Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Satone
Feb 9, 2007
Good to the last drop

Ok lemme say first off for all the quibbling I'm about to do Guardians is definitely worth your time and money. The action is good, the characters are mostly pretty interesting (a talking raccoon with a bad attitude and a walking tree with a limited vocabulary? Yeah this will beat Fault in Our Stars for sure at the awards shows this year), and I'll be damned if it ain't funny (because beyond just having comic relief this movie goes out of its way for it's laughs).

Ok down to the quibbling. The film features several a-list actors, except that for at least a couple of them it makes no difference unless you look at the cast list afterwards. What am I talking about? Well generally when a film hires a fairly big name actor like Bradley Cooper to do voice work they do so because his voice is unique and recognizable. There's two problems with that here, namely that a) Bradley Cooper's voice isn't particularly recognizable b) he's not using his normal voice anyway. On the plus side, Vin Diesel only gets to say three words the entire movie, which I find hilarious (ok four words). He's also a giant tree and like Cooper is totally unrecognizable in the role. Zoey Saldana and Dave Bautista are a little more recognizable under the all heavy, heavy costume and make up. John C. Reilly and Benicio Del Toro make appearances as well though these are mostly to small and to short. Del Toro's postscript is pure. loving. gold.

And while we're talking about the actors, who the gently caress is Chris Pratt? I found myself wondering midway through the movie if Sean William Scott was trying to break his fratboy mook typecast by changing his name, because whoever this dude is he sounds EXACTLY like him. At any rate, given the comic leanings of this movie, Scott probably would have been better for the role.

The film has something of a focus on older 70's music, Marvin Gaye for example, which I didn't really feel was the best course for it. I mean it worked fine for the trailer, however, for an action movie I would have suggested they should have gone with some stuff with a little more edge than Ain't No Mountain High Enough and Cherrybomb.

Oh yeah, the obligatory Stan Lee cameo is in there, near the beginning, and its pretty easy to spot as well.

(did I mention it has space rednecks, too?)

4/5 for making me laugh my rear end off and for being lots of fun (thats rare for hollywood anymore)

Satone fucked around with this message at 11:42 on Aug 4, 2014

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

ex post facho
Oct 25, 2007




Satone posted:

And while we're talking about the actors, who the gently caress is Chris Pratt? I found myself wondering midway through the movie if Sean William Scott was trying to break his fratboy mook typecast by changing his name, because whoever this dude is he sounds EXACTLY like him. At any rate, given the comic leanings of this movie, Scott probably would have been better for the role.

4/5 for making me laugh my rear end off and for being lots of fun (thats rare for hollywood anymore)

I take it you've never watched Parks and Recreation, which is really a shame. Chris Pratt plays lovable idiot-oaf Andy Dwyer in the vein of Homer Simpson in that series, and does it really well.

I liked Guardians myself, but it was very formulaic. I know most Marvel movies follow the same script, but this movie was predictable to the end as soon as the MacGuffin was revealed. The space scenes were gorgeous, the costuming and art direction was well-realized, but it was a pretty boilerplate summer movie otherwise. Benicio del Toro and John C Reilly should have had expanded roles in particular. Dave Batista's main role in the film seemed to be getting his rear end kicked, which was pretty incongruous with his presentation as some hulking living weapon.

Overall, a good popcorn flick, decent to check out if you've got nothing else to do on a weekend, but absolutely worth waiting to rent if you're on the fence.

3/5.

Mercury_Storm
Jun 12, 2003

*chomp chomp chomp*


The computer graphics were good. That's about it.

2/5

Mercury_Storm fucked around with this message at 06:50 on Nov 11, 2017

Baron Bifford
May 24, 2006
Probation
Can't post for 2378 days!


How does Marvel Studios do it? 10 movies and all have them have been decent if not great, and all big box office hits. Guardians of the Galaxy is yet another home run.

Weaponized Autism
Mar 26, 2006

All aboard the Gravy train!

Hair Elf

This is your typical modern-day big-budget Hollywood film. Linear plotlines, trite characters, and just a massive sense of familiarly that I've seen with movies these days, especially with comic-book movies.

The good parts of the movie have to be the graphics. I saw it in 3D, and it just amazes me how much better the technology and in general graphics are getting. Also, Lee Pace gives one heck of a performance.

2.5/5

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Elentor
Dec 14, 2004



I never got how this movie got so much attention, especially compared to the other Marvel movies. They're all the same. This movie had a forgettable villain and boring ending, and in that regard it served as stylistic setup for something else, bigger than it. In that regard, GOTG succeeds. I like the cast, and the crew. But by the time I saw it (when it was released) I already longed for something more interesting for a superhero movie plot, and tried as they may the cast and CGI did not carry this movie for me.

2.5/5

  • Post
  • Reply