|
|
Post by rom on Nov 8, 2018 10:42:25 GMT -5
I just saw Solo: A Star Wars Story on Blu-ray earlier this week; this was my first time seeing the film & I thought it was superb. Screw the bad reviews. This is not only one of the best films I've ever seen, but has become my third favorite SW film ever (behind ESB & Rouge One). This definitely brought to mind the OT films/era. I will definitely want to see this again soon to fully appreciate this; like all the SW films, I'm sure my appreciation will grow with each subsequent viewing.
Here is my SPOILER-filled review:
-The casting was fine. I wasn't expecting the actor who played the young Han Solo to be able to fill Harrison Ford's shoes, and he didn't - but, let's be honest, no one can. However, he was solid in the role, and convincingly portrayed someone who had a hard life growing up on the streets of Corellia, been through a lot (fighting as an Imperial), was somewhat cynical - but was still a good person at his core. I liked the fact that the actor didn't try to "mimic" Ford, which would have just felt artificial.
-I also felt the casting of a young Lando Calrissian was solid as well.
-The "relationship" between Lando & L3-37 was...slightly amusing in a way & poignant in another. It was interesting that L3 mentioned that Lando "liked" her, but she didn't want to get involved because it wouldn't work out - LOL. I also may have been reading too much into this, but there did still appear to be "something" between them; what that was exactly wasn't really clear (nor would I want to know anyway - LOL). It could have just been that Lando had become emotionally dependent on her due to their close proximity on the ship & re: their working together; she had also probably saved his life at some point(s) in the past, etc. In any case, as with the robots in the OT, they really humanized "her" to a great extent so that when she was destroyed, you really felt like a person had "died". Well-done.
-From start to finish, the movie kept my interest, and never dragged.
-Moloch was a bizarre looking alien, and had a small - but significant - role in the beginning; I didn't think he was a throw-away character like some were making him out to be. He also seemed to speak a form of Huttese, which was a homage to the OT.
-The centipede/slug gangster creature Lady Proxima was one of the most grotesque, disgusting SW aliens in any of the films - and I say this as a compliment. Well-done!
-Rio Durant was another great character; liked the 4 arms, which may have been awkward-looking but due to the great CGI was smoothly done here.
-I liked seeing the bustling streets of Corellia & the landspeeder chase; the train battle/sequence (it was cool how the Imperial Troops had magnetized boots so they could stand on the train without falling off, etc.); the Sabacc game(s), etc.
-Enfys Nest was a great character with a fantastic speeder; very creative costume design/mask. And, it was nice that she finally took off her mask - which humanized the character to a great extent.
-I liked how the chess holograms from ANH made their way into Solo as well; also, I think there were at least a couple that hadn't been in ANH - nice.
-The "reveal" of the leader of Crimson Dawn was interesting. I was not expecting to see Darth Maul, since he should be dead (given that he was bisected in Episode 1, which took place before Solo). However, IIRC the character came back to life at some point in the comics, so I guess that's where they took that from. In any case, great to see the character again.
-The plethora of new creatures, droids, and cool uniformed characters were fascinating - this was especially pronounced re: the crowds surrounding the two Sabaac game scenes, but they were also interspersed in many other sequences throughout the film. The Ape-like Wookie?! that Chewie briefly befriended was especially cool looking. I was also extremely impressed by the new tech, including the AT-DP, the briefly seen Imperial Trooper Patrol Bike w/Trooper, Han Solo's blue Landspeeder, etc.
-Nice to see Chewie & Han meeting for the first time; I remember reading "The Wookie Storybook" years ago, which had 1-2 pages discussing Han freeing Chewie from the Imperials - and that's how they met. I know they modified the original story somewhat for the film, but it was the same idea.
-It was clever that Han anticipated Tobias Beckett's double-crossing him, and acted accordingly.
-I liked how the Sabacc game came full circle at the end. I.e., when Han & Lando first played Sabacc, Lando cheated (by literally having a card up his sleeve) and won, when Han should have won. However, at the end, when Han confronted Lando on that jungle planet (for abandoning them) & noticed the "hidden" card, he surreptitiously took it away, so Lando couldn't use it to cheat at the end...which resulted in Han winning the Falcon
Side-note about Sabacc: Years ago, I remember reading an SW Expanded Universe book (possibly the Han Solo/Brian Daley novel(s) Sourcebook by West End Games) which mentioned that the reason Sabacc is so difficult to play & win is that the cards have digital images imprinted on them, and the image is constantly changing - so, though you may think you have a winning card, the image may change a second later & you won't anymore; i.e., the only image that meant anything was the one that was imprinted on the card once you revealed the cards at the end, by putting them down on the table. However, they obviously discarded this "EU" version of Sabacc because it would have been to complicated to depict on screen & opted instead to have this be a more traditional card game - which was the best approach to take.
