Solo: A Star Wars Story

[THE DUKE]

3 minutes ago, BroncosFan2010 said:

It wasn't a great movie, but I was surprised by how much I enjoyed it.

The plot was mediocre to bad.

Ehrenreich was bad. The kid has zero of the charisma that you expect out of someone playing Han Solo. He certainly didn't get the role on merit. Kid has talent, and was really funny as the idiot actor in Hail Ceasar, but he wasn't meant for this role.

Emilie is just a bad actress. Nothing more to say here.

Robo SJW seems like a sign of the times. These hyper left partisan studios and producers are going to be shoving this sort of stuff down our throats from this point forward. No nuance, no conflict, just forced and out-of-place talking points. I hate it with all my soul.

Glover was underwhelming too IMO. A few scenes where he seemed similar to Lando, but basically just himself. Could have been the short screen time and writing though.

Really wish Thandie Newton had more of a role. She is a tremendous actress. In fact, the story would have been a lot better if it was just called 'A Star Wars Story' and centered around Woody and Thandie. You know, two people that can emote and act.

But, the saving grace was the sets, costumes, excellent CG and overall tremendous job of creating a background that truly built a universe. The stage, if you will, was the best I have ever seen in a star wars film. It was the actors on the stage, and the writing behind the stage, and the direction to a point as well, that failed. But the stage was beautiful. The detail by far the best I have seen since the original Star Wars. I just want to give props to that department in regards to this film. They were tremendous.

It was worth seeing, and honestly is on par with Episode 8 to me, which I hated. Might even compete with Episode 7 too. Hell, after writing this I might only be willing to say that Rogue One was better, and that's a indictment of this new franchise more than a endorsement of this new film.

 

I agree with everything except the bolded.  I don't think he was fantastic or anything, but I thought he had solid charisma and did a decent job carrying the movie.  If your bar was needing to be as good as Harrison Ford, then your opinion of the role was destined to fail from the start.  He was solid, which was more than I expected.

[Malfatron]

27 minutes ago, THE DUKE said:

I agree with everything except the bolded.  I don't think he was fantastic or anything, but I thought he had solid charisma and did a decent job carrying the movie.  If your bar was needing to be as good as Harrison Ford, then your opinion of the role was destined to fail from the start.  He was solid, which was more than I expected.

agree. his character was like the best part of the movie 

 

the lighting was horrible too

[Malfatron]

20 hours ago, Phire said:

The Robo-SJW was annoying but not film-breaking or anything. It didn't have that much screen time, though every time they made the joke they made sure to slam you in the face with it.

it was almost like the film was making fun of SJW because it was so bad. 

[Phire]

18 minutes ago, MathMan said:

it was almost like the film was making fun of SJW because it was so bad. 

I have no doubt it was intended as a token to SJWs. But it was executed so poorly that it ended up equating the modern SJW to a semi-malfunctioning robot that is programmed to view the world in a set, certain way. 

[Oregon Ducks]

Ya snowflakes really think about SJWs a lot.

[Calvert28]

On 6/6/2018 at 11:37 AM, Phire said:

I have no doubt it was intended as a token to SJWs. But it was executed so poorly that it ended up equating the modern SJW to a semi-malfunctioning robot that is programmed to view the world in a set, certain way. 

I could picture the droid as one of these people walking out and protesting.

 

[cddolphin]

On 6/6/2018 at 8:14 PM, Oregon Ducks said:

Ya snowflakes really think about SJWs a lot.

They force their ideology into our media, news, public schools, universities; YouTube/Facebook/Twitter all censor on their behalf.. there's not much choice but to respond to them on some level, is there?

[cddolphin]

On 6/6/2018 at 2:37 PM, Phire said:

But it was executed so poorly that it ended up equating the modern SJW to a semi-malfunctioning robot that is programmed to view the world in a set, certain way. 

So the portrayal was accurate, then.

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

On 6/8/2018 at 8:43 AM, cddolphin said:

They force their ideology into our media, news, public schools, universities; YouTube/Facebook/Twitter all censor on their behalf.. there's not much choice but to respond to them on some level, is there?

those damn people and their tolerance! It needs to be stopped! We can't be out here treating everyone equally and stuff!

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

Anyways, about the actual movie...

Thought it was....alright. The plot was decent, and it was different from a typical "us vs. the Empire" point of view. Characters were pretty good

The thing that really ticked me off was the reveal of Darth Maul at the end. His dialogue just really did not fit his character whatsoever. Are we supposed to believe that after his fall he's now "changed" and is more outgoing and articulate? I would be inclined to think he would be even more introverted and more evil after that fall. I don't know. It just bugged me, though I'm glad we see him back.

[Deadpulse]

13 minutes ago, Darth Pees said:

The thing that really ticked me off was the reveal of Darth Maul at the end. His dialogue just really did not fit his character whatsoever. Are we supposed to believe that after his fall he's now "changed" and is more outgoing and articulate? I would be inclined to think he would be even more introverted and more evil after that fall. I don't know. It just bugged me, though I'm glad we see him back.

Its 100% faithful to every depiction of him outside of episode 1 where he had almost zero speaking roles. 

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

53 minutes ago, Deadpulse said:

Its 100% faithful to every depiction of him outside of episode 1 where he had almost zero speaking roles. 

Alright, fair enough.

[MacReady]

Yeah, I remember reading somewhere that Darth Maul originally had a much bigger role in Phantom Menace.  I just keep thinking about Phantom Menace and the entire prequel trilogy and wondering what it might have been if any number of the following occurred:

1. Lucas didn't get so obsessed with CGI over Practical Effects.
2. Lucas removed Jar Jar Binks.
3. Lucas made Darth Maul more of that Vader presence throughout the trilogy.  Cut Dooku, maybe Grievous, give more screen time to Maul.
4. Got actors that can act to play the most iconic villain of all science fiction/fantasy. 
5. Picked someone other than Natalie Portman.  How anybody thinks she's this A-list actress is beyond me.  She's as bad as Hayden.  The only reason people don't see this is because she's extremely attractive. 
6. Actually created a sense of a strong bond between Anakin and Obi-Wan.
7. Made it so that Obi Wan didn't completely invalidate everything with the line in A New Hope where he has no recollection of R2 and C-3PO.
8. Made the Jar Jar conspiracy theory a conspiracy fact.  I still to this day believe that was George's plan all along.  It makes too much sense.  There was a TON of foreshadowing of Jar Jar actually being a villain.  Why did Palpatine focus on Naboo?  Because Jar Jar was there.  Jar Jar just happens to get in the way of Obi Wan/Qui Gon.  Jar Jar was exiled for doing "bad things," Jar Jar could have led them directly to Tattooine to get Anakin, literally every villain in Star Wars has Jar Jar's eyes.  I think Lucas planned on Jar Jar being a lovable sidekick on par with Chewbacca, and when people complained about Jar Jar as being too obnoxious, he probably had his feelings hurt and retconned the whole idea. 

 

[seminoles1]

9 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said:

Yeah, I remember reading somewhere that Darth Maul originally had a much bigger role in Phantom Menace.  I just keep thinking about Phantom Menace and the entire prequel trilogy and wondering what it might have been if any number of the following occurred:

1. Lucas didn't get so obsessed with CGI over Practical Effects.
2. Lucas removed Jar Jar Binks.
3. Lucas made Darth Maul more of that Vader presence throughout the trilogy.  Cut Dooku, maybe Grievous, give more screen time to Maul.
4. Got actors that can act to play the most iconic villain of all science fiction/fantasy. 
5. Picked someone other than Natalie Portman.  How anybody thinks she's this A-list actress is beyond me.  She's as bad as Hayden.  The only reason people don't see this is because she's extremely attractive. 
6. Actually created a sense of a strong bond between Anakin and Obi-Wan.
7. Made it so that Obi Wan didn't completely invalidate everything with the line in A New Hope where he has no recollection of R2 and C-3PO.
8. Made the Jar Jar conspiracy theory a conspiracy fact.  I still to this day believe that was George's plan all along.  It makes too much sense.  There was a TON of foreshadowing of Jar Jar actually being a villain.  Why did Palpatine focus on Naboo?  Because Jar Jar was there.  Jar Jar just happens to get in the way of Obi Wan/Qui Gon.  Jar Jar was exiled for doing "bad things," Jar Jar could have led them directly to Tattooine to get Anakin, literally every villain in Star Wars has Jar Jar's eyes.  I think Lucas planned on Jar Jar being a lovable sidekick on par with Chewbacca, and when people complained about Jar Jar as being too obnoxious, he probably had his feelings hurt and retconned the whole idea. 

I agree with a lot of that except for 2 things.

Portman was awful, but not an A-List at the time of her selection.

Hayden can act and proved it in both Life as a House and Shattered Glass.  The fact that those 2 movies were the ones directly before Episode II and between Episode II and Episode III make it pretty obvious the awful portrayal of Anakin was much more on Lucas than Christensen.

[Calvert28]

5 hours ago, seminoles1 said:

I agree with a lot of that except for 2 things.

Portman was awful, but not an A-List at the time of her selection.

Hayden can act and proved it in both Life as a House and Shattered Glass.  The fact that those 2 movies were the ones directly before Episode II and between Episode II and Episode III make it pretty obvious the awful portrayal of Anakin was much more on Lucas than Christensen.

Hayden was not right for the part. That was the problem. He looked the part on the surface when he was calm and collected. But when it came to fits of anger. It's just more of the same whiny brat that doesn't inspire the fear surrounding Vader.

http://time.com/4936666/star-wars-actors-almost-cast-leonardo-dicaprio/

These were supposedly the guys who were in line for the role among others. Leo might have pulled it off at the time although this was still a ways off from his Departed role.

Ryan Phillipe would have been perfect at the time IMO.