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.

 Vankraken wrote:
it really felt too caught up in trying to hit all the background plot points for the already established history instead of creating its own story and events

I don't get this criticism. You walked into a Star Wars film called SOLO. The inescapable nature of such a movie is that it will portray how the character we first met in ANH came to be that person in that place. Plus the Milennium Falcon is really the only "background point" that is at all important to the story. By contrast, for example, Han gets his blaster pistol because someone he's working with just tosses it to him so thathe is armed. No big deal.

I think there was a potential trap here of portraying young Han Solo as pretty much just ANH Han Solo and I am so glad they avoided this. The main theme of Solo is, can you afford to have friends in a dangerous world? Young Han, who is not as cynical as we find him in ANH, believes you can (or even MUST) but as the story unfolds it becomes increasingly doubtful. This is a great story context for the plot beat of Han and Chewie meeting and teaming up.

Yes, I agree.

This film is a spectacular visual feast with a twisty turny plot of betrayal and disillusion, -- the only positive thing being the Han/Chewbacca team-up. -- AND does a great job of building a "creation myth" for the Han Solo we know from SW4.

Sadly it doesn't seem to be doing well at the cinema.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-44283427

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Yes, I agree.

This film is a spectacular visual feast with a twisty turny plot of betrayal and disillusion, -- the only positive thing being the Han/Chewbacca team-up. -- AND does a great job of building a "creation myth" for the Han Solo we know from SW4.

Sadly it doesn't seem to be doing well at the cinema.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-44283427

I've heard people say it's because of TLJ and honestly i can't blame them. I think the new trilogy has been sunk. As i said before the Star Wars stories may have promise though as they won't be sunk by one bad movie. A shame Solo must be suffering for TLJ. I have hope for the obi-wan story as well. I think i'll entirely skip episode 9 though.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Yes, I agree.

This film is a spectacular visual feast with a twisty turny plot of betrayal and disillusion, -- the only positive thing being the Han/Chewbacca team-up. -- AND does a great job of building a "creation myth" for the Han Solo we know from SW4.

Sadly it doesn't seem to be doing well at the cinema.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-44283427

I've heard people say it's because of TLJ and honestly i can't blame them. I think the new trilogy has been sunk. As i said before the Star Wars stories may have promise though as they won't be sunk by one bad movie. A shame Solo must be suffering for TLJ. I have hope for the obi-wan story as well. I think i'll entirely skip episode 9 though.

Deadpool 2 and infinity war didn't help either.

I'd say the lesson here is, if you tell your fans you don't need them and the movies aren't for them, they'll listen and stop going.

I thought it was a good counterpoint of how "you can't trust anyone" being told to him by everyone while he meets the one guy he will always absolutely be able to trust.

My wife and I just got back from the movie, and absolutely loved it. So glad I skipped TLJ so I wasn't carrying any baggage into this one. There are definitely 5 movies now that feel like 'Star Wars', between the Original Trilogy, Rogue One and Solo.

Yeah I agree. I said before, TLJ has created a big hole on the franchise that the other movies are going to have to climb out off. That, and Solo came out too soon after TLJ leading to franchise fatigue, and it came out after IW and Deadpool 2, so the odds were against it.

I was on the fence on this one and leaning towards not seeing it. But after reading through this thread I’m definitely going to see it!

 Mrs. Esterhouse wrote:
I was on the fence on this one and leaning towards not seeing it. But after reading through this thread I’m definitely going to see it!

Do yourself a favor and do so. It's a fun movie, and if you liked the cinematography of Rogue One harkening back to the "feel" of the Original Trilogy, but wished there was more character chemistry, you'll like Solo. It's a pretty safe movie, but it's also fun and GOOD.

U.K. school half term next week. Seems likely that’ll be the film of choice.

 AegisGrimm wrote:

 Mrs. Esterhouse wrote:
I was on the fence on this one and leaning towards not seeing it. But after reading through this thread I’m definitely going to see it!

Do yourself a favor and do so. It's a fun movie, and if you liked the cinematography of Rogue One harkening back to the "feel" of the Original Trilogy, but wished there was more character chemistry, you'll like Solo. It's a pretty safe movie, but it's also fun and GOOD.

I liked Rogue One quite a bit so I’m sold!

 Mr Morden wrote:

TBH there is no reason to trust any review of this film that appears before general release.

Why? Most reviews appear before general release.

I think thats the point - see The Last Jedi

Reviewers get to see films ahead of general release. It’s not that they always write reviews based on nothing.

Rogue One and Solo are both wonderful. I gotta watch them again soon.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

TBH there is no reason to trust any review of this film that appears before general release.

