began development of their first video games, an all-out, first-person action title called Quiver and a moody, story-driven science fiction epic entitled Prospero. After a few months in development they realised they didn't have enough manpower to develop both games, so combined them into a new title: Half-Life.

Released in late 1998, Half-Life was almost immediately acclaimed the greatest video game ever made (at least on PC) and sold millions of copies. Expansions followed, Opposing Force in 1999 (which launched the career of Gearbox Software) and Blue Shift in 2000. Valve and their fans in the modding scene developed a number of spin-offs from the engine, including the popular multiplayer games Counter-Strike and Team Fortress, before beginning work on a full sequel.

When Half-Life 2 was released in November 2004, it was not only also immediately acclaimed the greatest PC game ever made, it was also hugely controversial for requiring online activation and validation on Valve's propriety online store, called "Steam." A lot of people were furious with Valve for this move, but the overwhelming critical acclaim given to the game saw them give in and join the services. Half-Life 2 also sold millions of copies, as did its expansions Episode One (2006) and Episode Two (2007) and a related spin-off game, Portal (2007).

Half-Life 2: Episode Two ended on a massive cliffhanger, with a major character dead and the fate of the rest of the characters in severe jeopardy. Valve assured fans they were working on Episode Three. However, several years passed in which little news was released. In the meantime Valve continued making well-regarded games, including Team Fortress 2 (2007), Left 4 Dead (2008), Left 4 Dead 2 (2009), Portal 2 (2011) and Dota 2 (2013).

Also during this time period Steam went through a massive explosion of popularity, becoming the default online PC games portal and making Valve billions of dollars in pure profit. As of this year, there are more than 90 million regular Steam customers and over one billion accounts in existence.

The Half-Life franchise's main protagonists, Gordon Freeman (left) and Alyx Vance (right).

So what happened to Half-Life 3?
Shortly after the release of Half-Life 2 in 2004, Valve confirmed it was working on three "episodes," each one of which would be about one-third the length of Half-Life 2. The idea was that the episodes would form a full sequel to Half-Life 2, and delivering them incrementally would mean that fans would not have to endure another six-year wait such as that which fell between the first two games. Episode One and Episode Two duly followed (split by an eighteen-month gap) in 2006 and 2007, with Episode Three estimated for arrival in mid-2009.

Valve's public statements about the episode were brief and not particularly useful, although they confirmed that the game would pick up on story elements left dangling from Episode Two, particularly the revelation that Dr. Mossman had discovered a key to defeating the Combine on board an old freighter lost in the Arctic, the Borealis. In 2011 the game Portal 2 featured some tie-ins to Episode Three, including the player discovering the drydock the Borealis was launched from. There were also some hints that Episode Three might unite the Half-Life and Portal franchises in some fashion.

By 2012 the Internet had officially grown bored of the wait and a huge number of memes about the missing game had been amassed. Valve boss Gabe Newell made a brief (if coded) comment that the game was in development but said little else about it. Over the following four years there was again little sign of life in the franchise, except a few comments and apparently internal T-shirts at Valve which suggested that Half-Life 2: Episode Three was dead and the story would only continue in a full Half-Life 3 itself.

In 2016, Marc Laidlaw, the main writer on all of the Half-Life games, quit Valve unexpectedly. A year later, he revealed the working outline of Episode Three and how the story would have unfolded (it would have ended on another cliffhanger, if of a lesser magnitude). It was also confirmed around this time that Valve had not seriously been working on Half-Life 3 or Episode Three for many years. This battery of news, following the news that other Half-Life alumni had quit Valve over the years, seemed to confirm to the Internet that Half-Life was finally dead.

Until this week, when Valve unexpectedly announced a full-length, brand-new Half-Life game which wasn't a sequel to Episode Two. Instead, Half-Life: Alyx is an "interquel" set between Half-Life and Half-Life 2, and will be a VR exclusive. It's the latest, unexpected twist in a story that constantly defies explanation.

A pre-release screenshot for Half-Life: Alyx, a new VR game.

So why on Earth has Valve never just made Half-Life 3?
This is the hundred million dollar question. On the surface, Half-Life 3 would have been a licence to print money. The franchise has sold tens of millions of copies and made hundreds of millions of dollars in profit (maybe more). They had momentum from making Half-Life 2 and the two episodes and a team in place ready to roll on.

The reasons why Valve lost that momentum now seem more obvious in retrospect. Steam was a much bigger, much wilder success than anyone ever expected. Valve take home around $4 billion in profit a year from just running a games store, which rather handily eliminates any question over their financial security. Valve are currently the most profitable-per-employee company in the United States and have rejected offers to be bought out by both Electronic Arts and Microsoft, each offer allegedly northwards of $20 billion.

In addition, Valve seemed to struggle with the idea of a central mechanic to hook Half-Life 3 around. Half-Life was built around the all-encompassing idea of a realistic 3D environment; Half-Life 2 was built around physics and the ability to manipulate everything in the world via the Gravity Gun. What new tech Valve could use to direct Half-Life 3 seems to have been something they struggled with for some time; the "Episodes" format even seems to have been a way for them to try to get around that by not requiring a new mechanic for the smaller games, but that didn't work out either.

There's also the risk of diminishing returns and impossible expectations: Half-Life and Half-Life 2 were both deemed the greatest game of all time on release, but by the time of Episode Two's release, the critical acclaim had ebbed away somewhat and the expansion got only middling reviews, with most of the acclaim going on its contemporary spin-off release instead, Portal. One of the reasons for pulling Episode Three is likely that the Source Engine technology it was relying on was going to be too old hat in 2009 (when it was originally due for release) and Valve didn't want to overhaul the engine to the extent required to make it more of a cutting-edge release (although they eventually did for Portal 2 two years later). This inspired the move from Episode Three to Half-Life 3, but the project never seemed to get off the ground, probably due to this issue over not having a central new mechanic. Valve seem to have developed a perfectionist streak and the determination that Half-Life 3 could not be released unless it was guaranteed to re-make the wheel again, which is a huge (and likely impossible) task to set yourself.

The other issue with not making Half-Life 3 is one of age. This year Half-Life turned 21 years old. Half-Life 2 celebrated its 15th anniversary a fortnight ago. An entire generation of gamers has grown up who are completely unfamiliar with the franchise, which is a problem for Valve.

Another pre-release screenshot for Half-Life: Alyx, due for release in March 2020.

Does Half-Life: Alyx put Half-Life 3 back in play?
In a word, yes. Half-Life: Alyx appears to be a gimmick, another attempt to push VR technology on a sceptical gaming audience. But it should be remembered that in order to make Alyx, Valve have had to completely revamp their engine technology and their art. As the game is set in City 17, it will feature new, HD and 4K assets and textures of locations we have already seen in previous games, as well as new lighting technology, better water and so on.

These are all elements that can be fed back into not just a Half-Life 3 but also a Half-Life 2 Remastered. Remasters are all the rage and Half-Life 2 has benefited from minor tech upgrades over the years, but it hasn't had the full remaster treatment yet. With the technology developed for Alyx, it should be relatively simple for Valve to completely remaster Half-Life 2 and its two expansions, all ready for re-release on the next generation of PC and console hardware. And of course, if you can do that then you're most of the way to building expectations for a Half-Life 3.

We saw this recently when Gearbox Software acquired the Homeworld licence, released Homeworld Remastered and then a stand-alone prequel game, Deserts of Kharak, and then based on their success have started work on Homeworld 3. And that franchise was (and remains) very obscure compared to Half-Life.

