Jump to content

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Axelay said:

Perplexing to me is that didn't we briefly see the Falcon in ROTS? Didn't George claim that it was the "actual" Falcon and not just another YT-1300? It had its mandibles then...

Yes, it's a retcon. Which doesn't make sense. If the YT-1300 series is supposed to look like the Millennium Falcon in Solo and the drastic change in appearance later in the continuity is all due to customization and (one would have to assume) bad care... then how come there's another YT-1300 customized in the EXACT same way in RotS?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly they can leave whatever YT or Falcon was shown in the prequels where it belongs, in the past. Just like Jar Jar and midicholrians (spelling).

I'm hopeful that Solo is fun, without being silly, and while having some serious/dramatic elements not be dark.

Just let it be a well-acted, decent scripted, adequately directed popcorn flick. 

-b.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks fine, I guess (it's a trailer so it's supposed to look good). But I'll reiterate the common statement. Disney is answering questions nobody really asked. Which is how I feel about this movie. I don't care for it because I never needed to know more about Solo than what was presented the first time around. Aren't there other stories about other people besides those from the Skywalker-Saga?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, azrael said:

Aren't there other stories about other people besides those from the Skywalker-Saga?

That's what they are going to address in the other 2 trilogies they announced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Thom said:

It may not be the Falcon. Another SSM member floated the idea that this is just a different freighter, but that it was the one that caught Lando and Han 's eye.

It's likely the Falcon, can't have a Solo origin story without it. If the story ends with Lando and Han going to the local used ship lot at the end of the movie lookin for a cheap junker I'm all for it.

14 hours ago, Chronocidal said:

This is part of the weirdness they've introduced by nixing the known EU canon really.. I want to say it's entirely possible, since the ships were supposed to be from a common production line that had a lot of customizable options, and were very popular with light traders and smugglers.. but I have no idea what the history of the design is supposed to be anymore. :wacko: 

The part that throws me is that for years, the front mandibles of the ship were always labeled with some cargo loading/unloading/grasping function.  Removing those changes the the ship both aesthetically and from a practical perspective.. since.. I mean, if you're not using the centerline for a cargo-related function.. why is the cockpit offset?

I always thought the mandibles were for cargo too, can't remember where I heard that from so many years ago though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, electric indigo said:

Entirely a Rule of Cool thing. Johnson himself tried this and discarded it:

So, all that is?  They mashed up the original Falcon concept (which became Leia's ship, the Tantive IV) with the existing Falcon design.

I'm going to start referring to things like that as the "rule of stool," because all it looks like is someone taking a well known design, and crapping all over it to make it unique, or different, and make their own mark on the franchise, without actually giving any thought to either the implications of what they're changing, or the reasoning behind the original design.

The only reason for the Falcon's unique offset cockpit design is so the front end is open for the mandibles.  Without that, the ship looks stupid, and unfinished, as if there should be something in the middle that just isn't there.  It's just blank space with no purpose, and you're left thinking whoever designed this is an idiot for sticking the pilot so far off the centerline.  Maybe they want to imply the cockpit is a self-contained pod that can detach in an emergency?  It's never looked that way before, and there's still no reason it couldn't have been put in the center of the ship like the Otana from X-Wing Alliance.

Speaking of Alliance though, I'm pretty sure you actually do use the mandibles to pick up a floating cargo container at some point in the game.  Or, if not physically picking it up, I think it might have been a tractor beam location?  It's vaguely shown in the opening cinematic, but I think the cargo is just loosely attached to the underside of the front of the ship.

Anyhow.. Eh.  I've just reached the conclusion that the concept artists for the new movies are hopeless.  Disappointing, but I figure in the end it's money saved on loads of merchandise I couldn't care less about. :p 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chronocidal said:

So, all that is?  They mashed up the original Falcon concept (which became Leia's ship, the Tantive IV) with the existing Falcon design.

I'm going to start referring to things like that as the "rule of stool," because all it looks like is someone taking a well known design, and crapping all over it to make it unique, or different, and make their own mark on the franchise, without actually giving any thought to either the implications of what they're changing, or the reasoning behind the original design.(...)

