Solo: A Star Wars Story (original speculation thread)

[Mamatried]

SPOILER!

It is actually confiremd that we will see Han Solo and Chewbacca in the movie.

We will also see the Kessel run done in 12 parsec

We will see The Millenium Falcon


Rumors have it Lando will appear in the movie, but gonna spoil any more.

Just got home from the theatre and love the movie

[Whill]

[Whill]

[Treefrog]

[Grimace]

I know what *I* would consider disgusting, though I cannot say that Whill's reasons are the same as mine.

1. You are dismissing things about the Falcon without even seeing the movie, and using that as a reason to not see the movie. And the things you are dismissing AREN'T EVEN VALID. (there ARE mandibles. It's not a cargo pod on the front. It's not longer nor narrower. It has hull plating on it, making it look sleeker. So you've used total fallacy as one of your reasons to not see the movie.

2. Lando. Again, since you haven't seen the movie, you have NO IDEA how Lando acts in it. I thought he did an admirable job of portraying Lando at a younger age. So you're going either on the word of another person who was pre-disposed to not like the movie, so they do not have a favorable opinion of the movie, or you're going on your own prejudice against the movie...a prejudice that is not based on fact.

3. You don't want to see it because there's no Jabba the Hutt on Corellia?!? Really? That's a reason?? Where in the world did you ever get the idea that Jabba the Hutt had control over Corellia when he was living on Tatooine (a completely different region of space!) So if someone had a new idea, you automatically assume it's going to be a bad thing if a multitude of old character are not re-used in the movie? I take it you were filled with hatred for Rogue One, since they only have a couple characters that were re-used from Star Wars (Tarkin, Leia, C-3P0, R2-D2) and the rest of the people where wholly created anew in the movie.

I'm guessing you were probably one of those people that thought "But where are the Bothans that were supposed to die"? (also an incorrect assumption by very many people who were griping about Rogue One online)


4. Corellia made ships. Remember Han Solo's words to Luke and Obi-Wan when asked how fast his ship was? "I've outrun Imperial cruisers. Not the bulk cruisers, mind you, the big Corellian cruisers."

Whoa! Corellian Imperial ships were mentioned in the original Star Wars! So maybe Corellia actually made ships as well, since the Corellians were such good ship builders. Did you really think that only Kuat could build the ships for the Empire?

So, again, completely incorrect information used for your reasons for not seeing the movie.

5. What do you care whether Ron Howard had the movie from the start, or whether there was a direct change for the movie? Do you personally know those guys and their financial status has a direct impact on you? If Kathleen Kennedy wants to pick Quentin Tarantino as director and then replace him 90% of the way through shooting, only to bring in someone who she thinks is better and will give a better movie, then that's her prerogative! You're not in charge, and the movie we got was an enjoyable movie, not a slapstick comedy movie like it sounded the others were working towards.

I can't argue with the inclusion of Darth Maul. It was rather unnecessary.
I never read The Courtship of Princess Leia so I have no stake in the matter of how he got his last name. Considering the Solo movie happens BEFORE anything that occurred in any of the Corellia book series, it's entirely possible that the reason Han Solo got his last name is how they showed it in the movie.
And yes, the movie was not really "necessary". Honestly, NONE of the Star Wars movies are "necessary". They are there for entertainment! They are put out to the public to entertain the public and make the executives money. Absolutely none of them are necessary! If you believe any of them are "necessary", you obviously have an incredibly skewed and artificially inflated opinion of the Star Wars franchise.

So basically, your points are either entirely subjective based on NEVER SEEING THE MOVIE, or are based on completely fabricated and false reasons.

That, to me, is a disgusting display.

[Whill]

Thank you, Grimace. I concur.

1. It is established by dialogue that the extra stuff in the front of the Falcon were recent modifications including escape pods and they were jettisoned during an action scene, so the ship returned to its classic visage you're used to during the movie and stayed that way until the end. The mandibles are still there and always where, but you'd know that if you'd actually seen the movie.

2. This film takes place 10 years before the classic trilogy begins. The actors that played Han and both Lando totally nailed portraying younger versions of the characters. And you are misunderstanding what Jon Kasdan and Donald Glover said about Lando - The prefix pan- does not mean "only". It means the opposite of only. And it doesn't come into the story of the film. It is just out-of-universe fluff talk regarding a one-line joke in the movie. Lando's sexuality remains open to viewer interpretation, but you'd know that if you'd actually seen the movie.

3. It's a BIIIG galaxy. Jabba has a lot of reach for sure, but there is plenty of room for other crime lords. And there is nothing in the film that says Jabba doesn't have any influence on Corellia. The Corellian crime boss in the film, Lady Proxima, may even be a part of Jabba's organization. It simply isn't determined one way or the other. And Jabba is referenced later in the film, but you'd know that if you'd actually seen the movie.

4. So there can only be one shipbuilding company on Corellia? CEC? Like Jabba, that is another extremely narrow-minded and limiting view you have of something as huge as the Star Wars galaxy. How many big vessel manufacturer companies do we have here on Earth? Kuat can't operate on Corellia too? Jeesh. There is nothing in the film that indicates Corellia only build Imperial ships. And the film establishes that CEC definitely does still exist on Corellia, but you'd know that if you'd actually seen the movie.

