All because I am not sucking the dick of Guardians of the Galaxy?
Stop throwing a fit because someone is not bending over and taking Guardians of the Galaxy in his butt, straight veins, no lube.
Generally, I'm the person on the defending end on KMC. Just ask anyone here who has ever furiously engaged me over the following films:
Promtheus
Star Wars Prequel Trilogy
Transformer Franchise
But, at this point, I do not need to explain myself to you. You clearly do not deserve any further explanations. Get over the fact that someone had some legit criticisms of the movie that you are clearly masturbating over. If you need some Preparation H, I can order you some from Amazon.com.
Yeah, this is my line. I should be saying this. Don't get butthurt and turn into a small child throwing a tantrum because I did not like the film as much as you.
There's a huge difference between what I did, which was criticize the faults of a film, and what you, Estacado, and Kaz are doing, which is throwing a fit and insulting me because I did not like the film as much as you three.
Well, too bad. If you're going to be a hypocrite, I'm going to call you out for your shit posting. Don't be a hypocrite, stop being a baby, and lessen the amount of shit-posting you're doing.
P.S. Is your KMC name "Inhuman" because you're a troll? If so, that's mildly clever.
__________________
Last edited by dadudemon on Aug 14th, 2014 at 02:39 PM
Based on previous discussions with you, you're definitely not trolling me. You are literally this dense.
Go back and read that part of our conversation, again. If you do not understand why you literally conceded that particular point, I will make you a Youtube video and explain why you're being dumb.
What worked with Quan? Are you on drugs? You do know that Quan and I argued about shit for pages and pages and still argue about shit, right?
Really? The image I posted was from "Guardian books" and the point you conceded was also from a "Guardian book"?
We seem to like it almost the same. I'm not sure what those 3 people's problems are.
It was an enjoyable film. It just failed in some areas, imo, and that's what I posted on. I think the main issue was the script: I believe it was hastily written.
As I said before, the next Guardians movie seems like it is shaping up to be more interesting.
Gender: Male Location: 4th Street Underpass, Manhattan
I disagree with many of your criticisms:
Highly disagree. Virtually all of his jokes from beginning to end were funny, at the very least clever and entertaining. I can not think of one annoying joke he cracked, and I'm someone who doesn't like too many comedies.
What do you mean by that? It should have been darker? they got as gritty as they could possibly get within the realm of an all-ages family movie, which this was
I disagree. They got the perfect amount of character development and backstory they needed to necessitate entertainment/investment. I didn't need a Citizen Kane level character arc in a light-hearted sci-fi action comedy.
Nah, I disagree. Rocket wasn't exactly my favorite character, but he was fun and his sarcasm was witty and understandable from a character perspective.
Again, disagree. The script was modeled perfectly to achieve the affect it wanted. A film that didn't spend enough time on script was IM3. This one, while formulaic, was pitch perfect with that classic 5-man-ragtag-bunch-of-misfits formula, and provided the perfect amount of entertainment expected from an all-ages comic book summer blockbuster.
that's a comic book nitpick and not that of the casual non-comic reading movie goer like myself.
I hope it will better also, as I do all sequels. This film was good though.
Negatory. Tropes and cliches are only bad if done wrong, and this film used them perfectly. I was enjoying all of the humor from the first dance during the opening credits to the final "dance battle". The characters had good backstories and traits and they felt 3-dimensional. I was highly entertained.
More like one of the films to see if you're having a bad day and want a little escapism.
For me, they were mostly stale, cliché, and felt forced. There was also not enough of Pratt's type of humor (which is good (his humor) if you've seen him in Parks and Recreation).
This was not an all-ages family movie. This was a PG-13 movie that tried to push the PG-13 envelope as much as possible (which is what pretty much all PG-13 movies are trying to do, these days...and this is part of why I think PG-13 should be abolished as a rating). This movie would have probably been rated R in 1987.
To directly answer your question, this does not mean it should have been darker or grittier. But it does mean that the villains are going to be subdued (the closest we got to a dark and gritty villain is Ronan breaking the neck of Thanos' acolyte...but that came off as more funny than it did showing his ruthlessness), the language is going to be unrealistically tamed down, and the sexual content is going to be pushed as far as possible without getting it an R-Rating. You didn't cringe when Quill said "A-hole" instead of "*sshole"? Sure, you can say *sshole in PG-13 films but when you push the envelope so much, one more "naughty word" could be the difference between PG-13 and R. Are we really to believe that a smartass space pirate who was raised by space pirates is really going to have as tame of a mouth as Quill? Not even the high-powered and over-paid execs that I work with have language that subdued.
Did you read the link on why the PG-13 rating should be abolished?
