"Solo: A Star Wars Story" by Ron Howard - movie review

In the history of mankind everything - absolutely everything! - rests on possession (money) and territory on which influence (power) extends. A sad part of our reality and the postmodern eclectic of the 21st century is the eradication of any sensation of measure, the atrophy of the senses, distortions of the notions of value, and the tendency of murder of brain cells by which the most popular and powerful entertainment industry cultivates the stupidity of several generations of young people gradually turning into conscientious users of pseudo-art. Outside the art-cinema, which, from the very birth of movies, is preferred by a limited circle of thought fans, blockbuster machines are constantly looking to create new and new epochal "canvases" that for decades have been favorite junk food for the millions of fattened brains of the average population around the world. And if Marvel and DC are responsible for the comic "serials," I personally am disgusted with Disney's death for total impudence, defeating the world of the "Star Wars" saga. Because everything is up to money and influence! "The House of the Mouse" has done everything possible to buy - honestly - a "golden" series and intends to squeeze it all the way. The way it is "spin-off" and new episodes to faint - even when or especially when they find themselves unnecessary ...

And since I mentioned death, do you remember that epoching moment in Episode VII, which shook the senses of all die hard fans - with the bored boy who pierced his own father? No, Han Solo was not killed then - they did very well Kathleen Kennedy and Ron Howard with "Solo: A Star Wars Story" . The two actually did a great job to Chris Miller and Phil Lord because everyone is already wondering what their version of the movie was angry with the producer and whether it would not have been better. However, if I have to be absolutely honest, after seeing the result of the combined efforts of spending an endless number of millions in the name of other millions of revenue, I no longer care "what if"The sad or rather tragic situation is how I was not, at least, enthusiastic about going to the movie theater for the first time in my life to watch a story from the Star Wars universe - if that fact was known to my teenage "I" in the early 1980s, when my parents took me for the first time to see the beginning of the saga, and I fell in love with it, I would be self-sacrificing for blasphemy! Throughout my conscious life I would not have thought that it would be possible to get there to have no desire to see a Star Wars movie. I went without seeing trailers in an attempt to get rid of all expectations - and I could not even hate the result I saw on the screen. The first impression of "Solo: A Star Wars Story" was a senseless, in some places even boring "drag". And I would have remained totally indifferent if I was not overwhelmed with the purity of the filmmakers who wanted to spoil this ... The most important element in the nightmare's confused puzzle is the casting. We all had serious doubts that Aldren Aranjrach would have been in the role of the famous bastard and unscrupulous charmer - and they were right. Even the people who do not understand the cinema have long been aware that this boy can not play, but Kathleen and Company had to make their experiment all the way to kill the movie. We met a simple, charisma-empty character that can only be charmed by viewers who have not heard of Han Solo; who had said the lines and played the action-scenes, and by the end of the movie we did not see any development in him - he went through the meetings with other plot characters and important beings in his life (maybe) had to have intriguing episodes, but nothing happened at the emotional level, neither in him as a hero in his own story nor in our viewers. For me, this "version" of Han Solo will remain absolutely unknown, and the "promise" of one or two episodes devoted to his youth provokes only the skeptical smile of an indifferent observer - if there is anything to fund them ...

The element of the other heroes - another big mistake is putting Emily Clark's "Dragon's Mother" into the cast. The girl also does not act as an actress (to some extent, it is more tragic than Eraniyah), but I would not say that there is much like a dramatic material to work with. The interaction between her heroine (Han's heartbeat) and the future favorite gambler of the galaxy is devoid of any chemistry (no matter how I do not like that word!) And even you become indifferent whether you look at them both on the screen - the poor characteristic of a work, to provoke indifference. Donald Glover, as the young Lando Calrizian, was not infinitely bad, because he achieved some resemblance to the image we know in the performance of Billy Dee Williams, but the total "lightening" of the role comes from the plot of blame that he had to save his second pilot - a feminine feminist robot with rebellious ideas about equal rights to artificial intelligence. How weird is that? The appearance of Paul Bettani in a villain role was also quite meh-moment and I don't need the explanation that this character was conceived as a CGI, at the last moment he was re-cast and reprinted - untrue and predictable, not working on the plot, there are cool daggers, with nothing else to be remembered. The only nice and courageous character, without exception from the common denominator "two-dimensionality", is that of Woody Harrelson, a bold, daring, but cautious cheater from which young Han can learn. It's boring for me to waste time - both yours and mine - in commenting on fan-service moments where no more interesting activities would be won. Truly I say to you, they can be neglected with a light hand, even one being overly self-centered.

"Solo: A Star Wars Story" can be called an adventure film, but it misses dramatic spark and magnetic heroes. It may be left as a head at the space opera, invented more than four decades ago by George Lucas, but only if any associations with already familiar faces and events are deleted. I feel overwhelmed by the fact that Laurence Kadzin (who debuted as a 31-year-old with the script of my favorite episode V - "The Empire Strikes Back") stands out with his name behind this film-misunderstanding, and I tend to give up all the negative " credit "to his son Jonathan, co-author of the crime. And above all - I can not forgive Ron Howard and Kathleen Kennedy that they failed a (potentially) good promise with wrong decisions in all respects about this film. The most rewarding prize would be a total failure at the box office and a refusal of draft plans for the next two films devoted to Han. But my naivety does not go so far - I know there will be millions of people who will go to see"Solo: A Star Wars Story", despite the feedback on its inadequacy, and the company's money box will once again jangle the gold of the deceived hopes. And if I believed in oaths, I would have asked all Uncle Scrooge's worthy heirs to choke with their precious coins! Amen! R.I.P Han Solo ...

Image source: 1, 2