Conclusion

Valve have not so far made a Half-Life 3 due to a combination of having total financial security from their Steam service instead; not having found a central technology or mechanic to hook the game around; declining interest in the franchise as it gets older; and utterly unachievable expectations set by the fanbase which only get worse with every year.

However, Valve creating and releasing Half-Life: Alyx suggests that they have overcome some of these objections and also developed technology and assets that could be used to make Half-Life 3. This doesn't mean it'll happen, but it puts the idea back in play as a serious possibility for the first time in many years. Of course, if Alyx is an unexpected success it does raise the possibility that Half-Life 3 itself may follow...as a VR game. And that would be an interesting situation to watch unfold.

Thank you for reading The Wertzone. To help me provide better content, please consider contributing to my Patreon page and other funding methods, which will also get you exclusive content weeks before it goes live on my blogs.

SF&F Questions: What became of the Targaryen crowns in A SONG OF ICE AND FIRE?

After a discussion with ASoIaF superfan Nina, the question arose of what happened to the seven crowns of the Targaryen dynasty in A Song of Ice and Fire. This is an interesting question because at one time George R.R. Martin went into considerable detail about the crowns, but their eventual fates are largely a mystery. We can, however, come to some educated guesses about their fates.

The Seven Crowns
The sixteen ruling Targaryen kings (and one ruling queen, arguably) of Westeros wore seven crowns between them, as follows:

1. Aegon I, Maegor I, Aegon II, Daeron I: a circlet of Valyrian steel embedded with square-cut rubies. Presumed lost or destroyed when Daeron I was cut down and killed during his attempt to retake Dorne.
2. Aenys I: an elaborate and gaudy crown of gold. Not worn by any other king.
3. Jaehaerys I, Viserys I, Rhaenyra: a simple gold band inset with seven gemstones. After Viserys I's death, the crown passed to his oldest child, his daughter Rhaenyra, but her younger half-brother Aegon II disputed the succession. Rhaenyra was forced to sell her crown at one point to buy passage on a Braavosi ship back to Dragonstone.
4. Aegon III, Viserys II, Aegon V: A slender gold band with no ornamentation. This crown was lost in the Great Fire of Summerhall, where Aegon V lost his life and the summer palace of the Targaryens was burned to the ground in an ill-fated attempt to hatch dragon eggs.
5. Baelor I: a simple crown of actual flowers and vines. Actually multiple crowns, probably renewed every day or two.
6. Maekar I, Jaehaerys II: a crown of black iron and red gold, sharply pointed. This crown's fate is unknown; Jaehaerys II died of natural causes, so the crown was presumably retained in the Red Keep or on Dragonstone.
7. Aegon IV, Daeron II, Aerys II: a huge and heavy crown made of red gold, each of its points a dragon's head with gemstone eyes. Worn reluctantly by Daeron II to make a point that he was his father's son, given that rumours of his true parentage dogged his life and triggered the civil war known as the Blackfyre Rebellion. This was also the crown of Aerys II, the Mad King, and fell from his head when Jaime Lannister slew him at the foot of the Iron Throne.

Fate of the Crowns
It should be noted that the ultimate, canonical fate of none of the crowns has been 100% firmly established in the books. However, we can make strong and educated guesses. The first crown was lost in Dorne and, as far as we know, was not returned to the Iron Throne when Dorne joined the realm. Given that Daeron I died in an ambush with a relatively small number of combatants, rather than the chaos of a full-scale battlefield, we can reasonably guess that the crown survived. Whilst it could have been knocked over a ravine or lost in some fashion, most likely it was recovered from the battlefield and secreted away, possibly by a common Dornish soldier but much more likely by a nobleman. The Martells having secured the crown and kept it hidden for generations is quite possible.

The second crown sounds quite hideous and the fact it was never worn against suggests it was probably melted down, broken up, sold or destroyed, possibly on Maegor the Cruel's orders.

The third crown was sold to a Braavosi merchant, so it was likely again broken up, sold on or destroyed for its parts.

The fourth crown's fate is the closest we have to being certain: it was likely utterly destroyed during the burning of Summerhall.

The sixth crown (the fifth doesn't really count, being effectively shrubbery) is the one most likely to have survived intact in the Red Keep or back on Dragonstone. Assuming Robert didn't destroy it, it may simply be on display somewhere, or locked in the treasury, or perhaps "liberated" by Varys for some future royal head?

The seventh crown was the one worn by Aerys II, the Mad King, and it was very likely destroyed by Robert Baratheon, who had a terrible hatred of the Targaryens in general and the Mad King in particular, and would have not let it survive as a symbol for Targaryen loyalists to rally around.

On this basis, both the first crown - the one worn by Aegon the Conqueror himself - and the sixth are likely to have survived in some fashion, and may yet find their way in the possession of a future claimant to the Iron Throne.

Thank you for reading The Wertzone. To help me provide better content, please consider contributing to my Patreon page and other funding methods, which will also get you exclusive content weeks before it goes live on my blogs.

SF&F Questions: Does human religion still exist at the time of Star Trek?

Star Trek is the most extensive live-action science fiction franchise of all time, spanning 762 episodes (as of July 2019) across seven distinct television series, along with thirteen theatrical movies and countless novels, video games and comics. The Star Trek timeline extends from the near future to more than a thousand years in our future.

In all of that time, Star Trek has somehow managed to sidestep the question of religion, specifically human religion. Alien religions are covered, sometimes in exacting depth, with multiple episodes focusing on the religious beliefs of races including the Bajorans and Klingons, and the ideological attitude and spirituality of the Vulcans. But the show tends to shirk away from answering questions such as whether humans still believe in God in the 23rd and 24th centuries.


Word of God
Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry, a committed atheist, secularist, optimist and humanist, was unequivocal on the matter: he believed that by the time of Star Trek (the 23rd and 24th centuries), human beings would have come to the realisation that religion was outdated superstition and would have embraced a philosophical and ideological point of view that rejected both religion and the pursuit of money as the motivating factors of the human race.

Of course, such a viewpoint was fairly radical for 1960s American television, and it seems that Roddenberry didn’t enforce this POV on his writers, who frequently adopted more traditional viewpoints, with characters affirming a belief in God at several points. Later Star Trek producers Brannon Braga and Ronald D. Moore confirmed that Gene’s tenet on religion remained in full force on the 1990s Star Trek shows (The Next Generation, Deep Space Nine and Voyager). “On Roddenberry's future Earth, everyone is an atheist. And that world is the better for it.”

In addition, it appears that humanity has abandoned the use of the Anno Domini (After Christ) or Common Era calendar in favour of non-denominational Stardates instead. In fact, it took twenty-two years after the airing of the first episode of Star Trek for a current year to even be mentioned in this system (in The Next Generation’s The Neutral Zone, when the current year is identified as 2364 AD).

Evidence in The Original Series
In Balance of Terror it is revealed that the Enterprise has a non-denominational chapel on board where religious ceremonies can be held, including weddings and funerals. This suggests that human religious faith still exists and all beliefs are catered to on the ship.

However, in Who Mourns for Adonis? Kirk seemingly contradicts this by saying that polytheistic religious beliefs are considered outdated as “we find the one [god] quite sufficient.” This seems to suggest that Hinduism and any belief not centred around a single god (such as Buddhism) no longer exists. It also suggests that most humans still believe in a single god at this point in history.

In Space Seed, Lt. McGivers reports that Khan is of Indian descent and may be a Sikh, although when he wakes up, Khan does not identify himself with any religious belief. However, given that Khan originates from the late 20th Century, that doesn’t mean that the Sikh culture and faith is still extant in the 23rd Century.