5. You do realize that Lucas named the character "Solo" because of his story arc, right? "Look, I ain't in this for your revolution... I'm in it for the money." Han Solo is my favorite Star Wars character but that last name was always a bit too on the nose for me. (It's like "Obi-Wan Jedi" or "Luke Death-Starkiller"). The new film shows that in a corrupt Empire where some bureaucrat just doesn't care about his job, Han is given the Solo last name after describing that he has no family. That makes a lot more sense than a mercenary who claims to only care about himself just coincidentally having a last name that describes his personality. And outside of Han telling Lando that his father used to build YT-1300s at the CEC plant until he got laid off and that Han doesn't have a good relationship with him (if he is even still alive), we learn nothing about Han's past except that after some point he grew up a street rat.

In this film we learn that Han got booted from the Imperial flight academy and sent to the front line of the Imperial war machine as a grunt. We learn how Han meets Chewie and Lando, we see the infamous Kessel Run in about 12 parsecs, and we see how Han wins the Falcon from Lando. All those things were referred to or implied previously. The usual reason people say this movie was "unnecessary" is due to the fear that learning too much about Han's past will spoil the mystique of the character that comes from having a vague background. This movie leaves a lot of mystery. There was no mention or reference to Han's mother. It is unknown if Han's father is even still alive. We don't know when Han became a street rat or under what circumstances. We don't know where Han got his lucky dice. We still don't know how Han knows the Wookiee language. We don't even know Han's real last name! That one adds mystery to the character. The Courtship of Princess Leia giving Han's "Solo" genealogy of several generations going back to kings of Corellia (but there was scandal that they might have been pretenders to the throne) was just plain silly. And Han had a cousin that bullied him growing up and later becomes a Star Wars villain? I for one am happy that Legends nonsense was absent from Solo. The canon version is more mysterious and better.

As Grimace said, no Star Wars movies are "necessary" and I suspect that 'necessity' is the heart of the issue for you. Many Star Wars fans have begun to feel entitled that Star Wars movies should conform to their strict view of what they should be or else bash them on the internet. I was certain the Star Wars film series was completed in 2005. Every movie since then is pure bonus. I can like it or not, I can take it or leave it. Disney has no obligation to fans, just like you have no obligation to be a customer. No movie is going to please everyone, so they are making movies for the people who like them, not the ones who don't feel they are necessary. I personally feel blessed that out of four unnecessary movies, Disney has made three awesome ones. Solo was totally unnecessary, but it didn't ruin the mystique of the character and I loved it.

[Treefrog]

I find it interesting that you (Whill) accuse me of pre-bashing the film when, as I recall, Solo came out in May, and I stated my reasons well after the release of the film. I also never stated on these forums any animus towards the film. I kept my opinions to myself. As for specific statements regarding my Corellia point, I acknowledge the Ep. IV reference.

I know that there are some people that like the movie. I disagree with anyone who claims that just because its a Star Wars film means that I have to absolutely adore the idea of it. Just as KK removed the SW crawl and SW fanfare from Rogue One, she removed my desire to be in absolute adoration with any anthology film.

The Millennium Falcon appeared in Episode III, and Lucas stated that in that one particular scene it was the Millennium Falcon:

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/File:Episode_3_Falcon.jpg

That photo proves that the Falcon in Solo isn't the Falcon. The Falcon has a very distinctive look, and Solo takes it away. BTW, I have no problem with the paint job.

My issues with LFL lately are from specific individuals attacking the fans generically. Jon Kasdan declaring the Lando was a "pan-sexual" and then blasting fans for disagreeing with him; Rian Johnson continuing his crusade against TLJ detractors and attacking them. Employees of LFL (including Chuck Wendig) blasting fans for not liking the current trajectory of the franchise. Well, enough fans have shown that they don't like some of LFL's recent decisions, and the fortunes of Solo have been shown to be a dud.

On the other side of the coin, Kelly Marie Tran didn't deserve the treatment she got from the more extreme fans. Those fans are pathetic. The same fans who attacked Jake Lloyd for his portrayal of 9 year old Anakin was pathetic as well. Hell, Hayden Christianson didn't deserve much of the criticisms he received also.

While I'm not exactly a fan of the Prequels --- at least they had an overarching story. These anthology films should be enhancing the episodic films. Rogue One did that to some extent. Unfortunately, Solo hasn't. LFL should have had some sort of story arch, not a "here's a Star Wars movie, do with it what you will." If I were a director, and LFL came calling to hire me, I'd be very apprehensive with them... Look what happened to Gareth Edwards, Lord & Miller, and Colin Trevarrow.

Marvel has proven to be masters at bringing in directors that understand that there's a story... Using a book analogy: each Marvel film serves as a specific chapter within the "novel." LFL needs to take lessons from Marvel, and that's sad because I used to think that LFL was the Master.

Edit: As for the Solo being a financial success: $300,000,000 (estimated budget); rumored cost of reshoots and marketing: $350,000,000; with a grand total of $650,000,000; which is the break-even point. As of 26 Jun 2018, the box office total is $355,451,372. Thus, Solo isn't even close to being a financial success, and is instead, a "galactic" flop

[Whill]

So you have chosen to continue arguing. That is disappointing.