Guardians of the Galaxy Guardians of the Galaxy: General Discussion & Speculation Thread - Part 5

[KillerCarlson]

The Wolverine underperformed because it was already hobbled by a bad reputation from XMOW. Audiences *did* come out to see Logan's first solo movie, and they got burned; the general public just didn't want to see that again. And from a fanboy perspective, the scope of The Wolverine just wasn't attractive --- it was designed to be a smaller, more personal film, and the villains came from Marvel's D-list.

GOTG has no reputation or preconceptions from audiences to deal with at all. It's going to be a completely unknown quality to everyone. Mix in high-level marquee actors and a high-concept, wide-open space opera thrill ride that doesn't even begin to take itself too seriously, and it's gonna be like Star Wars opening in 1977 all over again.

The only Marvel movie I'm concerned about underperforming is Ant-Man. Joss Whedon and Edgar Wright have completely pulled the rug out from under the mythos on Hank and Janet and isolated a core Avenger into an iffy solo movie that has now become completely redundant. I don't see any reason to waste money on making that movie now.

If GOTG is 1977 star wars all over again i think even marvel and disney would be surprised. Making that kind of remark before even having a trailer is just silly.

Secondly, You are correct it has no reputation. That's entirely my point. Disney is a marketing powerhouse. And if they are smart they will figure out a way to tie this into the MCU. Not just rely on a Marvel logo. More importantly it has to be know that it is the final film before the avengers 2.

Marvel doesn't need a DC Green Lantern nightmare. People on here could make the same argument you made about Ant-man about GOTG.

Personally, i think both of them will be hits. I just have faith that Disney will make damn sure to market them correctly, because both films are going to need it. IMO.

 

[terry78]

August 1 isn't really an "August film" per se. I still consider the first week of August to be within the blockbuster realm.

 

[Mr. Dent]

The only Marvel movie I'm concerned about underperforming is Ant-Man. Joss Whedon and Edgar Wright have completely pulled the rug out from under the mythos on Hank and Janet and isolated a core Avenger into an iffy solo movie that has now become completely redundant. I don't see any reason to waste money on making that movie now.

You can't say the movie is redundant when we know next to nothing about it. Not to mention Ultron was never going to be a villain of an Ant-Man film because Ant-Man alone can't take out Ultron, Ultron has always been an Avengers villain.

The fact the Ant-Man movie has two protagonists and is a "high concept spy heist" about a guy who can shrink already makes it more unique in itself.

 

[Moridin]

I think the biggest concern is the release date. Can't think of many high earning August films, but I haven't really checked.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/monthly/

The Bourne Ultimatum - US $227m / WW $442m
Rise of the Planet of the Apes - US $ 176m / WW $481m
Signs - US $227m / WW $408m
Rush Hour 2 - US $226m / WW $347m
The Sixth Sense - US $293m /WW $672
G.I. Joe:The Rise of Cobra - US $150m / $302m

From the past 14 years, all first week in August. I think GotG is looking at somewhere between $150-200m US & $400-500m WW.

GOTG has no reputation or preconceptions from audiences to deal with at all. It's going to be a completely unknown quality to everyone. Mix in high-level marquee actors and a high-concept, wide-open space opera thrill ride that doesn't even begin to take itself too seriously, and it's gonna be like Star Wars opening in 1977 all over again.

The only Marvel movie I'm concerned about underperforming is Ant-Man. Joss Whedon and Edgar Wright have completely pulled the rug out from under the mythos on Hank and Janet and isolated a core Avenger into an iffy solo movie that has now become completely redundant. I don't see any reason to waste money on making that movie now.

Ant Man's mythos is as unknown to the GA as GotG's is. They don't care how Marvel adapt it.

And please, "iffy" film? Wright is one of the sharpest filmmakers out there right now.

I don't see how it's redundant when Ultron never figured into Wright's plans.

Totally agree about Ant-Man. Marvel should scrap that one and spend the money on a Black Panther movie instead. They'll probably have to push it back into 2016 anyway because the next Bond movie has staked out the same date.

They'll probably moved it forwad or back a week or two, no need at all to push it into 2016, especially as they're already making plans for 2 2016 films.

 

[Rock Sexton]

Ehh... Sexton and Tee both raise good points. It just seems weird to me that Del Toro would be amazing as Thanos, yet he's cast as a side antagonist/anti-hero even though be bears absolutely no resemblance to the comic counterpart. I wouldn't be surprised if it was a smokescreen.

I mean, we all know Marvel aren't against doing that sorta thing...

Bares no resemblance? Whaaaaaaa.....?

It's not smokescreen. Some of you guys push too hard with that agenda all that time. He wouldn't have even been at the SDCC panel if it were the case.

 

[Rock Sexton]

Oh, so having Marvel come up on the poster and in the credits is all that is needed? You must have missed Ghost Rider.

The name "Marvel" doesn't automatically mean people will flock to it. Nor does it mean it's part of the MCU film universe that we all elude to. The best thing Thor and Cap had going for it were the teases from previous films. They were set up, bringing the audience back for more with a different superhero.

The average movie go'er has no idea what Guardians of The Galaxy is. Which is why its important to distinguish it most likely with a post credits scene in either Thor or Cap.

You mean the Ghost Rider from some other film studio and the one that took place before The Avengers and the cache the actual Marvel studios built for itself? Besides, comparing a demonic anti-villain to a spacey odyssey is not even remotely accurate.

Where in the last 3 years or so did Marvel suddenly become mindless gnats who don't know how to market their product?

 

[Starhawk]

It's a mohawk in the movie. If you look at the design of it it's clear they're not going to CGI in a giant fin. I like his space biker/pirate look, it fits the movie and the MCU. I figured they weren't going to do the giant fin and naked hunter clothes thing.

That looks like a marker they will use to figure out where to put the fin in the movie. Its either that or he lost his fin in battle. If you look at the shots closely it looks solid as opposed to what hair would look like.

My theory on Yondu:
He crash lands on a planet having come back from the future (they dont even need to show the future...it could be simply mentioned). To me this explains why he is an older Yondu. Instead of using captain america as a symbol the guardians in the future uses Star-Lord as a symbol so in a way the future guardians are named after the present day guardians....this is why they have star-lord's symbol (the future guardians in the comics have a star with red/blue/white symboled after captain america).

however star-lord and the present day team name themselves after the guardians of the galaxy of the future...so really its a chicken and the egg thing...which came first?

 

[Starhawk]

Also, the photos where it looked like Rooker was whistling are a neat call-back to Yondu's abilities in the comics. He used a bow and arrow but could direct his arrows' flight by whistling. Sort of whistle-guided missiles. Hawkeye could learn a trick or two from him.

technically its a combination of his whistling and the type of metal used for the arrows (that was actually explained in his 1st appearance).
i don't remember which photo but you can see a bow in one of the pictures that has leaked.

 

[Mulholland-Jr]

I think the biggest concern is the release date. Can't think of many high earning August films, but I haven't really checked.

Is there even any competition in August?

 

[Rock Sexton]

That looks like a marker they will use to figure out where to put the fin in the movie. Its either that or he lost his fin in battle. If you look at the shots closely it looks solid as opposed to what hair would look like.

My theory on Yondu:
He crash lands on a planet having come back from the future (they dont even need to show the future...it could be simply mentioned). To me this explains why he is an older Yondu. Instead of using captain america as a symbol the guardians in the future uses Star-Lord as a symbol so in a way the future guardians are named after the present day guardians....this is why they have star-lord's symbol (the future guardians in the comics have a star with red/blue/white symboled after captain america).

however star-lord and the present day team name themselves after the guardians of the galaxy of the future...so really its a chicken and the egg thing...which came first?

There is no time travel in this. Marvel already made that clear.

 

[Mr. Dent]

I don't get why people are so fixated on the fin. It's clearly not going to be a fin and they're going for a biker/pirate look. It works and looks fine.

 

[KillerCarlson]

You mean the Ghost Rider from some other film studio and the one that took place before The Avengers and the cache the actual Marvel studios built for itself? Besides, comparing a demonic anti-villain to a spacey odyssey is not even remotely accurate.

Where in the last 3 years or so did Marvel suddenly become mindless gnats who don't know how to market their product?

REREAD what i wrote and what i responded to.

 

[TeeKay]

Is there even any competition in August?

The new teenage mutant ninja turtles movie and 50 shades of grey as far as i know...

 

[Mr. Dent]

50 Shades of Grey isn't competition. I don't know whether to worry or laugh about TMNT.

 

[Mr. Dent]

I just thought of a cool idea. What if in every Guardians movie, assuming it gets sequels, they use one of the old Guardians? They're using Yondu in this film, so in a sequel they would use Vance Astro. And then in a third film Charlie 27. And etc etc.

 

[mkilban2]

I'll totally see tmnt before gotg. Maybe just make a day out of it and catch both because I'm pumped for both but basically avoiding all tmnt spoilery stuff. I think both will do well but tmnt will easily outgross gotg. Can't wait for these next 3 phase 2 movies and of course avengers2

 

[Rock Sexton]

REREAD what i wrote and what i responded to.

I have no need.

Have fun worrying!

 

[Mr. Dent]

I'll totally see tmnt before gotg. Maybe just make a day out of it and catch both because I'm pumped for both but basically avoiding all tmnt spoilery stuff. I think both will do well but tmnt will easily outgross gotg. Can't wait for these next 3 phase 2 movies and of course avengers2

Easily outgrossing is going way too far. The last high grossing TMNT movie was back in 1990 and the most recent one was a $35m budget $95m grossing product. That movie is not going to be a blockbuster.

 

[jaqua99]

Easily outgrossing is going way too far. The last high grossing TMNT movie was back in 1990 and the most recent one was a $35m budget $95m grossing product. That movie is not going to be a blockbuster.

Legit, I would think it would be close, maybe with gotg surpassing.

 

[KillerCarlson]

I have no need.

Have fun worrying!

I dont worry about people who are unable to read the context of a message board post.

 

[Mr. Dent]

I think Guardians will make $500m+, and I definitely don't see TMNT getting anywhere near that, mostly because I think it's going to be a smaller budget film.

 

[Quasimod0]

Dent your signature with the list of marvel and dc films and shows is making me sad. lol. Look at all that marvel and only 3 upcoming dc projects. Two of which are shows

 

[Mr. Dent]

In a way you could look at my sig as an indirect dig at DC.

It is very shameful.

 

[cherokeesam]

Edgar Wright wants to make the movie. You let Edgar Wright make the movie because the chances of ending up with the best MCU film to date is very, very high. Just like how you let Joss make an Ultron film when he wants to make an Ultron film, Hank or no Hank.

Edgar Wright's latest movie debuted at #4 on the charts, and grossed all of $9 million in its opening weekend. The biggest "blockbuster" he ever put out was Scott Pilgrim, at $47 million worldwide total.

Add to that the fact that he's making a movie about a superhero nobody cares about and who the general public continuously mocks and derides; and on the fanboy end of it add to that the fact that the mythology has been completely rewritten to make Hank Pym a non-Avenger from days gone by, Scott Lang a non-Avenger Ant-Man from the present, Janet Van Dyne non-existent, and the Ultron connection utterly severed. Who is this movie for? The handful of Edgar Wright cultists out there? The world's biggest Scott Lang fan? People who really like ants?

If GOTG is 1977 star wars all over again i think even marvel and disney would be surprised. Making that kind of remark before even having a trailer is just silly.

Secondly, You are correct it has no reputation. That's entirely my point. Disney is a marketing powerhouse. And if they are smart they will figure out a way to tie this into the MCU. Not just rely on a Marvel logo. More importantly it has to be know that it is the final film before the avengers 2.

Marvel doesn't need a DC Green Lantern nightmare. People on here could make the same argument you made about Ant-man about GOTG.

Personally, i think both of them will be hits. I just have faith that Disney will make damn sure to market them correctly, because both films are going to need it. IMO.

I certainly wasn't implying that GOTG is likely to generate Star Wars-type revenue; only the fact that it's a return to feel-good, fun and funny space opera, which is the exact opposite of what sci-fi movies have become in recent decades (including the whole Star Wars saga). That's another reason why it won't duplicate GL's disaster....GL took itself way too seriously, and couldn't decide whether it wanted to be entertaining space opera (the Corps) or Earth-based schlock psychodrama (the Hammonds and Amanda Waller). GOTG has no doubt that it prefers to be space opera.

 

[Crimson King]

Edgar Wright's latest movie debuted at #4 on the charts, and grossed all of $9 million in its opening weekend. The biggest "blockbuster" he ever put out was Scott Pilgrim, at $47 million worldwide total.

Add to that the fact that he's making a movie about a superhero nobody cares about and who the general public continuously mocks and derides; and on the fanboy end of it add to that the fact that the mythology has been completely rewritten to make Hank Pym a non-Avenger from days gone by, Scott Lang a non-Avenger Ant-Man from the present, Janet Van Dyne non-existent, and the Ultron connection utterly severed. Who is this movie for? The handful of Edgar Wright cultists out there? The world's biggest Scott Lang fan? People who really like ants?

I admit that Wright's track record with disappointing box office results has me slightly worried. Couple that with the fact that I have a love/meh relationship with the stuff he's done and there's some cause for concern on my part.

That being said, I'm not worried that Pym is going to suffer. It's not like he was the most popular character to start with, so there's some freedom to reinvent aspects of his background to help give him new life. If anything, the stuff we're hearing should give you hope that he has a chance to explode in popularity.