Hacker News Reader

Comment by danso | Hacker News Reader

> “Solo” discovers that the young Han is pretty much identical to the older one, with the same skills, mannerisms, and values. It would’ve been interesting to learn that Han was once a sensitive boy with a musical gift

A wacky, subversive twist like that would go a long way in getting me interested in Disney’s direction, but I just don’t associate them with anything particularly risky. Which is ironic because I thought the casting of Adam Driver was brilliant — it’s almost possible to imagine him single handedly saving the prequels if he were retroactively cast as Anakin.

He’s good enough that I’ll go watch Episode IX, but the ending of “Last Jedi” left me incredibly underwhelmed. What storylines and character arcs are even worth wrapping up? I guess I’m mildly interested in how they’ll even attempt to make Rose and/or Finn relevant.

View on HN

In my opinion, the decades of novels in between star wars movies where much better than the prequels and sequels we eventually got. At varying times, different novels were canon then not canon. But in the end, Lucasfilm jettisoned the lot. Maybe there were IP issues involved I don't know but the Timothy Zahn novels were epic.

Unfortunately, Lucasfilm didn't embrace them and mine them the way Feige is mining decades of Marvel comics for the MCU.

> But in the end, Lucasfilm jettisoned the lot. Maybe there were IP issues involved I don't know but the Timothy Zahn novels were epic.

In fairness, Disney seems to have recognized that in re-canonizing characters like Thrawn.

The expanded universe had a lot of absolute junk in it. It's easier for them to throw it all out and then selectively re-introduce the few bits that are worth saving than it would have been to drum out the bad bits one at a time.

If you enjoyed Timothy Zahn's Thrawn trillogy, I hope that you know that he recently wrote a new book called "Thrawn", and it's just as good as his older writing. I would definitely recommend it if you enjoyed Thrawn as a character.

Disney had to decanonize them to carve out room for movies that people didn't know the plot to beforehand, and to get rid of massive blunders like the Yuuzhan Vong.

but then we end up with Solo where we pretty much know the plot beforehand.

That's like saying we knew the plot of Saving Private Ryan beforehand because we knew how the battles went.

um... I'm unaware of the 4 movies about Private Ryan's adventures after WWII...

Plus the Jedi Outcast games! I have a hard time imagining a worthy successor to that in the Disney era, especially with EA having a 10-year contract on exclusive rights. I don't think they set out to make worse games on purpose, but they're definitely oriented more toward mass-market movie tie-ins with a focus on looking pretty. And I'd bet any single player story game we get will be built around a character that Disney writes into a movie, so there aren't nearly as many stories they could tell yet.

Visceral (best known for Dead Space) was working on something to come out this year, but EA canned it, shut down the studio, and merged them into EA Vancouver and EA Montreal.

Who knows if it wasn't shaping up well or if it wasn't suitably designed to stuff full of microtransactions or what. EA is supposedly still planning to adapt some parts of the concept into something else eventually, but I don't have high hopes. Maybe they'll surprise me.

This!! Kevin Anderson, Timothy Zahn... The stories were great and the fact that all the authors included and referenced each other’s events really made the universe cohesive and rich.

There was even a trilogy (!) of books already written about young Han Solo, which were equally amazing and rich..

The comics had plenty of material that breathed life in the form of details and different perspectives. Even Star Wars: Legacy, which ostensibly had the same retread of the original trilogy that the current sequel trilogy does- there is a new Empire, the Jedi are dispersed, young misfits must become heroes- redid the original plotline in a fresh and exciting way.

I wouldn't hate some sort of subversive twist, but at the same I don't think think it's necessary. To me the new trilogy has perfectly recaptured the heart and soul of star wars. I think a lot of the disappointment stems from life long fans who have expectations built up over years and years of being fans and speculating on what could be.

I haven't seen Solo yet, so I can't comment on that, but in my opinion I'd rather have one or two mediocre Star Wars movies a year than nothing at all.

I also think that people are greatly unfair when judging new entries in the franchise. It seems like if it isn't twice as good as Empire, it isn't worth anything.

'Last Jedi' was a lot of fun for me. I enjoyed it a ton. I can understand why people felt underwhelmed, but I also like that it was a typical cliff-hanger middle entry movie and can stand on its own. Maybe its just personal preference but I don't need mystery and open storylines to keep me interested. If anything, it leaves more freedom for the 3rd entry and provides plenty of jumping off points.

Overall I don't think Star Wars has a 'growing emptiness', I think fans are demanding way more than is realistic and are suffering from the hype machine/echo chamber that plagues media these days.

Are the movies underwhelming or was Star Wars in the past more amazing because you were younger?

For me there are two big positives to the earlier movies; the original trilogy was amazing because it was something new and it was my introduction into Star Wars.

The prequal trilogy was the movies I grew up with; less amazing than the original trilogy but what I absolutely loved about it was how it managed to give you an idea of the scale of things.

Like when in EP7 the new republic government solar system is instantly destroyed by starkiller base... who cares? Billions of people died in that moment, but none of them were introduced, the movie didnt allow us to develop a bond with them. The prequal trilogy did a better job in building a world around the main characters; they were part of something much bigger.

The new movies lack both; they don't do anything new and they don't build a world around the characters. It feels empty, and I couldn't care less for most of the cast if they make it or not.

Maybe its also the timeframe we live in; every movie needs to be full of action and movies rarely take the time to build up to something grand. I miss the much much much slower approach to movies like The Godfather had.

> It feels empty, and I couldn't care less for most of the cast if they make it or not.

Very astute. I'm someone who was in the same boat, sharing the same beliefs you hold for the OT and prequels. I haven't watched a single one of the new movies, I just don't care. The story isn't new if you (Disney) just swap some character stats (age, ethnicity, melanin levels) and just go "it's the same but everyone looks different! check out the explosions and the lightsabers! WUMMM WUMMM KRSHHH buy merchandise PEW PEW KPOW."

I know I just implied that I think it degraded because it became about the money, but at least give me good reason to spend my money. This is why I liked the old EU and side stories in general, and why game like Republic Commando and KOTOR were appealing: there were other things going on in the universe, and these things were given time to mature and breathe. There were cool things going on and I'm pretty sure I still have the Episode III capital ship/vehicle cross section book hanging around somewhere because god help me I think that the Acclamator and Venator are some cool ship designs.

I've found that this phenomenon isn't just limited to Star Wars, either.

> Are the movies underwhelming or was Star Wars in the past more amazing because you were younger?

People say this all the time, but the people who went crazy in 1977 for the original Star Wars weren't all kids. It bowled over lots of adults, too. It was a genuine pop culture phenomenon.

It would’ve been interesting to learn that Han was once a sensitive boy with a musical gift

What’s interesting is that is this the second time they have ballsed this up. Han-shot-first is a redemption arc, a man who was little better than a villain himself coming around to do the right thing when he sets aside self-interest in the end. But that was erased in rereleased editions. It seems that Han is doomed to never have any character development.

Leia will be wrapped up. Han in the first one, Luke in the second, so it's gotta be Leia in the third. Slowly kill the legacy so they can build the future of their own.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com