Solo: A Star Wars Story (Ron Howard, May 25, 2018) Movie • Page 7

This is fucked.

 

Going to try to reserve judgement until I see the movie but this seems like a pr nightmare

 

I'm fairly "doomsday" about this, but the movie will be "fine". It's a PR disaster, but I see this as public confirmation of what's really been known/unofficially confirmed since Ava Duverney backed out of Black Panther and Edgar Wright dropped out of Ant Man (which, bear in mind, was his passion project for 10 years). That big name directors being attached to a Disney/MCU movie means pretty much nothing in that yeah, maybe they'll get some liberties stylistically, but in the end, they still need to conform to the vision that the Mouse wants.

I never wanted this movie to be made, but it's still going to get decent reviews and make a ton of money, but it's not going to be the special movie that it should be (ignoring that it shouldn't be made in the first place).

 

I think it's safe to say this was the worst possible situation this project could find itself in.

 

It's Star Wars so it has an audience but this could actually get people interested because all of the behind the scenes drama.

 

No way this stays at a May release now, right? There's only three weeks left of shooting, but I imagine there will be extensive reshoots with whoever they hire.

 

I don't think the Black Panther comparison works, since Ava DuVernay turned down the film herself after initial talks and has gone on to direct Disney's upcoming Wrinkle in Time film (while also praising her friend and peer Ryan Coogler's work on Black Panther). I think that film is the upcoming Marvel project most likely to allow for a strong director's voice akin to James Gunn on GOTG (and arguably Joss Whedon to some extent on the Avengers films); Taika Waititi could still go either way.

My only other disagreement with this post (which I largely really agree with) is the idea that this film "shouldn't be made in the first place." No intellectual property is or should be sacred as far as I'm concerned. A Han Solo prequel isn't something that inherently appeals to me personally outside of it being a vehicle for Lord & Miller to do their thing in this universe, but I also don't care either way. There are more interesting stories to tell within this franchise, but this particular story doesn't affect me either way.

All the above being said, though, yeah, the unwillingness to allow more creative liberty is a major bummer, especially if they're gonna keep cranking these out at this current rate. Star Wars is such a wonderful sandbox that can totally contain a wide range of filmmaking styles if those at the top allow it to happen.

 

Which will likely push back Episode IX

 

I don't think they'd sacrifice that movie's release timeline for the sake of this one.

 

Could see Han and IX getting December releases.

 

If they were willing to go from VIII in December to Solo in May, I don't see why they wouldn't be willing to go from Solo in December to IX in May, should this get pushed back. I personally would prefer if Star Wars films continued to get December releases, since we already get Marvel films every May, but I don't think it matters that much either way.

 

If they bring in someone like Ron Howard, Joe Johnston or whoever else was on that list, they'll finish the film efficiently because they're pros and the release date probably won't be affected too much.

That being said, they're pros, but have any of them even made a half decent movie this decade? Do they have more than one half decent movie between the three of them in the last decade? If they're working from Lord & Miller's script, they'll probably neuter it and the movie will be completely average and "fine", but this is just a bummer of a situation all around. I just don't get why they'd hire unique and creative geniuses and then bristle at them doing what they do enough to fire them this deep into a shoot.

 

Most people I know who have seen Rush (directed by Howard) said it was great, but I've never seen it.

 

Lord & Miller didn't write the script, Lawrence Kasdan and his son did. I think the big problem will just be the obvious clash of directorial guidance and how disjointed it will feel when it's assembled together, Frankenstein's monster-style.

Also Rush was actually pretty decent!

 

Ah, gotcha. That certainly makes the conflict clearer. I don't think Lord & Miller have ever directed a film they didn't write.

I didn't see Rush, I don't exactly consider Ron Howard appointment viewing, though I had at least one friend who liked it. The last thing he did that I saw and enjoyed was probably Frost/Nixon, but I haven't revisited it since theaters.

With post-2000 highlights of Frost/Nixon, Rush, Captain America: the First Avenger, and... Hidalgo? I'm not sure they could have put together a more bland pool of names if they tried. Though I suppose it could always be worse, at least Brett Ratner hasn't come up. But that's just it, I see no reason to invest in Star Wars as a unique and quality franchise when this is what we see play out. Their weight is fully behind J.J. Abrams, Colin Treverrow, and Lawrence Kasdan. It's not behind Gareth Edwards, Josh Trank, or Phil Lord/Chris Miller (or female filmmakers). Trank mentioned not so much to defend his vision, but to again point out their history of holding very firm to an established model, rather than letting directors who want to push those boundaries have more freedom.

That's their right. Kennedy is very good at her job, she has made Lucasfilm and Disney unreal money, and will continue to. They've put out two movies now that people liked, and will continue to make movies a lot of people like. But unique, boundary pushing films, which the original Star Wars trilogy films were (and even the prequels had elements of, though they were absolutely terrible), are not their goal.

 

I don't really consider Howard appointment viewing either, I had just heard good things about Rush and decided to check it out. It was pretty enjoyable and Daniel Bruhl was excellent in it. I also really enjoyed Frost/Nixon back when it came out but I also don't think I've seen it this decade lol

I actually said to my one friend yesterday "If Kennedy just wants a studio hack why don't they just get Brett Ratner" haha so he's at least come up in my own private conversation.

And I'm still holding out hope for The Last Jedi with Johnson, but yeah after that these films are probably going to remain just products at this point. They've been exposed for what they are and there's no putting that genie back in the bottle.

 

I know I'm in the minority with this, but I've actually come to really enjoy the first Captain America film for what it is, both in spite of and because of its corniness. Joe Johnston doing a Star Wars film written by Lawrence Kasdan isn't something that gets me actually excited or anything, but I think that could lead to a decent enough classic serial-inspired adventure film akin to the first Star Wars film (especially since Johnston also did that wonderfully corny Rocketeer film in the 90s). If that duo were assigned to the right Star Wars film from the start, I'd be somewhat intrigued by it.

Still, Lord & Miller's voice would've been a lot more interesting, and an awkward mesh of their directing and whoever replaces them will certainly be lacking in any distinct personality. Oh well. Hopefully the final product is decent enough to appease diehard Star Wars fans in the same way that low-end Marvel films still generally appease me.

 

I like the First Avenger too, it's an adequate origin with some really solid character moments and arcs. My point wasn't that those movies were bad, just that they're not exactly a stellar background for a Lord & Miller replacement to come from. Which isn't what Lucasfilm is going for, but just something I'm lamenting.

 

I agree. My only defense is that Johnston's experience with adventure films flavored by classic serials makes him more distinctly qualified (if on the film from the start) than, say, a Brett Ratner or whatever, lol. But, yeah, we're largely on the same page here.

 

This is really disappointing, but the movie is going to be fine. I mean, the sky was falling 9 months ago with Rogue One reshoots and that movie was awesome. That said, I'm still bummed. I don't think young Han Solo is all that enticing of a movie idea on its own, but the idea that it was going to be made by the 21 Jump Street dudes gave it enormous potential in my mind.

 

But was it awesome?

 

I loved Rogue One, but I probably would've liked it even more if it had stuck to Gareth's vision for the film (based on how much I loved Godzilla).

While I can still see Edwards in Rogue One, I don't think I'll be able to see much of any Lord & Miller in this one, which has my expectations much lower.

 

Gonna be pretty continually unhappy that Disney is doing to Star Wars what they did to Marvel.

 

Rogue One is a good, not great movie. Nothing wrong with that. I'm never going to be mad at a good movie, but when movies start to feel formulaic, that's when "franchise fatigue" starts to kick in for me.

 

Phil Lord & Chris Miller get fired, but coming in 2019, from the people who brought you Jurassic World, Monster Trucks, and the Book of Henry: Star Wars Episode IX