In Bread and Circuses, Septimus asks the crew if they are “Children of the Sun,” to which McCoy replies, “If you’re speaking of worship of sorts, we represent many beliefs.”

In That Which Survives, navigator Lt. Rahda is shown wearing the bindi (a traditional Hindu symbol on her forehead), contradicting Who Mourns for Adonis?




Evidence in the movies
In Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, a funeral is held for Spock after his death in the battle with Khan. The funeral is apparently non-religious, with no prayers offered, although Scotty does play the 1779 Christian hymn “Amazing Grace” on his bagpipes. It should be noted that as a Vulcan (a half-Vulcan, but raised on the Vulcan homeworld as a full Vulcan), Spock would presumably not have requested any kind of human religious funeral anyway. Several characters also exclaim “My God!” at various points in the film, but Dr. McCoy also refers to the story of Genesis as “a myth.”

In Star Trek V: The Final Frontier, religious faith and fundamentalism is a key theme and it is even hinted that the hostile alien entity imprisoned at the centre of the galaxy may be the inspiration for numerous real-world religions (as Kirk memorably points out, “What does God want with a starship?”).

In Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country, Captain Sulu yells “My God!” upon seeing the shockwave from the Klingon moon Praxis approaching his ship, the Excelsior.

In Star Trek: Generations, Picard celebrates Christmas, although Christmas is of course considered a secular holiday by many.




Evidence in The Next Generation
In Who Watches the Watchers the crew of the Enterprise interfere with a preindustrial civilisation and inadvertently create a religion based around their activities, to Picard’s evident horror. He describes the age of religious belief as a primitive “setback.”

Several weddings take place in the series, most notably the marriage of Miles and Keiko O’Brien in Data’s Day, but these are non-denominational weddings. However, in the same episode Data notes that the Hindu Festival of Lights is currently ongoing and there will be celebrations of this on the Enterprise.

In Sub Rosa, Dr. Crusher’s grandmother is given a Catholic funeral.




Evidence in Deep Space Nine
In The Ship and The Sound of Her Voice, wakes take place. However, they are not overtly religious ceremonies.

In the episode Penumbra (taking place in AD 2375), Captain Kasidy Yates says that her mother would expect her to be married by a minister.

Evidence in Voyager
Commander Chakotay is of Native American descent and frequently mentions his spiritual beliefs.


Evidence in Enterprise
Taking place a hundred years before Kirk’s times, Enterprise features much more overt references to religion still existing. Dr. Phlox is a student of human religion and in Cold Front mentions taking mass in St. Peter’s Square and visiting a Buddhist monastery in Tibet.


Evidence in other materials
Various Star Trek books and comics make more overt references to religion still existing: A Small Matter of Faith focuses on the career of a Starfleet chaplain and Guises of the Mind features Catholic, Jewish, Buddhist and Hindu believers in Starfleet. The video game Star Trek: 25th Anniversary features a group of religious separatists living on a breakaway colony, and Kirk can respond to their beliefs either respectfully or sardonically.

However, none of the Star Trek comics, video games or novels are canon, so these are not germane.


How could religion disappear in just 240 years?
Given that many of the world religions are thousands of years old, the idea that religion may disappear in just the next 240 years appears to be fanciful. Star Trek writer Ronald D. Moore notes that he considers it to be impossible, but could not overrule Gene Roddenberry’s rule.

One possibility is related to the fictional World War III. In Star Trek’s timeline, WWIII erupts in 2026 and rages until 2053, although there are apparently lulls and ceasefires during the conflict. The war involved both conventional military activity and nuclear strikes, which eliminated many of the world’s major cities. One reason San Francisco becomes apparently the biggest and most important city in North America in the Star Trek timeline is that many of the other major cities of the continent were destroyed. The death toll from WWIII is about 600 million.

It is possible that this war was so devastating that entire religions were wiped out, or driven underground or to the point of extinction and that the post-WWIII rebuilding process, especially after First Contact with the Vulcans in 2063, was undertaken specifically with the idea of uniting humanity under a single humanist banner.

It is also possible that the discovery of intelligent alien life resulted in a massive philosophical shift on Earth which contributed to the decline of religion.


So, has human religion disappeared by the time of Star Trek?
Based on multiple data points, it appears that religion continues to endure even by the time of Star Trek: The Next Generation and Deep Space Nine: Dr. Crusher’s grandmother is a Catholic, Captain Yates and her mother appear to be Christians of unknown denomination and a Hindu religious festival is observed on board the Enterprise-D. There are also Hindus serving in Starfleet at the time of The Original Series.

As a result, we can conclude that although religious worship among humans is much less widespread in the late 24th Century compared to now, it remains extant and people do continue to follow the major world religions, albeit in much smaller numbers than at present.

Thank you for reading The Wertzone. To help me provide better content, please consider contributing to my Patreon page and other funding methods, which will also get you exclusive content weeks before it goes live on my blogs.

SF&F Questions: Which is the longest-running SF or Fantasy TV series?

This sounds like a fairly straightforward question, but is more complicated than it sounds because of the different ways it can be counted.

The BBC science fiction series Doctor Who may at first glance be the obvious answer. It aired its first episode, An Unearthly Child, on 23 November 1963 and its 851st, Resolution, on 1 January 2019. In that fifty-six-year period, Doctor Who has produced 37 seasons of television, with the 38th season due to air in 2020. Approximately 413.3 hours of material has been produced, not including the spin-off shows (Torchwood, The Sarah-Jane Adventures and Class) in that time. This is more than twice as much material as has been produced by the likes of Stargate SG-1 and The X-Files, which have both erroneously been claimed to be the longest-running SF show in the past.

So, in terms of both length and quantity of material produced, Doctor Who is the clear front-runner.

However, some may dispute the position on several grounds. Doctor Who spent seven years off-air between 1989 and 1996, when a 90-minute special was produced, and then another nine years off-air between 1996 and the rebooting of the show in 2005, so it has not been in continuous production for all that time. Furthermore, when Doctor Who returned in 2005 it was officially designated and treated as a new show: the season count was reset to 1, so the most recent season to air is counted by the BBC as Series 11, not Season 37. This is counter-disputed because of legalities and technicalities: reprising Doctor Who in 2005 using the same framework as in place in 1989 was impossible, so the show had to be counted as a new series for technical purposes, but in terms of title, characters and continuity it is clearly meant to be a continuation of the 1963-89/96 series.

Despite that, it is certainly true that Doctor Who is not automatically the longest-running, continuously airing science fiction or fantasy TV series in the world. That honour is claimed by several other shows.

Paranormal adventure series Supernatural began airing in September 2005 and will conclude in 2020 with its sixteenth season. By the end of that season, it will have aired 327 episodes with a combined run-time of 239 hours and 48 minutes. This eclipses Doctor Who’s tally of 155 continuously-produced episodes since March 2005, totalling 124 hours and 20 minutes, almost only half of Supernatural’s run-time.

A wild card to throw into the mix is the web series Red vs. Blue, which began airing on 1 April 2003 and aired its most recent episode on 25 May 2019. It has totalled 364 episodes and 17 seasons released to date. However, Red vs. Blue’s episodes only average about 7 minutes in length, with the total length of the entire series to date weighing in at a relatively modest 41 hours, 57 minutes.

So the answer to this question is as follows:

Doctor Who is the longest-running SF series in the world in terms of total number of episodes produced, hours aired and seasons made, including hiatuses.

