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


unixknight
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, anatess2 said:

And Lucas gladly took the money, laughed his way to the bank and said... glad to finally get out of that hornet's nest

It is worth noting that he also donate most of the money to charity.

Regardless of what anyone thinks of his latter movies, he does come off as a good guy (and not only for donating most of the money from Star Wars to charity).   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Scott said:

It is worth noting that he also donate most of the money to charity.

Regardless of what anyone thinks of his latter movies, he does come off as a good guy (and not only for donating most of the money from Star Wars to charity).   

Just to clarify... He donated half of it to charity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, unixknight said:

Just to clarify... He donated half of it to charity.

Do you have a source for this?   No argument; I'm just curious.   All sources I can find say he donated most of it to charity.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Scott said:

Do you have a source for this?   No argument; I'm just curious.   All sources I can find say he donated most of it to charity.  

It was an article I read back when it happened.  He sold it for $4B and donated $2B to Education.  I did a search just now but the only hard figure I could find was 100%, which I know isn't the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Godless said:

Here's the article I was talking about re: Lucas' plans for Ep. VII - IX. Link

He's right.  Fans would have hated it.  UNLESS he had done Episode 7 immediately after Episode 6.  Then there wouldn't have been so many years of people getting "used to" Star Wars being a certain way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, unixknight said:

He's right.  Fans would have hated it.  UNLESS he had done Episode 7 immediately after Episode 6.  Then there wouldn't have been so many years of people getting "used to" Star Wars being a certain way.

I don't think they would.  I mean, not more than the usual OT vs Prequels bickering.  I would have loved this idea.  I can see how he's trying to play off the Holy Spirit thing. 

But what would have been really great if Episode 7-9 would have Luke as the new Yoda and how he changes the Jedi philosophy to overcome the weaknesses of Yoda's training philosophy and trains Lea to be a true Jedi.  They can start off the same way with the TFA (with the change that Rey gets to wield the force after having had some learning of it through Lea).  Then they can go start TLJ the same way but instead of Luke throwing the saber, he rises to his calling to train Rey... learns of that Luke/Kylo incident that causes Rey to get conflicted because Luke is not who she thought he was - the super positive Jedi who refused to abandon Darth Vader (this would have been an acceptable character change because then we get to wonder with Rey how and what made Luke change)... anyway, she runs to Kylo, then Snoke tries to get Kylo to kill Rey, but then Kylo ends up killing Snoke and the entire Red Guard with his mega anger tantrum showing us how truly powerful he is when he fights with the darkside brought on by his love for Rey (which is to be expected having been trained by Luke) which puts him as a worthy replacement of Vader as the foil for Luke.  Meanwhile, Rey is fighting too but just enough to defend herself and not get killed with Kylo saving her bum a time or two... and in the end Rey joins Kylo (okay okay I'm in the KyloRey camp, sue me) and continues her training but now with the darkside... Episode 8 can end with Luke and Lea fighting Kylo and Rey and end in some kind of a stalemate because they have to save Canto Bight or something (I'm even very generous with this, being ok with allowing that garbage to stay but this really would have been much better if the one they needed to save was Han Solo and they had to retreat because they failed in saving him - so Harrison Ford can finally get his way).  So now Luke has to come up with some creative way to extricate Rey from the darkside which would be an AWESOME Episode 9 plot how Luke, the greatest Jedi Master of all time, greater than Yoda, brings Kylo and Rey to the light side.  Kylo is not necessary, but I love Kylo so he has to get a redemption arc just for me.

Edited by anatess2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just one question (for anyone).

Who is Rey?   Where do think she came from?    How is she related to Kylo Ren?   Are they brother and sister?   If so, this would seem to obvious and wouldn't be a twist.  Luke's daughter?  Or something really unexpected so there is a twist?

Of course it will be reviewed in future movies (unless you don't see them), but what do you think?  

Edited by Scott
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Scott said:

Just one question (for anyone).

Who is Rey?   Where do think she came from?    How is she related to Kylo Ren?   Are they brother and sister?   If so, this would seem to obvious and wouldn't be a twist.  Luke's daughter?  Or something really unexpected so there is a twist?

Of course it will be reviewed in future movies (unless you don't see them), but what do you think?  

Actually, answers to at least some of those questions were expected in Episode 8.  The few answers we did get were all meant to SUBVERT AUDIENCE EXPECTATIONSTM   because Rian Johnson is such a wonderful director.

*gag*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Scott said:

Just one question (for anyone).

