Solo: A Star Wars Story

Solo4114 said:
Interesting. So Brian Daley -- who swapped out Jabba and swapped in Heater in the docking bay scene -- gave him a name, which was changed later in a reference book. Got a date or title for the book, out of curiosity? I always find this history stuff interesting. I mean that seriously. Not trying to be snarky here.

That said, it doesn't change the fact that they've had dumb names a plenty in Star Wars' history. It didn't make the movie any worse when he was known as Walrus Man. Why would it matter now?

There are plenty of grounds on which to worry that Solo will suck. This ain't one of 'em.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

He was renamed Ponda Baba in Galaxy Guide 1: ANH (1989), iirc.

I never said all the names were winners. But, IMO, GL and crew did a much better job. I was actually thinking about high-profile OT characters, since these guys (scissorpunch and sixeyes) are presumably part of Woody's crew or high profile bad guys judging from how they are being promoted.

Also, at no time did I say these names will make the movie worse. (although they aren't helping it either) They are just really bad names. Especially if these are indeed high profile supporting roles. I have a history of posts in this topic that list plenty of other reasons I think this movie will be disappointing, I even stated a couple in these name-related posts. Go back over them and you will see it.
 
I agree that the new Chewie seems off. Both the suit and the body language.

The new one isn't necessarily BAD but he/it is different.

I guess it's to be expected. There's only one Peter Mayhew. And some subtle suit changes don't bother me if they help with durability/etc. Heck, we all look different at different times of our lives. Chewie has a longer lifespan than the rest of us but he's allowed to fluctuate a little IMO.
 
Last edited:
MrSouthpaw said:
He was renamed Ponda Baba in Galaxy Guide 1: ANH (1989), iirc.
Click to expand...

Ah, ok. I actually have a copy of that, although it's the 2E version, not the 1E one. So, 1989 puts him at...12 years to be named "Ponda Baba" and named by the guys at West End Games like I predicted. (They really did add a TON of background info.) But still, "Walrus Man" (or not even named) from '77 to '81, and not "Ponda Baba" for another 8 years after that, assuming GG1 is the first appearance of the name.

I never said all the names were winners. But, IMO, GL and crew did a much better job. I was actually thinking about high-profile OT characters, since these guys (scissorpunch and sixeyes) are presumably part of Woody's crew or high profile bad guys judging from how they are being promoted.

Also, at no time did I say these names will make the movie worse. (although they aren't helping it either) They are just really bad names. Especially if these are indeed high profile supporting roles. I have a history of posts in this topic that list plenty of other reasons I think this movie will be disappointing, I even stated a couple in these name-related posts. Go back over them and you will see it.
Click to expand...

I honestly don't know if these guys will be high profile. I wouldn't necessarily count on it, though, given how LFL has published stuff that now provides background info for damn near everyone who gets a millisecond of screen time. I think probably the biggest reason to question whether this film will actually turn out well is the change at the 11th hour (maybe 9-10th if we're being generous?) of the directors. My guess is that'll mean the film has a rather uneven tone to it, and will end up being half decent and half...uh...not. The name stuff, though, I really couldn't care less about.

I do wish WEG was still around, though.
 
Solo4114 said:
Ah, ok. I actually have a copy of that, although it's the 2E version, not the 1E one. So, 1989 puts him at...12 years to be named "Ponda Baba" and named by the guys at West End Games like I predicted. (They really did add a TON of background info.) But still, "Walrus Man" (or not even named) from '77 to '81, and not "Ponda Baba" for another 8 years after that, assuming GG1 is the first appearance of the name.



I honestly don't know if these guys will be high profile. I wouldn't necessarily count on it, though, given how LFL has published stuff that now provides background info for damn near everyone who gets a millisecond of screen time. I think probably the biggest reason to question whether this film will actually turn out well is the change at the 11th hour (maybe 9-10th if we're being generous?) of the directors. My guess is that'll mean the film has a rather uneven tone to it, and will end up being half decent and half...uh...not. The name stuff, though, I really couldn't care less about.

I do wish WEG was still around, though.
Click to expand...