Supernatural is the longest-running fantasy series in the world in terms of total number of episodes produced, hours aired and seasons made. It is also the longest-running SF or fantasy series in the world in terms of the continuous number of episodes made.

Red vs. Blue is the longest-running, continuously-produced SF or fantasy series in the world in terms of dates, predating Doctor Who by two years and Supernatural by two-and-a-half years, but it has produced significantly less content than either.

Note: for the purposes of this article I have considered only live-action shows. Animation would be a different and potentially more difficult question.

Completed Shows

Again not counting animation, the longest-running, completed SFF series is Dark Shadows, a supernatural soap opera. Although it only ran on American TV for six seasons between 1966 and 1971, it amassed an enormous 1,225 episodes in that time, for a total run-time of 612 hours and 30 minutes.

Franchises

This has a more straightforward answer. The longest-running science fiction or fantasy franchise, spanning multiple shows, is Star Trek. It aired its first episode, The Man Trap from Star Trek, on 8 September 1966 and its most recent, Such Sweet Sorrow, Part II from Star Trek: Discovery, on 18 April 2019.

On television (not counting the movies), Star Trek has spanned seven distinct series: the original (1966-69), The Animated Series (1973-74), The Next Generation (1987-94), Deep Space Nine (1993-99), Voyager (1995-2001), Enterprise (2001-05) and Discovery and its related Short Treks spin-off (2017-present). It will soon be joined by Picard, Lower Decks and Section 31.

In that time the franchise has amassed 762 episodes in total, amassing a grand run-time of 555 hours and 21 minutes.

Thank you for reading The Wertzone. To help me provide better content, please consider contributing to my Patreon page and other funding methods, which will also get you exclusive content weeks before it goes live on my blogs.

SF&F Questions: How large is Arrakis?

The Basics

Dune, by Frank Herbert, is the biggest-selling science fiction novel of all time, having sold well over 10 million copies since its publication in 1965. It has been followed by five canonical sequels (Dune Messiah, Children of Dune, God-Emperor of Dune, Heretics of Dune and Chapterhouse: Dune) and various "expanded universe" books of execrable quality from Kevin J. Anderson and Brian Herbert (which can be - and, under all circumstances, should be - safely ignored).

Most of the action in the Dune saga takes place on the planet Arrakis, also known as Dune. Since the book was published, fans have asked about the size of the planet, with various attempts made to estimate the planet's circumference, diameter and mass. Most of these have foundered on a lack of hard information. In the 1990s an informal guess seems to have been made that Arrakis is around the same size as Mars, which seems to have become the default assumption for many fans since then.

The Evidence

In the novels, Arrakis is presented as a hot, desert world, essentially an entire planet covered by giant sand dunes similar to those of the Sahara. The only exceptions are the two poles, which are cooler and where clusters of mountains, rocks, plateaus and ridges provide some respite from the heat and also allow for the construction of permanent settlements. Most importantly, these rocky outcroppings are the only areas safe from sandworms, subterranean leviathans that can emerge from the dunes and consume people and equipment.

Arrakis is presented as a world with Earth-like gravity (or at least, not noticeably less) and a breathable atmosphere. The latter was a mystery, as Arrakis possesses neither extensive plant life nor oceans, until Frank Herbert clarified in a later sequel that the atmosphere of Arrakis is the result of gaseous emissions by the sandworms.

To determine the size of Arrakis, we require several things: distances and some way of determining the overall size of the planet that works with those distances. Fortunately, both are provided in the novel.

During the early part of the book, House Atreides moves to Arrakis and takes possession of the planet from House Harkonnen. The Atreides determine that it is too dangerous to take up residence in the Harkonnen capital of Carthag due to the number of booby traps and Harkonnen agents left behind, so they fortify the smaller city of Arrakeen instead. At one point it is said that Arrakeen is located more or less exactly 200 kilometers from Carthag, which is a firm distance (just about the only reliable, hard distance between two landmarks given in all six books).

Extrapolating this onto the map provided at the start of the book gives us a firm scale, which is quite useful. The map is also useful because it gives us longitude lines but, more usefully, the latitude line for 60° N. With the scale in place, we can then measure exactly how far it is from one side of the 60° N line to the other, through the northern polar ice cap. This works out, quite nicely, at almost 1,800 km (1,118.46 miles) exactly.


Comparisons to Other Worlds
Utilising Google Earth Pro, it is possible to measure the distance from one side of the 60° N line to another on no less than three other worlds. These produce the following results:

Earth: 6,693.82 km (4,159 miles)
Mars: 3,551.81 km  (2,206.99 miles)
Moon: 1,820.33 km (1,131.10 miles)


Conclusion

These show that Arrakis is approximately one-quarter the size of Earth and half the size of Mars, and almost exactly matches the size of our Moon. This would seem to give us a firm and straightforward answer using solely the textual evidence.


Problems & Contradictions

Arrakis being the size of our Moon is, however, highly problematic. First off, our Moon is generally considered to have insufficient mass - and thus gravity - to hold down a thick, life-supporting atmosphere. The Moon's gravity is about one-sixth that on Earth, and a combination of low gravity and solar winds have stripped the Moon of whatever atmosphere if may have once possessed.

There is a workaround for this: Arrakis could be small but dense, with many rich metals located far below the planetary surface. This would also solve the issue that during the saga, no-one comments on Arrakis being a low gravity world, or bounces around as they should. Instead, Arrakis clearly has a gravitational field as strong as Earth's, or not far off (the novel actually provides a figure of 0.9g for Arrakis's gravitational strength).

Another apparent contradiction arises in the text: an early conversation between Paul Atreides and Thufir Hawat reveals that the storms on Arrakis build up over "six or seven thousand kilometers of flatlands" in the equatorial band. However, this is not as contradictory as it sounds: the Moon's equatorial circumference is 10,921 km, so if Arrakis is the same, it is perfectly possible for the Coriolis storms to build up. More to the point, this conversation may confirm Arrakis's small size. Mars's equatorial circumference is 21,344 km and Earth's is 40,075 km. If Arrakis was more their size, than Hawat and Paul should be discussing much larger stretches of desert than just six or seven thousand kilometers.

Another question is if Arrakis is large enough to even be called a planet. However, it is larger than Ceres, Pluto and all the other dwarf planets of our star system, and presumably large enough to have cleared its orbit of debris, which is our modern definition of a planet.

Some fans may prefer to suggest that the map in the novel Dune is not to scale, which would be a more helpful answer, but the presence of both latitude and longitude lines on the map suggests this is not the case and the map is indeed supposed to be to scale.


Answer

Based solely on the textual evidence, the planet Arrakis is a near-perfect match for Earth's moon in size, with an approximate diameter of 3,474 km, an equatorial circumference of 10,921 km and a surface area of 38 million square kilometers (14.6 million square miles), which is more than Africa (30 million square km) but less than Asia (44 million square km).

Thank you for reading The Wertzone. To help me provide better content, please consider contributing to my Patreon page and other funding methods, which will also get you exclusive content weeks before it goes live on my blogs. SF&F Questions are debuting on my Patreon feed and you can read them there before being published on the Wertzone.

SF&F Questions: What works are part of the Middle-earth canon?

There are few words that strike fear deeper into the hearts of long-established fantasy fans and critics when someone starts asking about “the Middle-earth canon” and “what books are canon?” It’s a simple question, but the answer is long, complex and confusing.

What is a Canon?

