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 have been telling everyone to give it a chance. I am going again tonight, bringing two other friends along and the missus.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
So.

How a can we help Solo along? It’s unjusitifablg struggling, in a way that genuinely reminds me of Dredd.

Both are excellent films. Both didn’t do the business they deserved.

I would love to help but I'm the wrong kind of fan, also the 80's season at my local is using the cinema budget

I’ve been telling everyone who hasn’t seen it that it’s good and worth watching. I’d say that the main issue is apathy. Nobody who isn’t a massive Star Wars geek seems interested.

I think the best description I’ve seen is ‘Star a Wars meets Firefly, in the very best possible way’

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
So.

How a can we help Solo along? It’s unjusitifablg struggling, in a way that genuinely reminds me of Dredd.

Both are excellent films. Both didn’t do the business they deserved.

Go see it again, if you think it merits rewatching.

That was what made Star Wars such a phenomenon. People went to see it multiple times. Five, ten, even twenty times during it's run in the theaters... which both boosted sales and prolonged the theater run.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Stop.

Take a step back.

I can’t speak for anywhere else in the world, but in the U.K. the cinema is well expensive.

Pretty sure I paid around £16 to see Solo in 2D.

I get well fleeced in London, those prices are pretty normal. I saw Infinity War regular 2D and it was £13, I saw Solo on 3D Imax and it was £22 because I paid an extra bit to have the nice seats in the middle, also it was a vast screen. A £2 upgrade on a £20 seat seemed worth it at that point.

When I saw Fury at my folk’s place tickets were £2.50 each, let that sink in. I could take out the whole family for the cost of a single ticket in London.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
So.

How a can we help Solo along? It’s unjusitifablg struggling, in a way that genuinely reminds me of Dredd.

Both are excellent films. Both didn’t do the business they deserved.

buy all the empty seats in every theater in the world for a day.

buy 10 million copies of the dvd and mail them to random people across the world.

on a smaller scale, contact the nearest orphanage and send them to see the movie., should be good for a lot of karma as well.

The movie going bust could actually be good for future movies, they might actually spend more time and making a good story with better characters and not just slap star wars on every reject script they've had lying around and putting star wars names in it.

The trouble is, Solo is a good movie. It is the best of the new Star Wars movies from Disney. It is better than any of the sequels. It is a better film than RotJ, although because RotJ is the finale of the OT that is basically an irrelevant comparison. But Solo is taking a beating, among other reasons, because a lot of good will dissipated with TLJ.

Saw it again tonight and it definitely improves on a second viewing. Something very significant I totally missed the first time:A small but extremely significant moment that redounds to the larger theme of the picture.

It is a good script with good characters.

Yes, although we know Han and Chewie and Lando will come out alright by the end, there is plenty of danger, as not just lives are on the line. Although lives are certainly on the line throughout.Contrast with R1, where character after character dies and I just shrugged.

Skaorn wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Black Panther and Infinity War both did a helluva lot better than Solo.

Sure, but we're not living in an age were people are willing to shell out money multiple times a month to see movies in the theater anymore. With Infinity War coming out a month ago and almost directly competing against another blockbuster movie, Deadpool, is not exactly the release time any other blockbuster wants to be in these days. Coupled with the fact that people were expecting a bad movie, including many people here, because of all the crap going on behind the scenes. I only saw it because I read so many people here saying that they were expecting a bad movie, due to things like director changes and acting coaches, but ended up really enjoying.

This is why, despite all the really really problematic and anti-consumer aspects to it, I kinda hope Disney really throws their weight around with their upcoming streaming service and finally puts an end to films getting an exclusive run in theatres. Maybe then we can stop pretending that the only metric in whether a film is successful or not is box office take in a system where huge chunks of that take don't get anywhere near the people who made the film, or even the people who funded the film.

 Manchu wrote:

The visibility of “Solo” was dependent on the projection standards at individual theaters, and many of them weren’t up to par.

At the heart of this controversy is a disconnect between lax projection standards and a very specific creative agenda — namely, the work of “Solo” cinematographer Bradford Young, who is known for experimenting with low-light cinematography.

“The problem is digital cinema brought automation, and there’s no longer a trained technician checking that a film is projected correctly,” he said. “These machines drift, bulbs dim, and they need constant adjustments. You can save a lot of money, but the problem is if we aren’t showing movies the way they are meant to be seen we are giving people yet another reason not to come to the movie theater.”

link

Hah, I knew it. Add another reason why going to the cinema is rubbish compared to home viewing.

