Ghost Solo...

Rey is too one with the force and can see dead people

with Han being the link between Rey and Kylo, why would Kylo keep pushing for Rey to join him? He hates and killed their mutual relation (Han as pa or grandpa)... he probably wouldn't like Rey's mother, so why would Kylo have a soft spot for her? Is it sexual, and if so, ewww (but a precedent was set already).

NICE!!!

4 old ladies living in the town of Whils.

All i can picture is the facebook ladies for some reason

Flashdiaz said:

---

with Han being the link between Rey and Kylo, why would Kylo keep pushing for Rey to join him? He hates and killed their mutual relation (Han as pa or grandpa)... he probably wouldn't like Rey's mother, so why would Kylo have a soft spot for her? Is it sexual, and if so, ewww (but a precedent was set already).

---

Well he might not know about it... he could simply know her parents were nobodies which is true. In which case he simply sees her as a tool for now - he knows there is some link connecting them but does not know why.

Conversely - Also though as pointed out to me he did not kill Han because he hated him he killed him in order to extinguish the light in him completely. Having done that he thinks he can sway Rey to join him and if he does know who she is there is reason to think he might want that for balance somehow....or because he sees them both as powerful enough to rule together.

bobinator said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Agreed. The grandfather angle definitely cleans it up a bit. But the more I think about it, the more I'm wondering how they SHOW any of this? Or would it be just a giant expositional info dump?

---

You weren't concerned with how they'd show on-screen that Anakin Skywalker was definitely the product of Darth Plagueis manipulating the force and that Rey, for some reason 30 years later, was a product of the light side of the force, but "Han is your grandfather" is too much?

---

Because shooting Snoke/Plagueis scenes set in the past wouldn't be that much of a challenge. Just cast another actor to portray what Plagueis looked like before becoming Snoke, and tell an interesting story.

But how do you portray Han in the years after ROTJ? Bring back Ford and de-age him? But then would it be weird to simultaneously bring back Qi'ra as an older woman, and not have her opposite Alden Ehrenreich? And that's just the Han-as-Rey's-father scenario. It gets way more complicated telling the story of Qi'ra having a daughter that Han didn't know about, and then THAT daughter having a daughter, etc. It just seems like a weird, complicated thing to show relatively quickly. Especially when half the audience didn't even see Solo.

I had mentioned that the Snoke thing would be an on-going flashback. Almost like a second timeline in the movie. But this whole Han thing wouldn't really warrant that, so it'd have to be done more scattershot and in literal "flash"-backs, and I just don't how that could be done elegantly/coherently.

That said, the chances of any of this actually coming to fruition are next to zero, so it's likely not anything we really have to worry about...

TCTTS said:

---

bobinator said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Agreed. The grandfather angle definitely cleans it up a bit. But the more I think about it, the more I'm wondering how they SHOW any of this? Or would it be just a giant expositional info dump?

---

You weren't concerned with how they'd show on-screen that Anakin Skywalker was definitely the product of Darth Plagueis manipulating the force and that Rey, for some reason 30 years later, was a product of the light side of the force, but "Han is your grandfather" is too much?

---

But how do you portray Han in the years after ROTJ? Bring back Ford and de-age him? But then would it be weird to simultaneously bring back Qi'ra as an older woman, and not have her opposite Alden Ehrenreich? And that's just the Han-as-Rey's-father scenario. It gets way more complicated telling the story of Qi'ra having a daughter that Han didn't know about, and then THAT daughter having a daughter, etc. It just seems like a weird, complicated thing to show relatively quickly. Especially when half the audience didn't even see Solo.

---

Two thoughts:

1. Kerri Russell's character.
2. If they address Rey's parents again, I don't think it needs to be drawn out or require that much explanation. It isn't like the Original Trilogy spent a lot of time on Luke and Leia's mom or have a family tree discussion. The way I see it, you have a line or two of dialogue about Qi'ra from Maz to Rey or Lando to Rey discussing Qi'ra in some way. Heck, you can just have Lando say, "You remind me of some one I knew a long time ago." You just have to imply or state Rey is related to Qi'ra.

Then have two Han Solo movies (or books) to flesh out Han and Qi'ra's story, then it comes full circle. If they go this route, the only thing they have to do is tie Rey to Qi'ra which seems pretty easy.

