• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Solo: A Star Wars Story

LOL. Y’all should have been watching Star Wars Rebels.
 
so it's not darth maul #theyalllookthesame


eTA: oh right, he was resurrected or whatever
 
the movie was pretty fun though not very good. i actually liked the guy who played Han - he did a decent take on young version. definitely better than Chris Pine's young Kirk. i thought glover's lando had some moments but was too hammy.

also i thought Emilia Clarke's character sucked, either that or emilia clarke is just not a great actor.
 
ImTheCaptain said:
so it's not darth maul #theyalllookthesame


eTA: oh right, he was resurrected or whatever
Click to expand...

Right. We know the Sith like to turn their Sith Lords into cyborgs.
 
a caught a few minutes a A New Hope yesterday and was struck at how many times Han called Luke "kid" or implied how young Luke was despite that Han is not that much older than Luke. Of course, Han is far more worldly at this point as Luke has been on one planet his whole life and Han has been all over the galaxy.
 
ImTheCaptain said:
the movie was pretty fun though not very good. i actually liked the guy who played Han - he did a decent take on young version. definitely better than Chris Pine's young Kirk. i thought glover's lando had some moments but was too hammy.

also i thought Emilia Clarke's character sucked, either that or emilia clarke is just not a great actor.
Click to expand...

she isn't.

I don't watch Rebels but knew that they resurrected Maul on the show so it wasn't shocking to me that he was in the movie, I just think it's lame in general they did resurrect him.
 
it probably should've been a post-credit thing b/c it was very confusing for a non-Rebels watching fan of the SW franchise
 
I was really trying to figure out the timeline
 
SC DEAC said:
a caught a few minutes a A New Hope yesterday and was struck at how many times Han called Luke "kid" or implied how young Luke was despite that Han is not that much older than Luke. Of course, Han is far more worldly at this point as Luke has been on one planet his whole life and Han has been all over the galaxy.
Click to expand...

Han is considerably older than Luke much like Harrison Ford (75) is considerably older than Mark Hamilton (66).

Maul has been in canon for years. Again, they resurrected Grievous and Vader. Makes sense they’d do the same for Maul. From a story perspective, it made no sense to bring back Maul in the prequels.
 
Vader was resurrected because that was always his story line. Maul was resurrected because some writers for the cartoon were like "nah, he needed a better arc so I'mma bring him back."
 
PhDeac said:
Han is considerably older than Luke much like Harrison Ford (75) is considerably older than Mark Hamilton (66).

Maul has been in canon for years. Again, they resurrected Grievous and Vader. Makes sense they’d do the same for Maul. From a story perspective, it made no sense to bring back Maul in the prequels.
Click to expand...

more like "canon"
 
Saw it yesterday and really enjoyed it, however I would say that it was my 7 year old's least favorite. I was expecting that to be the case since after seeing so many of the recent movies, and all the new characters, guys like Lando are not on his radar and he isn't curious or interested about how he met Han.
 
Why did that other Wookiee look more like bigfoot from the beef jerky commercials?

Han called the young girl leader "kid" at the end of this movie.

I liked watching Chewie kick some ass.

The dudes who played Han (can't remember his name) and Lando (Glover) were solid, Lando especially.

It was a fun movie, but ultimately I'm with Brangus here. It just felt forced and they somehow made a movie about Han and Lando and Chewie that didn't really feel like a SW movie. I don't know how that's possible. Maybe it's just SW fatigue.
 
I guess it depends on what makes a Star Wars movie and Star Wars movie. Is it the familiar characters? Is it the John Williams score? Is it lightsabers? Is it droids? Is it Stormtroopers? Is it Skywalkers? Is it the sound effects?

The answer used to be simple because we only had 3 Star Wars movies and we loved them. Then we got 3 Star Wars movies and we hated them. Now Disney is trying to expand the blueprint.

I'm not sure if it's "fatigue" necessarily. I think people had a tough time to the fact we had 3 Star Wars films in 2 years after only getting 3 over 22 years. That's a lot to digest quickly for people used to digesting it slowly.

Disney to Lose Over $50 Million on Solo: A Star Wars Story



"This projected loss comes from Wall Street analyst Barton Crockett, who believes Solo will lose more than $50 million, though other industry sources suggest that total loss could eventually be over $80 million, if these drops in ticket sales continue. Though Solo is currently at the top of the box office, it is expected to peak around $400 million globally."

...

"More than losing money for Disney, Solo's disappointment is a surprise after The Last Jedi became the highest grossing movie in North America in 2017. Even Rogue One, the only other non-numerical Star Wars Story theatrically released by Disney, managed to gross over $1 billion worldwide."
 
Last edited:
Losing money is probably on the change of directors. Not making more is harder to figure out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top