Skip to main content

Solo: A Star Wars Story Review


There's no reason Solo should exist. Few fans were clamouring for it - certainly not as much as an Obi-Wan spin-off - and recasting the character when he's been defined by Harrison Ford for so long seemed too big a risk. Regardless, it exists now. I'm not here to judge a film on its necessity but its qualities as a film. So, whether we wanted it or not, is Solo any good?

Solo is a lot of fun, even if it isn't much else. If you're expecting more of the dramatic heft of The Last Jedi, you'll be disappointed. If anything, Solo is the Star Wars sequel that's closest in essence to A New Hope; a scrappy group of likeable (rather than complex) characters zipping around space and having adventures. Without the extra save-the-galaxy layer A New Hope has, everything in Solo does feel relatively inconsequential. However, a more small-scale Star Wars film is quite refreshing. Plus, ignoring the bigger picture allows the film to explore the weirder, seedier corners of the galaxy. In particular, the brilliantly gross Lady Proxima and the disarmingly menacing Dryden Vos provide a fascinating insight into the Star Wars criminal underworld. 

Solo's production was also infamously turbulent, with Ron Howard replacing original directors Phil Lord and Christopher Miller for extensive reshoots. Fortunately - as is to be expected from a reliable professional such as Howard - the film comes together almost seamlessly. The first act occasionally feels a little rushed, but Solo soon finds a strong rhythm that deftly balances exhilarating action with focused character moments. As has been the case for all the Disney Star Wars films, Solo also looks impeccable. Top-notch special effects bring wonderfully creative creature designs to life and Arrival cinematographer Bradford Young's use of colour and lighting is rather striking (even if the poor projection that cripples most cinemas these days doesn't do it justice).

Of course, the most controversial part of Solo is the casting of Alden Ehrenreich as the titular character. It doesn't help that replacing Harrison Ford is inherently controversial, but Ehrenreich received extra backlash as many had their hearts set on Ford impersonator Anthony Ingruber. The thing is, Ehrenreich is seriously fantastic. He isn't playing Harrison Ford, he's playing Han Solo and he absolutely nails the cocky exterior/sincere interior combination that makes Han such an iconic character. In fact, there are great performances all round, from Woody Harrelson's sympathetically world-weary Tobias Beckett to Donald Glover's effortlessly cool Lando Calrissian. However, it's Paul Bettany's scene-stealing turn as the volatile villain Dryden Vos that stands out the most, despite his limited screen time. 

Solo's biggest weakness is its script. Despite being co-written by veteran Star Wars scribe Lawrence Kasdan, the dialogue is very reflective of the film's overall lack of depth. The abundance of one-liners usually serves the film's light tone just fine and provides a solid handful of laughs. However, the more serious moments often topple into cheesiness as the script attempts to condense complex ideas into the snappy quips that populate the rest of the film. However, Solo doesn't always get it wrong. In particular, the third act is filled with smart subversions and compelling twists, ending the film at its most gripping. 

We didn't need Solo, but I think we're better off with it than without it. I've seen it twice now and I've thoroughly enjoyed it both times. Despite its lack of depth and flawed script, Solo delivers an action-packed ride bolstered by confident performances and the typical visual wonder that makes Star Wars such an enduring franchise.

7.7/10

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is Nativity 3: Dude, Where's My Donkey?! Any Good?

Dude, Where's My Funny?! Nativity 3: Dude, Where's My Donkey?! - Film Review by Nathan Brooks Nativity's lack of critical success completely baffles me. I thought Nativity was a great movie. It was funny, it had more depth to it than most comedies and was overall just a fun movie. Nativity 2: Danger in the Manger's lack of critical success, I understand a lot better. I still remember it being fairly entertaining, but I was about 11 then, and I didn't have a brilliant judgement of what makes a good movie. Of what I can remember, however, it was nowhere near as good as Nativity in terms of story and character and basically everything important needed to make a good film. I also remember that they spent most of the movie in a bus. Nativity 3: Dude, Where's My Donkey is proof that the film makers have given up on trying to please the critics. This is an awful film. Nativity 2 was not a brilliant movie, but it at least kept me entertained for however long it...
Post a Comment
Read more

Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom Review

Jurassic Park never needed to be a franchise. As a thriller, Jurassic Park inherently works better the more compact it is, so stretching it into multiple sequels seems rather counterproductive. Of course, I wouldn't mind if these sequels were good. Unfortunately, they are not. The Lost World , the first follow-up, does nothing new for virtually the entire film - only hinting at a distinctive identity in the final act. Jurassic Park 3 was even worse. The characters are so unengaging and the action so toothless you end it feeling like you've stared at an empty void for ninety minutes. Colin Trevorrow's 2015 sequel/reboot Jurassic World slightly reinvigorated the franchise with flashy new visuals, but it also suffered from bland characters and a muddled script. However, against all the odds, I still foolishly had my hopes up for that film’s follow-up Fallen Kingdom . I did have my reasons, to be fair. J.A. Bayona was taking over directorial duties and he's an exce...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Complicated Entitlement of Arthur Fleck

Joker’s (Probably) Accidental Identity Politics The discourse around Joker , the Joaquin Phoenix-starring origin story of the infamous Batman villain, has been exhausting. Beginning before most people had even seen the film, battle lines were immediately drawn between those decrying its allegedly alt-right sympathies and edgy gamers convinced this was going to be the greatest film of all time. Now that it’s actually in cinemas and I’ve seen it, it’s a lot more complicated than that, even if it isn’t on purpose. To get it out of the way, Joker is a fantastically constructed film. Whilst it’s certainly derivative of other prestige pictures (Martin Scorsese’s Taxi Driver and King of Comedy have been regularly brought up) that doesn’t stop it from being spectacular and gripping in its own right. At the centre of it all is Phoenix, who’s performance is genuinely astonishing. The gruesome physicality he brings to the role is mesmerising, exemplified during the surreal dance sequences i...
Post a Comment
Read more