In this sense, a canon is the definitive “official” version of what happened in a particular story, world or narrative created by an author. In very simplistic terms, the Harry Potter canon, for example, consists of the seven novels written by J.K. Rowling and other elements that she either wrote or approved of, such as the Pottermore website, spin-off books like Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them and the Cursed Child stage play. Fanfiction is clearly non-canon and the films represent a separate canon, as they are an adaptation of the book canon rather than a formal addition to it.

The definition of canon can also change. For example, when George Lucas created the film Star Wars in 1977 and then its sequels, he held that only the films were canon and nothing else was: the spin-off novels and comic books written by third parties were not canon and he would not be bound by their events and in most cases did not read them. However, by the late 1980s he had come to believe a single Star Wars canon was more desirable and he hired people to ensure consistency and continuity between all officially-authorised Star Wars products, including novels, video games and comic books. This scheme became known as the “Star Wars Expanded Universe,” with the idea being that if someone just wanted to watch the films that was fine, but if they wanted to delve deeper into the setting, they could find a huge amount of official, canonical material, information and new stories. When Lucas wrote the Star Wars prequel movie trilogy in 1999-2005, he used planets, races, terms, concepts and characters created in prior Expanded Universe work in the films. However, when Lucas sold Star Wars to Disney in 2012, Disney decided that maintaining the Expanded Universe and keeping it coherent with the new films they were planning was impossible, and they declared that none of the material outside of the films and the animated series were canon (to the fury of many fans).

The definition can also be argued. Frank Herbert published his hugely popular Dune series of science fiction novels between 1965 and 1986 before dying unexpectedly. He left behind a very small number of notes and outlines for a possible continuation of the series, leading to his son co-writing and publishing an enormous number of additional books in the setting. The canonical status of these latter books has been hotly debated, especially since it became clear that the depth and detail of Frank Herbert’s notes had been grossly exaggerated.

Tolkien’s Works

In most cases determining which works are canon and which are not is relatively easy, especially if the author is still alive to simply answer questions on this topic. In the case of J.R.R. Tolkien, this is of course sadly impossible, as he passed away in 1973. The complexities of the determining the Tolkien canon are considerably complicated by the fact that Tolkien only published two major (The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings) and two minor (The Adventures of Tom Bombadil and The Road Goes Ever On) Middle-earth works whilst he was alive. After his death, his third son and literary executor Christopher sifted through his files to arrange the publication of The Silmarillion (1977), Unfinished Tales (1980), The Children of Húrin (2007), Beren and Lúthien (2017), The Fall of Gondolin (2018), and the twelve-volume History of Middle-earth series (1983-96). However, the publication of the latter series, which effectively presented some 5,000 Tolkien manuscript pages written over fifty-six years, meant that readers could make their own decisions over Christopher’s choices in assembling The Silmarillion and in some cases found them wanting, particularly regarding those papers and notes which came to light only after The Silmarillion’s publication, which in some cases Christopher acknowledged would have resulted in changes to the book if he’d known about them beforehand.

For this reason, a simple determination of the Middle-earth canon is extremely difficult and debatable. This is further complicated by J.R.R. Tolkien’s own willingness to adjust even published books to reflect later decisions. Most famously, he rewrote the chapter in The Hobbit where Bilbo Baggins confronts Gollum and finds the One Ring from its original, light-hearted style and tone to better reflect the darker and more sinister atmosphere of Lord of the Rings, and this appeared in a second edition of the book published in 1951. Certainly, some of the changes to The Silmarillion J.R.R. Tolkien was considering in the closing years of his life would have resulted in inconsistencies and incompatibilities with the published Lord of the Rings and Hobbit, suggesting that he may have produced third editions of both novels with revisions to take account of these developments. Thus, the reliance on a “fixed text” that canon usually relies on is absent in the matter of Middle-earth.

This has led to a controversial status for The Silmarillion as published. We know J.R.R. Tolkien was planning extensive, sweeping changes to the book at the time of his death, but these changes were not fully conceptualised or outlined. In the editing of The Silmarillion, Christopher Tolkien therefore defaulted to the incomplete version of the story his father had developed from c. 1930 to the publication of Lord of the Rings, incorporating some elements from later on but also having to go right back to the original Book of Lost Tales idea (developed by Tolkien from 1917 to c. 1924) since that is the only place where he sketched out the end of the story in any kind of detail, despite the major differences in tone and style to his later writings. The result, it has been complained is a hodgepodge of drafts, ideas and stories and certainly does not reflect J.R.R. Tolkien’s plans for the book at the time of his death. Christopher Tolkien’s point, well-taken, is that it was impossible to create a book compatible with his father’s intentions in 1973, so he defaulted to the most completed and “best-case” narrative he could develop. The debate will no doubt rage on eternally.

So, what is the Middle-earth canon?

Returning to the original question, the Middle-earth canon can be broken down into the following groups:


Primary Canon
These are books published and revised by J.R.R. Tolkien in his lifetime. Despite Tolkien’s willingness to revise and issue new versions of the texts, we can nonetheless declare these as primary canon.

• The Hobbit, or There and Back Again (1937, revised 1951)
• The Lord of the Rings (1954-55, revised 1965)
• The Adventures of Tom Bombadil (1962)
• The Road Goes Ever On (1967, with Donald Swann)

It should be noted that although The Adventures of Tom Bombadil (a poetry collection) and The Road Goes Ever On (a musical score inspired by Middle-earth) both contain canonical new information, they are relatively minor works.


Secondary Canon
These are books consisting of material written by J.R.R. Tolkien but not published until after his death, usually edited by his son Christopher. This is material which is coherent and readable as stand-alone works, but some readers may raise concerns based on information from other sources:

• The Silmarillion (1977)
• Unfinished Tales of Númenor and Middle-earth (1980)

Tertiary Canon 
This is material which was written and created by Tolkien, but was not completed by him or brought to a satisfactory state where it can be reconciled with either primary or secondary canon. However, in isolated moments this material may be argued to be canonical where it does not conflict with established material.

• The History of Middle Earth Volume I: The Book of Lost Tales, Part 1 (1983)
• The History of Middle Earth Volume II: The Book of Lost Tales, Part 2 (1984)
• The History of Middle Earth Volume III: The Lays of Beleriand (1985)
• The History of Middle Earth Volume IV: The Shaping of Middle-earth (1986)
• The History of Middle Earth Volume V: The Lost Road and Other Writings (1987)
• The History of Middle Earth Volume VI: The Shadow of the Past (1988)
• The History of Middle Earth Volume VII: The Treason of Isengard (1989)
• The History of Middle Earth Volume VIII: The War of the Ring (1990)
• The History of Middle Earth Volume IX: Sauron Defeated (1992)
• The History of Middle Earth Volume X: Morgoth’s Ring (1993)
• The History of Middle Earth Volume X: The War of the Jewels (1994)
• The History of Middle Earth Volume XII: The Peoples of Middle-earth (1996)
• The Children of Húrin (2007)
• Beren and Lúthien (2017)
• The Fall of Gondolin (2018)

Thank you for reading The Wertzone. To help me provide better content, please consider contributing to my Patreon page and other funding methods, which will also get you exclusive content weeks before it goes live on my blogs. SF&F Questions are debuting on my Patreon feed and you can read them there before being published on the Wertzone.

SF&F Questions: Is HARRY POTTER an epic fantasy?

The Basics

Harry Potter is the biggest-selling novel series of the past twenty years. More than 600 million copies of the seven-volume sequence have been sold and the nine movies set in the same world have grossed over $9 billion (with a tenth due for release this year). The series is a huge crossover success, attracting both young and adult readers, and its characters, terminology and storylines have entered the popular consciousness.

