Solo: A Star Wars Story
POSTED BY: JEWELSTAITEFAN
UPDATED: Monday, June 11, 2018 15:31
VIEWED: 5561
PAGE 2 of 3
Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
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. Thandie Newton as Val. Okay enough of that. Howard brought this movie home with his deft touch as director, and that is to be applauded.
I'll agree with most of what you said, if not as emphatically. As much as I like Woody, I didn't like him or his slimy hairpiece in the role (which WAS mostly a rip-off of The Train Job). I get there's a lack of decent character actors, but do they have to stick him in there all the time? It felt more like Hunger Games again than Star Wars.
Alden reminds me of Dennis Quaid. He worked hard on the body language and he's likable enough, but he's still a generic Solo. Glover was great, and the thing with L3-37 was interesting enough, but I wasn't feeling it....And you wouldn't with only a handful of scenes to set it up.
It's not enough to not like the movie over, though. Good way to kill a couple hours, and aside from the distinct need to go find a flashlight for half the movie, we enjoyed it. Hubby is a little tweaked over the messing with cannon on Darth Maul and the Red Dawn/Black Sun/Enfys Nest stuff, but most people won't know enough backstory to care.
We give it an A-. It is entertaining enough. Not sure I'd want to watch it several times, but I could stand to see it again.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I get the feeling Jewels, that there's been a lot of vitriol in regards to this movie, mainly (IMHO) because of backlash from The Last Jedi. So I feel, that much of the rumors is propaganda to keep Solo from making any real money at the box office.
Much of the success of a movie lives and dies in the hands of the movie-going public, and it's even moreso with Star Wars. These fuckers, Kathleen Kennedy and Rian Johnson, have caused much grief by giving the fans the middle finger with The Last Jedi. I'm not saying that Solo is this great piece of art, I'm just saying that it was a fun movie with some flaws (but nothing deeply major). The more I think of it, the more I can understand the fans concern. The script did have problems, that's why Howard turned up the action and the charm (according to that NBC article).
I believe it was a mess, but Disney and company didn't want to rewrite the entire script or reshoot the whole movie, plus they desperately wanted that all-important May 25th release. So, in comes Howard. After seeing it Friday, that's why I say Bravo for Howard. Under his skilled hand he almost pulls a rabbit from the hat. Ooo, so close!
I liked the movie and will go again at some point. So, is Kathleen Kennedy a hack? Yes, based upon this mess with TLJ and Solo, she is a total loser as a producer of the Star Wars. Disney should replace her because she's totally fucked this up, and because she doesn't know her ass from her elbow when it comes to this franchise. Plus, she's such an arrogant bitch with the fans.
She claims that she's out to get new fans, but at this rate, she's out to lose the most passionate of all movie-goers.....the Star Wars fans. It is due to them that the franchise exists at all. The Force Awakens, with all it's flaws, made billions. What the fuck is wrong with this lady? Disney better figure this out fast or they will lose billions.
As far as Solo copying anyone. Please remember Star Wars started it all back in 1977. Peter Quill is Han Solo, not the other way around.
Quote:
Have you not seen Deadpool?
No, I haven't seen it yet. Most likely this weekend though.
SGG
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:Quote:Your review said it was non-spoiler, and I didn't run into any potential spoiler or objectionable tendency as I progressed through it.
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
I did read this review of yours, but I don't plan to read others until after I see Solo, likely on Tuesday.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, I'm that way too. I don't read or watch any reviews, especially spoilery ones opening week. Also, I try not to spoil it for anyone. Now I'm off to view a couple of You Tube comments and reviews. I'm curious to see what they're going to say.
SGG
So far I haven't heard people jabbering about how the film incessantly copies other derivative film parodies of prior installments of the franchise. Thank Howard for not being that juvenile and insipid.
Have you not seen Deadpool?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Solo: A Star Wars Story has been on several Must-See Lists this year, and I feel it may be the first or best to fulfill hopes and expectations, in quite a while. I liked Wind River but it was a surprise for me, I didn't really see it coming. I had known Rogue One was coming, but I didn't know what it was about, what context or connection to the Star Wars quiltwork. Solo was a character I was familiar with, and I am glad Ron Howard has added this to his resume. Makes me wish he would have accepted the other Star Wars film that he was asked to do years ago.
This could well be the best overall film of the year.
I can't list everything right now, but some thoughts of similarities: Let's Do Crime! From The Train Job. Some vibe of James Bond, with the story and scene of spy entering the villian's lair, which also resembles Trash - and I never noticed that about the Bellerophon visit until watching this film, and later this scene development reminded me of The Ball in Shindig, with 3 BDHs bumping into each other. And I wondered - is this what was trying to happen with that lame Casino gambit in TLJ?
Galaxy Quest had dragging mines, Star Trek II's climax, Star Wars V, Gran Torino, Pilot Serenity opening scenes, Starship Troopers, Top Gun flight tricks, plus the James Bond card games I was all reminded of.
I have not seen Thor 3
Select to view spoiler:
where Thor and Hulk meet in the arena.
