Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Guardians of the Galaxy (Complete Movie Thread-- Now With Spoilers)

1151618202134

Comments

  • TheOriginalGManTheOriginalGMan Posts: 1,763
    Chris Pratt is a hard guy to dislike.
  • GregGreg Posts: 1,946
    Chris Pratt is my new man-crush.
  • A friend of mine saw it at a pre-screening last night and his post on Facebook after seeing it just said that this movie is going to make a bazillion dollars. Considering he is usually pretty critical of movies, I took that as a great sign.
  • TheOriginalGManTheOriginalGMan Posts: 1,763
    As of this morning, it's got a 39-3 record (93%) at Rotten Tomatoes. That's a record Jordan and the Bulls would've been envious of.
  • Chuck_MelvilleChuck_Melville Posts: 3,003
    You've already heard my verdict. And I'm going to see it again!
  • TheOriginalGManTheOriginalGMan Posts: 1,763
    Preaching to the choir here, but ... "Top 10 Reasons Why Guardians of the Galaxy is Awesome"

    http://www.popmatters.com/post/183990-the-top-10-reasons-why-guardians-of-the-galaxy-is-awesome/
  • HexHex Posts: 944
    Trying so so SO hard to avoid reading or watching anything further in order to avoid any more spoilers. I don't want to know any more until I watch it in the theatre. It is killing me!
    I don't need any more info... I KNOW that I am going to love it.
  • Mr_CosmicMr_Cosmic Posts: 3,200
    edited July 2014
    < crybaby > My wife couldn't get the babysitter until Saturday...I have to wait to Saturday to see GotG!! aaaarrrrggghhh!!!!!!! :(( < /crybaby >

  • It's not even that bad a review. I do love that almost every article I've read includes the line "little known character from Marvel that debuted in 1969." Like it's too difficult to do basic research and see this isn't that group if little known characters, but an entirely different group of little known characters. I swear if do a spit take if I saw just one mainstream article that knew the difference.

    This is why I like to pretend this movie has a completely different title. I love the Charlie-27/Vance Astro group so much that I almost decided to boycott this flick
  • Chris Pratt is a hard guy to dislike.

    I have found it in me to do so
  • rebisrebis Posts: 1,820

    It's not even that bad a review. I do love that almost every article I've read includes the line "little known character from Marvel that debuted in 1969." Like it's too difficult to do basic research and see this isn't that group if little known characters, but an entirely different group of little known characters. I swear if do a spit take if I saw just one mainstream article that knew the difference.

    This is why I like to pretend this movie has a completely different title. I love the Charlie-27/Vance Astro group so much that I almost decided to boycott this flick

    Chris Pratt is a hard guy to dislike.

    I have found it in me to do so
    image

  • PlaneisPlaneis Posts: 980

    It's not even that bad a review. I do love that almost every article I've read includes the line "little known character from Marvel that debuted in 1969." Like it's too difficult to do basic research and see this isn't that group if little known characters, but an entirely different group of little known characters. I swear if do a spit take if I saw just one mainstream article that knew the difference.

    Does it REALLY matter if they are little known characters? Shouldn't that make it better for the reviewers because they don't have any pre-conceptions? Most movies aren't based on decades long, well known characters. And the ones critics tend to like are the most original, so.... that should be a plus.
  • WetRatsWetRats Posts: 6,314

    Chris Pratt is a hard guy to dislike.

    I have found it in me to do so
    Um... congratulations?
  • WetRatsWetRats Posts: 6,314
    Planeis said:

    It's not even that bad a review. I do love that almost every article I've read includes the line "little known character from Marvel that debuted in 1969." Like it's too difficult to do basic research and see this isn't that group if little known characters, but an entirely different group of little known characters. I swear if do a spit take if I saw just one mainstream article that knew the difference.

    Does it REALLY matter if they are little known characters? Shouldn't that make it better for the reviewers because they don't have any pre-conceptions? Most movies aren't based on decades long, well known characters. And the ones critics tend to like are the most original, so.... that should be a plus.
    In early 1977, Han Solo, Luke Skywalker, Leia Organa, Chewbacca, Obi Wan Kenobi, R2-D2, C3PO and Darth Vader were "little-known characters".
  • Planeis said:

    It's not even that bad a review. I do love that almost every article I've read includes the line "little known character from Marvel that debuted in 1969." Like it's too difficult to do basic research and see this isn't that group if little known characters, but an entirely different group of little known characters. I swear if do a spit take if I saw just one mainstream article that knew the difference.

