It’s official. This weekend at the Star Wars Celebration Chicago, Disney confirmed the official subtitle of Star Wars Episode IX will be, “The Rise of Skywalker.” But, who is the “Skywalker” in question? It’s been confirmed in the previous film, The Last Jedi - that Rey’s parents were nobodies so - are we about to see JJ Abrams (writer / director of the The Force Awakens and the upcoming film, “Rise of Skywalker”) doing a slight rewrite on the previous film? Perhaps the information that Rey was told - was a lie? I mean, it did come from a dude who is full on Dark Jedi. Or, maybe it’s a literal title and that one of our old Skywalkers from the past - will rise?
Technically, Leia’s character didn’t die even though beloved actor Carrie Fisher passed away. So, Leia can’t be the Skywalker that rises. Or, maybe a brand new Skywalker baby will pop up? And, of course - Kylo Ren is technically in the Skywalker bloodline. So, there's that.
Too many questions, not enough Star Wars answers. I guess we’ll have to wait until Christmas.
Star Wars: Episode IX: The Rise of Skywalker opens Christmas day, 2019. Featuring the return of Mark Hamill and Carrie Fisher (using unused footage she had previously shot for The Last Jedi) and guest starring Billy Dee Williams as Lando Calrissian. Returning to fight in the resistance will be Rey (Daisy Ridley, Finn (John Boyega), Poe (Oscar Isaac) and Rose (Kelly Marie Tran) heading up against the First Order led by Kylo Ren (Adam Driver). Written/directed by JJ Abrams.
Star Wars: Episode IX: The Rise of Skywalker, will bring an end to the saga of the Skywalker family.
For better or worse.
Disney and Marvel Studios have agreed to rehire writer/director James Gunn following his July 2018 firing over dozens of online statements he made regarding women and LGBT folks. So, what exactly happened (and for some folks - who is James Gunn and why should I care?):
James Gunn, he’s a writer/director of feature films who had to back to back hits with Marvel Studios Guardians of the Galaxy 1&2 both of which were surprise hits and have combined for a total world box office of $1.5 billion. So, when conservative personalities dug up old tweets on the Trump hating Gunn, they could not wait to manufacture some fake rage. Like most things in internet outrage culture it didn’t matter that Gunn wrote the tweets ten years ago and that, while tasteless and sometimes insensitive, they were clearly not to be taken seriously. But no matter. Disney caved to the faux rage and fired Gunn from the upcoming Guardians 3.
At the time, when reporters were questioning him about the tweets, Gunn clarified his earlier comments via Twitter: "Many people who have followed my career know, when I started, I viewed myself as a provocateur, making movies and telling jokes that were outrageous and taboo. As I have discussed publicly many times, as I've developed as a person, so has my work and my humor. It's not to say I'm better, but I am very, very different than I was a few years ago; today I try to root my work in love and connection and less in anger. My days saying something just because it's shocking and trying to get a reaction are over."
After Disney fired him for the decade old tweets, Gunn responded: "Regardless of how much time has passed, I understand and accept the business decisions taken today. Even these many years later, I take full responsibility for the way I conducted myself then. All I can do now, beyond offering my sincere and heartfelt regret, is to be the best human being I can be: accepting, understanding, committed to equality, and far more thoughtful about my public statements and my obligations to our public discourse. To everyone inside my industry and beyond, I again offer my deepest apologies. Love to all."
And if you read over the tweets some of them clearly go to far. In fact, what I thought was far more inappropriate was Gunn’s post titled, "The 15 Superheroes I Most Want to Have Sex With," which was filled with some pretty idiotic fanboy misogynist writing. ( Editor’s note: We are unable to find a link to that now deleted story, but numerous op-eds exist in which they discuss it including this one at the Marysue.com).
So, my general take on the firing was, “Gunn wrote stupid tweets, probably when he was drunk.” He should apologize, not do anything that stupid again and move on with it. And that should have been the end. Alas, Disney caved to outrage culture and so Gunn was fired. And that as they say - is that.
But didn’t you say he got hired, again?
I did. Which means that, as they say, was not that. How did Gunn get hired back? Well, shortly after the firing, a pretty obvious narrative emerged - Gunn was an often harsh critic of President Trump and so therefor - angry conservative personalities manufactured some engineered fake rage to shut him up! And it worked. It did not matter that all the movie stars that worked with Gunn on Guardians were like, “Um, this is BS. Please hire him back.”
But that wasn’t exactly enough to get him hired again. Thankfully, according to Deadline, Disney felt Gunn’s apologies were very sincere, and they were impressed with how Gunn handled the firing and how he didn’t blame the company. The other thing Disney noticed is that Gunn’s firing didn’t stop other companies from hiring him as he had signed on to direct the next Suicide Squad film. Which means, Disney probably figured, “Well, if other studios are hiring him - maybe we screwed up what with that firing thing we did to him.”
And so Gunn won his job again and is back to directing Guardians 3. To be honest, it doesn’t really matter. Most of those tentpole flagship franchise films are so predictably cookie cutter that the director no longer matters - that much. Obviously, you need A director. But if it’s James Gunn, or Peyton Reed, or Joe Johnston, or Scott Derrickson, or hell even Brett Ratner or Katherine Hardwick … I mean, they’re all basically the same. The idea of the auteur director is mostly gone. At least, it’s mostly gone in Hollywood franchise films.
The Nutcracker and the Four Realms is Disney’s latest release, and not only are viewers anticipating a fairy tale story, dancing, melodious soundtrack and illuminating colors, but they are also expecting a parent to die or not be in the picture early on in the story.
It’s inescapable if you commit to emotionally investing in a Disney film. And if you look closely, it’s more often the mother.
Why? Well let’s first look at some of the classics.
1938 Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs – Snow’s biological mother died and is replaced by the Evil Queen, her stepmother.
1941 Dumbo – our favorite elephant is parent-less in the movie.
1942 Bambi – sadly, graphic content below….
1950 Cinderella – the most famous princess to ever live is motherless in the movie and haunted by her big-footed step family.
1951 Alice in Wonderland – its been postulated Alice was orphaned and taken care of by a governess.
1963 The Sword and the Stone – Arthur is a 12 year-old orphan boy.
1967 The Jungle Book – Mowgli is found parent-less.
1989 The Little Mermaid – Ariel’s mother, Queen Athena, was killed, leaving her father Triton to raise her and her sisters.
1992 – Aladdin – Princess Jasmine is motherless.
In Tarzan's, Lilo's and The Emperor's New Groove's Kuzko, all lost their parents.
In 1994 not a dry eye was in the house during the scene in which Simba loses Mufasa in The Lion King….
1995 – Pocahontas – it’s revealed her mother had passed a while back.
And the most colorful and comical of the Disney films, Finding Nemo, wasn’t exempt either, with Nemo’s Mom being eaten in the opening scene.
Multiple theories were brought forward by Disney producer, Don Hahn, in an interview to Glamour. The first was that Walt Disney tragically lost his mother when he was younger.
In 1938 the successful film producer, young Walt, purchased a home for his parents and when the gas furnace was faulty he sent his studio men over to fix it. Unfortunately the repair was not adequate and it eventually leaked, and his mother, Flora Call Disney, soon died of asphyxiation.
It’s believed the grieving son found the interweaving of this tragedy into his work as a means to deal with his guilt.
The second theory is that Disney films wanted to mix fairy tale with the reality many children face, adding a sense of “realism” to the stories.
And final theory is Walt Disney wanted children to feel like heroes, and a film in which a child battles evil without the help of Mommy and Daddy infused a sense of empowerment to his target audience.
So the idea of celebrating the triumph of the quest of a parent-less child is probably more pervasive in these movies than the purposeful injection of a gory parental death. Although this makes Disney movies more palatable, I’m still hoping Mufasa was only unconscious and recovered off the set when we weren’t looking.