One question that arises occasionally is to do with the genre of the series. The field of epic fantasy has boomed in popularity in the last twenty years, driven by the success of the Lord of the Rings movies and, more recently, the Game of Thrones TV series (both based on huge-selling novel series). It is therefore interesting, if ultimately unimportant, to ask the question, is Harry Potter an epic fantasy? If not, what genre is it in?

I asked this question previously in 2011 and this generateda lot of discussion (lots of excellent points in the comments as well), but I hadn’t fully caught up with either the books or films at that point. Now that I have done so with the films, it seemed an interesting idea to revisit the question.

What is an epic fantasy?

What makes this question more problematic is that no generally-accepted definition of what an epic fantasy is seems to exist. Most people seem to respond with a variation of, “I don’t know, it’s got magic and dragons and elves in it, or something?”

The Encyclopaedia of Fantasy (1997) offered this definition by SFF uber-critic John Clute:

"An epic is a long narrative poem which tells large tales, often incorporating a mixture of legend, myth and folk history, and featuring heroes whose acts have a significance transcending their own individual happiness or woe. The classic epic tells the story of the founding or triumph of a folk or nation... Prose fiction which might be called EF include several of the central secondary world tales central to the development of fantasy over the past 100 years - e.g. much of the work of Kenneth Morris, E.R. Eddison, J.R.R. Tolkien and Stephen R. Donaldson. Any fantasy tale written to a large scale which deals with the founding or definitive and lasting defence of a land may fairly be called an EF. Unfortunately, the term has been increasingly used by publishers to describe heroic fantasies that extend over several volumes and has thus lost its usefulness."

Not tremendously helpful, so in my own blog series A History of Epic Fantasy I offer the following definition:

"An epic fantasy is a substantial work of fiction set either in a fictional realm, or a fictionalised version of the real world, in which several characters (and sometimes many dozens) are faced with transformative goals and tasks. Something inherent in the setting must be impossible or fantastic, to set it aside from being merely an alternative history or work of science fiction. There is usually an antagonist to defeat, magical items to utilise and battles to be fought on a large scale. The work is usually long or extends across multiple volumes, although short epic fantasies are not unknown."

Although not definitive, I think that works as a rough idea of the elements you might expect to see in the genre.

What is Harry Potter about?

If you’re one of the three people on Earth not familiar with the series, it may be constructive to briefly summarise the series to see how well it fulfils the tenants of epic fantasy:

Harry Potter is a fantasy series written by J.K. Rowling consisting of seven novels: Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone (1997), Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (1998), Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (1999), Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2000), Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2003), Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2005) and Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (2007). An eight-film adaptation of the books (The Deathly Hallows was broken into two films) began in 2001 and concluded in 2011. A sequel stage play (Harry Potter and the Cursed Child) and two prequel movies (Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them and The Crimes of Grindelwald) have followed.

The books are set in a fantasied version of the real world, where magical creatures, wizards, witches and sorcery exist in parallel to our world, but sophisticated magic is employed to keep the existence of this world secret from the mundane one. The magic community regards the non-magic community disparagingly as “muggles” and takes little interest in them, despite their technology and numbers. Children with an aptitude for magic are taken to one of several magic schools, with apparently one school for each country or region: the UK’s school, located in Scotland, is called Hogwarts.

Eleven years before the books begin, the magical world is rocked by a conflict where one wizard, Tom Riddle, attempts to seize power and conquer the magical world (and possibly the muggle one as well). Taking the name “Voldemort” and styling himself “the Dark Lord”, nearly succeeds in his mission. During a final battle in the village of Godric’s Hollow, he successfully kills two wizards opposed to him – Lily and James Potter – and tries to kill their one-year-old son, Harry. However, Harry is able to resist the attack and Voldemort is apparently killed as a result. When the books open, Harry is being looked after by his mother’s sister Petunia and her husband Vernon, both muggles who despised Lily and James, and hate and mistreat Harry as a result. Despite their objections, Harry is recruited into Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. Harry, who was hitherto unaware of the existence of the magical world, starts off on the backfoot. He is also taken aback by his fame as a result of his role in Voldemort’s apparent destruction. Potter quickly makes two very close friends, Hermione Granger and Ron Weasley, but earns the enmity of Draco Malfoy and the potions teacher, Severus Snape.

Over the course of his time at Hogwarts, it becomes clear that Voldemort was not killed, but instead reduced to a shadow or wraith-like existence. Voldemort’s followers, the Death-Eaters, successfully restore their master to a corporeal and apparently invulnerable form and Voldemort quickly launches a renewed attempted to conquer the magical community. Harry, aided by friends and allies, organises a resistance and learn Voldemort’s weakness, that to preserve his life he has split his life force between seven vessels, known as Horcruxes. Harry sets out to destroy the Horcruxes and also draw Voldemort’s forces into a decisive battle at Hogwarts.

Does Harry Potter fulfil the criteria?

At first glance, Harry Potter fulfils most of the criteria to be counted as an epic fantasy. The story is epic in scale, unfolding over seven novels (and eight long movies), the latter four of which are quite large. Although the story is episodic, at least to start with, a clear over-arcing storyline quickly emerges and comes to dominate the saga.

The story itself is also the most familiar one in epic fantasy: a Chosen One (Harry) is prophesied to stand against a Dark Lord (Voldemort). Magic is a fact of life and non-human races (elves, goblins, centaurs and giants) and creatures (dragons, giant spiders, basilisks and many others) abound. There are several key and major battles throughout the series and there are a large number of Plot Coupons (magical mcguffins or plot devices), including magical swords, a secret crown (or diadem), the Horcruxes, the Deathly Hallows and magical wands, among many others. There are also conspiracies and political intrigue, with the return of the Dark Lord being regarded with scepticism by many factions which hinders Harry’s attempts to forge an alliance to stand against Voldemort.

Several arguments mustered against Harry Potter being an epic fantasy seem unconvincing. The series is predominantly aimed at children and teenagers, but several key epic fantasy works are likewise aimed at younger readers, including J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Hobbit (and The Lord of the Rings at least starts in a similar mode before becoming more adult), C.S. Lewis’s The Chronicles of Narnia, Ursula K. Le Guin’s Earthsea series and Christopher Paolini’s Eragon saga, whilst other series seem to be deliberately calibrated so either children or adults can enjoy them, such as David Eddings’ Belgariad (recently reissued in a YA edition) and Weis & Hickman’s Dragonlance books. Being aimed at younger readers does not disqualify a work from being an epic fantasy.

More debatable is the fact that Harry Potter ostensibly takes place in our world but with a magical hidden society. Some have argued this makes the series more akin to an urban fantasy than an epic one. This seems flawed, as urban fantasies take place in urban environments: Jim Butcher’s Dresden Files features a secret magical world existing alongside our own, but the action itself takes place in the real world (most regularly in and around Chicago). The same is true for Charlaine Harris’ Sookie Stackhouse series and other works of urban fantasy. Harry Potter, by contrast, does not take place in urban environments (a few isolated moments aside) and the majority of the story takes place in fictional locations, mostly in and around Hogwarts Castle.

Furthermore, many epic fantasies do take place in remote and fictional historical periods of our world (such as Tolkien’s Middle-earth works and Robert Jordan’s The Wheel of Time), in parallel universe versions of our history (such as Kate Elliott’s Spiritwalker Trilogy and Crown of Stars series) and feature characters crossing over from our world to a fantastical one (such as Narnia, Guy Gavriel Kay’s Fionavar Tapestry and Stephen Donaldson’s Chronicles of Thomas Covenant, the Unbeliever). It’s actually less common to encounter epic fantasy worlds with absolutely zero connections to our one.

