Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Ronan wasn't using Kree. He had an army of Sakaarans using what was presumably Sakaaran technology. We only saw two other Kree in this film (from what we know), Korath and the disinterested Kree who told Nova Prime that Ronan wasn't their problem.

What's funny about Ronan in GotG is that he's been a good guy recently...

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Ronan wasn't using Kree. He had an army of Sakaarans using what was presumably Sakaaran technology. We only saw two other Kree in this film (from what we know), Korath and the disinterested Kree who told Nova Prime that Ronan wasn't their problem.

Oh, must have missed that detail somehow when I watched it. That explains a lot, thanks for the clarification. So far the sci-fi baddies really like using mercenaries though eh? First the Chitauri from Thanos/Loki, now Sakaarans from Ronan? What's Ultron going to use? A hired army of technicians or R2-D2's?

 Grimskul wrote:
A hired army of technicians or R2-D2's?

Well... Disney does own Star Wars as well.

But from this picture, probably lots of Ultrons:

As an aside, I love that most of the Avengers' villains are mistakes they themselves have made;

Cap couldn't save Bucky, who became the Winter Soldier.

Ultron was made by Tony, and it blew up in his face ( I believe).

Loki was jealous of Thor's constantly being the favored son.

Abomination/Leader would never have happened if Bruce hadn't tried to cure his problem.


It was always awesome that sure the Avengers are the answers to alot of problems..... that they themselves started.

 trexmeyer wrote:
Are you kidding me? The 5th Element was a much better film

I went in expecting Guardians to be a comedy. It is absolutely fine when it is a comedy. However, that doesn't excuse poor writing, poor acting, and instances of embarrassing dialogue. I've also noticed that people suck down absolute crap as if it some great work of art so it is no surprise to me that a film that is actually good is being praised as "perfect" or "the best ever."

Considering 99.9999999% disagree with this assessment, we know the problem is you, not them.


Also GOTG took 94 million opening weekend (NA), only one million behind winter soldier.


Sorry DC

Ultron was made by Tony, and it blew up in his face ( I believe).

Ultron was created by Hank Pym. Hank (Ant-Man) and Wasp were two of the original Avengers who have been left out of the film. I belive the upcoming Ant-Man movie is based more on the pervy Shield agent that stole Hank's original helmet.

 pities2004 wrote:

 trexmeyer wrote:
Are you kidding me? The 5th Element was a much better film

I went in expecting Guardians to be a comedy. It is absolutely fine when it is a comedy. However, that doesn't excuse poor writing, poor acting, and instances of embarrassing dialogue. I've also noticed that people suck down absolute crap as if it some great work of art so it is no surprise to me that a film that is actually good is being praised as "perfect" or "the best ever."

Considering 99.9999999% disagree with this assessment, we know the problem is you, not them.


Also GOTG took 94 million opening weekend (NA), only one million behind winter soldier.


Sorry DC

Strong exaggeration. Even in this thread other people are acknowledging it has flaws. I know it's a shock, but a movie can have flaws and still be good. [Redacted by Moderator.]

Not that strong an exaggeration. It's got a 93% on rotten tomatoes and is only getting poor reviews from the pretentious douchebag reviewer crowd.

 cincydooley wrote:
Not that strong an exaggeration. It's got a 93% on rotten tomatoes and is only getting poor reviews from the pretentious douchebag reviewer crowd.

I didn't even give it a poor review. I said the film had problems and aspects I disliked, but it was still one of the better Marvel films. Are we living in an era where you can critique anything without being a hater?

 cincydooley wrote:
Not that strong an exaggeration. It's got a 93% on rotten tomatoes and is only getting poor reviews from the pretentious douchebag reviewer crowd.

So did Star Wars

2112 wrote:

Ultron was made by Tony, and it blew up in his face ( I believe).

Ultron was created by Hank Pym.

Not in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, which is what we are talking about.

 trexmeyer wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:
Not that strong an exaggeration. It's got a 93% on rotten tomatoes and is only getting poor reviews from the pretentious douchebag reviewer crowd.

I didn't even give it a poor review. I said the film had problems and aspects I disliked, but it was still one of the better Marvel films. Are we living in an era where you can critique anything without being a hater?

Oh my bad. I wasn't calling you a hater.

I think I went in with the appropriate expectations having read some of the source, and as such was pretty pleased overall.

But then again I'm not one that gets too sciencey on a movie that invoked an anthropomorphic talking raccoon and a tree man.

You need to remember:
The Comic Universe is not the Television Universe it not the Movie Universe is not the Television Universe is not the Comic Universe. Even the Comic Universe is not the same as the Comic Universe.
With the expiation of Agents of Shield and the Avenger's Universe
You can even say that X-Men, Fantastic 4 and Spiderman are not part of the Avenger's Universe doe to the Marvel Studios/Sony thing going on.

Saw it, liked it though I think Cap2 and Days of Future Past are still a bit better. I was surprised how much stuff from the comic was actually I there. Cosmo, Knowhere, Xandar etc. I'm happy they found a way to get that stuff in. Even the Novacorps albeit a weird version of it. They were more like a normal military. I wonder if the the sequel or other movies will introduce the superhero type Novas because of the events of this film. They could say they needed to switch tactics because their entire military was destroyed.

 trexmeyer wrote:

 pities2004 wrote:

 trexmeyer wrote:
Are you kidding me? The 5th Element was a much better film

I went in expecting Guardians to be a comedy. It is absolutely fine when it is a comedy. However, that doesn't excuse poor writing, poor acting, and instances of embarrassing dialogue. I've also noticed that people suck down absolute crap as if it some great work of art so it is no surprise to me that a film that is actually good is being praised as "perfect" or "the best ever."

