Guardians of the Galaxy (2014)

[Edgy MD]

Saw it last night, and am having trouble getting the smell of nerd off of me this morning.

[fimg=444:2zfju7jx]http://screenrant.com/wp-content/uploads/Guardians-of-the-Galaxy-Poster-High-Res-691x1024.jpg[/fimg:2zfju7jx]

[seawolf17]

Oh! Thanks for the reminder to buy my tickets for tonight.

[nymr83]

has anyone seen the thread for X-Men Days of Future Past? best marvel movie ever and i cant find the thread. please bump it if you can and feel free to delete this post.

Guardians might be the first ever marvel movie that i wait for blueray on.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I'll probably see it in the theaters and fairly soon, but I feel the way Namor does; it's the first Marvel movie (from Marvel Studios, anyway) that I have little enthusiasm for. I waited for cable to see the rebooted Amazing Spider-Man, and will probably do the same for its sequel.

[dgwphotography]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I'll probably see it in the theaters and fairly soon, but I feel the way Namor does; it's the first Marvel movie (from Marvel Studios, anyway) that I have little enthusiasm for. I waited for cable to see the rebooted Amazing Spider-Man, and will probably do the same for its sequel.

I saw it last night, and it was the best Marvel movie since Avengers. As my daughter put it, it's the intergalactic comedy you didn't know you needed.

[Edgy MD]

Yeah, the challenge is launching this and not letting it undermine their Marvel Universe. Delivering a tongue-in-cheek-y Spaceballs/Flash Gordon space adventure certainly is a challenge to reconciling with the graver and weightier tone they've been bringing to the Avengers films, if we are to accept that they indeed take place in the same universe.

Which isn't to say it isn't better than Spaceballs and Flash Gordon. It is. And done right, I guess it could lift and lighten the tone of the Avengers series if there indeed is to be any reconciliation. (And some shared peripheral context suggest there is.)

[Benjamin Grimm]

Oh, they're definitely going to be in the same universe. I imagine it will all be tied together by the third Avengers movie, if not sooner.

[Edgy MD]

Well, I'll just go ahead and outright recommend it then. I've found the cosmology of the Thor films weighty and stupid, but this just embraces the stupidity and delights in it, gobbling on its cheesiness just as lovingly as it gobbles on its cheesy seventies soundtrack.

[dgwphotography]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Oh, they're definitely going to be in the same universe. I imagine it will all be tied together by the third Avengers movie, if not sooner.

Definitely. There are characters in Guardians of The Galaxy that will be in Avengers 3

[Frayed Knot]

From what I understand, one of the guardians of this galaxy (not sure if it's our galaxy or not) is a raccoon?

[Benjamin Grimm]

Yes. And one of the others is a tree.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Edgy MD wrote: Well, I'll just go ahead and outright recommend it then. I've found the cosmology of the Thor films weighty and stupid

I thought I was the only one. I mean, I love-- LOVE-- me some old-school Thor, but I found myself as intensely annoyed as I have been in some time about midway through The Dark World, mostly at the fact that my Marvel Universe completism would force me to sit through the second half.

[nymr83]

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Edgy MD wrote: Well, I'll just go ahead and outright recommend it then. I've found the cosmology of the Thor films weighty and stupid I thought I was the only one. I mean, I love-- LOVE-- me some old-school Thor, but I found myself as intensely annoyed as I have been in some time about midway through The Dark World, mostly at the fact that my Marvel Universe completism would force me to sit through the second half.

but you managed to get through Elektra?

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Okay, maybe not complete completism-- I've never seen that one. After the hash those made of Daredevil, there was no fuggin' way I was sitting through sh*tty-Alias with sais from the same minds/hands. (I did sit through the second FF movie under similar circumstances, though.)

I AM intensely looking forward to the DD-related webseries, though.

[dgwphotography]

This was shown as an introduction to the Marvel panel at SDCC - pretty freaking cool...

[youtube:ixjg2epy]cInu82fWFfQ[/youtube:ixjg2epy]

[Guest Mets � Willets Point]

They seem to be releasing these movies at the same rate they release comic books. I don't know how you all keep up with it.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Just got back from seeing the movie. I gave it three stars. Fun, but forgettable. I'm not that much into sci-fi stories, especially when the action doesn't take place on earth. For me, the fun of these movies is seeing favorite characters from my childhood on the big screen. This movie didn't have that.

And the after the credits scene was, well... I guess I shouldn't say anything yet.

[Vic Sage]

I loved it. My son and I saw it twice over the weekend. Even my wife liked it, and she has a lower tolerance for this sort of thing.

It's a great marvel movie, 2nd only to Avengers (and not by much). Despite the references here to SPACEBALLS and FLASH GORDON, do not think that this is a spoof, satire, or camp in any way. Sure, it mocks some SF and superhero tropes, but that's not its focus. It's an action comedy, with a bit of pathos. The action is well done, the comedy is laugh-out-loud funny, the characters have back-stories, leading to some touching moments. The terrific use of music to define character, set mood, even furthering the action, is unique for this genre. And the visuals are, as you would expect, pretty grand.

No, these are not the Guardians i grew up with, except Yondu, whose character is totally different here but for the name, blue skin and mohawk. There is no Charlie-27, or Martinex, or Starhawk, or Vance Astro. But the presence of Thanos, Ronan, Nebula and Gamora and the Collector provide a sufficient nostalgia factor. Starlord, too, was a 70s character, connected to the Guardians. And the cameo after the credits made my 12-year old self giddy.

The movie isn't flawless; some of the attempts at sentiment are maudlin and heavy handed. The storyline, while pretty straightforward, does a poor job of explaining the infinity stones (one of which is the core of the tale), and it leaves some storylines open for the inevitable sequel, which is a device i don't much care for. And the acting is not always entirely convincing, particularly Chris Pratt in the lead as StarLord. He's OK, but everything sounds like sarcasm coming from him, so his attempts at heroic speeches are undercut by his tone. But Bradley Cooper's vocal performance as Rocket Racoon is spot on, and i always like Zoe Saldana, whether her skin is green, blue or her more natural dark tan.

two thumbs way up on this one.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Between the lead Pratt and the vibe, this felt a little to me like a superamped Kurt Russell action-comedy-- and I mean that in the best possible way-- only with more emotional resonance.

[Edgy MD]

So my wife went out and purchased the "soundtrack," which in fact was presented as a clever package representing Peter's mixtape. It's actually just called Awesome Mix Volume 1. And I hate myself for saying this, but they totally fuck up that small little appeal.

1. Why don't they release it on cassette? Cassettes throwbacks are totally a thing now. They could have used auto-sign machines to mark up the packaging with Peter's mother's handwriting.

2. Why do they include "Ain't No Mountain High Enough" and "I Want You Back"? You see the film, you know that these two tracks are clearly tacked on the end as representative of Awesome Mix Volume 2. They could have padded out the mix with three or four tracks not used in the movie under the premise that these were tracks from the tape that we didn't hear.

3. (or 2b.) It totally violates the spirit of the enterprise. "ANMHE" and "IWYB" are songs from the late sixties, the implication being that his mother filled the first mix with songs from the '70s and the latter with songs from 60s. While they are far less cheesy, they scrape away the authenticity of the whole. Of the whole!

I'd blame marketers not getting down with the spirit of the artists, but the director and screenwriter are listed "Soundtrack Executive Producers," so I don't know.

[Vic Sage]

I bought the soundtrack, too, and have no complaints. It has all the songs that were in the movie...that's all i want from a soundtrack. And i thought the labeling of it as "Awesome Mix, Vol.1", in reference to the movie, was nifty.

It's true, 2 of the songs were shown in the fil to be on "Mix V2", and that could have been easily addressed in liner notes that said "as a bonus, we're including 2 extra songs from Mix 2". Maybe they did that; i didn't check. Do record companies even bother creating "liner notes" anymore? Do you only get them if you buy a hard copy of the music? As for an audio tape version, maybe if it sells well enough, they'll do that. Is there really a market for that now? I had no idea. Maybe the technology has changed alot, i don't know, but tape used to be a poor 2nd choice to vinyl, and used only for its portability. Now, downloads (and even CDs) have better portability, while delivering superior sound.

I know vinyl is still around, because it gives you a different audio experience (and some would argue a better one) than digital, and an album is a better package (bigger cover art, inserts, liner notes, etc, plus the utility of double-albums to clean your weed), but i can't imagine audio tape is an equivalent (or even good) audio version of the music. It has the reproduction quality of a VHS with the small packaging of a CD. Why would tape, or 8-track, or victrola cylinders, be popular now, beyond hipsterish iconoclasm? I guess the tech has really changed that much.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Why would anyone listen to cassettes today? Unless the technology improved, the sound's inferior to other forms of music and cassettes degrade every time you play 'em, just like the bottom of your shoes wear out some with every step you take. I listened to cassettes when I was a teenager, but only because I was a teenager. And maybe in an auto, because before CD's, cassettes (and 8-tracks) were the only way to listen to music you specifically selected while in an automobile.

OE:

Vic Sage wrote: Do record companies even bother creating "liner notes" anymore? Do you only get them if you buy a hard copy of the music? As for an audio tape version, maybe if it sells well enough, they'll do that. Is there really a market for that now? I had no idea. Maybe the technology has changed alot, i don't know, but tape used to be a poor 2nd choice to vinyl, and used only for its portability. Now, downloads (and even CDs) have better portability, while delivering superior sound.

I shoulda waited until I read the whole thread before posting.

[Edgy MD]

I did a search and found any number of articles about cassettes making a comeback, but the why part is almost invariably fudged. They report on why physical formats in general (LPs, CDs, and cassettes) are preferable to some, but they shoot blanks on why some go for cassettes specifically.

I did find this story also arguing about the fumbled opportunity that was Awesome Mix: Volume 1. Good for you, Chris Wade of Slate!

[MFS62]

Haven't seen it yet, but have just read this thread.
Sound track - Better than the Flash Gordon one by Queen? (which was written specifically for that movie)

Later

[Lefty Specialist]

Saw it, loved it. It was a lot more light-hearted than most of the Marvel stuff, which was refreshing. It's why Robert Downey Jr. is useful as Iron Man, because he's irreverent while everybody else is So. Goddamn. Serious.

Here, pretty much everybody was irreverent. It was fun.

[dgwphotography]

MFS62 wrote: Sound track - Better than the Flash Gordon one by Queen? (which was written specifically for that movie)

I think so. It's a great CD.