Otherwise what were they planning to do with three Han Solo movies?

And for the record, I agree this is all remote.

Yeah, I hear you. Via dialogue wouldn't be my first choice, but I guess it wouldn't be that hard to "explain." As for more Solo movies, those died on opening weekend, I'm afraid. I doubt we see Ehrenreich as Han or Glover as Lando ever again.

Dekker_Lentz said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

bobinator said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Agreed. The grandfather angle definitely cleans it up a bit. But the more I think about it, the more I'm wondering how they SHOW any of this? Or would it be just a giant expositional info dump?

---

You weren't concerned with how they'd show on-screen that Anakin Skywalker was definitely the product of Darth Plagueis manipulating the force and that Rey, for some reason 30 years later, was a product of the light side of the force, but "Han is your grandfather" is too much?

---

But how do you portray Han in the years after ROTJ? Bring back Ford and de-age him? But then would it be weird to simultaneously bring back Qi'ra as an older woman, and not have her opposite Alden Ehrenreich? And that's just the Han-as-Rey's-father scenario. It gets way more complicated telling the story of Qi'ra having a daughter that Han didn't know about, and then THAT daughter having a daughter, etc. It just seems like a weird, complicated thing to show relatively quickly. Especially when half the audience didn't even see Solo.

---

Two thoughts:

1. Kerri Russell's character.
2. If they address Rey's parents again, I don't think it needs to be drawn out or require that much explanation. It isn't like the Original Trilogy spent a lot of time on Luke and Leia's mom or have a family tree discussion. The way I see it, you have a line or two of dialogue about Qi'ra from Maz to Rey or Lando to Rey discussing Qi'ra in some way. Heck, you can just have Lando say, "You remind me of some one I knew a long time ago." You just have to imply or state Rey is related to Qi'ra.

Then have two Han Solo movies (or books) to flesh out Han and Qi'ra's story, then it comes full circle. If they go this route, the only thing they have to do is tie Rey to Qi'ra which seems pretty easy.

Otherwise what were they planning to do with three Han Solo movies?

And for the record, I agree this is all remote.

---

Agree on both counts - remote chance but also easily done.

Maz and Lando have a conversation:


Lando: Who's the girl....she reminds me of someone?
Maz: Han told me he and a woman had a child long ago.... before Leia. She raised the child herself on Jakku. He believed that Rey is his granddaughter from that child.
Lando: Oh yeah....you mean Qi'ra.... that's who she reminds me of. Wow it's a small universe.
Maz: Supposedly her parents were deadbeat junk traders on Jakku and traded her for drinking money before they died. Then Qi'ra left her there with Unkar Plutt rather than expose her to the dark side.
Lando: Poor kid... tough background. Well I owe Han ... I'll look out for her.
Maz: I don't think she needs any help actually. She's done alright on her own.


Maybe a minute of discussion - in a bar of course.

Han "thinks" she is his granddaughter is established. That's all you really need. He would have told Maz back in her bar. And Lando knows Qi'ra so it lends some more credence to it.

You don't have to prove it, you don't have to show it.

The other Solo movies could show it later if they happen.... and people who have seen TFA but not Han Solo movie are also not entirely lost. They know Han told Maz something about who Rey is, and she is just relaying that. They are also not upset at Han since it happened before Leia. And Lando is the confirmation - a well liked character.

TCTTS said:

---

Yeah, I hear you. Via dialogue wouldn't be my first choice, but I guess it wouldn't be that hard to "explain." As for more Solo movies, those died on opening weekend, I'm afraid. I doubt we ever see Ehrenreich as Han or Glover as Lando ever again.

---

Man, I really want a Donald Glover Lando movie.

Zombie Jon Snow said:

---

Dekker_Lentz said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

bobinator said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Agreed. The grandfather angle definitely cleans it up a bit. But the more I think about it, the more I'm wondering how they SHOW any of this? Or would it be just a giant expositional info dump?

---

You weren't concerned with how they'd show on-screen that Anakin Skywalker was definitely the product of Darth Plagueis manipulating the force and that Rey, for some reason 30 years later, was a product of the light side of the force, but "Han is your grandfather" is too much?