Why? Most reviews appear before general release.

I think thats the point - see The Last Jedi

Reviewers get to see films ahead of general release. It’s not that they always write reviews based on nothing.

Also in this film's case it's a funny argument to make - the person who did the Guardian's review of the film from the press showings was pretty positive and gave it a good score, while the person who did a review after the release date shat all over it for basically not being TLJ and gave it two stars.

Any disparity between pro-critic and audience or pro-critic and fanbase reaction is almost always adequately explained by the psychology of the type of people who become pro-critics(ie, "film buffs" who place a high value on process and technical details that most viewers can't even notice let alone name) and the realities of their job(viewing vast, vast numbers of films every year compared to punters) leading them to place excessive value on novelty and subversion. Some pro-critics are capable of recognising those tendencies in themselves and rising above them to provide reviews in the context of an average viewer, but not many, which is why it still baffles me why people pay any attention.

Like, I understood people relying on reviews to make snap judgements of what to see back when I was wee and the internet wasn't ubiquitous, all normal folk had was reviews in papers and magazines, but these days it's easy to find folk online with similar tastes to you and find out what they thought. Hell these days it's easier to do that than find a magazine or a newspaper to read a review in

Just watched Solo.

Pros:

Looks pretty
Good music
Woody harelson
Awesome cameo

Thats about it

Cons:
Droid.
Cliche story and utterly predictable


So on the whole not a bad film per se, not amazing as some people have claimed, hardly a surprise there though right

Dont want to give away any spoilers so will leave it at this.

 Galef wrote:
Very hopeful for this. Keep the "criminal underworld western" vibe. It would be cool to see a live action version of obi-wan and maul's final dual, but I doubt they'd do that.

I could 100% see them doing it, only it'd be a 6 minute flashy lightsaber fight, rather than the 3 second samurai duel that we got in Rebels.

Yep Solo looks as good and at least IMO better than R1 but has the benefit of charismatic characters actually having a fun adventure.

sirlynchmob wrote:

 flamingkillamajig wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Yes, I agree.

This film is a spectacular visual feast with a twisty turny plot of betrayal and disillusion, -- the only positive thing being the Han/Chewbacca team-up. -- AND does a great job of building a "creation myth" for the Han Solo we know from SW4.

Sadly it doesn't seem to be doing well at the cinema.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-44283427

I've heard people say it's because of TLJ and honestly i can't blame them. I think the new trilogy has been sunk. As i said before the Star Wars stories may have promise though as they won't be sunk by one bad movie. A shame Solo must be suffering for TLJ. I have hope for the obi-wan story as well. I think i'll entirely skip episode 9 though.

Deadpool 2 and infinity war didn't help either.

That's actually an interesting question. The backwash of the big spring blockbusters is a weird place to schedule a supposedly 'troubled' film. I mean, yeah, 'Show Dogs' is also running around the local theater- but it's a completely unrelated genre (and probably cost a lot less). But at least in the local theatre around these parts, Solo still has to compete directly with Deadpool in every time slot, and even with Infinity War in a couple slots.

By mid June a lot of the direct competition is gone until at least September- it probably would have done better facing off against Ant Man 2 (the first was better than I expected it to be, but it isn't the same kind of obvious box office draw) and Hotel Transylvania 3.

 Manchu wrote:
Yep Solo looks as good and at least IMO better than R1 but has the benefit of charismatic characters actually having a fun adventure.

I actually thought that was a good call for R1. Spies, assassins, saboteurs, and soldiers in a covert war generally aren't all that charismatic, and they're just moral enough to not have fun committing murder, no matter how great the cause they're murdering people for is.

 Formosa wrote:

Cons:
Droid.
Cliche story and utterly predictable
.

Really? I loved L3. She reminded me of HK but with a different set of crazy.
As for a cliche and predictable story? It's a SW movie and a heist movie, so it's kinda right there on the tin.

I didn’t hate L3, but her character felt a bit off to me. I think she might be the most human droid they’ve done in a movie yet.

I liked that she was different from other comic relief droids in the franchise.

I do think she felt kind of off kilter in the cast though, but I thought the entire movie had a mild problem with cast chemistry.

I was worried that L3 would be a mouthpiece for IRL politics, like Rose Tico or Admiral Holdo. But as it turns out, her obsession with "droid rights" is played as joke along the lines of C-3P0's excessive chattiness. The character is supposed to be annoying. The other characters in the movie find her neurotic ranting annoying, just as the OT characters found Threepio's incessent prisiness annoying. L3 was elevated beyond comic relief, however, because Lando considered her to be a true friend rather than a pet or some other form of property. This was effective because the overall theme of the movie is about the value of friendship in a dangerous world of crime and betrayal.

