Solo: Another Star Wars prequel?
May 2018
Alastair Clark
SPOILER ALERT – if you have not seen SOLO: A Star Wars Movie and want to see it fresh then please stop reading.
There was an awkward moment on The Jedi Council podcast recently when Dave and Alex both with a certain degree of astonishment and consternation found out I didn’t like Rogue One. I couldn’t articulate it properly at the time but I realise now that I am suffering from prequel fatigue and I don’t think I am alone.
The recent Solo film to me is an exception to this, it’s a great piece of cinema that was really fun, but there is a legitimate question of did we really need it?
Solo was seen as a sure-fire hit by box-office analysts: no Disney-produced Star Wars film had opened to less than $155 million (Rogue One) in the United States, why would this film be any different? Despite original estimates of between $130 million and $150 million, the film managed just $103 million over the memorial weekend in the States. Worse, Solo crashed at the international box office, taking just $68.2 million. Considering the movie has an estimated budget of between $250-300 million, Solo has a long way to go until Disney make any profit.
There are many theories about why the film is under-performing. Is it franchise fatigue? Was the marketing plan flawed? Did The Last Jedi turn a large group of people against the entire series? Was the movie itself just not very good?
I very much dismiss the notion that this is anything but a great piece of cinema and a great Star Wars film, but I do have a much simpler explanation for why audiences didn’t turn up. Disney was trying to sell us a ticket to see a story we already knew and that has an ending we’ve already seen 30 years ago that ties into a large universe in a manner we’re all very acquainted with.
Solo does everything it sets out to do very well, in this film we go back to 1970s-retro sci-fi aesthetics, back to characters we know better than they know themselves, but unfortunately back to a story whose intricacies are all but irrelevant since we already know the consequences. You, like me, might have been getting this feeling a lot recently when watching the latest Star Trek, Harry Potter, Alien or X-Men prequels.
From a commercial point of view, prequels make perfect sense. They’re a way of cashing in on brand recognition without messing with the original, Solo is effectively the fifth Star Wars prequel.
In theory, the past can hold as many surprises as the future, and a good prequel can add depth, but is this a substitute for chronological-order storytelling? Where new things happen, and we don’t know what’s coming next, and we feel as if we’re moving forwards?
Even if I wasn’t it’s biggest fan, Marvel’s current superhero cycle culminating in Avengers: Infinity War, has demonstrated how chronological storytelling can generate suspense and surprise, even shock, but it doesn’t appear right now that Kathleen Kennedy and the Star Wars storytelling team have the foresight or ambition to plan that far ahead. Indeed, if the reaction to Solo is this bad, imagine what the reaction to a Rian Johnson led trilogy will be like from fans?
The one big talking plot point introduced by Solo is that Darth Maul is not only alive but is in control of a massive crime syndicate. It’s also unlikely to do anything to help the box office receipts, since even talking about it would be considered a spoiler. Solo hid the genesis of Darth Maul in a manner that makes it nearly impossible to discuss it unless you know the person you have spoken to has seen the movie.
I really enjoyed Solo and can’t wait to talk about it more on the next Jedi Council podcast and hopefully see a sequel, but there’s no mystery about how these events tie into the story of Star Wars because we knew that before the movie was even announced.
Having sat in an IMAX screen that seats 350 people and had 15 people in it on opening night, I’m inclined to believe that I am not alone and it turns out people just aren’t that interested in movies that ask questions we already know the answers to.
Why do you think Solo has underwhelmed at the box office? Do you agree with Ali or do you have another explanation? Let us know your views on twitter @TheJedi_Council
Alastair Clark
SPOILER ALERT – if you have not seen SOLO: A Star Wars Movie and want to see it fresh then please stop reading.
There was an awkward moment on The Jedi Council podcast recently when Dave and Alex both with a certain degree of astonishment and consternation found out I didn’t like Rogue One. I couldn’t articulate it properly at the time but I realise now that I am suffering from prequel fatigue and I don’t think I am alone.
The recent Solo film to me is an exception to this, it’s a great piece of cinema that was really fun, but there is a legitimate question of did we really need it?
Solo was seen as a sure-fire hit by box-office analysts: no Disney-produced Star Wars film had opened to less than $155 million (Rogue One) in the United States, why would this film be any different? Despite original estimates of between $130 million and $150 million, the film managed just $103 million over the memorial weekend in the States. Worse, Solo crashed at the international box office, taking just $68.2 million. Considering the movie has an estimated budget of between $250-300 million, Solo has a long way to go until Disney make any profit.
There are many theories about why the film is under-performing. Is it franchise fatigue? Was the marketing plan flawed? Did The Last Jedi turn a large group of people against the entire series? Was the movie itself just not very good?
I very much dismiss the notion that this is anything but a great piece of cinema and a great Star Wars film, but I do have a much simpler explanation for why audiences didn’t turn up. Disney was trying to sell us a ticket to see a story we already knew and that has an ending we’ve already seen 30 years ago that ties into a large universe in a manner we’re all very acquainted with.
Solo does everything it sets out to do very well, in this film we go back to 1970s-retro sci-fi aesthetics, back to characters we know better than they know themselves, but unfortunately back to a story whose intricacies are all but irrelevant since we already know the consequences. You, like me, might have been getting this feeling a lot recently when watching the latest Star Trek, Harry Potter, Alien or X-Men prequels.
From a commercial point of view, prequels make perfect sense. They’re a way of cashing in on brand recognition without messing with the original, Solo is effectively the fifth Star Wars prequel.
In theory, the past can hold as many surprises as the future, and a good prequel can add depth, but is this a substitute for chronological-order storytelling? Where new things happen, and we don’t know what’s coming next, and we feel as if we’re moving forwards?
Even if I wasn’t it’s biggest fan, Marvel’s current superhero cycle culminating in Avengers: Infinity War, has demonstrated how chronological storytelling can generate suspense and surprise, even shock, but it doesn’t appear right now that Kathleen Kennedy and the Star Wars storytelling team have the foresight or ambition to plan that far ahead. Indeed, if the reaction to Solo is this bad, imagine what the reaction to a Rian Johnson led trilogy will be like from fans?
The one big talking plot point introduced by Solo is that Darth Maul is not only alive but is in control of a massive crime syndicate. It’s also unlikely to do anything to help the box office receipts, since even talking about it would be considered a spoiler. Solo hid the genesis of Darth Maul in a manner that makes it nearly impossible to discuss it unless you know the person you have spoken to has seen the movie.
I really enjoyed Solo and can’t wait to talk about it more on the next Jedi Council podcast and hopefully see a sequel, but there’s no mystery about how these events tie into the story of Star Wars because we knew that before the movie was even announced.
Having sat in an IMAX screen that seats 350 people and had 15 people in it on opening night, I’m inclined to believe that I am not alone and it turns out people just aren’t that interested in movies that ask questions we already know the answers to.
Why do you think Solo has underwhelmed at the box office? Do you agree with Ali or do you have another explanation? Let us know your views on twitter @TheJedi_Council