Solo (young Han Solo film) spoilers from post 1493

pixelburp · 06-01-2018 11:52AM

Yeah, including the Kessel Run would steer things too deep into 'fan service' territory; as said above it was a passing bluff by Solo - and it only became as quoted as it was because of a science goof ('parsec' being a unit of length, not time, as Han seemed to imply in his boast).

At this stage though, with the film only 5 months away, I'm mostly a bit shocked there hasn't been a single teaser or trailer. 'Cos if there is a resting baseline of caution and pessimism towards this, it's nothing a (good!) trailer couldn't fix.

david75 · 06-01-2018 12:04PM

pixelburp wrote: »

Yeah, including the Kessel Run would steer things too deep into 'fan service' territory; as said above it was a passing bluff by Solo - and it only became as quoted as it was because of a science goof ('parsec' being a unit of length, not time, as Han seemed to imply in his boast).

At this stage though, with the film only 5 months away, I'm mostly a bit shocked there hasn't been a single teaser or trailer. 'Cos if there is a resting baseline of caution and pessimism towards this, it's nothing a (good!) trailer couldn't fix.

There’s a rumour there’s a trailer tomorrow during some sports thing in the US

dr.fuzzenstein · 06-01-2018 12:39PM

Tony EH wrote: »

So Lego has said that the Millennium Falcon in this thing is the
Kessel Run Millennium Falcon. So that's that.

Personally, I couldn't give a toss about the Kessel Run.

That's cause you can only do it in 14.

Tony EH · 06-01-2018 01:48PM

pixelburp wrote: »

Yeah, including the Kessel Run would steer things too deep into 'fan service' territory; as said above it was a passing bluff by Solo - and it only became as quoted as it was because of a science goof ('parsec' being a unit of length, not time, as Han seemed to imply in his boast).

At this stage though, with the film only 5 months away, I'm mostly a bit shocked there hasn't been a single teaser or trailer. 'Cos if there is a resting baseline of caution and pessimism towards this, it's nothing a (good!) trailer couldn't fix.

I don't bother looking at trailers as an indication of what a film will hold any more. The trailer for 'Rogue One' had stuff in it that wasn't in the film and the trailer for 'The Last Jedi' promised a much different (and better) film than we got.

Tony EH · 06-01-2018 01:50PM

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

That's cause you can only do it in 14.

pixelburp · 06-01-2018 02:09PM

Tony EH wrote: »

I don't bother looking at trailers as an indication of what a film will hold any more. The trailer for 'Rogue One' had stuff in it that wasn't in the film and the trailer for 'The Last Jedi' promised a much different (and better) film than we got.

I didn't say a trailer indicates a final films quality, hell they often dont even demonstrate the movies tone or genre, but a good trailer can build up hype and enthusiasm, two qualities scarcely in abundance ATM with this film. The reshoots probably didn't help, I imagine they put back the promotional schedule.

Tony EH · 06-01-2018 02:18PM

It can do. But I don't think they have that effect on me anymore. Far too often they give away too much and in the case of Star Wars recently are, in part or wholly, misleading.

'Solo' will still make a shedload, regardless of how bad it may be. Disney could have two hours of Jabba's band on screen people would still pay for a ticket and then make excuses for it.

I think the last truly good trailer I saw was for '10 Cloverfield Lane'. Didn't give anything away and actually made me want to see more.

FunLover18 · 06-01-2018 02:21PM

I will be very surprised if this does well financially. It will make its money back but it won't be a hit.

DrWu · 06-01-2018 02:30PM

FunLover18 wrote: »

I will be very surprised if this does well financially. It will make its money back but it won't be a hit.

Could be the first SW movie since 77 that I wont be seeing in the cinema. No big huffy protest or anything, I'm just not really interested in it.

pixelburp · 06-01-2018 02:38PM

Tony EH wrote: »

It can do. But I don't think they have that effect on me anymore. Far too often they give away too much and in the case of Star Wars recently are, in part or wholly, misleading.

'Solo' will still make a shedload, regardless of how bad it may be. Disney could have two hours of Jabba's band on screen people would still pay for a ticket and then make excuses for it.

