-
Most new users don't bother reading our rules. Here's the one that is ignored almost immediately upon signup: DO NOT ASK FOR FANEDIT LINKS PUBLICLY. First, read the FAQ. Seriously. What you want is there. You can also send a message to the editor. If that doesn't work THEN post in the Trade & Request forum. Anywhere else and it will be deleted and an infraction will be issued.
-
Please read our Rules & Guidelines
Read BEFORE posting Trades & Request
Guardians of the Galaxy
- Thread starter Gaith
- Start date
addiesin
Well-known member
- Messages
- 5,922
- Reaction score
- 1,552
- Trophy Points
- 163
Here's another very simple theory. Whole thing in spoiler tags just in case.
So what do you guys think? Possible? Likely, even? I think so. Not nearly as stupid an idea as the Morag backwards thing, at least. ;-)
People are saying there's a Beta Ray Bill cameo in Guardians of the Galaxy. James Gunn was wishy washy and I think I know why.
I think there are two separate cameos and people are getting them confused. Gunn commented and sparked this theory of mine.
There IS a cameo of Beta Ray Bill. But he's dead, and it's on Morag.
(Here's two angles of Star Lord looking at him:
1 http://cdn.niketalk.com/f/fe/500x1000px-LL-fe4a93cd_Screenshot2014-11-15at10.22.26PM.png
2 So yeah, I think that's him and he's dead. Won't show up in future Marvel films.)
The one everyone thinks is Beta Ray Bill is in the Collector's museum, and here's what James Gunn has to say about that: "THAT’S who you guys’re talking about? That is totally NOT Beta Ray Bill."
(Source: http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Was-...s-Galaxy-Here-What-James-Gunn-Says-68305.html EDIT: I realized after posting this somebody in the comments at that site had a similar inkling. This post was not influenced by that and I am not dat guy. Fo serious.)
This begs the question. Who the hell is that in the Collector's museum? The shot shows him clearly for a second while he's looking away, and as he turns his head so we could see the side of it, the focus shifts to the Collector in the foreground and our red-caped captive is blurred out. This made me a combination of furious and curious, which I call furcurious (don't google it). I did more research than I should have on Marvel characters with red capes, thinking "okay, it can't be Thor, Beta Ray Bill, any X Men, any FF character, etc." I found a few that look possible but unlikely either due to being featured in an upcoming film or having NOTHING to do with the film universe, like The Hood, Doctor Strange, Red Raven, Wonder Man, Mephisto.
Then I recalled the end of Thor 2.
Loki poses as Odin. Does Odin wear a cape? I don't remember. A quick Google search confirms that yes, he does. Red, in fact.
...
TLDR; My theory is that the Collector is holding Odin captive while Loki rules Asgard.
I think there are two separate cameos and people are getting them confused. Gunn commented and sparked this theory of mine.
There IS a cameo of Beta Ray Bill. But he's dead, and it's on Morag.
(Here's two angles of Star Lord looking at him:
1 http://cdn.niketalk.com/f/fe/500x1000px-LL-fe4a93cd_Screenshot2014-11-15at10.22.26PM.png
2 So yeah, I think that's him and he's dead. Won't show up in future Marvel films.)
The one everyone thinks is Beta Ray Bill is in the Collector's museum, and here's what James Gunn has to say about that: "THAT’S who you guys’re talking about? That is totally NOT Beta Ray Bill."
(Source: http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Was-...s-Galaxy-Here-What-James-Gunn-Says-68305.html EDIT: I realized after posting this somebody in the comments at that site had a similar inkling. This post was not influenced by that and I am not dat guy. Fo serious.)
This begs the question. Who the hell is that in the Collector's museum? The shot shows him clearly for a second while he's looking away, and as he turns his head so we could see the side of it, the focus shifts to the Collector in the foreground and our red-caped captive is blurred out. This made me a combination of furious and curious, which I call furcurious (don't google it). I did more research than I should have on Marvel characters with red capes, thinking "okay, it can't be Thor, Beta Ray Bill, any X Men, any FF character, etc." I found a few that look possible but unlikely either due to being featured in an upcoming film or having NOTHING to do with the film universe, like The Hood, Doctor Strange, Red Raven, Wonder Man, Mephisto.