Skaorn wrote:
-snip- If anything, I'd say she isn't an extremist but a feminism for beginners guide. -snip-

This is actually, I think, at the root of the issue many people have with her work - she's doing pop feminism at an introductory level, with the sometimes simplistic criticisms that go with that, but for a period a while ago her work was being presented as much more than that, as authoritative. Unfortunately, even though that moment has long passed, some folk can't let it go and engage with her material on its own merits rather than in the context of a fraught debate being fuelled by tone-deaf clickbait hacks and trolls several years ago.

From what I've seen, most of her criticisms are inoffensive, many are simplistic, and she gives a few more weight than they really deserve, but she's hardly the raging vagina-monster coming to destroy all geekdom that the Red Pill brigade present her as.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I don't think a comedy has to be a mockery, but perhaps that's a cultural thing.

It can be very hard to get humour right, of course, especially with a very wide audience.

I think the problem is when someone says "Star Wars comedy", what fans hear is "Jar Jar Binks".

You could absolutely get away with a Star Wars movie with a more comedic tone but it can't be slapstick, or the kind of self aware GotG style, it would have to be more wry and still grounded in a fundamentally Star Wars adventure narrative.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
So.

How a can we help Solo along? It’s unjusitifablg struggling, in a way that genuinely reminds me of Dredd.

Both are excellent films. Both didn’t do the business they deserved.

Not sure TBH. I've paid to see it myself even though it was a garbage experience(and one I'm not willing to repeat even though I would quite like to see it again). I've talked it up to folk I know who I thought might be persuaded to go see it. There's not really much more any of us can do - like someone mentioned, Disney seem to have just dropped the film, and the media is full of the "Solo a box office failure" and "Solo safe and boring not like awesome subversive TLJ" stories.

 Manchu wrote:
Yes, although we know Han and Chewie and Lando will come out alright by the end, there is plenty of danger, as not just lives are on the line. Although lives are certainly on the line throughout.

Spoiler:

No less than four "good guy" characters die and every death felt very emotional, all in different ways. This is because (1) even small parts had skillful characterization and (2) the deaths were tied to the theme of the movie. Val dies to give Beckett a chance at pulling off the job, and thus preventing Voss from murdering him. Despite Beckett's cynical worldview, Val really loved him. When Jon Favreau's character Rio dies, his last words are about the regret he has about dying alone - significant words for young Han. L3's death shows how Lando truly valued her as a friend, despite acting like she was an annoyance and embarassment. And Beckett's death is the capstone, showing how a mercenary lifestyle could only end in tragedy.

Contrast with R1, where character after character dies and I just shrugged.

about L3

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

Spoiler:

If it was just the data, he wouldn't have been cradling her body after she died.

I think Lando clearly had genuine attachment to L3 beyond her database, not to the extent of ‘loving’ her, that was clearly played through the relevant scenes to be mistaken on L3’s part. But I think the scene where she dies was also done in such a way to explicitly show he valued her as a friend. That he takes off in the Falcon at the end, well he’s pretty pissed off that his ship has been trashed and he’s facing almost certainly being killed by either of the groups turning up to fight over the loot.

He certainly got colder towards droids in the next 13 years or so - but the humans who act with any warmth towards droids in general were a rather small set.

"Having problems with your droid?" - when he sees 3po blasted into lots of bits in ESB - for example.

Yes, Lando definitely thought of L3 as a real friend. That's very clear in the movie. He tries to be cool and detached, talking about how he would have her memory wiped but for her navigational database but it's just an act.

 Manchu wrote:
The trouble is, Solo is a good movie. It is the best of the new Star Wars movies from Disney. It is better than any of the sequels. It is a better film than RotJ, although because RotJ is the finale of the OT that is basically an irrelevant comparison. But Solo is taking a beating, among other reasons, because a lot of good will dissipated with TLJ.

I agree, and it's frustrating to see the fandom cheating themselves out of a good movie. Good job sticking it to the man, geeks!

Just saw it. I liked it almost as much as Rogue One. It might be because Solo is stronger in the middle and starts to fizzle a bit near the end, where Rogue One putzes around quite a bit and then finishes strong. Either way, Solo felt like a Star Wars movie, with at least two scenes of perfect Star Wars...ness. ...ocity? Will definitely buy on DVD.