In closing, instead of this just being a by-the-numbers fill-in "origin" movie about Han Solo's youth/beginnings, this was an amazing, visually stunning film with interesting characters/aliens/robots, solid characterization, fantastic tech, and incredibly well-done action scenes. In fact, I would even say this is a stand-alone film that can be seen & enjoyed without even being familiar with the other SW films.
|
|
|
|
Post by brutalis on Nov 8, 2018 13:40:38 GMT -5
Totally agree that Solo is a very enjoyable and watchable move. Perhaps it will make up some of its losses with DVD/Blue-ray sales. Personally I think it was hampered by Disney not hyping it properly. There was too much bad will from the "FANS" after The Last Jedi and I believe it carried over into poor viewing for Solo. Also too much fan expectation and entitlement of what "THEY" wanted to see in Solo rather than allowing the movie to be it's own thing.
Let's face it. Everyone wants Harrison Ford as Solo, Hamill as Luke and Fisher as Leia from the original that they know and love. If Ford was dead or the Solo movie made after a long time of no Star Wars then the movie would have likely been a grand slam. Solo should have been a Harrison Ford movie back in the 80's to have really made people sit up and take notice, but as for being made now it strikes a sour note when fans are still hating on JJ Abrams for killing Han off in The Force Awakens. Hell, Star Trek killed off Spock but were smart enough to know that was a truly bad move and revived him with the very next movie. You can kill the tertiary characters all you like but leave our beloved HEROES alone!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 8, 2018 15:30:06 GMT -5
-The "reveal" of the leader of Crimson Dawn was interesting. I was not expecting to see Darth Maul, since he should be dead (given that he was bisected in Episode 1, which took place before Solo). However, IIRC the character came back to life at some point in the comics, so I guess that's where they took that from. In any case, great to see the character again. His resurrection happened in the Clone Wars animated series. |
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Nov 8, 2018 22:45:53 GMT -5
I really hated that they made Sabacc into poker with funny shaped cards.. the whole concept of shifting cards and stasis fields for they to stop in was very Star Wars to me, and would have been easy to good and looked great.
|
|
|
|
Post by rom on Nov 10, 2018 19:58:03 GMT -5
I really hated that they made Sabacc into poker with funny shaped cards.. the whole concept of shifting cards and stasis fields for they to stop in was very Star Wars to me, and would have been easy to good and looked great. I am torn about this. Though I expected Sabacc to be played like it was depicted/explained in the novel Lando Calrissian and the Mindharp of Sharu (1983, L. Neil Smith) , I kind of understand why they chose not to go that route for the film - given that it may have been confusing to a mainstream audience. I.e., I believe they would have needed some exposition/explanation if they depicted it the way SW fans expected to see this. Here's a link with more info. on the game: starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Sabacc |
|
|
|
Post by rom on Nov 10, 2018 20:01:39 GMT -5
Let's face it. Everyone wants Harrison Ford as Solo, Hamill as Luke and Fisher as Leia from the original that they know and love. If Ford was dead or the Solo movie made after a long time of no Star Wars then the movie would have likely been a grand slam. Solo should have been a Harrison Ford movie back in the 80's to have really made people sit up and take notice, but as for being made now it strikes a sour note when fans are still hating on JJ Abrams for killing Han off in The Force Awakens. Hell, Star Trek killed off Spock but were smart enough to know that was a truly bad move and revived him with the very next movie. You can kill the tertiary characters all you like but leave our beloved HEROES alone! Agree that Solo was a great film, and also agree that no one could play Solo as well as Ford. However, if they're making a film about a young Han now they obviously had to have a younger actor. I'm glad they waited to make the film now, when the effects are so much better than they would have been in the '80's. The scenes on Corellia, the train attack scene with the modified Stormtroopers (w/the magnetic boots), etc. were all fantastic - this would have been impossible to do back in the day. I'm not a big fan of the Sequel Trilogy (ST), though I have seen the films & do like some of the tech. & new Imperial Troop designs. I also feel that by making the new films, Disney/Lflm. is also able to make the spin-off films Rouge One & Solo (both of which take place in the OT-era), and I am a HUGE fan of both of these superb movies. Back to the ST: I do feel that at least one of the reasons Han Solo was killed in TFA was because Harrison Ford wanted this; IIRC, back in the '80's he told Lucas that he wanted the character to die in ROTJ, but Lucas didn't want to end the film that way because it would have made it too down-beat. However, flash forward 32 years later - I do feel that Solo's death - by the hand of his son - was one of the most poignant & sad scenes in any SW film. I also felt it made Kylo Ren (a villian I don't really like) beyond redemption to a great extent. Hell, even Darth Vader, who had killed many innocents - was redeemed when he not only stopped short of killing his son, but saved him - by sacrificing himself. In comparison, Kylo Ren was just an entitled, whiny little bi%$#. I hope the character dies a horrible death in the third film. |
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Nov 19, 2018 11:12:15 GMT -5
I too enjoyed Solo more than I expected from the press and fan griping. My main complaint was that he wasn't the pirate that we met in ANH; he's a sympathetic goofball like Star-Lord. Perhaps this was on purpose. I could imagine a second film that depicted him going from the happy guy we saw here to the selfish, arrogant man in the Mos Eisley cantina. But now that second film will never get made; pity.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jan 10, 2019 22:32:01 GMT -5
Much better than I expected; it’s true that, as some folks here pointed out, it had a genuine Star Wars feel to it. Much better than The Last Jedi of course; the difference in box office success seems pretty unjust.