    Does it REALLY matter if they are little known characters? Shouldn't that make it better for the reviewers because they don't have any pre-conceptions? Most movies aren't based on decades long, well known characters. And the ones critics tend to like are the most original, so.... that should be a plus.
    It doesn't matter at all. Lazy cut & paste journalism does. Not that this is a truly important story, it's just irksome.
  • chriswchrisw Posts: 792

    It's not even that bad a review. I do love that almost every article I've read includes the line "little known character from Marvel that debuted in 1969." Like it's too difficult to do basic research and see this isn't that group if little known characters, but an entirely different group of little known characters. I swear if do a spit take if I saw just one mainstream article that knew the difference.

    It's not that far off, though. They may not be the same characters, but the concept of Guardians of the Galaxy was introduced back then. You could argue that the X-Men introduced in films back in the '90s weren't the X-Men introduced in comics back in the '60s (or even the ones in the '70s), but I don't think most people analyze it enough to make that distinction.
  • TheOriginalGManTheOriginalGMan Posts: 1,763
    edited July 2014
    GotG continues to hold strong at Rotten Tomatoes, improving to 50-4 thus far (93% fresh):

    http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/guardians_of_the_galaxy/reviews/

    I particularly like this quote from the critic at the Arizona Republic ... "Really, "woo-hoo!" just about covers it."

  • WetRatsWetRats Posts: 6,314
    TWENTY-NINE HOURS!
  • bamfbamfbamfbamf Posts: 718
    edited July 2014
    Vin Diesel Says I Am Groot in Multiple Languages
    http://youtu.be/jM4Step_EXE
  • playdohsrepublicplaydohsrepublic Posts: 1,377
    edited July 2014
    chrisw said:

    It's not even that bad a review. I do love that almost every article I've read includes the line "little known character from Marvel that debuted in 1969." Like it's too difficult to do basic research and see this isn't that group if little known characters, but an entirely different group of little known characters. I swear if do a spit take if I saw just one mainstream article that knew the difference.

    It's not that far off, though. They may not be the same characters, but the concept of Guardians of the Galaxy was introduced back then. You could argue that the X-Men introduced in films back in the '90s weren't the X-Men introduced in comics back in the '60s (or even the ones in the '70s), but I don't think most people analyze it enough to make that distinction.
    True, but even the concept is pretty different. Classic Guardians and new Guardians really only share the name. It's not a big deal, I just wish one mainstream reviewer had also been a fan also.
  • chriswchrisw Posts: 792

    chrisw said:

    It's not even that bad a review. I do love that almost every article I've read includes the line "little known character from Marvel that debuted in 1969." Like it's too difficult to do basic research and see this isn't that group if little known characters, but an entirely different group of little known characters. I swear if do a spit take if I saw just one mainstream article that knew the difference.

    It's not that far off, though. They may not be the same characters, but the concept of Guardians of the Galaxy was introduced back then. You could argue that the X-Men introduced in films back in the '90s weren't the X-Men introduced in comics back in the '60s (or even the ones in the '70s), but I don't think most people analyze it enough to make that distinction.
    True, but even the concept is pretty different. Classic Guardians and new Guardians really only share the name. It's not a big deal, I just wish one mainstream reviewer has also been a fan also.
    They're probably all getting their information from a press release, anyway, which means that someone at Marvel Studios probably didn't bother to elaborate. I often get the impression that research isn't always a priority for entertainment journalists.
  • bamfbamfbamfbamf Posts: 718
    edited July 2014
    FCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Business Insider already spoiled the end credits scene...

    WHY IN GODS NAME DID I CLICK ON THE LINK?!?!?!?!?!?!
  • matchkitJOHNmatchkitJOHN Posts: 1,030
    edited July 2014
    bamfbamf said:

    FCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Business Insider already spoiled the end credits scene...

    WHY IN GODS NAME DID I CLICK ON THE LINK?!?!?!?!?!?!

    Sorry to hear that and with that I better just leave the internet and social media till I see it. See you fellas Saturday!

  • TheOriginalGManTheOriginalGMan Posts: 1,763
    GotG with a 91% "Fresh" rating (63-6) heading into today. Same as "Dawn of the PotA"

    http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/guardians_of_the_galaxy/

    Hoping to see it this weekend (if my wife lets me :-) )
  • bralinatorbralinator Posts: 5,967
    Finally.... :)
Sign In or Register to comment.