So... Solo. The Han Solo Movie. The.... yeah.

[anatess2]

2 minutes ago, Scott said:

Dang guys.  It's just a movie.  You pay a few bucks and spend a few hours to see it and it may or not be good.  

If it wasn't what you expected, no harm was done.  Watching movies is usually a big time waster anyway.   

Disney owns Star Wars now.   They can do whatever they want with it and no one has to see it.  If they want to put Mickey Mouse or Goofy in it, that's their business.  

Movies are made to make money for the producers and others; that is all.   They aren't made to make everyone happy.

Solo made Disney more than $150,000 i profits.    They accomplished their goal whether or not you liked the movie. 

Uhm... they didn't.  They lost at least $40 MILLION, if not more if you consider the unsold Christmas toys as a Disney loss and not the retailer's loss.  And Disney's revised FEC filings show that Lucasfilm dragged Disney profits down as Marvel pushes it up with the cost of the ongoing projects that has not been cancelled with a lower projection of sales.

"It's just a movie" is SMACK DAB what killed Star Wars.  People who think that are heading the production.  Sad.

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

1 hour ago, NeuroTypical said:

- In like episode 2 of Discovery, the other minority female died.  So let's give her a show focused on the years before she died.  [image: TV Exec board meeting:  "We're here to talk about what people with money like.  Minority females!  Those like those, right?"

This show is actually about the Evil empress from the mirror universe. Have you watched Discovery or just sketchy news stories about it?

[Midwest LDS]

21 minutes ago, unixknight said:

Agreed.  I think Solo fell victim to the backlash on Episode 8, as @Emmanuel Goldstein mentioned.  People couldn't take their money back from seeing Episode VIII, but they could refuse to pay to see another movie by the same studio.  

I think we could have done without the droid being an emblem of civil rights pandering.  I didn't hate the character, I just felt like they used her all wrong in the story.

The more I think about it, the more I think this script was a revised script for an Old Western comedy film, not unlike Maverick.  I don't mean Star Wars done in a Western style, I mean I think they took a straight Western and adapted it to Star Wars.  Not necessarily a criticism, just an observation.  

Actually... I do mean it as a criticism.  Science fiction or Science Fantasy should be stories that simply cannot be told in any other genre.  It's their strength.  It allows them to do social commentary from an entirely new and enlightening perspective that lets us see our own world in a different light.  To simply take an existing story and wrap it in a veneer of a science fantasy franchise is a waste, and ultimately I think that's what kept Solo from being awesome.

I see where you are coming from, although I think Space Western can work (Firefly comes to mind among others). Solo was a good film that was kept from greatness, I think, because of the subject matter. Han Solo is such an important character to most Star Wars fans, myself included, that any attempt at a film was destined to fall short of our expectations and any actor trying to replace Harrison Ford was going to fall short. Add in some of the problems we've talked about, and it's guaranteed to not receive a good reception.

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

1 hour ago, unixknight said:

I'm so torn about Discovery.  Some of it was actually pretty great, especially the big twist... but... it doesn't feel like Star Trek.  It feels like a sci fi show set in the Star Trek universe.

Trekkies will understand.

 

Maybe it is just a holo-novel that some of the characters use to relax? lol

[unixknight]

4 minutes ago, Scott said:

Solo made Disney more than $150,000 i profits.    They accomplished their goal whether or not you liked the movie. 

No, they didn't make a profit on Solo.  The movie generated about $393M in gross revenue for a stated budget of $300M.  That may sound like a profit, but it doesn't take into account the cost of distribution, marketing, taxes, the cut from theaters and distributors, re-shoots, etc.  None of that appears in the stated budget and that's just what the Studio admits to spending.  IN actuality it's usually higher to begin with.  Solo was a financial loss for Disney.

3 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Into Darkness broke Star Trek too.  The beginning scene already put Trekkies into... whaaaat... then the ending with Khan's nano-whatevers curing Kirk was like... get outta here with that junk!  It would have been better if they kept Kirk dead and spend some time figuring out how to properly bring him back alive in the next movie.  Right now, the next movie is... tat-tada... cancelled.