Apparently Wookie Speak does not have a word for
Select to view spoiler:
reinforcements
I heard that Howard shot more than 80% of the shots. I suspect one that was left from the twits was Falcon landing on Savareen.
I did notice some grainy or fuzzy lensework, and maybe poor lighting or contrast on numerous shots. This seemed a departure from the Lucas works, which had crisp color, contrast, focus, lighting whether indoors or desert locales. Howard's work has also maintained crisp cinematography in each film I can recall. I think all of Firefly had better resolution and clarity than some scenes in Solo.
The story seemed quite the symphony of coinciding needs and talents, altering the balance from one shot to the next.
Does anybody know of the time frame here, or did I miss it? SWIV was 18 years after SWIII. So how far between there did this span take place?
Did we already know how old Chewbacca was?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I believe Chewie's age as a 200-year-old Wookiee was noted in the script or novelization for A New Hope. In any event, I'm 99% sure we've from expanded materials that he's about 200 since the era of the original trilogy.
I thought the timing for this movie was 10 years BBY, but I just read an article that said it's about 11 BBY, not that the one year makes a big difference... In context, though, that places us 6 years prior to the Rebels animated series, for those who care about that.
One thing that I found awesome were the references to the old Lando Calrissian trilogy. The first two books, The Mindharp of Sharu and The Flamewinds of Oseon, were directly referenced. There was probably a reference to the Starcave of ThonBoka that I missed.
Similarly, there were a few visual references to the old Han Solo trilogy (Brian Daley, not A.C. Crispin), with at least two homages to the third book in Dryden's collection (I would never have picked up on the second one without having flipped through the visual dictionary).
Theforce.net has an interesting article today about why the BO take for SOLO isn't the full - or even main - story from Disney's perspective. The article posits that this movie is basically a sounding to see how audiences will respond to certain things, and although it will have impact on some of their long-term plans, those long-term plans will move forward nonetheless:
http://www.theforce.net/story/front/Why_The_Solo_A_Star_Wars_Story_Box
_Office_Doesnt_Tell_The_Whole_Story_180880.asp
Perhaps worth noting, too: The first Thor movie had a worldwide take of 450 million and is considered one of the worst Marvel movies. The most recent Thor movie has made almost double that, and is considered among the best... and Solo is certainly a better movie than either of the first two Thors.
I think the positive word of month the movie has been receiving from those who've seen it will factor into things. I've spoken to probably a dozen people who've seen it so far, and the reactions have ranged from "I enjoyed it" to "I loved it." Sure, tickets tell a different story, but that's something I can't say about about Eps 7 and 8.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I don't think it is Spoiler that there is a 3 year span in this film.
Originally posted by GWEK:
I believe Chewie's age as a 200-year-old Wookiee was noted in the script or novelization for A New Hope. In any event, I'm 99% sure we've from expanded materials that he's about 200 since the era of the original trilogy.
I thought the timing for this movie was 10 years BBY, but I just read an article that said it's about 11 BBY, not that the one year makes a big difference... In context, though, that places us 6 years prior to the Rebels animated series, for those who care about that.
One thing that I found awesome were the references to the old Lando Calrissian trilogy. The first two books, The Mindharp of Sharu and The Flamewinds of Oseon, were directly referenced. There was probably a reference to the Starcave of ThonBoka that I missed.
Similarly, there were a few visual references to the old Han Solo trilogy (Brian Daley, not A.C. Crispin), with at least two homages to the third book in Dryden's collection (I would never have picked up on the second one without having flipped through the visual dictionary).
Theforce.net has an interesting article today about why the BO take for SOLO isn't the full - or even main - story from Disney's perspective. The article posits that this movie is basically a sounding to see how audiences will respond to certain things, and although it will have impact on some of their long-term plans, those long-term plans will move forward nonetheless:
http://www.theforce.net/story/front/Why_The_Solo_A_Star_Wars_Story_Box
_Office_Doesnt_Tell_The_Whole_Story_180880.asp
Perhaps worth noting, too: The first Thor movie had a worldwide take of 450 million and is considered one of the worst Marvel movies. The most recent Thor movie has made almost double that, and is considered among the best... and Solo is certainly a better movie than either of the first two Thors.
I think the positive word of month the movie has been receiving from those who've seen it will factor into things. I've spoken to probably a dozen people who've seen it so far, and the reactions have ranged from "I enjoyed it" to "I loved it." Sure, tickets tell a different story, but that's something I can't say about about Eps 7 and 8.
At the end of the 3 years, Chewbacca is 190 years old, at least. Based upon the comments about the Rebellion and it's Genesis, I had thought it closer to ANH/R1. But I think you said it is from 11 years to 8 years before, making Han about 29 when he meets Luke & Leia.
What is BBY?
So then this starts 7 years after Episode III, right?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I love the trolling that happened regarding Lando's character.
I'd been hearing a lot about how they turned him into a pansexual in Solo. You had web articles giving high praise for this, as well as those demonizing the creators of the movie for putting something like that in a family movie. People on both sides going crazy about the issue.
Then what seems to be a pretty small amount of people so far went to see the movie and there was no evidence of this at all.
That's probably the most entertainment that Star Wars has brought me since 1983.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:2 things. They might have been talking about his relationship with his droid Pilot. Or that stuff may have been discarded by Howard.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
I love the trolling that happened regarding Lando's character.
I'd been hearing a lot about how they turned him into a pansexual in Solo. You had web articles giving high praise for this, as well as those demonizing the creators of the movie for putting something like that in a family movie. People on both sides going crazy about the issue.
Then what seems to be a pretty small amount of people so far went to see the movie and there was no evidence of this at all.
That's probably the most entertainment that Star Wars has brought me since 1983.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I guess Deadpool is too...
https://nerdist.com/pansexuality-in-pop-culture-lando-calrissian-deadp
ool-rick-and-morty/
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:Quote:2 things. They might have been talking about his relationship with his droid Pilot. Or that stuff may have been discarded by Howard.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
I love the trolling that happened regarding Lando's character.
I'd been hearing a lot about how they turned him into a pansexual in Solo. You had web articles giving high praise for this, as well as those demonizing the creators of the movie for putting something like that in a family movie. People on both sides going crazy about the issue.
Then what seems to be a pretty small amount of people so far went to see the movie and there was no evidence of this at all.
That's probably the most entertainment that Star Wars has brought me since 1983.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
I think there's the stuff with L3, definitely, but also Lando chatting up various alien folks. There's also that moment where L3 calls Lando on flirting with Han. Personally, it didn't seem to be real flirting to me, but L3 knows Lando better than I do, so who knows what she's seen before?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:Quote:I don't think it is Spoiler that there is a 3 year span in this film.
Originally posted by GWEK:
I believe Chewie's age as a 200-year-old Wookiee was noted in the script or novelization for A New Hope. In any event, I'm 99% sure we've from expanded materials that he's about 200 since the era of the original trilogy.
I thought the timing for this movie was 10 years BBY, but I just read an article that said it's about 11 BBY, not that the one year makes a big difference... In context, though, that places us 6 years prior to the Rebels animated series, for those who care about that.
One thing that I found awesome were the references to the old Lando Calrissian trilogy. The first two books, The Mindharp of Sharu and The Flamewinds of Oseon, were directly referenced. There was probably a reference to the Starcave of ThonBoka that I missed.
Similarly, there were a few visual references to the old Han Solo trilogy (Brian Daley, not A.C. Crispin), with at least two homages to the third book in Dryden's collection (I would never have picked up on the second one without having flipped through the visual dictionary).
Theforce.net has an interesting article today about why the BO take for SOLO isn't the full - or even main - story from Disney's perspective. The article posits that this movie is basically a sounding to see how audiences will respond to certain things, and although it will have impact on some of their long-term plans, those long-term plans will move forward nonetheless:
http://www.theforce.net/story/front/Why_The_Solo_A_Star_Wars_Story_Box
_Office_Doesnt_Tell_The_Whole_Story_180880.asp
Perhaps worth noting, too: The first Thor movie had a worldwide take of 450 million and is considered one of the worst Marvel movies. The most recent Thor movie has made almost double that, and is considered among the best... and Solo is certainly a better movie than either of the first two Thors.
I think the positive word of month the movie has been receiving from those who've seen it will factor into things. I've spoken to probably a dozen people who've seen it so far, and the reactions have ranged from "I enjoyed it" to "I loved it." Sure, tickets tell a different story, but that's something I can't say about about Eps 7 and 8.
At the end of the 3 years, Chewbacca is 190 years old, at least. Based upon the comments about the Rebellion and it's Genesis, I had thought it closer to ANH/R1. But I think you said it is from 11 years to 8 years before, making Han about 29 when he meets Luke & Leia.
What is BBY?
So then this starts 7 years after Episode III, right?
I just skimmed a few articles and I don't think there's solid consensus about what exact year the movie takes place, but everyone agrees that it's roughly a decade prior to A New Hope.
With the 3 year jump indicated, it could be 14/11, or 13/10, or even 12/9. But
BBY = Before Battle of Yavin, so Rogue One and A New Hope are technically "zero," I guess. My understanding (again, from the articles I just skimmed) is that the timeline looks like this:
Phantom Menace -32 BBY
Attack of the Clones -22 BBY
Revenge of the Sith -19 BBY
Solo (intro) approx -14/-13 BBY
Solo (main story) approx - 11/10 BBY
Rebels (animated series) begins -5 BBY
Rogue One 0 BBY
A New Hope 0 BBY (establishes Battle of Yavin and new timeline)
Thus, Chewie may not LITERALLY be 190 in Solo or 200 in ANH, but he's close enough. If you've 202, does it really matter? :)
As for Han, his actual age has never been established, but he's about a decade older than Luke and Leia, who would be 19 during ANH, so let's call him 29 (a commonly accepted number, despite Ford being much older than that). That would make Solo roughly 19 during the main storyline and 16 during the intro. That seems to jibe storywise, even if Alden Ehrenreich (like Ford before him) is older than the
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME