Solo! First! Trailer! Superbowl!

[hamishspence]

Oh boy, I can't want to learn how Han Solo became the massive failure we know him as!

Han might be "a failure in his smuggling career" by TFA - but not by ANH.

"Han the failed Imperial pilot" is one way of looking at ANH,

but another is "Han the guy too moral for the Empire" - the guy who saved Chewie's life and got kicked out of Imperial Service (or in the newcanon, The Academy, it looks like).

[Scowling Dragon]

Han might be "a failure in his smuggling career" by TFA - but not by ANH.

Everything he accomplishes in the OT is for nothing and he dies by the hand of his own son.
Im not being sarcasting or overplaying it. I don't get it. I don't get how people have this ability to just consume media like this. How can you care for a character in these compartmentalized parts?

We know how Han Solos Life ends. Irrelevantly. We know this lovable rouge becomes a broken old man by the end, who was cowardly and fled from his problems until they caught up with him and killed him.

Im genuinly lost. How can people consume the same imagery and plots over and over. Again I don't get it. I don't get it with Dragonball, I don't get it with this.

[hamishspence]

People don't have to care about the ST, to consume OT-related media.

Similarly - the fact that Kylo turns evil, is not necessarily something Han has to be blamed for - Kylo's actions don't have to take away from Han's.


Or, in Legends terms - the events of late period books, don't have to take away from enjoyment of early-period books - just because LOTF happened (Han's kid turned evil in that, too, and Han himself behaved somewhat poorly compared to other eras) is no reason not to enjoy Han's early adventures.

[Kitten Champion]

I don't especially care about this movie, though I might see it if the stars align correctly.

I am somewhat curious to see the overall results of changing Han Solo's actor at this point. It has some obvious parallels to the question of whether Indiana Jones can be an entity outside of Ford, and just the wider question of at what point are audiences not willing to accept an actor swap. At least, on such a prominent iconic character whose been defined by one actor for decades, rather than someone like Mon Mathma. It'll be a pretty big indicator on whether Jones can eventually be James Bond-ed into a new actor in the near future.


The closest we've come to that is the Star Trek reboot I think, which had a fairly mixed reaction to the new cast embodying those roles.

[Peelee]

Everything he accomplishes in the OT is for nothing and he dies by the hand of his own son.
Im not being sarcasting or overplaying it. I don't get it. I don't get how people have this ability to just consume media like this. How can you care for a character in these compartmentalized parts?

We know how Han Solos Life ends. Irrelevantly. We know this lovable rouge becomes a broken old man by the end, who was cowardly and fled from his problems until they caught up with him and killed him.

Im genuinly lost. How can people consume the same imagery and plots over and over. Again I don't get it. I don't get it with Dragonball, I don't get it with this.

Without speaking for anyone else....

I currently have well over a hundred of the old EU novels on my bookshelf, and it's not nearly all the ones that I've read. Some were good. Some were great. Some made me wonder why the author thought themselves a professional book writer, much less why anyone in the industry thought of them as such. And yet I still enjoyed it, even with all the crap. And there was a lot of crap.

So I don't see why I should be particularly bothered when I don't psrticularly enjoy some of the movies, when I wasnt bothered by the books.

[Keltest]

Without speaking for anyone else....

I currently have well over a hundred of the old EU novels on my bookshelf, and it's not nearly all the ones that I've read. Some were good. Some were great. Some made me wonder why the author thought themselves a professional book writer, much less why anyone in the industry thought of them as such. And yet I still enjoyed it, even with all the crap. And there was a lot of crap.

So I don't see why I should be particularly bothered when I don't psrticularly enjoy some of the movies, when I wasnt bothered by the books.

For that matter, why should we care that we know the ultimate ending for his story? Theres a lot of stuff that happens in between "Han is born" and "Han dies." Are we not allowed to be interested in some of that stuff?

[Scowling Dragon]

Like I said. If a story is something with a beggining, middle and end, I cant just consume another one in the way one consumes a burger.

I genuinly cant comprehend how somebody says they can care about a character and not care about a story as a whole.

