Movies: Solo: A Star Wars Story, 25 May 2018 Release (Early reviews are in)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Osprey

Registered User
Feb 18, 2005
27,090
9,350
I think that there's some truth in the suggestion that the OT established locations, especially planets, better.

For example, we got a pretty good idea of what Tatooine is like from just the first film: not simply that it's desert-y and vast, but that it has farmers (Luke's uncle and aunt), cities (Mos Eisley), dangers outside of the cities (sand people) and a culture (the cantina scene). It felt like a real place. In contrast, Jakku is a sandy junkyard without much else established about it to make us more curious about it or want to return. It was interesting when Return of the Jedi returned to Tatooine for all of the Jabba scenes because we'd come to like the planet, but I have a feeling that audiences would probably groan if Episode IX returned to Jakku.

Another example is Hoth vs Crait, which are also pretty comparable because they're the sites of Rebel outposts that get attacked by the Empire. We don't really know much about either planet, but we're at least given a better sense of the vastness of Hoth with all of the aerial shots (especially following the A-Wings) and a better sense of the conditions and what it takes to survive there. Hoth had a bit of scale and character. Crait wasn't fleshed out as well. The only interesting thing that we know about it is that it has red soil beneath a layer of salt, and we learn that only because it becomes a very important plot point.

Another example is Cloud City vs the Canto Bight casino. Even though it's more sparse and Canto Bight has more character, Cloud City seems more established and easier to get a sense of. It feels like a complete location, rather than a glimpse of a tiny part of one.

I think that the characters and locations being more interesting in the OT is owed to the fact that George Lucas is a storyteller. To storytellers, those things have to be interesting on their own and apart from the story. In contrast, I think that Abrams is more of a showman who feels that details of characters and locations are not important if they don't directly serve the greater spectacle (so we don't know much about Jakku other than it's a junkyard because that explains the Falcon being there and we don't know much about Crait other than its hidden red soil because that detail contributes to the scene's biggest twist).
 
Last edited:

Cole Caulifield

Registered User
Apr 22, 2004
27,967
2,465
You seem to be making a big assumption that no one complains that there are so many superhero movies. There are some of us, few though we may be, who are tired of them, hate the fact that the film industry has been overrun with them and especially don't like seeing a similar "milk the franchise to death" strategy being applied to Star Wars. If someone can't get enough of superhero films and, yet, complains about so many Star Wars films, it's valid to question that specific inconsistency, but all complaints shouldn't be dismissed like that, since there are some of us who are consistent in complaining about the number of both.

I like to think I'm consistent. I can't get enough good movies. The marvel ones are good, and I'd watch as many quality ones as they can release. Same with star wars. Problem with star wars is that the quality hasn't been there at all. Whether they release a lot of them or very few... I just want them to be good.
 

Cole Caulifield

Registered User
Apr 22, 2004
27,967
2,465
I don’t think Marvel and Star Wars are necessarily comparable.

Marvel is a combination of many different stories, characters and worlds. Star Wars was only ever one story about a specific group of people.

Star Wars is more analogous to a singular Marvel property like X-Men or Spider-Man than it is to Marvel as an entire cinematic/comic universe.

It could definitely be like Marvel though with many different stories and characters. The expanded universe books were like that in truth.
 

Osprey

Registered User
Feb 18, 2005
27,090
9,350
I'm not sure if this or similar has been posted already, but I found this both interesting and confirming:

Gizmodo said:
[Ron Howard] not only shot the scenes that needed to get completed, but reshot a lot of the previous scenes, in a much more “Star Wars-y” way.

“Ron wanted to go back to the spirit of the original trilogy, while Phil and Chris were looking forward to something new, more like Guardians of the Galaxy,” a source told the WSJ.

https://io9.gizmodo.com/most-of-solo-was-shot-by-ron-howard-according-to-a-new-1825934420
 

beowulf

Not a nice guy.
Jan 29, 2005
59,357
8,954
Ottawa
Already talking sequel.

Han Solo 2: Smuggler’s Boogaloo

Jonathan Kasdan promises that any potential sequel to Solo: A Star Wars Story will include an appearance from Bossk, and possibly some of the other alien bounty hunters who made their debut in The Empire Strikes Back.
I was trying to get [the bounty hunters] in the movie, you know, very hard. And I think that if there’s ever another one of these, you’re going to have to either kill me or Bossk will be in it.​
 
  • Like
Reactions: tacogeoff

ArGarBarGar

What do we want!? Unfair!
Sep 8, 2008
44,017
11,677
Already talking sequel.