Erm... I think you misread his post.  The offset cockpit is the 'rule of cool'.  That other design (the so-called 'mash-up') looks uncool, so it was rejected by the original artist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, sketchley said:

Erm... I think you misread his post.  The offset cockpit is the 'rule of cool'.  That other design (the so-called 'mash-up') looks uncool, so it was rejected by the original artist.

Ah, good point, that might have been the reverse meaning of what I was thinking.  Really though, I don't think that design is bad.  Reminds me a bit of the Ghost from Rebels, and still better than a good deal of the newer designs in the recent movies.  The "rule of cool" thing is definitely more the case for the Outrider though, since it just uses the offset cockpit, with no real visible reason for it.

My comment is more about the practice in general though, changing designs to make them look new, without considering the reason they were originally designed the way they were.  Removing the mandibles on the Falcon just leaves a bunch of blank space that looks pointless to the design, and removes the visible reason for the offset cockpit.  It just makes the ship look unfinished, as if there should be something more there.

Edited by Chronocidal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On offset cockpit will be out of the way for loading and unloading of Cargo.  Either that or WAY above the loading line.  This ignores that fact that as a cargo carrying design the Falcon (old, new, mandibles, no mandibles) is just not all that great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chronocidal said:

Ah, good point, that might have been the reverse meaning of what I was thinking.  Really though, I don't think that design is bad.  Reminds me a bit of the Ghost from Rebels, and still better than a good deal of the newer designs in the recent movies.  The "rule of cool" thing is definitely more the case for the Outrider though, since it just uses the offset cockpit, with no real visible reason for it.

My comment is more about the practice in general though, changing designs to make them look new, without considering the reason they were originally designed the way they were.  Removing the mandibles on the Falcon just leaves a bunch of blank space that looks pointless to the design, and removes the visible reason for the offset cockpit.  It just makes the ship look unfinished, as if there should be something more there.

That practice of making things new for the sake of making new things is... well, different from the rule of cool (you could say it's the antithesis...).

I agree with Dynaman - the offset cockpit also gives a different (better?) perspective when docking to load cargo through the maw.

As far as the Falcon being a cargo ship goes - I've only really considered the Falcon to be like a sports car (hot rod might be better?).  So, if a cigar boat can be used to transport contraband (erm... cargo), so too can the Falcon. ;)

Edited by sketchley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's just it though.. without the cargo port in the front, what does that offset cockpit help with?  It doesn't really have any sort of opening cargo bay.  Though, if you consider loading cargo through the airlock-looking things on either side of the hull, the cockpit being on the side would at least give a good view of the right-hand docking port.  Then.. now I'm just imagining a chain of YT-1300s all linked port to port in a chain. :lol: 

Anyway, when the scale of vehicles in the universe has such a huge range, I always figured the Falcon was something like a souped-up UPS truck, or panel van.  Still only holds a relatively small load of cargo, but it's bulky enough contraband that you still need something bigger than a hot rod to carry it around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The one thing I hope for with this movie is that there is no tie in with the Rebellion.  Please, no young Han Solo meeting young Leia or some such bullshit.  I don't know what the plot is, but I hope it's just about Han Solo out for #1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kalvasflam said:

The one thing I hope for with this movie is that there is no tie in with the Rebellion.  Please, no young Han Solo meeting young Leia or some such bullshit.  I don't know what the plot is, but I hope it's just about Han Solo out for #1.

The old Bantam novels handled this well. In them he falls in love with a drug addicted slave working for the Hutt's spice processing racket. Thank's to Hutt factional in fighting he is able to free her, but she goes through withdrawal and leaves him ending the relationship badly.

She later turns as a member of the rebel alliance and tries to recruit him to take down her former slavers on behalf of the rebels. Still heartbroken and feeling betrayed he only helps on the condition he gets paid. In the end she betrays him and takes all the money to fund her rebel group. Destitute Han takes the smuggling job from Jabba which fails and is why he has a price on his head in ANH and why he has no love for the rebellion.

