Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner
1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Master debator.
Joined
·
8,777 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hilarious. If you haven't seen the first one because you thought it looked stupid, you are doing yourself a dis-service. See the first one, then go watch the second. Even my wife was laughing out loud and was chuckling afterwards, and she's not known for liking this type of movie.

Drax does nothing useful except crack one-liners that seem to be timed to make you spit out your diet Coke. The plot is thin of course, but if you know the characters you'll find it entertaining enough. Half of the theater was even crying at the end, no spoilers. Remember for Marvel movies to stay for the end credits for sneak peeks of upcoming movies.

4 out of 5 because nothing is perfect.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,488 Posts
Glad to hear that. I liked the first one. I was afraid the second one might take the all-too-common route of hand-picking everything people responded to in the first one and way overdoing those things in the second one.
 

·
Registered
Escorted from the White House
Joined
·
36,949 Posts
Saw it. Liked it. Thought it was overall a better movie than the first one, and I liked that one, too.

It does get a bit too chaotic in places (the whole 'more is better' Hollywood thing), and a couple of things don't make much sense, but it's a perfect, (mostly) light-hearted popcorn movie with likable characters who interact entertainingly. And Michael Rooker (Yondu), of Walking Dead fame, actually steals the show, along with Drax. Kurt Russell ain't bad either, but the script doesn't let him do quite as much as he's capable of.

Three stars out of four. If you hate comic book movies, you won't like this one, but you won't hate it, either. And if you like comic book films at all, it's a definite go-see.
 

·
Cat 6
Joined
·
4,695 Posts
Didn't enjoy it nearly as much as the first. Way too much time spent with baby groot and Drax laughing at things that aren't that funny. Just not as good/funny as the first.
 

·
Is it the future yet?
Joined
·
1,978 Posts
I agree. It wasn't as funny as the first even though they seemed to try harder. Also, the constant 70's soundtrack was too over-bearing and the music was too popular.
I liked how the first one dabbled in 70's and nostalgia, this one is over the top, too much.

It's still a good movie though.
 

·
Registered
Escorted from the White House
Joined
·
36,949 Posts
One thing that I think was bad about Guardians 2 was the marketing.

WAY too many different trailers and commercials giving away too many of the punchlines and better moments in advance.

Hollywood really needs to stop doing that. It's like a sickness with them.

Two genres it especially hurts them in are comedy and horror. For obvious reasons.
 

·
What the Hell is going on
Joined
·
5,152 Posts
Best use of a ZUNE EVAR!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
Saw it last night, didn't like the flow of things. I liked the first one a lot more.

Logan was played right after and I enjoyed that more.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
 

·
your text here
Joined
·
13,192 Posts
i liked the fact there wasnt a scene where a large spaceship was plummeting into a planet and our heroes were certainly staring death in the face when all of a sudden something saves them.

i didnt like the whole "we're family" crap. it was like watching a fast 'n furious marathon on FX interspersed with a bunch of olive garden and pepsi commercials.
 

·
Registered
Escorted from the White House
Joined
·
36,949 Posts
WARNING: Spoilers ! ! ! ! !

i didnt like the whole "we're family" crap. it was like watching a fast 'n furious marathon on FX interspersed with a bunch of olive garden and pepsi commercials.
They kinda *had* to do that, though... it was the counterpoint to Kurt Russell's "I am your true family by blood, even though I was an absentee father/total bastard" thing.

The real issue, to me, was that they didn't really develop Russell's father-son thing at all, beyond some stupid glowball catch-playing. Pretty cliche'd, that, and it would've been much cooler if Russell had actually looked very convincingly warm and human and caring. Which takes not only Russell's considerable presence and acting ability (which they had), but also enough screen time devoted to it (which they chose not to give).

So that when the sh*t went down, you might actually be a bit, y'know, surprised. And maybe better feel Pratt's character's shock and hurt... "Oh yeah... my Dad really *is* a cosmic assh*le."
 

·
your text here
Joined
·
13,192 Posts
But did they have to constantly say, "we're family?" No.

Glow ball was dumb. As was Quill just accepting him as his father.

Maybe if they spent a bit more time unpacking the Michael Rooker as proxy-father, then the Mary poppins / armeggedon scene might have hit a bit harder.

Talked to The Boy after the movie, and he really liked it. Then I said, "man, quill basically found out he had two dads within one day, and lost them both that same day."
"You're right, Dad. Shouldn't he have been sadder?"

They kinda *had* to do that, though... it was the counterpoint to Kurt Russell's "I am your true family by blood, even though I was an absentee father/total bastard" thing.

The real issue, to me, was that they didn't really develop Russell's father-son thing at all, beyond some stupid glowball catch-playing. Pretty cliche'd, that, and it would've been much cooler if Russell had actually looked very convincingly warm and human and caring. Which takes not only Russell's considerable presence and acting ability (which they had), but also enough screen time devoted to it (which they chose not to give).

So that when the sh*t went down, you might actually be a bit, y'know, surprised. And maybe better feel Pratt's character's shock and hurt... "Oh yeah... my Dad really *is* a cosmic assh*le."
 

·
Registered
Escorted from the White House
Joined
·
36,949 Posts
But did they have to constantly say, "we're family?" No.

Glow ball was dumb. As was Quill just accepting him as his father.

Maybe if they spent a bit more time unpacking the Michael Rooker as proxy-father, then the Mary poppins / armeggedon scene might have hit a bit harder.

