Guardians of the Galaxy: General Discussion & Speculation Thread

[Darthphere]

Originally Posted by phlac

While I admit I'm not impartial ... If you question Levi's ability to do drama as well as comedy you haven't seen the last few episodes of Chuck Season 5.

You're right, we didn't because we hate Chuck. I thought we established this.

[Joeyjojo72]

Quill is a generic enough character that he could be played in various ways by various actors. Levi is faaar from my first choice, but it makes sense that they're looking at actors who can do both action and comedy.

[samsnee]

U

Originally Posted by phlac

While I admit I'm not impartial ... If you question Levi's ability to do drama as well as comedy you haven't seen the last few episodes of Chuck Season 5.

I actually have and I'm still not impressed. I wish we got Joel Edgarton.

[Sawyer]

Originally Posted by Darthphere

You're right, we didn't because we hate Chuck. I thought we established this.

Oh, Darth... silly, silly Darth...

[xeno000]

Originally Posted by Darthphere

You're right, we didn't because we hate Chuck. I thought we established this.

Co-signed.

[cherokeesam]

Levi was never among my Top 5 casting choices, but I sure as hell won't be upset if he gets the part. Again, he's got geek cred, which almost all of the others named lack; and geek cred is actually going to be important in a film like this. Even if he just turns it into "'Chuck' Goes To Space," Levi would at least be comfortable and knowledgeable about the milieu; the rest of them would be wandering around wondering what the hell is going on.

Plus, if Levi gets the nod, that increases the chances of Yvonne Strahovski getting the call for Gamora, and that's a casting decision we can all get behind here in SHH, right....?

[Chewy]

There is nothing that matters less than "geek cred" when casting these movies. What matters is casting an actor that will be able to pull off an engaging, funny yet weighty performance. That's not Levi. He doesn't have it in him to break out as a leading man in an action film anymore than Taylor Kitsch or Ryan Reynolds did. Do not want.

Originally Posted by phlac

While I admit I'm not impartial ... If you question Levi's ability to do drama as well as comedy you haven't seen the last few episodes of Chuck Season 5.

Saw them. He was still goofy Chuck, just sad goofy Chuck.

[Joeyjojo72]

Agreed on "geek cred". But I would argue that Kitsch's complete failure as a leading man was due to his utter blandness.

And to be fair to "Chucky", he hasnt really had the opportunity yet to prove that he can do "weighty". Maybe he nailed the Thor AND the GotG audition by showing a heretofore unseen "weightiness". He simply doesn't have the track record to make assumptions about his range one way or the other.

Also, it seems increasingly obvious that they will probably be going with a relatively light, tongue-in-cheek tone for this film. Maybe not as light as Chuck, but close. So a smarmier version of Quill may not be a stretch for a guy who just carried an hour long action comedy for 5 years. (Im not a dedicated fan of chuck, btw, but Ive seen enough eps to get the gist).

All that said, I see no reason why they're recycling actors. Levi would have to be amazing in the role in order to justify it.

[Darthphere]

Originally Posted by Sawyer

Oh, Darth... silly, silly Darth...

You would be a Chuck fan.

[Chewy]

Fandral is a great role for him, a goofy supporting character that fits him like a glove

[Chewy]

Originally Posted by Joeyjojo72

Also, it seems increasingly obvious that they will probably be going with a relatively light, tongue-in-cheek tone for this film.

Based on? It's seemed obvious since it was announced that it'll be tonally similar to most of their other films, playing the material straight with moments of heft but littered with fun quips and colorful characters. I sincerely doubt it'll be an out-and-out comedy, they're making this movie to establish Thanos, aka ridiculously evil mass-murdering guy

[Darthphere]

A light, tongue-in-cheek tone is the WRONG tone for a film like this. There are plenty of opportunities for quips and jokes but it shouldn't be the overall tone of the movie.

[Joeyjojo72]

The choice of director, the source material, etc.

But please note the word "relatively". It won't be "chuck" level of lightness, but it will most likely be the lightest of all the Phase 2 films. Nobody is saying it should be a comedy. Plenty of great action adventures have had pervasive tongue in cheek humor - The Indy movies for example. Chill baby.

[Chewy]

You could describe the Indy films in a lot of ways, tongue in cheek isn't really one of them.

Also when I think of James Gunn I think of dark, morbid humor. The anti-Chuck, really.

[Joeyjojo72]

I assure you it has been described as just that by critics starting with Raiders. Its one of the reasons why Spielberg gets away with a PG-PG13 rating for those incredibly violent movies. Happy to provide examples if you're not convinced.

YOU may not describe them as such, but thats you, not me or film critics or the general public. Tongue-in-cheek is perfectly apt. Sorry.

Here's a google search that should clear things up for you:

https://www.google.com/search?q=tong...w=1440&bih=791

the second page is particularly illustrative.

irregardlessly, i think an "Indy" tone would be just fine for this movie. Somewhere between Raiders and Slither.

[Chewy]

Maybe Last Crusade could be described as tongue in cheek. And Crystal Skull is basically a parody, lol. But Raiders is a really earnest, sincere adventure flick, which is why it's such an enduring classic. And I agree that it's tonally about what Guardians should aim for.

[Sawyer]

Originally Posted by Darthphere

You would be a Chuck fan.

Haters gon' hate.

[Joeyjojo72]

Originally Posted by Chewy

Maybe Last Crusade could be described as tongue in cheek. And Crystal Skull is basically a parody, lol. But Raiders is a really earnest, sincere adventure flick, which is why it's such an enduring classic. And I agree that it's tonally about what Guardians should aim for.

As I said, much of the action/humor/violence in Raiders has been (rightly) described as tongue-in-cheek. Almost all of the often brutal violence has a humorous punchline - the scene in Marion's bar has like ten such incidents.

You must have a narrow or different definition of tongue-in-cheek than the one commonly used, which is fine. Leave it at that.

Any bets on when they start to announce casting?

[Wolvieboy17]

Guardians of the Galaxy is one of the marvel series I'm least familiar with but bizarrely enough, it's the upcoming Marvel film I'm probably the most excited about. It seems like such a unique film idea, James Gunn is a great director and I think I'm just thrilled at the idea of something that whilst it takes place within Marvel universe, will feel largely new and different for me.

Also, a talking racoon won't hurt.

[Son of Coul]

Same. This feels really out there and unlike most Marvel movies, especially with Gunn at the helm. I recently rewatched Super on blu-ray and can't be more hyped for what he'll do.

I think another reason Marvel hired him is how incredibly efficient he is as a director in terms of production. In the Super commentary he talked about having personally storyboarded everything, with very specific shot lists; blasting through production very quickly and most of all cost-effectively, holding back on certain effects knowing they'd need money for songs later on. That fits right in line with Marvel's methods (and is similar to the way I like a shoot I'm on to function).

[Chewy]

His Troma training at work, lol

[KangConquers]

Do all of you really hate Chuck?

[KangConquers]

Originally Posted by Wolvieboy17

Guardians of the Galaxy is one of the marvel series I'm least familiar with but bizarrely enough, it's the upcoming Marvel film I'm probably the most excited about. It seems like such a unique film idea, James Gunn is a great director and I think I'm just thrilled at the idea of something that whilst it takes place within Marvel universe, will feel largely new and different for me.

Also, a talking racoon won't hurt.

When the GotG rumors started in 2011, I decided to see what was up. Over the course of December of last year, I read the entire Marvel cosmic canon from Thanos #1 in 2004 through the Thanos Imperative. I'm now as big of a Guardians of the Galaxy fan as I am any character in Marvel.

If any of you are unfamiliar and unsure, I suggest you read through the material. It's a hell of a ride.

[Darthphere]

Originally Posted by KangConquers

Do all of you really hate Chuck?

Hate is not a strong enough word.

[KangConquers]

Originally Posted by Darthphere

Hate is not a strong enough word.

I'm aware how you personally feel at this point. I meant the rest of the posters. I was always under the impression that it was more less universally loved by "our kind."