Grrr…. Into Darkness.... A movie so bad it made me miss Star Trek V.  That movie was hokey, cheap and silly but at least it didn't break the story universe.  Because of Into Darkness we can have:

• Beam anywhere you want!  No spaceships required!
• Dead?  No problem!  We'll just tap an Augment and bring you right back!
• Emo Spock baby YEAH!
• The submarine Enterprise! (Though to be fair, that didn't bother me too much.)  
• Khan:  Sikh Warrior now in Vanilla flavor!

I could go on.  I don't wanna.

[Midwest LDS]

27 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Again, Solo was not what broke Star Wars.  The Last Jedi did.  There's no point in ANY Disney Star Wars movie when the universe is not Star Wars anymore.  It's like going to a Vegan Convention where the main offering is bacon.  What's the point in going?

I agree Disney's made some huge misteps, biggest of which is not using the original Thrawn triliogy as the plot for the new films. Although I'm not convinced that everything they do is no longer in the Star Wars universe as not everything in the Old EU was amazing (endless clones of Palapatine come to mind). But I can see where you are coming from.

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

30 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Again, Solo was not what broke Star Wars.  The Last Jedi did.  There's no point in ANY Disney Star Wars movie when the universe is not Star Wars anymore.  It's like going to a Vegan Convention where the main offering is bacon.  What's the point in going?

 

[Guest Scott]

17 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Uhm... they didn't.  They lost at least $40 MILLION, if not more if you consider the unsold Christmas toys as a Disney loss and not the retailer's loss.  And Disney's revised FEC filings show that Lucasfilm dragged Disney profits down as Marvel pushes it up with the cost of the ongoing projects that has not been cancelled with a lower projection of sales.

I don't think the source I used considered promotion cost so yeah, bad numbers.   It looks like it's currently just about breaking even.

Quote

"It's just a movie" is SMACK DAB what killed Star Wars.  People who think that are heading the production.  Sad.

It is just a movie.   It is nothing more and nothing less.  Like the majority of movies, you are supposed to be entertained for two hours plus or minus; not to have a life changing experience.  

As mentioned, I liked Solo.   It was still more plausible than several other Star Wars movies (even though I enjoyed those too).  Even though I liked Solo, it was hardly a life changing experience or something I would base any part of my life on.   It was just a movie, like almost all other movies are and were.    

 

Edited January 15, 2019 by Scott

[unixknight]

3 minutes ago, Emmanuel Goldstein said:

This show is actually about the Evil empress from the mirror universe. Have you watched Discovery or just sketchy news stories about it?

Erm…. Spoiler alert...

2 minutes ago, Midwest LDS said:

I see where you are coming from, although I think Space Western can work (Firefly comes to mind among others). Solo was a good film that was kept from greatness, I think, because of the subject matter. Han Solo is such an important character to most Star Wars fans, myself included, that any attempt at a film was destined to fall short of our expectations and any actor trying to replace Harrison Ford was going to fall short. Add in some of the problems we've talked about, and it's guaranteed to not receive a good reception.

That's fair.  You're right that such an iconic character is very difficult to successfully recast.  One of the few things I like about the Star Trek Abramsverse is that they did a decent job with the casting, overall.

That said, I think a much better movie would have been this same story but told from Lando's point of view.  Donald Glover was GREAT as Lando Calrissian, and made for a more interesting character.  They could have expanded his part of the story a bit, and relegated Han to a supporting character, so that they didn't have quite so much riding on the success of the replacement actor for Han.  

And yeah, Space Westerns can work.  I think Firefly was overrated but I did like it.  The thing about Firefly though is that a lot of it really can't be told in any genre other than Sci-fi, and that's what makes it GOOD Sci-fi.  Solo could be reshot as a Western beat for beat and change NOTHING.  

[unixknight]

6 minutes ago, Scott said:

It is just a movie.   It is nothing more and nothing less.  Like the majority of movies, you are supposed to be entertained for two hours plus or minus; not to have a life changing experience.  

For you, it's just a movie.  I think it's unfair to assume that's the same way others view it.  For those of us who were at just the right age, Luke Skywalker was an icon, a role model, an important figure in our childhood in the same way that epic heroes of other eras shaped the minds and  perspectives of kids who grew up with them.  

For some, Star Wars is a real passion.  It's a pastime and a hobby.  I'm a Trekkie and I have models of Federation Starships in my man cave that I built myself.  I occasionally use examples from Star Trek stories to teach moral lessons to my kids.  (You'd be surprised how useful that is.)  I don't feel quite that way about Star Wars but I know a lot of people do.  

Genres like Star Wars, Star Trek, comic book movies, etc. are the mythology of the modern age.  Luke Skywalker, James Kirk, Superman and the like are our modern Aneas, Achilles, Jason and Perseus.  They're the mythology that both reflects and shapes our stories as a culture.  

Edited January 15, 2019 by unixknight

[Guest Scott]

21 minutes ago, unixknight said:

For you, it's just a movie.  I think it's unfair to assume that's the same way others view it.  For those of us who were at just the right age, Luke Skywalker was an icon, a role model, an important figure in our childhood in the same way that epic heroes of other eras shaped the minds and  perspectives of kids who grew up with them.  

To me it's sad that people choose to base their role models on fiction, but I guess to each his or her own.

Also, the emphasis is on Luke Skywalker was an icon. Presumably, aren't a kid anymore, so it doesn't (or at least shouldn't) matter if he was an important figure in your childhood.    Star Wars were made to be kids movies; at least before a few of the more recent ones.   They were never meant for a majority adult audience.   

Most adults who even have a very basic understanding of science just barely tolerate Star Wars and Star Trek as a few hours of brain dead entertainment, as it should be.  

Quote

For some, Star Wars is a real passion. It's a pastime and a hobby. 

Again, to each his or her own, but I never understood (and never will) why someone can be so passionate or base even part of their lives on or about something that is fiction and which they have no control over.  You have no input or control over the story and it's all written as someone else's fantasy rather than your own.  

To me hobbies and pastimes are something you do and create that you enjoy.  Watching a movie is nothing more than vegging out in front of a screen (just like watching TV is).  You really aren't doing anything but sitting there and doing nothing.  It's just idle entertainment.  

Of course the above is only my opinion. 

Edited January 15, 2019 by Scott

[anatess2]

17 minutes ago, Scott said:

It is just a movie.   It is nothing more and nothing less.

 

This shows you have no idea what Star Wars is.

Star Wars is a universe.  The universe used to be controlled by George Lucas himself who approves and rejects additions to the universe.  The universe is composed of the movies, books, children's books, comics, TV shows, etc. etc.  Each and every one of these story sources integrate into each other so that you don't have a novel (Vector Prime) that has Chewie getting killed to save Anakin Solo, and then have a TV Show showing Chewie alive and well or getting killed by a Sith.  The entire universe remains consistent regardless of where the story comes from.

When Salvatorre (the author of Vector Prime) killed Chewie, he got the fandom hating on him because this was the first Chewie appearance after the original trilogy, so he basically killed any other development to Chewie's character beyond the OT in any form in the universe.  So graphic artists who wanted to create Chewie comic books have to abandon their projects.  But, it doesn't matter how bad the fandom gets mad because... Chewie is not in the list of unkillable characters in George Lucas' blueprint!

This time, with Disney... they have no blueprint as they "un-canonized" the expanded universe, so you're just left with the movies and the clone wars TV series, and EVEN THEN they cannot stay true to the character within the universe that they decided to keep!

This is not Star Wars.  This is... oh, I don't know... any other kind of movie.

[unixknight]

3 minutes ago, Scott said:

To me it's sad that people choose to base their role models on fiction, but I guess to each his or her own.

Why would that be sad?  That's the entire point of good fiction.  To tell stories of what could be, or what ought to be.  It's the point of every single Aesop fable.  It's the point of most fairy tales.  Teaching moral, social or life lessons by example through entertainment.  That's especially valuable when reality isn't providing enough such examples.  Luke Skywalker was humble, he was brave, he was honest, he was friendly.  He showed respect and compassion, he valued friends, family and most importantly, he grew as a person.  Got a better role model?  (Don't say Jesus,  that's an easy answer and goes without saying.)

3 minutes ago, Scott said:

Also, the emphasis is on Luke Skywalker was an icon. Presumably, aren't a kid anymore, so it doesn't (or at least shouldn't) matter if he was an important figure in your childhood.    Star Wars were made to be kids movies; at least before a few of the more recent ones.   They were never meant for a majority adult audience.   

I know George Lucas made that claim a lot, but I don't recall too many kids movies showing a bloody, severed arm laying on the floor.

3 minutes ago, Scott said:

Most adults who even have a very basic understanding of science just barely tolerate Star Wars and Star Trek as a few hours of brain dead entertainment, as it should be.  

Why would it have to be scientifically consistent to be more than brain dead entertainment?  As I said, it's part of our modern mythology.  It's symbolic of the values people who enjoy it can relate to.  I wouldn't call that brain dead.  

Now, Jerry Springer... that's total brain death.

3 minutes ago, Scott said:

Again, to each his or her own, but I never understood (and never will) why someone can be so passionate or base even part of their lives on or about something that is fiction and which they have no control over.  You have no input or control over the story and it's all written as someone else's fantasy rather than your own.  

Why would one need to control the story?  Do you find classical literature to be of value?  Does it lose any value because the reader doesn't control the story?

3 minutes ago, Scott said:

To me hobbies and pastimes are something you do and create that you enjoy.  Watching a movie is nothing more than vegging out in front of a screen (just like watching TV is).  You really aren't doing anything but sitting there and doing nothing.  

Maybe that's the way you watch movies.  I don't.  I look for the metaphors.  I look for the symbols.  I look between the lines to see what the movie is REALLY about.  Watch Star Trek VI sometime.  You think that's a space adventure movie?  Wrong.  It's a metaphor for the end of the Cold War.  It's a commentary on hawkishness at a time when the Berlin Wall was coming down and people were reaching across it.  It's how people who are set in their ways can find a place in a world where all of their previous notions of what "the other" was like are being challenged and they have to reach out with an open hand and not with a fist.

[anatess2]

14 minutes ago, Scott said:

To me it's sad that people choose to base their role models on fiction, but I guess to each his or her own.

Also, the emphasis is on Luke Skywalker was an icon. Presumably, aren't a kid anymore, so it doesn't (or at least shouldn't) matter if he was an important figure in your childhood.    Star Wars were made to be kids movies; at least before a few of the more recent ones.   They were never meant for a majority adult audience.   

Most adults who even have a very basic understanding of science just barely tolerate Star Wars and Star Trek as a few hours of brain dead entertainment, as it should be.  

Again, to each his or her own, but I never understood (and never will) why someone can be so passionate or base even part of their lives on or about something that is fiction and which they have no control over.  You have no input or control over the story and it's all written as someone else's fantasy rather than your own.  

To me hobbies and pastimes are something you do and create that you enjoy.  Watching a movie is nothing more than vegging out in front of a screen (just like watching TV is).  You really aren't doing anything but sitting there and doing nothing.  It's just idle entertainment.  

Of course the above is only my opinion. 

If you don't know Star Wars and why people are passionate about it, I think you should not be talking about it.  It's like trying to explain to somebody why you spend all your time reading Shakespeare to somebody who says, "I don't understand poetry.  It's trash.  I don't understand why you spend so much time on it.  To me, poetry is just something to pass the time vegging out on one's couch.  Romeo is just some character in some story and his motivations don't need to be analyzed."

Star Wars IS NOT JUST A MOVIE.  The movies is a VERY SMALL SUBSET of that universe even as it anchors it.  For example, an iconic character in Star Wars is Thrawn.  You won't find him in any movie.

 

Edited January 15, 2019 by anatess2

[Guest Scott]

10 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

The universe used to be controlled by George Lucas himself who approves and rejects additions to the universe. 

Star Wars is a fake universe, not a real one.

Also, George Lucas says that Star Wars is a movie for 12 year olds and for children about that age:
 

 

Edited January 15, 2019 by Scott

[anatess2]

1 minute ago, Scott said:

Star Wars is a fake universe, not a real one.

Also, George Lucas says that Star Wars is a movie for 12 year olds and for children about that age:
 

Okay, you're just a troll.

Now, I want you to explain to @unixknight that all that time he spends doing cosplay in a fake universe is just "idle entertainment" and has zero value.

Edited January 15, 2019 by anatess2

[Guest Scott]

5 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

If you don't know Star Wars and why people are passionate about it, I think you should not be talking about it.  It's like trying to explain to somebody why you spend all your time reading Shakespeare to somebody who says, "I don't understand poetry.  It's trash. 

I didn't say that Star Wars was trash and in fact I have seen everyone and have even like every one (though some were better than others).   And, there is no reason why I shouldn't be talking about it.  

[anatess2]

2 minutes ago, Scott said:

I didn't say that Star Wars was trash and in fact I have seen everyone and have even like every one (though some were better than others).   And, there is no reason why I shouldn't be talking about it.  

Yeah, because all you know about Star Wars is MOVIES.  We're not talking in the same wavelength.  So talk about it all you want but stop minimizing things you know nothing about... like destroying the Star Wars universe.  

Edited January 15, 2019 by anatess2

[Guest Scott]

10 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Okay, you're just a troll.

Now, I want you to explain to @unixknight that all that time he spends doing cosplay in a fake universe is just "idle entertainment" and has zero value.

So, pointing out what George Lucas himself says about what Star Wars actually is (and you are the one that brought up George Lucas and his universe) is trolling?  George Lucas wanted Star Wars to be kids movies and stories.   That is the whole reason he create Star Wars.  He has said this many, many times.  If you or anyone else missed this, then you should listen to his own words.

Edited January 15, 2019 by Scott

[unixknight]

1 minute ago, Scott said:

So, pointing out what George Lucas himself says about what Star Wars actually is (and you are the one that brought up George Lucas and his universe) is trolling?  George Lucas wanted Star Wars to be kids movies.   That is the whole reason he create Star Wars.  He has said this many, many times.  If you or anyone else missed this, then you should listen to his own words.

It isn't that we missed it.  It's that we don't buy it.  See my reply above.

[Midwest LDS]

2 minutes ago, Scott said:

So, pointing out what George Lucas himself says about what Star Wars actually is (and you are the one that brought up George Lucas and his universe) is trolling?  George Lucas wanted Star Wars to be kids movies.   That is the whole reason he create Star Wars.  He has said this many, many times.  If you or anyone else missed this, then you should listen to his own words.

Who cares? We like the movies and draw inspiration from some of it's themes. His opinion is irrelevant to how I enjoy the story and themes involved.

[Guest Scott]

11 minutes ago, unixknight said:

It isn't that we missed it.  It's that we don't buy it.  See my reply above.

So you don't buy what George Lucas has been saying for decades? He's the one that created it so he should know the reason he created it.  

Why do you think he was and is lying?   What would be his motivation for lying about the reason he created Star Wars?   

As far as the severed arm goes, a lot of kids movies have plenty of violence.   Bambi's mother got shot; the beast was stabbed with a knife in Beauty and the Beast; Ursula got stabbed with a boat in the Little Mermaid, Simba's father was stampeded by a herd of wildebeest, etc.   The violence is (earlier at least) Star Wars movies is no different.  

PS, I was just expressing a viewpoint on the Star Wars movies and movies in general.  You don't have to agree with me and I didn't express those opinions to insult anyone.  It's totally cool if you want to disagree.  