Talked to The Boy after the movie, and he really liked it. Then I said, "man, quill basically found out he had two dads within one day, and lost them both that same day."
"You're right, Dad. Shouldn't he have been sadder?"
I think all three of us are on the same page. :)

Strangely, I think Rooker, despite the constraints, came out significantly better than Russell in this film. Which goes to show that, 1) Rooker's a bit underrated as an actor, and 2) script really, really matters.

It could have been an awesome summer movie. Instead, we have to settle for 'eh, pretty good'. Which is actually 'very good', by summer movie standards.

And, as is often the case, the editing room is probably the culprit. I bet there are plenty of character-oriented deleted scenes that would've been great inclusions, that were cut in the name of pacing. So that we could have a few more minutes of CGI instead. :(

Hollywood never learns.
 

·
your text here
Joined
·
13,192 Posts
maybe kurt russell has become too big for the movie? there was a time when he was a fringe/near grindhouse player, but that has turned. aside from the brief cameo of stallone, no veritable stars are seen in the movie. yeah, vin and brad lee are "in" it, but you dont see them. heck, they dont even sound like themselves, especially in this one.

when the "hip" crowd sees rooker, they react the way i imagine we would have reacted if we saw russell pop up in the matrix. russell is the star that takes us away from the ensemble.

i think the movie geeks probably got a lot more enjoyment out of rooker, but maybe more seeing sean gunn get so much screen time. having him so affected at the climax of the film might have been more meaningful to those that have followed the gunns and rooker.

i wonder how this movie would have been different if gunn had final cut. i mean, i dont think any director gets final cut of a marvel movie, but the guardians movies have a near split personality. you get the intimate ensemble, inside joke, wink-wink-nudge-nudge, almost indie feel, but then they have the galaxy-in-peril side of things. i still keep looking for a "super" headnod...


I think all three of us are on the same page. :)

Strangely, I think Rooker, despite the constraints, came out significantly better than Russell in this film. Which goes to show that, 1) Rooker's a bit underrated as an actor, and 2) script really, really matters.

It could have been an awesome summer movie. Instead, we have to settle for 'eh, pretty good'. Which is actually 'very good', by summer movie standards.

And, as is often the case, the editing room is probably the culprit. I bet there are plenty of character-oriented deleted scenes that would've been great inclusions, that were cut in the name of pacing. So that we could have a few more minutes of CGI instead. :(

Hollywood never learns.
 

·
Registered
Escorted from the White House
Joined
·
36,949 Posts
maybe kurt russell has become too big for the movie? there was a time when he was a fringe/near grindhouse player, but that has turned. aside from the brief cameo of stallone, no veritable stars are seen in the movie. yeah, vin and brad lee are "in" it, but you dont see them. heck, they dont even sound like themselves, especially in this one.

when the "hip" crowd sees rooker, they react the way i imagine we would have reacted if we saw russell pop up in the matrix. russell is the star that takes us away from the ensemble.

i think the movie geeks probably got a lot more enjoyment out of rooker, but maybe more seeing sean gunn get so much screen time. having him so affected at the climax of the film might have been more meaningful to those that have followed the gunns and rooker.

i wonder how this movie would have been different if gunn had final cut. i mean, i dont think any director gets final cut of a marvel movie, but the guardians movies have a near split personality. you get the intimate ensemble, inside joke, wink-wink-nudge-nudge, almost indie feel, but then they have the galaxy-in-peril side of things. i still keep looking for a "super" headnod...
Agree with most all of that, though I'd note that Chris Pratt, since the first Guardians movie, has become quite a big star in his own right. Jurassic World made well over a billion dollars worldwide, for instance.

It is kinda weird how 'big' Russell's gotten, though. In the '80s, he was this sort of cult-classic-film fixture, chewing up the scenery in John Carpenter movies (which I love). Now he's like an elder statesman among actors or something, and you see him in Tarantino films, in Marvel Universe summer blockbusters, and in the Fast and the Furious franchise. How times change.


//oh, and you gotta like Sean Gunn. Even just his face alone is hilarious.
 

·
your text here
Joined
·
13,192 Posts
Not sure I would call Pratt a "star" yet, but I see what you're saying. I think the reason he works is he is closest we recognize in a universe of aliens. Really fulfilling the proxy roll.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,615 Posts
Saw this last night in 3D. Turned out to be a lot of fun, if long! I guess Hollywood is trying to cram a lot "more" into movies so that people feel like they're getting their money's worth.

John loves getting their in time for the previews, which I don't care for. What was especially annoying this time around is how all the movies seem identical:

  • Explosions galore- check
  • Wisecraking- check
  • Emotional moments- check
  • Loud buildup that suddenly goes blank and silent- check
  • Classic rock/music that's somehow cool again- check

i liked the fact there wasnt a scene where a large spaceship was plummeting into a planet and our heroes were certainly staring death in the face when all of a sudden something saves them.

SPOILERS FYI!!

What about the scene when the sister's out in the open field, and suddenly the other sister tries to shoot her down with the giant spaceship?

It was also irritating how the plot had more and more twists added toward the end that could've made up a movie in itself. But the feeling was more like, jeeez will this ever end?! Enough already. :rolleyes:

It also had a lot of the Deadpool cheekiness thrown in, but toned down in raunchiness, which was nice.

I also find it hard to get into all the effects. All I keep thinking about is how all the "action" is taking place on a green-screen stage. Whenever they talked to the raccoon or Groot, I thought, "it's amazing how they can keep a straight face talking to a tennis ball dangling from a string."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
Cram a lot more into movies sucks if it is at the cost of good story, flow, scene and character development.

And that's why I like Tarantino's movies as they seem to be the opposite.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top