Are you going to boycott "SOLO: A STAR WARS STORY"

POSTED BY: whozit
UPDATED: Wednesday, July 4, 2018 18:57
VIEWED: 30115
PAGE 7 of 18

I think that part of the criticism regarding 'Solo' is that Disney is pushing for "rave" or "glowing" reviews. After all, they do have billions at stake.

But my take on all of this is that in The Force Awakens, both old and new fans went to the movie theater to see the original cast of Star Wars (after the disappointing prequels, episodes I,II & III). To see if their heroes could save the day, literally. When it did fantastic at the box office, well, expectations were high.

Then we got a less than stellar follow up in The Last Jedi. But it was a lot more than that. We got Luke standing over his nephew contemplating murder, and drinking green milk from a sea cow. Not to say it was all bad. There were moments, however brief, of sheer brilliance. It just didn't seem to make sense. The die-hard fans, truly despise Johnson and Kennedy for what they did to Luke and, in general, the franchise. It was change for the sake of change, and little else. No logical follow up to the motivations of the characters that older fans have come to know.

So, fans came up with this notion. How do we get back at them? Funny thing is now the same fans who hated Lucas's prequels, are wishing he come back and reclaim his creation. Rumor (there he goes again) has it that Lucas helped direct Solo. Don't know how true that is (Howard and Lucas have worked together before in American Graffiti), so I take that little tidbit with a grain of salt.

But I don't think the numbers of pissed-off fans will derail the franchise, not by themselves. Some of the reviews I read were mixed, and if that trend continues, a boycott will not be Disney's only concern.


SGG

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Zeek:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
That's not good news for Disney and Star Wars franchise. Somehow they'll survive it. I read a rumo0r online that critics and entertainment mags/papers have been writing glowing reviews. Could Disney be behind this?
Oh and advance sales are not doing well.

But I think I will judge for myself.


SGG

---

I've read some good reviews. I thought some articles said advance sales were going well. That's why I wasn't entirely sure my office's anecdotal evidence was accurate, but maybe I misread. Regardless it will be interesting to see if the vocal opponents of The Last Jedi are so upset that they won't see future Star Wars movies and if they're numerous enough to concern Disney.

---

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by whozit:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Sorry about that Whozit.

Damn. You've already squandered about 15% of your life you took back by boycotting this movie. My bad.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Forget about it, I've wasted more time watching "Flat Earth" vids.

---

The Earth is flat and is only 6,000 years old. 9/11 was a false flag and the Twin Towers never even existed in the alternate universe I came from, and neither did Russians, so I really don't even know what y'all are talking about half the time in here. Donald Trump was real, but he's dead now. He went on to host The Price is Right after he got Fired from the Apprentice and met his end in a bizarre Plinko accident shortly after the fact. The Cloud People are sending laser beams into your brain and making you spend your money on Marvel and Star Wars movies. The only reason that y'all don't think you want to see Solo is because they don't want you to see another movie in the Star Wars universe starring a white male hero. WAKE UP SHEEPLE!!! OBAMA TURNED THE FROGS GAY!!!!

- Alex Jones

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Speaking as a proud pro-life right-wing conservative...Alex Jones is insane

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Disney already made a better version of "Solo: A Star Wars Story"
By Mike Murphy May 25, 2018

This review contains no spoilers.

Step back a bit and squint, and you can see that Disney has actually already made the Han Solo story—if you’re not too picky about your wisecracking intergalactic spaceship captains with furry sidekicks. This new film is essentially a limp, awkward version of Guardians of the Galaxy, the original Marvel film about a gang of mercenaries led by charmingly gruff pilot. But the comparisons don’t stop there: The main character is a scoundrel who doesn’t really know a normal family life (Peter Quill/Han Solo). He falls for a woman of questionable morality (Gamora/Qi’ra). Then there’s a large character who can’t speak and is used for muscle (Groot is really Chewbacca, fur aside); a small wisecracking copilot (Rocket Raccoon/Rio Durant); a jaded old gang leader who takes the main character under their wing (Yondu/Beckett); a villain who is actually working for a scarier villain (Ronan the Accuser and Thanos/Dryden Vos and someone I don’t want to spoil for you); and an infinitely powerful source of energy that everyone wants (infinity stone/coaxium).