Unless its viewing the characters like somekind if sitcom. Which I assume is how people consume media. On a second to second basis. If the current second entertains me, im happy, if it doesnt im sad. But not viewing things as a congrous story. In compartments.

[hamishspence]

I look at it this way - just because you know King Arthur's life is going to end in failure, death at hands of son, etc, is no reason to keep that in mind when watching stories about a young Arthur.

I don't let my knowledge of Mordred, and Camlann, spoil my enjoyment of The Sword in the Stone.


Same can apply to Han.

[Dr.Samurai]

Like I said. If a story is something with a beggining, middle and end, I cant just consume another one in the way one consumes a burger.

I genuinly cant comprehend how somebody says they can care about a character and not care about a story as a whole.

Unless its viewing the characters like somekind if sitcom. Which I assume is how people consume media. On a second to second basis. If the current second entertains me, im happy, if it doesnt im sad. But not viewing things as a congrous story. In compartments.

While I understand what you're getting at, Han's ending is awful, as is Luke's, as is Leia's (well, I'm guessing there), and what they did in the OT kind of doesn't matter because the ST is basically the same thing happening all over again.

But I think people that feel strongly about this can ignore it and be excited to see more Han Solo stories from before. It's like, yeah, I hate that Han turned smuggler again, ran from his problems, and then got killed needlessly so his son can get over his "conflict" even though he still isn't over his "conflict" and it was all for nothing, like everything else.

But I could just ignore all that and be excited for a new Han Solo movie that has nothing to do with that, before any of that awful stuff.

I mean, I could. If I thought it was going to be good lol. But I don't, so I won't .

[Scowling Dragon]

I look at it this way - just because you know King Arthur's life is going to end in failure, death at hands of son, etc, is no reason to keep that in mind when watching stories about a young Arthur.

I don't let my knowledge of Mordred, and Camlann, spoil my enjoyment of The Sword in the Stone.

Same can apply to Han.

I again dont get that comparison. The Sword In The Stone is a pretty different animated disney film. Its like saying that knowing shakespear doesnt lessen your enjoyment if the lion king.

Its mire like enjoying the Fox and the Hound direct to DVD prequel movie where the puppy and the fox join a band.

The original movie us about inexorable social differences causing a rift in a seemingly eternal friendship. The prequel in the face of that comes off inexorably twee, sachstine, and manipulative.

[hamishspence]

I again dont get that comparison. The Sword In The Stone is a pretty different animated disney film.

It's also a novel.

Think of it as a stand-in for any "Younger Character" prequel story.

[JoshL]

Like I said. If a story is something with a beggining, middle and end, I cant just consume another one in the way one consumes a burger.

I genuinly cant comprehend how somebody says they can care about a character and not care about a story as a whole.

Unless its viewing the characters like somekind if sitcom. Which I assume is how people consume media. On a second to second basis. If the current second entertains me, im happy, if it doesnt im sad. But not viewing things as a congrous story. In compartments.

I think where you are seeing compartments, I am just seeing different stories. I agree that a story should have a beginning, a middle and an end. If you are telling something past the end, you are not continuing that story, you are telling a new story with that character. What happens to that character does not invalidate the story before, because that story already reached the end.

When you are dealing with larger works, it gets a bit more complicated. In, say, the original Star Wars trilogy, all three movies built towards an ending. Yet each of those movies was a complete story, with a beginning, middle and an end (hereafter b-m-e for brevity). If you want to break that down further, there are lots of little arcs/scenes that are complete stories in and of themselves. Being smaller stories, the whole movie isn't, for example, just the invasion of Hoth, but you can easily see the complete narrative arc within (and even that can be broken down into further b-m-e stories).

You can look at your own life like that. Say you told the story of high school; each class had a b-m-e, but all of that led into larger arcs of b-m-e (a year of school), culminating into a bigger series (your overall grade for all years of high school). Then you go to college. It's a new series, with another series of larger arcs broken into smaller b-m-e arcs. And more importantly, it is not the same story as high school. It is a new story told with the same character (you), though the experiences you had in the OT shaped the person you were (and maybe some off-screen b-m-e stories over the summer, to positive or negative effects). But even if you failed miserably at college, that doesn't invalidate what you did in high school, because that story is over.

Put another way (because I'm having fun with this way of looking at things), I have had bands that achieved some big things (a notable show, album, composition, etc). Sometimes those bands fall apart afterwards. The b-m-e of the band didn't end up in a great place, but the story of those individual achievements is not invalidated by that. Just because the band broke up, that one big show still happened, that one album is still a great album, etc. And when I start a new band, the story of the old one is certainly good background, experience and history, but the current band's success or failure has absolutely no bearing on the successes or failures of the previous band. That story is over, even though this new story has the same character (me).

tl;dr, I agree with you about the structure of story, and that it is important to be satisfying. I disagree that a work has to be only one story. And that's why some of us like the ST, or the EU, or these side-story films. Of course, that's fine if you don't; for the record, I was never that fond of the EU.

[Scowling Dragon]

It's also a novel.

Think of it as a stand-in for any "Younger Character" prequel story.

And I often don't give a **** about them either. They either don't matter or contrive something in them to matter.

Like I can see the importance of something like Metal Gear Solid 3, because we knew nothing of the character beforehand, and that story gave context to both the more recent stories as well as gave insight on a interesting new character an a whole new cast of interesting ones, as well as a different environment and gameplay then before.
But this is both more of the same and not really all that important.

So Ignoring Solos importance to the plot overall. Just lets say I was just seeing this as a self contained film:

Im still not interested. Its story beats I have seen before, visuals Im now outright sick of, and characters that don't really catch my eye or tell me anything new.

If this wasn't Star Wars I don't think anybody would notice. And if it IS to be treated like star wars, as a brick in a universe then the universe has long since gone stagnant and this brick is utterly irrelevant.

[Rogar Demonblud]

While I understand what you're getting at, Han's ending is awful, as is Luke's, as is Leia's (well, I'm guessing there), and what they did in the OT kind of doesn't matter because the ST is basically the same thing happening all over again.

I think you have that backwards. What they do in the ST doesn't matter, because it's just basically redoing the OT all over again. I strongly suspect that once the 'shiny new' effect wears off, a lot of people are retroactively going to find they were disappointed in the ST for character assassinations of the beloved heroes of the OT.

[Dr.Samurai]

I think you have that backwards. What they do in the ST doesn't matter, because it's just basically redoing the OT all over again.

Well I don't mean in a meta sense but in a narrative sense.

Each character goes through their arcs in their fight to overthrow the Empire and restore the Republic.

But in the ST, we go back to the beginning. Han, who went from smuggler to rebel soldier, returns to being a smuggler. Luke became a Jedi to defeat the Empire, only to denounce the Jedi and give up the fight. Leia became a general, only to get sidelined in her command; Poe disobeys her, Holdo has to take over for her, and then she gives up command to Poe.

All the while the First Order has replaced the Empire and we have the original conflict all over again. Essentially, what they did originally doesn't matter. We're back to square one in the story.

I strongly suspect that once the 'shiny new' effect wears off, a lot of people are retroactively going to find they were disappointed in the ST for character assassinations of the beloved heroes of the OT.

Well they'll be playing catch up lol, because many of us are already there .

[Devonix]

The first order and the resistance fulfill the role of heroes and villains but in very different ways than in the original trilogy.

The empire vs the rebels was a story about fighting against and bringing down a corrupt yet legitimate government by an insurgent group and their allies.

First order vs resistance is a story about an outside group using economic and military might to try and take hold of the Galaxy and a group trying to stop them by uniting the various factions who seem willing to stand by and let them.

[Lord Joeltion]

Cant... hold... it... make... space... for... IT!

WHERE ARE MY ALIEN MAIN CHARACTERS!!!!

I want my money back! Why do I have only the animated series to enjoy those green/blue/red faced human-lizard/furries?!?!?! I wan't my Twileks for goddamsake! Get me some Duros at least! If the Battlefront's flimsy excuse for a storymode managed to give me a quasi-Lando alien main character; why can't I get one in the film to?!?!?!

AND NO, CHEWIE DOESN'T COUNT DAMMIT! GIMMEE NEW FACES!

---rant over---

Why did they need to push what seems to be a female interest for Han? I've seen that already! She isn't even a Jabba alien-slave this time!

Btw, is it just me, or Chewbie looks even faker* this time when he is trying to hug (or kill?) Han? Sure, it can be edited later on, but wasn't this supposed to blow everyone's mind at the superbowl? "Solo: A Very Muppets Movie" doesn't quite strike me like a good impression.

Who am I trying to fool anyway? I'll be watching this one first day cuz I'm a sucker for Lando's pure white smile

*I know you can't really get faker than a guy in a Halloween suit. I mean his hair looks like it was borrowed from Sesame Street.

[Dr.Samurai]

You'll have to remove white people from the movies almost completely to keep the diversity quota *and* fit aliens in there.

Now that we've lost Luke, Han, and (will) Leia, we can replace Rey and Kylo with aliens. Then we'd have a latino, an asian that is also a woman (double whammy), a black guy, a droid, and two aliens.

It's almost a perfect cast right?

[Velaryon]

Haven't seen the trailer, but I'll look it up when I get home. Without having seen it, I have had no excitement for this film. A prequel featuring a young Han Solo is not something I want or would ask for. I'm fine with that being done in books, but I don't generally take well to roles I strongly associate with a particular actor being recast (Abrams Trek being the most obvious example).

Unless the trailer really blows me away, the most I will do is rent the DVD from the library eventually.

[Bobb]

The empire vs the rebels was a story about fighting against and bringing down a corrupt yet legitimate government by an insurgent group and their allies.

"The Emperor has dissolved the senate."

[Peelee]

First order vs resistance is a story about an outside group using economic and military might to try and take hold of the Galaxy and a group trying to stop them by uniting the various factions who seem willing to stand by and let them.

The First Order takes control of the Galaxy by force. The government they are replacing, how did they take control of the Galaxy?

[Devonix]

The First Order takes control of the Galaxy by force. The government they are replacing, how did they take control of the Galaxy?

By assassination of the legitimate political leader during a rebel uprising.

[Peelee]

By assassination of the legitimate political leader during a rebel uprising.

One could even say a rebel military, even.

[Olinser]

"The Emperor has dissolved the senate."

Who were stupid enough to vote him dictatorial powers and then applauded him when he declared himself Emperor.

Frankly as governments go it was a significantly more legitimate takeover than a decent percentage of governments that are in existence right now on Earth.

[lord_khaine]

Well.. i might have decided to see it.. its about one of my favorite.. if not the favorite.. star wards character.

But some numbskull decided to go and kill him off.. so no.. it would feel like reading a chapter in a book you already knew the ending on.

[Peelee]

it would feel like reading a chapter in a book you already knew the ending on.

I don't know about you, but I care about the journey more than the destination.

[Olinser]

I don't know about you, but I care about the journey more than the destination.

Sure, but given the massive production difficulties that they've had I'm highly skeptical the journey is going to be any good.

[Scowling Dragon]

I don't know about you, but I care about the journey more than the destination.

Why not both? I assume even if this movie was a self-contained story you would want IT to have a solid beginning middle and ending as well?

Also we knew Hans Journey as well. It was in the OT.

[Peelee]

Sure, but given the massive production difficulties that they've had I'm highly skeptical the journey is going to be any good.

I do acknowledge this is a significant possibility. I choose to be hopeful, though.

Why not both? I assume even if this movie was a self-contained story you would want IT to have a solid beginning middle and ending as well?

Yes. See above.

[Cikomyr]

Why not both? I assume even if this movie was a self-contained story you would want IT to have a solid beginning middle and ending as well?

Also we knew Hans Journey as well. It was in the OT.

We knew that Rogue One would succeed. They still made their journey an interesting one.