Guardians of the Galaxy (2014) (1 Viewer)

[Chris Will]

I'm not a comic book person, never have been. I can count the number of comic books I've read in my lifetime on one hand, it was something that just didn't interest me when I was growing up. I had never heard of Guradians until this thread. So, coming from someone with zero knowledge of the source, that trailer left me very uninterested. Looks very corny and, at this point, not something I'm willing to pay theater prices to see. Right now, it's an iTunes rental at best.

Again, coming from a non-comic book fan, these fringe or lesser known characters hold very little interest to me and there movies will have to be blow your socks off amazing to get my money. Right now, this one just doesn't look that good.

I love sci-fi so, that might be it's saving grace. If the reviews end up being good then the sci-fi elements might sell me a ticket.

 

[Bobby Henderson]

With movies costing so damned much to see at the theater anymore (especially when you throw in surcharges for 3D, fake-IMAX, a trip to the snack counter, etc.) I look at Rotten Tomatoes & Metacritic prior to seeing any movie at the theater. I'm not going to blow $50 on a blind buy for my girlfriend and I to watch a movie.

The new Guardians of the Galaxy trailer looks pretty good. It established a good, off-beat tone, which probably would be expected since one of the characters is a talking raccoon. But the trailer did so without giving away a bunch of the story. Too many movie trailers pretty much show the whole movie in a 2½ minute span, allowing the viewer to piece together the entire plot with just a little deductive reasoning work.

Raccoons can be pretty freaking mean. I witnessed a couple of them fighting outside my house a few years ago. They can drown a dog, coyote or wolf if engaged near a body of water. They have a pretty scary growl. And they're known to carry rabies.

The music in the trailer was interesting. I liked the use of Blue Swede's version of Hooked on a Feeling. This is also another Marvel movie trailer grabbing music from Nine Inch Nails. One of the trailers for The Avengers used We're In This Together from The Fragile double album. This trailer for Guardians of the Galaxy uses parts of Love Is Not Enough from the album With Teeth. Being a big NIN fan I recognized this immediately. Funny thing: the With Teeth album has a song called The Collector. Benecio Del Toro plays a character of the same name in this movie.

 

[Sean Bryan]

You're Welcome.

 

[Quentin]

You're Welcome.

image.jpg

Love that tagline!

 

[Sean Bryan]

I love that this poster has more of a classic movie poster feel instead of the typical photoshop jobs we get for most modern stuff. Anyone who wants to hear what Rocket sounds like and see a little more of what he looks like in action can catch a glimpse here. http://youtu.be/5r7hak-1KJkAlso, James Gunn has already be talking about how this was just a teaser trailer and he's excited to show the full trailer in the near future. I'd imagine we'll probably see that by the time the summer movie season starts.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

Great poster. Great tag line. If the movie can be as fun as the teaser promises, while also being a rollicking space opera, this could be a real treat.

 

[SilverWook]

I'm not a comic book person, never have been. I can count the number of comic books I've read in my lifetime on one hand, it was something that just didn't interest me when I was growing up. I had never heard of Guradians until this thread. So, coming from someone with zero knowledge of the source, that trailer left me very uninterested. Looks very corny and, at this point, not something I'm willing to pay theater prices to see. Right now, it's an iTunes rental at best.

Again, coming from a non-comic book fan, these fringe or lesser known characters hold very little interest to me and there movies will have to be blow your socks off amazing to get my money. Right now, this one just doesn't look that good.

I love sci-fi so, that might be it's saving grace. If the reviews end up being good then the sci-fi elements might sell me a ticket.

How many non comic book fans could answer the question "Who is Tony Stark?" before 2008?

 

[Ejanss]

How many non comic book fans could answer the question "Who is Tony Stark?" before 2008?

Well, just those of us made to feel he was a cool exec with a heart of steel.
But yes, Tony was a pretty minor character reduced to "just" being the leader of the Avengers group-comic by that point.

