Donald Glover is young Lando

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.

**reds8n**

http://www.starwarsunderworld.com/2016/10/breaking-donald-glover-cast-as-young.html

Big news just broke regarding the upcoming young Han Solo film! A few months back rumors surfaced that suggested that actor and musician Donald Glover was being considered for the role of young Lando Calrissian in the film.

Just moments ago, Lucasfilm announced that Glover has been cast in the role and will star alongside Alden Ehrenreich as Han Solo in the film, which is due for release in 2018. Regarding what we can expect from Glover's Lando, StarWars.com reports:

"This new film depicts Lando in his formative years as a scoundrel on the rise in the galaxy’s underworld — years before the events involving Han, Leia, and Darth Vader in The Empire Strikes Back and his rise to Rebel hero in Return of the Jedi."

In response to the news, directors Phil Lord and Chris Miller released the following statement:

“We’re so lucky to have an artist as talented as Donald join us. These are big shoes to fill, and an even bigger cape, and this one fits him perfectly, which will save us money on alterations. Also, we’d like to publicly apologize to Donald for ruining Comic-Con for him forever.”

On behalf of Star Wars fans everywhere, I would like to welcome Mr. Glover to the Star Wars family! The Force will be with him... always.

The untitled Han Solo "A Star Wars Story" film is currently set for release on May 25th, 2018!

... yeah, works for me

**Paradigm**

Yeah, he looks the part. As with Han, I don't think they'd have cast/recast him in the role if there was even a shadow of a doubt that he couldn't pull it off, so I trust in their decisions.

But he'd better get the cape!

**H.B.M.C.**

The very idea of a Han movie is stupid, and couldn't be more unnecessary. I cannot imagine it will be in any way good.

But casting Donald Glover is a very good idea.

**Yodhrin**

Disagree. He looks the part certainly, but I'm not convinced he has the right voice or that he can pull off the appropriate level of smarm without pushing it into outright comedy.

**Kanluwen**

Yodhrin wrote:
Disagree. He looks the part certainly, but I'm not convinced he has the right voice or that he can pull off the appropriate level of smarm without pushing it into outright comedy.

Highly suggest you check out the show he's been doing on FX; "Atlanta" then.

He can do it.

**Yodhrin**

Kanluwen wrote:
Yodhrin wrote:
Disagree. He looks the part certainly, but I'm not convinced he has the right voice or that he can pull off the appropriate level of smarm without pushing it into outright comedy.

Highly suggest you check out the show he's been doing on FX; "Atlanta" then.

He can do it.

You're mistaken in assuming I've not seen it; I stand by my initial assessment.

**sirlynchmob**

H.B.M.C. wrote:
The very idea of a Han movie is stupid, and couldn't be more unnecessary. I cannot imagine it will be in any way good.

But casting Donald Glover is a very good idea.

what are you? a trekkie?

a han movie is a great idea, with a han trilogy, 7,8, & 9, and however many rogue 1 movies they make, starwars will finally have more movies than star trek

plus any han trilogy is bound to have the fett man as the bad guy, and that's just more great stuff.

**BobtheInquisitor**

H.B.M.C. wrote:
The very idea of a Han movie is stupid, and couldn't be more unnecessary. I cannot imagine it will be in any way good.

But casting Donald Glover is a very good idea.

I agree completely. Just from a risk management viewpoint, Disney is nuts. They'd need a miracle to thread the needle, while there are a million mundane ways to screw the pooch. As the prequels showed, it is possible to retroactively destroy popular characters and poison your franchise.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

sirlynchmob wrote:
H.B.M.C. wrote:
The very idea of a Han movie is stupid, and couldn't be more unnecessary. I cannot imagine it will be in any way good.

But casting Donald Glover is a very good idea.

what are you? a trekkie?

a han movie is a great idea, with a han trilogy, 7,8, & 9, and however many rogue 1 movies they make, starwars will finally have more movies than star trek

plus any han trilogy is bound to have the fett man as the bad guy, and that's just more great stuff.

Dear God, stop! I can't take any more retching.

Is Star Wars Nemesis really what you want? Is it? Because this is how you get Star Wars Nemesis.

Or worse: Star Wars Into Darkness. *herk*

**sirlynchmob**

BobtheInquisitor wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

sirlynchmob wrote:
H.B.M.C. wrote:
The very idea of a Han movie is stupid, and couldn't be more unnecessary. I cannot imagine it will be in any way good.