Then I recalled the end of Thor 2.
Loki poses as Odin. Does Odin wear a cape? I don't remember. A quick Google search confirms that yes, he does. Red, in fact.
...
TLDR; My theory is that the Collector is holding Odin captive while Loki rules Asgard.
So what do you guys think? Possible? Likely, even? I think so. Not nearly as stupid an idea as the Morag backwards thing, at least. ;-)
- Messages
- 14,917
- Reaction score
- 2,442
- Trophy Points
- 228
Warning! I know the urge is to run out and buy this film* but DO NOT BUY THE 2D BLU-RAY!
Word on the vine is the colour-grading is botched. I'm looking into it to confirm how big the problem is. I've read that the 2D disc that comes with the 3D set is coloured correctly but again I can't confirm that yet.
(* Or to buy it for Xmas present)
Word on the vine is the colour-grading is botched. I'm looking into it to confirm how big the problem is. I've read that the 2D disc that comes with the 3D set is coloured correctly but again I can't confirm that yet.
(* Or to buy it for Xmas present)
hbenthow
Well-known member
- Messages
- 1,610
- Reaction score
- 174
- Trophy Points
- 68
TM2YC said:
I found some screenshot comparisons.
Here is a capture from the 3D Blu-ray:
And here is one from the 2D BLu-ray:
3D:
2D:
As far as I can tell, it doesn't sound like it's an accident. It's probably a conscious decision, just like the added greenish tints on the Blu-rays of "Alien", "The Terminator", "Blade Runner", "X-Men: Days of Future Past", etc. A stupid decision, but a decision nonetheless.
- Messages
- 14,917
- Reaction score
- 2,442
- Trophy Points
- 228
hbenthow said:
Like I said I'm not sure of all the facts yet because I need to buy the 3D/2D set tomorrow morning to do some comparisons for myself. But from what I've disovered so far, I am sure this is not a dileberate recolouring like in the cases you mention. Shear laziness on the part of Marvel is almost certainly the cause.
I posted some of my thoughts so far over on OT.com...
TM2YC said:Arrrrrrgh!!! Just got back from buying the 2DBR an hour ago and thought the image looked off. Almost so dark and muted I couldn't see what was going on.
Refund time!
Behold this awesome FX shot I did a screencap of...
TM2YC said:A comparison between a frame from the 2D/3D set captured by KK650 and the "same" frame that I've captured from the UK 2D standalone release...
Being a daylight scene the colour difference probably isn't as marked as it is in some scenes. If you look very closely though you'll see that this isn't actually the "same" frame. It more obvious when I overlay the two...
Everything in the foreground and background is at a different angle. I'm 99.9999% sure this is because the standalone 2D is just a scan of the left or right eye from the 3D Blu-Ray. It's not the first time I've noticed this problem...
Dredd 2012 French Blu-Ray Review
I'm not sure if this is because preparing a seperate 2D home-video master is expensive, or if sometimes studios just don't really care and assume nobody will notice. Maybe this is standard practice wth Marvel. I wasn't that impressed with the 'Winter Soldier' BR either but unlike Guardians, I hadn't seen that movie 3 or 4 times to be able to instantly notice when something was off.
Another couple of shots...
^ This one is terrible, like a photocopy, of a painting, of a film... in the dark.
...and what is up with the blue splodges of flat cyan in the background of this ^.
This and the UK Dredd 2D Blu-Ray really shakes my faith in the format. I'm going to treat any release of a 3D film with deep suspicion from now on.
TM2YC said:
- Messages
- 4,509
- Reaction score
- 8
- Trophy Points
- 48
I don't know if it's just me, but I'm not seeing any difference in colors between the screenshots you posted.
matrixgrindhouse
Well-known member
- Messages
- 2,398
- Reaction score
- 126
- Trophy Points
- 73
Frantic Canadian said:
One's a little brighter and redder, the other's a little darker and greener. Maybe it's just my apathy to the film, but if I hadn't been told something was off on one of them, I probably wouldn't have noticed.
I can kind of live with this, I bought this for my friend anticipating christmas and then he tells me today that he's ordered it online so now it's become MY copy.