 

Having explained all that it pretty much brings to light a problem with the current disney canon. So much of the universe had been fleshed out already with many great ideas that Disney's choice to redo everything and cherry picking what they like is leaving us with poorly planned half baked stories that pale in comparison to what came before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, renegadeleader1 said:

Having explained all that it pretty much brings to light a problem with the current disney canon. So much of the universe had been fleshed out already with many great ideas that Disney's choice to redo everything and cherry picking what they like is leaving us with poorly planned half baked stories that pale in comparison to what came before.

I've definitely worried about this myself.  It's not that there's any shortage of good ideas for new stories.. it's just that with so many ideas already done, it's difficult to come up with something that looks original now.

I should re-read those Han prequel novels at some point.  I don't remember them being the best EU books, but they had some great moments.  I particularly liked the second book, I think, and I loved that the author actually went into some detail about Sabacc.  The scene at the end of the last book could even almost fit right into Rogue One, now that I think about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

298NAo0.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just watched the trailers on the previous page, and as someone who wouldn't self-identify as a Star Wars fan and who has minimal experience with Star Wars works outside of the films, it left me more curious than anything.

I'm definitely getting a bad feeling about casting Alden Ehrenreich as Han Solo.  He does manage to look a bit like a young Harrison Ford, but from the trailer doesn't seem to have a grip on Han's mannerisms.  He's more smug than snarky, which I suspect is gonna get old really fast.  More a Chris Pratt than a Harrison Ford, attitude-wise.  Donald Glover looks like he's going to make a good Lando Calrissian though, he has that self-assured grin that was Lando's thing (when he wasn't shitting bricks in front of Vader) in Empire.  No idea who the rest of them are supposed to be, except Chewbacca.  I don't know if I'm supposed to know either.  That Imperial recruiting officer looks so thoroughly bored-bureaucrat that I almost want to see the movie just to see how Han'll ruin the poor f*cker's life.  (I vaguely recall something about Han having been a veteran in the old lore, like he was still wearing his old uniform trousers with the stripe or something?)

The visuals are really pretty, but that's kind of par for the course.  Seeing the Millennium Falcon looking pristine inside and out is just bizarre.  Four Star Wars movies kind of gave me the view that the Millennium Falcon just sort of sprang into existence as a beat up old junker covered stem to stern in grease and grime.  I actually kind of like the new design for the ship though.  Aerodynamics are meaningless in space, but with the tuning fork prow filled in and with the blue-on-silver paintjob it looks more like something that was designed to go irresponsibly fast.  Like a space formula racer or something.  I was never super clear on how the Falcon was supposed to be a freighter when it seems to have almost no cargo space.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't really care for the modified ship design, but it's a solid chunk of those white plates at least.  Might be worth it for the parts alone.

Far as Han's history went, the only really solid history that remains from the old EU is that he was court-martialed from the Imperial navy after stopping someone who was going to punish Chewie, or something vaguely along those lines.  Assorted stories took various perspectives on that.  The later Bantam Han Solo books fleshed out the story a little, including his pants, and even worked in bits from the old Han Solo Adventures books that came out much earlier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Seto Kaiba said:

Just watched the trailers on the previous page, and as someone who wouldn't self-identify as a Star Wars fan and who has minimal experience with Star Wars works outside of the films, it left me more curious than anything.

I'm definitely getting a bad feeling about casting Alden Ehrenreich as Han Solo.  He does manage to look a bit like a young Harrison Ford, but from the trailer doesn't seem to have a grip on Han's mannerisms.  He's more smug than snarky, which I suspect is gonna get old really fast.  More a Chris Pratt than a Harrison Ford, attitude-wise.  Donald Glover looks like he's going to make a good Lando Calrissian though, he has that self-assured grin that was Lando's thing (when he wasn't shitting bricks in front of Vader) in Empire.  No idea who the rest of them are supposed to be, except Chewbacca.  I don't know if I'm supposed to know either.  That Imperial recruiting officer looks so thoroughly bored-bureaucrat that I almost want to see the movie just to see how Han'll ruin the poor f*cker's life.  (I vaguely recall something about Han having been a veteran in the old lore, like he was still wearing his old uniform trousers with the stripe or something?)

The visuals are really pretty, but that's kind of par for the course.  Seeing the Millennium Falcon looking pristine inside and out is just bizarre.  Four Star Wars movies kind of gave me the view that the Millennium Falcon just sort of sprang into existence as a beat up old junker covered stem to stern in grease and grime.  I actually kind of like the new design for the ship though.  Aerodynamics are meaningless in space, but with the tuning fork prow filled in and with the blue-on-silver paintjob it looks more like something that was designed to go irresponsibly fast.  Like a space formula racer or something.  I was never super clear on how the Falcon was supposed to be a freighter when it seems to have almost no cargo space.

The stripe is an honour mark of the Corellian navy, at least in the old EU.

As for the ship, it shouldn't be the falcon nor even a YT-1300 class, at least not by current (as in pre-Solo, post Disney buy-out) canon. But not surprised that Disney would re-con it's own properties considering the end of Rogue One after thinking about it. I would give them massive props if the toys are mis-labeled on purpose to capitalize on brand identity for pre-sales so that they don't give away movie info prior to it's release. But doubt it. 

The YT-1300 has a bit of cargo space, this is one of the few times that the tech manuals show more then what is seen on film. Technically there is cargo space in most of the saucer section the two circle prongs on the side are cargo doors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's interesting that the SOLO falcon appears to have a double layer of armor, or at least an outer skin.


 

Spoiler

 

If you pay attention to the gun turret area, you'll notice that it appears far more recessed than on the Falcon we're familiar with. That and also we can see greeblies peeking through between the solar panel/smokestack thingamabobs. Also, the saucer appears to have a slightly larger diameter, presumably also extra bodywork.

5a86f2145e67f_ScreenShot2018-02-07at22_52_09.png.6ea37e3a13b537cf3119952a4bc5a92c.png

And the nose-cone is the cargo container...

serveimage.jpeg.70040a5d1a2110e3d1949cfb922cf161.jpeg

 

...Which would explain this nifty upcoming toy feature.

15E024A2-0D00-4A1D-88F7-98758EA44C87.jpeg.06ec5d9b541af1a1dbf8ef249a5c3df5.jpeg

So in some ways, the Falcon is like the Galactica. :D

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, captain america said:

I think it's interesting that the SOLO falcon appears to have a double layer of armor, or at least an outer skin.


 

  Hide contents

 

If you pay attention to the gun turret area, you'll notice that it appears far more recessed than on the Falcon we're familiar with. That and also we can see greeblies peeking through between the solar panel/smokestack thingamabobs. Also, the saucer appears to have a slightly larger diameter, presumably also extra bodywork.

5a86f2145e67f_ScreenShot2018-02-07at22_52_09.png.6ea37e3a13b537cf3119952a4bc5a92c.png

And the nose-cone is the cargo container...

serveimage.jpeg.70040a5d1a2110e3d1949cfb922cf161.jpeg

 

...Which would explain this nifty upcoming toy feature.

15E024A2-0D00-4A1D-88F7-98758EA44C87.jpeg.06ec5d9b541af1a1dbf8ef249a5c3df5.jpeg

So in some ways, the Falcon is like the Galactica. :D

 

 

Well frak me.... ok, my prior statement just got removed. Granted this gives the movie credit before viewing, but that would have been neat to see on screen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m actually quite liking this early Falcon design.

Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Focslain said:

The stripe is an honour mark of the Corellian navy, at least in the old EU.

Ah.

 

3 hours ago, Focslain said:

The YT-1300 has a bit of cargo space, this is one of the few times that the tech manuals show more then what is seen on film. Technically there is cargo space in most of the saucer section the two circle prongs on the side are cargo doors.

That seems like a really awkward place to put a loading door, with such limited clearance...

 

 

2 hours ago, captain america said:

I think it's interesting that the SOLO falcon appears to have a double layer of armor, or at least an outer skin.

