I think original plan was for three movies on Han's progression to the Han we know and love in the OT. They signed the actor to a multi-movie deal. I think that is probably off the table now because of how badly this did.

bangobango said:

---

I think original plan was for three movies on Han's progression to the Han we know and love in the OT. They signed the actor to a multi-movie deal. I think that is probably off the table now because of how badly this did.

---

give it 3 to 4 years and maybe.

you need some pent up demand for anything SW.... letting this get views on cable, DVD, airplanes, etc. by a wider audience could build a base for a sequel because it is actually a great movie.

and let the ST conclude at the end of 2019.... then maybe before the other new stuff or in between some of those there might be an audience wanting it more. like around 2021-2022.

we'll see. i don't think it's dead. Even the $350-$400MM it will make justifies a $100-$125MMish sequel budget. Sequels have been made for movies that made a lot less than that - it's just not typical SW numbers.

The original Thor only made $181MM domestic and $209MM for Dark World and $315MM for Ragnarok.

Zombie Jon Snow said:

---

bangobango said:

---

I think original plan was for three movies on Han's progression to the Han we know and love in the OT. They signed the actor to a multi-movie deal. I think that is probably off the table now because of how badly this did.

---

give it 3 to 4 years and maybe.

you need some pent up demand for anything SW.... letting this get views on cable, DVD, airplanes, etc. by a wider audience could build a base for a sequel because it is actually a great movie.

and let the ST conclude at the end of 2019.... then maybe before the other new stuff or in between some of those there might be an audience wanting it more. like around 2021-2022.

we'll see. i don't think it's dead. Even the $350-$400MM it will make justifies a $100-$125MMish sequel budget. Sequels have been made for movies that made a lot less than that - it's just not typical SW numbers.

---

Those other movies did not have a $300 million plus production cost. And that's not even factoring in the marketing budget, which was likely hundreds of millions of dollars, as well. Even when you factor in dvd and blu-ray sales, Disney is going to lose money on this movie. Those other Marvel movies did not lose money.

Yes, I agree that in several years things might change, especially if it goes steaming or cable and there is a positive reaction to it, but how long do they have the actor under contract? I am assuming it is not indefinitely and at some point Disney's rights will terminate if nothing is in production.

I also think it is always a little disingenuous to compare Marvel box office takes with Star Wars. Fact is, Star Wars was a bigger franchise and had more of a built in baseline than Marvel did. So yeah, Captain America and Thor are going to have smaller opening movies, because there aren't nearly as many people who know or care about Captain America or Thor is there are people who know and care about Han Solo and Star Wars. Marvel has done more to increase the public consciousness of their comic book heroes and create more demand for them, while Lucasfilm seems to be trending the other way. In other words, if it was a race, Lucasfilm and Star Wars had a significant head start on Marvel, but Marvel will soon be lapping Star Wars if things do not change, in my opinion.

Finally, I wonder how much of the problem, and this goes back to really poor planning on Disney and Lucasfilm's parts, is that people don't want to watch the prequels for a character you just got through kind of making a miserable ending for a few years earlier.

By that, I mean, how much more excited would everyone have been if they'd done the Solo movie before he is murdered by his son after being an absentee father?

Also, what I really don't understand, is if you're going to do these prequel movies and recast this legendary roles with new and younger actors, why don't you just start episode VII a few years or weeks or months after the end of the RotJ and have the new actors play the old roles.

Or, if you wanted to do prequels with the new characters, then start Episode VII sixty years after the end of RotJ and have the old characters all dead and just people of legend and memory. Then you have that entire sixty years after the end of the RotJ to come back later to and play around with and you don't have to kill off, in pretty non-heroic ways, the main protagonist of the Original Trilogy. You don't really have to explain how they died at all. And you can work in descendants of them if you want for later story-lines to tie things back to what the fandom knows and loves. Just really strange decision making by Disney. I understand that they wanted to create the nostalgia factor to draw in the fans of the original trilogy, and that's why they included the old actors in the movies, but why do that and then treat the old characters in ways you know is going to bother the older fans? Just seems like a blatant money grab and a lack of respect for your audience.

https://screenrant.com/solo-star-wars-story-budget-force-awakens/

Looks like the reports say $250MM, which is double their initial estimates, given the reshoots, etc.

Most expensive SW movies to make, to date, if these articles are accurate. That's crazy.

Took my boys to see in Friday. Thought it was great. May current SW rankings:

1 - Empire
2 - Star Wars
3 - Force Awakens
4 - Solo
5 - Revenge of the Sith
6 - Rogue One
7 - Return of the Jedi
8 - Last Jedi
9 - Episode 1
10 - Episode 2

1. Empire Strikes Back
2. Star Wars A New Hope
2. Rogue One
4. Return of the Jedi
5. Solo
6. Revenge of the Sith
7. The Force Awakens
8. Clone Wars animated movie
9. The Last Jedi
10. Attack of the Clones
11. The Phantom Menace

Zombie Jon Snow said:

---

Seriously doubt it was a $300MM production budget. that would be one of the most expensive movies ever made.

