Solo (young Han Solo film) spoilers from post 1493

radonicus · 11-01-2018 05:59PM

david75 wrote: »

It doesn’t look like the majority of those who were disappointed by TLJ are even going to see Solo, if comments sections on numerous Star Wars fb pages are anything to go by. Looks like they’ve all quit Star Wars for good.

They say that now.

radonicus · 11-01-2018 06:00PM

pixelburp wrote: »

True, Han Solo's return in TFA was somewhat undermined by the old-man running / tottering that Abrams did his best in concealing. The scene when the tentacle monster got loose was particularly silly; Ford's obvious slowness at odds with this flailing, lightning fast creature

I did enjoy his Indiana Jones-esque punching a guy on the run moment.

pixelburp · 11-01-2018 06:06PM

david75 wrote: »

He had just broken his leg on set and he’s in his 70s in fairness.

I thought he was pure Han. Really thought We were gonna get bored grumpy Harrison ford which is what he’s been doing the last 15 years. But he was Han and really delivered imo.

That's kinda the point though; arguably he was way past his prime to be playing Solo. No one wants to see him play Indiana Jones again for that reason, and TFA kinnnnda proved that in places...

To be fair to him, and I've openly questioned his professionalism on this forum, he turned in a good performance both here and his other genre return (Blade Runner 2049), but at least the latter cut its cloth based on Ford's age. Deckard was a man in retirement & hiding, the narrative didn't try to wedge him into action.

david75 · 11-01-2018 06:12PM

pixelburp wrote: »

That's kinda the point though; arguably he was way past his prime to be playing Solo. No one wants to see him play Indiana Jones again for that reason, and TFA kinnnnda proved that in places...

To be fair to him, and I've openly questioned his professionalism on this forum, he turned in a good performance both here and his other genre return (Blade Runner 2049), but at least the latter cut its cloth based on Ford's age. Deckard was a man in retirement & hiding, the narrative didn't try to wedge him into action.

That’s true. But in universe he’s back smuggling and being a scoundrel. He’s not really the quiet retirement feet up type

(Still haven’t seen the new blade runnner. Must change that)

david75 · 11-01-2018 06:15PM

radonicus wrote: »

They say that now.

This is the bit that kills me. If you’re done with Star Wars after the last Jedi, well be done with it. Maybe the OT is all you need? But the preparing to hate something before you’ve even seen it? I’ll never ever understand that. It’s almost like it’s being done in order to lay a foundation and come back after release *just* to complain about it. It’s toxic and all over the place in Star Wars fandom. If it can be called fandom anymore.

salmocab · 11-01-2018 06:25PM

Have to say I’m not in love with the idea of the young Han movie, I prefer the rogue one approach of all new characters with a bit of a link to stories we already know. That said I’ll obviously be going. Think back stories might have the ability to ruin a character for me, especially in Hans case where I’d hope he’s not just a bit of a rogue and a lad but might have a bit of a dark dickish streak maybe slightly nasty

Falthyron · 11-01-2018 06:26PM

One thing is for sure, Han won't be the one to shoot first in any scenes. :pac:

Just on that note, I would love to see Lucas' contract with Disney when he sold them LucasFilm. I wonder if he wanted certain clauses added to the contract like: 'Han didn't shoot first', or 'Hayden Christensen is the real Anakin Skywalker, no Sebastian Shaw', where Disney aren't allowed to change certain things, post-buy-out.

david75 · 11-01-2018 07:36PM

Falthyron wrote: »

One thing is for sure, Han won't be the one to shoot first in any scenes. :pac:

Just on that note, I would love to see Lucas' contract with Disney when he sold them LucasFilm. I wonder if he wanted certain clauses added to the contract like: 'Han didn't shoot first', or 'Hayden Christensen is the real Anakin Skywalker, no Sebastian Shaw', where Disney aren't allowed to change certain things, post-buy-out.

There is a totally unsubstantiated rumour that there’s a clause saying they can’t redo the OT or the prequels but that sounds like BS to me. I’d say it’s a matter of time before they redo both. Well all he Old when it happens but I can deffo see it happening.

Drumpot · 11-01-2018 08:05PM

david75 wrote: »

There is a totally unsubstantiated rumour that there’s a clause saying they can’t redo the OT or the prequels but that sounds like BS to me. I’d say it’s a matter of time before they redo both. Well all he Old when it happens but I can deffo see it happening.

Redo the the originals? Why? There’s a massive universe and thousands of years of mythical stuff to explore.

david75 · 11-01-2018 08:10PM

Drumpot wrote: »

Redo the the originals? Why? There’s a massive universe and thousands of years of mythical stuff to explore.

Ever tried to show the OT to a younger person? It looks badly dated and doesn’t always hold their attention. It looks crap set against the marvel big effects films this generation have grown up with. Disney will someday want to update it and make it with the modern technology of the day.

Drumpot · 11-01-2018 08:16PM

david75 wrote: »

Ever tried to show the OT to a younger person? It looks badly dated and doesn’t always hold their attention. It looks crap set against the marvel big effects films this generation have grown up with. Disney will someday want to update it and make it with the modern technology of the day.

