Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 28, 2024, 01:54:35 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
we're back, baby
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  General Discussion  |  Movies  |  Topic: Solo: A Star Wars Story 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Solo: A Star Wars Story  (Read 65264 times)
TheWalrus
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4319


Reply #140 on: June 15, 2018, 02:37:16 PM

I wouldn't blame her for leaving if she came out and said, "Fuck Star Wars fans." Because I'd agree with her. People are fucking awful, I'm tired of them, and I don't create content. Buncha goddamn awful people.

vanilla folders - MediumHigh
Sir T
Terracotta Army
Posts: 14223


Reply #141 on: June 15, 2018, 04:10:09 PM

Yeah. I've been looking at a few fan videos lately, and she really has been getting it in the neck for stuff that she wasn't in any way responsible for. Granted I know nothing about the woman but pro and anti-SJW shit was getting dragged into the criticism so the stupid level was mounting.

Hic sunt dracones.
Paelos
Contributor
Posts: 27075

Error 404: Title not found.


Reply #142 on: June 16, 2018, 05:20:09 AM

The story directions do put more women in the fore of the movies. They also do have a tone I think completely missed the mark of their mostly male demographic. I think in many cases they took unnecessary risks to try to hit a broader appeal and ended up infuriating their base. Honestly if Star Wars fans are giant man children you make movies for giant man children. This is a business not a political rally.

CPA, CFO, Sports Fan, Game when I have the time
jgsugden
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3888


Reply #143 on: June 16, 2018, 07:06:28 AM

This Universe Bloat idea needs to be ut to bed.  Black Panther, Infinity War and Deadpool all did well - even with Deadpool and Infinity War being released weeks apart.  If the movies are good, distinctive and marketed well they'll succeed.  If they get lazy with any of those elements, they'll fail.  Solo failed at the BO because people lacked faith in it, it was one of the weaker SW films, and the marketing was weak.  Not because TLJ was release 6 months earlier.

2020 will be the year I gave up all hope.
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11838


Reply #144 on: June 16, 2018, 07:27:14 AM

The story directions do put more women in the fore of the movies. They also do have a tone I think completely missed the mark of their mostly male demographic. I think in many cases they took unnecessary risks to try to hit a broader appeal and ended up infuriating their base. Honestly if Star Wars fans are giant man children you make movies for giant man children. This is a business not a political rally.

This is rubbish and the people complaining about women and black people in their star wars, firstly aren't relevant to the continued success of the ip and secondly can fuck right off.

There are issues in new star wars but most positive thing Disney have done with them is fix the somewhat understandable diversity issues the OT had.

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
Threash
Terracotta Army
Posts: 9165


Reply #145 on: June 16, 2018, 07:46:33 AM

it was one of the weaker SW films

It really wasn't. I liked it more than TLJ and I've been defending that movie since it came out.  I think too soon after DP2 and Infinity War are real factors, as well as the bad marketing and bad word of mouth throughout the entire production, and i really don't know why there was any reason to release it in may rather than November like every single other movie they've released.

I am the .00000001428%
Soln
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4737

the opportunity for evil is just delicious


Reply #146 on: June 16, 2018, 12:10:31 PM

I dunno. I'm still (above) just not up for the film.  I'm a SW fan and TLJ just left me bleh -- not ragey or butthurt, just unenthused for this film.  Like, "I'll add it to my Netflix or Amazon queue one day" unenthused. 

Argument: SW films just aren't "special" or particularly unique events anymore.  MCU at least has the framework of an evolving story, so you kind of do want to see them all.  This?  It wants me to see it because of an early hero who doesn't have a future in the new films.  And arguably, he isn't that special anymore after TFA/TLJ.
BobtheSomething
Terracotta Army
Posts: 452


Reply #147 on: June 16, 2018, 08:10:21 PM

I dunno. I'm still (above) just not up for the film.  I'm a SW fan and TLJ just left me bleh -- not ragey or butthurt, just unenthused for this film.  Like, "I'll add it to my Netflix or Amazon queue one day" unenthused. 

Argument: SW films just aren't "special" or particularly unique events anymore.  MCU at least has the framework of an evolving story, so you kind of do want to see them all.  This?  It wants me to see it because of an early hero who doesn't have a future in the new films.  And arguably, he isn't that special anymore after TFA/TLJ.

