Which version?Solo was written by Kasdan.
Which version?Solo was written by Kasdan.
The movie was written by the Kasdans. The original directors weren’t following the script at all so Lawrence Kasdan got them fired and Ron Howard reshot the whole movie.Which version?
Fair enough. I would love to see that Lord version though. PWB was the chick c3po urging the droid rebellion, right?The movie was written by the Kasdans. The original directors weren’t following the script at all so Lawrence Kasdan got them fired and Ron Howard reshot the whole movie.
The opening scene is set in a Nazi castle in 1944.Is this movie going to go back in time and show him younger? Seemed like some of the scenes they were using de-aging tech no?
From stuff I’ve read he still loves the character and wants this to be great.H. Ford didn't give a fuck in the last Star Wars and Bladerunner, will it be the same here?
Ford never liked Han Solo. He loves Indy.From stuff I’ve read he still loves the character and wants this to be great.
I heard that too in the past. To be honest, I think I like Indiana Jones better than Star Wars myself.Ford never liked Han Solo. He loves Indy.
Ford never liked Han Solo. He loves Indy.
James Mangold is not Stanley Kubrick. Nobody is Stanley Kubrick. Whether you think Fincher is to blame for Alien 3 he still directed it. Mangold has already not batted 100, his 1st Wolverine movie and his Tom Cruise movie Knight and Day are not so hot. He's a good, heck even great director, but Steven Spielberg--one of the greatest directors of all time--cannot be trusted to deliver a surefire win of a sequel a franchise he started and successfully maintained, I don't really understand putting absolute trust in anyone else.Nobody bats a 100 (and even that’s debatable, did Kubrick make a bad movie? And I don’t think David Fincher was to blame for Alien 3 sucking, granted I never saw Benjamin Button but all his other films range from really good to incredible IMHO), yet betting on Mangold has more logic to it than those who were 100% convinced it was going to suck before they even saw a trailer.
Steven Spielberg--one of the greatest directors of all time--cannot be trusted to deliver a surefire win of a sequel a franchise he started and successfully maintained, I don't really understand putting absolute trust in anyone else.
2008 Spielberg was not the same as the Spielberg of the 80s. He was making different types of movies by then. Even The BFG, written by the same screenwriter of E.T., ended up being one of his worst movies ever - again because he's in his 70s now and making different types of movies. Even Spielberg himself says that by the mid 80s he couldn't even make Close Encounters, because by the mid 80s he changed and wouldn't make a movie where a dad left his family.
Lincoln was an incredible movie and it was made in 2012.
Man that movie had some amazing action scenes. It outdid Raiders!
True enough, some good food for thought. Regardless, his track record continued to be mostly solid (critically) at that point, and he continued to dabble in different genres. Crystal Skull may not have been the same if he had made it back in the 90s, however it could have still been good. There is no reason it had to be the mess it was. I believe it failed because he got cold feet resurrecting a beloved franchise he hadn't touched in nearly 2 decades. He was trying too hard to recapture the magic, to top himself, so he threw in every 1940s pulp magazine story he could recall into a blender and hoped for the best.2008 Spielberg was not the same as the Spielberg of the 80s. He was making different types of movies by then. Even The BFG, written by the same screenwriter of E.T., ended up being one of his worst movies ever - again because he's in his 70s now and making different types of movies. Even Spielberg himself says that by the mid 80s he couldn't even make Close Encounters, because by the mid 80s he changed and wouldn't make a movie where a dad left his family.
Doubting the writer/director of these:
Pretty sure that Indy being erased from history and being replaced by Fleabag would make any fan of the series mad - irrespective of who the villains are. But Nazis being the villains would be very weak as well.What you heard was made up by a Neo Nazi YouTuber mad that Nazis are the villains again and is bullshit.
Doubting the writer/director of these:
Ford v Ferrari was tight.
Yes. Especially if we're looking at his full filmography and not just three cherry picked examples.
He's a great director, but has still been responsible for some less than great films. I'm not saying that this new indy film will be terrible, but I'm not 100% confident it'll be amazing based on a few chosen films from the same director.
If I'd have to guess, the plot is Indiana trying to go back in time to stop him from being born.So where did Shia Lebouf go?
It’s the ILM deep fake tech they used with Luke in Book of Boba Fett.
Deepfake or oldschool CGI? Looks pretty good! Better than Tarkin and Luke
If it's what they are using in Willow then it is getting better, particularly when they have good period source material to draw from.It’s the ILM deep fake tech they used with Luke in Book of Boba Fett.
It doesn’t rely on still photos like most deep fake stuff you see people using online, this tool can pull data from video footage.If it's what they are using in Willow then it is getting better, particularly when they have good period source material to draw from.
I enjoy that people come out of the woodwork to 'defend the concept' and then conveniently ignore the track record of bodies brought on by botched attempts at this 'totally fine' concept.I know you’re being purposely obtuse but that’s what people said for the new Star Wars movies. We know how that turned out.
Mangold isn’t the problem. His Disney paymasters most definitely are. They don’t hire people to create a singular vision. They hire people to do what they’re told, according to their carefully curated marketing strategies.
The chances of this film sucking are very high.
Google/YouTube platforms Neo Nazis, confirmed.What you heard was made up by a Neo Nazi YouTuber mad that Nazis are the villains again and is bullshit.
They're the same character, one is in space the other is in dirt.Ford never liked Han Solo. He loves Indy.
I just wish we could see more of ruthless amoral Indy. Back when he was banging his mentors daughter, waaaaaay less scrupulous about taking jobs for pay, and in constant struggle to one up other grave rob....errr preservers of artifacts like Belloque. The mid to late 20's early 30's is where this character need to be and where he needs to stay IMHO.They're the same character, one is in space the other is in dirt.
I like them both, but do have a hair more fondness for the tomb raiding, even though I was a bigger SW fan than Indy.
There’s a 4th Indiana Jones film?I'm curious if there's any way this could be worse than Crystal Skull?
Deepfake or oldschool CGI? Looks pretty good! Better than Tarkin and Luke
He was in military intelligence during WW2. The first 3 films were pre-WW2.Part of me thinks Crystal Skull sucked so hard as George Lucas helped to write it. He was probably at a point where everyone around him was like, "Yeah, monkey swinging sword fight......that could be good, George" and "Sure, nuke the fridge is hilarious, George!!"
Kind of like how Taika Waititi and Thor.
I also hated that they uncovered he was in military intelligence at one point as I liked the notion of a badass professor. Don't need an origin for everything - looking at your Boba Fett!!
Exactly. I'm not worried about Mangold. He's a good director. Kathleen Kennedy is the one I'm worry about. She's very hands on in the movies she produces, and not in a good way.