STAR WARS ANTHOLOGY: HAN SOLO (5/25/18) 0

[Larryw7]

I watched it on Blu-ray the other night, now I wish I would have seen it theatrically. This and Rogue One are the highlights of the Disney SW era so far.

[RedRaven]

Just saw this for the first time on Amazon 4k. I really went into this with an open mind ready to enjoy a fun space western. What a disappointment. The story is so damn lazy and consists of nothing but shoehorned narratives, macguffins, and deus ex machina moments that I ended up feeling insulted. How stupid do the film-makers consider their audience? Maybe if I was high or blind drunk I could overlook this monumental piece of absurd story telling. It's a shame. I actually liked the actors portrayal of young Han. So friggin done with the Star Wars universe.

 

Edited to add: Will probably give Star Wars one more chance with JJ Abrams's next installment.

Edited October 21, 2018 by RedRaven

[theCapraAegagrus]

On 10/20/2018 at 6:53 PM, RedRaven said:

Just saw this for the first time on Amazon 4k. I really went into this with an open mind ready to enjoy a fun space western. What a disappointment. The story is so damn lazy and consists of nothing but shoehorned narratives, macguffins, and deus ex machina moments that I ended up feeling insulted. How stupid do the film-makers consider their audience? Maybe if I was high or blind drunk I could overlook this monumental piece of absurd story telling. It's a shame. I actually liked the actors portrayal of young Han. So friggin done with the Star Wars universe.

 

Edited to add: Will probably give Star Wars one more chance with JJ Abrams's next installment.

Aaaaaaaand this is why it struggled (in addition to the Episode VIII backlash).

While many people I know say it was "somewhat enjoyable", they also said that it spits in the faces of its audience, while turning "nothings" (really, the dice prop means something now..?) into "somethings" in place of actual storytelling.

I'll see it for free on TV/Netflix some day. And, for the billionth time, Abrams being at the helm of Episode IX will bring me to theaters to see that one once or twice, at minimum.

[fantastic_four]

On 10/20/2018 at 6:53 PM, RedRaven said:

Just saw this for the first time on Amazon 4k.

What platform did you use to watch it on 4K from Amazon?  I've found it to be a confusing maze of surprisingly steep technical hurdles to actually watch anything in 4K via streaming from either Netflix or Amazon.  I can't do it at all from my computer, only from my XBox.

[RedRaven]

Just now, fantastic_four said:

What platform did you use to watch it on 4K from Amazon?  I've found it to be a confusing maze of surprisingly steep technical hurdles to actually watch anything in 4K via streaming from either Netflix or Amazon.  I can't do it at all from my computer, only from my XBox.

Its a 4k Amazon Fire TV I picked up on Prime Day.

[fastballspecial]

I thought the movie was decent nothing special. Rogue One is still the only new film I have liked.
I didn't think it really did anything bad maybe it just failed to bring more SW material, but I liked 
the appearance at the end.

It seems to suffer from the same problem John Carter did.

 

Edited November 24, 2018 by fastballspecial

[NewEnglandGothic]

34 minutes ago, fastballspecial said:

It seems to suffer from the same problem John Carter did.

Yeah, promising the good stuff down the road.

[theCapraAegagrus]

I saw that this is on Netflix, Saturday, so I watched it.

I got bored 20 minutes in. It was not good.

Some lore is great for its mystery and doesn't need to be explained (Kessel Run). Other krap that didn't exist in the original trilogy can't really be added without alienating that story (speaking 'Wookie', stupid lucky prop dice).

That droid is literally the opposite of K2S0 and was a completely worthless inclusion to this.

The difference between this whoop-diddy scoop poop, and Rogue One, is that the latter provided a story that mattered to the original trilogy. Many people thought that the opening to the Death Star was a huge plot hole. I'm not big on Rogue One, but it serves a purpose. Solo does nothing to capitalize on a dead character. It wasn't even fun for me. Isn't Chewy close to 1k lbs? How can a 150 lb Han Solo hold onto him..? Easily 1/5.

[Gatsby77]

I saw this recently via a $2.00 Redbox rental.

And I'm conflicted, because it was fun, but it was also thoroughly mediocre.

So the question is...am I (and Star Wars fans generally) okay with fun but mediocre/unnecessary (but still official) Star Wars films?

All the other films -- including Rogue One -- were epic events where as this one seemed inconsequential and borderline forgettable. The question is whether a series of films like this are okay?

I think I'm okay with this. It's brand dilution, but at the end of the day I'd prefer the option of more Star Wars films to less, even if there are some minor / bad entries.

The flip side is Disney needs to be okay with this as well -- spending $200-$400 million on films that might only gross $500-$700 million worldwide, rather than expecting that *every* film has to gross $900 million + just because you slap the "Star Wars" brand on it.

I honestly think that it'd be better for the franchise to embrace that not every Star Wars film needs to be an amazing *event,* -- something that Marvel has proven they understand. Yes - we get epics like Infinity War; but we also get throwaways like Ant-Man and the Iron Fist TV show.

 

 

 

[awakeintheashes]

27 minutes ago, Gatsby77 said:

I saw this recently via a $2.00 Redbox rental.

And I'm conflicted, because it was fun, but it was also thoroughly mediocre.

So the question is...am I (and Star Wars fans generally) okay with fun but mediocre/unnecessary (but still official) Star Wars films?

All the other films -- including Rogue One -- were epic events where as this one seemed inconsequential and borderline forgettable. The question is whether a series of films like this are okay?

I think I'm okay with this. It's brand dilution, but at the end of the day I'd prefer the option of more Star Wars films to less, even if there are some minor / bad entries.

The flip side is Disney needs to be okay with this as well -- spending $200-$400 million on films that might only gross $500-$700 million worldwide, rather than expecting that *every* film has to gross $900 million + just because you slap the "Star Wars" brand on it.

I honestly think that it'd be better for the franchise to embrace that not every Star Wars film needs to be an amazing *event,* -- something that Marvel has proven they understand. Yes - we get epics like Infinity War; but we also get throwaways like Ant-Man and the Iron Fist TV show.

 

 

 

I see what your saying. My issue with Solo is that, honestly, he's not that compelling of a character, and his backstory, as it's portrayed, does nothing to tie into what's happening in the larger universe or further any narrative. Sure, there is that small cameo, which is more of a "wink and a nod" to Clone Wars and Rebels Fans than anything. A lot could have been done with that character, and could have been a nice set up to a potential Obi-Wan movie. 

Solo takes place in between Revenge of the Sith and Rebels, so there is a lot going on. The movie could have benefited from recognizing this and portraying it. 

I understand why Disney decided to do this movie, because well, people liked Han in the OT, so monies! But, that couldn't even save this movie.

Edited January 22, 2019 by awakeintheashes

[theCapraAegagrus]

15 hours ago, Gatsby77 said:

I saw this recently via a $2.00 Redbox rental.

And I'm conflicted, because it was fun, but it was also thoroughly mediocre.

So the question is...am I (and Star Wars fans generally) okay with fun but mediocre/unnecessary (but still official) Star Wars films?

All the other films -- including Rogue One -- were epic events where as this one seemed inconsequential and borderline forgettable. The question is whether a series of films like this are okay?

I think I'm okay with this. It's brand dilution, but at the end of the day I'd prefer the option of more Star Wars films to less, even if there are some minor / bad entries.

The flip side is Disney needs to be okay with this as well -- spending $200-$400 million on films that might only gross $500-$700 million worldwide, rather than expecting that *every* film has to gross $900 million + just because you slap the "Star Wars" brand on it.

I honestly think that it'd be better for the franchise to embrace that not every Star Wars film needs to be an amazing *event,* -- something that Marvel has proven they understand. Yes - we get epics like Infinity War; but we also get throwaways like Ant-Man and the Iron Fist TV show.

I agree with your notion that Disney needs to be okay with Star Wars movies not grossing a billion dollars, but...

They need to produce films that are more than just "fun" with a Star Wars label. As I mentioned in my post, despite not caring too much for Rogue One, its story serves a purpose and it is a good movie. Han's backstory here does nothing other than give meaning to things that don't have meaning from the original trilogy.

I think I've also mentioned here, that opposed to doing a Fett movie, they should do a Bounty Hunters movie. Give fans a reason to understand why Fett is the best. Why does Vader only call those specific guys to hunt down Han in Episode V? Stories like that add to the Star Wars name. Movies like Solo do not.

[awakeintheashes]

1 hour ago, TwoPiece said:

I agree with your notion that Disney needs to be okay with Star Wars movies not grossing a billion dollars, but...

They need to produce films that are more than just "fun" with a Star Wars label. As I mentioned in my post, despite not caring too much for Rogue One, its story serves a purpose and it is a good movie. Han's backstory here does nothing other than give meaning to things that don't have meaning from the original trilogy.

I think I've also mentioned here, that opposed to doing a Fett movie, they should do a Bounty Hunters movie. Give fans a reason to understand why Fett is the best. Why does Vader only call those specific guys to hunt down Han in Episode V? Stories like that add to the Star Wars name. Movies like Solo do not.

A bounty hunters movie wouldn't be a bad idea. The Clone Wars series does a nice job of giving Boba Fett a back story and builds on many of the bounty hunters we see in the OT, as well as Fett's relationship to them. There is a lot that happened between Clone Wars and Empire Strikes Back, it'd be cool to see what they were up to. 

The Mandalorian show that Disney is putting out is something I am looking forward to. Mandalor is an important place in the Star Wars Universe and its politics. If done right, you'll have plenty of opportunity to tell the stories of some interesting and important characters and delve into Fett's lineage if you wanted. 

[media_junkie]

I tried to watch it on netflix, made it 20 to 30 minutes in, it sucked so I turned it off.  Between The Last Jedi and Solo disney/lucasfilm has killed any desire for me to ever watch a new Star Wars film again.

Edited January 23, 2019 by media_junkie

[bane]

I also turned it off after an hour, thought it was boring.

[Foley]

Just curious if another TLJ thread was started after the old one was locked? Figured this is as good a place as any to ask.

[Bosco685]

Quote

While Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker is coming up in December, director Ron Howard is calling out trolls as a reason for Solo‘s poor box office returns.

 

Solo: A Star Wars Story director Ron Howard hit success in his personal career with Solo, but it was a disappointment for the Star Wars franchise and he’s well aware. While many fans loved it, Solo only made $392 million at the worldwide box office.

 

Earlier this week, Ron Howard was a guest on the Happy Sad Confused Podcast and discussed Solo‘s disappointing box office returns. He brought up the notion of core Star Wars fans vs. “tagalong” or casual fans, who wait for the movie to become popular before seeing it. These fans want to see the buzz and word-of-mouth popularity before seeing the movie. Howard told host Josh Horowitz the following:

 

“I feel very good about the way it turned out. I love the way it played to audiences, which I witnessed and was a part of. So all of that I’m able to feel good about. Sure, I wish it would’ve done [better] and lived up to the box office and so forth, so that’s disappointing. Why? Maybe it’s the release. Maybe it’s the idea that it’s sort of too nostalgic, going back and revisiting an origin story for a beloved character may not be what the fans were looking for. It kind of seemed to me, looking at it, the opening — which was big, not as big as the others, it was probably my biggest opening, personally, it was still disappointing to them — I think those are the hardcore fans. It sort of tells you how many people are tagalongs who need to wait to see what people think and whether it’s essential, if it’s a zeitgeist movie or not, and whether it’s just ‘I love Star Wars and I want to see what’s next.”

 

[mattn792]

Get over yourself Opie.

[theCapraAegagrus]

The Last Jedi blowing , and Solo itself being mediocre/bad, are the reasons for its box office success (or lack thereof).

All of the Han Solo fans I know of were really disappointed in the movie. It's not downright awful but it doesn't have many redeeming qualities. All of this regarding a dead character, too. It doesn't have much going for it.

[Bosco685]

30 minutes ago, TwoPiece said:

All of the Han Solo fans I know of were really disappointed in the movie. It's not downright awful but it doesn't have many redeeming qualities. All of this regarding a dead character, too. It doesn't have much going for it.

I've actually never watched this movie. Maybe sometime in the future when I get a free Redbox offer I'll take the plunge.

[theCapraAegagrus]

5 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

I've actually never watched this movie. Maybe sometime in the future when I get a free Redbox offer I'll take the plunge.

No Netflix? They put it up there a while ago.