But casting Donald Glover is a very good idea.

what are you? a trekkie?

a han movie is a great idea, with a han trilogy, 7,8, & 9, and however many rogue 1 movies they make, starwars will finally have more movies than star trek

plus any han trilogy is bound to have the fett man as the bad guy, and that's just more great stuff.

Dear God, stop! I can't take any more retching.

Is Star Wars Nemesis really what you want? Is it? Because this is how you get Star Wars Nemesis.

Or worse: Star Wars Into Darkness. *herk*

star wars had it's nemesis already, it's the trilogy that shall not be named and it's into darkness the force awakens. You should have went with the 5th movie, the final frontier when you let those who've been involved with the franchise set out to destroy it, shatner.

disney should know it's on thin ice with the star wars fans and they better start delivering before we stop supporting their movies.

**Paradigm**

Would those be the same Star Wars fans that helped TFA make nearly $2 billion worldwide and become one of the highest-grossing films of all time, and by and large gave it glowing reviews?

I agree that Han is not a character that needed more time in the spotlight, I'd much rather see this money and time spent on an Obi-wan film or something else in the Clone Wars era, or even kickstart an Old Republic spin-off series, but I have no doubt it'll still be a great film. Disney know how precious the character is, and moreover are painfully aware how the prequels turned people off certain characters and facets of the setting, so will be treading very carefully and pulling out all the stops, I think.

**sirlynchmob**

Paradigm wrote:
Would those be the same Star Wars fans that helped TFA make nearly $2 billion worldwide and become one of the highest-grossing films of all time, and by and large gave it glowing reviews?

I agree that Han is not a character that needed more time in the spotlight, I'd much rather see this money and time spent on an Obi-wan film or something else in the Clone Wars era, or even kickstart an Old Republic spin-off series, but I have no doubt it'll still be a great film. Disney know how precious the character is, and moreover are painfully aware how the prequels turned people off certain characters and facets of the setting, so will be treading very carefully and pulling out all the stops, I think.

Han does fall well into the Disney theme, Orphan turned hero.

Yes TFA did well, but to use an analogy to explain it. Starwars fans were wandering alone through a desert, they hadn't eaten anything in weeks, then they bump into a stranger who gives them a cracker. Man that was the best cracker ever, it must have been a ritz, OMG that cracker was gods greatest creation. After the man gets home and has eaten regularly he looks at those crackers and goes meh, they're really just plain crackers, nothing special about them.

I remember those glowing reviews, even when it first came out it was correctly labeled a remake of episode 4, almost scene for scene. It's only really claim to fame was it was better than the prequels, which was a low bar to hurdle. I helped with the opening day sales, I had the kids skip school so we could see it on opening day in 3d

**Xenomancers**

I might be weird but I liked Star Trek Nemesis. I think it's easily better than the last 4 star-wars movies. I think rouge one has a lot of potential though - I am really excited about it.

**Ahtman**

Being better than the prequels isn't high bar to hurdle; Nemisis can be better than them and still be a bad movie.

**d-usa**

sirlynchmob wrote:

Yes TFA did well, but to use an analogy to explain it. Starwars fans were wandering alone through a desert, they hadn't eaten anything in weeks, then they bump into a stranger who gives them a cracker. Man that was the best cracker ever, it must have been a ritz, OMG that cracker was gods greatest creation. After the man gets home and has eaten regularly he looks at those crackers and goes meh, they're really just plain crackers, nothing special about them.

And after people realizing it's just a plain old meh cracker, it went on to sell 5,167,345 Blu-Ray copies in the US, enough to take the #5 spot in the all-time Blue-Ray sales record in the US, and break records for DVD, digital sales, as well as rental performance.

**Spinner**

Sometimes crackers are exactly what's needed; as a palate cleanser after a three-course meal served by a friend who went out and bought 'Microwave Cooking for One', for example!

I'm really excited for this. Donald Glover is an amazingly talented person, and I can't wait to see his take on Lando!

**gorgon**

Regarding TFA:

1) For my kids, it's 'their' SW film more than any of the older ones will be. It is what it is.

2) It was never really for the diehard SW fans. Maybe that's hard to accept, but you don't matter *that* much. They hoped you'll show up, of course. Or perhaps it's better to say that they know you'll show up no matter what. But to hit the box office numbers they wanted, Disney needed general audiences.

3) Disney loves general audiences. They've been creating watered-down, easily digestible stories for decades, from Cinderella to the Marvel films.