Recent rumor is that Ron Howard was mostly brought on board to get the shots correct. Supposedly Lord and Miller had trouble shooting the movie, they even had an assistant director that basically had to take the reigns at times.

http://www.businessinsider.com/solo-a-star-wars-story-actor-fired-directors-did-30-takes-2018-3

I would expect the plot, characters, etc to remain largely unchanged. Just filmed more efficiently and appropriately, if this rumor is true.
 
MrSouthpaw said:
Recent rumor is that Ron Howard was mostly brought on board to get the shots correct. Supposedly Lord and Miller had trouble shooting the movie, they even had an assistant director that basically had to take the reigns at times.

http://www.businessinsider.com/solo-a-star-wars-story-actor-fired-directors-did-30-takes-2018-3

I would expect the plot, characters, etc to remain largely unchanged. Just filmed more efficiently and appropriately, if this rumor is true.
Click to expand...

That doesn't jibe with the narrative we've been fed that Lord & Miller were canned for making an Ace Ventura movie.
 
Yeah, I thought that the story was Lord & Miller were having issues with the shoot and doing a TON of takes per shot (figuring they'd fix it in the editing room) and then it just wasn't coming together and the dailies weren't wowing the producers. My guess on that is that the tone and style they were going with didn't jive with what the producers had in mind. Obviously, they wanted something a little freewheeling and comedic, but maybe they got more than they bargained for, and brought Ron in to clean it up and pull out the performances they were hoping for.

I'm guessing that L&M do fine with comedians trained in improv, especially folks who come out of the major improv houses in the U.S. (e.g., Groundlings, UCB, Second City), but with actors who are more traditional and may have only had a few improv classes, it's not much to go on. Improv is just...different from traditional acting. I think you can take comedic actors, including those grounded in improv, and they can often do serious work, but it's a lot harder to go in the other direction, and I expect it's really hard to change gears on the fly within a single story.
 
Solo4114 said:
Yeah, I thought that the story was Lord & Miller were having issues with the shoot and doing a TON of takes per shot (figuring they'd fix it in the editing room) and then it just wasn't coming together and the dailies weren't wowing the producers. My guess on that is that the tone and style they were going with didn't jive with what the producers had in mind. Obviously, they wanted something a little freewheeling and comedic, but maybe they got more than they bargained for, and brought Ron in to clean it up and pull out the performances they were hoping for.

I'm guessing that L&M do fine with comedians trained in improv, especially folks who come out of the major improv houses in the U.S. (e.g., Groundlings, UCB, Second City), but with actors who are more traditional and may have only had a few improv classes, it's not much to go on. Improv is just...different from traditional acting. I think you can take comedic actors, including those grounded in improv, and they can often do serious work, but it's a lot harder to go in the other direction, and I expect it's really hard to change gears on the fly within a single story.
Click to expand...

Yeah, most of what I heard was taking too long, doing too many takes, and diverging too much from the scripted material.
 
Lord & Miller might have been good for the Solo project in theory. But Lucasfilm should always have kept somebody like Ron Howard in the room with the authority to step in and overrule them.

It amazes me that they needed to make this mistake (and blow the price of a medium-size movie) to learn it. It seems so obvious.


But then, I'm the crazy guy who thinks they needed a foggy idea of their trilogy's storyline before they started making the movies. What do I know?
 
Last edited:
https://twitter.com/JennyENicholson/status/982185840217546752

DaFsps8VAAALpHp.jpg
 
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.

Similar threads

JediMichael
Darkside Story - A Star Wars Parody
Replies
3
Views
423
Halliwax
Halliwax
JediG60racer
Star Wars Outlaws (video game)
2 3
Replies
41
Views
1,131
HeartBlade
H
janglesworthy
Star Wars Tales of The Empire D+ animated series
Replies
15
Views
683
Halliwax
Halliwax
division 6
Star Wars and Gremlins Actor Mark Dodson Dies
Replies
0
Views
230
division 6
division 6
_Lee_
Star Wars sequel trilogy.
6 7 8
Replies
144
Views
7,416
Greenie
Greenie
Back
Top