Reserve that meh for episode 9.  Solo is fun and feels like Star Wars.  If that's not enough to interest you, then I guess don't bother.  I guess the franchise is in more dire straights than I had believed possible in so short a time.
Riggswolfe
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8024


Reply #148 on: June 16, 2018, 10:55:06 PM

I dunno. I'm still (above) just not up for the film.  I'm a SW fan and TLJ just left me bleh -- not ragey or butthurt, just unenthused for this film.  Like, "I'll add it to my Netflix or Amazon queue one day" unenthused. 

Argument: SW films just aren't "special" or particularly unique events anymore.  MCU at least has the framework of an evolving story, so you kind of do want to see them all.  This?  It wants me to see it because of an early hero who doesn't have a future in the new films.  And arguably, he isn't that special anymore after TFA/TLJ.

Reserve that meh for episode 9.  Solo is fun and feels like Star Wars.  If that's not enough to interest you, then I guess don't bother.  I guess the franchise is in more dire straights than I had believed possible in so short a time.

I'm right there with him. This is more or less where I'm at. I'll still go see Episode 9 because I want to see how it all turns out but I couldn't work up any enthusiasm for Solo. I really do think that their number one mistake was making the Episode movies somewhat rudderless. They should have had a trilogy more or less planned out in advance as opposed to letting Rian do whatever he wanted, which appears to have been basically discarding 75% of TFA. Combine that with "another prequel?" and "good lord this movie had a troubled production." and Solo just sort of paid the price for their mis-steps.

Also, I tend to find Ron Howard a very boring director, so that didn't help.

"We live in a country, where John Lennon takes six bullets in the chest, Yoko Ono was standing right next to him and not one fucking bullet! Explain that to me! Explain that to me, God! Explain it to me, God!" - Denis Leary summing up my feelings about the nature of the universe.
lamaros
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8021


Reply #149 on: June 17, 2018, 06:03:35 AM

Is the Star Wars brand worth more now than when Disney bought it?

I've never been a "fan", but the outside view seems to be that Lucas's shitty films were still Star Wars films, and the recent Disney ones are on a cash grab schedule that will devalue the brand.
BobtheSomething
Terracotta Army
Posts: 452


Reply #150 on: June 17, 2018, 06:49:43 AM

People hated the prequels, but they were still excited enough about Star Wars to see them in the theater.  Looks like Disney killed that enthusiasm.
Ginaz
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3534


Reply #151 on: June 17, 2018, 12:26:03 PM

This Universe Bloat idea needs to be ut to bed.  Black Panther, Infinity War and Deadpool all did well - even with Deadpool and Infinity War being released weeks apart.  If the movies are good, distinctive and marketed well they'll succeed.  If they get lazy with any of those elements, they'll fail.  Solo failed at the BO because people lacked faith in it, it was one of the weaker SW films, and the marketing was weak.  Not because TLJ was release 6 months earlier.

TBF, Solo was a much better movie that any of the Lucas prequel stuff.  Was it a better Star Wars movie?  Debatable.
Sir T
Terracotta Army
Posts: 14223


Reply #152 on: June 17, 2018, 12:36:30 PM

"Better than the Lucas Prequels" is a really, really low bar.

Honestly, My overall feeling on Solo was "Why?" I had no interest in seeing the life of Solo before the movies, it wasn't relevant to the overall story. Solo in TFA? Sure. Young Frankenstein Sherlock Homes Indiana Jones Solo? Uh... why?

Whats next? Barbie Leia in the Palace? Ewoks in... oh ya, Lucas did that...  Oh ho ho ho. Reallllly?

I mean "Rouge one" was a self contained story concurrent to the other events, so it actually had some interest behind it.

Hic sunt dracones.
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11838


Reply #153 on: June 17, 2018, 01:22:05 PM

Is the Star Wars brand worth more now than when Disney bought it?

I'd guess they are closing in on breaking even on the deal, if they haven't already.

So probably not - but only because Disney have used it to make actual cash money, and produce star wars content.

This thread is massively overestimating the 'damage' these films have done.


"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
Ginaz
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3534


Reply #154 on: June 17, 2018, 02:09:18 PM

Is the Star Wars brand worth more now than when Disney bought it?

I'd guess they are closing in on breaking even on the deal, if they haven't already.

So probably not - but only because Disney have used it to make actual cash money, and produce star wars content.

This thread is massively overestimating the 'damage' these films have done.



Maybe it's true for younger, new fans but older fans are increasingly less interested in anything Star Wars related.  Maybe we're just growing out of it but I have almost no interest in the next Star Wars anything.  I'll watch it but it'll probably be a throw away experience.
Sir T
Terracotta Army
Posts: 14223


Reply #155 on: June 17, 2018, 02:50:42 PM

The other indicator is that Nu Star wars merch isn't selling that much. Avengers crap is selling but nuWars is dying on the shelves. Mind you, Prequel crap didn't sell much either.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-18/-star-wars-toy-sales-fall-in-2017-as-movie-tie-fatigue-sets-in

https://www.cosmicbooknews.com/star-wars-last-jedi-toy-sales-tank

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFqsiuPxfn8

Hic sunt dracones.
Threash
Terracotta Army
Posts: 9165


Reply #156 on: June 17, 2018, 04:59:52 PM

There are problems with the Star Wars toys that go beyond the movies. Do you recognize this guy?. He was one of the first figures released after TFA and didn't even appear in the movie. Rogue One had like three different versions of Jyn and Cassian while the other more interesting members were rare as fuck and they didn't even bother making a Bodhi. Every movie you get a new Rey, a new Kylo and a new Finn all of which are completely interchangeable with each other. There is just zero variety, just cranking out version after version of the same main characters after every movie is not what made Star Wars toys huge during the original trilogy.

I am the .00000001428%
TheWalrus
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4319


Reply #157 on: June 17, 2018, 05:10:10 PM

I seem to remember that if you were a careful hunter, you could get the entire cantina crew from Mos Eisley. They just don't do the variety, you're right. OTOH, the Lego shit is badass.

vanilla folders - MediumHigh
lamaros
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8021


Reply #158 on: June 17, 2018, 08:14:49 PM

Is the Star Wars brand worth more now than when Disney bought it?

I'd guess they are closing in on breaking even on the deal, if they haven't already.

So probably not - but only because Disney have used it to make actual cash money, and produce star wars content.

This thread is massively overestimating the 'damage' these films have done.



Sure, legit to buy the rights and then try and get that money back asap, but doesn't mean you have to trash it in the process.

If you think it's been handled as well as it could have? Well that is clearly wrong.
SurfD
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4035


Reply #159 on: June 17, 2018, 10:58:50 PM

OTOH, the Lego shit is badass.
That probably has more to do with Lego, than with Disney.

That being said, 100% agree.  If I had $1000 bucks to burn, I would SOOOO have a gigantic Millennium Falcon sitting on my dresser.  That thing will probably sit on my some day wish list for the rest of my life.

Darwinism is the Gateway Science.
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11838


Reply #160 on: June 18, 2018, 09:32:55 AM

Is the Star Wars brand worth more now than when Disney bought it?

I'd guess they are closing in on breaking even on the deal, if they haven't already.

So probably not - but only because Disney have used it to make actual cash money, and produce star wars content.

This thread is massively overestimating the 'damage' these films have done.



Sure, legit to buy the rights and then try and get that money back asap, but doesn't mean you have to trash it in the process.

If you think it's been handled as well as it could have? Well that is clearly wrong.

Probably not, but people have unreasonable expectations for what 'as well as it could have' means and are overstating the gap between that and reality. TFA was an understandable safety-first project, not great but didn't screw up; R1 is unambiguously good - something that only be said about 2 other SW films; TLJ has mixed reviews - but I like it so fuck everyone else; Solo everyone here seems to basically agree is good. Nothing seems 'ruined' by anyone.

Worst case, at some point Disney might have to countenance going 1 full calendar year without a star wars film.

Just as a reminder, a rival space related franchise has survived voyager, first contact, and into darkness. Not even the star wars prequels were that bad.


"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
Paelos
Contributor
Posts: 27075

Error 404: Title not found.


Reply #161 on: June 18, 2018, 10:04:37 AM

This is rubbish and the people complaining about women and black people in their star wars, firstly aren't relevant to the continued success of the ip and secondly can fuck right off.

There are issues in new star wars but most positive thing Disney have done with them is fix the somewhat understandable diversity issues the OT had.

While I agree with you that they can fuck off, what happens when they actually do fuck off and leave you short of budget by $200M? Is that what happened here? Was it simple overburdening of the product? Is it bland production?

Honestly, the movie is better than people give it credit for and people still didn't show up. It's a fun movie, so what caused the flop in your mind?

CPA, CFO, Sports Fan, Game when I have the time
Threash
Terracotta Army
Posts: 9165


Reply #162 on: June 18, 2018, 10:22:53 AM

OTOH, the Lego shit is badass.
That probably has more to do with Lego, than with Disney.

That being said, 100% agree.  If I had $1000 bucks to burn, I would SOOOO have a gigantic Millennium Falcon sitting on my dresser.  That thing will probably sit on my some day wish list for the rest of my life.

You should have bought one anyways, Lego sets are like rock solid investments.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2018, 10:27:06 AM by Threash »

I am the .00000001428%
Shannow
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3703


Reply #163 on: June 18, 2018, 11:40:35 AM

OTOH, the Lego shit is badass.
That probably has more to do with Lego, than with Disney.

That being said, 100% agree.  If I had $1000 bucks to burn, I would SOOOO have a gigantic Millennium Falcon sitting on my dresser.  That thing will probably sit on my some day wish list for the rest of my life.

You should have bought one anyways, Lego sets are like rock solid investments.

In some ways I regret I didn't keep my son's Star Wars sets together. A friend of mine's kid did and sold them when he was 14, made a mint.

Someone liked something? Who the fuzzy fuck was this heretic? You don't come to this website and enjoy something. Fuck that. ~ The Walrus
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11838


Reply #164 on: June 18, 2018, 01:34:39 PM

This is rubbish and the people complaining about women and black people in their star wars, firstly aren't relevant to the continued success of the ip and secondly can fuck right off.

There are issues in new star wars but most positive thing Disney have done with them is fix the somewhat understandable diversity issues the OT had.

While I agree with you that they can fuck off, what happens when they actually do fuck off and leave you short of budget by $200M? Is that what happened here? Was it simple overburdening of the product? Is it bland production?

Honestly, the movie is better than people give it credit for and people still didn't show up. It's a fun movie, so what caused the flop in your mind?

I really don't think people who hate that there was a black jedi on the tfa poster and a lady jedi in the film had any material impact on the takings of any of these films. But I think it does make a difference to anyone observant enough to notice that the best you can say of diversity in the OT and prequels is that their approach was typical of 1976.

As for the flop, first off flop is massively overstating it, this was a 110M opening weekend - which is roughly the MCU median after inflation, and that seems a reasonable comparator, especially for an anthology film. Secondly, poor marketing with little build up is probably the main issue. If it was anything to do with the film itself then it wouldn't have had a poor opening.

I don't think the problem was being too close to TLJ so much as not having a strategy that got them coverage for solo alongside coverage for TLJ. TLJ being 5 months ago certainly made it harder - but the sort of harder that well paid people ought to be able to deal with.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2018, 01:38:10 PM by eldaec »

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
MahrinSkel
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10857

When she crossed over, she was just a ship. But when she came back... she was bullshit!


Reply #165 on: June 18, 2018, 02:16:12 PM

People who went to see Solo early did not come out telling other people "You need to see this movie." They bought their gross, with no significant word of mouth bounce, and what they bought was less than what they spent. Parse nits over what is a "flop" all you want, it was not a success.

--Dav4

--Signature Unclear
Ceryse
Terracotta Army
Posts: 879


Reply #166 on: June 18, 2018, 02:37:57 PM

I really don't think people who hate that there was a black jedi on the tfa poster and a lady jedi in the film had any material impact on the takings of any of these films. But I think it does make a difference to anyone observant enough to notice that the best you can say of diversity in the OT and prequels is that their approach was typical of 1976.

As for the flop, first off flop is massively overstating it, this was a 110M opening weekend - which is roughly the MCU median after inflation, and that seems a reasonable comparator, especially for an anthology film. Secondly, poor marketing with little build up is probably the main issue. If it was anything to do with the film itself then it wouldn't have had a poor opening.

I don't think the problem was being too close to TLJ so much as not having a strategy that got them coverage for solo alongside coverage for TLJ. TLJ being 5 months ago certainly made it harder - but the sort of harder that well paid people ought to be able to deal with.