I think the last truly good trailer I saw was for '10 Cloverfield Lane'. Didn't give anything away and actually made me want to see more.

Well that's great for you n all

but a trailer would still be a very potent tool in general for building goodwill, or at least in the immediate term, getting some semblance of what this film IS. Like, we've not even had a promotional still; lego toy sets have been the best indicator so far, which is bizarre by any stretch.

And sure, the film is likely to turn a profit, but honestly I don't think anyone doubts this - the question is not IF the film will turn a profit, but how much profit. In todays blockbuster landscape you need to basically earn all the money to be considered a success. That must go double for star was films.

david75 · 06-01-2018 04:21PM

It’s up against serious summer blockbuster competition (new avengers I think?) but some movie podcasts I listen to are saying if Howard’s knocked it into a good shape (he reshot 80% of it) it’ll be one of the biggest of the summer.
I’ve nothing like as much interest in standalones as the saga films but I’ll give it a spin.

It’s all lying heavily on Erinreichs shoulders. If he’s likeable and believeable everything else should fall into place.

Acosta · 06-01-2018 05:30PM

Tony EH wrote: »

Perhaps. I still couldn't care less though. The Kessel Run was an off the cuff bluff by Solo to indicate that the Falcon was a fast ship.

I simply don't need to know anything more. Nor do I want to.

#notmyfalcon

#notmysolo

#notmylando

#notmystarwars

:pac:

Yeah, I do fear a lot of the focus of this movie will be basically be references to a couple of sentences in the script for Star Wars and Empire.

This is good, and funny, if you haven't already watched it.

Tony EH wrote: »

I don't bother looking at trailers as an indication of what a film will hold any more. The trailer for 'Rogue One' had stuff in it that wasn't in the film and the trailer for 'The Last Jedi' promised a much different (and better) film than we got.

I remember there being at least one Rogue One trailer that had almost no visuals or dialogue that ended up in the movie.

Tony EH · 06-01-2018 07:26PM

Yeh, saw that RLM vid a while back. They're probably and lamentable correct about some of those things they talk about.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Han Solo's life condensed into 90 minutes (probably 120).

Eck.

david75 · 06-01-2018 08:52PM

One things for sure, this script is gonna be a lot thinner.

Eh? Ehh?

Tony EH · 06-01-2018 08:55PM

david75 wrote: »

One things for sure, this script is gonna be a lot thinner.

Eh? Ehh?

david75 · 06-01-2018 08:58PM

Cue bloated script jabba jokes once we see it

david75 · 07-01-2018 11:07PM

Han and chewie and Lando legos

SuperSean11 · 07-01-2018 11:09PM

Who wouldn’t prefer a young jar-jar-binks film?

david75 · 08-01-2018 01:31PM

https://twitter.com/realronhoward/status/950247326936788992

Drumpot · 08-01-2018 01:47PM

david75 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/realronhoward/status/950247326936788992

In all fairness, Ron Howard knows how to make a good movie so I expect this to be a good one.

In saying that, I have little interest in this movie, but I will go an see it because there are some movies that are made for cinema. Also, my children will enjoy it so I would be mad to pass off the opportunity to get the chance to take them to something like this that I will prob enjoy.

A star Wars movie is made to be seen on the big screen, if you have any interest in ever watching it, its madness to get the hump, judge it before you have seen it (or based on other peoples reviews) because you wont get the chance again to see it the way it was meant to be seen.

david75 · 08-01-2018 01:52PM

Drumpot wrote: »

In all fairness, Ron Howard knows how to make a good movie so I expect this to be a good one.

In saying that, I have little interest in this movie, but I will go an see it because there are some movies that are made for cinema. Also, my children will enjoy it so I would be mad to pass off the opportunity to get the chance to take them to something like this that I will prob enjoy.

A star Wars movie is made to be seen on the big screen, if you have any interest in ever watching it, its madness to get the hump, judge it before you have seen it (or based on other peoples reviews) because you wont get the chance again to see it the way it was meant to be seen.

There are a lot of people gifted with clairvoyance who seem to know these films will be terrible before they’ve seen them and double down on that once they have:)
I’m expecting nothing from this one so it’s no loss if its bad(it won’t be) and a great addition to Star Wars if it’s good.

eviltimeban · 08-01-2018 02:01PM

Drumpot wrote: »

In all fairness, Ron Howard knows how to make a good movie so I expect this to be a good one.

He can also make critically derided ones (The Da Vinci Code) and flops (In the Heart of the Sea).

Tony EH · 08-01-2018 02:15PM

Yeh, Howard is pretty hit or miss in fairness.

On the plus side, he seems like a genuine enough fella.

Whether that's enough for a good Star Wars film remains to be seen.

FunLover18 · 08-01-2018 02:31PM

eviltimeban wrote: »

Drumpot wrote: »

In all fairness, Ron Howard knows how to make a good movie so I expect this to be a good one.

He can also make critically derided ones (The Da Vinci Code) and flops (In the Heart of the Sea).

I don't really know what point you're trying to make; a movie flopping doesn't always indicate quality, both It's a Wonderful Life and Shawshank Redemption flopped, no classics. More recently Bladerunner 2049 flopped yet was critically acclaimed. Whereas the critically derided Da Vinci Code made enough to warrant two sequels.

TerrorFirmer · 08-01-2018 03:03PM

eviltimeban wrote: »

He can also make critically derided ones (The Da Vinci Code) and flops (In the Heart of the Sea).

Did badly at the box office but I thought In the Heart of the Sea was quite good. Certainly wouldn't call it anything close to a bad film.

eviltimeban · 08-01-2018 03:22PM

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

Did badly at the box office but I thought In the Heart of the Sea was quite good. Certainly wouldn't call it anything close to a bad film.

Didn't comment on the quality of those films, I quite like the Da Vinci Code. And Rush was good.

Just saying, he can make good films, critically derided films, and flops.

Whatever you want to take from that. Hit and miss seems to sum it up.

I do feel his movies are generally very much designed to appeal to the masses, so he's never going to rock any boat particularly hard, or challenge too many brain cells.

What that means for the Solo movie is, it'll probably be a good, enjoyable movie, but no one's gonna come out of it thinking "Wow, I never expected that!"

His movies are very "American", if you know what I mean. The sentiment behind that.

Wibbs · 08-01-2018 10:48PM

There's a part of me likes the internal connections going on. That Ron was in American Graffiti written and directed by George and then cemented his acting fame with the TV version that was Happy Days and now he comes back to helm a flic in the universe started by George.

IMH he's a good director and can be a bloody good one at times. I like that he's "hit and miss", that for me often suggests someone who actually tries to bring a story to the screen. Not easy and can be hit and miss. Yes he can often play to the American Home team in his stuff, but that's him and he doesn't try to make apologies for it and try to ape new wave or whatever is fashionable. Again for me he's one of those "old fashioned" Hollywood directors. You could have dropped Ron into the studio setup of the 1930's and he'd have been able to work.

However this Solo flic turns out, bad or good, IMHO it'll be better for having Ron behind the lens

S.M.B. · 08-01-2018 11:04PM

Looking at his filmography I'm surprised with how average it all feels to me.

I'd take hip new trendy director over safe hands Ron Howard any day of the week.

Sad Professor · 09-01-2018 12:30PM

Howard is a very good director but the kind of mid-budget movies he makes aren't really made anymore. He was never top of the list anyway and now he only gets the dregs of whatever does get made. And he was never really a writer, so his ability to develop his own projects is limited. Most of his ilk have given up and switched to tv but he's managed to hang in there.

uncleoswald · 09-01-2018 06:31PM

david75 wrote: »

There are a lot of people gifted with clairvoyance who seem to know these films will be terrible before they’ve seen them and double down on that once they have:)
I’m expecting nothing from this one so it’s no loss if its bad(it won’t be) and a great addition to Star Wars if it’s good.

Are you one of these clairvoyant people you speak of?

And you are expecting it not to be bad

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

Comments

Solo (young Han Solo film) spoilers from post 1493