4) One can cry 'memberberries', and certainly JJ Abrams has doled out plenty of them. But nostalgia does sell to general audiences. And you can also get punished if you stray too far from old formulas and favorites. See one spirit-hunting film from earlier this year. Balancing all of this is harder than it might appear.

5) It's been 36 years since TESB. Maybe it's time to consider that it's just not a franchise marked by good films with mature sensibilities? I mean, the creator of the series calls them kids' movies.

**DarkTraveler777**

sirlynchmob wrote:
disney should know it's on thin ice with the star wars fans and they better start delivering before we stop supporting their movies.

Wait, what? When did the fans turn on Disney?

I thought Force Awakens was well received and the buzz around Rogue One seems strong, is there a vocal backlash I am not aware of?

**jmurph**

DarkTraveler777 wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
disney should know it's on thin ice with the star wars fans and they better start delivering before we stop supporting their movies.

Wait, what? When did the fans turn on Disney?

I thought Force Awakens was well received and the buzz around Rogue One seems strong, is there a vocal backlash I am not aware of?

I think it is tongue in cheek. At least I hopes so, because cashing in on Star Wars junk has long been a thing and the movies were never some top tier piece of literature. They are pretty much recycled hero's journey in space. Entertaining, absolutely, but hardly the end all be all. Nostalgia filters are a hell of a thing!

Disney will crank out all the STAR WARS stuff it can make money off of. Which is fine, because space knights with laser swords and talking robots are pretty cool.

**Paradigm**

sirlynchmob wrote:

Han does fall well into the Disney theme, Orphan turned hero.

Now you mention it, that's the one pitfall I hope they avoid in this. As a prequel, Han has to end this in a similar place to where he first appears in ANH, a scruffy-looking Nerf-herder with no loyalty to anything beyond his ship, his best mate and the next paycheck. His redemptive arc of becoming a reluctant hero is contained nicely within the OT and finished in TFA, so hopefully, Han Solo Goes Solo will be pretty a self-contained, simple adventure story, rather than some big character piece

Like I say, I'm not at all worried, I have faith Disney can pull this off, but that is one of the few ways they could kill it if they go far with making Han a true hero too early.

**squidhills**

Paradigm wrote:

Now you mention it, that's the one pitfall I hope they avoid in this. As a prequel, Han has to end this in a similar place to where he first appears in ANH, a scruff-looking Nerf-herder with no loyalty to anything beyond his ship, his best mate and the next paycheck. His redemptive arc of becoming a reluctant hero is contained nicely within the OT and finished in TFA, so hopefully, Han Solo Goes Solo will be pretty a self-contained, simple adventure story, rather than some big character piece

Like I say, I'm not at all worried, I have faith Disney can pull this off, but that is one of the few ways they could kill it if they go far with making Han a true hero too early.

That's a good point. If Disney does have to do a character piece, maybe they can do it on Lando. I mean, make Han the star of the movie; he's the protagonist, the guy who gets things done, but make Lando the character who changes and matures. It wouldn't be out of order with what we've seen, either. Remember in ESB, Han thinks Lando is a con artist and a scoundrel and a card cheat... but Lando is the one who was supplying Tibanna gas to the Alliance. Everything he did in regard to Vader and the Empire in Ep5 was to protect his customers (the Rebellion). He'd picked a side in the Galactic Civil War years before Han did, and Han had no idea (clearly the two of them don't follow each other on Facebook).

**Ahtman**

Han didn't really turn hero until the end of A New Hope, so wouldn't have to be a selfish prick in earlier films?

**Jehan-reznor**

Oh it is Donald, I thought Danny Glover really?

Spoiler:

**BobtheInquisitor**

Paradigm wrote:
Would those be the same Star Wars fans that helped TFA make nearly $2 billion worldwide and become one of the highest-grossing films of all time, and by and large gave it glowing reviews?

I agree that Han is not a character that needed more time in the spotlight, I'd much rather see this money and time spent on an Obi-wan film or something else in the Clone Wars era, or even kickstart an Old Republic spin-off series, but I have no doubt it'll still be a great film. Disney know how precious the character is, and moreover are painfully aware how the prequels turned people off certain characters and facets of the setting, so will be treading very carefully and pulling out all the stops, I think.

