Guardians of the Galaxy What you didn't like about Guardians of the Galaxy - Flaws/Critiques

[piccolo]

I stand by my conviction that the opening scene is exploitative. It is not really related to the overall story in any tangible way, and it is not even really related to Quill's adult character, as in the immediate scene afterwards, he jarringly kind of abuses CGI animals, kills a couple of guys, and is shown to treat women as disposable sex objects. It seemed the whole Quill's mom died - thingy was simply meant to excuse almost anything Quill did as an adult. In another words, it was exploitative, bad screenwriting.

I don't judge these movies as moral obligations to "feel" something or even to have "fun". These movies and their narratives have to earn it, not the other way around. Incidentally, despite being "serious" movies, I felt more and had more fun with TWS and DoFP.

In terms of the movie as a whole, I thought the entire thing was bad screenwriting and the opening scene was one of the less egregious examples. Though I understand your point.

What it may come down to is people are a sucker for a cancer/mom/kid scene....or at least I am. At times sadness can override questionable execution, so if it was meant to manipulate than it did its job.

That and Rocket are the only two things i'm not with you 100% on. Everything else...sigh.

 

[Marathon]

In terms of the movie as a whole, I thought the entire thing was bad screenwriting and the opening scene was one of the less egregious examples. Though I understand your point.

What it may come down to is people are a sucker for a cancer/mom/kid scene....or at least I am. At times sadness can override questionable execution, so if it was meant to manipulate than it did its job.

Yeah, I don't deny that scene's efficacy in itself, but that scene's function in the overall narrative remains a mystery to me.

Having said that, I think almost all of the "emotional" moments in the film relied on the audience's "muscle memory" that appreciates the power of the scene itself without the scene either being really earned by the narrative, only "earned" through exposition or even downright making no sense.

Of these moments, Groot's self-sacrifice was a whole bundle of nonsense to me. Why is the Kree warship falling all of a sudden? Why is nobody attempting to get to the ship's control center? How is being surrounded by twigs - however dense they might be - going to protect you from an impact? And why can't Groot then regenerate from any of the remaining twigs? It's probably the convenient, arbitrary threshold of remaining Groot-material that allows regeneration or doesn't, according to the needs of the plot, or even a scene in question.

And why was Groot made almost a doofus in this film? He's supposed to be a highly intelligent person, not an idiot ball - carrier for random joke scenes.

 

[Sexy Magician]

I stand by my conviction that the opening scene is exploitative. It is not really related to the overall story in any tangible way, and it is not even really related to Quill's adult character, as in the immediate scene afterwards, he jarringly kind of abuses CGI animals, kills a couple of guys, and is shown to treat women as disposable sex objects. It seemed the whole Quill's mom died - thingy was simply meant to excuse almost anything Quill did as an adult. In another words, it was exploitative, bad screenwriting.

I don't judge these movies as moral obligations to "feel" something or even to have "fun". These movies and their narratives have to earn it, not the other way around. Incidentally, despite being "serious" movies, I felt more and had more fun with TWS and DoFP.

This movie is based on existing source material, in the comics Peters mum gets killed when he is 11, it wasn't cancer, but her death when he is a kid is simply part of his origin, although you may not have liked it, it is his story, it's like saying Uncle Bens death isn't integral to Spider-Man, Uncle Bens death when Peter Parker was a teen made him the hero he is, Peter Quills mothers death when he is still a young boy and him subsequently growing up in space with no parents and not many role models in The Ravagers, is what makes him the way he is, a bit of a jerk, if you aske me it was necessary.

 

[piccolo]

I've heard bullish comparisons to Star Wars. I'd say they are bull****, haha. If anything, flicks like GotG make me realize Star Wars (the 1977 original, that is) is very underrated in many aspects. GotG has none of the careful and elegant handling of exposition or coherent world-building which made and still makes the original Star Wars so remarkable.

And to add another grumble about GotG's world-building... take Quill's ship: it has a sort of plasticky exterior sheen, seemingly primitive rusty innards but with extremely high-tech, "clinical sci-fi" looking screens and whatnot. It is again interestingly symbolic of not only this movie's but most modern corporate blockbusters' problems: unsure of what to focus on, throw a bit of everything in there so that something might stick.

GotG felt like the cliffs notes of Star Wars.

Marvel has set the bar extremely high for themselves with films like Winter Soldier and Iron Man, that are written with such layer, wit and intelligence on top of amazing action. You can't tell 80 million people that they're wrong about how they feel after a movie, so I give credit to Gunn for creating an entertainment vehicle that made so many people happy. I'm actually glad it did so well, and I didn't hate the movie as much as was extremely disappointed by it.

But i'm a little concerned that the reception to this film, which seems to be more enthusiastically applauded in media than even Winter Soldier was (perhaps because it was more an underdog Marvel film), in spite of its script deficiencies is going to encourage the same kind of creative process from the same creative team in the future. I'm not sure Gunn is hearing anything that would inspire him to improve his content and i'm worried we'll get the same soul-less, witless space porn the next time around.

 

[Sexy Magician]

Of these moments, Groot's self-sacrifice was a whole bundle of nonsense to me. Why is the Kree warship falling all of a sudden? Why is nobody attempting to get to the ship's control center? How is being surrounded by twigs - however dense they might be - going to protect you from an impact? And why can't Groot then regenerate from any of the remaining twigs? It's probably the convenient, arbitrary threshold of remaining Groot-material that allows regeneration or doesn't, according to the needs of the plot, or even a scene in question.

Trying to find the realism in a movie featuring a talking, gun toting raccoon and a walking, talking tree, Wowzers.

 

[StarLord]

This movie was definitely not ''soul-less''. That's absolute nonsense.

People keep pandering for ''dark and gritty'' comic book movies, complain when it's too dark and gritty or because they want something light and fun and then in return complain that it wasn't serious enough. It baffles me.

This was pure joyous fun with some great heart felt moments and some awesome humor. Anyone who didn't feel anything during this movie is a heartless bastard.

The trailers for this movie were pretty insightful to what it was going to be about, and if you didn't get that then I don't know what you were expecting.

 

[Sexy Magician]

This movie was definitely not ''soul-less''. That's absolute nonsense.

People keep pandering for ''dark and gritty'' comic book movies, complain when it's too dark and gritty or because they want something light and fun and then in return complain that it wasn't serious enough. It baffles me.

This was pure joyous fun with some great heart felt moments and some awesome humor. Anyone who didn't feel anything during this movie is a heartless bastard.

The trailers for this movie were pretty insightful to what it was going to be about, and if you didn't get that then I don't know what you were expecting.

This

 

[Colossal Spoons]

And to add another grumble about GotG's world-building... take Quill's ship: it has a sort of plasticky exterior sheen, seemingly primitive rusty innards but with extremely high-tech, "clinical sci-fi" looking screens and whatnot. It is again interestingly symbolic of not only this movie's but most modern corporate blockbusters' problems: unsure of what to focus on, throw a bit of everything in there so that something might stick.

Sir! You've gone too far. We can sit here all day and facepalm at Batista struggling to string sentences together or Yondu accidentally calling Star-Lord "Rick Grimes"; but the Milano is a work of art and a galactic treasure who's beauty is only surpassed by the heavenly blessed beauty it was named after.

Take it back

 

[The Endless]

The Milano is fantastically designed i think. It's designed to be colourful and high tech, but it's visibly "worn in" and of course, dirty.

Anyone who says this film is soulless has no soul to begin with, quite frankly.

 

[marcvader]

I have read the reasonable critiques written in this thread and for the most part they have been perfectly understandable and as i said reasonable but last page or two, my gods all i want to do is and lay in bed in the fetal position.

 

[The Endless]

Yea same here. Criticizing the logic of Groot's sacrifice and what not... I mean really?

And the opening scene is done as a cold opening for a reason. It's a representation of movie goers "escaping" from mundane, maybe even depressing lives into cinema. Quill is basically "escaping" into the Marvel Universe. It is no coincidence that the Marvel Studios logo pops up as he's getting abducted.

In story, Quill has never grown up or matured, and he has never gotten over the fact that he was afraid to take his mothers hand on the death bed. The scene at the end is cathartic in that he realizes he doesn't have to be alone out in space, he can have a new family. That he can finally let go of that regret. Maybe the film should have portrayed him as a moping sad sack to get the point across though...

I'm curious what Marathon thinks of Raiders of the Lost Ark and it's fantastical mcguffin. Considering the world Raiders immerses us in is much more similar to ours, the Ark is surely breaking the logic of the films universe?

 

[piccolo]

This movie was definitely not ''soul-less''. That's absolute nonsense.

People keep pandering for ''dark and gritty'' comic book movies, complain when it's too dark and gritty or because they want something light and fun and then in return complain that it wasn't serious enough. It baffles me.

Iron Man and Avengers weren't dark and gritty at all and they were both great movies. The humor wasn't the problem with Guardians.

This was pure joyous fun with some great heart felt moments and some awesome humor. Anyone who didn't feel anything during this movie is a heartless bastard.

haha I felt a lot of things. Occasional laughter but mostly profound, eye-rolling disappointment.

But i'm actually glad everyone enjoyed it, wins for Marvel are wins for everyone. I can understand why people would love it even if I didn't. You know, as a heartless bastard.

 

[ctsketch]

Soooo the movie bad because rocket and Quill are a**holes to people? Ummmm isn't the point of this movie to show a bunch of a**holes finally giving a crap about something important for the greater good?

 

[The Endless]

Yes but kicking CGI rats makes Quill an *******. It's the equivalent of forcing dogs to fight.

 

[DA_Champion]

If the cybernetic eye and cybernetic leg joke had been in a Michael Bay the usual suspects would be saying it's mean-spirited and gross.

I laughed at the plastic leg and plastic eye joke, but they're just as bad as shooting the space vagina in TF4, actually they're worse.

 

[The Endless]

Not really. This film deliberately portrays it's protagonists as morally grey *******s. Rocket in particular is damaged goods.

The Autobots are meant to be righteous, wholey altruistic good guys. Yet the likes of Hound border on sociopathic blood thirsty lunatics.

And Quill paid the guy 30k credits for his leg so all is well and good in the universe.

 

[marcvader]

Yes but kicking CGI rats makes Quill an *******. It's the equivalent of forcing dogs to fight.

Joke right? Please?

 

[The Endless]

Joke right? Please?

No it's not a joke. This film is promoting animal cruelty by having it's protagonist be cruel to CGI alien creatures. He is morally reprehensible and is a bad example for children.

 

[marcvader]

lol, I've had it with this thread.

 

[The Endless]

lol i'm clearly joking. The fact that you thought i was possibly being serious is an indictment on some of the posters around here (not you).

 

[Sexy Magician]

Yes but kicking CGI rats makes Quill an *******. It's the equivalent of forcing dogs to fight.

I watched an interview with Chris Pratt and they mentioned him kicking them little rat things, then the interviewer brilliantly pointed out that Luke Skywalker used to shoot womp rats, does this make Luke a *********?

 

[The Endless]

I watched an interview with Chris Pratt and they mentioned him kicking them little rat things, then the interviewer brilliantly pointed out that Luke Skywalker used to shoot womp rats, does this make Luke a *********?

Yea Luke is a cold hearted bastard.

 

[Tanin]

I watched an interview with Chris Pratt and they mentioned him kicking them little rat things, then the interviewer brilliantly pointed out that Luke Skywalker used to shoot womp rats, does this make Luke a *********?

They didn't show it on screen. It never happened

 

[StarLord]

Iron Man and Avengers weren't dark and gritty at all and they were both great movies. The humor wasn't the problem.

haha I felt a lot of things. Occasional laughter but mostly profound, eye-rolling disappointment.

But i'm actually glad everyone enjoyed it, wins for Marvel are wins for everyone. I can understand why people would love it even if I didn't. You know, as a heartless bastard.

This was a great movie too, and the humor wasn't a problem either.

Not everyone enjoyed it, and that's fine by me. But these points that some are making are quite honestly baffling to me.

 

[Colossal Spoons]

I'm neutral on the topic of Groot's sacrifice. It made no sense from a logical, scientific, reasonable POV. They should have all died with flaming twigs strewn every which way. However, this is a movie that featured a talking raccoon and tree while somewhere else, a Norse God is having a drink with a green rage monster. Sooooo I'll buy it?

lol, I've had it with this thread.

Hahaha. I think we're doing a good job of voicing opposing opinions and nobody's been banned yet. This has to be a Hype record.