Before bearing witness to the brilliant magic of Disney’s live-action Winnie the Pooh reboot, Christopher Robin, I was given goosebumps by the trailer for Disney’s live-action remake of Dumbo. If you thought Disney was going to make money with its purchase of Fox’s Marvel Cinematic Universe or UFC, consider the money to made by remaking every classic Disney, cartoon movie.
Christopher Robin wasn’t just good. It was funny and heartwarming and transported me to another time and place like the tree transported Christopher Robin to the Hundred Acre Wood.
You can’t go wrong with Pooh. I’ve maintained that The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh is one of the funniest movies I’ve ever seen, and Robin retains that humor by keeping Pooh’s character, and all the characters of Hundred Acre Wood, consistently classic. All great reboots and remakes appeal to their longtime fans’ affinity for nostalgia by preserving the characters they grew up loving. I wrote about Solo doing so, and Robin is no exception.
Pooh, Piglet, Eeyore and Tigger might have shed their cartoon bodies for live-action “stuff and fluff,” but they are otherwise unchanged and equally enchanting--if not more so. I actually felt as childish watching the grown-up Christopher Robin as Ewan McGregor looked playing with his friends upon his return to Hundred Acre Wood. That feeling was mutual for much of the United Kingdom’s moviegoers over the Labor Day weekend, as Robin topped BlacKkKlansman at the U.K. box office. It was sixth despite being in its fifth week in the states.
Robin has recouped its $75 million budget and has nearly made as much on top of that as of this writing. The live-action remake of The Jungle Book made almost a billion dollars on its $175-million budget back in 2016. It stands to reason that Disney could use the same template to turn its longtime, cartoon assets into revenue generators once again, and they are. Not only did I see the trailer for the live-action Dumbo remake, but the rebooted Mary Poppins Returns also made an appearance, and while the original was a live-action film, it is indicative of Disney adding some cars to the seemingly endless train of Hollywood reboots and remakes.
In May 2019, a live-action version of Aladdin directed by Guy Ritchie will hit theaters, followed by John Favreau’s The Lion King in July and Milan in March of 2020. There is a score of reboots and remakes reportedly in the works at Disney, which should buoy its books well above water for a very long time. Imagine, a live-action reboot of The Rescuers and The Rescuers Down Under or, as I pitched to my sister during the trailers prior to Robin, a live-action remake of The Great Mouse Detective. Disney’s options are vast given the improved technology around visual effects, so it doesn’t have to rely on comic book movies to make its money in theaters.
At Foul Play-by-Play we provide play-by-play and color commentary of foul play in sports on and off the field, pitch, court and ice. Here are the headlines, cheats of the week and a trip back in time when foul play was fair game to John McGraw.
The NFL Players’ Association filed a non-injury grievance challenging the NFL’s new national anthem policy, Tuesday. According to our comrade Al Neal of PeoplesWorld.org, “[w]ith the league changing the policy without first negotiating with the union, it will need to rely on the broad powers given to the commissioner, Roger Goodell, through the personal conduct policy.”
What I took from the piece at People’s World is the players’ chances sort of depend on the definition of detrimental conduct and whether a majority of four, mutually-selected neutral arbitrators would consider kneeling during the national anthem to be conduct detrimental to the NFL. It seems the conduct has been detrimental to the league if you consider television ratings. A survey released in February found that 50 percent of U.S. consumers who watched less football in 2017 did so because of the anthem protests. But in-game advertising revenue actually increased, so what qualifies as evidence of detriment? Is loss of fans enough or does it have to be quantified in dollars?
And what kind of precedent would this be setting if the NFL’s national anthem policy remains unchanged? Neal mentioned prayer being challenged in his piece, but Tim Tebow proved taking a knee for Jesus is profitable for the NFL, but probably not during the anthem. And apparently taking a knee for a minority murdered by police who go free is detrimental to the league, which is just another example of American racism that didn’t go away because we had a black President; it intensified instead. I think eliminating prayer would be the last thing on the NFL’s wish list. I’m sure the old, white, can’t-dance owners, of which there are 30, would prefer to implement penalties as stiff as their hips for the hip-thrusting dancers we all love like Antonio Brown. I just don't think there's any way the NFL wins this because of the means by which they adopted the policy outside the collective bargaining agreement and without considering the players' association. But they could get an anthem win elsewhere...