My kids actually enjoy the originals! But Surely that’s a good while away? They haven’t even finished episode 9! Unless they reboot immediately after using our new Han Solo !

david75 · 11-01-2018 08:20PM

Drumpot wrote: »

My kids actually enjoy the originals! But Surely that’s a good while away? They haven’t even finished episode 9! Unless they reboot immediately after using our new Han Solo !

Smaller kids ah yeah. R2 alone in ANH is a magnet for the eyes of smaller kids.
Tweens and up though, they often find it boring. Little horrors

11-01-2018 08:55PM

david75 wrote:

Ever tried to show the OT to a younger person? It looks badly dated and doesnâ€™t always hold their attention. It looks crap set against the marvel big effects films this generation have grown up with. Disney will someday want to update it and make it with the modern technology of the day.

Don't buy that for a second. The Star Wars films are dated in some areas but at least they look like films unlike Marvel films which are the cinematic equivalent of watching someone play a video game. My brother is 10 and loves the original films, that have a charm that few modern Blockbusters do.

david75 · 11-01-2018 09:02PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Don't buy that for a second. The Star Wars films are dated in some areas but at least they look like films unlike Marvel films which are the cinematic equivalent of watching someone play a video game. My brother is 10 and loves the original films, that have a charm that few modern Blockbusters do.

Not all of them for sure, but it’s easily as many aren’t into it as are into it.

—* there’s an entire generation out there that love the prequels. That’s their Star Wars. And they look at the OT with the same withering view we do the prequels.

Tony EH · 12-01-2018 09:53AM

david75 wrote: »

Thos inconsistencies have always been there though particularly with force users. Obi wan v grievous is a good example.

Oh...so you wanna talk prequels eh...eh!!!!

Seriously, quoting inconsistencies in the prequels to someone who doesn't even count them as part of the Star Wars story is a non-starter Dave.

david75 wrote: »

Luke in ROTJ is the most glaring one. The skiff battle should have been luke just despatching them all easily with a wave of his hand. We saw him just a few scenes before disabling two guards with a force choke.

You COULD say though, they choking two simple minded Gamorrean guards would be a fairly easy task, compared to the more complex situation facing Luke during the fight over the Sarlacc.

That comparison doesn't really work.

eviltimeban · 12-01-2018 09:57AM

david75 wrote: »

I thought he was pure Han. Really thought We were gonna get bored grumpy Harrison ford which is what he’s been doing the last 15 years. But he was Han and really delivered imo.

For me, he WAS bored and grumpy Harrison Ford. Just like he was in The Crystal Skull. Even his voice was too low and gravelly all the time. There was only one "C'mon Chewie!" in the whole movie!

He spoke to slowly and with very little Solo-sass.

What struck me about TLJ (really more upon second viewing) is how much I'm buying Hamill as an older Luke. Much more than I bought Ford as an older Solo. Hamill inhabits the part so much more, he looks like Luke, he sounds like Luke. He IS Luke.

And I'm sorry, but I just couldn't accept Fisher as an old Leia, again she was just an old woman playing the part rather than "Princess Leia". Couldn't get past the blocked-nose voice. She barely moves in the two new movies, she's always just standing still or sitting.

So I'll echo my earlier post when I said that they should've made the NT in the 90s. That should've come first. Then the prequels.

As for remaking the OT and PT, I doubt that'll happen. Too much money has been spent (and made) and there would be too much investment in the same story. They can't really make a new story out of it. Certainly as a movie; potentially what could happen is a Netflix-style drama series about Anakin's fall from grace. Make it really dark and gritty. But then the kids won't watch it.

Speaking of which, my little kids loved TFA, Rogue One, and TLJ. They haven't seen any prequels (yet, though I see them liking TPM but that's it) and they failed to sit through the OT (I think they saw ANH but switched off during Empire). However they know the whole story and probably don't have any need to see them now; they probably will watch them when they are older. They enjoy playing all the scenarios in Battlefront II however!

Tony EH · 12-01-2018 10:16AM

Yeh, out of all the old crew, Hamill did the best job. Even if Luke's story was a real disappointment and his death was farcical.

Can't see the mouse remaking the older films though. I think that would just send the fanbase into meltdown completely. Although, I'd happily see the prequels get redone, so long as they were done better than the dreck that exists at the moment.

As for doing a sequel trilogy in the 90's, that certainly would have been the right time. But, they wouldn't have been able to get Ford involved - he was just too much of dick about Solo and Star Wars in general and Lucas probably would have made a balls of it anyway.

nix · 12-01-2018 12:03PM

I'd bet my bottom dollar the OT will be remade, most likely when they have squeezed as much as they can out of the new content and the numbers start to dwindle. They will blow the internet up with a remake of OT and prequels announcement, and that will keep the billions rolling in for another 20 years :rolleyes::D

eviltimeban · 12-01-2018 12:07PM

There's no way the OT will be remade.

nix · 12-01-2018 12:13PM

eviltimeban wrote: »

There's no way the OT will be remade.

Why?

eviltimeban · 12-01-2018 12:26PM

nix wrote: »

Why?

