Solo: A Star Wars movie

The place to talk about your favorite movies, tv series, cartoons, music and theater.
User avatar
Ares
Site Admin
Posts: 1409
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:40 am

Re: Solo: A Star Wars movie

Post by Ares » Mon Jun 11, 2018 5:44 pm

Batgirl III wrote:
Mon Jun 11, 2018 5:30 pm
Batman: The Animated Series certainly wouldn’t exist without the successful Tim Burton films; However, it’s existence doesn’t make the Joel Schumacher Batman films good.
I never said that it did. All I said was that I judge films within a franchise by the standards of the better films in that franchise. I consider the Incredible Hulk bellow average for a MCU film, but it's still an above average superhero/action film. If a film is a stand alone, I will judge it on its own merits. If a film is part of a franchise or connected to other films, I see no problem in judging that film by how it compares to other films in that franchise.
A film’s quality must be measured by the content of the film, not the quality of a separate production in a different format.
I never compared the Prequel films to the Clone Wars/Rebels TV show in terms of quality. I merely said that the Prequel films gave us our first glimpse of Anakin and his story, and that laid the ground work for others to more fully flesh the character out and make me appreciate the character more. The existence of the Clone Wars cartoons does not make the Prequels good or bad, but it makes the Prequels necessary for the Clone Wars existence.

I don't feel any problem in comparing the novelization of Revenge of the Sith and the movie, however, since it is the same story just told in different mediums. Allowances have to be made for the adaptation process, but I have no issue in saying one told the story better, or that the film could have been as good as the novel had different choices been made.

User avatar
Batgirl III
Posts: 1715
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 6:17 am
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: Solo: A Star Wars movie

Post by Batgirl III » Mon Jun 11, 2018 6:13 pm

If a film isn’t good, then the film isn’t good.

If a film isn’t good, but the novelization is great, then the film still isn’t good.

If film X isn’t good, but films W, Y, and Z in the franchise great, then film X still isn’t good.

If a film isn’t good, but the tv spin-off is great, then the film still isn’t good.

If a film isn’t good, then the film isn’t good.
BARON wrote:I'm talking batgirl with batgirl. I love you internet.

User avatar
Ares
Site Admin
Posts: 1409
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:40 am

Re: Solo: A Star Wars movie

Post by Ares » Mon Jun 11, 2018 7:15 pm

Batgirl III wrote:
Mon Jun 11, 2018 6:13 pm
If a film isn’t good, then the film isn’t good.

If a film isn’t good, but the novelization is great, then the film still isn’t good.

If film X isn’t good, but films W, Y, and Z in the franchise great, then film X still isn’t good.

If a film isn’t good, but the tv spin-off is great, then the film still isn’t good.

If a film isn’t good, then the film isn’t good.
I never said otherwise. Its astounding that you don't seem to understand this.

You seem to be under the impression that being part of a franchise I like prevents me from calling a movie I think is bad, well, bad. That's not the case. See Iron Man 3, Last Jedi, Prometheus, etc. Its actually the opposite. If a movie is good or average but part of a franchise that has much better films, then I judge it against what that franchise has produced, good and bad.

A stand alone movie is judged on its own merit. A franchise film is judged by that metric, and then against the films in its franchise. Why is that so difficult to grasp?

User avatar
Batgirl III
Posts: 1715
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 6:17 am
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: Solo: A Star Wars movie

Post by Batgirl III » Mon Jun 11, 2018 8:04 pm

That’s not the issue; I’m just struggling to understand why you’re saying a book or a television show is enough to make up for a film’s failings.
BARON wrote:I'm talking batgirl with batgirl. I love you internet.

User avatar
Ares
Site Admin
Posts: 1409
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:40 am

Re: Solo: A Star Wars movie

Post by Ares » Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:08 am

Batgirl III wrote:
Mon Jun 11, 2018 8:04 pm
That’s not the issue; I’m just struggling to understand why you’re saying a book or a television show is enough to make up for a film’s failings.
I'm not. All I said was that their existence made that film necessary. The movie isn't less bad because the novelization tells the story better, it just shows that there wasn't really wrong with the story itself, and that it's the execution that can ruin things. It's frankly amazing to listen to the Audio-Book of Revenge of the Sith, and hear the voice actor have more chemistry with himself than the actors did. The Revenge of the Sith movie is a bellow average Star Wars film and an average action/sci-fi film, but it and the prequels did set up Anakin's story and portrayal enough that more skilled hands could examine him better.

This whole debate got started when the question was asked if knowing Vaders full story turned out better for him. I said yes, but I never limited the process of exploring Vader's backstory to just the films.

User avatar
Woodclaw
Posts: 570
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:05 pm
Location: Como, Italy

Re: Solo: A Star Wars movie

Post by Woodclaw » Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:39 am

Ares wrote:
Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:08 am
Batgirl III wrote:
Mon Jun 11, 2018 8:04 pm
That’s not the issue; I’m just struggling to understand why you’re saying a book or a television show is enough to make up for a film’s failings.
I'm not. All I said was that their existence made that film necessary. The movie isn't less bad because the novelization tells the story better, it just shows that there wasn't really wrong with the story itself, and that it's the execution that can ruin things. It's frankly amazing to listen to the Audio-Book of Revenge of the Sith, and hear the voice actor have more chemistry with himself than the actors did. The Revenge of the Sith movie is a bellow average Star Wars film and an average action/sci-fi film, but it and the prequels did set up Anakin's story and portrayal enough that more skilled hands could examine him better.

This whole debate got started when the question was asked if knowing Vaders full story turned out better for him. I said yes, but I never limited the process of exploring Vader's backstory to just the films.
So the point is to understand if the failing of a specific production are because of the plot or because of the execution.
"You're right. Sorry. Holy shit," I breathed, "heckhounds.”

WareHouse W (main build thread for M&M)

User avatar
Ares
Site Admin
Posts: 1409
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:40 am

Re: Solo: A Star Wars movie

Post by Ares » Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:06 am

Woodclaw wrote:
Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:39 am
Ares wrote:
Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:08 am
Batgirl III wrote:
Mon Jun 11, 2018 8:04 pm
That’s not the issue; I’m just struggling to understand why you’re saying a book or a television show is enough to make up for a film’s failings.
I'm not. All I said was that their existence made that film necessary. The movie isn't less bad because the novelization tells the story better, it just shows that there wasn't really wrong with the story itself, and that it's the execution that can ruin things. It's frankly amazing to listen to the Audio-Book of Revenge of the Sith, and hear the voice actor have more chemistry with himself than the actors did. The Revenge of the Sith movie is a bellow average Star Wars film and an average action/sci-fi film, but it and the prequels did set up Anakin's story and portrayal enough that more skilled hands could examine him better.

This whole debate got started when the question was asked if knowing Vaders full story turned out better for him. I said yes, but I never limited the process of exploring Vader's backstory to just the films.
So the point is to understand if the failing of a specific production are because of the plot or because of the execution.
My point was only that finding out more about Anakin Skywalker's past as a Jedi was ultimately a good thing and deepened my appreciation for the character. On their own, the prequel films didn't do a great job of exploring Anakin, but they laid the groundwork for better examinations of the character.

I'm not sure how that spiraled into whatever the discussion became. I do think that if one person takes a story and tells it poorly, while another takes the same story and tells it well, then it's apparent to me that it's a matter of execution. Granted, that ultimately isn't saying much. A great creative team can take a silly story (a man going after the mob for killing his dog and stealing his car) into a fantastic movie, while it's possible to take a good story (the Hobbit) and have it fall apart due to a poor execution (looking at you, last two Hobbit films).

User avatar
Batgirl III
Posts: 1715
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 6:17 am
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: Solo: A Star Wars movie

Post by Batgirl III » Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:27 am

My point was only that finding out more about Anakin Skywalker's past as a Jedi was ultimately a good thing and deepened my appreciation for the character.
This is going to have to be an "agree to disagree" point, Ares. I felt that everything we needed to know about Darth Vader was explained to us in Star Wars and then expanded upon in Empire Strikes Back. He was a brave Jedi Knight, he fell to the Dark Side, now he was twisted and evil... But there was still a spark of good in him, deep down, and Luke was able to rekindle it.

I believe the prequel films were not only bad films, I believe they were unnecessary films.
BARON wrote:I'm talking batgirl with batgirl. I love you internet.

BriarThrone
Posts: 291
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2016 7:33 am

Re: Solo: A Star Wars movie

Post by BriarThrone » Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:32 am

Worth noting that novelizations are derived from the screenplay, but not limited to them, and in the hands of a good writer, a bad screenplay can be turned into a good story. At that point, is the distinction you're making really even a thing?

Unfortunately, I found Terry Brooks' work on The Phantom Menace boring, much like I find everything else he does.

Also, I found every detail of Anakin's background covered in those three titles, movie or novelization, to lessen the character. Sometimes mystery is important. Allow imagination to do the work. If you go to examine a figure of power and menace, and you spend one movie with him as an adorable little moppet and two with him as an entitled, self-centered little emo punk... yeah, in my mind, the Imperial March will forever include Mrs Stevenson's Second Grade Kazoo Section. Can't take him seriously any more.

User avatar
Batgirl III
Posts: 1715
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 6:17 am
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: Solo: A Star Wars movie

Post by Batgirl III » Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:44 am

The Silence of the Lambs is considered a masterpiece of the crime thriller genre and just a generally great movie. Anthony Hopkins' portrayal of Hannibal Lecter is considered career-defining for the man who was already a celebrated actor... and he's on screen for less than eighteen minutes. Would we want to see a film about nine-year old Hannibal winning the soapbox derby?
BARON wrote:I'm talking batgirl with batgirl. I love you internet.

User avatar
Ares
Site Admin
Posts: 1409
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:40 am

Re: Solo: A Star Wars movie

Post by Ares » Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:55 am

Batgirl III wrote:
Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:27 am
My point was only that finding out more about Anakin Skywalker's past as a Jedi was ultimately a good thing and deepened my appreciation for the character.
This is going to have to be an "agree to disagree" point, Ares. I felt that everything we needed to know about Darth Vader was explained to us in Star Wars and then expanded upon in Empire Strikes Back. He was a brave Jedi Knight, he fell to the Dark Side, now he was twisted and evil... But there was still a spark of good in him, deep down, and Luke was able to rekindle it.

I believe the prequel films were not only bad films, I believe they were unnecessary films.
And that's certainly an understandable position to take. But I found the Anakin we got to see in the novel and the Clone Wars cartoon made me appreciate Anakin more, because we got to see the character, the good and the bad, see his genuinely heroic moments and the good in him, and the bits of darkness that the Emperor twisted and manipulated. For me, it helped me like the character more, but I understand that's my perspective.

I don't really see "unnecessary" as inherently negative when describing a film, especially since I view it as somewhat subjective. Ironically enough "unnecessary" is one of the largest complaints some folks are lobbing at Solo. For me, I'm more concerned with whether or not a new entry into a franchise damages it. The Prequels, mixed bag that they were, didn't damage the Star Wars franchise, and created plenty of new storytelling opportunities. Conversely, I feel The Last Jedi DID damage the franchise, and we can see it in how its affected Solo, and actively limits storytelling possibilities.

User avatar
Ares
Site Admin
Posts: 1409
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:40 am

Re: Solo: A Star Wars movie

Post by Ares » Tue Jun 12, 2018 11:04 am

Batgirl III wrote:
Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:44 am
The Silence of the Lambs is considered a masterpiece of the crime thriller genre and just a generally great movie. Anthony Hopkins' portrayal of Hannibal Lecter is considered career-defining for the man who was already a celebrated actor... and he's on screen for less than eighteen minutes. Would we want to see a film about nine-year old Hannibal winning the soapbox derby?
Probably not, but it's doubtful that would have any impact on the character. Whereas seeing that Anakin came from a slave background, desperately wanted to save his mother, how he got off on the wrong foot with the Jedi, and other formative things that would shape his character, did help set the stage for who he would become. The podracing was there as an action scene and to showcase that Anakin already was using the Force to be a great pilot.

Conversely, the Lich King in the Warcraft games wouldn't have felt as personal an opponent if we hadn't gotten to know Prince Arthas beforehand, seen his gradual fall to darkness despite his good intentions, or felt that same sense of accomplishment in his defeat.

But again, this is something we'll just have to agree to disagree on. That doesn't bother me, and given that you don't particularly care for Star Wars in the first place, that shouldn't really concern you.

User avatar
Ken
Posts: 1562
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 10:40 pm
Location: DeKamore, IL, Earth-Two
Contact:

Re: Solo: A Star Wars movie

Post by Ken » Tue Jun 12, 2018 6:31 pm

Last edited by Ken on Tue Jun 12, 2018 7:03 pm, edited 2 times in total.
After his success co-authoring a murder mystery w/James Patterson, Marvel is now talking to Bill Clinton about doing some comics writing: a revival of Steve Gerber's swamp monster hero. They expect Bill Clinton's 'Man-Thing' will be very popular.

User avatar
Batgirl III
Posts: 1715
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 6:17 am
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: Solo: A Star Wars movie

Post by Batgirl III » Tue Jun 12, 2018 7:02 pm

I think you mistyped that URL, clearly this is the link you’re looking for.
BARON wrote:I'm talking batgirl with batgirl. I love you internet.

User avatar
Ken
Posts: 1562
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 10:40 pm
Location: DeKamore, IL, Earth-Two
Contact:

Re: Solo: A Star Wars movie

Post by Ken » Tue Jun 12, 2018 7:03 pm

Batgirl III wrote:
Tue Jun 12, 2018 7:02 pm
I think you mistyped that URL, clearly this is the link you’re looking for.

Try this.
After his success co-authoring a murder mystery w/James Patterson, Marvel is now talking to Bill Clinton about doing some comics writing: a revival of Steve Gerber's swamp monster hero. They expect Bill Clinton's 'Man-Thing' will be very popular.

Post Reply