Han Solo 2: Smuggler’s Boogaloo

Jonathan Kasdan promises that any potential sequel to Solo: A Star Wars Story will include an appearance from Bossk, and possibly some of the other alien bounty hunters who made their debut in The Empire Strikes Back.
I was trying to get [the bounty hunters] in the movie, you know, very hard. And I think that if there’s ever another one of these, you’re going to have to either kill me or Bossk will be in it.​
If the movie is solid, go for it.
 

johnjm22

Pseudo Intellectual
Aug 2, 2005
19,398
14,497
From Jeremy Jahns Review:

"What carries this movie are the references. This movie is constructed for you to see something happen with Han Solo that ties back to Han Solo that we know from the original trilogy."

"The references in Solo aren't jokes. They don't make you laugh. They make you go 'oh'. That's not enough to carry a movie, that's not enough to make a good movie."

"This movie by the end is really predictable. This movie spring boards off the flaws of Star Wars movies that have come before it, not the strengths. This is essentially just pick a generic scifi movie and slap a Star Wars label on it."
We knew this movie would be predictable and have references, but being carried by references? Even I'm surprised they would take it that far.

On RT right now it has 21 negative reviews and 56 positive reviews. The negative ones don't seem too negative, and the positive ones don't seem too positive. Feels very "meh" overall.
 

tacogeoff

Registered User
Jul 18, 2011
11,590
1,801
Killarney, MB
From Jeremy Jahns Review:


We knew this movie would be predictable and have references, but being carried by references? Even I'm surprised they would take it that far.

On RT right now it has 21 negative reviews and 56 positive reviews. The negative ones don't seem too negative, and the positive ones don't seem too positive. Feels very "meh" overall.

oh yay. a review by a youtuber who gave The Hurricane Heist and Power Rangers a fresh review.

I personally will reserve judgement until I see it for myself. Luke warm about it so far but not getting my expectations too high.
 

No Fun Shogun

34-38-61-10-13-15
May 1, 2011
56,091
12,748
Illinois
73% on RT right now. Consensus is “fine”, we are beginning to see Star Wars fatigue.

I think that's a oversimplification, to be honest. Fans that utterly hate the Disney movies and those that love them and almost everyone in between are mostly meh on this movie. I think it was just a movie core concept that didn't really strike a lot of people as being something really all too excitable about.

Not to mention that after three Star Wars movies coming out in consecutive Decembers, one coming out in the middle of summer just feels a bit off. I'm still a tad confused about that one, as to me laying claim to the public expectation of a Star Wars flick every Xmas and claiming December as a major movie annual event is valuable and logical to me.
 
Last edited:

Blackhawkswincup

RIP Fugu
Jun 24, 2007
186,837
20,293
Chicagoland
Disney has major releases in December that Star Wars would have been going directly against to potential detriment of those franchises

For instance they have the new Mary Poppins dropping on Christmas this year. Its a big brand for Disney they are trying to revive so putting it against Solo would have been potentially harmful
 

NyQuil

Big F$&*in Q
Jan 5, 2005
95,340
59,233
Ottawa, ON
Prequels are always a little bit unsatisfying because there's always some foreknowledge of what the outcome will be.
 

Blackhawkswincup

RIP Fugu
Jun 24, 2007
186,837
20,293
Chicagoland
There is really no reason for Disney to bother considering fans thoughts at this point

Star War fans complain when they go in different directions on things that "This isn't Star Wars" , etc

Star war fans complain when they go with predictable/established storyline's how "Its just a rehash of original" , etc

You cant please Star War fans
 

ThePhoenixx

Registered User
Aug 7, 2005
9,285
5,750
There is really no reason for Disney to bother considering fans thoughts at this point

Star War fans complain when they go in different directions on things that "This isn't Star Wars" , etc

Star war fans complain when they go with predictable/established storyline's how "Its just a rehash of original" , etc

You cant please Star War fans

Yeah. It's all the fans fault these Disney movies aren't being well received.

Blame the fans.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shello

Blackhawkswincup

RIP Fugu
Jun 24, 2007
186,837
20,293
Chicagoland
Thus far Disney's films have been well received

All have been hits with critics and fans at box office

The small minority of extremist fans who are vocal on internet are hardly proven to be anything but a small segment of Star Wars viewing audience
 
  • Like
Reactions: Epsilon

SettlementRichie10

Registered User
May 6, 2012
9,916
7,523
Yeah. It's all the fans fault these Disney movies aren't being well received.