My only gripe is that too many Easter eggs and unneeded connections are a distraction, and even induce a few “oh, come on” moments. Han being a major factor in the founding of the Rebel Alliance, for example? That I could have really have gone without. Darth Maul not being dead? Look, Lucasfilm, I don’t watch your cartoons. If you kill a character in your movies, don’t resurrect them in comics, on TV or novels and then bring them back on the silver screen with no explanation; it’s jarring and very distracting... we don’t pay attention to what’s going on when we’re busy trying to figure out if this new film occurred before or after The Phantom Menace. Lando’s disguise in Return of the Jedi is used here too: are we to understand that Han kept in in the Falcon for God knows how many years separate this episode from Star Wars? Those aren’t major points, to be sure, but they’re unneeded and feel a little amateurish, a little too fanboyish... Kind of like the first three Dune prequels. Can the galaxy really be so small that everybody has less than two degrees of separation with everybody else?
The actor who plays Han didn’t try to do a Harrison Ford impression, but he still reminded me of him at times and he was convincing in his role. The trailers and stills had left me dubious, but he rose up to the challenge.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2019 11:19:58 GMT -5
Woody Harrelson kills every movie for me that he's in.
he's never "acting". .he's ALWAYS Woody Harrelson. . not sure how he's in such demand in so many Genre films
|
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Jan 15, 2019 7:32:38 GMT -5
Much better than I expected; it’s true that, as some folks here pointed out, it had a genuine Star Wars feel to it. Much better than The Last Jedi of course; the difference in box office success seems pretty unjust. My only gripe is that too many Easter eggs and unneeded connections are a distraction, and even induce a few “oh, come on” moments. Han being a major factor in the founding of the Rebel Alliance, for example? That I could have really have gone without. Darth Maul not being dead? Look, Lucasfilm, I don’t watch your cartoons. If you kill a character in your movies, don’t resurrect them in comics, on TV or novels and then bring them back on the silver screen with no explanation; it’s jarring and very distracting... we don’t pay attention to what’s going on when we’re busy trying to figure out if this new film occurred before or after The Phantom Menace. Lando’s disguise in Return of the Jedi is used here too: are we to understand that Han kept in in the Falcon for God knows how many years separate this episode from Star Wars? Those aren’t major points, to be sure, but they’re unneeded and feel a little amateurish, a little too fanboyish... Kind of like the first three Dune prequels. Can the galaxy really be so small that everybody has less than two degrees of separation with everybody else? The actor who plays Han didn’t try to do a Harrison Ford impression, but he still reminded me of him at times and he was convincing in his role. The trailers and stills had left me dubious, but he rose up to the challenge. They killed him in the Cartoons, too... the fact that Maul is puzzling from a continuity standpoint. Maul in Rebels is on a personal quest looking for power in the Force, and dies towards the end (around the time of Rogue One, perhaps slightly after) It makes NO SENSE that he was also a crime lord at the time. Lando is in that same series, and is about the same age as in the movie. It's has to be slightly before, since Lando does have the Falcon in Rebels (I think) but it can't be that far before. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2019 10:38:49 GMT -5
Until Episode IX comes out, the cannon is still pretty vague on many, many things, and Maul is still a puzzle that we don't have all the pieces of yet. We got glimpses of the Siege of Mandalore in the Ahsoka novel (which may be part of the Clone Wars revival) which takes place at about the same time as Revenge of the Sith. Solo: A Star Wars Story takes place about 7 years later and still 12 years before A New Hope. We don't see Maul again until his appearance in Rebels which is 2 years prior to Rogue One. So there is a nice 10 year gap. In Solo, Maul has his Inquisitor saber which implies that he's already had dealings with them and the next time we see him canonically, he's a broken shell of what he was previously. Unfortunately, since it looks like we won't get Solo sequels, we'll have to hope that we get a story that fills in that gap in comic or book form.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jan 15, 2019 21:01:28 GMT -5
Has anyone seen the fan made short Vader: shards lf the past?