(And the only reason we got Jon Favreau to do a hip-but-faithful action take on Iron Man was that Paramount originally wanted to follow Fantastic Four's lead, and get the Elf/Zathura guy to do a "spoofy, tongue-in-cheek" version of Captain America.
He chose to do the labor-of-love comic he read, knew and was a fan of, instead. That's how these things get made. I don't know if that applies to this one--knowing Gunn's slightly overdone goofiness, probably not--but it certainly applies to Edgar Wright and Ant-man.)

 

[Sean Bryan]

Not sure how accurate that story is about "Paramount" wanting to do a spoofy Captain America. Paramount was only the distributor for the newly formed Marvel Studios, and their plan was to build a shared cinematic universe around their characters. So I'm not sure about them wanting to do a campy cap movie and only doing Iron Man because of Favreau. I've never heard anything like that. Could be wrong and not aware of some early ideas before Marvel Studios decided what it wanted to be but that would definitely be news to me.Yes, Marvel is only doing Ant-Man because Edgar Wright has wanted to do an Ant-Man movie for years and brought his pitch to them. And they wanted to work with him. But Feige has also said that when considering new projects they like to consider things they haven't done before, which is also why Dr. Strange is a very likely new entry in Phase 3. As for Guardians, Marvel Studios wants to develop a shared cinematic universe around their cosmic titles like Guardians, Nova, Inhumans, Captain/Ms. Marvel, Quazar, etc... which could also build to an "event" movie that is separate from the Earth-bound stuff and Guardians of the Galaxy is their first step in starting this. I don't recall if James Gunn pursued the gig or if Marvel pursued him, but I know that Gunn is VERY passionate about the project. I specifically remember Gunn saying how after Marvel and Whedon read his first draft of the script they sent it back with the main note of "needs more James Gunn". He's also said they have encourage him to takes chances with the project. Some interesting comments from Gunn in a discussion about the trailer:

"There is probably no film that influenced me more as a child – no film that excited me more or that I loved more – than Raiders Of The Lost Ark. It not only influences how I see Guardians, it influences how I live my life."

"We've recorded most of Bradley’s dialogue already. I suppose you would expect me to tell you he’s fantastic and his characterization of Rocket will blow your mind – so don’t believe me and just wait to see (or hear) it for yourself. In all truth, we hired Bradley because he’s able to do both comedy and drama – it’s the thing I look for most in the actors on all my films – and to truly sell Rocket – for you to believe a Raccoon can talk (and blow up and shoot tons of stuff) we need a well-rounded actor."

"I love Groot so much I get teary eyed when I think of him sometimes. Essentially, all the Guardians start out the movie as bastards - except Groot. He’s an innocent. He’s a hundred percent deadly and a hundred percent sweet. He’s caught up in Rocket’s life, really"

"Zoe is about as un-intimidating as you can imagine! She gets in the zone the moment that cameras start filming – but before that she’s basically her loud, brash, completely lovable and goofball self. She got it easy with the makeup – it only took about four hours to put on, whereas it took Dave Bautista and Karen Gillan six hours or more. Zoe and Karen are the two most hardass characters in the movie – they’re our Clint Eastwoods. It should take more than a few people by surprise."

"The movie has a lot of edgy humour, unusual for a comic book movie. But we were encouraged by Marvel to take risks, so we did. However, we never wanted the humor to get in the way of the fun or the emotional heart of the film – those things came first."

"'Hooked On A Feeling' is used in the movie. That and a lot of other old songs are on Quill’s mixed tape in his Sony Walkman. It’s one of the few things he has from Earth. I don’t think of it as a joke, because it’s very dear to him. It’s the umbilical cord that connects him to earth and the home and family he lost."

"The Guardians are criminals, essentially – a thief, two thugs, a murderer, and a maniac. They end up in prison together. When you have those personalities all in one place at one time, you can imagine a scrap or two starting pretty easily."

"It’s important to add that we left out some of our coolest characters – Lee Pace’s Ronan the Accuser, Michael Rooker’s Yondu, and Glenn Close’s Nova Prime – because we want to save them for the full trailer in a couple of months."