In more NFL legal news, the NFL is asking arbitrator Stephen Burbank to issue a summary judgement in Colin Kaepernick’s collusion lawsuit against the league, which would bring an end to the saga and give NFL owners another win on the anthem front. Burbank’s refusal to issue a summary judgement would allow the grievance to move forward and allow Kaepernick an opportunity to collect.
The NFL, according to Mike Florio of Pro Football Talk, hopes to force Kaepernick to ‘put his cards on the table’ and prove they have enough evidence of collusion to continue the lawsuit. So even if the NFL doesn’t get the summary judgement, they’ll know the trial plan of Kaepernick’s team of lawyers. But law requires all facts to be viewed “in the most favorable light” towards Kaepernick, meaning it shouldn’t take much to force the continuation of the case.
I’m assuming Kaepernick doesn’t have a recording of a phone call with an NFL owner saying “I can’t hire you because the other owners said I can't,” so what could Kaepernick possibly have to prove collusion besides the statistics of his last season being better than most backup quarterbacks who played, and why can't that be enough? The only chance I think Kaepernick has is if NFL owners unanimously agreed that the backlash from Donald Trump's tweets would be more damaging to their bottom line than blackballing Kaepernick.
Disney’s $71.3-billion offer for the movie and television assets of 21st Century Fox has been granted provisional approval by the Department of Justice as long as Disney sells the 22 regional sports networks it would acquire in the acquisition. While Comcast could still outbid Disney for Fox’s assets, they too would likely be required to sell the regional sports networks (RSNs) in order to receive DOJ approval.
With Disney’s assets already including ESPN and ABC programming – the homes of Monday Night Football, the NBA Playoffs and NBA Finals – the company that rode the coattails of a cartoon mouse to mountains of money has found plenty of new ways to invade your home. But Disney’s potential acquisition of Fox’s assets opens doors at the box office as well, uniting the Marvel Cinematic Universe to include the X-men, Fantastic Four and Deadpool along with Disney’s Avengers and Black Panther.
The condition of divesting Fox’s RSNs demanded by the DOJ is intended to preserve competition and protect consumers from monopolistic price gouging, but will it? Andrew Bucholtz of Awful Announcing expects Comcast, holder of the second-most RSNs behind Fox with seven, Charter, owner of five RSNs, and AT&T, owner of three RSNs and a minority shareholder of Seattle’s Root Sports, to be frontrunners for the 22 RSNs Disney will be forced to sell.
Sports teams could also acquire their respective RSNs. YES Network, formerly owned by the Yankees, could once again become an asset for the pinstripers. Eight professional sports teams are featured on Fox Sports Southwest, so it’s possible that a few RSNs end up owned by teams, but taking the best offer might not be the best deal for Disney.
Selling the 22 RSNs individually might result in the most money made from the sale of those networks, but packaging all or most of the RSNs together in a deal allows the buyer to set a higher price for access because of a lack of competition that would remain, which would allow Disney to, in turn, hike the price of its offerings to match that of the acquiring party, resulting in more revenue long-term despite the lower purchase price.
Colombia striker Radamel Falcao accused American referee Mark Geiger of favoring England in Colombia’s World Cup loss to England in the round of 16, last Tuesday. Colombia was the recipient of six of the game’s eight yellow cards and were whistled for 23 of the 36 fouls.
Geiger was also responsible for England’s only goal during open play, resulting from a penalty he called on Colombia midfielder Carlos Sanchez. Falcao thought scheduling a referee who only spoke English for a game involving England allowed for bias and that “through small calls,” Geiger was pushing Colombia toward its own goal.
We talked a bit last week about the attitude of soccer players in our discussion of the Swedish coach complaining about the German team celebrating its win in stoppage time in front of the Swedes’ bench. And while players and coaches find a way to complain about officiating in every sport, FIFA’s history of corruption has to be considered before Falcao is labeled a crybaby. I didn’t watch the match, so I can’t comment on the calls Geiger made, but I don’t need to watch the game to make a decision in this case.