Previous post:

 

Quote

  It's symbolic of the values people who enjoy it can relate to.  

I agree, but I don't see Star Wars as being unique in this.   Most Disney movies, for example are symbolic of values that can be related to.  Still, I'm not going to be upset if Disney came out with a bad movie.  

 

Quote

Do you find classical literature to be of value?

Yes, but not something to base my life on (and I'm not saying that you base your life on Star Wars).  

Edited January 15, 2019 by Scott

[Midwest LDS]

3 minutes ago, Scott said:

So you don't buy what George Lucas has been saying for decades? He's the one that created it so he should know the reason he created it.  

Why do you think he was and is lying?   What would be his motivation for lying about the reason he created Star Wars?   

As far as the severed arm goes, a lot of kids movies have plenty of violence.   Bambi's mother got shot; the beast was stabbed with a knife in Beauty and the Beast; Ursula got stabbed with a boat in the Little Mermaid, Simba's father was stampeded by a herd of wildebeest, etc.   The violence is (earlier at least) Star Wars movies is no different.  

 Once again so what? Who cares if it was created for children or adults if I enjoy it? I'm not really sure what your point is. Are you just trying to show how vastly superior you are to the rest of us who enjoy these movies and books? 

[unixknight]

1 minute ago, Scott said:

So you don't buy what George Lucas has been saying for decades? He's the one that created it so he should know the reason he created it.  

Why do you think he was and is lying?   What would be his motivation for lying about the reason he created Star Wars?   

As far as the severed arm goes, a lot of kids movies have plenty of violence.   Bambi's mother got shot; the beast was stabbed with a knife in Beauty and the Beast; Ursula got stabbed with a boat in the Little Mermaid, Simba's father was stampeded by a herd of wildebeest, etc.   The violence is (earlier at least) Star Wars movies is no different.  

George Lucas is completely full of it right up to his eyeballs when he says Star Wars is, and always was, for kids.  He's maintained that nonsense from day 1 and when you hear his words and compare it with what we see, they just don't mesh.  The examples you're citing were not as graphic as blood splattered all over the cantina floor from the severed arm.  I'm not talking violence, I'm talking graphic violence.  

He continued that same nonsensical claim about the  prequels, even after many years of adult fandom.  He knew who the audience was, but continued saying that same line.  You think those long, dragged out scenes in the Republic Senate discussing setting  up exploratory committees to look into the  Trade Federation blockade of Naboo to determine the legalityzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ……..

*snore*

*sniff*  *ahem*  

You think that stuff was written with kids in mind?  Jar-Jar I'll give you.  Senate debates... no.  

I'll also remind you that Episode 3 was rated PG-13.  Not a kid movie.

So either Lucas has a very bizarre and disturbing notion of what goes into a kids movie, or he's just saying that for PR reasons.

[Guest Scott]

6 minutes ago, Midwest LDS said:

 Once again so what? Who cares if it was created for children or adults if I enjoy it? I'm not really sure what your point is. Are you just trying to show how vastly superior you are to the rest of us who enjoy these movies and books? 

As pointed out, I also enjoyed the movies.  I have even read a few of the books (two relating to Revenge of the Sith).   Although I read a lot, I usually don't read fiction, but I read those, so I would think that that says a lot.

So, no, I have no problem with anyone who enjoys the movies and books, even if they are geared towards children (older children).   I still like the Power Puff Girls (the older version, not the new one), the Animaniacs, and Disney movies.  How's that?

There is nothing wrong with enjoying a movie as long as it doing become an obsession.  Either way they are still just movies.  

I understand enjoying a movie (or book or whatever).   What I don't understand is (I'm not referring to anyone on this thread specifically-or I hope not) people that take Star Wars or something so seriously that they actually felt wronged if a movie came out that they didn't like.   There are a lot of people that have said something like "Star Wars 8 (or whatever) ruined my childhood".   Really?   Ruined your childhood?   That really is pathetic if a movie ruined your childhood.