- Joined
- Oct 5, 2008
- Messages
- 127,350
- Likes
- 147,875
- Points
- 115
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Sorry, but no Harrison Ford = not Han Solo.
It's Young Han Solo.
Like the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles. That was a great show even without Harrison Ford.
Talking with J.J. Abrams, with whom he collaborated on The Force Awakensscreenplay, at the Director's Guild of America, he shed a little light on the set up, saying:[The film] will not be, "Here’s where he was born and this is how he was raised." I think what it will be is what was he like 10 years earlier [than A New Hope]—maybe a little earlier, you’ll get a glimpse. But Kurosawa once said the heroes are the ones that are still changing and the villains are locked and petrified into what they are, and Harrison embodies in Force Awakens someone who is still not settled on who he is.
This timeline isn’t too terribly shocking as it’s always been said the story will check in with the smuggler and general space rogue in his younger days. And given the events of Star Wars: The Force Awakens, he’s no longer with us, so looking to the future isn’t an option (and even if he was, he’d show up in Episode movies).
It's not the 10 years...it's the milesNot THAT young. Supposedly 10ish years before A New Hope. Not long enough to justify a dude that doesn't look anything like Harrison Ford.
https://www.cinemablend.com/new/Han-Solo-Star-Wars-Movie-Take-Place-104337.html
It's not the 10 years...it's the miles
I have a feeling this will be like Smokey and the Bandit in space.
I don't think a franchise built on selling toys since 1977 can really sell out, can it?Cash In: The Corporate Takeover Strikes Back!
I don't think a franchise built on selling toys since 1977 can really sell out, can it?
The toys were actually a device for Lucas to make some money. He thought the movie would barely even cover costs. People forget that THX was a huge financial disaster. And he made almost no money from American Graffiti because of it. Even after the success of Star Wars they still wouldn't give Lucas the money he wanted for Empire.
.... So no, the stand alones are all about how much money Disney can milk from this franchise. And I will jump up and down and shout that as much as I please. I got no problems with the films that follow the original story though. The last two Trilogy films have been really good.
There's a whole Star Wars World going up in Orlando right now....mid-2019 opening, I think.Disney is 3-for-3 so far making good Star Wars movies; Lucas ended up 1-for-4, and his surrogates were 2-for-2. Disney is a long-haul franchise curator; what's good for the viewer is good for the bloodless corporate sociopaths!
Disney is 3-for-3 so far making good Star Wars movies; Lucas ended up 1-for-4, and his surrogates were 2-for-2. Disney is a long-haul franchise curator; what's good for the viewer is good for the bloodless corporate sociopaths!
I got no problems with the films that follow the original story though. The last two Trilogy films have been really good.
East bound and down, loaded up and space truckin',
We're gonna do what they say can't be done.
We've got a long way to go and a short time & space to get there.
I'm Falcon bound, just watch the Kessel run.
That's pretty much the reverse for me. I haven't found the "trilogy" films under Disney particularly great--not awful like the prequels, but somewhat boring. I did really like Rogue One, though, so I'm looking forward to Solo. My feeling is that Disney so far isn't doing that great a job writing new story, but is okay when they plunder the old lore. Much like Game of Thrones has been better when going off GRRM's source material and not as good since progressing the story (with minor guidance) themselves.
Anthony Hopkins plays "creepy aristocratic refined guy"
