THE OFFICIAL Marvel's GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY Thread

[gluvnast]

Just watched it. shyt was dope. Movie looked incredible in IMAX 3D.

I'm gonna address a couple of the things in this thread.

1. Is this a kid's movie?

Short answer, a mom dies from cancer in literally the first 5 minutes of the movie....so I'm gonna say "no".

Longer answer, no. It's a fun movie that never takes itself too seriously, but there was nothing overly kiddie or childish in the movie. The way dudes was talking I thought I was in for "Care Bears" or some shyt.

I went to the IMAX showing at 4pm, so the theater wasn't very full, I didn't hold a poll or anything but looking around I'd say the average age there was mid 20's. There was one family there with kids.

As far as the "lego ads!" argument, the ads before my movie was some new phone by LG, XBOX1, and a bunch of new dramas starting this fall. So we need to toss that argument out the window.

2. Is this the new "Star Wars"?

Short answer, yes.

Longer answer so people don't lose their minds:

Yes, it is the new "Star Wars" to someone. Some of you cats need to come to grips with the fact that a whole generation of people was introduced to "Star Wars" via the prequels, which were mediocre at best, terrible at worst. So they don't have that kind of reverence for the "Star Wars" franchise that we do.

So yes, I'm sure to a lot of young people Peter Quill is their Han Solo. Groot is their Chewbacca. Ronan is their Darth Vader, Thanos is their Emperor Palpatine. And before someone nerds out and says "Ronan ain't shyt compared to Darth Vader!"....again, these people probably don't give enough of a fukk about Vader, or "Star Wars" in general, to even engage you in that argument. Because they have no frame of reference for how awesome Vader is supposed to be.

Random thoughts:
Zoe Saldana wasn't very good in this. Some of her line readings were just flat. I'm gonna blame that on the director moreso than her, because he approved what they shot, and she's normally a great actress.

Thanos sonning the shyt out of Ronan was but didn't make much sense story-wise, because we know who Thanos is, and how he gets down, but most people just seen the main antagonist of the movie get sonned, so it deflated him as a threat. IMO it would've made more sense for Ronan to fail, then at the end be killed by Thanos.

I have no idea how this movie is making so much money, because it's dense as fukk in terms of information presented. And I actually somewhat know the source material. I dunno how the average person ain't watching it like just straight tuning out when they're talking about The Celestials or the Infinity Stones, or any of that crazy shyt.

Fred.

Number 2 is all fine and dandy if it not for: A) it's more like this generation's FLASH GORDON for accuracy sakes and... B) the REAL generation's STAR WARS is... wait for it, the NEXT STAR WARS MOVIE coming out next year.

 

[Ethnic Vagina Finder]

I see your still butt hurt over the kids shyt

Bambi's mother was shot and died, Muffassa was kiled in a cold blood by Scar
Captain Hook was eating by an alligator

these were all kids movies. People die in kids movies all the time

if you don't know why this is a kids movie, I don't know what to say to you

2. this is not star wars in any shape or form, not financially, not culturally, nothing

peter quill is not hand solo, groot is not chewbacca, just stop

3. the acting in this movie was all like that, because thats the type of movie it is

Breh, kids movies don't have 2 hour run times. 80 to 90 minutes tops. They also don't have blatant sexual undertones. I will say that its a "family" movie because of the wide age demographic it caters to. I put in in the same category with Lord of the Rings. You trying to put it with Harry Potter.

 

[ECA]

Imply that "children movies" shouldn't be taken seriously as films, brehs.

 

[Jefe Blanco]

Number 2 is all fine and dandy if it not for: A) it's more like this generation's FLASH GORDON for accuracy sakes and... B) the REAL generation's STAR WARS is... wait for it, the NEXT STAR WARS MOVIE coming out next year.

A) is your opinion tho. To some it might be Flash Gordon, to others Star Wars

B) that remains to be seen. If the new flicks are the quality of the prequels they won't measure up

 

[Master Teacher]

Breh, kids movies don't have 2 hour run times. 80 to 90 minutes tops. They also don't have blatant sexual undertones. I will say that its a "family" movie because of the wide age demographic it caters to. I put in in the same category with Lord of the Rings. You trying to put it with Harry Potter.

