What was the last movie you watched?

[Pak-Man]

I'm hoping Solo becomes a sleeper hit. It deserves better than it got at the box office.

[The Lurker]

Watched Solo for the first time. I actually liked it quite a bit. It was the first Star Wars movie I’ve seen in a long time where I didn’t want it to end. I liked pretty much all of the characters and it was fun. Even the action was cool and exciting. Wasn’t anything amazing, but enjoyable all around I thought.

Everyone and their mother at least LIKED Solo, so that makes me wonder... why the eff did it flop? And I will not accept the answer that maybe people thought it was a remake of the 1995 Mario Van Peebles movie.

Memorial Day weekend is historically not a very good slot for blockbusters. Also, it's the first Star Wars movie released less than a year than the previous one (actually less than half a year; a bold choice). Also, Avengers: Infinity War came out only 2 weeks before its historic run and Deadpool 2 in the middle of the two. Stacking tentpole blockbusters one after another like that is a gigantic risk as well; flat-out stupid if you ask me considering Disney owns both Marvel & Star Wars. So Disney was basically taking a lot of risks and hoping they'd all pan out. There might be something to say about MoviePass getting super strict about what movies could be seen by that time. Before Infinity War, it was a free-for-all. Afterwards, they started making blockbusters more difficult to see. The fact that anyone was surprised at the less-than-stellar numbers for Solo is *more* surprising imo.

Hope that answers your question without bringing the movie's quality or anecdotal evidence into it.

That and there seemed to be the thought that it was an unnecessary prequel.

[Pak-Man]

I mean- No prequel is really necessary. If you're telling the story that came before an already fully-realized story, it doesn't need to be there. That story was told fine without it. But if the universe is rich enough, sometimes it's fun to see what came before. Solo is fun.

[Lesbunny]

I mean- No prequel is really necessary. If you're telling the story that came before an already fully-realized story, it doesn't need to be there. That story was told fine without it. But if the universe is rich enough, sometimes it's fun to see what came before. Solo is fun.

Not sure Monsters U did that, tbh. By setting it in a time before the original, it messes up it's own lore building, since we know that Screams aren't an efficient energy source. What it DOES do is give more insight into the characters we know and love, which I assume is similar to how Solo worked. I dunno, I've not seen either, just basing off of my impressions of the two.

[Russoguru]

Just out of curiosity I checked to see what the Rotten Tomatoes score was for Armed and Dangerous and I was stunned to find it has an 11% approval rating. I'm REALLY surprised about that because ever since I first saw it I thought it was a really funny movie. Anyway, not sure what I can attribute that score to.

[Darth Geek]

Just out of curiosity I checked to see what the Rotten Tomatoes score was for Armed and Dangerous and I was stunned to find it has an 11% approval rating. I'm REALLY surprised about that because ever since I first saw it I thought it was a really funny movie. Anyway, not sure what I can attribute that score to.

The John Candy and Eugene Levy movie?! I remember really liking that. Haven't seen it in years, though.

[Russoguru]

Just out of curiosity I checked to see what the Rotten Tomatoes score was for Armed and Dangerous and I was stunned to find it has an 11% approval rating. I'm REALLY surprised about that because ever since I first saw it I thought it was a really funny movie. Anyway, not sure what I can attribute that score to.

The John Candy and Eugene Levy movie?! I remember really liking that. Haven't seen it in years, though.

I'm afraid so. I enjoyed it a hell of a lot more than Summer Rental.

[Edward J Grug III]

I also think its troubled production gave it a bit of bad will and a reputation ahead of the release.

[Russoguru]

I also think its troubled production gave it a bit of bad will and a reputation ahead of the release.

I never even heard about any of that.

[Edward J Grug III]

I also think its troubled production gave it a bit of bad will and a reputation ahead of the release.

I never even heard about any of that.

You never heard about Miller and Lord getting fired when the film was almost complete and Ron Howard taking over? It was pretty big news.

[kunedog]

There was also the severe SW brand damage from Last Jedi to consider.  Writer John Kasdan openly wondered if Solo might have done better if released in December 2018 instead of May 2018:

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/M11h_7pJgGM" target="_blank" class="new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/M11h_7pJgGM</a>

The first eight minutes of the vid cover this and conclude it wouldn't have helped much, and I agree.  Moving the release date would only "solve" non-credible problems such as Star Wars fatigue and proximity to other blockbusters, which get mentioned a lot but (for some reason) didn't affect Marvel or Fox during the same time period, only Lucasfilm.

Although Disney would have had an extra half-year to make efforts to restore the fans' confidence in the brand, that's assuming they would even bother to try (spoiler: they didn't, and made things worse instead).  The real question that should haunt Kasdan is how Solo would have fared if released to a still-overwhelmingly-trusting fandom in, say, May of 2017.

[stansimpson]

Just out of curiosity I checked to see what the Rotten Tomatoes score was for Armed and Dangerous and I was stunned to find it has an 11% approval rating. I'm REALLY surprised about that because ever since I first saw it I thought it was a really funny movie. Anyway, not sure what I can attribute that score to.

It's a flawed system. If a movie is at 50%, it shouldn't be considered "rotten." It should be considered divisive. Those that hover around that number tend to be loved by half and hated by the other. And I've noticed a lot of 80s/90s movies don't do well with RT scores. I'd like to think it's nostalgia goggles, but there's no way The Mighty Ducks deserves a 21%.

Like what you like. Find a rating system that works for you. Roger Ebert used to be my go-to guy for a while (we "parted ways" in his later years). I've found IMDb scores to be my current closest barometer.

[Russoguru]

You never heard about Miller and Lord getting fired when the film was almost complete and Ron Howard taking over? It was pretty big news.

Ohhhhh you're talking about Solo. Me and Darth Geek were talking about Armed and Dangerous. Sorry for the confusion.

Speaking of which, I just got Armed and Dangerous in the mail today and while I would definitely say it's funny, it's generally speaking a fun film to watch. It's not like it's a laugh a minute comedy but it's great to watch.

[Edward J Grug III]

You never heard about Miller and Lord getting fired when the film was almost complete and Ron Howard taking over? It was pretty big news.

Ohhhhh you're talking about Solo. Me and Darth Geek were talking about Armed and Dangerous. Sorry for the confusion.

Speaking of which, I just got Armed and Dangerous in the mail today and while I would definitely say it's funny, it's generally speaking a fun film to watch. It's not like it's a laugh a minute comedy but it's great to watch.

Oops, sorry

God, I wound up the Kunedog again for nothing. Sorry everyone.

[Russoguru]

Oh well. Hey Kunedog? No hard feelings over what I said about The Last Jedi here.

Just got through watching Airplane!. Such a great comedy, it's a great synthesis of all things silly and goofy. I would basically call it the American cousin of Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Oh, and there's also certain... things in Airplane that you could never get away with in a PG rated movie today, maybe even a PG-13 rated movie.