If it can be avoided, I don’t think a native English speaker, and certainly not a speaker of only English, should officiate any international contest in which native English speakers are involved. I understand that coaches and captains, not necessarily every player, should be able to communicate with officials, but FIFA is known to have its favorites, and Colombia has never been one of those. England, meanwhile, has exceeded everyone’s expectations at the World Cup. Even if the scheduling of Geiger for this game wasn’t an intentional attempt at foul play, FIFA didn’t do much to silence sceptics like Falcao and Foul Play-by-Play.
Kam Chancellor has announced his retirement after eight seasons as safety for the late Legion of Boom. His announcement doesn’t qualify as an official retirement, though, because he isn’t medically cleared to play and is retiring as a result.
That means the Seahawks will be required to pay Chancellor the $6.8 million he’s owed this season because he was on the roster after Feb. 10. Chancellor is also due the $5.2 million guaranteed next season, NFL.com’s Ian Rapoport explains.
I think this is money Chancellor has already earned simply by sacrificing his body to play previous seasons, but some people might be up in arms over the fact Chancellor is being paid not to work, even if they qualify for workers’ compensation when they’re injured on the job.
The Super Bowl champion Philadelphia Eagles will likely be without starting linebacker Nigel Bradham for their opening game of the 2018 NFL season against the Atlanta Falcons. Bradham, 28, just signed a five-year, $40 million extension with the Eagles.
A one-game suspension could be coming for Bradham as a result of a 2016 alleged assault at a hotel in south Florida. Bradham turned himself in and was charged with aggravated battery, but he avoided jail time. Ray Rice was only suspended two games for his third-degree aggravated assault, so do you think the NFL gave Bradham a break because of how he handled the allegation or because we don’t have a video of the alleged assault, which Bradham said has been resolved legally?
Our dishonorable mention this week is New York Yankees outfielder Brett Gardner, who told Newsday he wasn’t happy about being fined “thousands of dollars” for taking too long to get into the batter’s box. Gardner complained about pitchers throwing to bases to waste time while he takes “three seconds too long to get in the box.” Gardner isn’t the first or only player fined for pace of play violations. Adam Jones told MLB Network Radio he was fined $50,000 last year for violating the rules. I don’t think Gardner has good argument here because throw-overs are necessary, legal in-game action, while Gardner tightening his batting gloves or adjusting his nut cup is simply inaction.
Bronze Balls: Speaking of nuts, owner of the bronzest balls this week is New England Patriots receiver Julian Edelman for appealing his four-game, performance-enhancing drug suspension and losing.
Silver Syringe: Winner of the silver syringe this week is Indianapolis Colts running back Robert Turbin, who is facing a four-game suspension for performance-enhancing drug use, which he confirmed on Twitter.
Two-bit Cheat of the Week: And our two-bit cheat of the week is my boy, Grayson Allen, who got tangled up with the Atlanta Hawks’ Trae Young in the final Summer League game for the Utah Jazz. A more apt description of the incident might be that Allen tied up Young, with his arms draped over Young’s shoulders in what was at least an intentional foul (VIDEO). Allen received a personal foul and then technicals were given to both players for the foul play after Allen’s foul play.I like this attitude of Allen’s showing up early in his NBA career because he can make up for some of his defensive inability by flirting with the boundaries of foul play. It’s also fun to watch given his history.
On July 8th, 1902, player/manager John McGraw earned his release from the Baltimore Orioles after being suspended indefinitely on June 29th because he and his players incessantly argued with umpires even after McGraw told Johnson he’d put an end to it. McGraw proceeded to protest calls by umpire Jack Sheridan by sitting down in the batter’s box until he was expelled, and continued to encourage his players to berate umpires.
Upon his release, McGraw organized the purchase of 201 shares of Orioles stock with John Brush and Andrew Freedman from Orioles president John J. Mahon for majority ownership of the franchise so they could ship players to the Cincinnati Reds or New York Giants franchises Brush and Freedman also owned. Knowing that Johnson intended to move the Orioles to New York and the American League after the season, McGraw secured the rights of four players to play for the Giants, and Brush claimed three more for the Reds, leaving the Orioles with just five players.