Saw it last night.

Liked the tie-ins to the current continuity.
Pyke Syndicates, Hutt cartels and the remains of the shadow collective and the reveal of "who" was in charge wasn't that big a shock to me - and even puts it into a certain window during the timeline (confirmed by chewie's age:190, which means it's approx 10 years before ANH - since chewie was 200 in that one).

Sure, it doesn't have the grandeur, but I'm thankful for that. A movie without skywalker's brats is a good change.

Saw it tonight. Wasn't interested in the trailer pretty much at all but the positive word of mouth swayed me.

I liked it OK. It wasn't great to me, but it had some great parts, and some really good characters. Lots of weird aliens and visual flair. I didn't think the guy playing Han was amazing but he really didn't need to be. Woody Harrelson was really good, I thought. I also did like the droid but not sure how I felt about how that storyline resolved.

I also wasn't expecting the who was in charge thing. I have no knowledge of what happened outside of the main movies. I'll do some reading tonight.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Yes, I agree.

This film is a spectacular visual feast with a twisty turny plot of betrayal and disillusion, -- the only positive thing being the Han/Chewbacca team-up. -- AND does a great job of building a "creation myth" for the Han Solo we know from SW4.

Sadly it doesn't seem to be doing well at the cinema.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-44283427

I enjoyed the movie, but it was in my opinion anything but a spectacular visual feast.

In the beginning of the film, Han and Kira are racing away from a life of poverty and servitude through the grimy streets of an industrial labyrinth. The camera pans up toward the heavy clouds bearing down on the pitiless conurbation and we see a skeletal Star Destroyer under construction ominously hung in the troubled skies, like Damocles's sword.

In this shot, Howard connects the terrible conditions of the life these poor kids are trying to escape to the oppressive might of the corrupt Empire that presides over a galaxy of inequity.

Anything but a visual feast?

Is just me or is L3 almost a cheeky acknowledgement of the accusations of obsession with social justice that's been leveled at Star Wars of late? It's a bit like Terrace & Philip from South Park; Stone and Parker were accused of making a crudely animated show that was nothing but fart jokes. And their response was to say "let us show you what a badly animated show that's all fart jokes would really look like". Solo seems to be joking around with it and that's quite funny really.

 Yodhrin wrote:

Any disparity between pro-critic and audience or pro-critic and fanbase reaction is almost always adequately explained by the psychology of the type of people who become pro-critics(ie, "film buffs" who place a high value on process and technical details that most viewers can't even notice let alone name) and the realities of their job(viewing vast, vast numbers of films every year compared to punters) leading them to place excessive value on novelty and subversion. Some pro-critics are capable of recognising those tendencies in themselves and rising above them to provide reviews in the context of an average viewer, but not many, which is why it still baffles me why people pay any attention.

Also, most reviews will be reviewing the film, not the franchise. For example, I think Solo is a much better standalone sci-fi heist film than a Star Wars film. Same with Infinity War - your opinion on that really depends on whether you're a follower of the other Marvel films. I've seen reviews that are basically "It's OK, but if you liked the other films, you'll probably love this one".

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Is just me or is L3 almost a cheeky acknowledgement of the accusations of obsession with social justice that's been leveled at Star Wars of late? It's a bit like Terrace & Philip from South Park; Stone and Parker were accused of making a crudely animated show that was nothing but fart jokes. And their response was to say "let us show you what a badly animated show that's all fart jokes would really look like". Solo seems to be joking around with it and that's quite funny really.

Funny as in you actually think that's a joke they intended and which lands, or funny as in haha, they actually think "we're marginally less ridiculous than an intentional self-parody, checkmate Star Wars nerds" is a deflection of the more measured criticisms of that aspect of TLJ that actually works?

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Is just me or is L3 almost a cheeky acknowledgement of the accusations of obsession with social justice that's been leveled at Star Wars of late? It's a bit like Terrace & Philip from South Park; Stone and Parker were accused of making a crudely animated show that was nothing but fart jokes. And their response was to say "let us show you what a badly animated show that's all fart jokes would really look like". Solo seems to be joking around with it and that's quite funny really.

Funny as in you actually think that's a joke they intended and which lands, or funny as in haha, they actually think "we're marginally less ridiculous than an intentional self-parody, checkmate Star Wars nerds" is a deflection of the more measured criticisms of that aspect of TLJ that actually works?

The former, considering who was directing it at first.