It is too culturally significant.

Besides special effects, there's no way to make it better.

It would negate the use of Ford / Fisher / Hamill in the new trilogy. And to a lesser extent McGregor's performance as Obi-wan in the PT (as he was "being" Alec Guinness). Vader's voice would also fall into this category.

Fans WOULD NOT accept it.

Any remake would be up against massive scrutiny and would never win in a comparison with the original movie.

No, the best they can do is take elements from the OT (such as the Death Star plans) and make movies out of them. Solo, Obi-wan, Boba Fett, heck even "Mon Mothma: A Love Story", but anything other than a remake of the OT.

pixelburp · 12-01-2018 12:28PM

Why remake the trilogy when you can just shoot the whole universe forward or backwards in time (as has been done already with Knights of the Old Republic) on a whim? There's nothing to be gained in remaking the OT, when it's easier to just rattle together a new Epic - throw the universe 4000 years after the events of Episodes I-IX and bingo, a functional reboot, if not an actual one.

Mickeroo · 12-01-2018 12:33PM

They 100% won't do it in the next decade or possibly two, considering there's an ongoing series of sequels being made. I wouldn't rule it out from ever happening though.

dr.fuzzenstein · 12-01-2018 12:35PM

Tony EH wrote: »

It's not "quirky" that's the problem. It's the gags. They just don't belong in a film that wants an audience to feel an emotional impact from drama. As I said before, when you stage a scene where tens of thousands of people are losing their lives and then it's preceded with a stupid gag set up and clumsy punchline, it completely undermines any of the drama that preceded it.

Hopefully the backlash against the TLJ will make both Johnson and Disney think twice before they litter their trilogy with idiot stuff like can you hear me now phonecalls. That kind of crap might be ok in a Monty Python riff, but it's just not ok in a Star Wars film that wishes to have any dramatic oomph.

Humour is fine, in very limited doses and if it's actually well written. Jokes and gags? Leave that to the professionals.

Yes thank god the original films didn't have any bad or awkward gags in them, you stuck up, half witted, scruffy looking nerf herder...

pixelburp · 12-01-2018 12:37PM

Nothing can be ruled out, but I think if you're literally dealing with a 'long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away', there's surely enough latitude to tell as many stories as required, without pressing the 'reboot' button.

Now, whether there really ARE that many stories to tell in the Star Wars movie universe is another problem: that the new films contrived a return of the Rebels vs. Empire narrative speaks to a certain limitation inherent in the mythology as a commercial franchise.

david75 · 12-01-2018 12:42PM

It won’t happen for a long long time but it will eventually happen.

Tony EH · 12-01-2018 01:17PM

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Yes thank god the original films didn't have any bad or awkward gags in them, you stuck up, half witted, scruffy looking nerf herder...

Which wasn't a gag.

It's a mildly humourous line.

Humour is not necessarily gags or set ups for jokes.

nix · 12-01-2018 01:22PM

I'm not saying it will be done soon, far from it, its not gonna be for atleast 20 years, they have alot they can do before going down the remake/reboot road. And just to make it clear, i never want to see it being done, but what ive learned over the span of my life is, in hollywood, nothing is sacred. And if they have a machine that can print money, you can bet thats just what they will do

And

eviltimeban wrote: »

It would negate the use of Ford / Fisher / Hamill in the new trilogy. And to a lesser extent McGregor's performance as Obi-wan in the PT (as he was "being" Alec Guinness). Vader's voice would also fall into this category.

Fans WOULD NOT accept it.

Any remake would be up against massive scrutiny and would never win in a comparison with the original movie.

They will just remake the new trilogy also after doing the prior movies, and again, they wont care if it stands up to the originals or if it comes under massive scrutiny. They just care if it will make money, and it will make an insane amount, even people who are against it and condemn it will be in line to watch the bloody thing.. and they will most likely hate it but at that point its too late and they would have handed the money over.. and then they will watch them again countless times.

The only thing that was remade/rebooted that was a massive fail that stands out to me, was Ghostbusters, but that was handled so poorly. It'd would be hard to **** up making a profit on star wars.. even if Paul Feig directed the bloody thing..... which is really really sad lol

eviltimeban · 12-01-2018 01:41PM

nix wrote: »

The only thing that was remade/rebooted that was a massive fail that stands out to me, was Ghostbusters, but that was handled so poorly. It'd would be hard to **** up making a profit on star wars.. even if Paul Feig directed the bloody thing..... which is really really sad lol

Point Break, the Transporter, Psycho, Ben Hur, Footloose, Planet of the Apes, Nightmare on Elm Street, The Wicker Man, Pink Panther, The Omen...

Bacchus · 12-01-2018 01:46PM

eviltimeban wrote: »

Point Break, the Transporter, Psycho, Ben Hur, Footloose, Planet of the Apes, Nightmare on Elm Street, The Wicker Man, Pink Panther, The Omen...

I assume you mean the Mark Wahlberg Planet of the Apes reboot. That was awful. The new trilogy is great though, and a big success.

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

Comments

Solo (young Han Solo film) spoilers from post 1493