The Orioles had to forfeit a game to the St. Louis Browns on July 17 and borrowed players from other teams to complete their schedule. Johnson announced the intended move of the Orioles to New York and the American League, and Brush purchased the Giants from Freedman. And in the second year of its existence, the World Series was cancelled because McGraw refused to play the American League due to his feud with Johnson. He agreed to play the following season, winning the 1905 World Series. John McGraw went on to win two more World Series for the Giants in 1921 and 1922. These McGraw-inspired antics are what I miss most in this era of replay.
A few months ago I wrote about how sports fans can save more than 50 percent on their cable and internet bills without missing their favorite teams’ games. Much of the savings came in the form of cutting cable and switching to online streaming services like MLB.TV and NHL.TV -- both operated by BAMTech.
Well, Disney is now the majority owner of BAMTech. So instead of enticing cable-cutting sports fans to re-enter the cable fray, ESPN will rely upon a stand-alone streaming service it intends to launch early in 2018.
The move to streaming is a big one for the “worldwide leader in sports,” as ESPN has long depended on cable subscribers paying $9 per month for its four channels -- ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU and the SEC Network. But the network has lost 10 million subscribers to cable-cutting since 2010. That’s over $1 billion in lost revenue, which resulted in the termination of around 100 online journalists and television personalities.
ESPN executives hope to maximize revenue by meeting the needs of both cable-subscribing and cable-cutting sports fans, and apparently they know who’s who.
ESPN’s acquisition of majority ownership in BAMTech gives them access to the cable-cutting sports fans it’s lost, who are generally fans of sports not often televised nationally. ESPN will now get 75 percent of revenues from MLB.TV, NHL.TV and MLS Live, the Major League Soccer streaming service.
Also available via the ESPN streaming service will be the typical collegiate games available on the WatchESPN app, but not those televised on cable channels. Grand Slam tennis matches will also be streaming live.
Monday Night Football will still require a cable subscription, though. But if you live in the market of your favorite NFL team, a $25 digital antenna will get you most of their games in HD. Watching the NBA will also require either a cable subscription or NBA League Pass.
So what does this all mean for cable-cutting sports fans? Nothing really. It just means the majority of their money is going to ESPN rather than BAMTech. And while ESPN could roll MLB.TV, NHL.TV and MLS Live into its one streaming service and require customers to pay for all three streaming services, that’s likely a recipe to lose even more subscribers.
The real potential of the streaming services to ESPN is the advertising potential. If you’ve ever watched a game on MLB.TV, NHL.TV or MLS Live, you’re likely familiar with the “Commercial break is in progress” screen. This screen will likely appear less and less given Disney’s fat Rolodex of advertisers.
So not only will ESPN take back some of the 10 million cable-cutting sports fans it’s lost since 2010 via streaming services, it will also profit from filling the plethora of commercial breaks that have gone unfilled since the advent of sports streaming services. It should be a big win for Disney, and shouldn’t cost cable-cutting sports fans a penny more -- unless they see something advertised they just have to have.
If you like this, you might like these GCN talk radio shows: Erskine Overnight, Home Talk, The Josh Tolley Show, The Tom Chenault Show, The Tech Night Owl, The Dr. Katherine Albrecht Show, Free Talk Live, View From The Couch
Phil Lord and Chris Miller, the duo directors behind The Lego Movie and the Jump Street film (revival) have been removed from production of the Untitled Star Wars Han Solo film after seventeen weeks of principle photography. Seventeen weeks! With only five weeks left of shooting, production shut down until replacement director, Ron Howard, stepped in to pick up the pieces.
According to the Hollywood Reporter:
“Several sources close to the movie and others close to the directors tell EW that ever since filming began back in February, Lord and Miller, who are known primarily for wry, self-referential comedies like 21 Jump Street and the pilot episodes for Brooklyn Nine-Nine and Last Man on Earth, began steering the Han Solo movie more into the genre of laughs than space fantasy.
According to some sources, the split was a subtle one that became magnified over time: Lucasfilm and producer Kennedy believed Lord and Miller were hired to add a comedic touch; Lord and Miller believed they were hired to make a comedy.”
Okay. Fair enough. I see the potential for disaster there. Another issue was that Lord and Miller have been known to allow significant improvisation on the set of their previous films. Which is precisely what they did on this set, too! Super screenwriter and Star Wars royalty Lawrence Kasdan (writer - Empire Strikes Back, Return of the Jedi, The Force Awakens and the Untitled Han Solo Film), was none too pleased at the dailies coming back from set. The entire story line, it seemed, had been significantly derailed, due to the improvisational direction that Lord and Miller had taken.
Writer / Executive Producer Kasdan stepped in with a, “Stick to the script” note. A note, apparently, the directors thought was just a suggestion. Lord and Miller ignored the note. Finally, Kathleen Kennedy, president of Lucasfilm Ltd., fired Lord and Miller after seventeen weeks of filming. Seventeen weeks!
You keep saying “seventeen weeks” as if that’s significant. What’s up with that?
It is significant! Directors aren’t fired after seventeen weeks. Ever! If they’re fired at all, they’re fired after a week or two. Or three or four. It doesn’t take seventeen weeks to figure out that the movie isn’t working! That can’t be the only reason for the removal of the directors after about 80 percent of principle photography.
Seems suspicious. Or, as Bill and Ted would say, “Strange things are afoot at the Circle-K!”
Strange things indeed. The only other (potential) negative rumor coming out of the Han Solo film camp was that lead actor, Alden Ehrenreich (young Han Solo), didn’t have the acting chops they at first thought. According to the popular online movie news source The Wrap:
"Matters were coming to a head in May as the production moved from London to the Canary Islands. Lucasfilm replaced editor Chris Dickens (Macbeth) with Oscar-winner Pietro Scalia, a veteran of Ridley Scott films including Alien: Covenant and The Martian. And, not entirely satisfied with the performance that the directors were eliciting from Rules Don't Apply star Alden Ehrenreich, Lucasfilm decided to bring in an acting coach. Lord and Miller suggested writer-director Maggie Kiley, who worked with them on 21 Jump Street."
As has been pointed out by many sources, adding an acting coach is not unusual. But acting coaches are usually on set from day one and/or brought on by the actor themselves. Some actors have worked with the same acting coach for years, or decades, and work with them on set. But it’s certainly unusual to bring an acting coach in so late into production.
So, while it appears there were difficulties behind the scenes, even that is nothing new. If you’ve ever worked on set you know that making movies is controlled chaos, at best. There are no mystical properties that a director possesses. Directing is paperwork, organization, collaboration and making choices. In fact, the only solo choice a director adds to the production without collaboration from anyone else is tone. The tone of movie is decided by the director. Unless, of course, you work for Disney. Or Lucasfilm Ltd. In which case they will fire your ass if you change the tone of their films. Just sayin.
And now we have little Ronnie Howard piloting the fate of young Han Solo. How much of the original footage Howard will be able to use is unknown. It would probably be too expensive to reshoot the majority of the film. Besides, these tent pole flagship movies have marketed release dates to keep! It’s true that all huge films like this have time and money budgeted for the inevitable reshoots but this situation is unprecedented.
Unlike the Zack Snyder/Joss Whedon switch up on the Justice League film, Whedon is going in to finish up the film and do his best to match the style and tone of Snyder (because the film was ninety percent done). Whedon was not hired to rethink the entire movie and significantly restructure the picture.
Ron Howard will have to make due with a lot of footage that Lord and Miller produced, and he probably won’t get any extended amount of time to complete the picture. It should make for an interesting challenge. And hopefully, an interesting movie.
So, I'm sorry, Mr. Howard, but you will probably have to make due with what time is left for production. But in Hollywood, much as on Broadway, as they say -- the show must go on.
NOTE: This story is developing and will be updated with new information as it becomes available.