Blame the fans.

The quality of the Disney Star Wars' films is a different debate than the toxicity of the general Star Wars fanbase. They're not mutually exclusive. The Disney Star Wars films can be mediocre, and the Star Wars fanbase can be utterly toxic at the same time.

It comes down to one simple issue here: Star Wars lives in a very limited creative space. It appears boundless, with thousands of stories across thousands of characters and planets. But in reality, Star Wars at its best is a very small story: the struggle between light and dark, good and evil, Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader.

Once you diverge from this core Skywalker drama, Star Wars becomes any other expansive sci-fi universe. There's nothing special about Star Wars outside of that original central conflict.

Star Wars fans haven't come to grips with that yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Epsilon

ThePhoenixx

Registered User
Aug 7, 2005
9,285
5,750
The quality of the Disney Star Wars' films is a different debate than the toxicity of the general Star Wars fanbase. They're not mutually exclusive. The Disney Star Wars films can be mediocre, and the Star Wars fanbase can be utterly toxic at the same time.

It comes down to one simple issue here: Star Wars lives in a very limited creative space. It appears boundless, with thousands of stories across thousands of characters and planets. But in reality, Star Wars at its best is a very small story: the struggle between light and dark, good and evil, Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader.

Once you diverge from this core Skywalker drama, Star Wars becomes any other expansive sci-fi universe. There's nothing special about Star Wars outside of that original central conflict.

Star Wars fans haven't come to grips with that yet.

Or just maybe the new Star Wars films are not very good. They turned their back on everything that made Star Wars good and turned it in to a social engineering vehicle. When you spend all your creative resources pushing an agenda instead of building worlds, characters and plots then this is what you get. Instead of letting a story flow you are constantly trying to shoehorn things in to further said agenda. This is what the new Star Wars have become. A preach at you movie.

Then you wonder why they are not well received?
 

ThePhoenixx

Registered User
Aug 7, 2005
9,285
5,750
Thus far Disney's films have been well received

All have been hits with critics and fans at box office

The small minority of extremist fans who are vocal on internet are hardly proven to be anything but a small segment of Star Wars viewing audience

The force awakens was old money earned by the old Star Wars movies. There were a few complaints but nothing like TLJ. Star Wars tried to be something else other than Star Wars. That's the problem.
 

No Fun Shogun

34-38-61-10-13-15
May 1, 2011
56,091
12,748
Illinois
It's not all or nothing here. Lots of Star Wars fans have loved all three films so far, lots have liked one or two, and lots have hated all three. Star Wars fandom isn't a monolithic entity that has a common groupthink.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tacogeoff

SettlementRichie10

Registered User
May 6, 2012
9,916
7,523
Or just maybe the new Star Wars films are not very good. They turned their back on everything that made Star Wars good and turned it in to a social engineering vehicle. When you spend all your creative resources pushing an agenda instead of building worlds, characters and plots then this is what you get. Instead of letting a story flow you are constantly trying to shoehorn things in to further said agenda. This is what the new Star Wars have become. A preach at you movie.

Then you wonder why they are not well received?

There have been ten full length theatrical Star Wars films. Only two are universally considered “good,” and they were released thirty years ago.

At the very least, you must admit this hints at wildly divergent expectations for these films amongst the general viewing audience. There have been eight films from five different directors released since Empire, and every one of them have been heavily criticized by the “hardcore” fanbase.

It’s starting to look like the universe in general simply isn’t capable of meeting the expectations of hardcore fans.

Edit: Also, please clarify your “they turned their backs on Star Wars” comment. Are you suggesting Star Wars has only recently dipped in quality under Disney’s stewardship? Because the Lucas-helmed prequels would like a word.
 

Drytoast

Registered User
Sep 27, 2017
6,334
4,498
Anyone wanna bet that Solo's love interest in the movie...Danaerys from game of thrones and he have a scene where he says "I love you" and she cleverly says back "I know!"

Anyone?
 
  • Like
Reactions: MordredGK

IceNeophyte

Registered User
Nov 14, 2017
9,976
7,291
Disney has major releases in December that Star Wars would have been going directly against to potential detriment of those franchises

For instance they have the new Mary Poppins dropping on Christmas this year. Its a big brand for Disney they are trying to revive so putting it against Solo would have been potentially harmful

Honestly, I don't think anything will save Mary Poppins. I've been wrong before.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->