DominicCobb said:
B) that a lot about what we got in Solo would have been the same even if they had indeed brought it to the finish line.I don’t think that would have been the case as Ron Howard reportedly re-shot 70% of the movie and I imagine the 30% kept from L&M was probably edited quite differently that they would have envisioned.
There’s more to a film that just that. Understand that the entirety of preproduction was done by Lord/Miller. So just about the entire look of the film is L/M (cinematography, art direction, costumes, locations, much of the FX work and sequences). This also means they had a good deal of say in the development of the script (though if rumors are to be believed their improvisational straying from the script during filming was an issue). All that on top of the 30% L/M shot. So really the main thing that would have been different is the tone - of the some of the performances and editing (and staging). I personally believe this constitutes a significant difference but the truth is that a lot of people would have generally felt the same way about the film, either way.
I don’t doubt what you say about all the preproduction and so the movie would still have L&M’s “footprint” so to speak but with 70% reshot I would have to think it turned out quite differently than if L&M were allowed to complete it themselves.
I do agree though that regardless of what changed and what remains from L&M that many people would likely still feel the same way about the film.