What are you basing that on? You think the same Disney that allowed JJ to revert Han Solo back into a cynical, look-out-for-#1 smuggler, undoing the most endearing character arc of the franchise while adding a dash of Full-Lucas bumbling schlemiel, will now somehow protect the character's integrity and tread carefully?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

d-usa wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:

Yes TFA did well, but to use an analogy to explain it. Starwars fans were wandering alone through a desert, they hadn't eaten anything in weeks, then they bump into a stranger who gives them a cracker. Man that was the best cracker ever, it must have been a ritz, OMG that cracker was gods greatest creation. After the man gets home and has eaten regularly he looks at those crackers and goes meh, they're really just plain crackers, nothing special about them.

And after people realizing it's just a plain old meh cracker, it went on to sell 5,167,345 Blu-Ray copies in the US, enough to take the #5 spot in the all-time Blue-Ray sales record in the US, and break records for DVD, digital sales, as well as rental performance.

A lot of people probably saw Chrome Phailure and Kylo Ren on the cover and bought the DVD under the mistaken impression it was a Bayformers movie. They probably weren't too unhappy with their mistake, similar quality and all.

**jmurph**

BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Paradigm wrote:
Would those be the same Star Wars fans that helped TFA make nearly $2 billion worldwide and become one of the highest-grossing films of all time, and by and large gave it glowing reviews?

I agree that Han is not a character that needed more time in the spotlight, I'd much rather see this money and time spent on an Obi-wan film or something else in the Clone Wars era, or even kickstart an Old Republic spin-off series, but I have no doubt it'll still be a great film. Disney know how precious the character is, and moreover are painfully aware how the prequels turned people off certain characters and facets of the setting, so will be treading very carefully and pulling out all the stops, I think.

What are you basing that on? You think the same Disney that allowed JJ to revert Han Solo back into a cynical, look-out-for-#1 smuggler, undoing the most endearing character arc of the franchise while adding a dash of Full-Lucas bumbling schlemiel, will now somehow protect the character's integrity and tread carefully?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

d-usa wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:

Yes TFA did well, but to use an analogy to explain it. Starwars fans were wandering alone through a desert, they hadn't eaten anything in weeks, then they bump into a stranger who gives them a cracker. Man that was the best cracker ever, it must have been a ritz, OMG that cracker was gods greatest creation. After the man gets home and has eaten regularly he looks at those crackers and goes meh, they're really just plain crackers, nothing special about them.

And after people realizing it's just a plain old meh cracker, it went on to sell 5,167,345 Blu-Ray copies in the US, enough to take the #5 spot in the all-time Blue-Ray sales record in the US, and break records for DVD, digital sales, as well as rental performance.

A lot of people probably saw Chrome Phailure and Kylo Ren on the cover and bought the DVD under the mistaken impression it was a Bayformers movie. They probably weren't too unhappy with their mistake, similar quality and all.

Clearly you cannot distinguish a Michael Bay production from a Disney piece. Star Wars didn't have nearly enough American flags or explosions to be a Transformers movie.

**Xenomancers**

Have to admit - the Han character that Disney put out is absolute trash. Safe to assume the Lando will also suck.

**kronk**

I, for one, welcome a Han Solo trilogy.

Disney made 4 fething great movies (3 great, one OK) based of a fething RIDE at Disney Land. A fething ride!

**BobtheInquisitor**

kronk wrote:
I, for one, welcome a Han Solo trilogy.

Disney made 4 fething great movies (3 great, one OK) based of a fething RIDE at Disney Land. A fething ride!

Haunted Mansion got three sequels?

Besides, the Pirates series proves the point; those mediocre movies only succeeded because Depp's performance resonated with the audience, much like how Harrison Ford made Han Solo the most compelling of the Star Wars heroes, uplifting the first two movies into true classics. How do you believe the audience would respond to a Pirates movie with some fresh face as Jack Sparrow?

**kronk**

Mediocre? I was fething entertained musically and with my eye balls and with the story.

It's almost like we have different opinions and gak!

Automatically Appended Next Post:

BobtheInquisitor wrote:
How do you believe the audience would respond to a Pirates movie with some fresh face as Jack Sparrow?

If the movie is great, then very positively.

**BobtheInquisitor**

The music in Pirates was definitely first-rate. Depp's performance was captivating and enjoyable. Just about everything else was ho-hum and forgotten by the time I left the theater. Never saw any of the sequels.

Yeah, we have different opinions, and mine tend towards the crotchety.

**kronk**

If you didn't care for it, you didn't care for it.

Depp was excellent, but I really liked Davey Jones in movies 2 and 3.