ForceMel wrote:TKTB51 wrote:I'm 56, probably an older and grumpier old man than you, and ... it was ... ok.
It was not a good movie, it was the best of the three in the "sequel trilogy". Solo was better, Rogue One was even better than that.
It all had to be forced, there were so many plot threads hanging around, you could have built a spider web for Hagrid's spider from them.
You have me by less than a year. I do agree though. It was the best of the three. I actually really liked the Solo movie, even though I thought the portrayal of Solo was quite weak... of course, how do you follow Harrison Ford, the original bad ass. I didn't much care for Rogue One, but found the ending interesting.
If looked at the chronological point of view, then RO's story is more better and explanatory and explains how rebels got the Death Star plans and what sacrifices they had to make and also makes it clear that Organa wanted Kenobi to join the rebels.
Solo's story explains how Han made his way from being a Imperial Pilot to a smuggler and how he met chewie.
The progression that these movies make helps in explaining how certain characters made up to the OT.