The Rancor Pit Forum Index
Welcome to The Rancor Pit forums!

The Rancor Pit Forum Index
FAQ   ::   Search   ::   Memberlist   ::   Usergroups   ::   Register   ::   Profile   ::   Log in to check your private messages   ::   Log in

Solo: A Star Wars Story (original speculation thread)
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> General Star Wars -> Solo: A Star Wars Story (original speculation thread) Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Mamatried
Captain
Captain


Joined: 16 Dec 2017
Posts: 535
Location: Norway

PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2018 2:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SPOILER!

It is actually confiremd that we will see Han Solo and Chewbacca in the movie.

We will also see the Kessel run done in 12 parsec

We will see The Millenium Falcon


Rumors have it Lando will appear in the movie, but gonna spoil any more.

Just got home from the theatre and love the movie
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Owner/Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 4777
Location: Columbus, OHIO, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2018 7:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Falconer wrote:
Getting swept up in the crowd’s excitement can only help my enjoyment!

Hoping to possibly get a chance to listen to the score beforehand. The album drops the day of the film release, so, maybe at least on the car ride to the theater?

I would say don't read the Solo soundtrack track titles but I accidentally saw them already and there is nothing too spoliery like "Qui-Gon's Noble End".
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration & Log-In Help
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Owner/Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 4777
Location: Columbus, OHIO, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Sun Jun 24, 2018 12:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Treefrog wrote:
I currently haven't seen Solo...

Now my reasons for not wanting to see the film, stems from after seeing TLJ multiple times, and also discussions with my cousin, whom did see the film.

#1: Solo was a completely unnecessary film.
I like having a certain kind of mystery to my characters. For me, Han Solo was a cool character that wasn't afraid of taking out a threat (a la Han shooting first in ANH). A Han Solo backstory wouldn't do anything else but dumping a wagonload of excrement on the character.

#2: The Millennium Falcon.
I don't consider the Millennium Falcon in Solo to be the actual Millennium Falcon. There aren't any mandibles. I've heard the arguments that because the front of the ship was completely solid means that it was a cargo pod. The Falcon in Solo looked longer and narrower than the Falcon in both the OT and TFA/TLJ.

#3: Solo wasn't his actual surname?
I find it insulting to the viewer that we are made to believe that because he came into an Imperial recruiting office alone means that his surname will be Solo from that point on? No! They could have taken some material from the Corellia book series, and The Courtship of Princess Leia.

#4: Lando Calrissian.
TESB is my favorite Star Wars film. Lando was introduced in it. The things I've heard about the Lando in Solo doesn't sync with the character in the OT.

#5: No Jabba the Hutt.
I also find it odd that the most powerful crimelord wouldn't have any sort of presence on Corellia.

#6: Darth Maul.
I see that LFL is still beating that dead horse to death. I didn't agree with Maul showing up in the Clone Wars cartoon series, but I at least trusted Lucas and Filoni in bringing an underutilized character from TPM. Including Maul, to me, is only an attempt to generate buzz for the film.

#7: Corellia.
I'm actually mixed on this one. I do like that Corellia is in the film, but not that its a major Imperial shipyard (What the hell happened to Kuat?). I was under the impression that all ISDs were Kuat Drive Yard productions, but I guess that they're now Corellian Drive Yards now.

#8: Lando's droid "paramour".
With Lando now interested in only droids (intimately) - at least according to Jon Kasdan, this droid that's only "interesting" facet is its "droids rights" mantra. Come on!!! Growing up with R2, Threepio, IG-88, and the new additions of BB-8 and K-2SO make this new droid that stands for droids rights part of the problem, not something to ponder.... and then to have the droid's brain become a part of the Millennium Falcon? Just another reason why the new Falcon isn't the Millennium Falcon in the rest of the Saga.

#9: Kathleen Kennedy/Lord & Miller/Ron Howard.
With the behind the scenes drama of the film airing out, this didn't exactly endear the film to me. KK appointing L&M as directors to only later firing them with more than 75% if the film completed. Sounds to me as being mismanagement by KK more than anything. I didn't care for L & M to begin with, so I didn't shed a tear at their dismissal. I like some of Ron Howard's directed films. He's a solid director. He didn't deserve the chaos that was the state of Solo; and then having to reshoot the rumored 85%? LFL itself is destroying itself from within, and its all Kathleen Kennedy's fault. She should resign, and a more capable LFL head be appointed by Disney.

Anyway, these nine reasons are the main reasons why I wasn't exactly overjoyed in seeing Solo. I'm sure that there are those that disagree with my analysis completely, but there is the Wampa in the room, and that Solo will be lucky to even break even financially. As for the rumored Obi-Wan and Boba Fett anthology films.... They're in the same catagory as Solo: completely unneeded.

Some of your information is incorrect, but it doesn't matter. Don't bother seeing the movie on DVD, or ever. You've already decided you'll hate it so it will just be a self-fulfilling prophecy. Why torture yourself like that? And if you do see it anyway, please spare us your reaction. I have no respect for pre-bashing a movie you haven't even seen. I find this level of prejudice to be rather disgusting.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration & Log-In Help
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Treefrog
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 27 Aug 2009
Posts: 184
Location: West Wisconsin, USA

PostPosted: Sun Jun 24, 2018 10:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Whill wrote:
Treefrog wrote:
I currently haven't seen Solo...

Now my reasons for not wanting to see the film, stems from after seeing TLJ multiple times, and also discussions with my cousin, whom did see the film.

#1: Solo was a completely unnecessary film.
I like having a certain kind of mystery to my characters. For me, Han Solo was a cool character that wasn't afraid of taking out a threat (a la Han shooting first in ANH). A Han Solo backstory wouldn't do anything else but dumping a wagonload of excrement on the character.

#2: The Millennium Falcon.
I don't consider the Millennium Falcon in Solo to be the actual Millennium Falcon. There aren't any mandibles. I've heard the arguments that because the front of the ship was completely solid means that it was a cargo pod. The Falcon in Solo looked longer and narrower than the Falcon in both the OT and TFA/TLJ.

#3: Solo wasn't his actual surname?
I find it insulting to the viewer that we are made to believe that because he came into an Imperial recruiting office alone means that his surname will be Solo from that point on? No! They could have taken some material from the Corellia book series, and The Courtship of Princess Leia.

#4: Lando Calrissian.
TESB is my favorite Star Wars film. Lando was introduced in it. The things I've heard about the Lando in Solo doesn't sync with the character in the OT.

#5: No Jabba the Hutt.
I also find it odd that the most powerful crimelord wouldn't have any sort of presence on Corellia.

#6: Darth Maul.
I see that LFL is still beating that dead horse to death. I didn't agree with Maul showing up in the Clone Wars cartoon series, but I at least trusted Lucas and Filoni in bringing an underutilized character from TPM. Including Maul, to me, is only an attempt to generate buzz for the film.

#7: Corellia.
I'm actually mixed on this one. I do like that Corellia is in the film, but not that its a major Imperial shipyard (What the hell happened to Kuat?). I was under the impression that all ISDs were Kuat Drive Yard productions, but I guess that they're now Corellian Drive Yards now.

#8: Lando's droid "paramour".
With Lando now interested in only droids (intimately) - at least according to Jon Kasdan, this droid that's only "interesting" facet is its "droids rights" mantra. Come on!!! Growing up with R2, Threepio, IG-88, and the new additions of BB-8 and K-2SO make this new droid that stands for droids rights part of the problem, not something to ponder.... and then to have the droid's brain become a part of the Millennium Falcon? Just another reason why the new Falcon isn't the Millennium Falcon in the rest of the Saga.

#9: Kathleen Kennedy/Lord & Miller/Ron Howard.
With the behind the scenes drama of the film airing out, this didn't exactly endear the film to me. KK appointing L&M as directors to only later firing them with more than 75% if the film completed. Sounds to me as being mismanagement by KK more than anything. I didn't care for L & M to begin with, so I didn't shed a tear at their dismissal. I like some of Ron Howard's directed films. He's a solid director. He didn't deserve the chaos that was the state of Solo; and then having to reshoot the rumored 85%? LFL itself is destroying itself from within, and its all Kathleen Kennedy's fault. She should resign, and a more capable LFL head be appointed by Disney.

Anyway, these nine reasons are the main reasons why I wasn't exactly overjoyed in seeing Solo. I'm sure that there are those that disagree with my analysis completely, but there is the Wampa in the room, and that Solo will be lucky to even break even financially. As for the rumored Obi-Wan and Boba Fett anthology films.... They're in the same catagory as Solo: completely unneeded.

Some of your information is incorrect, but it doesn't matter. Don't bother seeing the movie on DVD, or ever. You've already decided you'll hate it so it will just be a self-fulfilling prophecy. Why torture yourself like that? And if you do see it anyway, please spare us your reaction. I have no respect for pre-bashing a movie you haven't even seen. I find this level of prejudice to be rather disgusting.


So, which point is, as you say, "disgusting"? I don't like confrontation, but people pre-bash films all the time. These are valid concerns that caused the film to implode dramatically at the box office. I've been a SW fan since 1977, when I was five years old. The info that was released, and reactions from other fans makes this film a massive red flag as being a non-Star Wars film.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Grimace
Captain
Captain


Joined: 11 Oct 2004
Posts: 580
Location: Montana; Big Sky Country

PostPosted: Sun Jun 24, 2018 5:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I know what *I* would consider disgusting, though I cannot say that Whill's reasons are the same as mine.

1. You are dismissing things about the Falcon without even seeing the movie, and using that as a reason to not see the movie. And the things you are dismissing AREN'T EVEN VALID. (there ARE mandibles. It's not a cargo pod on the front. It's not longer nor narrower. It has hull plating on it, making it look sleeker. So you've used total fallacy as one of your reasons to not see the movie.

2. Lando. Again, since you haven't seen the movie, you have NO IDEA how Lando acts in it. I thought he did an admirable job of portraying Lando at a younger age. So you're going either on the word of another person who was pre-disposed to not like the movie, so they do not have a favorable opinion of the movie, or you're going on your own prejudice against the movie...a prejudice that is not based on fact.

3. You don't want to see it because there's no Jabba the Hutt on Corellia?!? Really? That's a reason?? Where in the world did you ever get the idea that Jabba the Hutt had control over Corellia when he was living on Tatooine (a completely different region of space!) So if someone had a new idea, you automatically assume it's going to be a bad thing if a multitude of old character are not re-used in the movie? I take it you were filled with hatred for Rogue One, since they only have a couple characters that were re-used from Star Wars (Tarkin, Leia, C-3P0, R2-D2) and the rest of the people where wholly created anew in the movie.

I'm guessing you were probably one of those people that thought "But where are the Bothans that were supposed to die"? (also an incorrect assumption by very many people who were griping about Rogue One online)


4. Corellia made ships. Remember Han Solo's words to Luke and Obi-Wan when asked how fast his ship was? "I've outrun Imperial cruisers. Not the bulk cruisers, mind you, the big Corellian cruisers."

Whoa! Corellian Imperial ships were mentioned in the original Star Wars! So maybe Corellia actually made ships as well, since the Corellians were such good ship builders. Did you really think that only Kuat could build the ships for the Empire?

So, again, completely incorrect information used for your reasons for not seeing the movie.

5. What do you care whether Ron Howard had the movie from the start, or whether there was a direct change for the movie? Do you personally know those guys and their financial status has a direct impact on you? If Kathleen Kennedy wants to pick Quentin Tarantino as director and then replace him 90% of the way through shooting, only to bring in someone who she thinks is better and will give a better movie, then that's her prerogative! You're not in charge, and the movie we got was an enjoyable movie, not a slapstick comedy movie like it sounded the others were working towards.

I can't argue with the inclusion of Darth Maul. It was rather unnecessary.
I never read The Courtship of Princess Leia so I have no stake in the matter of how he got his last name. Considering the Solo movie happens BEFORE anything that occurred in any of the Corellia book series, it's entirely possible that the reason Han Solo got his last name is how they showed it in the movie.
And yes, the movie was not really "necessary". Honestly, NONE of the Star Wars movies are "necessary". They are there for entertainment! They are put out to the public to entertain the public and make the executives money. Absolutely none of them are necessary! If you believe any of them are "necessary", you obviously have an incredibly skewed and artificially inflated opinion of the Star Wars franchise.

So basically, your points are either entirely subjective based on NEVER SEEING THE MOVIE, or are based on completely fabricated and false reasons.

That, to me, is a disgusting display.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Owner/Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 4777
Location: Columbus, OHIO, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Mon Jun 25, 2018 12:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you, Grimace. I concur.

1. It is established by dialogue that the extra stuff in the front of the Falcon were recent modifications including escape pods and they were jettisoned during an action scene, so the ship returned to its classic visage you're used to during the movie and stayed that way until the end. The mandibles are still there and always where, but you'd know that if you'd actually seen the movie.

2. This film takes place 10 years before the classic trilogy begins. The actors that played Han and both Lando totally nailed portraying younger versions of the characters. And you are misunderstanding what Jon Kasdan and Donald Glover said about Lando - The prefix pan- does not mean "only". It means the opposite of only. And it doesn't come into the story of the film. It is just out-of-universe fluff talk regarding a one-line joke in the movie. Lando's sexuality remains open to viewer interpretation, but you'd know that if you'd actually seen the movie.

3. It's a BIIIG galaxy. Jabba has a lot of reach for sure, but there is plenty of room for other crime lords. And there is nothing in the film that says Jabba doesn't have any influence on Corellia. The Corellian crime boss in the film, Lady Proxima, may even be a part of Jabba's organization. It simply isn't determined one way or the other. And Jabba is referenced later in the film, but you'd know that if you'd actually seen the movie.

4. So there can only be one shipbuilding company on Corellia? CEC? Like Jabba, that is another extremely narrow-minded and limiting view you have of something as huge as the Star Wars galaxy. How many big vessel manufacturer companies do we have here on Earth? Kuat can't operate on Corellia too? Jeesh. There is nothing in the film that indicates Corellia only build Imperial ships. And the film establishes that CEC definitely does still exist on Corellia, but you'd know that if you'd actually seen the movie.

5. You do realize that Lucas named the character "Solo" because of his story arc, right? "Look, I ain't in this for your revolution... I'm in it for the money." Han Solo is my favorite Star Wars character but that last name was always a bit too on the nose for me. (It's like "Obi-Wan Jedi" or "Luke Death-Starkiller"). The new film shows that in a corrupt Empire where some bureaucrat just doesn't care about his job, Han is given the Solo last name after describing that he has no family. That makes a lot more sense than a mercenary who claims to only care about himself just coincidentally having a last name that describes his personality. And outside of Han telling Lando that his father used to build YT-1300s at the CEC plant until he got laid off and that Han doesn't have a good relationship with him (if he is even still alive), we learn nothing about Han's past except that after some point he grew up a street rat.

In this film we learn that Han got booted from the Imperial flight academy and sent to the front line of the Imperial war machine as a grunt. We learn how Han meets Chewie and Lando, we see the infamous Kessel Run in about 12 parsecs, and we see how Han wins the Falcon from Lando. All those things were referred to or implied previously. The usual reason people say this movie was "unnecessary" is due to the fear that learning too much about Han's past will spoil the mystique of the character that comes from having a vague background. This movie leaves a lot of mystery. There was no mention or reference to Han's mother. It is unknown if Han's father is even still alive. We don't know when Han became a street rat or under what circumstances. We don't know where Han got his lucky dice. We still don't know how Han knows the Wookiee language. We don't even know Han's real last name! That one adds mystery to the character. The Courtship of Princess Leia giving Han's "Solo" genealogy of several generations going back to kings of Corellia (but there was scandal that they might have been pretenders to the throne) was just plain silly. And Han had a cousin that bullied him growing up and later becomes a Star Wars villain? I for one am happy that Legends nonsense was absent from Solo. The canon version is more mysterious and better.

As Grimace said, no Star Wars movies are "necessary" and I suspect that 'necessity' is the heart of the issue for you. Many Star Wars fans have begun to feel entitled that Star Wars movies should conform to their strict view of what they should be or else bash them on the internet. I was certain the Star Wars film series was completed in 2005. Every movie since then is pure bonus. I can like it or not, I can take it or leave it. Disney has no obligation to fans, just like you have no obligation to be a customer. No movie is going to please everyone, so they are making movies for the people who like them, not the ones who don't feel they are necessary. I personally feel blessed that out of four unnecessary movies, Disney has made three awesome ones. Solo was totally unnecessary, but it didn't ruin the mystique of the character and I loved it.

Treefrog wrote:
So, which point is, as you say, "disgusting"?

No, that's not how it works around here. We don't debate and haggle over where the line is so you can argue about it. If the admin of this website is telling you that you are past the point of disgusting, then I recommend that be the point that you pull up the reigns and whoa.

Treefrog wrote:
I don't like confrontation

Then why are you being excessively negative, prejudice and hateful? The point of bashing is either confrontation or seeking validation. Either way, that's sad. You started this diatribe against a movie you haven't seen on a thread about ranking movies you have seen, so my suspicion is that your motivation is leaning towards confrontation. Saying you don't like confrontation doesn't mean anything if you're behavior is confrontational. It's a deflection.

Treefrog wrote:
but people pre-bash films all the time.

That has not been my experience on the general internet. People tend to go see movies they know they'll hate, and then hate on them on the internet. In my opinion these anti-Disney fans should just stop watching Star Wars movies, leave the franchise behind, and instead focus on things they do like. It's a more positive life.

Treefrog wrote:
but people pre-bash films all the time.

Not here they don't. Please click on the Forum Guidelines link in my signature and read them. There are specific guidelines regarding the bashing of films. In short, don't bash.

Treefrog wrote:
These are valid concerns that caused the film to implode dramatically at the box office.

There was no box office implosion, so who is being dramatic? The film has grossed over $200 million domestic and over $150 million foreign, for a total so far of over $350 million worldwide. It's total budget with the reshoots was $250 million, so do the math. The so-called "valid concerns" are mostly prejudice that the movie was doomed to failure due to the troubled production and fan backlash to a previous movie that had nothing to do with this one.

Treefrog wrote:
I've been a SW fan since 1977, when I was five years old.

We're the same age, so I am living proof that not all 1st generation Star Wars fans our age go Dark Side on the internet over newer Star Wars films.

Treefrog wrote:
The info that was released, and reactions from other fans makes this film a massive red flag as being a non-Star Wars film.

If that information (some incorrect) and reactions from other fans is important to you as a basis for deciding to see the film or not, then of course you should use it to decide. That's your prerogative. But what does that have to do with the pre-bashing of a film you haven't seen here? Your massive red flags for not watching the movie do not justify what you've posted here.

In my experience, bashing tends to have several characteristics: Excessive negativity, overly dramatic/sensational language, gross generalizations, and outright falsehoods presented as facts. It's disgusting. You've got all that, but more - You haven't even seen the movie! Bashing to this degree when you haven't seen the movie you are bashing is extremely prejudiced and frankly, absurd. I might have been able to respect a negative but educated opinion, but you have an uneducated opinion. If you ever watch Solo please do not post about it here if you are just going to bash again. Thank you.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration & Log-In Help
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Treefrog
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 27 Aug 2009
Posts: 184
Location: West Wisconsin, USA

PostPosted: Thu Jun 28, 2018 11:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I find it interesting that you (Whill) accuse me of pre-bashing the film when, as I recall, Solo came out in May, and I stated my reasons well after the release of the film. I also never stated on these forums any animus towards the film. I kept my opinions to myself. As for specific statements regarding my Corellia point, I acknowledge the Ep. IV reference.

I know that there are some people that like the movie. I disagree with anyone who claims that just because its a Star Wars film means that I have to absolutely adore the idea of it. Just as KK removed the SW crawl and SW fanfare from Rogue One, she removed my desire to be in absolute adoration with any anthology film.

The Millennium Falcon appeared in Episode III, and Lucas stated that in that one particular scene it was the Millennium Falcon:

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/File:Episode_3_Falcon.jpg

That photo proves that the Falcon in Solo isn't the Falcon. The Falcon has a very distinctive look, and Solo takes it away. BTW, I have no problem with the paint job.

My issues with LFL lately are from specific individuals attacking the fans generically. Jon Kasdan declaring the Lando was a "pan-sexual" and then blasting fans for disagreeing with him; Rian Johnson continuing his crusade against TLJ detractors and attacking them. Employees of LFL (including Chuck Wendig) blasting fans for not liking the current trajectory of the franchise. Well, enough fans have shown that they don't like some of LFL's recent decisions, and the fortunes of Solo have been shown to be a dud.

On the other side of the coin, Kelly Marie Tran didn't deserve the treatment she got from the more extreme fans. Those fans are pathetic. The same fans who attacked Jake Lloyd for his portrayal of 9 year old Anakin was pathetic as well. Hell, Hayden Christianson didn't deserve much of the criticisms he received also.

While I'm not exactly a fan of the Prequels --- at least they had an overarching story. These anthology films should be enhancing the episodic films. Rogue One did that to some extent. Unfortunately, Solo hasn't. LFL should have had some sort of story arch, not a "here's a Star Wars movie, do with it what you will." If I were a director, and LFL came calling to hire me, I'd be very apprehensive with them... Look what happened to Gareth Edwards, Lord & Miller, and Colin Trevarrow.

Marvel has proven to be masters at bringing in directors that understand that there's a story... Using a book analogy: each Marvel film serves as a specific chapter within the "novel." LFL needs to take lessons from Marvel, and that's sad because I used to think that LFL was the Master.

Edit: As for the Solo being a financial success: $300,000,000 (estimated budget); rumored cost of reshoots and marketing: $350,000,000; with a grand total of $650,000,000; which is the break-even point. As of 26 Jun 2018, the box office total is $355,451,372. Thus, Solo isn't even close to being a financial success, and is instead, a "galactic" flop
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Owner/Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 4777
Location: Columbus, OHIO, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Thu Jun 28, 2018 6:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

So you have chosen to continue arguing. That is disappointing.

Treefrog wrote:
I find it interesting that you (Whill) accuse me of pre-bashing the film when, as I recall, Solo came out in May, and I stated my reasons well after the release of the film. I also never stated on these forums any animus towards the film. I kept my opinions to myself.

"Pre-bash" is a term I invented to describe your absurd behavior in bashing a film before YOU see it. OK, you didn't do it before most of US saw the movie, but that was never the point. Bashing films is not allowed here period, whether you have seen a movie or not. But on top of bashing, you are doing it before YOU have even seen the movie, thus the special term. That is unheard of. Pre-bash is related to the term prejudice. It has nothing to do with when the movie came out.

Treefrog wrote:
I know that there are some people that like the movie. I disagree with anyone who claims that just because its a Star Wars film means that I have to absolutely adore the idea of it.

No one here is claiming that. It has been no secret that I do not adore TLJ, for example. No one is saying what you should like, think or feel. You are free to hate the movie with a burning passion if you want. This is just about what you say about it here, to what degree, and how you say it. Again, see the forum posting guidelines.


The Millennium Falcon in Episode III was before Lando owned it. It is established in Solo dialogue that Lando modified it to his liking. The story itself shows the Falcon going back to what we are used to.

I've never heard of Jon Kasdan "blasting" fans for disagreeing with him, so I suspect this is more mistruth or exaggeration. I follow Rian Johnson in Twitter and I have never seen anything that would be even close to a crusade. Rian Johnson gets Star Wars fan hatred on ever single tweet he posts, most of it completely off topic. He largely ignores fan-hate. I have never seen him attack detractors so this "crusade" must be pretty lame. Or it doesn't exist. I couldn't care less what Chuck Wendig thinks, but if he came here and posted fan bashing he would be under the same guidelines as everyone else.

Multiple sources report a $250 production final budget for Solo (after the reshoots), which makes it the most expensive Star Wars movie ever made. As far as marketing, I don't have that figure but in Hollywood it is typical for these big budget releases to spend up to half of its budget, but in this case it would most likely be half of its original budget. That was planned before the original directors were fired, and the decision to spend more money on a new director and reshoots would be adjusting its production budget, not its marketing budget. I pay close attention to it and I did not at all sense that the Solo had an inordinate amount of marketing compared to the previous three Star Wars films. The bottom line is, with marketing cost the film did not make a lot of money. No one debates that. I only found your inflated figures on sites that bash the film and also use overly dramatic negative language, some of the same language you use. The film was certainly not a big hit, but it was certainly not a flop either.


However, the financial success and failure of the film is beside the point. I only even mentioned your inaccuracy to highlight another example of your textbook bashing. The point is this. You presented the lack of box office success as a justification for your bashing, and I have a big problem with this mentality. You are suggesting that there is some objective, indisputable qualities of a Star Wars film that justifies your excessively negative behavior here. Solo is someone's favorite Star Wars film. Even if it did flop, your behavior is still unacceptable. Critic reviews and fan ratings don't matter. We just don't bash films here. Not even TLJ. There is absolutely nothing you can say or do to justify doing it here.

This was just the speculation thread before the film even came out, so there is no reason to continue it. This thread is now closed. Treefrog, please consider this a warning to not do this on any other threads. I'd really love to hear positives from you, such as all the things you love about your favorite film in an appropriate thread. Let's please try to steer clear of the excessive negativity about anything, but especially the films. Thank you.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration & Log-In Help
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> General Star Wars All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Page 4 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group


v2.0