The level of worldbuilding that Rowling has done for the series also exceeds that of many epic fantasies, with vast numbers of characters, timelines, backstories, magical rules, terms and bloodlines created and detailed.

Answer: Harry Potter fulfils most of the requirements for being an epic fantasy, and the arguments used to counter its place in the genre would also eliminate many works considered to be inarguably core to the genre. As such Harry Potter can be counted as part of the epic fantasy subgenre, as well as being a YA fantasy.

Thank you for reading The Wertzone. To help me provide better content, please consider contributing to my Patreon page and other funding methods, which will also get you exclusive content weeks before it goes live on my blogs. SF&F Questions are debuting on my Patreon feed and you can read them there before being published on the Wertzone.

SF&F Questions: Has Disney turned a profit on its Lucasfilm purchase yet?

The Basics
In 2012 Disney bought Lucasfilm from founder George Lucas, paying $4.05 billion for the company, all of its assets and sub-divisions (including special effects company Industrial Light and Magic), and all of its franchises, most notably Star Wars and Indiana Jones.

A common question that's often been asked recently is if Disney has made back the money on this deal in the last four years, which has seen multiple Star Wars TV shows and video games made, along with dozens of novels and comics and, of course, four feature films (with many more coming).

The answer is that this is difficult to answer definitively - Disney are not exactly releasing detailed financials to the public - but we do have significant evidence to go on.


Profit from the Films: $1.5 billion
Disney, of course, have not just spent $4 billion on buying Lucasfilm, but have also spent significant money on producing the new movies and materials. For that reason we are not interested in the total gross of the movies, but the profit alone (as each film - with the possible exception of the underperforming Solo - has made a profit on an individual basis).

Fortunately, we have figures confirming the profit made from the new movies. This confirms that The Force Awakens made $780 million in pure profit for Disney and The Last Jedi made $415.5 million. That's around 1/3 of the total gross in each case (The Force Awakens' box office total was $2.06 billion and The Last Jedi was $1.3 billion). Extrapolating, Rogue One likely made around $300 million profit from its box office of $1.06 billion. Solo, at this rate, will struggle to break even at the box office and will likely rely on future home media and streaming releases to carry it across the line, so that can be disregarded for now.


Profit from Media Releases: $1 billion
These figures are harder to come by, but it has been confirmed that The Force Awakens has made $151 million in Blu-Ray sales in the USA alone, followed by Rogue One at $66 million and The Last Jedi at $56 million. Worldwide figures can comfortably double this and DVD sales (as DVD remains, bizarrely, a strong-selling format) can double that again. This is also not including media releases from The Clone Wars and Rebels, and Disney's legacy re-release of the original six movies in multiple formats.

Streaming rights to different channels worldwide is also a significant income. I would bet that the home media releases in varying formats match the $1.5 billion made by the films (matching the profitability of the original franchise at the moment Disney bought it in 2012, where home media and box office were at parity), but certainly well in excess of $1 billion.


Profit from the Toys: $300 million
Star Wars has been a phenomenon in toy sales, with combined action figure, vehicle, playset, Lego and costume sales exceeding an astonishing $14 billion by 2012. Sales since then have been more modest (a reflection of kids spending more time and money on video games and mobile devices than physical toys), but Star Wars was still the biggest-selling toy franchise in 2015 and 2016 before falling to second place in 2017. Star Wars toy sales exceeded $700 million in fiscal year 2015-16, did slightly less in 2016-17 and a lot less in 2017-18 (so far), the latter surprising as it's the first fiscal year to see two Star Wars movies released.

Thanks to Netflix documentary series The Toys That Made Us, we know that Lucasfilm's deal with Hasbro (inherited by Disney) gives them 16% of the income from the toys. Assuming $1.75 billion from toy income since 2015, this takes us up to around $280 million conservative.

These figures doesn't appear to include the adult collectable market (which is small in overall numbers but huge in margin), books, comic books, collected graphic novels and the adult-oriented board games and miniature games from Fantasy Flight. Crucially, this figure also doesn't include early sales from 2012-15 as well. On this basis, Disney's merchandising sales likely far exceed $300 million in terms of pure profit.

The total sales and profits of the Star Wars franchise between 1977 and 2012.

Video Games: $500 million
There have been two major video game releases since Disney took over the franchise: Star Wars Battlefront (2015) and Star Wars Battlefront II (2017), along with several spin-off Lego video games and legacy sales of earlier titles. Many classic Star Wars games have recently been released on the GoG store and have cumulatively sold hundreds of thousands of new copies. The MMORPG Star Wars: The Old Republic has also generated significant income ($140 million in 2013 alone, for example).

We are predominantly interested in the performance of the two Battlefront games. Together, the two titles have sold 22 million copies, Battlefront accounting for 14 million copies sold and Battlefront II about 8 million. This would generate almost $1.5 billion in revenue. Disney's cut is rumoured to be around 30% (which would certainly explain Electronic Arts' bizarre claims about the games "disappointing" in their performance, since their cut is significantly reduced), which gives us an approximate figure of $500 million in profit to Disney. This figure does not include Disney's cut of microtransactions or income from mobile games and services, which are also significant.


Industrial Light and Magic: $1 billion
When Disney bought Lucasfilm in 2012, they also acquired Industrial Light and Magic, a division of Lucasfilm that provides visual effects to the film industry. Since the 1980s, ILM has consistently been the largest and most successful provider of visual effects to the global film industry, despite challenges from the likes of Weta Digital and Framestore.

We know that ILM made over $180 million per year in the late 1990s, at a time when the global effects market was small fraction of its present day size. As a wholly-owned subsidiary of Lucasfilm and in turn Disney, ILM's profits are a mystery, but they appear to be significant, and certainly far higher than in 1997. The company is the largest employer of digital effects specialists in Hollywood, it has the largest render farm in the industry and it is capable of tackling half a dozen large movies simultaneously. As well as the Star Wars movies, it works on the Marvel Cinematic Universe and Disney's new live-action division, as well as providing visual effects for the Transformers franchise.

A reasonable and massively conservative estimate of ILM's profits would be $200 million per year, every year, in 2013-17. This is likely a gross underestimate, not accounting for the sheer magnitude of ILM's global operations and work on dozens of films in multiple countries and franchises. As ILM charges a flat market fee (which is not dependent on the film's final performance, so they still get paid regardless of the film's performance), this gives them a commanding presence in the industry.


Final Tally: $4.3 billion
The final and highly conservative tally falls somewhere around $4.3 billion in pure profit garnered by Disney since 2012. There are significant shortfalls in these figures, however. We don't know what revenues the TV series Star Wars: Rebels have brought in, or the novels or comics (it should be noted that the novels and comics were highly profitable in the pre-2012 era, cumulatively bringing in over $2 billion in profit), nor the amusement park rides and attractions.

The final figure will be somewhat higher than this.


Answer: Since the takeover by Disney, Lucasfilm's franchises and divisions have brought in well over $4 billion in profit alone. George Lucas may have even significantly underestimated the value of the company when he sold. Disney are now comfortably in profit on the overall deal.

Thank you for reading The Wertzone. To help me provide better content, please consider contributing to my Patreon page and other funding methods, which will also get you exclusive content weeks before it goes live on my blogs. SF&F Questions and The Cities of Fantasy series are debuting on my Patreon feed and you can read them there one month before being published on the Wertzone.