"There is no doubt that the cinematic pinnacle of my career is our cameras circling around a maniacal raccoon shooting a machine gun on the back of a living tree. And I say this with as much modesty as I can muster – because certainly it is not me, but the hand of God guiding us all as we make this film – but it just may be the pinnacle of cinema in general.When we shot it we were twirling around an empty space in a giant set. But I think all of us could see the raccoon and the tree in our minds. They were already starting to form. I can’t wait to share them with everyone in August."

 

[Ejanss]

Not sure how accurate that story is about "Paramount" wanting to do a spoofy Captain America. Paramount was only the distributor for the newly formed Marvel Studios, and their plan was to build a shared cinematic universe around their characters. So I'm not sure about them wanting to do a campy cap movie and only doing Iron Man because of Favreau. I've never heard anything like that. Could be wrong and not aware of some early ideas before Marvel Studios decided what it wanted to be but that would definitely be news to me.

I'm pretty sure the goofy-Cap idea predates Marvel Studios, back when studios were responsible for their own artistic takes on the tones of the comics, and studio heads were unsure how earnestly to pursue the WWII origin. (Thus the F4 theory, which Fox also was going to start out as "Silver Age retro and tongue-in-cheek" after Peyton Reed had just done a funny 50's/60's-ish comedy. )

Favreau may have just stayed around under contract to owing Paramount and Marvel a picture, but Marvel doing their own Iron Man came after they decided to crack down on other studios' ideas and do their own house work.

 

[Sean Bryan]

I'm so glad that Marvel decided to form their own film studio. I've wanted to see a shared cinematic comic book superhero universe since I was a kid and I still find it amazing that it actually exists.

 

[Bobby Henderson]

Marvel Studios isn't really independent. Disney bought Marvel for roughly $4 billion nearly five years ago. Since then Disney has been buying out the distribution rights on various Marvel movie properties already developed by other studios. Sony is trying its best to hold onto Spiderman. Fox is trying to do the same with X-Men.

Even though the Marvel brand is above the title for Guardians of the Galaxy (a smart move in branding by the way), the movie will actually be distributed by Disney.

Regarding the "You're Welcome" movie poster, it doesn't look "old school" to me. The poster looks good, but it still is a Photoshop job mixing studio photography and 3D renderings into a digital illustration. When I think of "old school" movie posters I go back at least 25-30 years years when at least some movie posters were still illustrated by hand. Guys like Drew Struzan, Bob Peak and Richard Amsel were dominating the movie poster scene in the 1970's and 1980's. Renowned illustrators mainly working other fields, like Boris Vallejo and Frank Frazetta, would jump in from time to time making posters for movies like National Lampoon's Vacation or The Gauntlet.

Many of those hand-drawn or hand-painted movie poster illustrations are timeless. In this age of very fickle marketing it's a miracle any of them still get used on covers for re-releases on Blu-ray. Criterion could have just thrown up some stupid Photoshop collage job for their recent release of It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World, but they used the original illustration by legendary Mad Magazine artist Jack Davis instead.

Even though the illustration field isn't what it was 20 or 30 years ago, there's still quite a few artists out there who could produce some great, analog "old school" hand-crafted movie posters. Movie posters can be more than just a collage of digitally processed actor head shots.

 

[Sean Bryan]