Gotta hate friends, you know exactly all the stuff they want and they end up buying it all themselves.
Gotta hate friends, you know exactly all the stuff they want and they end up buying it all themselves.
- Messages
- 14,917
- Reaction score
- 2,442
- Trophy Points
- 228
I got the UK 3D/2D double pack. It looks exactly the same as the standalone 2D version :-( oh well. At least this new disc doesn't have the same Defcon-5 level copy-protection ;-). Maybe the US 3D/2D set will look better, then at least somebody will get their money's worth for christmas.
Moe_Syzlak
Well-known member
- Messages
- 3,505
- Reaction score
- 1,217
- Trophy Points
- 118
I finally saw this last night. I'll keep this short, but it was not my cup of tea. I really don't understand what all the fuss is about. It was totally forgettable to me. The one takeaway is that Chris Pratt is going to be a huge star. He is very charismatic. But otherwise the movie did very little for me. I felt like had the Rocket character been human or humanoid it would've been laughed at and not in an intended way. But I could just feel them saying " but look, he's a RACCOON! That's why it's different; that's why he's funny!" For me, he wasn't. Honestly, I feel like I've forgotten most of the movie already. I've liked exactly two things about the MCU: Chris Pratt and Robert Downey Jr. These guys are watchable, but otherwise I guess I'm just not a fan of these types of movies. Sorry for being a downer.
TomH1138
Well-known member
- Messages
- 2,819
- Reaction score
- 44
- Trophy Points
- 53
James Gunn has released the original list of songs intended to be in GotG, including tunes that didn't make it into the final film.
http://collider.com/james-gunn-reve...-awkwardly-fits-into-guardians-of-the-galaxy/
I could see a clever editor reworking the movie to include the missing tunes, if the DVD or Blu-ray has a way to separate the background audio from the foreground.
http://collider.com/james-gunn-reve...-awkwardly-fits-into-guardians-of-the-galaxy/
I could see a clever editor reworking the movie to include the missing tunes, if the DVD or Blu-ray has a way to separate the background audio from the foreground.
- Messages
- 14,917
- Reaction score
- 2,442
- Trophy Points
- 228
TomH1138 said:
Cool. I might use some of those. By coincidence, I already had 'Livin' Thing' in my alternate GOTG longlist. Groovy.
I love how Gunn has been adamant in several interviews that some of the tracks on the official Soundtrack should not have been on 'Awesome Mixtape Vol. 1'. It's that attention to detail that makes me believe this is going to be the first in an amazing series of movies.
TomH1138
Well-known member
- Messages
- 2,819
- Reaction score
- 44
- Trophy Points
- 53
OK, I finally got a chance to see the movie myself, and...it was decent, but not much else.
I'm baffled at the endless love given for GotG all over the Internet. Yes, it's a cute, fun little romp. But I don't understand why it significantly beat out Captain America: Winter Soldier and X-Men: Days of Future Past at the box office, when those are superior films in almost every way. I don't get why it's being hailed as the best Marvel movie ever in many quarters, or as some kind of game-changer. It's really just a standard space adventure movie like hundreds of films before it.
Every element felt lifted from something else. In particular, the main character (guy from Earth who makes pop culture quips) has already been done in the form of John Crichton from Farscape, and done much better there. The bandits-in-space stuff was done better in Firefly (or for that matter, Han Solo and Chewbacca).
The main female character is also the lead in two other sci-fi franchises (Avatar and Star Trek), and it feels like she's playing the same character here. The glamorous Karen Gillan plays a creepy blue alien; it felt like Mystique in the X-Men movies all over again. (For that matter, she was almost as wasted in this film as Christopher Eccleston, another Doctor Who alum, was wasted in Thor: The Dark World.)
OK, having a talking raccoon was a bit daring, but even as recently as Ted, we've had a wisecracking, crass talking animal character. Groot was endearing, but Grape Ape has also done the shtick of saying one self-identifying phrase over and over again. Drax was also fun, but Sheldon on The Big Bang Theory is another example of a character who doesn't get metaphor and takes everything literally.
Peter's kidnapper Yondu was played by Michael Rooker, who plays him exactly like he played Merle on The Walking Dead, right down to the same thick country accent. It's so hilariously out of place that it might actually be the most daring thing in the movie.
I don't expect mainstream audiences to recognize all the previous influences, but the way the movie has been embraced by sci-fi fans (who do already know this material inside and out) is a bit puzzling.
As with the aforementioned Eccleston character in Thor: The Dark World, the villains were boring and one-dimensional. And
Another thing that bugs me:
And then in the end,
But, again, it is a good movie. Not a great movie, IMO, but an entertaining way to pass 2 hours. And despite how baffled I am about the movie's success, I actually have a theory or two about it.
In the first place, the Marvel brand is so strong now that the name alone is enough to get people into theaters. It's like Pixar being able to release a film where the main character is an old widower, and everyone goes to see it just because it's Pixar. (And that was Up, and it was wonderful.)
Paradoxically, though, the obscureness of the characters also works in the movie's favor. I think some audiences are getting a bit tired of all the endless mega-franchises and connected movie universes, and this film feels like a standalone movie that doesn't require any further viewing than itself. The neat trick of GotG may be that it manages to scratch these two opposing itches in the audience at the same time. And for that, I will give James Gunn and co. a hats-off.
Incidentally, I just finished reading a TPB of a Guardians of the Galaxy story called Cosmic Avengers by Brian Michael Bendis. It co-stars Iron Man, and overall it's a much tighter, more interesting story than the movie was. I highly recommend it.
I'm baffled at the endless love given for GotG all over the Internet. Yes, it's a cute, fun little romp. But I don't understand why it significantly beat out Captain America: Winter Soldier and X-Men: Days of Future Past at the box office, when those are superior films in almost every way. I don't get why it's being hailed as the best Marvel movie ever in many quarters, or as some kind of game-changer. It's really just a standard space adventure movie like hundreds of films before it.
Every element felt lifted from something else. In particular, the main character (guy from Earth who makes pop culture quips) has already been done in the form of John Crichton from Farscape, and done much better there. The bandits-in-space stuff was done better in Firefly (or for that matter, Han Solo and Chewbacca).
The main female character is also the lead in two other sci-fi franchises (Avatar and Star Trek), and it feels like she's playing the same character here. The glamorous Karen Gillan plays a creepy blue alien; it felt like Mystique in the X-Men movies all over again. (For that matter, she was almost as wasted in this film as Christopher Eccleston, another Doctor Who alum, was wasted in Thor: The Dark World.)
OK, having a talking raccoon was a bit daring, but even as recently as Ted, we've had a wisecracking, crass talking animal character. Groot was endearing, but Grape Ape has also done the shtick of saying one self-identifying phrase over and over again. Drax was also fun, but Sheldon on The Big Bang Theory is another example of a character who doesn't get metaphor and takes everything literally.
Peter's kidnapper Yondu was played by Michael Rooker, who plays him exactly like he played Merle on The Walking Dead, right down to the same thick country accent. It's so hilariously out of place that it might actually be the most daring thing in the movie.
I don't expect mainstream audiences to recognize all the previous influences, but the way the movie has been embraced by sci-fi fans (who do already know this material inside and out) is a bit puzzling.
As with the aforementioned Eccleston character in Thor: The Dark World, the villains were boring and one-dimensional. And
Thanos is supposed to be the Big Bad of Avengers 3 and 4, yet when Ronan challenges /defies him, Thanos' reaction is...nothing. Ronan just switches off the monitor, and Thanos goes away. I'm not quaking in my boots here.
Another thing that bugs me:
Shortly after we first see Chris as an adult, he comes back to his ship and there's a girl there and he says, "I thought you'd be gone by now." Oh, ha ha! (sarcasm) Isn't it funny? He slept with this girl and then expected her to get out because he didn't care about her at all. Haven't we moved past this Neanderthal type of male hero in movies yet?
And then in the end,
a heroic character (Groot) sacrificially gives up his life -- except that he really doesn't, and he's alive by the movie's end, just like every other modern popcorn film these days. Sure, Groot is terrific, but I wish that modern filmmakers had the guts to follow through on an important character death.
