Coastal View News
“Solo: A Star Wars Story”
Han Solos is one of the most charming, compelling
characters in the “Star Wars” franchise. So why not make a movie about him? For
big studios like Disney and Lucasfilm, the formula is temptingly simple: Get a bunch
of famous actors together, find a team of writers to come up with a bracingly
safe script, spend a few hundred million on special effects, and, viola, you’ve
got yourself a cash cow. It may be a mere clone, which is carefully concocted
in a big Hollywood studio “laboratory”, but, hey, it’s Han Solo we’re talking
about here! This cow is fat, and its moo is so reassuringly familiar.
As we all know, Han Solo (Alden Ehrenreich) is a bad boy.
He has to be, in fact. Because where he grew up poor people like him have to
scratch, claw, trick, and steal in order to make ends meet.
From the very opening scenes, Han, along with his girlfriend,
Qi’ra (Emilia Clarke), is on the run. Some pissed off baddies are after him. He
manages to charm his way out of it, but, alas, Qi’ra gets captured in the
process. It’s always the loved ones that get screwed.
After running away, Han tries his hand at the military. Doesn’t
work out. Then he turns to marauding—with a guy named Beckett (Woody
Harrelson). That’s more promising (for obvious reasons). But even there Han
runs into serious trouble. After failing to deliver some goods, his criminal
overlord, Dryden Vos (Paul Bettany), threatens to kill Han and Beckett if they don’t
come up with something soon.
So now we’re set up for the addition of a few standard
ingredients—the genetic building blocks of a film like this. Yes, Han is going
to get the goods. But he’s also got to get hooked up with some good guys—preferably
rebels—so that we know that, criminal history be damned, Han is a noble soul. And
he’s got to meet some familiar people, such as Chewbacca (Joonas Suotamo) and
Lando Calrissian (Donald Glover), so that we can feel the warmth of “Star Wars”
nostalgia. And, of course, it’s got to have a promising start, a very dire
middle, and plenty of impossible near-misses by the end.
That’s the recipe, at least. But will this be different?
Han Solo is different in various ways from the likes of Luke Skywalker or Rey. So
there’s potential there for a different, more complex approach. Might “Solo” actually
break the mold?
Of course not.
“Solo” is an “on in the background” sort of movie. Despite
its cutting-edge visual effects, it doesn’t require, or even really ask for,
any kind of careful attention. The story is exactly what you’d expect, the plot
is ho-hum, the themes are thoroughly unoriginal and underdeveloped, and the
acting is fine but not particularly compelling. So, yeah, it’s pretty … but so
what? Pretty action movies are a dime a dozen these days.
Now, of course, the movie is fun in its way. It’s
certainly action packed. Yet, with the recent proliferation of “Star Wars”
movies and the burgeoning of other sci-fi franchises, as well as all the super
hero stuff and everything else so much like it, I admit I’ve lost my grip on
why “action packed” is still thought to name a distinguishing, standout, good-making
feature of a film. And I don’t see why we—the viewers—ought not expect a bit
more.
“Star Wars” fans will of course want to see this movie. And
they may even be satisfied with it—if for no other reason than they can bathe
in the aura of “Star Wars” for a couple of hours. I’m not exactly a “Star Wars”
aficionado, but I too enjoy the feel of the franchise—the look of the droids,
costumes, light sabers, starships, etc., all set to John Williams’ famous musical
themes.
That’s why this movie, for all its mediocrity, may be worthy
as an “on in the background” sort of thing. You can, if you want, make it fill
a room like elevator music—pleasant enough as long as you don’t pay too much
attention to it.