There is nothing you can call it except a flop. What makes it a flop is the budget, not the take, though, imo. Had they made the movie for a reasonable amount of money (and been able to buy ad-space well ahead of release, instead of having to wait until the last minute due to massive re-shoots, thus keeping the advertising budget down). It hasn't even come close to breaking even yet. At the rate it is slowing down it will be lucky to break $400 million world wide gross. Considering even the most flattering estimates having at a $250 million production budget and $100 million advertising budget (both are likely to be higher), and given the percent the theatres keep it needs to make a minimum of $450-$525 (large variance due to how many markets have the theatres keeping different percentages of the box office) to merely break even. That means it is looking like $80-$150 million, minimum, loss on the movie. It may be able to make that back via the streaming and disc sales, but it might not; and this is the best case scenario.

As for why it flopped, I don't think it really comes down to even just a couple things, but a large number of things that just added up;

1) The racist/sexist morons boycotting the movie do impact it a bit, as they also tended to be of the hard-core Star Wars fan base, and thus likely to see a SW movie they weren't offended by (due to being pieces of shit) multiple times in theatre, irregardless of the film's quality.

2) The non-racist/sexist fans boycotting the movie due to being lumped in with the above crowd by members of Disney/LucasFilms/media/etc., and being routinely insulted by them, or because of disdain towards how Disney has treated the property of Star Wars (i.e.; being complete fucking idiots by not planning out at least the major plot points, but letting directors do whatever the hell they feel like irregardless of prior instalments/expectations). These are largely, again, hard-core SW fans who'd otherwise see any SW movie multiple times in theatres.. like they did the prequels (despite those being horrible and Solo being, by and large, seen as below average to above average by people who've actually seen the movie).

3) Management. From Kennedy down there's been massive mis-management of the franchise as a whole and Solo in particular, leading to inflated budgets, bad PR and a general erosion of the brand's attractiveness. SW used to be 'the' franchise. Now it isn't.

4) Crap marketing and placement in the schedule. I don't believe the movie was placed too close to Episode 8, in that I don't believe fatigue is the issue. The divisiveness of Episode 8 didn't help in the slightest, of course, and it should have been pushed further from that movie if only to give people more time to get over it, or at least lessen the impact. More importanly, however, it came out in a period of time loaded with block-buster movies despite being a non-block-buster movie in terms of tone and perception. It should have been nowhere near Infinity War, Deadpool 2, Incredibles 2, and even Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom, especially given the erosion of trust in the brand.

5) SJW crap. Like it or not; true or not, the perception of SW of being too ham-fisted in embracing SJW stuff did hurt it. Some of the most dedicated SW fans I know are angry at the franchise because of how the new characters are being elevated not because they're awesome, but at the expense of the older characters (I.e.; Luke in Episode 8 and the Droid in Solo being too on-the-nose). I can't really speak to how true this stuff is (I tend to avoid pro/anti SJW discussions because the entire thing makes me want humanity removed from existence) but it was a major talking point prior to the film's release and further impacted the willingness of people to go see it, or see it multiple times.

6) It just wasn't good enough. While many here liked it.. the people who did go see the movie didn't like it enough to go see it multiple times, which was standard for all other SW movies, albeit primarily the trilogies. It just didn't get enough repeat viewings. To be fair, the release date played a part in this as well, imo. See Solo again, or see a new block-buster release? Or see one of those block-busters again?
HaemishM
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 42628

the Confederate flag underneath the stone in my class ring


WWW
Reply #167 on: June 18, 2018, 03:02:42 PM

Solo being a May release was a really bad idea, no matter how many other things you pile on to the reasons for it being a flop. Audiences may be dumb, but they aren't so dumb they don't feel the cash grab happening, especially when TLJ has barely been out of theaters long enough for a Blu-Ray/Streaming release. Rogue One had both the positive-ish buzz from TFA (which even for its flaws, has been credited with saving the franchise from the stank of the prequels) and a full year from the release of TFA to make people want another Star Wars movie. Plus at least Rogue One felt like a story that was "new-ish." It didn't use any existing characters and its entire tone was clear from the marketing. This is a war movie in the Star Wars universe.

Solo was... a heist movie in the SW universe? An examination of an existing character's past? Its entire existence didn't really have a good reason for being, at least not a marketable one.

Sir T
Terracotta Army
Posts: 14223


Reply #168 on: June 18, 2018, 03:15:44 PM

They may have been trying to capitalize on that stupid "May the Fouth be with you" shit.