Given that it was a smuggler ship, and would probably either be running Imperial blockades or at least running from heavily armed Imperial warships and their fighter squadrons, the extra armor's pretty sensible.  (Or, given that the A New Hope version has a lot of exposed exterior wiring, that may just be the stock model outer hull that Han couldn't be arsed to replace.)

 

2 hours ago, captain america said:

 

  Hide contents

If you pay attention to the gun turret area, you'll notice that it appears far more recessed than on the Falcon we're familiar with. That and also we can see greeblies peeking through between the solar panel/smokestack thingamabobs. Also, the saucer appears to have a slightly larger diameter, presumably also extra bodywork.

5a86f2145e67f_ScreenShot2018-02-07at22_52_09.png.6ea37e3a13b537cf3119952a4bc5a92c.png

And the nose-cone is the cargo container...

serveimage.jpeg.70040a5d1a2110e3d1949cfb922cf161.jpeg

 

...Which would explain this nifty upcoming toy feature.

15E024A2-0D00-4A1D-88F7-98758EA44C87.jpeg.06ec5d9b541af1a1dbf8ef249a5c3df5.jpeg

So in some ways, the Falcon is like the Galactica. :D

 

 

The more I see it, the more I like it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the sleek appearance and the reference to Mc Quarrie's style, although he stated that he just didn't have the time to fill in all the greeblies in his illustration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, GMK said:

But five landing legs...?

Isn't one of those where that drop-down antipersonnel gun thing is in the original trilogy?  

Maybe Han removed one or both of the surplus landing gear to make room for more dakka?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, GMK said:

But five landing legs...?

 

18 minutes ago, Seto Kaiba said:

Isn't one of those where that drop-down antipersonnel gun thing is in the original trilogy?  

Maybe Han removed one or both of the surplus landing gear to make room for more dakka?

Looks like they're just ignoring the ANH version of the ship with only three landing gear going forward.  Or, maybe they're going to try and explain it away as those forward compartments being removed for some reason during ANH, and then reinstalled before the Alliance took up residence on Hoth.  :huh: 

Can't really do anything but blame the model builders for being inconsistent. :lol: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, ILM has been consistent about the landing gear since 1979...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/2/2018 at 11:51 AM, Kanedas Bike said:

Honestly they can leave whatever YT or Falcon was shown in the prequels where it belongs, in the past. Just like Jar Jar and midicholrians (spelling).

I'm hopeful that Solo is fun, without being silly, and while having some serious/dramatic elements not be dark.

Just let it be a well-acted, decent scripted, adequately directed popcorn flick. 

-

If I were making a Han Solo movie it would have:

1) Stormtroopers

2) Boba Fett

3) How Chewbacca and Solo became friends

4) Han and Chewbacca vs Stormtroopers

5)The game where Han won the Falcon

6) Han and Chewbacca vs Boba Fett

7) Bossk and the other ESTB bounty hunters

So I wonder if any of these elements will be in the movie.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Unspeakably awesome.  Paul Johnson has taken the best of Macross, Gundam, and Legend of Galactic Heroes, and applied it to Star Wars.

The sound mix is a little jarring, though, with voices that sound like radio transmissions (but shouldn't), voices that should sound like radio transmissions (but don't), and a slightly anachronistic reliance on new music applied to the original trilogy... but it's great music nonetheless.  B))

 

Edit: Wow, I see there's no end to Star Wars fan films on YouTube.  Guess Lucasfilm's attitude hasn't changed, despite Disney ownership...?

Edited by tekering

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On ‎3‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 8:27 PM, tekering said:

Edit: Wow, I see there's no end to Star Wars fan films on YouTube.  Guess Lucasfilm's attitude hasn't changed, despite Disney ownership...?

I think there's been some nastiness on the video game side of things, but that might be more attributable to EA than Lucasfilm itself.

The tradition of fan-made Star Wars stuff is so well-established at this point, Disney would be committing franchise suicide to attempt to stop it, I think.  It's far too prolific and widespread, as well, because there was such a vacuum of official content for so long.

Besides that, I think they're at least savvy enough to recognize free advertising when they see it.

Edited by Chronocidal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×