Solo (young Han Solo film) *spoilers from post 1493*

Why does it have to be?

Sure, he can be sarcastic etc and the chemistry between him and Chewbacca is entertaining - however, if it's present here, it'll be largely unearned, assuming that the film is going to cover their meeting.

But, if we're going down the '21 Jump Street' route, I'll end up not giving a **** what happens to him in the film, cos the characters won't, as is the usual problem with light hearted films.

In the end, I suppose I'm just sick of that approach. The frivolity of 'Guardians of the Galaxy' was enough to make me not care that it was over. It ended up just being some meh ride, that I couldn't have cared less about when the credits rolled.

When a Star Wars film ends I want to feel that I've experienced something other than a simple passing of two hours where I didn't really give a damn what happened or where the story went. I've had that so far with all of them, except the prequels.

The most difficult part of creating the spin-off stories for SW, IMO, is the emotion attached to it, which stems directly from the original trilogy. The writers, directors, actors have the tricky task of satisfying people's needs for nostalgia, whilst offering a new enjoyable experience.

It's a difficult balance to cater to everyone's tastes. Too much of one, and the movie becomes a rehash or trip down memory lane. Too much of the other, and it'd be regarded as "not being a Star Wars movie."

By the sounds of it, some people are expecting Bladerunner 2 in disguise. We'll, most likely, get the buddy-angle of Han and Chewy, plenty of sarcastic one-liners, as well as the story of how the Falcon was acquired from Lando. Alongside fun action pieces, like the Kessel Run. And, being honest, I'd be happy enough with that from a Han Solo movie.

david75 wrote: »

Wow.
There's nothing but canon. Loads of it. And there definitely is a plan. Episode 8 is all but finished and is being scored and edited right now. It's finished. Production on Han has just begun. Comical to suggest Disney are being scatter brained and don't know what they're doing

That's not what I said.

My point is that there's no timeline structure. It's flip flopping all over the place. The very fact that we're getting a Han Solo film when Ford is too old to play the character in a story that takes place before he even stepped into the shoes of Solo just smacks of not of flip flop. It just shouldn't be done, especially when there are millions of Star Wars stories to be told.

In any case, I think Disney want to get rid of the trilogy concept of Star Wars and just focus on their own "stories" and thus allow them all the one shot pictures til we're all blue in the face, sick of Star Wars or we're dead.

Also, on canon...my point is is that it's meaningless if it's not going to be adhered to. Disney jettisoning 30+ years of canon shows that they just want their own playground. This has a good effect to in that it got rid of the 90% of canon bullshit that stank up Star Wars for years. But it also means the nothing really means anything either. I've never liked this king of comic book approach where the entire past of a character or series can be just destroyed in a Year Zero and we all start again. That's just bollocks. Why should anyone care about any stories if they can all be eliminated? Marvel and DC are more guilty than Disney, let me be clear on that. But it's also clear that Disney are going for a Marvel Cinematic Universe approach to their Star Wars IP as well and I don't really want to see Star Wars go down that route. They've handled it ok so far, with one alright film and one great one. But this Han Solo film and the much mooted Boba Fett one just sends shivers up my spine.

david75 wrote: »

Tony you sound really jaded If I may say. It's not high minded art. It's Star Wars. Fast paced action adventure with loveable characters on the surface is all it has to be. And a whole word of back story and canon if you want to dive in. I'll agree with you if this turns out to be awful?
I was hard on rogue one is it wasn't 'my kind of Star wars' but I can't deny it was a really great movie that looked gorgeous and added to the story. If it failed it was in the lie that it was a standalone when clearly you needed to at least now a little about Star Wars for it to work. It'll be the same here.

I am jaded. I've been around since the beginning and I've been burnt as well as elated. I know what Star Wars is and what it can be. I also know the depths it can sink to. I also know that most modern cinema is entirely meh and the Marvel approach is insipid, souless and tasteless. I don't want to see Star Wars go that way.