Who is Rey?   Where do think she came from?    How is she related to Kylo Ren?   Are they brother and sister?   If so, this would seem to obvious and wouldn't be a twist.  Luke's daughter?  Or something really unexpected so there is a twist?

Of course it will be reviewed in future movies (unless you don't see them), but what do you think?  

None of that is knowable in this new Star Wars that doesn't follow a consistent set of universal rules.  I don't even think JJ Abrams know anymore.

Edited by anatess2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not certain about the movie, but many decades ago I bought one of my children a picture book on the origins of Han Solo and Chewbacca.  It's been a while (at least since the 80s, no idea whatever happened to the book, maybe my kids have it with them now?) since I read it.  I used to read it to them when they brought it to me to read to them.

If I recall, Chewbacca and his planet were enslaved by the empire.  Han Solo ended up going there for some reason and freed Chewbacca.  As a result, Chewbacca owed him a life debt or something to that idea.

I understand Disney, in their infinite wisdom decided to do away with everything approved by George Lucas except for the movies, and would like to do away with those too if they could and only keep the name and concept...

So it seems they changed the back story, new story times for new kids.  Disney wants to have their own Star Wars (not sure why they bought it then...probably just for the IP).  Of course, I'm unfamiliar with the Star Wars Han Solo Novels people have talked about here, so the backstory may have not been the same already.  It may have changed from the story book to whatever the new story was with the Legends/EU even prior to the movie changing some of it once again.

I cannot for the life of me recall what the name of that book was.  It was a short picture/story book.  Nice little storybook, we had it alongside the Star Wars Storybook and the Empire Strikes Back storybook (both shorter books with pictures from the films throughout that told the story of both movies.  Read those to the kids as well).  The Chewbacca/Han Solo storybook was smaller than the other two though, and had illustrations instead of photos for the pictures.

Wish I could tell you Han Solo fans what the name of the book was though, sorry, can't remember.

Edited by JohnsonJones
now know what Solo's plot and summary is
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎1‎/‎15‎/‎2019 at 2:14 PM, unixknight said:

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.

I'm not certain about all with George Lucas.

I think at the time of the Phantom Menace he was making movies for his children in that light.  I can't recall the ages, but we'll say around the age of 8 when he started, thus around 10 or 11 when he put it out.

By the time of Revenge of the Sith I think he would have put it at around the age of 13 when he started it and 15 or 16 when it got released.  In that light his prequels aged with his children.

The original was just his nostalgia attribution to old B sci fi movies and serials.  I do not think he had children in mind.  I think that and Indiana Jones were his ideas in modern serials (short 15 minute films before the main feature that were shown in the 40s and such, I actually can remember watching a few though I'm not sure how as I think they were before my time).  These serials were things like Flash Gordon and other such ideas.

I'm not sure why he would say he made the Original Trilogy for children, but I think it was pretty clear he tried to make his prequel trilogy for children around the same age as his kids at the time.

On ‎1‎/‎15‎/‎2019 at 2:31 PM, anatess2 said:

George Lucas sold the thing to Disney.  Disney decided to slash the expanded universe.  What's left is the movies and Clone Wars that, except for Revenge of the Sith, tries to stay at a PG rating. 

When he created Star Wars, Lucas never planned on Star Wars becoming a cultural phenomenon.  But it did become one despite of it.   The universe exists BEYOND Lucas even as he is the one that has the final say of what goes in and what gets rejected.  Lucas ONLY created the movies.  Every single storyline that expands the universe outside of the movies is created and owned by somebody other than Lucas.  For example, Lucas got ripped to shreds by the fandom when he decided to create the midichlorian storyline because it is not consistent with the universe.

I have seen/read quite possibly every single George Lucas interview on the planet including that one.  I've been doing so since the 70's.  It's not just about listening to "his own words" on one interview.  It's the HISTORY of everything Lucas and Star Wars.

I had heard that George Lucas actually stated that there was a comic book that was pretty close to what he had envisioned for a sequel to the original trilogy if it ever came out.  I think it was called the Dark Empire or something like that (my son has a copy of it on audio tape as a audio drama that we listened to a while back).  It was a little odd with the Emperor cloning himself.  I think some people may have panned it strongly and it was this that Disney wanted to get away from.

As you have listened to Lucas's interviews, did you hear about this idea of such for sequels from the 90s or thereabouts?

Edited by JohnsonJones
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎1‎/‎15‎/‎2019 at 2:33 PM, anatess2 said:

I don't know what '"ruin your childhood" means.  But, The Last Jedi ruined Luke Skywalker - the guy who graced my bedroom wall throughout my childhood.  I have fond memories making fantasy stories and daydreaming about space with that guy and his sister and his brother-in-law.

So, does The Last Jedi make me upset.  Yep.  It does.

But, to be honest, it wouldn't have gotten SO BAD that it's almost a miracle for Episode 9 to recover from it if Disney did not attack it's own fans with their crap telling fans they just hate TLJ because they're sexists and racists and just can't stand it that a black man and a woman is headlighting the good guys.  That's when the fandom - Empire and Rebel alike, Prequels and OT fans alike, even Jarjar haters and Jarjar fans - united in their vocal criticism of Lucasfilm.

They did?

I find it ironic that a minority woman would be blamed for being a racist sexist.  I suppose that would be irony.

Did they really do that?

Seriously, did they say such things.

It would seem that would set off those who were women or minorities if Disney did that.  How did Disney get away with that without some serious backlash in the media?

On ‎1‎/‎16‎/‎2019 at 9:32 AM, anatess2 said:

The Star Wars fandom is what it is because THEY ARE Star Wars.  The Fandom built the expanded universe.  They're not just passive fans where they just wait for the next movie to come out.  No.  They are co-creators of the universe!  Fan fiction is just as much a part of the universe as all the canon.  And they get analyzed and critiqued and built upon just like they are George Lucas' movies.  George Lucas was very tolerant of copyright concerns in fan fiction because it is well-known that fan fiction is not to be monetized. Fan fiction creators and critics are VERY, VERY dedicated to consistency within the universe even as they create this stuff out of their own dime without any expectation of making one cent out of it.  It's like the biggest challenge of creating these stuff is to be able to work within the current universe and have your work remain consistent as the universe expands.  That's their reward for their efforts - that their work stay relevant in the universe.  These stories (the good ones) get passed down to the next generation too! 

 

So, I would say George Lucas's ideas of sequels have changed over time.  Originally it was going to be 9-12 movies and Leia was not Luke's sister.

Later on, the wrapped it all up into Return of the Jedi and then it was going to have some plot revolving around Droids.  It was supposed to be about civil rights, but in regards to Droids and how they were treated as second class or slave classes at best.

I related how apparently he said Dark Empire was really close to what he had in mind for a sequel.  And then we have what has been posted in this thread about midichlorians.

From what I understand, EVERYTHING (at least in general plot and many times names of major characters and their storylines) had to be APPROVED by Lucas.  There were instances where he said they could not do something or dictated that they do something else with the EU (now legends) books.

That would seem to make them more official as far as the Official Canon than anything that Disney ever comes out with.

I am confused then why people default to feeling that Disney and not the original creator dictates what is the true Canon and what is not?

We have half a dozen fantasy knockoffs of JRR Tolkien's Lord of the Rings, but only his writings and what he or his son approved are considered official 'canon' in that regards.

We have several fan attempts (and official ones published for money) for Frank Baum's Oz books, but only Baum's books and those that he personally approved are considered the longstanding Canon.

Why aren't there two types of Canon in regards to Star Wars? 

I'm kind of confused over this, at least from what I've read in this thread.  Why can't there be two Canon's at the same time?

I'm pretty sure this is what they are doing with all those Comic book movies coming out. There is a Canon for the movies and another for the Comicbooks.

I think they did that for Star Trek too (well with the new movies vs. the Old TV series).

The entire talk about what is canon or not seems a little confusing.

Edited by JohnsonJones
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

I'm not certain about all with George Lucas.

I think at the time of the Phantom Menace he was making movies for his children in that light.  I can't recall the ages, but we'll say around the age of 8 when he started, thus around 10 or 11 when he put it out.

By the time of Revenge of the Sith I think he would have put it at around the age of 13 when he started it and 15 or 16 when it got released.  In that light his prequels aged with his children.

The original was just his nostalgia attribution to old B sci fi movies and serials.  I do not think he had children in mind.  I think that and Indiana Jones were his ideas in modern serials (short 15 minute films before the main feature that were shown in the 40s and such, I actually can remember watching a few though I'm not sure how as I think they were before my time).  These serials were things like Flash Gordon and other such ideas.

I'm not sure why he would say he made the Original Trilogy for children, but I think it was pretty clear he tried to make his prequel trilogy for children around the same age as his kids at the time.

You make good points.  I guess I just can't imagine he was thinking of the kids when he wrote all the political drama and exposition.  Then I also think about moments like the one during the pod race where the one little alien dies in a fireball after we were shown that his wife and kids were there watching the race.  If this is what Lucas sees as kids' movies... That raises questions in my mind...

I agree that there was a TON of content for kids... like Jar-Jar, little kid Anakin, etc... but that feels like marketing.  Remember when Episode I came out?  Licensed merch was absolutely EVERYWHERE.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

They did?

I find it ironic that a minority woman would be blamed for being a racist sexist.  I suppose that would be irony.

Did they really do that?

Seriously, did they say such things.

Over and over and over and over... Seriously.  A multi-cultural worldwide fanbase asking a simple question of why there's now a Black Stormtrooper when Stormtroopers are Clones especially when the latest Star Wars offering is a cartoon series called Clone Wars?  The Disney response is... you're racist!  "These toxic white males can't accept that a major character in a Star Wars movie is black.  Star Wars is striving to improve diversity and inclusion...".  Yes, that's how ignorant these people are.  

Read this and weep:  https://disneystarwarsisdumb.wordpress.com/2018/05/21/a-brief-sad-history-of-lucasfilms-treatment-of-fans-under-disney/

 

Quote

It would seem that would set off those who were women or minorities if Disney did that.  How did Disney get away with that without some serious backlash in the media?

What media?  You see any backlash in the media for the new Gillete commercial? 

But yeah, there's a serious backlash alright - they're all over SOCIAL media.  Culminating in at least $40million loss on Solo.

 

Quote

So, I would say George Lucas's ideas of sequels have changed over time.  Originally it was going to be 9-12 movies and Leia was not Luke's sister.

Later on, the wrapped it all up into Return of the Jedi and then it was going to have some plot revolving around Droids.  It was supposed to be about civil rights, but in regards to Droids and how they were treated as second class or slave classes at best.

I related how apparently he said Dark Empire was really close to what he had in mind for a sequel.  And then we have what has been posted in this thread about midichlorians.

From what I understand, EVERYTHING (at least in general plot and many times names of major characters and their storylines) had to be APPROVED by Lucas.  There were instances where he said they could not do something or dictated that they do something else with the EU (now legends) books.

That would seem to make them more official as far as the Official Canon than anything that Disney ever comes out with.

I am confused then why people default to feeling that Disney and not the original creator dictates what is the true Canon and what is not?

We have half a dozen fantasy knockoffs of JRR Tolkien's Lord of the Rings, but only his writings and what he or his son approved are considered official 'canon' in that regards.

We have several fan attempts (and official ones published for money) for Frank Baum's Oz books, but only Baum's books and those that he personally approved are considered the longstanding Canon.

Why aren't there two types of Canon in regards to Star Wars?

I'm kind of confused over this, at least from what I've read in this thread.  Why can't there be two Canon's at the same time?

I'm pretty sure this is what they are doing with all those Comic book movies coming out. There is a Canon for the movies and another for the Comicbooks.

I think they did that for Star Trek too (well with the new movies vs. the Old TV series).

The entire talk about what is canon or not seems a little confusing.

Because that's not how Star Wars works.  Before Disney bought the thing, there was one canon - anything licensed by Lucasfilms is canon.  Any unlicensed fan fiction is not canon.  Lucas was tolerant of people using copyrighted Star Wars material without license as long as its not monetized.  George Lucas' team approves any product that gets licensed.  There's a "do not" list.  For example - there's a Do Not Kill list.  You can kill off any movie character as long as it's not on that list.  There's a Timeline - like before the Clone Wars, the galaxy is a Republic, after that it's a galactic Empire.  This guides creators so that you can have a whole slew of creators contributing to the story through any form of media - movies, tv series, video games, novels, comic books, etc. - from any timeline and the universe remains cohesive.  Now, this is big money stuff.  Creators have made a lot of money with this and fans are happy to give them their money because they want more and more stories and more and more characters to love or hate or cosplay, etc.  Timothy Zahn made a lot of money creating Thrawn.  Tons of people loved Thrawn and other creators made a ton of money writing a bunch of stories using Thrawn as a character.  There are even Thrawn action figures and video game characters.  All those creators have to remain cohesive in their characterization of who Thrawn is.  Anything that is not canon can't be monetized because of copyright infringement.

When Disney bought the thing, part of the agreement is that Lucas bow out.  So now Disney becomes the new source of control for copyright material.  Disney removed the expanded universe from canon.  So creators don't have any guidance anymore on the "rules of the universe" outside of the movies.  Which is fine and good... but then Disney can't stick to consistent rules of the universe with their movies!  Perfect example is that Black Stormtrooper - so, now what... are storm troopers Clones (as previous movies suggests) or are storm troopers not Clones anymore?  So, if they're not Clones... who are they now?  Are they random recruits (Finn's story seems like he didn't volunteer to be one), prisoners, slaves?  So when you're a creator trying to sell a Star Wars novel about a Storm Trooper... what kind of backstory can you give him?  It's mass confusion!