SF&F Questions: Will there ever be a BABYLON 5 reboot?

The Basics

Babylon 5 is a popular space opera television show which aired from 1993 to 1998. Set on a massive space station, it was notable for being a heavily serialised story which unfolded over five years. It’s been cited as a major influence on everyone from Joss Whedon to Damon Lindelof to the Wachowskis.

After the main series wrapped up twenty years ago, it was resurrected for a series of TV movies and a spin-off show, Crusade, which only lasted half a season. In 2007 there was a further straight-to-DVD movie which sold very well, The Lost Tales, but since then no further Babylon 5 material has been released. Since then fans have asked for either a continuation of the series via a movie or new TV show, or a HD remastering of the original series of the kind that many contemporary shows (such as Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Star Trek: The Next Generation) have received, to keep it relevant and watchable for future generations.

Who owns the rights?

Babylon 5’s TV rights are held by Warner Brothers, who produced the first four seasons of the original series and the pilot movie, as well as the Legends of the Rangers and Lost Tales TV/DVD movies. TNT funded the fifth season, Crusade and several of the TV movies, but no longer have the rights to them.

Babylon 5’s creator, J. Michael Straczynski, held onto the movie rights and he alone has the right to make and market a Babylon 5 film for theatrical release.

Authorship

Babylon 5 is unusual in that it is almost completely identified with the work of one man, its creator J. Michael Straczynski. Straczynski wrote 91 of the show’s 110 episodes, most of Crusade and all of the TV movies, as well as acting as executive producer and showrunner. Most Babylon 5 fans would be reluctant to watch or accept a B5 project that Straczynski was not involved in or did not at least have his seal of approval. Although Warner Brothers have the legal right to make a new B5 series without Straczynski’s involvement, it’s clear they are reluctant to do so due to the negative coverage this would engender from fans.

Success of the Original Series

A B5 reboot, remake or remaster is only viable if the original show was successful in the first place. Babylon 5 actually had reasonably strong ratings when it was on-air, often outperforming its alleged rival, Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. It had a very strong and passionate fanbase. Most crucially, it has made a lot of money for Warner Brothers. Given the original show was made on a shoestring budget – 110 episodes for $91 million – it had made Warner Brothers over $500 million in profit by around 2010 in overseas sales, licensing, merchandising and DVD box sets alone. Podcasts, YouTube rewatches and rewatch blogs for the show are all very popular. Straczynski has a popular and well-followed Twitter account where he talks about the show and his other projects.

The show also has major name recognition, first among fans from that era and people who’ve watched it since, and also due to the show being the subject of a long-running joke on popular (but terrible) sitcom The Big Bang Theory.

The name recognition and the strong profits made by the show mean that the series is ripe for resurrection in some form.

Why a reboot or remake? Why not just make more stories with the original cast?

Tragically, despite having a relatively young cast and only airing a quarter of a lifetime ago, Babylon 5’s cast has had a ridiculously high attrition rate. Since the show ended the following castmembers have passed away:

• Michael O’Hare (Commander Sinclair)
• Jerry Doyle (Security Chief Michael Garibaldi)
• Andreas Katsulas (Ambassador G’Kar)
• Richard Biggs (Dr. Stephen Franklin)
• Johnny Sekka (Dr. Benjamin Kyle)
• Jeff Conaway (Security Chief Zack Allan)
• Stephen Furst (Vir Cotto)
• Tim Choate (Zathras)
• Robin Sachs (Satai Hedronn and Warleader Na’Kal)

Making a new Babylon 5 TV movie or series not involving any of these characters (almost all of whom survive to far beyond the lifespan of the series) would be logistically difficult, if not impossible.

Why not just remaster the original show in HD to introduce it to a new audience?

This has been mooted several times but it is particularly challenging for Babylon 5 due to the sheer volume of CGI (computer-generated imagery) used in the show. All of this CG was rendered in standard definition only and mastered on video, so it would need to be re-rendered from scratch. This includes not only every space scene, but every composite scene, every scene with weapons fire, every scene with the characters on a virtual set and every scene with a CG creature. A conservative estimate has it that Babylon 5 had approximately three times as many scenes involving a CG or effects element as Star Trek: The Next Generation, despite having 68 fewer episodes to work with.

This makes putting Babylon 5 through a HD remaster prohibitively expensive. Another conservative estimate of the process is that it would cost between $30 million and $40 million, twice what ST:TNG cost to go through the same process, and ST:TNG struggled to make a profit on its remastering despite being the most-watched and most popular space opera TV show ever made (which is why a HD remastering of Deep Space Nine and Voyager has not taken place yet).

In addition, Babylon 5 had production restrictions when it was made which might make remastering it less feasible: many of the sets were made out of wood and painted to look like plastic or metal, and the limitations of this would show up more in HD. In addition, all of the viewscreens in the show are actual CRT monitors, and of course it’s not possible to “fix” those without invoking time travel, otherwise you’d have pristine HD images of people looking at fuzzy viewscreens.

B5 was also digitally upscaled (a little) for the DVD release and running the DVDs through a Blu-Ray player (which upscales them further) results in a very fine, good-quality (almost 720p, but of course nowhere near 1080p) image that looks pretty damn sharp. The quality decreases whenever effects scenes take place, but the non-effects footage already looks perfectly decent. The whole show being shot in widescreen has already helped it age better than many of its contemporaries, which have had to run through hoops to be converted to widescreen (like Buffy and The X-Files) or it’s simply been impossible to render them in widescreen in the first place (ST:TNG).

Okay, so is anyone interested in doing a remake or reboot?

Yes. Warner Brothers has said they consider Babylon 5 to be a valuable franchise to them and it’s certainly in the zone for a remake/reboot. I can imagine Amazon or Netflix being interested in the idea if they proceed, especially if they can keep the budget down to a sane level (which is what led to Sense8’s cancellation). J. Michael Straczynski also said a few years ago he had plans for a Babylon 5 reboot movie before he started work on Sense8 with the Wachowskis. Both projects appear to have stalled – and never got beyond idle musings at Warner Brothers – but I imagine behind-the-scenes discussions on the idea take place on a regular basis.

One thing holding back the idea is that, at this point, Straczynski seems to favour a movie over a TV series. As he notes in this interview, he’s already made the TV show once and it was an extremely stressful and time-consuming process. So, making a film as an alternate (and presumably much more concise) way of telling that story is understandable. However, most B5 fans, I suspect, want to see a version of the story unfolding over the long-term, as that’s what Babylon 5 was most successful at. Reducing 80½ hours of storytelling into maybe three or four coherent movies would be extremely challenging.

The result of this appears to be a logjam: Warner Brothers are at least open to the idea of doing a new Babylon 5 series but seem to be reluctant to proceed without Straczynski’s involvement due to the fan blowback they’d likely receive. Straczynski seems more interested in the possibility of a feature film, which Warner Brothers don’t seem to be as interested in. If this logjam can be cleared, progress could be made on a new project.

Answer: A Babylon 5 remake or reboot seems inevitable at this point and there is interest from all quarters (studio, creator, fans), it just depends on the creative personnel having an alignment of vision and agreeing on a project that is acceptable to all of them.

Thank you for reading The Wertzone. To help me provide better content, please consider contributing to my Patreon page and other funding methods, which will also get you exclusive content weeks before it goes live on my blogs. SF&F Questions and The Cities of Fantasy series are debuting on my Patreon feed and you can read them there one month before being published on the Wertzone.