Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
I think Han not knowing much of the Jedi can just be chalked up to first movie weirdness. Just like how for some reason the lightsaber doesnt cauterizes the wound. Its just because it was the first movie made with the idea it was only 1 movie.
It's a shame KOTOR 2 got messed up by the studio running out of money, they were shaping up to be very powerful stories and great games in the setting that weren't afraid to use morally grey and also out of the box thinking for the series.
Also lets be honest for all the talk of the power of the Force most Force users don't use that much - now a dark lord flying a basically "undead" Stardestroyer that's crippled beyond use through space with only the power of the Force - now that's something to be impressed by. Far more so than distance strangulation.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
hotsauceman1 wrote: I think Han not knowing much of the Jedi can just be chalked up to first movie weirdness. Just like how for some reason the lightsaber doesnt cauterizes the wound. Its just because it was the first movie made with the idea it was only 1 movie.
In fairness even if its an energybeam that doesn't mean it will ever perfectly cauterise a wound. Swung fast through a limb it might well cauterise some of it, but much will be very thin burning so a good bump from the last beat of the heart or arteries hitting hte ground in the arm could easily breach thin burned flesh and bleed out. I think its more that blood in itself wasn't what they wanted after that one scene for the films target audience and ratings. So they show it once to give an idea, then never really again.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/04/28 16:16:28
LunarSol wrote: Burning garbage is way more interesting than burnt garbage.
Snoke was just Palpatine with no thought or purpose than to put Palpatine back in. He was killed off and replaced with a FAR more interesting villain, who was than squandered by forcing Palpatine back in when at no point did we need anything resembling Palpatine.
Whatever JJ had planned for Snoke, it wasn't going to be any more interesting than what we got. Snoke ends up being the secret master of the Sith from Exegol who has secretly been building the Final Order fleet of Star Destroyers. That's ultimately the issue with JJ's mystery boxes. They're compelling so long as you don't realize that there was never anything in them to begin with.
Yeah, and then he dumped those empty boxes on other directors, then got pissed when said directors couldn't figure out anything good to do with them. Even if you hates TLJ, how can you absolve Abrams for going back to *Palpatine* after being handled a far more interesting Kylo Ren as the big bad? They say the plan was to redeem Ben, but redemption comes in a lot of forms that don't involve a square-on-the-nose "turning gud again and fighting the bad guys". Just write a story that serves the characters instead of a laundry list of required beats and kewl stuff.
LunarSol wrote: My biggest criticism of TLJ is that it starts 5 seconds after the end of TFA. A skip like the one we saw in ESB would have given the story quite a bit more room to breathe. If, for example, the resistance was literally just on the run in space looking for a new base, you change nothing but give some wiggle room for things in the background to fall into place.
I see both sides of it. You're right, but I can see Johnson feeling that the cliffhanger had to be addressed and responded to. And what happened to a nice, ANH-style ending to give the next guy and movie more room to breathe?
Honestly, the whole trilogy never had any room to breathe. Which I suppose gets us more back on topic. But I don't know that the failing was the format, per se. I just don't think Lucasfilm ever had a story for the trilogy. They had a list of 'stuff' that they tried to weave into a story. A TV show with a strong showrunner is more likely to have a vision in place, which leads to a better story. But you can do that in cinema too...they just didn't.
LunarSol wrote: My biggest criticism of TLJ is that it starts 5 seconds after the end of TFA. A skip like the one we saw in ESB would have given the story quite a bit more room to breathe. If, for example, the resistance was literally just on the run in space looking for a new base, you change nothing but give some wiggle room for things in the background to fall into place.
I see both sides of it. You're right, but I can see Johnson feeling that the cliffhanger had to be addressed and responded to. And what happened to a nice, ANH-style ending to give the next guy and movie more room to breathe?
Honestly, the whole trilogy never had any room to breathe. Which I suppose gets us more back on topic. But I don't know that the failing was the format, per se. I just don't think Lucasfilm ever had a story for the trilogy. They had a list of 'stuff' that they tried to weave into a story. A TV show with a strong showrunner is more likely to have a vision in place, which leads to a better story. But you can do that in cinema too...they just didn't.
It wasn't really a cliffhanger though. It's the kind of thing that the opening crawl is fantastic at dealing with:
"After a desperate victory over STARKILLER BASE, the RESISTANCE FLEET flees to the stars as the might of the FIRST ORDER pursues them across the galaxy.
From there you change essentially nothing. The First Order finds the fleet fueling up or something. Poe stalls for time but chooses to take out the fleet killer at the cost of too many lives rather than run when given the order. FO tethers the fleet and is able to track them through hyperspace. The only thing that changes is that there's no clear time between the end of 7 and the beginning of 8 so there's room for a sense of "stuff" to have happened since the destruction of Starkiller base.
I do think they had more of a plan than we realize, but I think it hinged on Carrie to tie it all together. Reading the Colin Trevorrow script definitely feels like a story that knew where it was supposed to go. I'm not 100% sure it would have landed, but having seen the new trilogy a few times now, I can definitely see where she was supposed to fit and where her absence limits the finale. Most obvious is Han ghosting in to try and give us the third and definitive phantom Kylo must face. There's small ones too, like how there's probably a 50/50 chance that Rey is back to using Anakin's old saber either because JJ is a hack or because that's what they had footage of Leia holding.
Regardless, when the whole thing started, I though the decision to use JJ for ONLY the first movie was the best decision they made. It's just a shame they brought him back to handle the thing he's just not ever been good at pulling off.
Maybe Han is so disbelieving of The Force precisely because he's travelled from one end of the galaxy to another, and there aren't any Jedi doing mind tricks, lightsaber battles or all powerful force in charge of everything. All the stories from his youth were just stories. As far as he can tell, it was all made up.
Graphite wrote: Maybe Han is so disbelieving of The Force precisely because he's travelled from one end of the galaxy to another, and there aren't any Jedi doing mind tricks, lightsaber battles or all powerful force in charge of everything. All the stories from his youth were just stories. As far as he can tell, it was all made up.
Exactly, except that for his age chances are he should have, in theory, seen the Galaxy at the end of the Republic when he was young.
Think of it (sorry for a bad example but its the only thing that comes to mind) like the holocaust. For Han Jedi are gone, just like for us the Holocaust is gone; but there is ample evidence to support it happening still around and many first account survivors and the like.
This is the generation problem created by the Phantom Menace. In A New Hope you get the idea that the Republic fell a LOT longer ago. That Vader was betraying the Jedi at a time when they were already ultra rare and dwindling and under a hunt by the Imperium, when in actuality of the story we get he betrays them when they are still at the height of power. If anything based on Palpatine using the Jedi as a blame target, instead of no information about Jedi, the larger places of the Galaxy should be hating Jedi any any hint of them. In theory Han shouldn't deny Jedi, but should instead be anti-jedi since if Palpatine's propaganda worked (and Imperial rule reinforced it); Jedi would be hunted even during Luke's lifetime.
Instead A New Hope presents a world perhaps two or three generations further along; where Jedi are basically gone, all evidence of them lost and where Vader would be closer to his grandfather or great grandfather in age; or was turned much later in the storyline. Which would make Obi Wan much older, but also likely having trained Vader in secret along with other hidden Jedi trying to survive in hiding long after they fell from power and when the Sith rose.
You’re mistaken about Jedha. The principal location shown in the film is a holy city. The only “skeptic” we saw there was Baze Malbus (yes, I had to look it up) who himself was a former Guardian of the Whills. The entire moon is a pilgrimage site for Force worshippers. Sorry but you couldn’t have picked a worse example!
In fairness even if its an energybeam that doesn't mean it will ever perfectly cauterise a wound. Swung fast through a limb it might well cauterise some of it, but much will be very thin burning so a good bump from the last beat of the heart or arteries hitting hte ground in the arm could easily breach thin burned flesh and bleed out. I think its more that blood in itself wasn't what they wanted after that one scene for the films target audience and ratings. So they show it once to give an idea, then never really again.
My take on that is unique anatomy. The arm looked a lot like a thin, hollow tube. I figured that species was just a lot more liquid inside and the cauterized bits couldn't seal the wound.
I’ve just watched Solo for the first time. It’s no Rogue one but I must admit I prefer it as a film to any film in the new trilogy except maybe the force awakens... The pacing was back to what I know and liked about Star Wars, and whilst there was some travel and movement, it wasn’t super rushed and felt like it was bouncing around the new places for the sake of it.
It’s not nearly as bad as people give it stick for. I also think the actor did Han quite well, and nailed the interactions with Chewie, he just doesn’t look anything like Ford really which is the main issue but otherwise yeah, it’s an alright film.
My hobby instagram account: @the_shroud_of_vigilance My Shroud of Vigilance Hobby update blog for me detailed updates and lore on the faction:
Blog
Solo is fantastic, especially for the war scenes. I just recently watched it again before starting Rebels, and it’s a perfectly serviceable heist movie. It absolutely did not deserve to flop like that.
Overread wrote: Honestly I think that it got some blowback from the "anti SW" crowed and the general bad feeling that the main Disney films had created.
I wasn’t going to mention it but yes, it paid the price for TLJ. Plus a troubled production and a bad release date too.
It was the revolt of the fans against Kathleen Kennedy, a lot of it justified if you ask me to be honest, but Solo did not deserve to take the brunt of it.
My hobby instagram account: @the_shroud_of_vigilance My Shroud of Vigilance Hobby update blog for me detailed updates and lore on the faction:
Blog
I really wasn't charmed by Solo. I didn't hate it either. If anything, it reminds me the most of the MCU Hulk film where the pacing keeps wildly switching from rushing through the plot, to screeching to a halt to check off something on a reference list. It felt like it existed to answer a bunch of trivia questions rather than tell a story, which is really too bad, as I think there's probably a great movie or two or maybe even 3 in there. It just didn't need Chewie and Lando and the Falcon AND the Kessel Run and the gun and the dice and the nav computer and the escape pod and Teras Kasi and Maul and... and... and...
I really doubt solo got any blowback from the SW fans hating TLJ.
1) Solo was profitable. I was made for 275 M and grossed just under 4 world wide. Now, normally you would double the production budget to factor in marketing, except solo wasn't really marketed. In part because of all the reshoots and delays and probably because the budget balooned so high that disney decided to write it off.
Disney has done this to other projects they didn't believe in. Treasure Planet had no marketing. Neither did Atlantis. Neither really bombed but neither were major smash hits either because Disney just let them quietly do what they do.
2) General Audiences didn't know it came out. Remember, massive fans of some crap only make up a incredibly small percent of the movie going audience. You need to capture the general audience to bring in the big bucks. Not promoting a movie whos release date kept changing is what hurt solo.
3) It had a lot of negative PR for over a year building to its release about the solo actor needing acting lessons, the director getting fired, recasts, reshoots, and so forth.
Now... taking all that into account. You think SW fans being upset about TLJ hurt the sales of solo more than any of those other factors? Even equal to? Even close to?
These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.
Allows people to be wounded and killed by Lightsaber, without any gory bits.
Likewise why the Jedi were leading a War against Droids. Droids don’t count for violence it would seem!
Like i said, dont think too much on it, a new hope was made with no other movies in mind and should be viewed as such, even with all the canon there is.
Its the same with shows that have weird early seasons that dont gell with the older ones. DS9, TNG, Steven Universe and all that gak.
Lance845 wrote: I really doubt solo got any blowback from the SW fans hating TLJ.
1) Solo was profitable. I was made for 275 M and grossed just under 4 world wide. Now, normally you would double the production budget to factor in marketing, except solo wasn't really marketed. In part because of all the reshoots and delays and probably because the budget balooned so high that disney decided to write it off.
Disney has done this to other projects they didn't believe in. Treasure Planet had no marketing. Neither did Atlantis. Neither really bombed but neither were major smash hits either because Disney just let them quietly do what they do.
2) General Audiences didn't know it came out. Remember, massive fans of some crap only make up a incredibly small percent of the movie going audience. You need to capture the general audience to bring in the big bucks. Not promoting a movie whos release date kept changing is what hurt solo.
3) It had a lot of negative PR for over a year building to its release about the solo actor needing acting lessons, the director getting fired, recasts, reshoots, and so forth.
Now... taking all that into account. You think SW fans being upset about TLJ hurt the sales of solo more than any of those other factors? Even equal to? Even close to?
Got to disagree with Solo, not touching the last jedi blowback comment but specifically talking about Solo as one of my hobbies is the movie industry and I love talking about it , the budget was indeed $275 million, marketing was everywhere at the time so I am not sure where you are getting the "not marketed" thing from to be honest, but lets compromise on that and say half rounding up $132 million, combined we are looking at $402 million in budget alone, now we apply the thing that no one ever seems to apply in these equations, box office take, lets just take the US one for arguments sake, that is 45% or $177 million rounded off, take that away from the total takings of $393.2 million and you are left with $216.2 million in tickets and then we compare this number to the budget of $402 million and you have a movie that lost an estimated $186 million, this is just a short hand example and not hard numbers as I would need to go to each nations box office take and apply it, China for example takes much much more.
UK side I do recall Solo getting a fair bit of advertising - esp for me to notice it as I'm not going looking for advertising in general. That means TV spots, likely billboards and the like - perhaps not as much as a major blockbuster, but certainly enough that most people knew about it being around - heck even my parents who are not really SW people at all had heard of it.
Now it might be that the USA didn't get the same advertising treatment - sometimes differences we see do end up being because something is handled differently in one country/region compared to another
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/04/29 22:40:27
TLJ blowback was a big factor but not the only one. TLJ sucked all the air out of the room not just in terms of its blowback but also in terms of marketing, long before there was any TLJ blowback. The idea was clearly that TLJ’s success would carry Solo’s marketing but TLJ proved to be a greater liability than advantage for Solo.
Yeah they where hoping for the hype train to continue, but if anything it failed badly.
No matter what is your Opinion of TLJ is, it is undeniable that it rubbed a lot of star wars fans the wrong way and really killed enthusiasm for it. You can say what you want about those can as I have see people do. But it is a devisive movie that did more harm to Star Wars than bad.
I know a lot of people that never saw solo simply because they weren't big fans of TLJ and solo released so soon after TLJ that they simply weren't ready to go see another Star Wars film yet and decided to just wait til it hit streaming services.
I think if it had released in December instead of May then it likely would have performed a lot better.
Regardless of why Solo did/didn't/couldn't do as well as it might have done, and bringing the conversation into a screeching K-turn back to the subject:
I think a TV series, set after Rise of Skywalker, with Billy Dee Williams taking former-stormtrooper-who's-backstory-doesn't-make-much-sense looking for her family and telling her stories of "Back in the old days", with flashbacks to Lando played by Donald Glover, would be awesome.
Allows you to have both "ongoing plot" (BDW) and monster of the week (DG) in the same episode!
People forgst that flj wasnt pure negativity. It was divisive. Many vehemently hated it. But many also loved it. I, for one, loved the change in direction and over all message of the film. I was looking forward to o being something new. Then it wasnt. 9 was the worst of the new trilogy for me for being a nothing film.
Solos marketing budget should be half itz original budget. Not the neadly doubled reshoot bidget.
These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.
Solo also suffered from a single online article that people somehow took to heart.
Making all sorts of allegations, stuff like ‘it’s garbage*’ and ‘dialogue coach in hand’
To the best of my knowledge, that was just one article. And claimed to be from ‘an inside source’.
Yet, when you watch the film? It’s not garbage at all. Like, at all at all. Imperfect? Sure. But not [i]garbage[\i].
*I do not know why, but every time I read this word in such an article, I start reading the rest in Cousin Kyle’s voice from South Park. I do not know why!
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
5000pts 
6000pts 
3000pts
, the budget was indeed $275 million, marketing was everywhere at the time so I am not sure where you are getting the "not marketed" thing from to be honest, but lets compromise on that and say half rounding up $132 million, combined we are looking at $402 million in budget alone, now we apply the thing that no one ever seems to apply in these equations, box office take, lets just take the US one for arguments sake, that is 45% or $177 million rounded off, take that away from the total takings of $393.2 million and you are left with $216.2 million in tickets and then we compare this number to the budget of $402 million and you have a movie that lost an estimated $186 million, this is just a short hand example and not hard numbers as I would need to go to each nations box office take and apply it, China for example takes much much more.