• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Scruffy-looking untitled Han Solo film thread

Then you're missing out on many great films.

:shrug: I'm sure they're fine. Its not like I'm anti-Ron Howard. I just only watch movies that seem interesting to me or cover topics I'm interested in, and Ron Howard hasn't really done anything like that outside of a so bad its entertaining christmas film and the upcoming Han Solo movie. I'm sure he's a great director, but his films and my interests just don't usually overlap. I'm much more excited for Solo with him at the helm then I was with the original directors.
 
No Cinderella Man, Frost/Nixon, Rush, Cocoon or Willow either?
You know, out of that list, the only one I've seen is Apollo 13, and it's been several years.
Splash, and Coccoon are classics that every SFF fan should watch at least once. Willow is pretty good, not quite at the level of Splash or Cocoon, but still enjoyable. Apollo 13 is great. A Beatiful Mind is pretty well regarded, but I didn't really like it when I saw back in theaters. Haven't seen any of the other movies mentioned.
 
Splash, and Coccoon are classics that every SFF fan should watch at least once. Willow is pretty good, not quite at the level of Splash or Cocoon, but still enjoyable. Apollo 13 is great. A Beatiful Mind is pretty well regarded, but I didn't really like it when I saw back in theaters. Haven't seen any of the other movies mentioned.

Agreed. I recommend Cinderella Man, Rush and Nixon/Frost because they’re true stories and their historical eras are portrayed quite faithfully. Especially Rush because of its Formula 1 and ‘70s racing and wild partying theme. As a reader of Dan Brown’s novels I also have enjoyed all the Robert Langdon films but I’m probably a minority.

Reading your list and then posting mine I realized that I am a fan of Howard’s work as a director and apparently I wasn’t even aware of it consciously!
 
Have you never seen a Ron Howard movie? No Apollo 13, Splash, A Beautiful Mind, or the three Robert Langdon movie?

Apollo 13 is a regular, but yeah, I've seen all but A Beautiful Mind out of these.

No Cinderella Man, Frost/Nixon, Rush, Cocoon or Willow either?

For these, Rush is also a regular nowadays, but I'd seen and enjoyed Cocoon and Willow a few times when I was younger.
 
First look at alden as Han Solo from a theater cup

RoANWFZ.jpg



Also Disney/marvel/harry potter/ tomb raider/ Fox’s Deadpool movie confirmed!

;)
 
Judging by the KINS at the end, I think that's going to be next years Harkins' cup, it definitely fits the style. Harkins is a smaller theater chain we have in Arizona and a handful of other nearby states and every year they do reuseable cups, which usually come out in December, so the timing seems right. The last few years they've done mashups of the years big movies like that, but what we get doesn't always fit the movie. In this year's year book themed cup they have Ceasar from the current Planet of the Apes series in either a white shirt and red vest or white and red shirt, but he never wears actually any clothes in the movie. So I'm pretty sure it's real, but I don't think it's an official image from Lucasfilm.
 
I've seen one Ron Howard movie, the Jim Carrey How the Grinch Stole Christmas. Its admittedly not good, but its a bit of a guilty pleasure. Besides that the only one of those I've heard of is Apollo 13, and its not a topic I'm that interested in (and its way too long for the subject matter for me to watch). His other stuff, doing a quick wikipedia check, has absolutely nothing I'd be even remotely willing to watch, which isn't a knock about him he just generally makes movies I have no interest in.

Wait... you're a sci fi fan who isn't interested in space travel???
 
So, with 80% of the movie re-shot, does that mean this movie now has an inflated budget and will need mega grosses to break even?
 
I doubt it'll loose money once you factor in the revenue from licence products, which has always been where Star Wars gets it's cash flow. Regardless, the extra expenditure will certainly tighten the margins but don't go thinking that reshooting most of the movie means the budget instantly doubles. The post-production costs shouldn't be significantly affected, nor the marketing, props, costumes, sets or basically anything that's not paying for the cameras to roll with people standing in front of them for a few weeks.
 
I doubt it'll loose money once you factor in the revenue from licence products, which has always been where Star Wars gets it's cash flow. Regardless, the extra expenditure will certainly tighten the margins but don't go thinking that reshooting most of the movie means the budget instantly doubles. The post-production costs shouldn't be significantly affected, nor the marketing, props, costumes, sets or basically anything that's not paying for the cameras to roll with people standing in front of them for a few weeks.

Well, the recent examples to date are Justice League with 20% re-shoots costing $25 million and Superman Returns where they shot pieces of entirely separate movies, and added their cost into Returns' budget, which inflated the budget by a rumored $80-100 million...
 
Wait... you're a sci fi fan who isn't interested in space travel???

I like Science Fiction, I'm not all that interested in real science. Its why I absolutely loathe Hard Sci Fi stories, and a movie like Apollo 13 is just unappealing. If I want to know about Apollo 13, I'll watch a TV documentary and probably learn all the relevant/interesting things about the actual event in half an hour, as opposed to over two hours watching a fictionalized version of events.
 
I like Science Fiction, I'm not all that interested in real science. Its why I absolutely loathe Hard Sci Fi stories, and a movie like Apollo 13 is just unappealing. If I want to know about Apollo 13, I'll watch a TV documentary and probably learn all the relevant/interesting things about the actual event in half an hour, as opposed to over two hours watching a fictionalized version of events.
:-(
 
All I can say is: if you avoid Apollo 13 because it's hard science then you are denying yourself two hours of thrilling human drama and one of the best true stories about the space program ever committed to film. Your choice, but if you watch just one film in its genre watch Apollo 13. Seriously. You're missing out. I'm not exaggerating. Hanks deserved another Oscar for that one.
 
All I can say is: if you avoid Apollo 13 because it's hard science then you are denying yourself two hours of thrilling human drama and one of the best true stories about the space program ever committed to film. Your choice, but if you watch just one film in its genre watch Apollo 13. Seriously. You're missing out. I'm not exaggerating. Hanks deserved another Oscar for that one.

I'm not arguing about the objective quality of the movie. Its a two hour and 10 minute docudrama about actual space travel. So its a long movie about a subject I don't care for ("thrilling" human drama or not). The Apollo 13 incident might be interesting to me as the subject of a half hour History Channel/Discovery Channel/etc show (one of their rare nonfiction shows about actual history, not some reality show). But outside of that I'm just not interested.

Docudramas in general bore me and are usually way, way longer then they need to be. If I'm going to watch something about a real event that's trying to tell me what actually happened, I'd rather watch a real documentary. That's not a statement about the quality of any specific movie, its just how my tastes tend to run when it comes to this type of thing.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top