---

But how do you portray Han in the years after ROTJ? Bring back Ford and de-age him? But then would it be weird to simultaneously bring back Qi'ra as an older woman, and not have her opposite Alden Ehrenreich? And that's just the Han-as-Rey's-father scenario. It gets way more complicated telling the story of Qi'ra having a daughter that Han didn't know about, and then THAT daughter having a daughter, etc. It just seems like a weird, complicated thing to show relatively quickly. Especially when half the audience didn't even see Solo.

---

Two thoughts:

1. Kerri Russell's character.
2. If they address Rey's parents again, I don't think it needs to be drawn out or require that much explanation. It isn't like the Original Trilogy spent a lot of time on Luke and Leia's mom or have a family tree discussion. The way I see it, you have a line or two of dialogue about Qi'ra from Maz to Rey or Lando to Rey discussing Qi'ra in some way. Heck, you can just have Lando say, "You remind me of some one I knew a long time ago." You just have to imply or state Rey is related to Qi'ra.

Then have two Han Solo movies (or books) to flesh out Han and Qi'ra's story, then it comes full circle. If they go this route, the only thing they have to do is tie Rey to Qi'ra which seems pretty easy.

Otherwise what were they planning to do with three Han Solo movies?

And for the record, I agree this is all remote.

---

Agree on both counts - remote chance but also easily done.

Maz and Lando have a conversation:


Lando: Who's the girl....she reminds me of someone?
Maz: Han told me he and woman had a child long ago.... before Leia. She raised the child herself on Jakku. He believed that Rey is his granddaughter from that child.
Lando: Oh yeah....you mean Qi'ra.... that's who she reminds me of. Wow it's a small universe.
Maz: Supposedly her parents were deadbeat junk traders on Jakku and traded her for drinking money before they died. Then Qi'ra left her there with Unkar Plutt rather than expose her to the dark side.
Lando: Poor kid... tough background. Well I owe Han ... I'll look out for her.
Maz: I don't think she needs any help actually. She's done alright on her own.


Maybe a minute of discussion - in a bar of course.

Han "thinks" she is his granddaughter is established. That's all you really need. He would have told Maz back in her bar. And Lando knows Qi'ra so it lends some more credence to it.

You don't have to prove it, you don't have to show it.

The other Solo movies could show it later if they happen.... and people who have seen TFA but not Han Solo movie are also not entirely lost. They know Han told Maz something about who Rey is, and she is just relaying that. They are also not upset at Han since it happened before Leia. And Lando is the confirmation - a well liked character.

---

We could even Lampshade Episode 7:

Lando: Who's the girl?
Maz: Qi'ra's.
Lando: This deal is getting worse all the time.
*Transition Wipe*

Rex Racer said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Yeah, I hear you. Via dialogue wouldn't be my first choice, but I guess it wouldn't be that hard to "explain." As for more Solo movies, those died on opening weekend, I'm afraid. I doubt we see Ehrenreich as Han or Glover as Lando ever again.

---

I agree, but that's such a shame because Solo was a very fun movie.

---

Agreed. Solo was a fun movie. I thought Ehrenreich did a serviceable job in portraying Han Solo, and Glover as Lando was pretty much nails. But curiously, it is the one Star Wars movie that I saw but one time in a theater, so there is that.

Sorry not sure if this has been posted here yet.....apparently this article came out about 6 hours ago...

What do y'all think about IX being split into two films?

https://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/films/1000930/Star-Wars-9-Episode-IX-SPLIT-TWO-movies-Avengers-Infinity-War-release-date-backlash

Part of me wants to say don't do it simply cause it's supposed to be a trilogy and the story should be able to be told in 3 films.

HOWEVER...

They do this and all cards on the table on what they can do with the story.

Hell any legit ideas and theories we've came up with here could quite possibly be in the works.

It is exciting to think about

I'm not 100% saying it can't or won't be split into two films, but if it is, this site won't be the ones to break the news. That article literally quotes a random message board conversation and provides no source or links to the "reports" it mentions. Journalists and bloggers have been mocking it all day. I wouldn't believe a word of it.

That said, I'm honestly kind of surprised Disney didn't split it up, especially since it looks like there's no Star Wars movie currently scheduled for 2020. But an announcement or more credible rumors would have hit a long time ago if this was happening. This simply isn't something a studio or production like this decides to do this late in the game.

Also, this straight up isn't true (in regards to Treverrow)...