But, again, it is a good movie. Not a great movie, IMO, but an entertaining way to pass 2 hours. And despite how baffled I am about the movie's success, I actually have a theory or two about it.
In the first place, the Marvel brand is so strong now that the name alone is enough to get people into theaters. It's like Pixar being able to release a film where the main character is an old widower, and everyone goes to see it just because it's Pixar. (And that was Up, and it was wonderful.)
Paradoxically, though, the obscureness of the characters also works in the movie's favor. I think some audiences are getting a bit tired of all the endless mega-franchises and connected movie universes, and this film feels like a standalone movie that doesn't require any further viewing than itself. The neat trick of GotG may be that it manages to scratch these two opposing itches in the audience at the same time. And for that, I will give James Gunn and co. a hats-off.
Incidentally, I just finished reading a TPB of a Guardians of the Galaxy story called Cosmic Avengers by Brian Michael Bendis. It co-stars Iron Man, and overall it's a much tighter, more interesting story than the movie was. I highly recommend it.
- Messages
- 14,917
- Reaction score
- 2,442
- Trophy Points
- 228
TomH1138 said:
He doesn't say that ^ at all. If you are mis-remembering lines like that, you sound dead against the film, maybe you should give it another try? At some point because you are missing out my friend. I know it's hard when a movie has been hyped to death by all the critics, the box office, your friends and family etc and then finally you go see it and the reaction is always going to be "Is that what all the fuss was about?".
GOTG has got flaws, it wears it's influences on it's sleeve, the bag guy isn't the greatest (He does what needs to be done, no more)... sure. But it's just non-stop hilarious fun for me, in a way I've not felt "In a long time... a long time" ;-).
- Messages
- 5,797
- Reaction score
- 303
- Trophy Points
- 123
^ Doesn't he say he'd forgotten she was there? Isn't that even worse? And "dead set" against a movie he calls "good"? Uh... ;-)
TomH, apart from the Firefly praise (meh), I agree - it was a good, not great, Avengers in Space flick, in which, no matter how colorful or far-off the setting, the heroes/innocent civilians are mostly white, there's not so much as a hint of anything other than complete cisgender heterosexuality (oh god, I just actually used the word cisgender), and everything comes down to a big-ass stop-the-bomb battle. In terms of MCU origin stories, I put it... above Cap 1, probably, but not necessarily above any of the others.
I will give it this, though: unlike John Carter or either of JJ's Treks, with their drab and lifeless rock/ice/wasteland planets and moons, this gave us some fun cosmic destinations for the first time since Avatar five years ago (even if Xandar looked like a high-end Naboo shopping mall), and a more fun Star Wars OT vibe than any of the PT. Also, it was pretty unexpected for most audiences, and a welcome surprise. So, I do understand most of the hoopla, and it's a fun flick, but yeah, not at all groundbreaking.
TomH, apart from the Firefly praise (meh), I agree - it was a good, not great, Avengers in Space flick, in which, no matter how colorful or far-off the setting, the heroes/innocent civilians are mostly white, there's not so much as a hint of anything other than complete cisgender heterosexuality (oh god, I just actually used the word cisgender), and everything comes down to a big-ass stop-the-bomb battle. In terms of MCU origin stories, I put it... above Cap 1, probably, but not necessarily above any of the others.
I will give it this, though: unlike John Carter or either of JJ's Treks, with their drab and lifeless rock/ice/wasteland planets and moons, this gave us some fun cosmic destinations for the first time since Avatar five years ago (even if Xandar looked like a high-end Naboo shopping mall), and a more fun Star Wars OT vibe than any of the PT. Also, it was pretty unexpected for most audiences, and a welcome surprise. So, I do understand most of the hoopla, and it's a fun flick, but yeah, not at all groundbreaking.
TomH1138
Well-known member
- Messages
- 2,819
- Reaction score
- 44
- Trophy Points
- 53
Gaith said:
Heh. Thanks for the backup.
I may not be remembering the line exactly, but Peter definitely says something unflattering there. And a scene or two later, the girl is gone and Peter never mentions her again.I honestly didn't go into this movie with a chip on my shoulder. I look forward to Marvel movies. And I don't think my expectations were set unreasonably high, because they were pretty high for Winter Soldier and DoFP, and those movies met and/or exceeded my expectations.
And as Gaith rightly pointed out, I'm not saying that the movie was the worst thing ever. This is no Batman and Robin or Phantom Menace by any stretch. It's a good movie. (If George Lucas had made Phantom Menace as good as GotG, no one would complain about it at all.) I just liked other Marvel movies better.
At any rate, TM2YC, thank you for at least disagreeing politely.
- Messages
- 14,917
- Reaction score
- 2,442
- Trophy Points
- 228
Sorry if I sounded like I was having a go or something :-(. I just thought that if that line had been "misinterpreted", then maybe the rest of the film had been misinterpreted too? Maybe I can explain what I meant a bit better...
Not really. For the sake of clarity, Peter says "I'm gonna be totally honest with you... I forgot you were here".
Although the film makes a big cut forward in time/space from Earth to the alien planet, the character of Peter has not moved forward in the years we never see. He is the same, a child, running from, or ignoring his past. He still behaves like a child and acts like a child, so him forgetting about the alien girl because he got caught up with chasing the latest tricket, seems totally right. Peter's journey from this childish state, to the grown man he is at the end of the movie after having faced up to his past and accepted new responsibilites, is a large part of what makes the film so satisfying for me. He didn't mean anyhting bad by forgettting her. In the next scene they have clearly made up, and in the next scene after that on Xandar, they exchange what looks like a friendly "See ya later". For all we know, Peter meant to meet up with her for drinks and nibbles after dropping off the orb, and it was only him being arrested that prevented it :-D.
Where as him saying "I thought you'd be gone by now", suggests he's already a cold cynical adult. He hadn't absent-mindedly forgotten about her, he remembered her alright and was just annoyed she was still there. If he'd said that, then yes I agree, he'd be an ar**hole ;-). It sounds like the exact opposit of what the correct line means. Maybe I'm reading to much into this, but I did find the characters pretty deep in this movie. They stand further viewings and interpretations.
Gaith said:
Not really. For the sake of clarity, Peter says "I'm gonna be totally honest with you... I forgot you were here".
Although the film makes a big cut forward in time/space from Earth to the alien planet, the character of Peter has not moved forward in the years we never see. He is the same, a child, running from, or ignoring his past. He still behaves like a child and acts like a child, so him forgetting about the alien girl because he got caught up with chasing the latest tricket, seems totally right. Peter's journey from this childish state, to the grown man he is at the end of the movie after having faced up to his past and accepted new responsibilites, is a large part of what makes the film so satisfying for me. He didn't mean anyhting bad by forgettting her. In the next scene they have clearly made up, and in the next scene after that on Xandar, they exchange what looks like a friendly "See ya later". For all we know, Peter meant to meet up with her for drinks and nibbles after dropping off the orb, and it was only him being arrested that prevented it :-D.
Where as him saying "I thought you'd be gone by now", suggests he's already a cold cynical adult. He hadn't absent-mindedly forgotten about her, he remembered her alright and was just annoyed she was still there. If he'd said that, then yes I agree, he'd be an ar**hole ;-). It sounds like the exact opposit of what the correct line means. Maybe I'm reading to much into this, but I did find the characters pretty deep in this movie. They stand further viewings and interpretations.
- Messages
- 8,349
- Reaction score
- 2,482
- Trophy Points
- 168
I thought GUARDIANS succeeded so well with mass audiences because it was just plain straight forward good fun that required no before hand information. Yes, it was a mix of many things we have all seen before, but are not most movies/stories/tv shows a remix of other ideas and concepts? It's not about the ingredients, it's the final combination that makes or breaks the story. And here, the story was a wonderful roller coaster ride. I smiled and laughed from beginning to end.
But I agree, both Winter Soldier and DOFP were superior in terms of character and story structure. But both of these movies and the satisfaction the audience received from them was built upon a certain amount of previous knowledge of their respected franchises. So from a general audience perspective, I can understand why GotG was more of a box office hit.