Yes, Marvel Studios is owned by Disney. They have Disney's backing but they are still left to operate pretty much autonomously. Note that with Thor: The Dark World there is no Disney logo. It's just the Marvel Studios logo. That says a lot about Disney's role in Marvel Studios' film productions. It'll be the same for all of Marvel Studios stuff going forward. After Disney bought Marvel in 2009, the Marvel Studios movies following that were still distributed by Paramount due to contractual obligations. Iron Man 2, Thor, Captain America, The Avengers, and Iron Man 3 all had the Paramount logo followed by the Marvel logo. Thor: The Dark World was the first where this old contractual obligation was ended and to acknowledge that Marvel Studios created their new logo and fanfare. But no distribution rights were bought back. The old distribution contracts which Disney still had to honor after buying Marvel simply expired. Can you elaborated on which distribution rights Disney has been buying up of other properties? The rights for Daredevil reverted back to Marvel because Fox didn't get their production going before the contractural cut off date. Rumor was that Marvel had tried to make a deal with Fox where they got Galactus and Silver Surfer back from Fox in exchange for letting them keep Daredevil past the cutoff date, but that didn't work out. I think Punisher, Ghost Rider, and Blade have gone back to Marvel, but again I think these were cases of the rights just reverting back due to the contract. Not buy backs. All Sony and Fox have to do to hold onto Spider-Man, The X-Men, and The Fantastic Four is continue to make movies. If they don't put a property into production within a certain period of time the rights would revert back to Marvel. But as long as they keep making them they keep them. Marvel/Disney could of course outright buy the rights back, but I don't think anyone sees that happening. After Marvel Studios' success with their cinematic universe and The Avengers, everyone wants their own "cinematic universe". It's inspired WB to move (slowly) with their DC stuff. Fox wants to do X-films and Fantastic Four films as part of a shared cinematic universe. And Sony only really has Spider-Man now, but they already have plans up through The Amazing Spider-Man 3 and a Sinister 6 movie (focusing on the villains), and the word is that they want to expand their Spidey stuff into spin off films (Venom, etc..). Bottom line, Fox and Sony aren't letting go of their Marvel properties anytime soon and Marvel/Disney is not going to drop the huge amount of cash it would take to buy those properties back. Not going to happen. They already have their hands full with the properties they have and are only really geared up to handle two movies a year.

 

[Sean Bryan]

Here is a compilation of some very brief interview comments from the cast on their respective characters featured in the trailer line up.

 

[Sean Bryan]

It's too bad that James Gunn didn't have much time to put together the mid-credits scene for Thor: The Dark World when Siff and Volstagg delivered the Aether to The Collector. It was cool that it revealed that Marvel will be building to an Infinity Gauntlet story, but the look of the scene was off. Gunn only had a day or two to throw it together. Too bad they didn't get imagery like this in that scene...

... which looks really cool.

 

[Bryan^H]

I love sci-fi so, that might be it's saving grace. If the reviews end up being good then the sci-fi elements might sell me a ticket.

Me too. I don't like much from James Gunn(The Dawn Of the Dead remake is about it). His sense of humor just doesn't grab me. But the trailer, and poster art give me hope. Here's hoping I not only like 'GOTG' but instead love it.

 

[Sam Posten]

Cheat sheet, no spoilers I don't think:
http://imgur.com/gallery/SY5fx

 

[Edwin-S]

I'll probably go and see this. Let's see. It has a raccoon. He talks, has a bad attitude, anger issues and has access to large amounts of firepower. What's not to like? It's surprising how many Marvel movies I have gone to see in the theatre, considering that I always thought that Marvel and DC superhero comics were uniformly awful and couldn't be bothered to read them.

 

[Quentin]

Can you elaborated on which distribution rights Disney has been buying up of other properties? The rights for Daredevil reverted back to Marvel because Fox didn't get their production going before the contractural cut off date. Rumor was that Marvel had tried to make a deal with Fox where they got Galactus and Silver Surfer back from Fox in exchange for letting them keep Daredevil past the cutoff date, but that didn't work out. I think Punisher, Ghost Rider, and Blade have gone back to Marvel, but again I think these were cases of the rights just reverting back due to the contract. Not buy backs.

I think he's probably referring to the Disney buyback of distribution rights on the early Marvel Studios movies like Iron Man 1&2, Cap 1, and Thor 1. And Disney bought back Daredevil.

 

[Sean Bryan]

But were distribution rights actually bought back? I know Parount had a distribution deal with Marvel up through Iron Man 3 (excluding The Incredible Hulk which was distributed through Universal) that has now expired. Do you mean they bought back distribution rights for the first seven movies for home video releases? I wasn't sure if those rights had to be bough back or if they simply reverted back to MARVEL after a certain period. Come to think of it, I believe the blu rays for at least Iron Man 3 and The Avengers were distributed through Disney. So yeah, Disney is now distributing the earlier films on video. Whether those home video rights had to be bought back or just reverted I don't know.