Also, there's a lot more to the original films than just "Fast paced action adventure with loveable characters" and Star Wars doesn't just have to be that. There's plenty of drama and weight going on if one wants to go beneath the mere surface. That's what made the original films so compelling and what makes them so today.

Agree with 'Rogue One' in that it was never really a standalone in the truest sense. Especially when it leads directly into the 1977 film. I think the "standalone" thing was to indicate that Disney wasn't making another trilogy of films, but it was just bad marketing IMO. However, this is wholly indicative of the scattershot approach that denartha was talking about. Loads of people thought that 'Rogue One' was a continuation of 'The Force Awakens' or thought that it was going to be Bothans stealing plans for Death Star II. It looks to people who aren't clued in that Disney are just making any old thing at any old point, regardless of the story the told before. This kind of "what's going on" is going to raise its head when you have sequels, prequels and episode X.5 or whatever.

david75 wrote: »

There's nothing whatsoever wrong with this being a buddy cop action / western kinda flick. Han Solo is a wise ass. His background is sighing and shady underworld. Star Wars would die if these films just were stuck in one genre doing one thing like all the comic book movies seem to do. They're trying to branch out. Give em a chance to see if they can do it.

Yes, Solo is a sarky character and part of a great on screen duo. But, if the film is merely a series of comic one liners and frivolous set pieces, people aren't going to care. In the original trilogy, Solo was a dangerous and dodgy individual. Cynical, lawless and murderous, but happened to get involved in a good deed, through no fault of his own and ended up with a redemption of sorts*. In 'The Empire Strikes Back' he arguably has one of the most dramatic scenes in the entire series. His story has weight. There's a drama to his arc.

That to me is Star Wars.

If this thing is going where I think it's going, there'll be no umph to anything that happens. It'll be wisecracks gallore, the characters won't care what happens to them and subsequently, neither will I.



*Which makes his return to smuggling in 'The Force Awakens' seem even more stupid and makes Abrams decision to return him to that occupation suspicious. It's like hey, this is what Han Solo was in the original film right!!!

The first line spoken in TFA is 'this will begin to make things right', a subltle but direct message from the studio to the fans in response to fans concerns regarding Disney taking the helm. So far they've lived up to that promise, so they deserve the benefit of the doubt for the Han Solo movie.

I can't believe Disney would go to so much trouble to get Star Wars back on track to then just throw it all away with an ill-conceived Han Solo origin movie. Rather, if this movie works, it throws open the possibility of also recasting Luke and Leia etc for new movies set over the 30 years between ROTJ and TFA. You could have Thrawn trilogy movies etc.

Wedwood wrote: »

The first line spoken in TFA is 'this will begin to make things right', a subltle but direct message from the studio to the fans in response to fans concerns regarding Disney taking the helm. So far they've lived up to that promise, so they deserve the benefit of the doubt for the Han Solo movie.

I can't believe Disney would go to so much trouble to get Star Wars back on track to then just throw it all away with an ill-conceived Han Solo origin movie. Rather, if this movie works, it throws open the possibility of also recasting Luke and Leia etc for new movies set over the 30 years between ROTJ and TFA. You could have Thrawn trilogy movies etc.

Ugh....*shudder*.

I had only one hope for this movie ....not a new hope . That they would just finish in the bar from Episode 4.
I am just getting the feeling they are going to try and do a series of "Solo" movies and I think this is a really bad Idea.

Emilia Clarke . I am sorry she is not a good actress .riding a wave of Thrones fandom but Genisys proved she has a fairly limited range............and yes I know I cannot act sing or dance but she is pretty poor.

Joeface wrote: »

I had only one hope for this movie ....not a new hope . That they would just finish in the bar from Episode 4.

I think that would have been a very bad idea. Essentially what you get is Han Solo walking into the cantina as Alden Ehrenreich and sitting at the table as Harrison Ford. The Han Solo trilogy books end this way and they're pretty well received, but I couldn't see this working out as film or a film series.