WHAT? There's plenty of kids movies with sexual undertones, because their made for adults
In 2nd grade I was talking about sex, in crude pathetic manor but still, kids aren't dumb, think back to when you were a kid

all movies have 2 hour run time damn near nowadays it standard

a script is 120 pages, 1 minute per page, that's two hours

the movie is cartoony its for kids, the style of the movie is for kids, the theme, the tone, it's nothing wrong with that

it's just a fact, I don't know why people get upset with this

 

[hex]

Number 2 is all fine and dandy if it not for: A) it's more like this generation's FLASH GORDON for accuracy sakes and... B) the REAL generation's STAR WARS is... wait for it, the NEXT STAR WARS MOVIE coming out next year.

Again, all of the aforementioned movies are space operas, so we're splitting hairs to say which this is like.

And not necessarily. We have no idea how those movies will be received, this is already a success by any measure of the word. The last 3 "Star Wars" movies were a train wreck, I can't assume "Star Wars" is quality off name alone.

Fred.

 

[Ethnic Vagina Finder]

WHAT? There's plenty of kids movies with sexual undertones, because their made for adults
In 2nd grade I was talking about sex, in crude pathetic manor but still, kids aren't dumb, think back to when you were a kid

all movies have 2 hour run time damn near nowadays it standard

a script is 120 pages, 1 minute per page, that's two hours

the movie is cartoony its for kids, the style of the movie is for kids, the theme, the tone, it's nothing wrong with that

it's just a fact, I don't know why people get upset with this

All comic book movies are for kids including superman and batman no matter how serious and dark they tried to make it. What age demo are you referring to when you say kids? Teens? Pre-Teens? because they all flock to see every comic book movie unless its just bad. Green Lantern and FF2 were bad. At the end of the day movies like this, unless its rated R cater to all demographics which is why they have a hard time categorizing them and putting them in a box.

 

[Ethnic Vagina Finder]

This is just some of the things critics were saying at the beginning of the year



3.) Guardians of the Galaxy will not suck, but will be inaccessible to most of the audience:

My thoughts on this are based solely on the director and the source material. First, Guardian’s is based on a comic that was originally an acid trip in the 70s. One of the characters is named after a Beetles song. There’s no way that this movie is done in a way that is audience friendly. Secondly, director James Gunn is a director known for making films that have no idea who the actual target audience is. His two most well known projects include: being a writer on Scooby-Doo a film that is notoriously bad for having no sense of what audience to pertain to, and being the director on Super a film that in the last twenty minutes has the one relatable character rape Rainn Wilson and get shot in the eye. Does this really sound like someone who cares about making an audience friendly movie? If you said yes, then I really think you should go for a CAT scan at some point in the near future. Plus, connect that back to the already audience unfriendly source material, and there’s no way Gunn gets reined in. If Gunn had been the guy on say Iron Man 4, then there would probably have been a copious amount of studio meddling that removed most of the Gunn touches from that film that would’ve turned the audience off. Instead, for Guardians to work, Gunn has to be given essentially complete control. Guardians will be a film that I, a major film nerd, will enjoy but the rest of the world won’t (what’s that saying about shoes and feet?). That does not bode well for an empire that is about as stable as a family game night version of Jenga. One misstep brings the whole thing crashing to the ground.

 

[Master Teacher]

All comic book movies are for kids including superman and batman no matter how serious and dark they tried to make it. What age demo are you referring to when you say kids? Teens? Pre-Teens? because they all flock to see every comic book movie unless its just bad. Green Lantern and FF2 were bad. At the end of the day movies like this, unless its rated R cater to all demographics which is why they have a hard time categorizing them and putting them in a box.

You're wrong. Most comic book films are but

the dark knight was not a child's movie, my problem is people think it's some magnum opus deep movie, and it's not

Watchman was not a children' s film

neither was sin city, and even Blade, which I child could still go see but it wasn't in that vain

if you don't understand what I'm talking about, then it's because of inability to properly explain

 

[Ethnic Vagina Finder]

a script is 120 pages, 1 minute per page, that's two hours

You gotta go by the genre. Comedies and animation movies are usually 90 minutes. Children's movies on average is about 98 minutes.

 

[Master Teacher]

You gotta go by the genre. Comedies and animation movies are usually 90 minutes. Children's movies on average is about 98 minutes.

That's true in generic causes based on BUDGET, like say Kevin Hart film, and cartoons, which are for very small children

Guardians of the Galaxy are for ages 8-14 in general

Harry Potter is a children's film, doesn't fit into that mold as welll

so I like said, this movie is designed to appeal to children

 

[Ethnic Vagina Finder]

You're wrong. Most comic book films are but

the dark knight was not a child's movie, my problem is people think it's some magnum opus deep movie, and it's not

Watchman was not a children' s film

neither was sin city, and even Blade, which I child could still go see but it wasn't in that vain

if you don't understand what I'm talking about, then it's because of inability to properly explain

No matter how serious they tried to make it at the end of the day he was still just a nikka in a batman suit. A costume. It was a family friendly movie. minimum violence and no blood. How many people did batman kill. Star Lord and Groot caught more bodies than the whole Dark Knight trilogy combined. So it cant be the death and destruction because GOTG got Dark Knight beat and it's not even close. Some of the deaths were graphic.

So the only thing you can possibly harp on is the dialog. Everyone took themselves too seriously, so basically when characters have fun and are not serious all the time well it must be a kids movie.

Then you complained about the sets being too kiddy and colorful . You reaching with that one.

 

[gluvnast]

Again, all of the aforementioned movies are space operas, so we're splitting hairs to say which this is like.

And not necessarily. We have no idea how those movies will be received, this is already a success by any measure of the word. The last 3 "Star Wars" movies were a train wreck, I can't assume "Star Wars" is quality off name alone.

Fred.

Why not? Star Wars is Star Wars.... UNLESS Guardians of the Galaxy has the SAME KIND of cultural impact and influence that literally transformed film making as we may know it... it will NEVER be "this generation's" STAR WARS. They are not remotely in the same LEAGUE. Star Wars was a literal GAME CHANGER. And the fact that the franchise is still going as strong as it is IN SPITE of having weak prequels only proves that fact. You have now a NEW generation of people reintroduced to STAR WARS therefore there cannot be another alternative saying it's "this version of"....

Again, Guardians is comparable to Flash Gordon. A fun space odyssey with a banging soundtrack.

 

[Ethnic Vagina Finder]

Guardians of the Galaxy are for ages 8-14 in general

And that's best on what? Your opinion? Marvel aint gonna make a movie with an established market for a demographic that small. And the Director wanted to ensure he got a sequel so he wasn't going to do that neither. You're reaching on everything but have nothing to back it up with. A non cartoon, non animated movie with no established characters was made solely for kids? AND its put in a summer block buster category?

It doesn't add up.

 

[kp404]

No matter how serious they tried to make it at the end of the day he was still just a nikka in a batman suit. A costume. It was a family friendly movie. minimum violence and no blood. How many people did batman kill. Star Lord and Groot caught more bodies than the whole Dark Knight trilogy combined. So it cant be the death and destruction because GOTG got Dark Knight beat and it's not even close. Some of the deaths were graphic.

So the only thing you can possibly harp on is the dialog. Everyone took themselves too seriously, so basically when characters have fun and are not serious all the time well it must be a kids movie.

Then you complained about the sets being too kiddy and colorful . You reaching with that one.

This argument is ridiculous. The Dark Knight was not a movie for kids and to make that argument is trolling...just because a movie doesn't have blood doesn't mean its a children's movie...Blade, The Dark Knight, Spawn, Sin City, etc...are not kids' movies...the themes are obviously not for children and the direction/story are not for children...horrible argument breh...