It’s probably better knwon right now because of its copyright issues, but it’s pretty well done.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,201 
|
Post by Confessor on Sept 13, 2019 9:13:21 GMT -5
So, I'm late to this party, I know, but I finally watched Solo: A Star Wars Story last night. ** Spoilers ahead!** First, a little background: I'm a HUGE Star Wars fan who was utterly obsessed with the franchise between the ages of 5 and 30. That love waned slightly during the prequel era, but basically remained steady. However, with the release of the sub-standard and ho-hum The Force Awakens and the utterly terrible The Last Jedi, I have unfortunately fallen completely out of love with the franchise. That said, I thought Rogue One was excellent and, in fact, was the best SW film since 1983's Return of the Jedi. But still, I feel alienated and disenfranchised as a SW fan and, as a result, Solo was the first SW film that I didn't see at the cinema. So anyway, my wife was out last night and I was at a loose end, so I downloaded Solo and gave it a watch. I expected the worst, given the well publicised production problems it had, but actually, I thought it was a better film from a plotting, pacing and directorial point of view than The Last Jedi. Still, "average" is the word I would use to describe it. "Muddled" and "forgettable" are other words that spring to mind. That said, it was kind of entertaining while it played...but it's certainly no Rogue One. I felt that it was basically a lightweight heist movie dressed up in Star Wars clothes, and I also can't escape the feeling that this was a story that really didn't need to be told. I think Han's backstory is best left unexplored to better preserve the transition from the morally questionable smuggler that we meet in the original Star Wars movie into the reluctant Rebel hero of Return of the Jedi. The implication at the end of Solo that Han helped to found the Rebellion was such a load of bollocks! What a terrible idea. In fact, I think that my biggest gripe about this movie was that the fan servicey references to the original trilogy were relentless and utterly eye-roll inducing. To quote our own Roquefort Raider... Can the galaxy really be so small that everybody has less than two degrees of separation with everybody else? This has been a constant problem with Star Wars films since the prequels and is one of my biggest bugbears. With every additional film after Return of the Jedi, film makers had the fantastic oppurtunity to massively expand the scope and bredth of the Star Wars galaxy. But right from The Phantom Menace, their desire to drop in Easter Eggs and fan service character and hardware cameos at every oppurtunity has had the reverse effect of making the Star Wars galaxy seem so much smaller. It now seems like everybody knows everybody else and everyone's story intersects with multiple other characters' stories. It's a damaging trend that I absolutely hate...and Solo had this in spades. Also, what the hell is Darth Maul doing back alive?! And with no explanation! Solo is supposedly set 10 years before Episode IV - A New Hope, so Maul should've been dead for 22 years by this point. From chatting with Roquefort Raider on Facebook earlier today, it seems that Maul was maybe resurrected in some novel/cartoon/comic somewhere. If that's true, it needed to be communicated better to audiences. The films are Star Wars for God's sake, and they should never be playing second-fiddle to events depicted in comic series or novels. Expecting cinema audiences to know what's happened in spin-off literature is arrogant and smacks of sloppy film making in my view. And why is Maul now a crime lord? That makes no sense. He's a Sith for Heaven's sake! In fact, if he's alive, why hasn't Darth Vader hunted him down and killed him, since we were told in Episode III that the Sith are always in twos: a master and an apprentice. No more, no less. Vader and Palpatine would surely want him dead. So many unanswered questions!  So yeah, Solo: A Star Wars Story: not as bad as I thought it'd be, but not a great SW movie either, by any means. |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Sept 13, 2019 10:17:15 GMT -5
