Solo: A Star Wars Story

Just got back from watching the film. My initial opinion is that its just above So Okay, It's Average. A solid film, better paced and more faithful to the franchise than Episode VII was, but not as great as Rogue One. In general, my biggest complaint was that the references were too frequent and heavy handed, and that the lead actor (while not as bad as the trailers and some of the criticism made him out to be) did not really have the charisma to pull off the character. I liked the visuals and music (but that's a given with this franchise) and the various things they pulled from Legends.

That said, I want a Lando movie now.

Once I get my thoughts together, I might post my detailed opinions.

edited 12th Jun '18 2:02:32 PM by Rationalinsanity

I went to see the film today and I must say that, while not great, it was better than I thought it was going to be On the plus side, the action was generally good, I liked most of the characters (especially L3) and there were some moments that I found quite funny.

On the downside however the dialog was... lacking, particularly between Han and Qi'ra. As well as this, there were a number of areas that seemed somewhat superfluous and some characters were terribly underused (such as Dryden).

Overall I would probably rate it better than The Last Jedi and the first half of Rogue One and I am glad I actually went to the cinema to see it rather than waiting for the DVD like I was going to do.

I don't think Q'ira is a slave in the conventional sense. Or, if she is, she's not a slave of one particular person, but of Crimson Dawn as a whole. The way Beckett talked about it, the impression I got is that Crimson Dawn is one of those criminal organizations where, once you're in, you're in, and trying to leave is treated as akin to defection and treachery.

edited 15th Jun '18 11:49:59 AM by RavenWilder

I don’t think she “decided to stay enslaved” so much as she’s that goddamn terrified of Maul and what he would do if he discovered she betrayed him - and rightfully so. The only reason Maul isn’t literally Space Satan is because Sheeve Eviler than Thou Palpatine is running the galaxy.

A fun detail from the Visual Dictionary: that singer that was just a head in a jar was apparently a film heartthrob in his younger days, and was well known for roles where he appeared wearing a hunky artificial body. I love Star Wars.

Finally saw it. It surely had some nice moments / shout outs. But all in all....it just didn't feel like a real Star Wars movie for me. It had no 'soul', so to speak.

I thought the reverse of , adding Solo (which I have dubbed Episode 3.7 pending the establishment of a "Crimson Dawn" series) to my list of "Movies in the Star Wars Canon", to be watched in the following order: 4, Solo, 5, The Prequels (if you want to, but then you must follow up with Rogue One), 6. In my opinion, TLJ put the "Sequel" series on life-support, though I'm reserving final judgement until 9.

That leads me to my gripe with the Sequel Hook, aside from the fact that Doomed by Canon was averted, thus necessitating a Sequel: By using Maul as the boss of Crimson Dawn, whether or not he should be here doesn't matter, the movie wasted a chance to connect The First Order to the Classic saga. Granted, we know of only a few First Order officers, but surely the Order would have to have its start somewhere. If Qi'ra was reporting to a young Hux instead of Maul, it would have left me with a feeling of connection, even if it was to the set of movies that was bordering on Fanon Discontinuity; instead, it connected to a TV series that I have no real knowledge of.

Seriously, The First Order is, at present, a Diabolus ex Nihilo for the 'verse; putting either Hux or Snoke into the Command Structure of Crimson Dawn would have been a step towards fixing that. On its own, have Maul be the overlord was merely a nuisance; not having Hux or Snoke as the overlord is my real gripe.

One minor quibble I have is that Han and Qi'ra never used the term "scoundrel" in their "good guy" dialogue.

Also, I saw Chewie as "The Beast" right from the moment "The Beast" was mentioned. And it was interesting to see Beckett as being like Han was in 4, only with fewer morals; Qi'ra's got Han on that one.

I'm not as miffed about how they changed Sabbac as Lando effectively using a "skifter". Granted, Han turned it about quite nicely in the end, but they could have held that off for a Sequel, because by the time Han turned it about, we knew there would be a sequel. The only question is will Han be in it?

Back before Disney, I was a big fan of the mechette viewing order. 4,5,2,3,6 (1 should be watched apart, because it's clearly intended to be a return to the setting, not an introduction, but is largely unconnected with the rest of the saga)

Now I shouldn't commit to a new view order until the sequel trilogy is complete. But if you want to include R1 and Solo, the machete order doesn't work, because the machete order is based on the idea that the saga is about Luke Skywalker. R1 and Solo are not about Luke Skywalker in much of anyway.

Hower I don't want to do just a straight up chronological order viewing because I hate Phantom Menance as a starting point.

Which means I've been selfishly longing for an anthology film set before Phantom for ages now.

Al the same, I'm curious about the logic behind your view order?

Hux wouldn’t be able to appear in Solo because he was born in 0 BBY, while most of Solo takes place in 10 BBY.

Yeah Solo takes place at the height of the Empire’s power long before the FO ever became a thing. Over 30 years to be more precise.

The FO only exist because they are remnants of the Empire so they can’t start before the death of the Empire.

It only create a connection that doesn’t make sense.

Edited by slimcoder on Jun 30th 2018 at 6:36:25 AM

Whowho:

• I put 4 in first because it introduces us to the setting.
• 5 goes before 1 because its explanation of the Force is spiritual as opposed to (quasi-)scientific. Conversely, I consider 1 to be a Necessary Evil because it introduces us to Anakin.
• I place Solo before 5 because I don't deem watching 5 to be necessary to know Solo!Lando while watching it after 5 would seem awkward due to Han being in carbon freeze; you get enough of Han's character from 4 that you could follow at least Han & Tobias and get the parallels.
• 3 goes before 6 because all of the time I was watching 3, when Ani & Padme were referring to their future kid singular, I kept on mentally saying "don't you mean kids plural?" In effect, I had forgotten that while Vader "knew" that he a kid, the fact that he had twins was not known to him until his duel with Luke. So, for that reason, it makes more sense to view 3 before 6 than the other way around.
• Rogue One goes after 3 because it starts only about 5 years after 3 even though the bulk of the action is immediately before 4.^note This makes Solo an Interquel among the spin-offs.

TC: Huh... I would have thought that Hux would have been older, given that he is a General^note albeit for the FO 20-25 years after Jedi. Being a self-proclaimed "General" at 40 is believable; being a "General" of any stripe at 30, not so much. I'll admit that my scenario wouldn't have worked unless Hux was at least 60, but the fact that he was a "general", even self-proclaimed, implied that he was significantly older than mid-20's.

Hmmm, in that light, I'd probably have my viewing order be...

Solo, Rogue, Hope, Empire, Clones, Revenge, Return.

Solo's not the best introduction to the setting, but it's fun and does have a thematic lead in to Rogue, which in turn goes directly into the OT proper.

Only reason I wouldn't have Solo between Hope and Empire is that I feel like it's cruel to interrupt Luke's story for some background on Han. At least going to the prequels after Empire reflects Luke learning the larger context of his conflict.

If one watches Solo before watching Phantom Menace, one won't have any idea who Maul is or why him showing up with robot legs is so surprising.

Yeah but I don't really think that twist hinges on who that person is. It's more about how Q'ria hasn't escaped in the slightest

If anything, not knowing who that person is improves the moment, because it means the focus is still on Q'ria.

On a different note, now that I think about it. Solo isn't a terrible introductory film. To Star Wars. It introduces the Empire, droids, hyperspace and the tone of the setting in accessible ways Phantom doesn't.

Sure it doesn't have Hope's pacing or great use of audience surrogate, but my fiancé says that every Gen Z kid she shows A New Hope to hates it for being slow, so maybe it's not as aged as well as I like to think.

My dad wasn't very impressed by A New Hope either (if he had ever seen it, it was a long time ago), so maybe it just hasn't aged well in general (though I wouldn't say that makes it a bad movie).

Hope definitely hasn't aged well. It has a great ending, but everything else is a bit meh. Han's dialogue is the main thing that makes it watchable. Phantom is a bit of the opposite—the dialogue gets worse every time you watch it, but the plot holds together nicely. Though thematically it's not a great introduction even though it was trying to be a reintroduction.

I've always loved the side stories more than the main films, so I'm trying to think of how to integrate the cartoons into viewing order. You could theoretically start with The Clone Wars, but while it does a reasonable job of introducing characters, it makes absolutely no attempt to introduce the universe. If you don't know what Star Wars is and why there are clones fighting droids, you're out of luck.

I think, in the end, I'd probably start with release order, but modify it in the prequels. So 4, 5, 6, 1, 2, TCW, 3, Solo, Rebels, and Rogue. And then I guess the sequels, but there aren't very good spots to jump to them from anywhere; they're thematically a bit unconnected to the rest of the films. Maybe once the Resistance cartoon comes out and completes, it will lead into them better. TCW redeemed the entire prequel era for me, so maybe Resistance will clean up the sequels in the same way.

I had considered a viewing order in two parts

Part one: Rogue, 4,5,2,3,6

Part two: Phantom, Wars, Solo, Rebels, Resistance, 7,8,9

Again, Rogue is a bad introduction and could be after Rebels, it does tie into Rebels pretty okay? But it's so connected to a New Hope I'm reluctant to detach it, and it gives a lot of context to the empire that doesn't exist in the OT. I also don't like Rogue at the end of the flash back because it's so detached from Luke's story.

I know that Phantom Menace is rather detached from the others, but I don’t think that separating it from the others does it any favors - it feels less like we’re watching a side story and more like we’re just watching a movie backwards or something. I say just bite the bullet and put it before like II.

So do we actually know anything for sure yet on the future status of the anthology films?

Phantom Menace has the best lightsaber fight in the series IMO. That alone warrants not skipping it.

They'll still happen, don't worry.

Not for a while though.

Better really that they treat the whole thing more cautiously.

I was thinking how weird it is that these films have two year production cycles rather than the seemingly disney standard of three.

The Podrace and the set and alien designs make TPM worth it too, IMO.

Liem Neison and Ewan Mcgreggor turn in enjoyable performances too. And I like Shmi.

Its just the dialogue, plotting, characters, racism, battles and pacing I don't like.