The difference is that Guardians was a lighthearted, fun, and thoroughly entertaining film that few had been expecting to do as well as it did (it’s currently the 82nd-highest grossing film of all time). It was a well-executed space opera in the tradition of the original Star Wars movies. Solo, on the other hand, had the weight of expectation of the entire franchise on its shoulders, as well as a relatively inexperienced lead actor trying to fill the shoes of one of the most charismatic actors of all time.

But still, go see it if you’re a fan. Why not? There are some good one-liners, a few fun action scenes, and a lot of shots of the excellent Donald Glover as Lando, in various capes. That alone is worth the price of admission.

https://quartzy.qz.com/1289321/

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Disney already made a better version of "Solo: A Star Wars Story"
By Mike Murphy May 25, 2018

This review contains no spoilers.

Step back a bit and squint, and you can see that Disney has actually already made the Han Solo story—if you’re not too picky about your wisecracking intergalactic spaceship captains with furry sidekicks. This new film is essentially a limp, awkward version of Guardians of the Galaxy, the original Marvel film about a gang of mercenaries led by charmingly gruff pilot. But the comparisons don’t stop there: The main character is a scoundrel who doesn’t really know a normal family life (Peter Quill/Han Solo). He falls for a woman of questionable morality (Gamora/Qi’ra). Then there’s a large character who can’t speak and is used for muscle (Groot is really Chewbacca, fur aside); a small wisecracking copilot (Rocket Raccoon/Rio Durant); a jaded old gang leader who takes the main character under their wing (Yondu/Beckett); a villain who is actually working for a scarier villain (Ronan the Accuser and Thanos/Dryden Vos and someone I don’t want to spoil for you); and an infinitely powerful source of energy that everyone wants (infinity stone/coaxium).

The difference is that Guardians was a lighthearted, fun, and thoroughly entertaining film that few had been expecting to do as well as it did (it’s currently the 82nd-highest grossing film of all time). It was a well-executed space opera in the tradition of the original Star Wars movies. Solo, on the other hand, had the weight of expectation of the entire franchise on its shoulders, as well as a relatively inexperienced lead actor trying to fill the shoes of one of the most charismatic actors of all time.

But still, go see it if you’re a fan. Why not? There are some good one-liners, a few fun action scenes, and a lot of shots of the excellent Donald Glover as Lando, in various capes. That alone is worth the price of admission.

https://quartzy.qz.com/1289321/

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

A few one liners and a few fun action scenes doesn't make it a classic. What's next?

JAR JAR: A STAR WARS STORY

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Disney already made a better version of "Solo: A Star Wars Story"
By Mike Murphy May 25, 2018

This review contains no spoilers.

Step back a bit and squint, and you can see that Disney has actually already made the Han Solo story—if you’re not too picky about your wisecracking intergalactic spaceship captains with furry sidekicks. This new film is essentially a limp, awkward version of Guardians of the Galaxy, the original Marvel film about a gang of mercenaries led by charmingly gruff pilot. But the comparisons don’t stop there: The main character is a scoundrel who doesn’t really know a normal family life (Peter Quill/Han Solo). He falls for a woman of questionable morality (Gamora/Qi’ra). Then there’s a large character who can’t speak and is used for muscle (Groot is really Chewbacca, fur aside); a small wisecracking copilot (Rocket Raccoon/Rio Durant); a jaded old gang leader who takes the main character under their wing (Yondu/Beckett); a villain who is actually working for a scarier villain (Ronan the Accuser and Thanos/Dryden Vos and someone I don’t want to spoil for you); and an infinitely powerful source of energy that everyone wants (infinity stone/coaxium).