Quote:

---

It's no secret that fired director Colin Tevorrow was upset by the deaths of Snoke and Luke and many fans feel the same.

---

That, and there's so much more suspect/amateur wording that hints at the article's fakeness.

Oh I agree the article was **** and provides zero substance.

But I personally hadn't given it any thought about splitting the film into 2 parts until I heard of this article.

But in your experience you don't think there's anyway they could do it at this point?

Or if they were doing it they would have announced it?

Yeah, the script has been locked as far back as February. I'm sure changes were made here and there since then, but they would have known at the time what they had and if they had too much for one movie. That, and what we've seen of the production material on set, tweets from the filmmakers, etc., all still says "IX" and it'd be kind of odd to still be referring to the 9th and 10th movies as "IX." Not to mention, so many massive decisions would have had to have been made already when it comes to contracts and what not. Getting paid to shoot one movie vs. two is substantially different, with all the negotiations and paperwork that would have gone into that.

Still, I guess it could technically be a surprise. My only argument was that the decision had to have already been made months and months ago, but I guess that doesn't mean they couldn't have kept it a secret ever since. Still, I'd be shocked if they did. I admit, it would pretty awesome to one day during production see Abrams or someone tweet out "X" but I just don't know how that news wouldn't have leaked by now. It would be unprecedented.

TCTTS said:

---

Also, this straight up isn't true (in regards to Treverrow)...

Quote:

---

It's no secret that fired director Colin Tevorrow was upset by the deaths of Snoke and Luke and many fans feel the same.

---

That, and there's so much more suspect/amateur wording that hints at the article's fakeness.

---

For the record, this has been popular fan fodder on youtube (and I'm sure elsewhere) since TLJ. I assume it is mostly blogger projection.

Star Wars people on Twitter with access have been laughing about the idea of the film being split. No chance.

i'm not a Star Wars person nor do I twitter and I laugh at the notion of IX being split into 2. It's going to be 1 movie.

But how awesome of a "I'm your Father" moment be if they kept splitting this movie a secret until it released?

I've actually been waiting for a movie to do something like this, but instead of releasing them a year apart, it's just like a month.

But for maximum effect I think you'd do it the other way around. You'd publicize it as two movies so everyone knows a second part is coming the next year, but then at the end of the first movie you'd do a surprise announcement that the second movie was coming out in just a few weeks.

Along those lines I've also been waiting for a movie to have different endings based on where you see it.

Then you'd be able to come on here and tell us how you'd cleverly figured out each different ending for each place?

hurleyag said:

---

But how awesome of a "I'm your Father" moment be if they kept splitting this movie a secret until it released?

---

Can you imagine how pissed you'd be the moment the movie ends on a cliffhanger delivered by Abrams?

Oh dang, I had never heard of that before! Did they market it as having different endings or was that a surprise? But I also think people would expect that from a movie based on a board game right?

Apparently some movie called "Unfriended: Dark Web" has different endings also.

But I want to see it for like a major release.

What?

I don't know how it was marketed but when people started talking about the ending they were confused to know that others saw a dif ending. They would go back to watch it at the other theatre across town or where ever. So people went like 2-3 times to watch the different endings of the movie. I don't think it went as well as could have been expected but it could have been the time of when it was released and not as big of a movie.

You're talking about the one back in 1985 right? I wonder what that would be like now in the age of social media, especially if it wasn't marketed that way at all.

Ya way back when. I do wonder if they may do something like that with the remake they are supposedly coming out with soon.

bobinator said:

---

I've actually been waiting for a movie to do something like this, but instead of releasing them a year apart, it's just like a month.

But for maximum effect I think you'd do it the other way around. You'd publicize it as two movies so everyone knows a second part is coming the next year, but then at the end of the first movie you'd do a surprise announcement that the second movie was coming out in just a few weeks.

---

A month would probably not be enough time. The first half would still be going strong when you released the second half.

But six months later could work pretty well, as with Back to the Future Part II releasing in November 1989 and Back to the Future Part III releasing in May 1990.

bobinator said:

---

It would be a hilariously legendary money grab to split the last episode of what is supposed to be a trilogy of trilogies into two parts.

---

Obviously not the "trilogy of trilogies" part, but didn't The Hunger Games do this?

And of course, they somehow turned The Hobbit into three movies.