So, I'm late to this party, I know, but I finally watched Solo: A Star Wars Story last night. ** Spoilers ahead!** First, a little background: I'm a HUGE Star Wars fan who was utterly obsessed with the franchise between the ages of 5 and 30. That love waned slightly during the prequel era, but basically remained steady. However, with the release of the sub-standard and ho-hum The Force Awakens and the utterly terrible The Last Jedi, I have unfortunately fallen completely out of love with the franchise. That said, I thought Rogue One was excellent and, in fact, was the best SW film since 1983's Return of the Jedi. But still, I feel alienated and disenfranchised as a SW fan and, as a result, Solo was the first SW film that I didn't see at the cinema. So anyway, my wife was out last night and I was at a loose end, so I downloaded Solo and gave it a watch. I expected the worst, given the well production publicised problems it had, but actually, I thought it was a better film from a plotting, pacing and directorial point of view than The Last Jedi. Still, "average" is the word I would use to describe it. "Muddled" and "forgettable" are other words that spring to mind. Thant said, it was kind of entertaining while it played...but it's certainly no Rogue One. I felt that it was basically a lightweight heist movie dressed up in Star Wars clothes, and I also can't escape the feeling that this was a story that really didn't need to be told. I thnk Han's backstory is best left unexplored to better preserve the transition from the morally questionable smuggler that we meet in the original Star Wars movie into the reluctant Rebel hero of Return of the Jedi. The implication at the end of Solo that Han helped to found the Rebellion was such a load of bollocks! What a terrible idea. In fact, I think that my biggest gripe about this movie was that the fan servicey references to the original trilogy were relentless and utterly eye-roll inducing. To quote our own Roquefort Raider... Can the galaxy really be so small that everybody has less than two degrees of separation with everybody else? This has been a constant problem with Star Wars films since the prequels and is one of my biggest bugbears. With every additional film after Return of the Jedi, film makers had the fantastic oppurtunity to massively expand the scope and bredth of the Star Wars galaxy. But right from The Phantom Menace, their desire to drop in Easter Eggs and fan service character and hardware cameos at every oppurtunity has had the reverse effect of making the Star Wars galaxy seem so much smaller. It now seems like everybody knows everybody else and everyone's story intersects with multiple other characters' stories. It's a damaging trend that I absolutely hate...and Solo had this in spades. Also, what the hell is Darth Maul doing back alive?! And with no explanation! Solo is supposedly set 10 years before Episode IV - A New Hope, so Maul should've been dead for 22 years by this point. From chatting with Roquefort Raider on Facebook earlier today, it seems that Maul was maybe resurrected in some novel/cartoon/comic somewhere. If that's true, it needed to be communicated better to audiences. The films are Star Wars for God's sake, and they should never be playing second-fiddle to events depicted in comic series or novels. Expecting cinema audiences to know what's happened in spin-off literature is arrogant and smacks of sloppy film making in my view. And why is Maul now a crime lord? That makes no sense. He's a Sith for Heaven's sake! In fact, if he's alive, why hasn't Darth Vader hunted him down and killed him, since we were told in Episode III that the Sith are always in twos: a master and an apprentice. No more, no less. Vader and Palpatine would surely want him dead. So many unanswered questions! So yeah, Solo: A Star Wars Story: not as bad as I thought it'd be, but not a great SW movie either, by any means. I saw your FB post before this so I won't rehash everything I said there but I think I will include one bit. For my money, I liked Solo well enough( I bought it on DVD after all) but I'll readily confess that it was average. It certainly got a little too far into the fan service zone at times and the ending where he helps kick start the alliance was certainly bad but it had a fun energy about it that certainly never left me bored. Yes it was pretty much your standard heist movie dressed up as Star Wars, but I'm not really opposed to that kind of concept if used in the side projects; for instance, I wouldn't want a main movie to be just a gangster movie with Star Wars trappings, but I wouldn't be opposed to TV show set in the underbelly of Corusant that was basically Goodfellas in Space because it would be an entertaining take on an area not often seen. In the scheme of things I think I'd place it along side the first Ewok Adventure, Solo doesn't have that special spirit that really fully captures your imagination like the Original Trilogy and I'd say Rogue One did but it's never the less entertaining. Yes, you read that right, I unabashedly enjoy the Ewok Adventure: Caravan of Courage. So sue me, that was my introduction to Star Wars  |
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,201
|
Post by Confessor on Sept 13, 2019 10:33:20 GMT -5
Yes, you read that right, I unabashedly enjoy the Ewok Adventure: Caravan of Courage. So sue me, that was my introduction to Star Wars As I said on Facebook, I secretly like the first Ewok movie too.  The second, The Battle for Endor, I like a lot less. |
|
The second, The Battle for Endor, I like a lot less.