The difference is that Guardians was a lighthearted, fun, and thoroughly entertaining film that few had been expecting to do as well as it did (it’s currently the 82nd-highest grossing film of all time). It was a well-executed space opera in the tradition of the original Star Wars movies. Solo, on the other hand, had the weight of expectation of the entire franchise on its shoulders, as well as a relatively inexperienced lead actor trying to fill the shoes of one of the most charismatic actors of all time.

But still, go see it if you’re a fan. Why not? There are some good one-liners, a few fun action scenes, and a lot of shots of the excellent Donald Glover as Lando, in various capes. That alone is worth the price of admission.

https://quartzy.qz.com/1289321/

---

Another quality reposting copied reposting of a non-FireflyFan's words by somebody without an original thought in their head.
The equivalent of requesting a Prime Rib and getting a Whopper patty.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

So basically Solo copied GoTG. Now there's a revelation, a unique and quantifiable expression of a pop culture phenomenon...namely Star Wars. A unique experience born out of a unremarkable period of the sci-fi domain. Lucas used old footage out of World War II air battles to simulate the battles he imagined that would occur in space. Hence, the "bomber squad" scene in the Last Jedi, a fete that defied gravitational logic.

Granted, Star Wars is forty years in the making, and/or telling, but my take on all of this is that Star Wars took the stories of Flash Gordon, Commando Cody, Forbidden Planet, When Worlds Collide, War of the Worlds, Earth vs. The Flying Saucers, yes even Plan 9 from Outer Space; and brought it into the modern era of sci-fi film. Oh, let's not forget the incomparable 2001: A Space Odyssey. Yes Second, it may be true what you depict in your response, but I dare say that film history will note that without Star Wars...well, you know the rest. Guardians of the Galaxy followed the formula; they did not break the mold, but added to it. Bravo, I say.

Peter Quill is Han Solo, Groot is Chewbacca, etc. GoTG is an excellent sci-fi film full of fun and flights of fancy. There is no mistaking it's appeal. I'll take it a step further, that loveable scoundrel has existed since the early days of film, way back in the 30s. I give you, Charlie Chaplin. Yes, I'm going back that far, before talkies. And it has worked throughout the years; Errol Flynn as Robin Hood; Robert Downey Jr. as Iron Man; Mel Ferrer as Cyrano. You get it, I'm sure. Derivative, perhaps. But saying that Solo is derivative of GoTG is like putting the cart before the horse. The only thing that's changed is the background of the story, the surroundings, but at it's core; the same old loveable wise-cracking chap moviegoers have fallen in love with since the days of the horse and cart is ever present.

As far as Solo goes. It is fun, it is lighthearted and thoroughly entertaining and serves the Star Wars story of the hero's journey by the beloved character of Han Solo. I would put it right up there with Rogue One. There is one character in Solo that puts me in mind of GoTG, as far as the wisecracking co-pilot is concerned. It also puts me in mind of a certain captain with tight pants, and a certain train robbery. By the way, just to keep things in perspective, there is a movie, in history, that depicts a group of train robbers...it is known as The Great Train Robbery, 1903. Hmmmm, The Train Job, Firefly, 2002. But, I digress.

I went in with an open mind, but expecting the worst; mainly from all the online vitriol and general overall "hate" of the Last Jedi. I did briefly give the "boycott" a thought, but then said to myself..."go see and judge for yourself."
Fuck it, I'm judging for myself...I liked this movie. Was it the greatest Star Wars movie of all time? No. Was it lighthearted fun and entertaining?...you betcha.
Was Alden Enrenreich Harrison Ford?, No. He was Han Solo as you would think him to be early on in his life. A scoundrel in the making, a young Han Solo. He served the character well, and therefore, served the story well. Thank you Ron Howard for doing a masterful job of not totally fucking with the characters we grew to love.
While I'm at it, thank you George Lucas for keeping him drawing inside the lines. Sometimes that works.

Solo had the grit and old feel of the original Star Wars movie. In other words, not perfectly shiny and new, not totally antiseptic like the prequels; and, most importantly, no Jar Jar Binks. This was a flashback to what made Star Wars, well...Star Wars. It started out slow, but picked up momentum and gathered speed, intrigue and the like as it went along. Yes, Glover was charming as Lando (with all his capes, which I found to be brilliant); but Emilia Clarke who nailed her role as the lovely Kira (Solo's love interest) deserves mention. Harrelson was his usual solid self, who totally immersed himself as Beckett

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
So basically Solo copied GoTG. Now there's a revelation, a unique and quantifiable expression of a pop culture phenomenon...namely Star Wars. A unique experience born out of a unremarkable period of the sci-fi domain. Lucas used old footage out of World War II air battles to simulate the battles he imagined that would occur in space. Hence, the "bomber squad" scene in the Last Jedi, a fete that defied gravitational logic.

Granted, Star Wars is forty years in the making, and/or telling, but my take on all of this is that Star Wars took the stories of Flash Gordon, Commando Cody, Forbidden Planet, When Worlds Collide, War of the Worlds, Earth vs. The Flying Saucers, yes even Plan 9 from Outer Space; and brought it into the modern era of sci-fi film. Oh, let's not forget the incomparable 2001: A Space Odyssey. Yes Second, it may be true what you depict in your response, but I dare say that film history will note that without Star Wars...well, you know the rest. Guardians of the Galaxy followed the formula; they did not break the mold, but added to it. Bravo, I say.

Peter Quill is Han Solo, Groot is Chewbacca, etc. GoTG is an excellent sci-fi film full of fun and flights of fancy. There is no mistaking it's appeal. I'll take it a step further, that loveable scoundrel has existed since the early days of film, way back in the 30s. I give you, Charlie Chaplin. Yes, I'm going back that far, before talkies. And it has worked throughout the years; Errol Flynn as Robin Hood; Robert Downey Jr. as Iron Man; Mel Ferrer as Cyrano. You get it, I'm sure. Derivative, perhaps. But saying that Solo is derivative of GoTG is like putting the cart before the horse. The only thing that's changed is the background of the story, the surroundings, but at it's core; the same old loveable wise-cracking chap moviegoers have fallen in love with since the days of the horse and cart.

As far as Solo goes. It is fun, it is lighthearted and thoroughly entertaining and serves the Star Wars story of the hero's journey by the beloved character of Han Solo. I would put it right up there with Rogue One. There is one character in Solo that puts me in mind of GoTG, as far as the wisecracking co-pilot is concerned. It also puts me in mind of a certain captain with tight pants, and a certain train robbery. By the way, just to keep things in perspective, there is a movie, in history, that depicts a group of train robbers...it is known as The Great Train Robbery, 1903. Hmmmm, The Train Job, Firefly, 2002. But, I digress.

I went in with an open mind, but expecting the worst; mainly from all the online vitriol and general overall "hate" of the Last Jedi. I did briefly give the "boycott" a thought, but then said to myself..."go see and judge for yourself."
Fuck it, I'm judging for myself...I liked this movie. Was it the greatest Star Wars movie of all time? No. Was it lighthearted fun and entertaining?...you betcha.
Was Alden Enrenreich Harrison Ford?, No. He was Han Solo as you would think him to be early on in his life. A scoundrel in the making, a young Han Solo. He served the character well, and therefore, served the story well. Thank you Ron Howard for doing a masterful job of not totally fucking with the characters we grew to love.
While I'm at it, thank you George Lucas for keeping him drawing inside the lines. Sometimes that works.

Solo had the grit and old feel of the original Star Wars movie. In other words, not perfectly shiny and new, not totally antiseptic like the prequels; and, most importantly, no Jar Jar Binks. This was a flashback to what made Star Wars, well...Star Wars. It started out slow, but picked up momentum and gathered speed, intrigue and the like as it went along. Yes, Glover was charming as Lando (with all his capes, which I found to be brilliant); but Emilia Clarke who nailed her role as the lovely Kira (Solo's love interest) deserves mention. Harrelson was his usual solid self, who total

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME