Solo (2018)

Okay, so... 

I finally sat down and watched this movie in full last night. And wow. It was like "The Mandalorian" on acid. "Solo" is now officially tied with "The Rise Of Skywalker" as my favourite Disney Star Wars movie. My favourite Disney Star Wars thing evah.

NOTE: Spoilers will gradually show up more and more as the paragraphs increase. If you don't want to read any spoilers, skip to the final paragraph or stop reading here.

I really see what you guys were on about on the first page of this thread. The movie is incredibly fun, energetically paced, has a great cast, super-crisp writing, gorgeous effects, a very nice score, strong production design, and just a wonderful sense of delivery. How "great" of a film it is, I'm not sure. But I can definitely say it's incredibly watchable and there's a lot that rings true to the SW universe within it. I mean, sure, it's the Post-Lucas, MCU-tinged SW universe, but this movie carries it off in style.

Crazily, while still lacking the scale and grandeur of the prequels, it might be the most convincing "slice" of the SW universe of anything Disney has made. Corellia, First Light (the Crimson Dawn yacht), the interior of the Falcon, the spice mines of Kessel, and the Kessel Run were all striking and felt very Star Wars. All the costumes, trinkets, and technology came across as very tangible and believable, too. It brought back the feel of a credible sci-fi universe. What also surprised me was that there was this very artistic quality to some shots and moments: a touch of Malickian beauty about them. In combination with the energetic, unpretentious storytelling, the film gave me a real lift after the last few episodes of the Obi-Wan series placed me in a funk. "Solo" definitely outstrips that series in terms of a furious cinematic rush by a Corellian mile (or should that be a Kessel Run parsec?). 

I dunno. The movie just allowed me to feel "plugged in" to the Star Wars universe once more. That the storytelling was so straightforward, but with hints of Machiavellian danger about it, was very satisfying. Han, Qi'ra, and Beckett are all strongly-drawn characters; each could honestly have their own series. Lando was probably the slightly weaker of the quartet, although Donald Glover puts in a strong performance with the rest of 'em. This movie somehow felt true to the heist/underworld/sci-fi western undertones/overtones of the Lucas films in ways that were completely abandoned in the Sequel Trilogy (and which the Obi-Wan series only skirts into briefly). The whole picture is a shot of adrenaline; or a much-needed coaxium speed burst to escape the depressing gravity well of modern Disney Star Wars that has come dangerously close to consuming the "Millennium Falcon", hot-rod romanticism of Star Wars itself.

Although I'd cheated and seen some of the film before on YouTube (which is how I was able to wing it, Han-like, and semi-respond to Ingram on the first page), I had somehow managed to mentally delete some of the little twists/outcomes I'd seen or read about; thus, the movie hit me fresh, and I wasn't quite sure what was going to happen. A degree of ignorance for any movie, Star Wars or otherwise, isn't a bad thing. Of course, some things stayed in my mind from earlier "sneak peeking", like the film's depiction of the Kessel Run. But it was no less amazing seeing it again: in proper context this time. Oh, man, what a sequence! Just so gloriously carried off with the outrageously good visual effects (and solid editing, fun writing, and very nice scoring). Seriously, "Solo" might actually have the best visual effects of any Disney Star Wars thing, equal to or maybe even slightly edging out TROS. Insane! (Yes, I am aware they spent a crazy amount of money on this film, as Ingram pointed out; although a lot of this was probably due to the original creators being fired quite late in the process -- either way, the money is on the screen when those ship effects sequences click in). This is how I like my Star Wars: with a tinge of trippy sci-fi weirdness to it. Because the Kessel Run sequence delivers that. And the remnants of L3 being wired into the Millennium Falcon? Perfect. So now the Millennium Falcon basically has a mind, a conscience, a soul. It explains why it practically feels eternal. There were definitely some interesting little riffs/twists on Star Wars lore here. I appreciate all of them -- or, as I'm still processing them, let me say I think I will appreciate all of them, once I've seen this film a few more times and thought things over in greater detail.

And yeah, in some ways, "Solo" is an atypical Star Wars film -- and it completely works. The ending, for example, is a pretty taut confrontation in an office. No big space battle, no immense shoot-em-up. Yet it's very satisfying and nicely punctuates the more elaborate heist sequences that precede it. The Han-Qi'ra dynamic is also different. Qi'ra (very well played by Emilia Clarke) isn't your usual damsel in distress; nor is she a wisecracking, sardonic girl-boss that don't need no man. She, like Han, is quite the tragic character: self-made yet enslaved, and haunted by dark entanglements she hints about to Han, but for which she knows he has little comprehension; and while she doesn't exactly reject Han's advances, nor does she lead him on or desire to pull him astray. She maintains this poised distance, tactfully preserving some of Han's innocence; and at the end, we learn why. It's these last scenes that really drive home, quite surprisingly for such a light and seemingly inconsequential "side car" movie, just how tragic a character Han himself really is.

For all his wisecracking, happy-go-lucky, bullet-proof ability to find trouble and then get himself out of it, Qi'ra is the one attachment, the promise of innocence and happiness in the world, that Han can never have. It's an interesting subversion that Han becomes a little wiser to the ways of the world by the end of the film, but Qi'ra has already surpassed him and understands the shady, compromised nature of the world better than him. Han's Achilles' heel is his fundamental goodness and Qi'ra tragically recognises this. Even after coldly shooting Beckett (perhaps the only real father figure in his life), he still comforts him afterward in his dying moments. When Han and Qi'ra are separated by the glass at the start of the film, that's the last time they know each other as kids: naive, scrappy yearners in a morally grey world. Fate does cruel things. Han can't believe his luck at seeing Qi'ra again, but she has already grown beyond Han and sees that she cannot bring him the contentment and wholeness he seeks. Han wanted to go out and see the world, but it's really Qi'ra who is fundamentally altered by the world and its shadows -- a point captured rather hauntingly by her closing the blinds and the stark 1950s lighting on her face when she communicates with Darth Maul at the end. Episode I fallout remaining. Paradise lost.

While they were clearly anticipating a sequel of some sort, the ending still works well on its own terms by sketching out the fundamentally lonely nature of Han, and how his psyche alienates him from long-term love. The inclusion of the golden dice at the start and end of the film is an ingenious framing device in this respect (never mind them obviously linking the dice here to their appearance in TLJ). It's a little strange for Star Wars that a streak of virtue could lead a character to being cut off from the prospect of a happy union; it almost goes against the simplistic "good vs. evil" morality tale that is Star Wars at its core. Yet the series has always had a slightly more complicated makeup than that. It's good to see "Solo", consciously or not, tapping into that and showing the sadness of Han behind the picaresque facade. Perhaps, in not receiving any sequels (so far), the movie is a bit isolated and detached from the main Star Wars proceedings -- but like Han himself, that makes it a fittingly "solo" affair; and we are left to ponder a universe, a la the GL films, that is bigger, more sprawling, more complex, than any one glimpse of it can convey. 

I didn't really expect to find this as enjoyable as I did. I was expecting something at a "Rogue One" level of execution. Now, while that movie certainly has its fans, I would firmly rank "Solo" ahead of it. The dour, jagged pessimism of "Rogue One" just puts me off. I also find something about its presentation quite plastic and facile; though I'm not sure I can locate exactly what it is. "Solo" has a much greater sense of escapist elan about it. Less military-punk, more about the seat-of-one's-pants heisting, and wonders beyond the imagination ("Kid, I've flown from one side of this galaxy to the other, seen a lot of strange stuff"). That's a lot more Star Wars to me.

Two other points in the movie's favour:

i) The bizarre cinematography. Yeah, it looks a bit yucky, but as Ingram put it, that's oddly compelling:


I just love that. It's right on the money. The cinematography of "Rogue One", the other spinoff movie shot also with modern digital cameras, is much more matter-of-fact by comparison; or somehow more cinematically readable. With "Solo", they really pushed the boat out and did something more daring and artistic. 

I don't know if it's just me, but the camera work also seems better in "Solo". I don't really remember a single cool shot in "Rogue One" (yeah, yeah: subjectively speaking, I'm sure there are a ton to anyone who's a fan), but in "Solo", there were a few very striking bits of camera work, like when they are running into the Falcon as they blast their way out of Kessel and the camera follows Han up the ramp, momentarily into darkness, then into the gorgeous luxury-grey interior of the virginal Falcon. Admittedly, those more fluid shots are pretty rare, but they have exactly the right heisting vibe. Even the editing, while occasionally maybe a bit too rapid-fire and patchy, somehow serves to keep the pace brisk and lively and doesn't allow for any bogginess in the framing. This is a movie that avoids self-conscious dramatics and expositional encumbrance. "Solo", perhaps more than any other Disney item I've seen, knows how to keep the sizzle going.

ii) Alden Ehrenreich. He's brilliantly cast in the part. Sure, he's no Harrison Ford -- but then, who is? Yet he's perpetually lively, handsome, cocky, brash, and always attractively bouncy and benevolent. He's never, in other words, an asshole; nor a charmless huckster or an angry, edgy outsider. He somehow makes you believe that you're watching, well... as Ingram put it, not exactly Han Solo himself, or not the Star Wars Saga's version of Han Solo, but maybe Han Solo 1.0. A guy that's not quite as cutting or as deep as Harrison at his effortless best, but still that smuggler with a heart of gold. This is Han Solo before that veil of cynicism has fully descended. When he was still learning the ropes and making his way in the world; trying to figure out who he is, beyond his attachments and persona on Corellia... the young, innocent street-rat he's yet to leave fully behind. In that new Vanity Fair article, I take Kathleen Kennedy's point; but she's really wrong to throw such a wonderful talent under the bus like that. 

-------------------------------------

It's kind of a shame this film got passed over on release. I was one of the ones that said, "Eh, I'll guess I'll skip it for now and watch it at some point." I just wan't feeling it at the time. It's worth a look, though, as a very reasonable two-hour entertainment. I wouldn't say it's perfect, or as intricate or engrossing as a Saga film. It has its limitations. Yet it's a neat little package that feels a lot less strained and padded-out than a lot of other Star Wars products that Disney have made. With a handsome, likeable lead, a fast, snappy pace, a strong supporting cast, and a lively journey into the (broadly) non-Jedi, non-Imperial side of Star Wars, it's quite the palate cleanser. Who knows how much tussling and re-arranging there was behind the scenes? It doesn't really matter. The fact it ended up being directed by Ron Howard also ties it back into the good ol' days of George Lucas and Lucasfilm. To paraphrase Ingram: It's really the little speeder of a movie that could.