More like $200MM which was the Rogue One production cost even with all the reshoots.

According to this list even adjusting for inflation only 2 movies ever made cost more than $300MM. and only 30 more topped $200MM.

you do love to exaggerate to make a point though.

---

Once again you call me a liar when a quick google search would show that what I am saying is being reported from multiple sources. The link above says OVER $250 MILLION. I have seen some reports that say over $300 million.

The Lord and Miller production is REPORTED to have been over 80% completed when Howard stepped in and basically reshot the whole thing.

Nm

Quote:

---

It's the same thing. And once again you are wrong.

---

exaggerate
verb

represent (something) as being larger, greater, better, or worse than it really is.

lie
noun
noun: lie; plural noun: lies

an intentionally false statement.

Zombie Jon Snow said:

---

Quote:

---

It's the same thing. And once again you are wrong.

---

exaggerate
verb

represent (something) as being larger, greater, better, or worse than it really is.

lie
noun
noun: lie; plural noun: lies

an intentionally false statement.

---

I deleted my comment. No sense arguing this stuff anymore. You can PM if you want to discuss any further.

Unless they fire the director again and have to reshoot it again... The sequels will not cost as much

Slicer97 said:

---

Rogue One was better than the 3 you have above it.

---

I apologize for having a bad opinion.

To be fair I haven't seen rogue one recently.

Late to the party. Just saw it yesterday.

I think the hardest part about doing this movie was making it important and relevant. I suppose that's why they introduced "freckles girl" (Erin Kellyman as Enfys Nest) as one of the earliest rebels and gave her the coaxium to provide initial funding to the rebellion. Not a bad tie-in, and I suspect we'll see her again. Is this true?

Liked Alden Ehrenreich as Han. Thought the story of how he gets with Chewy was great.
Liked Donald Grover as Lando. Not exactly sure why Lando and Han hug in this movie and subsequently in V though.
Thought Emilia Clarke as Qi'ra was so-so. Couldn't figure out why I should care about her.
Wood Harrelson as Tobias almost ruined it for me. I thought his acting was fine, but I just don't think he belongs in the Star Wars universe. Why couldn't they find a relatively unknown for this part?

Also surprised that Jaba's name was never mentioned when they talked about the smuggling job on Tatooine...



Edited to say that Woody was fantastic (as always).

It never truly felt like Han to me. But as I watched I lost myself in the story and forgot that the voice and appearance of the actor was so off. So the story did a good enough job in my opinion.

I really hated the convenient plot toys used to move the story. Lots of conveniences at play.

But this had the best action of any Star Wars film. And overall, I think it was pretty good and would definitely see a sequel, on the condition that they attempt to make the actor start becoming Han with more than just posture.

There's a big difference between Harrison Fords charming arrogance and what we just saw.

i'm going to guess the Han and Chewy shower scene was Lord and Miller's...

Did everyone else notice that the move Chewie used against Beckett in Dejarik was the exact same move he used against R2?

I am only going to group them in tiers and say what I would want to happen to move them up

Tier 1
Empire, New Hope

Tier 2
Rogue one ( More Bad Ass Vader)
Solo ( Less L3, less of the first scene on Corellia)
Return of the Jedi ( Replace Ewoks with Wookies )
Revenge of the Sith (Better reason for Anakin to turn than SAND and mommy issues)

Tier 3
Force Awakens ( No Mave, more Luke in it, be more different than original Trilogy, less Finn)
Last Jedi ( No Rose, less Finn, no stupid Luke projection, less Poe and Purlple Admiral interaction, no superman Leia)
Attack of the Clone ( Better story, writing, and dialogue, less whining, This is a hard on to fix)

Tier 4
Phantom Menace ( No Jar-Jar, Less Pod Race, no midiclorians )

This is literally Nymeria from Game of Thrones.

Fans have been eager for any bit of Game of Thrones they can get since season 7 ended last year, so the sweet cameo of Arya Stark's (Maisie Williams) direwolf Nymeria is a sight for sore eyes. Nymeria was last seen on Game of Thrones during a touching reunion with her human companion last summer. Arya had previously parted ways with Nymeria in order to save her life, after the animal's execution was ordered by Cersei Lannister. With this newly revealed cameo, fans can once again warmly remember the direwolf as they continue to endure a grueling wait for season 8, which premieres in 2019.

Revealed on a recent episode of The Star Wars Show by Lucasfilm Story Group member Pablo Hidalgo, Saxon - the dog who plays Nymeria in GOT - has talent beyond Winterfell, having appeared in several different films. For Solo, Saxon was trained to wear and perform as a Corellian hound dog. Yes, he is the dog chasing Han Solo, played by Alden Ehrenreich, off his home planet.