|
|
Post by Samnz on Nov 20, 2021 12:23:23 GMT
After having finally taken the time to watch "Solo", I was surprised to see that there's no thread about this film.
What are your thoughts on "Solo"?
I thought it was in parts better and in parts worse than the ST. It had a more interesting concept and it seemed - to some extent - influenced by Lucas' ideas for the ST with the crime lords and all that stuff. On the other hand I felt it was incredibly pointless and proved that Han Solo as a character purely depended on Harrison Ford. I mean after ANH they gave the character a bunch of cringe-worthy wanna-be lines to cover up them un-developing the character, accompanied by pushing a lady to the wall and making her kiss him, which forced them to make a 180° U-turn on the character by the time of ROTj because they had written him into a corner at the end of the previous movie. Beyond Harrison Ford's charisma, there's not much there. And "Solo" really did prove that point - for me, at least. Han is the weak point of his own movie.
I'm also still shaking my head in response to the "checklist approach" that they took. How Han got his name - check. How Han met Chewie - check. How Han met Lando - check. How Han learnd to let the Wookie win - check. How Han made the Kessel Run - check. How Han won the MF - check. I mean let's talk about Lucas "over-explaining" things in the Prequels, right? I'm still laughing since it became astronomically ridiculous when they lowered themselves to celebrating a fanboy orgasm scene of Han shooting first. That scene alone is proof enough why you should never allow the fans to write the movies.
I though the droid rights activist droid was fun and a nice idea, although the execution was floppy and way too in-your-face.
That said, I liked the Kira character and I felt Emilia Clarke did showcase some fitting "Daenerys vibes" and the return of Maul was atmospheric and intriguing. I am more interested in a continuation of their story than Han's or many of the Disney+ shows that they've annouced.
5 out of 10 for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cryogenic on Nov 20, 2021 13:23:12 GMT
After having finally taken the time to watch "Solo", I was surprised to see that there's no thread about this film. What are your thoughts on "Solo"?I'll say more at another time, but the Kessel Run is really well-done in the movie and quite exhilarating. For a spinoff movie, "Solo" has surprisingly gorgeous visual effects, particularly in that sequence. There also seems to be a little nod to it at the end of Poe's "lightspeed skipping" tactic at the start of TROS. P.S. You may want to warn the reader that your post contains spoilers. Granted, the film has been out a while, but one little warning is probably still a good thing, since ancillary material of this sort is still somewhat "new". |
|
|
|
Post by jppiper on Nov 20, 2021 19:28:24 GMT
Cryogenic I think the Main reason Solo Bombed was because people weren't interested in a Han Origin Story after what was done to him in TFA
|
|
|
|
Post by Moonshield on Nov 21, 2021 5:14:01 GMT
Cryogenic I think the Main reason Solo Bombed was because people weren't interested in a Han Origin Story after what was done to him in TFA
The main reason Solo bombed is TLJ.
|
|
|
|
Post by smittysgelato on Nov 21, 2021 6:38:39 GMT
I was never quite sure what to make of the equal rights droid. I think George has said that racism doesn't really exist in AGFFA, but droids are treated unequally. However, I'm not sure if he ever meant that in a way that it should be taken as a serious subtext about inequality in the real world. On the other hand, it seems like George also takes a lot of effort to make it clear droids aren't just machines. I kinda of get mixed messages from him on this.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ingram on Nov 21, 2021 11:26:47 GMT
I'd rank it squarely above the Sequel Trilogy. I mean after ANH they gave the character a bunch of cringe-worthy wanna-be lines to cover up them un-developing the character, accompanied by pushing a lady to the wall and making her kiss him, which forced them to make a 180° U-turn on the character by the time of ROTj because they had written him into a corner at the end of the previous movie. I'm not sure how that works. It seems to me that a good portion of Episode V is not only devoted to opening up his character as a lovelorn Romeo in vagabond form but where plot and world-building was predicated on his past existence as a hustler, to say nothing of his character necessitating the design of Leia's continued involvement; the two serve each other's purpose in storytelling. That's why I never superimposed post-modern sensibilities (i.e. Han's oft misdiagnosed chauvinism) over their courtship. It's Hawksian for starters, but also one that arcs Leia from a withdrawn princess-freedom-fighter hardened by a Rebellion upbringing into someone a little more rounded with vulnerability who is able to connect intimately with another beyond the formality of stations and duty. Han is the swaggering fool who breaks through said ice. Hell, their space narrative is practically a metaphorical panorama to that effect: from a frozen planet to colliding asteroids to a peach-creamed city in the clouds. Han as a disposition is very much the pivot for Episode V between one world where a revolution is taking place, spearheaded by Leia, and another where the illicit marketplace continues between the lines and beneath the surface, as embodied by Lando—noble princess and shady baron administrator both existing on opposite ends of Han's spectrum.
I've always liked Han Solo but not entirely for the same reasons that have earned him such consensual fandom praise over the decades. On that point I think he's actually something of an underrated character, believe it or not. Han really is the fool; romantically, as much a fool as Anakin ever was; comically, distinct from Jar Jar Binks only insofar that he's too cocky to admit when he's in over his head but where he nevertheless reveals the farcical face of Star Wars when, say, overplaying his battle charge against stormtroopers on the Death Star or falling short a simple hyperspace jump at its most critical need, scrambling ass-up to repair the Falcon mid-escape ("Ow! That's not it, bring me the hydrospanner!"). Han does have the reflexes and a kind of instinctive gypsy talent for cheating his way across a fringe galaxy, but he's a clumsy hero rather than a steely one, where imprudence is what often gets him into trouble in the first place. He has not the callous cool of James Bond nor the wisdom of Indiana Jones. He's more of a Jack Burton. Episode VI, despite the general criticism, actually does well to complete this theme. Han at this juncture has in no small part by his own doing and revealed inner-nature been wholly stripped of his roguish gunfighter guise to confess a simpler endearing bullshitter-buddy he's always been at heart, one with some cosmic luck at improvising.
I give points to Ron Howard and father/son Kasdan for sticking to this character core for Solo. It's a solid movie, the little-engine-that-could compared to the grandstanding attempts at epic narrative & myth that were the ST films. Did I need it? No. Did I even really want it, a Han Solo origin? No. I was less than lukewarm to the notion back when it was first greenlit. Do I now after the fact consider it in any way artistically essential to, or an accentuation of, Lucas' saga? Nnnh-no, not really. And yet, I'm not so quick to dismiss it as 'microwaveable Star Wars' like the ST. It sorta works for me in its own alternative register. If the character of Han Solo was graphed just fine from OT start to finish, and feels complete as a utilized archetype, the character for this spinoff movie still achieves something in the way of its own lyrically extended gesture. What we get is a kid from a factory town who, wouldn't ya know it, has always been dependent on a girlfriend to sooth his insecurities or an older brother as a yardstick for his self-confidence, or a kid-brother as a ballast for his innate (no-so)tough-love affections. Even the 'Han-shot-first' business passes the grade for me, elevated above cheap fandom placation as a genuine storied moment that stakes a flag in Han's (de)evolution: gunning down Beckett sans any gentlemen etiquette was his first truly cynical act.
As a movie fashioned, well, it's Rod Howard, thus ensues a technically seasoned and perfectly affable entry to the franchise that neither reaches for monument nor fumbles with crass mimicry, while therein tapping a gold vein to the idea of Star Wars cinema intended primarily as an excursion from weighty saga pronouncements. Interestingly, once you accept brass tacks, for whatever the hell its own worth, a sidewinding Han Solo origin, both the movie's lasting strengths and weakness lie in the details. Yes, there's some lame stuff. I don't mind the "checklist approach" that you elaborate, though I get where your coming from. I already went into the enterprise with my frequency set to it being a kind of wink-wink collage-celebration of the character not all that dissimilar to young Indy scoring his bullwhip introduction, chin scar, fear of snakes and signature fedora all before noon lunch in Last Crusade. It's just one of those things, you either go with it or you don't. And I understand the sense either way. I just wish they had committed to the bit by deploying said checklist with flair more audacious to downright absurd rather than ploddingly at even intervals throughout the runtime; why not go for broke and, with equal parts knowing whimsy and mad domino-causality, christen our hero with his surname moniker, the Falcon, it's Kessel run and Chewbacca/Lando meet-cute all within one extended set-piece or climax, moments before or after "shooting first"? At least then you leave little room for anyone to bemoan the checklist as an obligatory labor.
Some details propped fun ideas only to be cut down as missed opportunities. I see no reason why Han amidst the chaos of Imperial trench warfare and the coaxium train heist could not have been fused into a single act with one serving as an ongoing backdrop to the other, in turn affording the audience a more resonating purview of the Empire's war machine in it's most mindless, meat-grinding state, showcasing awesomely scaled logistics and perhaps even having some throwaway bits of fun with black-comedic tyrannical hierarchy à la the OT; our crew navigating Western Front Imperial management en route to a rail passage in the mountains nearby. I also like the gist of a droid slave revolt but simply wanted more from its batty potential in step with Ewoks and Gungans usurping institutional overlords, as it could've been the entire crux on Kessel necessary to completing their mission instead of being little more than a punchline. L3-37 altogether offers a cheeky setup to such an idea but the movie loses its nerve in the same instance and instead falls back on merely sentimentalizing the she-droid in rote manner. It would seem the current studio custodians are bent on supplanting the droids of Star Wars as odd little curiosities always just-shy of being incongruent with larger goings-on with droids as precocious Pixar memes/mouthpieces.
Yet another misbegotten detail, Qi'ra: she's great...until she's saddled with generic martial arts prowess. I guess a heroine in sci-fi & fantasy is not a heroine these days unless at some point she spins around with kicks or swords or whatever to choreography instantly stock. Warrior skills are logical enough for Enfys Nest, a figurative 'Lost Boy' leader of a tribe of lost boys, but with Qi'ra the trope betrays her central appeal. She's a wartime socialite vixen, the Gene Tierney or Hedy Lamarr of this galaxy far, far away. Womanly wiles and psychological Texas Hold'em marks her prowess, not wushu. The showdown with Dryden Vos would've been relatively pitch-perfect had they not reduced her hand to just another 'yas-queen-slay' action figure; imagine Vos on the cusp of Han's demise only to go wide-eyed and limp at the crack of a single shot, Qi'ra silhouetted behind him like a statue, thin smoke trailing from her pocket-blaster.
Pet peeves, I suppose. On a more diffuse level the movie abides a customary presentation in dramaturgy and beats, thereby automatically docking it a point or more below Lucas' rarefied space pulp theater. I never found it quite as obnoxious or shit-brained nonsensical as I did with much of the emotional conflicts Johnson and Abrams dished, so... a plus, sorta. Howard to that end cruises at a comfortable, if nondescript, speed. As a showman, though, I think he exceeds the other two mentioned and without looking like he's trying half as hard. The speeder chase on Corellia is precision; the editing clean and sharp, the perspectives dynamic. It picks a gear and doesn't get lost in visual chaos as does Abrams' numerous chase sequences -- the one on Pasaana, to point fingers -- or the embarrassingly second-rate Harry Potter production of Johnson's fathier stampede on Canto Bight. The train heist is just as good and maybe the stunt highlight of the movie where Star Wars for the first time goes full 'Cowboys and Indians' and where Howard's staging and framing is almost spherical in its up-close intensity. With the ground-level roughhousing he opts for a hand-held approach that, if unremarkable next to the music video swish-pans and gliding corridor-run shots throughout the ST ad infinitum (camerawork artifice I for one quickly found tiresome), it still befits the parameters of the story in question that trades in galactic swashbuckling for a facet of sordid cons and capers; I still halfway lament the film not being shot in a more immediate 1.85:1 ratio.
I also agree with, and wish to elaborate, a note from Cryo in how the visual FX strike a certain unexpected radiance. I suspect it might have something to do with the muddy contrast in cinematography and production design, where not every other surface on screen (including faces) is ceramically reflective and pumped with plasma light. Solo is aesthetically a coffee stain. By choice. Therefore when the average of ashen, acidic and sodium palettes give way to these occasional weird splashes of ultraviolet, an impression is made. Daylight bursting in upon half-puppet, half-CG Lady Proxima and her tomb of indigo is a jolt; sparks, lasers and ion thrusters pop amidst the otherwise industrial monotony; and, yes, the whole Maw Cluster sequence practically inverts the film with magenta bioluminescence and where electrified octopoda tentacles trailing to gigantic oculars tip the proceedings near the rim of fucking space madness—Han playing it offhandedly along the way is a moment of glib humor that actually works. And I dig how the movie flirts with this scope and dimension of Lovecraftian extreme before settling its dramatic climax...on a balmy beach, and in some dude's lounge room with furniture and stuff.
As for Alden Ehrenreich, he's fine. While he lacks Ford's wonderfully rubber capacity for ham and befuddlement and wound, such comparison is irrelevant anyways. This isn't the Han Solo of Star Wars. It's a Star Wars take on Han Solo, assuming that makes a lick of sense to anyone. It does to me, so: suck it.
Final mention should go to the outstanding twin-themed suite John Williams' composed for the titular character. It's almost a musical coda of the entire Original Trilogy's intrepid personality -- with a touch of Indiana Jones and the opening theme to Amazing Stories -- rendered salient and heard anew. John Powell not only manages these themes professionally into his denser, percussion-centric sound but to my surprise pulled off some lush old-Hollywood romanticism of his own with a love theme that quietly reoccurs throughout the score before finishing strong to Han and Qi'ra's bittersweet conclusion.
The Sequel Trilogy is like a potato salad of questionable ingredients that's just sitting there on a picnic table, half-eaten: no thanks. Disney/Lucasfilm's Star Wars undercards are where it's at for me. They're 2 for 3 so far, which is why I'm rooting for Patty Jenkins' Rogue Squadron project. One of these days I'll explain proper to everybody who thinks inferior Rogue One why they are objectively wrong and dumb, and why they shouldn't feel good about themselves. Because Rogue One is pretty rad, and they're not.
*nods confidently, plays valachord*
|
|
|
|
Post by Anthony on Nov 21, 2021 12:21:20 GMT
IMO the best Star Wars movie outside of the Prequel Trilogy!
|
|
|
|
Post by Cryogenic on Nov 22, 2021 11:43:44 GMT
Cryogenic I think the Main reason Solo Bombed was because people weren't interested in a Han Origin Story after what was done to him in TFA Cryogenic I think the Main reason Solo Bombed was because people weren't interested in a Han Origin Story after what was done to him in TFA The main reason Solo bombed is TLJ.
Probably a bit of both, with the former merely compounding on the latter. Bob Iger's feeble-sounding excuse that "Solo" basically came out too close to TLJ probably has some truth to it, too. Although, even then, it was probably because fans were still processing what had been done to the OT characters in those movies. Lastly, "Solo" isn't a Skywalker/Saga movie, nor does it even have all the big Imperial iconography of "Rogue One", or Vader slaying rebel soldiers at the end. So it was probably always going to do a worse box office one way or another. TFA and "Rogue One" coasted to glory because they clung to convention or fan expectation in a lot of ways, while TLJ and "Solo" are a little more: "If you liked that other stuff, you might like this." I was never quite sure what to make of the equal rights droid. I think George has said that racism doesn't really exist in AGFFA, but droids are treated unequally. However, I'm not sure if he ever meant that in a way that it should be taken as a serious subtext about inequality in the real world. On the other hand, it seems like George also takes a lot of effort to make it clear droids aren't just machines. I kinda of get mixed messages from him on this. Yep, same. I don't think George has ever settled on where droids rank on the sentience scale, and I think his view of them is inextricably bound up in how he used them as machine metaphors -- more often than not -- against the "human" characters, as if the former are dim reflections of the latter. Then again, it sometimes seems that the droids are more "alive" than the humans, so who knows? I'd rank it squarely above the Sequel Trilogy. Fair enough. A lot of fans seem to like the spinoffs more. Ingram, I still stand back in awe of your abilities. That is a mighty fine character defence, particularly the highlighted part. Brilliance! Now ROTJ seems even better than it ever did.
Nice. I guess it really is a shame that a lighter Star Wars offering -- as polemical palliative -- was passed over on release. It seems many fans are discovering the simple delights of this film only after either the completion or near-completion of the ST.
Yeah, somehow, they couldn't quite nail the chase sequences in the ST. Noisy, jumbled, and either try-too-hard (TLJ, TROS) or not-trying-hard-enough (TFA). That said, as you know, I do enjoy all of TROS, and the Canto Bight sequence (for me) is neat enough for what it is.
I might have a bit of a bias -- call it, if you like, a (general) grievance bias -- for all the offputting emphasis on Star Wars being a "Western" in the marketing around TFA. So if "Solo" wears its Western influences a bit more on-the-sleeve, I might still need to slap myself up the head: "C'mon, this is fun, you dork."
An extremely eloquent description. Wonderful! It's funny you allude to the deep-hued madness of the film, where it departs from its super-sepia somnambulism (try saying that five times fast). I was thinking, when I said what I said before, I should have added: "And maybe JJ and his cinematographer (Dan Mindel) took inspiration from the Kessel Run sequence for Exegol and the blue-drenched look of TROS." I mean, that epic tentacled monster sparking blue electrical bolts in a thick murky dark? It seems a little close to ignore -- visually resonant, attention-grabbing, and just the right amount of wacky. Heck, even Kylo flying through all that red stuff at the beginning of IX, just before he pops out and flies down to Exegol (which the novelisation refers to with three distinct appellations: Red Honeycomb Zone, Blood Net, and Ship Eater), seems to have been partly inspired by the Maw Cluster sequence. It's interesting how these Disney films feed into each other. Although, when I say this, only TROS -- of the sequel films -- was really able to properly tap into the spinoffs (since none existed for TFA, "Rogue One" was released only a year before TLJ, and only "Solo" was timely enough to release a month or two before J.J. Abrams and Chris Terrio replaced Colin Trevorrow and Derek Connolly on IX and completely revamped the whole thing). "Solo", therefore, may be more artistically significant for the ongoing franchise than it first appears.
Right. It's almost a parallel universe thing or like differing accounts of the same personalities and events in a storied text. Because isn't that what Star Wars now is? On its best side, it is a glorious excuse for finding fresh ways to say the same stuff; or to iterate a new conception of a formerly known set of parameters.
I'll have to pay more attention to the music. "Rogue One" had a disappointing score and even the sequel films aren't quite peak John Williams.
Neat analogy. Anyway, I think it's fair to say there is more imagination on display in the spinoffs, at least in terms of world detail. The Sequel Trilogy should have been more like that. Clearly, the people at Lucasfilm are wholly capable of developing enveloping worlds -- it was the filmmakers themselves holding back in the ST movies. Weird.
I'm not quite as pumped for "Rogue One" as you are, but I appreciate your takes and appreciate the fact that the movie is there (and seems to work for a lot of people). Again, to draw a solipsistic TROS comparison, I like "Rogue One" a little more because it clearly had some influence on the design and story process of Abrams' second bite of the cherry.
Star Wars was damn good when Lucas ran the show, but it arguably has a little more to offer to the world now. While the end results are open to debate, I'm genuinely impressed that Disney/LFL were able to pump out an entire trilogy and two supplementary films in just five years (or, okay, seven years, counting from 2012).
Also, since Lucas came out and spoke about his sequel trilogy ideas, "Solo" got a bit more appealing and it seems I must respect it a bit more, knowing what we now know. A fun, diverting "escapade" movie, seasoned with Lucas' mature TCW/ST ideas, seems like a very smart move on Disney/LFL's part. This thing has appropriately flown -- Millennium Falcon-like -- a little under the radar.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ingram on Nov 22, 2021 23:20:21 GMT
Anyway, I think it's fair to say there is more imagination on display in the spinoffs, at least in terms of world detail. The Sequel Trilogy should have been more like that. Clearly, the people at Lucasfilm are wholly capable of developing enveloping worlds -- it was the filmmakers themselves holding back in the ST movies. Weird. I'm not quite as pumped for "Rogue One" as you are, but I appreciate your takes and appreciate the fact that the movie is there (and seems to work for a lot of people). Again, to draw a solipsistic TROS comparison, I like "Rogue One" a little more because it clearly had some influence on the design and story process of Abrams' second bite of the cherry. Star Wars was damn good when Lucas ran the show, but it arguably has a little more to offer to the world now. While the end results are open to debate, I'm genuinely impressed that Disney/LFL were able to pump out an entire trilogy and two supplementary films in just five years (or, okay, seven years, counting from 2012). Also, since Lucas came out and spoke about his sequel trilogy ideas, "Solo" got a bit more appealing and it seems I must respect it a bit more, knowing what we now know. A fun, diverting "escapade" movie, seasoned with Lucas' mature TCW/ST ideas, seems like a very smart move on Disney/LFL's part. This thing has appropriately flown -- Millennium Falcon-like -- a little under the radar. I came down hard on the Sequel Trilogy as a comparison. It's latter two entries, at least, share with the spinoffs surface delights per a kind of Star Wars Cinerama virtual tour through years-accumulative of art-department labor that no doubt has some kick. I was also not without some internally conscious irony when characterizing Solo as "the-little-engine-that-could" amidst the ST Goliath, given how it ranks among them as one of the most expensive films ever made with its $275 to $300 million budget. So, yeah, it's certainly no indie or mitigated production from a division studio; Rogue One, then, would technically be the "little guy" with its paltry *cough* $220 million price tag. And yet... Solo maintains a fixed storytelling altitude below the saga's Titanomachy—no struggling galactic leaderships, legacy standoffs, Force dyads, any of that business. The movie is not very Homeric and isn't much of a fairy tale, so for me as one who just can't seem to gel with the post-Lucas attempts at Star Wars myth, playing adventure through the same movieverse with this stripped-down space hopper affords a compensation with which I am [ rel- uh-tiv-lee] content. "Space hopper" is the best descriptor I can muster, inspired by the film's nifty opening title that whizzes towards the screen (reverse from the 'Star Wars' block) as a pixelated hologram and positioned with a birds-eye view of some kid hot-rodding his way through a Corellian steelville megalopolis. At night.      It's, like, here we go: a jalopy ride through the Barbary Coast of Star Wars, sans the metaphysics. And you have to give the filmmakers credit for making this movie look like a "bucket of bolts".
|
|
|
|
Post by smittysgelato on Nov 23, 2021 0:15:09 GMT
I love how very THX the opening is.
|
|
|
|
Post by eljedicolombiano on Nov 23, 2021 1:58:45 GMT
The whole droid rights thing was dumb as hell- L3 is easily the most annoying character in the history of the franchise, and easily could have ruined the film had she been onscreen any longer. Metaphysically, Star Wars has never ascribed to the idea that the brain is a machine; if anything, the appearance of both Grievous and Vader hint to the idea, as told by Lucas himself, that as these individuals become more robotic they lose their humanity. Adding the concept of the Force and midichlorians, droids aren't really alive in any meaningful sense. This quote from George is quite definitive I think:
Part of the fun of Threepio is he has no soul. He is programmed to think a particular way and be compassionate, but he doesn't really know what that means--and sometimes he gets frustrated, and he has very human-like qualities, but they don't have a central place where he can think independently. Darth Vader, on the other hand, as he becomes more mechanical, he loses more and more of his ability to even think like a human.
|
|
|
|
Post by Subtext Mining on Nov 26, 2021 14:06:38 GMT
IMO the best Star Wars movie outside of the Prequel Trilogy! What are some aspects about it you enjoyed? |
|
|
|
Post by Anthony on Nov 27, 2021 22:27:03 GMT
Hard to answer, since I enjoyed almost everything in it lol
|
|
|
|
Post by jppiper on Dec 1, 2021 22:17:37 GMT
After having finally taken the time to watch "Solo", I was surprised to see that there's no thread about this film. What are your thoughts on "Solo"?I thought it was in parts better and in parts worse than the ST. It had a more interesting concept and it seemed - to some extent - influenced by Lucas' ideas for the ST with the crime lords and all that stuff. On the other hand I felt it was incredibly pointless and proved that Han Solo as a character purely depended on Harrison Ford. I mean after ANH they gave the character a bunch of cringe-worthy wanna-be lines to cover up them un-developing the character, accompanied by pushing a lady to the wall and making her kiss him, which forced them to make a 180° U-turn on the character by the time of ROTj because they had written him into a corner at the end of the previous movie. Beyond Harrison Ford's charisma, there's not much there. And "Solo" really did prove that point - for me, at least. Han is the weak point of his own movie. I'm also still shaking my head in response to the "checklist approach" that they took. How Han got his name - check. How Han met Chewie - check. How Han met Lando - check. How Han learnd to let the Wookie win - check. How Han made the Kessel Run - check. How Han won the MF - check. I mean let's talk about Lucas "over-explaining" things in the Prequels, right? I'm still laughing since it became astronomically ridiculous when they lowered themselves to celebrating a fanboy orgasm scene of Han shooting first. That scene alone is proof enough why you should never allow the fans to write the movies. I though the droid rights activist droid was fun and a nice idea, although the execution was floppy and way too in-your-face. That said, I liked the Kira character and I felt Emilia Clarke did showcase some fitting "Daenerys vibes" and the return of Maul was atmospheric and intriguing. I am more interested in a continuation of their story than Han's or many of the Disney+ shows that they've annouced. 5 out of 10 for me. Youtuber Robot Head who's been critical of Disney Star Was did a review for the film here's a link Star Wars: SOLO REVIEW Have They Killed The Golden Goose? - YouTube |
|
|
|
Post by Moonshield on Feb 21, 2022 9:27:48 GMT
The best cinematography in existence. Sand: A Star Wars Story Solo: A Sand Story Solo: A Sandstorm Solo: A Star Wars Story
|
|
|
|
Post by Seeker of the Whills on Apr 30, 2022 10:12:40 GMT
Solo is mostly a fun little romp. I especially like the Kessel run sequence, which I think is the most Star Wars-y part of any of the Disney movies. I love the use of the classic music from TESB, which reminds of the asteroid chase. But mainly I have a soft spot for Solo due to one line said by Qi'ra that is a small claim to fame for my country: "Teräs Käsi." It is Finnish and stands for "steel hand." In Star Wars, it is a martial art first mentioned in Shadows of the Empire and later featured in the titular video game:  Solo was the first time it was mentioned in a movie. Having it exist in the EU/Legends was already delightful enough, but it getting referenced in a movie was a true surprise. The actor who took over Chewbacca after Peter Mayhew is Finnish, but he went on to disparage the prequels, so the less said about him the better.  |
|
|
|
Post by Subtext Mining on May 2, 2022 16:33:39 GMT
How funny, I was talking with a Finnish guy and some Hungarians recently, asking them if Finnish and Hungarian were similar or not and they said only two words are similar. I can only remember one and it's the word for hand, kasi.
Which is interesting to me because in Clone Wars, the Nelvaan refer to Anakin as Holt Kazed, which means Ghost Hand. I wonder if it's inspired by Finnish or Hungarian.
|
|
|
|
Post by Seeker of the Whills on May 2, 2022 17:14:07 GMT
How funny, I was talking with a Finnish guy and some Hungarians recently, asking them if Finnish and Hungarian were similar or not and they said only two words are similar. I can only remember one and it's the word for hand, kasi. Which is interesting to me because in Clone Wars, the Nelvaan refer to Anakin as Holt Kazed, which means Ghost Hand. I wonder if it's inspired by Finnish or Hungarian. I'm not that knowledgeable about such things, but Finnish and Hungarian aren't that similar as far as I know. Kazed could almost be derived from the Finnish "kädet", which means "hands". The amount of references to Finland in Star Wars is highly surprising. I've mentioned earlier how Duchess Satine's homeworld Kalevala is named after the Finnish national epic. If anyone is interested to easily acquaint themselves with Kalevala ( smittysgelato), there is a great Donald Duck comic book that deals with it. A bit off topic, but it's some surprising synergy with Disney.     |
|
|
|
Post by jppiper on May 2, 2022 18:32:11 GMT
Solo is mostly a fun little romp. I especially like the Kessel run sequence, which I think is the most Star Wars-y part of any of the Disney movies. I love the use of the classic music from TESB, which reminds of the asteroid chase. But mainly I have a soft spot for Solo due to one line said by Qi'ra that is a small claim to fame for my country: "Teräs Käsi." It is Finnish and stands for "steel hand." In Star Wars, it is a martial art first mentioned in Shadows of the Empire and later featured in the titular video game: Solo was the first time it was mentioned in a movie. Having it exist in the EU/Legends was already delightful enough, but it getting referenced in a movie was a true surprise. The actor who took over Chewbacca after Peter Mayhew is Finnish, but he went on to disparage the prequels, so the less said about him the better.  He's not Worthy of Succeeding Peter Mayhew |
|
|
|
Post by jppiper on May 17, 2022 20:21:55 GMT
|
|