Considering 99.9999999% disagree with this assessment, we know the problem is you, not them.


Also GOTG took 94 million opening weekend (NA), only one million behind winter soldier.


Sorry DC

Strong exaggeration. Even in this thread other people are acknowledging it has flaws. I know it's a shock, but a movie can have flaws and still be good. Be a prick elsewhere.

I'm pretty sure calling me a prick could of been left out of this sentence, when you resort to name calling you lose.

Everyone is entitled to there own opinion.

but the house of mouse is king

Kronk enjoyed this movie a lot.

 kronk wrote:
Kronk enjoyed this movie a lot.

Best Review Ever!

Why Vin Diesal as Groot though when most of the acting cme from body language?

So have any of you guys read the comics?

I was thinking about picking one up today, and just wanted to know how closely the movie followed the comics (As per Characterization, less about actual story).

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Why Vin Diesal as Groot though when most of the acting cme from body language?

The tone and timbre of his voice as well the varying inflection.

 Ahtman wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Why Vin Diesal as Groot though when most of the acting cme from body language?

The tone and timbre of his voice as well the varying inflection.

dont forget his mad dance moves at the end.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Why Vin Diesal as Groot though when most of the acting cme from body language?

Same reason he voiced the iron giant.

 Slarg232 wrote:
So have any of you guys read the comics?

I was thinking about picking one up today, and just wanted to know how closely the movie followed the comics (As per Characterization, less about actual story).

I think they have the characters right except Gamora who is basically a lot more mean and powerful. That would be one complaint I have. Gamora and Drax have super strength and are on a whole other power level from the rest of them. Gamora once had all her flesh burnt off her body because she was exposed to a star and was mostly ok. She would never be afraid of someone simply pointing a gun at her. They really depowered her. Also, this team is more like an abbreviated team. There have been a lot more members in the past but they sort of just took the main ones. Although currently they are only using the movie cast right now.

 cincydooley wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Why Vin Diesal as Groot though when most of the acting cme from body language?

Same reason he voiced the iron giant.

I guess i dont get getting celebritys to voice things when they are not recognizable?

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Why Vin Diesal as Groot though when most of the acting cme from body language?

He motion captured the character as well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 KamikazeCanuck wrote:
I think they have the characters right except Gamora who is basically a lot more mean and powerful. That would be one complaint I have. Gamora and Drax have super strength and are on a whole other power level from the rest of them. Gamora once had all her flesh burnt off her body because she was exposed to a star and was mostly ok. She would never be afraid of someone simply pointing a gun at her. They really depowered her. Also, this team is more like an abbreviated team. There have been a lot more members in the past but they sort of just took the main ones. Although currently they are only using the movie cast right now.

I'm actually okay with characters being depowererd compared to their comic book counterparts. The rising power creep of modern comics is one the main things that turns me off about them.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Why Vin Diesal as Groot though when most of the acting cme from body language?

He motion captured the character as well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 KamikazeCanuck wrote:
I think they have the characters right except Gamora who is basically a lot more mean and powerful. That would be one complaint I have. Gamora and Drax have super strength and are on a whole other power level from the rest of them. Gamora once had all her flesh burnt off her body because she was exposed to a star and was mostly ok. She would never be afraid of someone simply pointing a gun at her. They really depowered her. Also, this team is more like an abbreviated team. There have been a lot more members in the past but they sort of just took the main ones. Although currently they are only using the movie cast right now.

I'm actually okay with characters being depowererd compared to their comic book counterparts. The rising power creep of modern comics is one the main things that turns me off about them.

True, but I think Gamora should be at the very least super strong. Even in the movie she's supposed to be some kind of Thanos superweapon but she just seems to be a green chick.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Why Vin Diesal as Groot though when most of the acting cme from body language?

He motion captured the character as well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 KamikazeCanuck wrote:
I think they have the characters right except Gamora who is basically a lot more mean and powerful. That would be one complaint I have. Gamora and Drax have super strength and are on a whole other power level from the rest of them. Gamora once had all her flesh burnt off her body because she was exposed to a star and was mostly ok. She would never be afraid of someone simply pointing a gun at her. They really depowered her. Also, this team is more like an abbreviated team. There have been a lot more members in the past but they sort of just took the main ones. Although currently they are only using the movie cast right now.

I'm actually okay with characters being depowererd compared to their comic book counterparts. The rising power creep of modern comics is one the main things that turns me off about them.

Yeah, Like Wolverine being able to regen after being killed
If your heros can invulnerable to everything, you loose alot of what makes a good story, Tension. Yes we know they will win, but we need vulnerabilities to make it seem like they wont.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Why Vin Diesal as Groot though when most of the acting cme from body language?

Same reason he voiced the iron giant.

I guess i dont get getting celebritys to voice things when they are not recognizable?

Huh? So should Ellen degenerous not voice dory? Or should Bradley cooper not have voiced rocket? Or Cumberbatch not voice Smaug? Or am I confusing your point?

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Why Vin Diesal as Groot though when most of the acting cme from body language?

Same reason he voiced the iron giant.

I guess i dont get getting celebritys to voice things when they are not recognizable?

Because Vin Diesal is a super nerd.