Solo: A Star Wars Story

[kbelle8995]

I just find it crazy that one Star Wars movie turned so many people off. The prequels weren’t good and people survived and moved on. It just seems with the Last Jedi some people were so turned off they don’t want to watch Star Wars ever again.

I also think that when the prequels came out we didn't have the internet as much. So some of this is being blown up by social media.

 

[rteetz]

I also think that when the prequels came out we didn't have the internet as much. So some of this is being blown up by social media.

That is a good point.

 

[BrianL]

I just find it crazy that one Star Wars movie turned so many people off. The prequels weren’t good and people survived and moved on. It just seems with the Last Jedi some people were so turned off they don’t want to watch Star Wars ever again.

Well, for many it's not just about TLJ being a "bad" movie. I'll leave it at that as I think it's all nonsense. I liked TLJ just fine, even if it's not my favorite Star Wars movie. Then again, I also liked the Prequels, so my opinion must not mean much.

I also think that when the prequels came out we didn't have the internet as much. So some of this is being blown up by social media.

As I remember it, a lot of the hate for the Prequels came later, once some Internet pedagogues started trashing them. For TLJ, the well was poisoned even before the movie came out.

 

[jknezek]

I just find it crazy that one Star Wars movie turned so many people off. The prequels weren’t good and people survived and moved on. It just seems with the Last Jedi some people were so turned off they don’t want to watch Star Wars ever again.

The prequels didn't mess with the original characters. Other than Kenobi and Yoda, the prequels had no character overlap. Annkin and Vader are different people. Kenobi was one of the bright spots of the prequels and they did some fun things with Yoda, but the characterizations were consistent. What TLJ did with Luke was... disturbing to a lot of people.

Then you add in the pointless fluff adventure to Casino Planet and a few other bits of nonsense and rehash and that movie is going to irritate some people. It did me. Not to the point of swearing off Star Wars, but to the hope that they rethink Johnson being in charge of that next trilogy.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

The prequels didn't mess with the original characters. Other than Kenobi and Yoda, the prequels had no character overlap. Annkin and Vader are different people. Kenobi was one of the bright spots of the prequels and they did some fun things with Yoda, but the characterizations were consistent. What TLJ did with Luke was... disturbing to a lot of people.

Then you add in the pointless fluff adventure to Casino Planet and a few other bits of nonsense and rehash and that movie is going to irritate some people. It did me. Not to the point of swearing off Star Wars, but to the hope that they rethink Johnson being in charge of that next trilogy.

I 100% get what you are saying, but I could see thinking how whiny Anikin is was worse than anything about Luke and all the republic senate hearings and political debate was and also the amount of time devoted to Anakin and Padme was worse than the one bit to Canto Bight ... I just see all of the movies having issues and it comes down to if you like the overall package enough to overlook those elements or not.

 

[jknezek]

I 100% get what you are saying, but I could see thinking how whiny Anikin is was worse than anything about Luke and all the republic senate hearings and political debate was and also the amount of time devoted to Anakin and Padme was worse than the one bit to Canto Bight ... I just see all of the movies having issues and it comes down to if you like the overall package enough to overlook those elements or not.

Oh I don't dispute that the prequels are bad. But they can be held separate in people's minds from the OT because there was so limited overlap. Assassinating Luke's character is a cardinal sin that I think a lot of people that love the OT just aren't getting over. The man that fought to redeem Vader, almost died doing it, then turns around and tries to kill his nephew on a possibility of going bad? How was he going to explain that to his sister? It was stupid and it was about making a shock scene with a character, not about anything that made sense. Someone needed to step in at that point and ask, "are we really going to ruin this character?" That no one did tells me Kathleen Kennedy is the wrong person to be stewarding this franchise. Not fixing the ending when Carrie Fischer died to trade the major character death is another massive bit of stupidity...

 

[TheMaxRebo]

Oh I don't dispute that the prequels are bad. But they can be held separate in people's minds from the OT because there was so limited overlap. Assassinating Luke's character is a cardinal sin that I think a lot of people that love the OT just aren't getting over. The man that fought to redeem Vader, almost died doing it, then turns around and tries to kill his nephew on a possibility of going bad? How was he going to explain that to his sister? It was stupid and it was about making a shock scene with a character, not about anything that made sense. Someone needed to step in at that point and ask, "are we really going to ruin this character?" That no one did tells me Kathleen Kennedy is the wrong person to be stewarding this franchise. Not fixing the ending when Carrie Fischer died to trade the major character death is another massive bit of stupidity...

I do see the idea that there is more separation (and different actors in roles probably aided in that as well). and I do get what you are saying about Luke, I really do - I just think it didn't ruin the film for me, but I also didn't grow up with Luke (I was born in 1978, so just before my time) so maybe it didn't hit me the same way

I also think some things might get adjusted in Episode IX so part of me also wants to take a wait and see approach. I mean, I am seeing some rumors now that Luke might not be dead, etc, stuff like that - so I think that might show how they do pivot off of Carrie Fischer's death

 

[jknezek]

I do see the idea that there is more separation (and different actors in roles probably aided in that as well). and I do get what you are saying about Luke, I really do - I just think it didn't ruin the film for me, but I also didn't grow up with Luke (I was born in 1978, so just before my time) so maybe it didn't hit me the same way

I also think some things might get adjusted in Episode IX so part of me also wants to take a wait and see approach. I mean, I am seeing some rumors now that Luke might not be dead, etc, stuff like that - so I think that might show how they do pivot off of Carrie Fischer's death

I was born in 78 also. I don't think how I feel holds for all obviously, but I know a lot that feel that way. I know others with other issues I don't think are a big deal. In the end, I think that movie provided a lot of reasons for different people not to like it. I also know plenty who enjoyed it. I just don't think it got much consensus.

 

[jade1]

Assassinating Luke's character is a cardinal sin that I think a lot of people that love the OT just aren't getting over. The man that fought to redeem Vader, almost died doing it, then turns around and tries to kill his nephew on a possibility of going bad? How was he going to explain that to his sister? It was stupid and it was about making a shock scene with a character, not about anything that made sense. Someone needed to step in at that point and ask, "are we really going to ruin this character?" That no one did tells me Kathleen Kennedy is the wrong person to be stewarding this franchise. Not fixing the ending when Carrie Fischer died to trade the major character death is another massive bit of stupidity...

ETA: I went 10 times when IV came out. So the 40 year wait for my hero is a bit tougher.

Yep exact.

I can overlook the PETA animal abuse scene, the child slave labor scene, the women are better than men at everything suggestion, the white First Order are Nazi's, the Capitalists are bad because they make weapons for both sides, that the Anakin/Vader Light Saber is pointless, Snoke with no story, Rey with no lineage, no villains left, and even "anybody" can use the force.

But to make Luke a teet sucking scardy cat hermit, that wont even show up in person to help after almost everybody is dead because of him-come on.

Oh and then kill him as well.

 

[jade1]

As for Solo, been more hopeful lately.

Plus it has Daenerys so that will help.

 

[MikeNamez]

ETA: I went 10 times when IV came out. So the 40 year wait for my hero is a bit tougher.

Yep exact.

I can overlook the PETA animal abuse scene, the child slave labor scene, the women are better than men at everything suggestion, the white First Order are Nazi's, the Capitalists are bad because they make weapons for both sides, that the Anakin/Vader Light Saber is pointless, Snoke with no story, Rey with no lineage, no villains left, and even "anybody" can use the force.

But to make Luke a teet sucking scardy cat hermit, that wont even show up in person to help after almost everybody is dead because of him-come on.

Oh and then kill him as well.

I agree with everything you said 100% but the bad decisions keep coming. Nothing specific, but if you think of a Solo movie there are like 3 or 4 check boxes on there of things you WANT to see. They exclude one of the MAJOR ones for me at least and put in another forced political message. Also from what I have seen and read they are answering questions nobody wants an answer too. There is more I want to say but I'll refrain as its spoiler heavy.

 

[BrianL]

I think the big point of that scene is that while Luke was tempted to preemptively strike Ben Solo he chose not to. I don't see how that ruins his character. He made the more difficult and right choice. Isn't that what the whole light side vs. dark side is all about?

 

[TheMaxRebo]

I think the big point of that scene is that while Luke was tempted to preemptively strike Ben Solo he chose not to. I don't see how that ruins his character. He made the more difficult and right choice. Isn't that what the whole light side vs. dark side is all about?

That’s how I saw it too - but obviously others took it differently

I think if you liked the movie you makes reasons to accept the various scenes and if you didn’t you find problems with them

 

[Planogirl]

You shouldn't mess with Luke. He's just one of those characters that could be counted on and I think that a lot of people couldn't accept the change. Maybe the next movie will vindicate him but I'm not holding my breath.

 

[jknezek]

I think the big point of that scene is that while Luke was tempted to preemptively strike Ben Solo he chose not to. I don't see how that ruins his character. He made the more difficult and right choice. Isn't that what the whole light side vs. dark side is all about?

He snuck into his room, lit his lightsaber, and hesitated. Ben woke up and kicked his butt to escape. There is no turning off the lightsaber and walking away. He was still there threatening when it went bad. Then he slunk off like a coward, leaving the rest of his students, his family, his cause, to deal with the mess he created while he pitied himself. And then, unlike Yoda, he even refuses to help when asked in the future.

I don't know what kind of sunshine you have to drink to think any of this is "the right choice." Any objective analysis of that scene and aftermath is a brutal betrayal of the Luke Skywalker character.

 

[jade1]

He snuck into his room, lit his lightsaber, and hesitated. Ben woke up and kicked his butt to escape. There is no turning off the lightsaber and walking away. He was still there threatening when it went bad. Then he slunk off like a coward, leaving the rest of his students, his family, his cause, to deal with the mess he created while he pitied himself. And then, unlike Yoda, he even refuses to help when asked in the future.

I don't know what kind of sunshine you have to drink to think any of this is "the right choice." Any objective analysis of that scene and aftermath is a brutal betrayal of the Luke Skywalker character.

Agreed, but it goes much further, like you say in the future.

I can even forgive that, if he were to come back full force by training/joining Rey etc (esp after hearing about Han which app he couldn't care less about) after leaving a secret map to be found if really needed, ya know-the entire point of FA.

 

[BrianL]

He snuck into his room, lit his lightsaber, and hesitated. Ben woke up and kicked his butt to escape. There is no turning off the lightsaber and walking away. He was still there threatening when it went bad. Then he slunk off like a coward, leaving the rest of his students, his family, his cause, to deal with the mess he created while he pitied himself. And then, unlike Yoda, he even refuses to help when asked in the future.

I don't know what kind of sunshine you have to drink to think any of this is "the right choice." Any objective analysis of that scene and aftermath is a brutal betrayal of the Luke Skywalker character.

Well, I've always seen Luke as having that dark streak in him, and he was motivated by fear, which is the path to the Dark Side. He did turn off the saber and he knew he wouldn't go through with it. Ben was going to turn no matter what by that point. Luke extricated himself from everything seeing how dangerous the whole situation was with Force users. Jedi have a history of doing that, and yes, it is a failure on Lukes part, but only one of many that he's experienced. I don't see that as out of character, even if I don't agree with the decision. It's just not a problem for me.

 

[jknezek]

Well, I've always seen Luke as having that dark streak in him, and he was motivated by fear, which is the path to the Dark Side. He did turn off the saber and he knew he wouldn't go through with it. Ben was going to turn no matter what by that point. Luke extricated himself from everything seeing how dangerous the whole situation was with Force users. Jedi have a history of doing that., and yes, it is a failure on Lukes part, but only one of many that he's experienced. I don't see that as out of character, even if I don't agree with the decision. It's just not a problem for me.

Different opinions I guess. But I wouldn't say Luke had a dark streak. Yoda says anger and impatience which he shows in Empire, but by Jedi it is mostly gone except for a brief moment when Palpatine goads him. Canon has Luke as the undisputed hero until this point. Solo is the rogue, Leia is the moral bedrock. Luke was the hero. Now he is a coward. That's crap in my opinion, yours may be different. But there was no reason to do it.

Tent pole blockbusters, of which Star Wars has always been a banner example, are about simple, exciting things that appeal to the masses. What Rian Johnson made was not a tent pole film. And I think that is a huge part of the problem and where Kennedy failed to be the right steward for the franchise. She let Johnson get away from what appeals to the most and make a film that had too many themes that appealed to and angered different groups of fans, probably not equally, but closer than it should have been. That is simply a failure of what a tent pole movie is supposed to be. Even the prequels, as bad as they were, we're really only offensive for being bad movies. TLJ offended large amounts of people because of the themes and actions in the movie. And that is not what a Star Wars film should have ever done.

Marvel is reaping the benefits of tent pole films right now. We will see if they can stay on track after Avengers 4. Kennedy allowed Johnson to jump that shark and the pushback is apparent. We will see if Abrams can bring it back online or how a significant part of the fan base will react. I think if 9 is ok, all will be forgiven. If it's not, Star Wars luster will dim.

I wouldn't be surprised if 9 tones the story way back to traditional and blander statements. Disney can't afford Star Wars to drop off over the next decade. I suspect Abrams is less interested in Johnson's deep thoughts and more interested in another billion dollar gross. I also suspect Johnson, and Kennedy, get reigned in on that next trilogy, if he survives to make it.

 

[BrianL]

Different opinions I guess. But I wouldn't say Luke had a dark streak. Yoda says anger and impatience which he shows in Empire, but by Jedi it is mostly gone except for a brief moment when Palpatine goads him. Canon has Luke as the undisputed hero until this point. Solo is the rogue, Leia is the moral bedrock. Luke was the hero. Now he is a coward. That's crap in my opinion, yours may be different. But there was no reason to do it.

Tent pole blockbusters, of which Star Wars has always been a banner example, are about simple, exciting things that appeal to the masses. What Rian Johnson made was not a tent pole film. And I think that is a huge part of the problem and where Kennedy failed to be the right steward for the franchise. She let Johnson get away from what appeals to the most and make a film that had too many themes that appealed to and angered different groups of fans, probably not equally, but closer than it should have been. That is simply a failure of what a tent pole movie is supposed to be. Even the prequels, as bad as they were, we're really only offensive for being bad movies. TLJ offended large amounts of people because of the themes and actions in the movie. And that is not what a Star Wars film should have ever done.

Marvel is reaping the benefits of tent pole films right now. We will see if they can stay on track after Avengers 4. Kennedy allowed Johnson to jump that shark and the pushback is apparent. We will see if Abrams can bring it back online or how a significant part of the fan base will react. I think if 9 is ok, all will be forgiven. If it's not, Star Wars luster will dim.

I wouldn't be surprised if 9 tones the story way back to traditional and blander statements. Disney can't afford Star Wars to drop off over the next decade. I suspect Abrams is less interested in Johnson's deep thoughts and more interested in another billion dollar gross. I also suspect Johnson, and Kennedy, get reigned in on that next trilogy, if he survives to make it.

I see Luke's dark streak as he force chokes a pig guard at Jabba's Palace. I think it was always there, though he thought he could balance it.

As for the film, I guess after so many movies, I like that they threw us a curve ball. They can't all be by the numbers. Even Marvel took some risks, like with Guardians or Ant-Man (granted skewing more towards the funny), and that has paid off. Obviously TLJ didn't quite hit with everyone, but the extreme overreactions befuddle me. I mean, it's still a pretty good movie, as were the prequels.

 

[Boski]

I see Luke's dark streak as he force chokes a gig guard at Jabba's Palace. I think it was always there, though he thought he could balance it.

As for the film, I guess after so many movies, I like that they threw us a curve ball. They can't all be by the numbers. Even Marvel took some risks, like with Guardians or Ant-Man (granted skewing more towards the funny), and that has paid off. Obviously TLJ didn't quite hit with everyone, but the extreme overreactions befuddle me. I mean, it's still a pretty good movie, as were the prequels.

I think Marvel's risk were more calculated. If Marvel were to pull a "Last Jedi", Avengers 4 will have Tony retire because he failed, leave Pepper, sulk alone away from everyone, only to help save the day by building some super new suit that he ends up giving to someone like War Machine to use because hes lost the will to fight. And I'd say that analogy probably still doesn't stack up because we are talking about Luke freaking Skywalker.