You can't have different canons for one universe as big and established as Star Wars is without breaking the thing that made Star Wars amass that kind of fandom that made it worth $4Billion.

Edited by anatess2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

I had heard that George Lucas actually stated that there was a comic book that was pretty close to what he had envisioned for a sequel to the original trilogy if it ever came out.  I think it was called the Dark Empire or something like that (my son has a copy of it on audio tape as a audio drama that we listened to a while back).  It was a little odd with the Emperor cloning himself.  I think some people may have panned it strongly and it was this that Disney wanted to get away from.

As you have listened to Lucas's interviews, did you hear about this idea of such for sequels from the 90s or thereabouts?

Dark Empire is one of the most popular stuff in the EU.  Some people strongly panning some Star Wars thing is the norm in the fandom.  It's part of being a fan.

But there's nothing about Lucas saying Episode 7-9 would be based off of DE except for fan rumors.  Lucas did get involved in the plans for DE back in the 80's and personally rejected several ideas of who gets to be the next "Palpatine" and ok'd the clone idea.  

Disney slashed the EU to make it easier for them to make tons of new stories based off of old characters and timelines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Dark Empire is one of the most popular stuff in the EU.  Some people strongly panning some Star Wars thing is the norm in the fandom.  It's part of being a fan.

But there's nothing about Lucas saying Episode 7-9 would be based off of DE except for fan rumors.  Lucas did get involved in the plans for DE back in the 80's and personally rejected several ideas of who gets to be the next "Palpatine" and ok'd the clone idea.  

Disney slashed the EU to make it easier for them to make tons of new stories based off of old characters and timelines.

From what I've seen (which is not much) it looks like they (Disney) are killing their old characters.  How would you make money off of dead characters?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, anatess2 said:

You can't have different canons for one universe as big and established as Star Wars is without breaking ...

StarTrek is crawling through this by the skin of it's teeth with it's alternate timeline reboot. 

ST:Enterprise ends with the founding of the Federation in 2161, Discovery kicks off in 2256, with plenty of time to have a good 7 seasons before TOS kicks off in 2266.  So that timeline is barely holding on, with a healthy dose of just suspending disbelief, pretending all the continuity errors don't exist, and accepting some of the weak explanations offered.  After all, if we can swallow the concept of a "universal translator" that makes everything English, except when it's cool to hear something in alien, we can accept lots of stuff.

Then come the rebooted new movies.  New timeline - time travelling romulans break crap.  Vulcan blows up, Kirk's dad died when he was born, more war and action and stuff.  It's canon, because when you can do time travel, anything can be canon.  The original timelines are still there, just, well, in a different timeline.  Most greying potbellied trekkies seem to be begrudgingly accepting it, trying to assimilate the new Obama-era young fans into the fandom before the old guard dies off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JohnsonJones said:

From what I've seen (which is not much) it looks like they (Disney) are killing their old characters.  How would you make money off of dead characters?

Star Wars is not a universe that only moves towards the future.  Any creator can make any story from any timeline within the universe.  For example... even as Han Solo died in The Force Awakens, the movie Solo still came out AFTER The Force Awakens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NeuroTypical said:

StarTrek is crawling through this by the skin of it's teeth with it's alternate timeline reboot. 

ST:Enterprise ends with the founding of the Federation in 2161, Discovery kicks off in 2256, with plenty of time to have a good 7 seasons before TOS kicks off in 2266.  So that timeline is barely holding on, with a healthy dose of just suspending disbelief, pretending all the continuity errors don't exist, and accepting some of the weak explanations offered.  After all, if we can swallow the concept of a "universal translator" that makes everything English, except when it's cool to hear something in alien, we can accept lots of stuff.

Then come the rebooted new movies.  New timeline - time travelling romulans break crap.  Vulcan blows up, Kirk's dad died when he was born, more war and action and stuff.  It's canon, because when you can do time travel, anything can be canon.  The original timelines are still there, just, well, in a different timeline.  Most greying potbellied trekkies seem to be begrudgingly accepting it, trying to assimilate the new Obama-era young fans into the fandom before the old guard dies off.

Star Wars has been smart to stay clear of time travelers.

Voyager is my favorite series but man... that time traveling stuff was just becoming ridiculous!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share