Joeface wrote: »

I am just getting the feeling they are going to try and do a series of "Solo" movies and I think this is a really bad Idea.

Yeh, I get what you mean. But I think it's more to do with setting up the ground for cheap origin stories and not necessarily just to facilitate a series of Han Solo films.

Look at the Marvel film stuff. Nearly everything is an origin story, with an insipid secondary avenue tacked on, featuring a boring subplot, quipy dialogue, weak enemies, zero drama and no tension. It's all lighthearted, popcorn, bullshit that's the cinematic equivalent of a big mac and if people stopped for a second and actually analysed what it was they were consuming they'd be pretty loath to put too much of that into they're system.

But, it makes money.

I fear that's what Disney want to turn Star Wars into and I also fear that there are legions of people out there that will lap it up, unfortunately.

Joeface wrote: »

My hope was that if it just ended there , they would avoid what happened say Wolverine ..........3 movies of absolutely wasted opportunity ( Maybe logan gets it right). all this to personal choice thing. I just don't want them trying to over write something or stretch thin in to 4 movies of sub par .

The Star Wars Universe in Disney's hands is not looking to fall anywhere near as badly as the X-Men universe did in the hands of Fox. They didn't treat it well and picked hacks left, right and center to deal with any way to try make a quick dollar off someone like Wolverine on his own. They never cared about an overall picture and shot themselves in the foot, although by all accounts Logan finally gets the solo treatment right:).

I can't see Disney botching it up in the same way. There is no going back, rebooting or remaking it. The only reboots here will be in the form of brand new Jedi and Sith stories, not alternate time lines ala Star Trek and X-Men.

If the Han Solo movie works our well and pleases fans then I don't see a problem in them taking on further adventures of pre-ANH Solo as standalone adventures.

thegreengoblin wrote: »

Was going to post this and you're right. It works perfectly well in the books because in your mind you're imagining Harrison Ford. I loved that trilogy, reckon I'll give it another read before the film comes and see if anything made it in.

As far as their physical likeness to each other goes, I think Alden Ehrenreich is a ringer for 'A New Hope' Harrison Ford...that cheeky grin, a glint in the eye. Time will tell!

Hmmm...You're talking to the guy who saw Star Wars and came out wanting to be Han Solo, so replacing Ford is going to be nigh on impossible for me.

However, I'll gladly eat my words if this thing turns out good and I'll give it a fair shake despite my reservations. I was pleasantly surprised with 'Rogue One' after my middling response to 'The Force Awakens', so I'll be happy if it's good.

I really, really, dislike recasts, though, and the problem with this film doing well is that it'll give Disney licence to recast everyone. What we'll end up with then is something akin to a Batman or Spiderman situation, where nobody knows who the hell is going to play who and in the end the character becomes meaningless.

Also, Star Wars is vast. Christ sake, make a story about somebody else.

thegreengoblin wrote: »

It was the same for me and countless others. I could never look at Harrison Ford again without wondering where his blaster was or if Chewie was hovering nearby. Ford is Han Solo and always will be, regardless of the new film.

But I don't think Disney will keep recasting old characters. That's based on little more than a hunch so I could well be wrong. I think they've done a very credible job so far. I have some minor misgivings about the two films they've done but then I think about the prequels (your favourite subject!) and I'm just thankful that we are where we are.

Ah, the prequels eh...ya wanna talk prequels... :P

Tony EH wrote: »

Ah, the prequels eh...ya wanna talk prequels... :P

No I don't...never again :pac:

Sad Professor wrote:

The directors, Miller and Lord, have either quit or been sacked due to creative differences with LucasFilm/Disney. Another soon to be announced director will complete the remaining few weeks of shooting with (presumedly extensive) reshoots to follow.

Filming since January, only 3 weeks left. What a 'mare!!