Hic sunt dracones.
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11838


Reply #169 on: June 18, 2018, 03:30:28 PM

If the budget was too big for a film more successful than GotG or Captain America, then the budget was too big.

Solo was... a heist movie in the SW universe? An examination of an existing character's past? Its entire existence didn't really have a good reason for being, at least not a marketable one.

These would both be perfectly good reasons for a film - but I'm not sure it was exactly marketed as either one.

It came across more as just OT nostalgia. And that, is not enough.

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11838


Reply #170 on: June 18, 2018, 03:34:40 PM

On the subject of a may release, remember every Disney star wars film previous to solo has been delayed from May to December.

Whether one month or the other is better I have no idea, but seems important to Disney and I assume we're on the 12 month cadence now.

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
HaemishM
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 42628

the Confederate flag underneath the stone in my class ring


WWW
Reply #171 on: June 18, 2018, 03:37:18 PM

The thing about December is that if you stick to that release schedule, you can claim it as your own. The Lord of the Rings films were similar, not summer tentpoles but December regularities. Putting TFA and TLJ and R1 in December I thought was a great idea, because you get the marketing for your merch and toys right before Christmas, you don't have a lot of competition for that type of movie and you don't interfere with the cash cow of the Marvel movies. Making the main SW movies into a summer tent pole release would be a good idea. Making one of the side movies like R1 or Solo into that? Not nearly as good an idea.

Ceryse
Terracotta Army
Posts: 879


Reply #172 on: June 18, 2018, 04:26:13 PM

If the budget was too big for a film more successful than GotG or Captain America, then the budget was too big.

Except it isn't more successful than either of those (yet, at least). GotG got over $773 million world wide. Captain America got $370 million world wide. It is likely, but not guaranteed, that Solo will surpass Captain America before its theatrical run is complete (as Solo is just shy of $341 million at the moment).

Now, if you're focusing just on opening weekend numbers (dumb, imo, as those are only relevant to a degree, and not as comparable across years as people like to think; see Ocean's 8 headlines of topping the opening weekend numbers of the prior franchise installments as the perfect example of this). Even if you don't account for inflation you do have to take into account the number of screens it opened across. Solo opened in 301 theatres more than GotG and still made less money opening weekend by $10 million (domestic), as GotG averaged a larger amount per theatre ($23,118 to $19,270). Captain American opened on almost 800 fewer screens, but did average lower per screen ($17,512 to $19,270).

Hell, if you look at opening weekend openings per screen average the only MCU movies Solo did better than are; Captain America, Thor, and Ant-Man, with Thor being the most expensive to produce at $150 million and Captain America being the least successful over its entire run ($370 million box office take compared to a ~$220 million production/advertising budget, meaning the film made Disney anywhere from $30 - $60 million in profit).

In short; yes, the budget is the main culprit, financially, in terms of why Solo is a flop. Had the movie been made for what it should have cost (~$150 million production budget, ~$100 million advertisement budget), it would have a shot at breaking even just on its theatrical release; but even that wouldn't be a guarantee (although, had it only cost that much to make, the movie likely would have done better due to fewer PR issues stemming from the production issues).
Abagadro
Terracotta Army
Posts: 12227

Possibly the only user with more posts in the Den than PC/Console Gaming.


Reply #173 on: June 18, 2018, 05:22:31 PM

I was generally entertained with it as a caper flick, but what bugs me is that Han is one of the greatest characters in the franchise, has the single best character arc in the original trilogy, and Ford is iconic in the role. Every single thing they have done to the character since Jedi has made the character worse. From Lucas' CGI tinkering, to a denouement that is too abrupt and not well-enough developed, to a prequel with a middling lead whose arc actually undercuts where we find him in ANH and what happens in that film.

I don't know what compels these studios to grind up their best characters and shove them into stupid cul-de-sacs. Money I guess. Marvel has avoided it so far, but we'll see when Phase 4 ends what they do to them.

 

"As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.”

-H.L. Mencken
Lakov_Sanite
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7590


Reply #174 on: June 18, 2018, 10:13:29 PM

I think it was red letter media where i heard this but the biggest sin in solo is that it ruins original triology han.  Han’s arc in the first movie if you already know he has a heart of gold going into it.

~a horrific, dark simulacrum that glares balefully at us, with evil intent.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  General Discussion  |  Movies  |  Topic: Solo: A Star Wars Story  
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC