Slashdot Mirror


'Solo' Will Lose $50+ Million In First Defeat For Disney's 'Star Wars' Empire (hollywoodreporter.com)

Zorro shares a report from The Hollywood Reporter: To borrow one of Han Solo's lines from Star Wars: The Force Awakens, "That's not how the Force works!" It's an apt way to sum up the troubled performance of Solo: A Star Wars Story. In one of the biggest box-office surprises in recent times, Solo is badly underperforming and will become the first of the Star Wars movies made by Disney and Lucasfilm to lose money. Wall Street analyst Barton Crockett says Solo will lose more than $50 million. Industry financing sources, however, say that figure could come in at $80 million or higher, although no one knows the exact terms of Disney's deals for home entertainment and television, among other ancillary revenues.

26 of 579 comments (clear)

  1. No it won't by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In the long run it will make hundreds of millions in DVD sales and TV rights world wide. And that's not counting merchandise.

    --
    Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    1. Re:No it won't by Pseudonym · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Nonsense! Solo will never be profitable because neither were most of the original trilogy.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    2. Re:No it won't by The+Cynical+Critic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The difference here is that it's projected to actually lose money, not just appear to lose money as far as the IRS is concerned. Actually losing money is something company executives will really take notice of, giving the IRS the wrong picture for the grave injustice of paying taxes.

      --
      "Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent any more of it."
    3. Re:No it won't by hazardPPP · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This was of course a movie made for streaming. It's almost the definition of not worth a movie theater trip.

      I disagree. Actually, I think that "Solo" is by far the best of the Disney Star Wars movies. I think the problem is that The Last Jedi was the worst Star Wars movie ever (yes, worse than Episode I) and that pissed people off. They will watch Episode IX since they wan't to know how the story will end, but they won't bother with an "anthology" movie outside of the main storyline since they don't feel like they are missing anything important.

    4. Re: No it won't by Nidi62 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Han Solo would probably approve of people tormenting the Solo movie anyway, he being a smuggler and pirate afterall.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  2. It wasn't a terrible movie by mykepredko · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm not really sure where the negative vibes came from; I thought it was better than "The Last Jedi" and a lot better than "Infinity Wars".

    Ron Howard did a credible job as director (you can see what was done before him).

    I think it really comes down to "Jedi Fatigue" and a really stupid release date (against "Infinity Wars" and "Deadpool 2").

    1. Re:It wasn't a terrible movie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, I actually really liked it, in fact, I liked Rogue One a lot too and I'm beginning to think maybe the spin offs are going to be consistently better than the mainline.

      As such, what bothers me is that the poor showing for Solo is because of the utter cluster fuck Rian Johnson made of the last film that was out in December. I sincerely hope they don't scrap the good films due to poor showings like this when the reason was the shit film that came out in December.

      I suspect if this film had been out in December, and Rian's shitfest had been out now, they'd both have done well as Solo would've been much appreciated in December and would've led to people being excited for another release now (only to be disappointed because it'd still be Rian's shitfest).

      The real problem here is the utter fuckup that is Rian Johnson ruining people's interest in December, not because Solo is a bad film in itself, on the contrary, it's quite good.

      Solution: Take that trilogy you've promised to Rian Johnson back away from him and don't hire him ever again and focus on actual good directors. Don't give up on spin offs because the mainline ruined people's interest in the subsequent film when the real problem was the director doing a shit job of the mainline film.

    2. Re:It wasn't a terrible movie by alvinrod · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I wouldn't place the blame squarely on Rian Johnson's shoulders. Part of the issue is that J.J. Abrams was given the first film and he's never been able to write a story from start to finish which you really need to do if you're making a trilogy. Look at something like Babylon 5 where J. Michael Straczynski had the overall story arc planned out in advance and was able to create something much more narratively satisfying because there was a point and purpose behind the different characters and events that occurred earlier in the series.

      For Star Wars, there were no character arcs planned and in usual J.J. Abrams fashion he introduced plenty of unresolved and mysterious plot threads that he had no solid plans for resolving while essentially remaking Episode IV. Maybe that works great for something like Lost where you can jerk the audience around for 6 seasons, but for a Star Wars trilogy you need to know where the story is headed.

      I suppose you could pass the buck to Disney who could have done a much better job of managing the Star Wars property. Why they didn't have an overall script or plan in place is beyond me. If you look at the Marvel cinematic universe they seem to have that much more planned out and I think that's why it's doing so well.

    3. Re:It wasn't a terrible movie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, it seems that Abrams had an outline for Ep. VIII written but Rian decided to completely ignore it and write his own story.

    4. Re:It wasn't a terrible movie by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The Last Jedi really set up the final episode with the biggest and most necessary change in the Star Wars universe - the final admission that the Jedi were actually pretty terrible and that the true saviour, the one who will really bring balance to the Force and peace the universe, is not a Jedi.

      In the original trilogy the Jedi were described as virtuous knights, fighting for good and protecting the innocent. Luke bought into it, he didn't know any better and his initial exposure to Jedi training was pretty positive. But in reality the Jedi not only failed in their most important mission to prevent the rise of the Sith, but they were actually pretty awful all round. They considered themselves superior and claimed ownership of the Force, used it to manipulate people without a second thought, and didn't seem to care at all about injustices like slavery. The latter arguably resulted in Anakin turning to the dark side and the deaths of billions.

      Luke tried to emulate them but made the same mistakes, resulting in Kylo Ren. Then he meets Rey and sees that she doesn't fear the dark side, to her it's all just the Force and a part of her. Luke realizes that the Jedi order was the problem, as does Yoda, and that Rey and Kylo Ren are the future, free from all that baggage and liberated to do the right thing.

      The new trilogy has so far mirrored the first one to an extent, but this is where it really diverges. Rey isn't descended from some great bloodline, Kylo Ren isn't a Sith. Ren killed his master not to save someone he cared about, for his own personal gain. The resolution won't be the return of the Jedi, it will be the end of the Jedi and something new taking their place and starting with Rey.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    5. Re:It wasn't a terrible movie by Brian+Kendig · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Luke realizes that the Jedi order was the problem, as does Yoda, and that Rey and Kylo Ren are the future, free from all that baggage and liberated to do the right thing.

      Yeah, because freeing someone from a moral framework and letting that person exercise his power as best he sees fit has worked so well in the Star Wars universe.

    6. Re:It wasn't a terrible movie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If that was the goal, they did it wrong.

      Luke faced torture and certain death to save his father, who he barely knew, from the darkside. And here we have that same Luke about to murder his own nephew, whom he has known his entire life, in his sleep! For just starting to fall to the dark side.

      Character motivation MATTERS when telling a good story. There interest here wasn't to show us how characters react in this drama, it was to take a widely-loved hero and turn him into a coward that just shrugs his shoulders and abandons his friends and family during their time of greatest need!

      So, it makes zero sense that Luke would behave this way, so the story is dumb. And it doesn't stop there. Poe, formerly an elite and devoted hero of the resistance, is now a mutineer that just wants to blow everything up, and is directly responsible for getting the entire resistance wiped out. Fin is selfish and obsessed.

      All our male heroes are having their characters destroyed, so their female counterparts can show their superiority, in each case. As if the bad plot wasn't bad enough, being beaten over the head with this man-shaming is just icing on the cake.

      Fuck star wars.

    7. Re:It wasn't a terrible movie by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Infinity wars was down a few million a day. It did not explain Solo theaters with 22 tickets sold.

      Solo suffered from the pansexual comment. Audience demographics showed families attendance was down 80%. What parent wants to discuss pansexuality with their 12 year old. Awkward. yea... I know... it really wasn't in the movie.. it was a forced error on the part of the writer who gave a bad off the cuff response to a question.

      Solo suffered from fan anger over TLJ. There's no way around it. Many of the peple the angriest were the ones who typically see films opening night and then repeatedly afterwards. I've seen A:IW 5 times and Deadpool II, 3 times. (BTW: I'm hearing good things about "Upgrade" a little independent Sci Fi film and I'm going to see it before it vanishes from theaters).

      I was angry because TLJ humiliated and ruined Jake Skywalker (as Mark Hamill called him). And generally because the film humiliated males (Poe, Hux, Kylo, even Snoke) without any corresponding humiliation scenes for females.

      TLJ was independently a really dumb film that repeatedly broke my suspension of disbelief so often that I had none left for the last half hour. I was just debating.. "do I leave and wait in the lobby or do I just sit out the last bit to see how this shit show ends?". And I went into TLJ in a very positive mood. It had a lot of my good will and had burned it all by the 45 minute mark. By the time I walked out, I'd decided not to see or buy any star wars material based on TLJ canon.

      So.. I'm going to Avengers and the Solo trailer came up (1st trailer) and I literally felt sick at my stomach from leftover anger at TLJ.

      EU is my canon. To say it's not canon is like Disney buy the rights to shakespeare and saying Hamlet is no longer canon. It was canon for 40 years. Some dumb soulless corporation isn't going to tell me what canon is.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
  3. Not Surprising by quantaman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Telling a completely new story in a great universe? Great idea.

    Telling a derivative story in a great universe? Good idea.

    Shooting a remake of a great movie? Decent idea.

    Shooting a movie with an iconic character, defined by an iconic actor? Terrible idea.

    The Star Trek remakes got away with it because the roles made the actors more than the actors made the roles (though they're still boring movies).

    But Han Solo was cool because Harrison Ford is a top-end actor who absolutely nailed the character of Han Solo. A Han Solo movie without Harrison Ford is basically a movie of going "Boy, that character isn't nearly as interesting as I remember. And that guy still isn't Harrison Ford!"

    It's not like there were a lack of stories to tell in the Star Wars universe.

    --
    I stole this Sig
  4. Re:Yawn ... by supremebob · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yeah... once you factor in BluRay sales, video service streaming fees, TV broadcast rights, and branded products (Toys, T-Shirts, etc) they'll still make a small fortune on this movie.

    It's just going to take more time to become profitable than usual.

  5. By my estimation by JudeanPeople'sFront · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The costs:
    Initial production budget was 250 mil. The movie was 80% done when the directors were fired and the new one re-shot most of the movie. So I'm adding 150 mil. The promotional budget for these movies is about the same as the production, so another 250 mil. Totaling 650 mil.

    The revenue:
    264 mil so far, not likely to go up by much. The second week's drop was quite heavy, so I expect 300 mil in total. Of which Disney's share is anyone's guess. Roughly half, 150 mil. Pathetic. Toy sales, TV rights, DVDs? Can't be much, judging by what The Last Jedi did. It basically broke Toys'R'Us! No one but ultra-geeks and collectors were exited about those toys. The regular fans, the general public, kids... are either "Meh" about it or actively hate Disney's Star Wars. The Last Jedi killed the golden goose.

    The big picture:
    Disney paid cool 4 billion for the franchise. A completely safe long-term investment in index funds will bring 5-10% annually. Therefore, Star Wars needs to bring 600 million to 1 billion every year to be on par. Disney needs The Force Awakens kind of film every year. So far, the investment has been a colossal failure. Disney can eat the loss because of the Marvel movies, theme parks, etc, but Star Wars will be a case study in failure for years to come.

  6. For specifics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Go to youtube. There are quite literally hundreds if not thousands of videos that detailed what went wrong. For one thing, there was an active boycott of Solo (otherwise known as Soylo now among fans for the apparent reveal by the writer that Lando is a pansexual right before the release of the movie). This also probably killed the movie for countless red-state movie goers who were already incensed at the blatant SJW preaching that The Last Jedi seemed to do.

    Really though, the stage was set for Solo's downfall with the poor movie (look at Rotten Tomato reviews) of The Last Jedi Returns. Sargon of Akkad has a video called "Gender Wars" that received a million views. How many of those did not buy a ticket to Solo? The Last Jedi is where the bridges were burned, and Solo is the consequence of that. Not that Solo is bad movie (though it has been described as mediocre at best).

    It is clear that Kathleen Kennedy wanted to inject her politics heavily into The Last Jedi. In an interview she specifically said that she did not feel like she needed to cater to the fan base. The director Rian Johnson and writer John Kasden have been treating fans inhospitably in rather poor attempts to defend their story decisions.

    Kathleen Kennedy made a Star Wars film that she and her fellow feminists wanted to see. Not what the traditional fan base was looking for (e.g. how the Luke Skywalker character was treated in The Last Jedi and the nonsensical Mary Sue aspects).

    It appears there are not as many feminists interested in Star Wars as there was with the traditional demographic.

  7. Less Wary This Time by mentil · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When Rogue One came out, I was skeptical that a spinoff movie could be any good, so I didn't see it at first. I was impressed by it, so figured Solo might be a safer bet than I'd ordinarily expect. Now with the fan reaction, I'm not so sure. Perhaps the reason Rogue One succeeded where Solo did not is that the former stars all-new characters (with some classic characters in ancillary roles) whereas Solo puts classic characters front and center, played by new actors. I.e. don't fuck with viewers' nostalgia. The Boba Fett movie will probably crash and burn, similarly.

    --
    Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
  8. Re:Yawn ... by mOzone · · Score: 4, Informative

    Don't know if you noticed but last jedi toys are still roting on the shelfs ...Walmart has tons toys r us has crap tons even youtube videos where 80% price cut they are still sitting ..gonna take a long time for 250 million+ loss

  9. Re:There are none so blind by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Star Wars fans would have thrown money at the franchise forever without a second thought if they hadn't put social evangelists in charge and allowed them to burn it down.

    Doubtful that had anything to do with it. Look at the list of top grossing films in the US we can see that number 3 is Black Panther, a film almost entirely made up of diversity hires where an SJW forces a bunch of conservatives to adopt his agenda and culminates in the creation of a reverse-racist outreach centre targeting poor black kids.

    We also have Avatar, about an SJW enviro-mentalist who thinks a primitive native tribe is more important than unobtanium that could bring prosperity and wealth to several rich white guys. Force Awakens is up there, which as we know is the ultimate Mary-Sue anti-male crapfest. Even the Last Jedi is in at number 8, right above proper fan favourite manly man film The Dark Knight.

    Worryingly, even femoid romantic crap like Titanic did really well. Even AmiMojo couldn't sit through that one. Somehow Wonder Woman, a feminist nightmare of a movie, did better than all the other DC universe stuff.

    I know everything is SJWs' fault, but in this case maybe Solo is just a bad movie or people are fed up with Star Wars now.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  10. Re:The Harrison Ford factor by An+Ominous+Cow+Erred · · Score: 5, Interesting

    That's not really true. It is *TOTALLY* doable. In fact, the prequels (as badly-written as they were) provide a perfect counterargument.

    Ewan McGregor seemed like he was channeling the deceased spirit of Sir Alec Guinness. He *was* Obi-wan. I'm amazed at how good his delivery was given the crap direction that Lucas provided (as seen how otherwise awesome actors like Natalie Portman were rendered like, well, petrified statues with hot grits).

    If they'd searched long and hard enough they certainly could have found someone who could *be* Han Solo.

    At the risk of invoking Godwin's Law, Alec Guinness himself made a pretty good Hitler, and Bruno Ganz was flat out iconic. Nobody complains that they're not as good at being Hitler as the real Hitler.

  11. People have figured out Star Wars by timholman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    My own opinion is that "Solo" is flopping because people have finally realized the series is never going to get any better.

    Some background: I saw the original "Star Wars" in college. It was a jaw-dropping movie, (unless you're old enough to remember what science fiction / fantasy movies were like before the release of SW, you really can't appreciate how amazing an experience it was to see it in the theater), and "The Empire Strikes Back" was even better. But "Return of the Jedi" was a let down, in large part because Lucas had full creative control and couldn't resist inserting "cutesy" characters like Ewoks into the story, and adding a ridiculously sappy ending.

    Still, two out of three wasn't bad. And then came episodes 1 through 3, which conclusively proved that Lucas knew how to build a universe, but had no clue how to write a good story. So now it's two out of six, but there was still hope after Lucas sold the franchise to Disney. Maybe (I thought), having some new people in charge might revitalize the SW universe.

    "The Force Awakens" was a reasonable reboot. J.J. Abrams isn't a great director, but he's a competent one, and he avoided a lot of pitfalls by recycling the plot of the original movie. "Rogue One" was a competent one-shot, but nothing special. Now's it four out of eight good films if you're generous.

    Then came "The Last Jedi", and the painful realization that really, really bad would be the new normal for Disney, and that future "Star Wars" movies would be micro-managed by Disney execs and designed to sell overpriced merchandise. And that, for me, was the end of it. When I walked out the "The Last Jedi", I knew I wouldn't be paying to see another Star Wars movie in the theater again. Most "Star Wars" movies have ranged from mediocre to bad, and it is never going to change. Disney will never let go. It'll just be bad formula movies from now on.

    I am indifferent to "Solo", which by all accounts is another painfully mediocre film. I might watch it when it hits cable, but I have about as much desire to see another "Star Wars" movie in the theater as I do to see another "Mission Impossible" or "Transformers" movie, i.e. none at all. And given how "Solo" is doing, I suspect I have a lot of company.

  12. And Disney won't learn a thing by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Disney could view this as a moment to learn about franchise fatigue, how fans are getting sick of their injection of weird feminist politics into SW, how they need to focus on better writing and directing, etc.

    Instead I guarantee you that Kathleen Kennedy will spin this as "People aren't interested in seeing movies with white male heroes anymore."

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  13. Re:Yawn ... by Wycliffe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    gonna take a long time for 250 million+ loss

    No worries, with current copyright laws, they have at least 95 years. And that's assuming Disney/Star Wars doesn't extend it again.
    You have to appreciate the strange irony of calling a movie a failure if it's not profitable within a week of release yet having copyright laws that extend for many thousands of times longer than that.

    We should change copyright laws to a max of 20 years or 5 years after profitability, whichever is shorter.

  14. Re:There are none so blind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There is no problem with Wonder Woman. You're either painfully dense or trying to create an outrageous strawman (or, possibly, you've been completely brainwashed by mainstream propaganda which was legalized for domestic use about 5 years ago). Wonder Woman is a good character, a strong female heroine. Nothing was too forced there. Black Panther, well, we all should be offended at that as it's incredibly patronizing and racist. Those of us against this SJW crap aren't racist. Actually, we often view SJWs as patronizing racists. Us anti-SJWs believe that everyone should have an equal opportunity and compete (hard) on merit. That's best for everyone. We wouldn't think of giving handouts to minorities. That's been a failing strategy for decades, and it indicated a deep racism. Actions speak louder than words. No, the fact that a movie has strong female characters or strong black characters is no problem. It's a problem when you sacrifice the art to get something PC or pushing an agenda. It's like walking around with terrible breath. You have long since gotten used to it, but it's so painfully obvious to everyone else. This crap with twisting and mangling great franchises to make it PC is ruining art. Simple as that. Want to make a feminist movie? Go make one. But, don't destroy something else great in the process. Make a good movie with strong (and real, although this doesn't apply much to superhero movies) female characters and don't push and agenda, just write a good story. No one will object.

  15. Where is this coming from? by skam240 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm not sure where you're getting this stuff about the Jedi from.

    "...but they were actually pretty awful all round"

    They were? They seem to be universally loved by "good characters" in the universe. Let's see why you say the are "pretty awful"

    "They considered themselves superior and claimed ownership of the Force, used it to manipulate people without a second thought"

    Sure seems like they would have been running the Republic's government if they thought they were both superior and were happy to "manipulate people without a second though". But no, instead of pursuing power in the Republic they acted as servants of it.

    "...and didn't seem to care at all about injustices like slavery."

    Slavery was illegal in the Republic ( http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki... ) so while it did exist in a few backwaters like Tatooine, this does not mean that the Jedi didn't care about it any more than the Republic didn't. They were a relatively small order patrolling the bulk of the galaxy and by their own admission, couldnt get to everything. In fact, "When the Old Republic outlawed slavery, the Jedi set about to free those held..." (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Jedi_Order).

    "Luke tried to emulate them but made the same mistakes, resulting in Kylo Ren."

    Specifically, what mistakes were made? The only one I know of was pulling his light saber out for a moment when he sensed the Dark side's influence on Ren.

    Don't get me wrong, what you're throwing out here is certainly an interesting narrative, it just doesn't fit the facts.

    --
    I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.