Also,

 Elemental wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
The trouble is, Solo is a good movie. It is the best of the new Star Wars movies from Disney. It is better than any of the sequels. It is a better film than RotJ, although because RotJ is the finale of the OT that is basically an irrelevant comparison. But Solo is taking a beating, among other reasons, because a lot of good will dissipated with TLJ.

I agree, and it's frustrating to see the fandom cheating themselves out of a good movie. Good job sticking it to the man, geeks!

I'm fairly sure the fandom are the only ones who went to see it. minus a few thousand who didn't want to see it because they didn't want to be told what horrible people they are if they didn't like it.

people forget the large Christian right who also boycotted the movie because Lando was pan. How many other cultures found that offensive? They probably should have kept that part quiet until after the movies release.

then the lack of advertising, it didn't start getting promoted until 1 month before release. The timing of the release was also bad, given the choice between marvel movies and star wars, people are choosing the marvel movies still. I hear Deadpool is shaping up to beat solo this weekend.

Yes there's a large star wars fan base, but that doesn't add up to how poorly received the movie was world wide, it just seems like it was doomed to fail from the start.

 Elemental wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
The trouble is, Solo is a good movie. It is the best of the new Star Wars movies from Disney. It is better than any of the sequels. It is a better film than RotJ, although because RotJ is the finale of the OT that is basically an irrelevant comparison. But Solo is taking a beating, among other reasons, because a lot of good will dissipated with TLJ.

I agree, and it's frustrating to see the fandom cheating themselves out of a good movie. Good job sticking it to the man, geeks!

Its not like there are not plenty of other things to watch - I'll watch it when its on sky.

Solo didn’t deserve this lukewarm reception. It’s such a shame.

I get why people are saying that solo didn’t deserve this kind of response, thing is, Disney does deserve it, the whole Star Wars cinematic universe needs a hard looking at and a change at the top, Kathleen Kennedy I believe her name is, while the films are making money they will not do this though, the whole team behind these films need the sack, the Star Wars franchise has been damaged by its mishandling and sadly Solo is a victim of this.

I'd rate it at the same level of Phantom Menace. It was a fun movie, it introduced the old and new, and it set up future plots/story foundations.

I still thought the writing/casting/script wasn't nearly as good as Rogue One but I've only seen Solo in a crowded /talking city theater once. I've seen Rogue One about 5 times, and three times at a cinema

So, I bought some of the Die Cast toys for my nephew's birthday (and some more for my son), and there was a ship that I don't recall seeing in the film. It was some kind of thin cruiser with three satellite dishes. Was it cut, or did I miss it?

I saw Solo with my two kids this week ( for the princely sum of £13.50 - gotta love old fashioned seaside cinematic) we all loved it but bearing in mind it was the middle of half-term hols there can’t of been more that 10-15% in for a matinee showing; Sherlock Gnomes was chock full judging bumpy the crowd that poured out at the same time.

Still we (me + 9yo + 6yo) loved it. My daughter rates it as her favourite SW film so far, high praise indeed.

Some scenes toward the end dragged a bit and the Dragon Queen just appearing out of nowhere granted a but but that’s a really minor complaint.

Sign me up for more like this please.

Solo is being crapped on unfairly. I would have much preferred to have Rogue One and Solo be the first two movies in the new Star Wars Generation, compared to what we got instead. I'm

Saw Solo today and it sure was better than I expected. Particularly early part of the movie is strong (with nice 'For the Emperor, Imperial Guard!' scene thrown in...). After Lando comes in it dips a bit but ending is decent again. I think it is better than Rogue 1, which suffered from boring characters and forced plotline. Plot was nice even though for cynical viewer there were few surprises. I liked that unlike other prequels, they did not try to tie the plotline directly to start of A New Hope.

The movie featured lots of lore and background references. Some fan service though not as much as some other SW movies.

So the problems were really that there were too many characters. 'Solo' is really unfitting name for it. Should have been called 'Group'. L3 particularly should have been cut out. I felt Lando was made bit too cartoonish.
Also the leads had no chemistry WHATSOEVER. It was almost painful to watch them act like they had something between them.

Anyway, they hinted for sequel and I would go to watch.

Solo, even more than Rogue One, feels like it was made by people with real love for the OT.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Take a step back.

I can’t speak for anywhere else in the world, but in the U.K. the cinema is well expensive.

Pretty sure I paid around £16 to see Solo in 2D.

Okay, that is pricey. I paid 13 Euros from 2D Solo (Sunday). Going price is 14€ but there was 1 Euro student discount.