Destroy All Monsters: That's Fine, There Never Should Have Been A HAN SOLO Movie Anyway

Contributor; Toronto, Canada (@tederick)
to Vote
Destroy All Monsters: That's Fine, There Never Should Have Been A HAN SOLO Movie Anyway

I'll get my biases out of the way right at the top: I think, and always have thought, that a Han Solo prequel movie is a terrible idea. There's the Patton Oswalt joke where he filibusters his way through the Star Wars prequels and lays bare the dread of encountering Boba Fett as an 8-year-old in Attack of the Clones; this is a little like that. There is precisely zero value in unveiling a wholly different context for a character whose allure is based in large part on the absence of that context.

But Disney, Lucasfilm and Kathleen Kennedy can, and have, disagreed with me, and so Whatever The Han Solo Movie Is Going To Be Called: A Star Wars Story is going to be the next instalment in the line of films that brought us Rogue One. Except, as of yesterday, the directors have left the project.

Rogue One, too, saw a thinly-veiled directorial replacement take place, though Gareth Edwards remained enough on board - or friendly enough with the producers - or mindful enough of the huge career opportunity that the project, under any circumstances, represented - that he remained the happy "face" of the project all the way through the blu-ray release. If Tony Gilroy really did come in last summer and reshoot great swaths of Rogue One to remove Jyn's excellent "I'm a rebel - I rebel!" character arc as spied in the early trailers, well, he kept quiet about it (as well he should, because that decision was terrible).

The Han Solo situation seems substantially worse. The directors, animation/comedy wunderkinds Phil Lord and Chris Miller, haven't just left; they've left the film in mid production, which - for a project of this size - I can't actually recall having seen before.

Directors leave before shooting, sometimes precariously close to the start (Mathew Vaughn on X3, for example), or after (the recent, startlingly tragic news that has pulled Zack Snyder off Justice League), but shooting is one of the few points in production where so many resources are being expended at all times that it's very difficult to make that level of a change. A cinematographer might get swapped out (James Cameron loves doing this) or under incredibly drastic circumstances, an Eric Stoltz or Stuart Townsend might get replaced.

This, though? This ain't "creative differences." It's hard to imagine a scenario in which anyone on the Han Solo project could have been far apart enough on creative vision that they would have made it into production and past the first few weeks' of dailies, were their output not precisely in sync with what Kathleen Kennedy deemed necessary for the final film.

There might be a conspiracy theory or two worth playing out (did the directors lose Chewbacca? Are we absolutely sure Lord and Miller are two people, and not two sets of identical twins?) but the details will inevitably emerge. What's clear, though, is that Disney and LFL need to immediately throw the brakes on the Star Wars Story project.

Look, developing "new" IP within existing IP must be incredibly challenging. You're messing about in the world's favourite sandbox, which would seem like the dream scenario to every single film-inclined creative individual on the earth (myself included), except that it's also a sandbox whose external expectations are so enormous, they actually flattened the sandbox's original creator.

Star Wars is a game that the guy who made Star Wars couldn't win twice.

The new Star Wars franchise as a whole, at Disney, is an unbelievably ambitious idea. Star Wars movies used to take three solid years to make, and now Lucasfilm is trying to run two full production units in parallel that will churn out movies at a staggered two years apart apiece.

It's a shit ton of work from a creative collaboration standpoint, and it doesn't even have the loose framework of preexisting roadmaps that guide, say, the Marvel Cinematic Universe. There might be a big story map somewhere on the Disney backlot that spells out Episodes VII-IX and a handful of prequels, but there's inherently less connective tissue throughout - I sincerely doubt the Han Solo origin story is going to reveal, for example, a crucial detail about the downfall of Kylo Ren - so each piece has little to go on besides its most devastating inherent aspect: that it's Star Wars, and people lose all sense of perspective for Star Wars.

So, the ideas for these movies - the Anthology stories in particular - need to be brick Bantha-houses. "A movie about Han Solo as a younger man" isn't an idea; the story of that movie is the idea. And from our admittedly outsider vantage point that doesn't seem to be the direction from which this project was ever approached: the Han Solo movie has always, and will always, feel like Disney putting their chips on a safe bet / brand recognition, while ignoring the major problems with the idea itself:

  • that it can only weaken the mystique of the character;
  • that recasting an iconic performer in an iconic role is a virtually impossible shell game;
  • and that, as with all prequels, we already know the outcome: Han's going to win that Sabacc game, get the Falcon, make the Kessel run, and end up married to Chewbacca.

This is a wrongly thought out project. Star Wars Stories that flesh out the lives of hero (or villain) characters in the Star Wars saga have been frequently compared to the stand-alone character movies in the MCU, but the development engine is being run in reverse. Captain America movies work because Captain America is a character with a long legacy of individual stories to draw from; he becomes part of the ensemble in The Avengers based on that backlog of established personality.

Han Solo, from our perspective, begins as part of an ensemble and functions with very specific purpose in the stories in which he is featured. He has never been a protagonist and, like Captain Jack Sparrow, arguably shouldn't ever be. It's not his purpose in the overall drama. Yes, everyone is the hero of their own story, but we already know that about Han Solo, from the moment he appears; and he spent four movies telling us how great he was, and went out that way too. ("Yes I do! Every time!")

Ditto Boba Fett; ditto Yoda; ditto, though it pains me to say it, Obi-Wan Kenobi (though if Disney does greenlight Ewan McGregor's stand-alone Old Ben story, I'll delete this post and pretend I never wrote it). These aren't the characters the Star Wars Stories should be about because Star Wars stories aren't ever about people like this, at least not centrally.

They're about the Jyns and the Reys, the ones whose lives get derailed by the "only fight," as Maz Kanata puts it, and who then get pulled into that riptide and find that they were meant to be there all along.

Sure, you could argue that you could write a movie about how that happened to Han Solo. But guess what: we've already seen it. It was called Star Wars.

Destroy All Monsters is a weekly column on Hollywood and popular culture. Matt Brown is in Toronto and on Letterboxd.

to Vote
Screen Anarchy logo
Do you feel this content is inappropriate or infringes upon your rights? Click here to report it, or see our DMCA policy.

More about Han Solo - A Star Wars Story

More about Destroy All Monsters (Matt Brown)

Around the Internet

ManateeAdvocateJune 21, 2017 12:29 PM

I sure do enjoy this column. Always an enjoyable and typically thought provoking read. Well said Matt.

Matt BrownJune 21, 2017 1:49 PM

Thanks for saying so! Much appreciated.

the hong Kong cavaliersJune 21, 2017 2:20 PM

As always brilliantly written, and I completely agree with you . A solo movie was never a good idea just Hollywood answering a question no one asked .
How about doing a "star wars movie" where we do not already know the ending

Zero LastimosaJune 21, 2017 2:36 PM

I wouldn't mind seeing a movie where Han marries Chewbacca and witness the rise and fall of their love and ultimately settle into a platonic pilot/copilot relationship xD

Ben UmsteadJune 21, 2017 5:26 PM

Spot on, Matt. You know as much as your work warrants conversation, it's a piece like this where I just go "yup, this is what I've been thinking for months." and then seemingly have very little to say because of it.

It's really sad that true development time doesn't seem to exist at this level of project anymore, where it is really needed the most to understand the viability of what they're going after. Had they not barreled into this with two other films going, and another two on the way, someone maybe would have considered many of the factors you have cited above. Hell, for all we know someone at the creative group did and then Kennedy and Iger and co. gave them the devil horns and cackled "money! money! money!"

KurtJune 22, 2017 12:03 AM

Here we go. ANTMAN all over again? As in: Hire director(s) for their distinctive auteur sensibility, then push them out because that style is 'too much' for the property. I expect to see more of this with the 'Extended Universe Building' of major corporate brands.


CHUDJune 22, 2017 10:42 AM

I think their potential for success hinges on how comedic they're willing to go. The casting of Glover is a good sign. But I'm reminded of the conveniently condensed origin story for Indiana Jones at the beginning of The Last Crusade. It was action and laughs punctuated by mnemonic props, and it worked. Maybe if the movie takes place almost entirely on a train? Ooh, a space train heist!

Jamie DewJune 22, 2017 6:40 PM

Great work as alway Mr. Brown. Tough to argue against anything you've written here. I was never sold on the movie, and I hate to admit that the Lord/Miller stewardship didn't really change that for me. I like most of their movies a great deal, but had difficulty connecting the dots between their work and the Star Wars universe. That said, I'm unsure what exactly Howard will bring to the party. Let's me just toss out the very unoriginal, "I've got a bad feeling about this."

ToryKJune 30, 2017 3:37 PM

I was looking forward to it on the basis of seeing Lord and Miller play in The Sandbox, but this:

"They're about the Jyns and the Reys, the ones whose lives get derailed by the "only fight," as Maz Kanata puts it, and who then get pulled into that riptide and find that they were meant to be there all along.

Sure, you could argue that you could write a movie about how that happened to Han Solo. But guess what: we've already seen it. It was called Star Wars."

This... I can't argue with this. Wonderful column, Matt.