Solo: A Star Wars Story

I can't be the only one that sees this...

View attachment 792915 aldenblack.jpg
 
Last edited:
You know, I have to say that I really don’t get the all white interior at all.

This ship is a freighter and always has been – says so right there in the model name. It was never a luxury yacht, even when Lando was the owner. So, given that, I assumed that the padding throughout the ship was there strictly for a functional purpose – to protect the walls and the cargo when it was being moved in and out of the ship, stored, etc - basically it’s all just one big ship full of padded cargo liner. So, even though it was noticeably dirtier in the later films, I always assumed it was always just a functional off-white because it was just going to get marked up over time anyhow. Having it look pristine and elegant like the blockade runner just doesn’t make any sense whatsoever to me. This is one of those instances were showing something shiny and new just to make clear that the time. Is 20 years before doesn’t make sense – even 20 years before, this was still just an ugly, practical freighter.

That’s why I’m almost wondering if the ship that Lando owns isn’t actually the same as the ship that Han later owns - there are enough physical differences that are not easily explained away that it may be that this is a different ship and Han, falling for it, acquires a similar, but not the same, ship later. (Of coarse, then we get into that whole “you lost her to me fair and square” thing - but I’d rather they retcon around that by saying that Lando had a second ship that he lost rather than try to tell us that this beautiful ship is really just a crappy freighter that Lando decided to pimp out like a nice hotel and then Han both structurally reengineered and completely trashed within 10 yearsj.

M
Sorta Like this theory.

Besides, ships sink or retire than another one gets the old name.



Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
 
Honestly, why would any actor WANT the part of Han Solo??

If the reaction to every "Star Wars" film, post-1983, has taught us anything, it is that there are no more critical fans out there than "Star Wars Fans" (well, maybe "Star Trek Fans"). It's like the guy/girl who compares every significant other to their very first love and finds every partner thereafter to be "wanting" no matter who they are and just picks them apart.

Are there legimate gripes to be had regarding the prequels and the new sequel trilogy? Absolutely. But the shoot from then hip judgments based on just trailers that are mere seconds in length are pretty extreme judgments.

Any actor who is not "Harrison Ford in the flesh (minus 40 years of mileage)" is almost destined to fail. As the sheriff said in one of the "Young Guns" movies, "I would rather drink turpentine and [urinate] on a brush fire" if I was an actor.

Also...as an aside, if that pristine white corridor seen in the trailer really IS the Falcon (and it could be another Corellian ship seen in the movie other than the Falcon), then there really is no excuse for its condition in "A New Hope"--Chewie and Han are a pair of negligent slobs.
 
Last edited:
I just watched the trailer again after thinking about what it was that rubbed me the wrong way and it's Ehrenreich's voice primarily. He sounds nasally and almost as if he's affecting some kind of accent. He (to me) sounds like a foreigner putting on a really bad American accent. I know he's American but that's what I'm hearing. His inflection, tone and line delivery are just all weird.


I thought the same thing...like he is going through puberty or some one had him by the testes
 
no, i mean a real actor. a GOOD one. you know, like that guy who won an oscar playing ray charles....

If you listen to a lot of good actors talk about how they got started, they say they did impressions, for anyone and everyone who would listen. Some, like Robin Williams, became great actors. To rip AI for doing impressions in his young career, and suggesting that his time spent honing those impressions in some way means he is not a good actor, or not capable of becoming a good actor, is absurd.

The Wook
 
Is it me or are the YT airlocks seen in the trailer behind whats-her- face different than the ones seen on the marketing ad YT.

Might be two different YTs.






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
If you listen to a lot of good actors talk about how they got started, they say they did impressions, for anyone and everyone who would listen. Some, like Robin Williams, became great actors. To rip AI for doing impressions in his young career, and suggesting that his time spent honing those impressions in some way means he is not a good actor, or not capable of becoming a good actor, is absurd.

The Wook

perhaps...and we shall see in the future i reckon, but not in this movie....
aren't celebrity impersonators in those "Scary Movie IV" movies? or perhaps Naked Gun movies?
 
At least it is clear why they waited so long. it looks like a typical Marvel/Disney movie looks nowadays, with cheesy dialogue and nothing but cgi and explosions in the trailer.

This is another one of those movies that no one really asked for. We don't really need to know Han Solo's past, that's what made it great to begin with.

I feel like this is what psychics do when they pretend to be in contact with a dead relative or whatever. They toy with your memory of that person and thus screw up the memory for monetary gain. This seems like a cash-grab and it also seems heavily tainted. I think all those people defending here and saying you shouldn't Judge based on a trailer should think about what they're saying.

That's exactly what you should be judging whether this is a movie you would like to see or not see on. And based on the past few installments in the Disney version of SW they have every right to be judgemental.

Gotta say though, I kinda half expected them to do what they normally do in the marvel movies and use a young actor to digitally put Ford's face over :p
 
I think all those people defending here and saying you shouldn't Judge based on a trailer should think about what they're saying.

That's exactly what you should be judging whether this is a movie you would like to see or not see on. And based on the past few installments in the Disney version of SW they have every right to be judgemental.

I see your point, and if the trailer didn't do it for you, that's a perfectly legitimate opinion, of course. However, I also think every one of us here has seen a **** movie that had a great trailer. And I think we have seen great movies where the trailer didn't do the film justice. Finally, I think we have all seen trailers that just sold a different movie than what the film actually was.

Trailers are "Frankenstein monsters" stitched together by marketing departments, often with no input by the actual filmmakers. Tentpole films like this need to fill as many seats as possible, so the trailers go broad for the widest appeal - way beyond the esoteric tastes of nerdy fanboys.

Easy obvious jokes, simple bits of catchy (if not trite) dialogue, VFX "money shots" - all context-free, with none of the film's narrative flow, and all pieced together to make as big of an impact as possible to as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time possible. It's designed to get your ass into a theater seat. Nothing more.

Frankly, I have thoroughly enjoyed all of the Disney installments of SW. And while I can't judge a movie as "good" or "bad" before I've seen it, nothing in this trailer dissuades me from wanting to see the film in May.
 
Last edited:
I'm wondering, what did fans think of the actor who played Indy in The Young Indiana Jones show?

Couldn't stand Corey Carrier (Young Indy)
Liked Sean Patrick Flanery (Teen Indy) probably because he was better than Young Indy
Really liked Harrison Ford (Wyoming 1950 Indy cameo)
George Hall, sad that he was retconed to the cutting room floor (Old Indy)

Did not like the inconsistent nature of the episodes thanks to the changing guest directors.
 
Hi Gang,

So theory is that the ship we see in the Solo trailer is NOT the actual MF. If so... I would love it if at some point during the movie Han thinks the ship he is flying is in fact Lando's. During whatever game they play where Lando looses the MF to Han, the actual MF is revealed to be the piece of junk we all know and love! That would be a great scene! :)
 
I think people are seriously getting their hopes if they believe that the ship that looks 95% like the MF and being shown in the trailer for the movie about Han Solo isn't the MF. Better get used to it before stepping foot in the cinema.

I kind of like the idea of Han turning it into a unique piece of junk himself over time, it's just a shame that a Han Solo movie doesn't have the recognizable look we've all come to know and love.
 
Hi Gang,

So theory is that the ship we see in the Solo trailer is NOT the actual MF. If so... I would love it if at some point during the movie Han thinks the ship he is flying is in fact Lando's. During whatever game they play where Lando looses the MF to Han, the actual MF is revealed to be the piece of junk we all know and love! That would be a great scene! :)

I do think that would be funny but I can't see how that meshes with that initial conversation with Lando in ESB. The line would be more like this to Leia in ESB "Did Han tell you how I tricked him with this hunk of junk back in the day" lol
 
I think people are seriously getting their hopes if they believe that the ship that looks 95% like the MF and being shown in the trailer for the movie about Han Solo isn't the MF. Better get used to it before stepping foot in the cinema.

I kind of like the idea of Han turning it into a unique piece of junk himself over time, it's just a shame that a Han Solo movie doesn't have the recognizable look we've all come to know and love.

I'm ok with the MF NOT looking like her old tired self. In essence, we're not only getting HS back story but a MF back story as well. To me, she's just as much of a main character as HS, LS, etc! :)
 
Last edited:
This thread is more than 5 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top