My interpretation of the Thanos/Ronan scene was completely the opposite. Thanos is so powerful, even Ronan with an infinity gem does not make him nervous. Let Ronan play with his gem and wreck havoc, it only works to his favour. When the time is right, and Ronan has exhausted his usefulness, he will kill then.
But I agree, both Winter Soldier and DOFP were superior in terms of character and story structure. But both of these movies and the satisfaction the audience received from them was built upon a certain amount of previous knowledge of their respected franchises. So from a general audience perspective, I can understand why GotG was more of a box office hit.
My interpretation of the Thanos/Ronan scene was completely the opposite. Thanos is so powerful, even Ronan with an infinity gem does not make him nervous. Let Ronan play with his gem and wreck havoc, it only works to his favour. When the time is right, and Ronan has exhausted his usefulness, he will kill then.
TomH1138
Well-known member
- Messages
- 2,819
- Reaction score
- 44
- Trophy Points
- 53
TM2YC Thanks for your analysis. It helps me to understand better what might have been meant by that line. If you had just simply posted the line without the analysis, I would have said that you simply proved my point.
I don't know if I'd go so far as to say that Peter's line had the exact opposite meaning from what I said; it's still immature, it's just immature for a different reason. And I guess one could say that Peter did progress by the end. Since we don't see that female again by the end, and there are no dialogue callbacks to the earlier scene, the connection is somewhat more vague than I would personally like. But your explanation makes sense, and I'm willing to accept it.
bionicbob Yes, all stories pull from things that have come before, but not all of them feel so recycled. Winter Soldier pulls from '70s conspiracy theory movies like Three Days of the Condor, but it still felt fresh to me, in part because we haven't seen that type of movie in a long time. (The most recent one I can think of that I've seen is the excellent 1998 Tony Scott movie Enemy of the State.) Meanwhile, Hollywood hasn't stopped making Star Wars-ish movies since '77, so this felt like just another one on the assembly line to me (even though, again I must stress, it is a good one).
It doesn't surprise me that the movie was a hit. It does surprise me that the movie was such a bigger hit than many of the other Marvel films. But I think that you're right, that the lack of needed foreknowledge was a strong contributing factor.
Sorry if I'm coming off too grumpy, folks. The main catalyst for this was finding among multiple discussion threads and on Facebook that people were talking endlessly about GotG but hardly had anything at all to say about the other, better Marvel films. But I think today I see it clearer: "I am Groot" and "Ooga chaka" just make better, more memorable Internet memes than political allegories and attempts to fix continuity through time travel. GotG is just simply more accessible.
If anyone reading this loves GotG, more power to you. I don't intend to rain on your parade, just trying to explain my own position a little better.
I don't know if I'd go so far as to say that Peter's line had the exact opposite meaning from what I said; it's still immature, it's just immature for a different reason. And I guess one could say that Peter did progress by the end. Since we don't see that female again by the end, and there are no dialogue callbacks to the earlier scene, the connection is somewhat more vague than I would personally like. But your explanation makes sense, and I'm willing to accept it.
bionicbob Yes, all stories pull from things that have come before, but not all of them feel so recycled. Winter Soldier pulls from '70s conspiracy theory movies like Three Days of the Condor, but it still felt fresh to me, in part because we haven't seen that type of movie in a long time. (The most recent one I can think of that I've seen is the excellent 1998 Tony Scott movie Enemy of the State.) Meanwhile, Hollywood hasn't stopped making Star Wars-ish movies since '77, so this felt like just another one on the assembly line to me (even though, again I must stress, it is a good one).
It doesn't surprise me that the movie was a hit. It does surprise me that the movie was such a bigger hit than many of the other Marvel films. But I think that you're right, that the lack of needed foreknowledge was a strong contributing factor.
Sorry if I'm coming off too grumpy, folks. The main catalyst for this was finding among multiple discussion threads and on Facebook that people were talking endlessly about GotG but hardly had anything at all to say about the other, better Marvel films. But I think today I see it clearer: "I am Groot" and "Ooga chaka" just make better, more memorable Internet memes than political allegories and attempts to fix continuity through time travel. GotG is just simply more accessible.
If anyone reading this loves GotG, more power to you. I don't intend to rain on your parade, just trying to explain my own position a little better.