My list would look like that except turned upside down and without Rogue One, Solo and The Force Awakens because I either never saw them or only partially some time ago.
TLJ to blame?
- Thread starter Spot261
- Start date
1. TLJ
2. Solo
3. R1
4. The Prequels
5. TFA
This is the correct order and you are wrong.
1. TLJ
2. R1
3. TFA
I haven't seen Solo yet because of a lack of time.
2. R1
3. TFA
I haven't seen Solo yet because of a lack of time.
That’d be my order as well. I knew there was a reason we got along!
WE STAND HERE AMIDST MY ACHIEVEMENTS!!!
1. TLJ
2. R1
3. TFA
4. Solo
2. R1
3. TFA
4. Solo
Do you need to flip the list if there is only one thing on it?
There is another option which was not listed in the voting. It is this, TLJ contributed to the failure of Solo, but was not the sole cause.
I don't think The Last Jedi contributed to the troubles of Solo. Beyond only being released five months before.
Solo was a movie that had production troubles: changing directors midstream and allegations they had to bring in an acting coach for the lead. Disney knew it was in trouble, which is why the advertising was minimal. They were prepared for a down performance.
Obviously because I woulod have a lis that would start with "4. TLJ" and doesn't continueDo you need to flip the list if there is only one thing on it?
For some that's how they like their star wars?Obviously because I woulod have a lis that would start with "4. TLJ" and doesn't continue
Having to bring in an acting coach for Alden was caused by the problems woth Lord and Miller.
This is my list as well. I MIGHT flip TFA and Solo when I see the latter more than once, or I might not. But TLJ is definitely top, and R1 is definitely 4.
I don't think so either. And, I don't think Disney thinks so. Just the Interwebs.
Are we blind?! Deploy the garrison!
[Mr. Garrison] That's our cue, Mr. Hat! [/Garrison]
Stuff like "the pandering T-shirt" helps them believe their cause but a picture isn't worth a thousand words if it's from the wrong book.
Disney only wants to make back its money while telling stories to capture new audiences as well as trying to keep the current ones for maximum interest and, obviously, maximum return on investment in the saga. If anything, making a movie to sell a character's distant past to established fans means far more than taking what was told on screen for 4 minutes some 40 years ago into a 2+ hour movie without making it spectacular to match up the charatcter we're told is hot stuff. Was "The Kessel Run" more spectacular onscreen than what was hinted at in Episode IV? Were there any other ways to be hip and cool to sell how Solo got his surname, assuming there was any hip and cool reason to tell it? Was young Han in character? Or was there enough told to explain any change in character's attitudes between movie's start end ending, like how Anakin became Darth and Darth's later redemption (e.g. now trying to give Han a similar story since his redemption came in eps IV-VI)? Was a goal to be multiple movies to explain it all, and if so then how does Han get handled if the sequels to his solo movie are dropped?
IMHO, Disney's onto something with some of these arcs, but the one-offs aren't as strong as they could be.
At least "Solo" had more potential. "Rogue One" didn't need to be told as ANH told more than enough about it already.
Since anything left to the audience imagination will never be as cool as imagined then it's a mute point. The larger question is do people enjoy seeing the film? Because very few things will live up to hype.