Additionally, if a parent took their small children to this film, they are probably not the best of parents. No body likes it when someone's 3-year old has a tantrum in a movie. A all-ages family movie is Frozen, by the way.
All of the character development was superficial, clichéd, and the characters themselves were all shallow. That might work if this was It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia, but it is not. The movie started out making us think there would be amazing writing and character development for Peter's character. Nope, that stopped as soon as the scene was over. Also, this is listed as Action-Adventure Sci-Fi, not comedy. However, I do agree that this is an action-adventure Sci-Fi comedy.
Also, if this movie had the perfect amount of character development, why did you rate it so low? For me, character development, in a movie that is supposed to flesh out the origin story for a team of "good-guys" coming together, in direct setup for additional installments, should be fairly top-notch regardless of the movie. It needs to be believable. It needs to be done well enough that it does not hinder the perception of the characters as being shallow and fake.
This lady made a great review and was better able to describe some of my problems with the films humor feeling off:
By the way, this lady also go death threats and violence because of this review. Pretty stupid...it is difficult to imagine that there are people out there even more extreme and butthurt than Inhuman, Kaz, and Estacado.
But Rocket was one of the worst for what I'm talking about. So much content...so much effort...but no substance.
If it had all this perfection, according to your perceptions, why did you rate it so low? If I was to talk about a movie the way you are talking about Guardians, I would rate it as my highest movie in my top 50 list. I do not think that highly of any film.
So what am I missing about your score? Where did the movie fall flat for you? What are your criticisms?
IMO, that's not a comic book nitpick, at all. These are supposed to be believable characters that are supposed to be powerful enough to contend with Thanos. Thanos is being setup as the big bad that is supposed to tie all of these movies together (Captain America, Thor, Iron Man, Hulk, Avengers, and now Guardians, and possibly Ant-Man). He is supposed to represent the ultimate threat for the Avengers, too. The Avengers does a much better job of showing us powerful super-heroes. How are they supposed to be on the same level as the Avengers if they come off as weak compared to the Avengers?
We have a Kree supervillian: he tosses around one of the good guys a bit (the cliché tough-guy on the team) but that is the closet we get to seeing how powerful these characters are supposed to be. Why are we afraid of this supervillain, again? He doesn't seem crazy powerful. And all of the Guardians are rather subdued in their powers, as well. If I am going to overlook this films failings, at least appeal to the inner-child in my by having powerful heroes and powerful villains beating the shit out of each other. The film couldn't even deliver that.
If they learn from the weaknesses in this film and improve those, I could easily see a Guardians movie becoming one of my favorite movies. It has all the elements to do that for me: potential character development, smartass humor, awesome villains, amazing superpowers, excellent effects, brilliant costume design/sound/coloring/art, and the Marvel Pizzazz.
I disagree. Tropes and clichés are bad if they are over-used, superficially thrown in, and used for the sake of marketing. Additionally, there you go again with the perfect label. I really need you to flesh out what you thought was wrong with the film...
Here is my problem with the humor: it tried to bring us the same brand and flavor the Avengers used...but it wasn't nearly as funny, witty, or sharp. It seems like the stupid little brother of Avengers...using similar jokes but either overusing some of them or getting the elements wrong to deliver them properly.
Okay...that's actually perfect.
Thanks for responding to me like an adult and picking apart my criticisms.
I like dialogue like this. Not lazy insults and tantrums.
Strike the above. You turn into a douchebag in this post:
__________________
Last edited by dadudemon on Aug 14th, 2014 at 04:48 PM
You're in a glass house with things like Freddy vs Jason in your top list.
But, try me. Throw at me anything you have about Prometheus in the Prometheus thread. I have likely already addressed anything you can think of. No cheating: do not use google to find problems with the film. List your specific problems.
I could care less if you liked the movie or not. I was just pointing out how you come off in your posts.
Anyhow I didn't want to ruin this thread with more nonsense.
Hey, it is okay to have an incorrect opinion like that. I love the Star Wars Prequel Trilogy and many think I am factually incorrect for my opinion.
At least you admit that this discussion is nonsense (because they are our opinions on how much we enjoyed a not-to-be-taken-seriously summer blockbuster). Maybe you're not a hypocritical baby after all?
I reserve the right to change my opinion of you, in the future.
I seem to recall Ronan pulping some dudes head in his intro with his bigass hammer. That made me cringe a bit, which isn't easy. Also the whole thing with Ronan being a racist genocidal zealot. Besides, I thought part that pushed how dark it could get was the intro with cancer mom. That was ****ing tragic and a hell of a morbid way to start a marvel superhero movie.
You can make the same argument about Han Solo, or Malcolm Reynolds. Hell, or even Tony Stark. Its a part of movies that no-one swears, no big deal.
Plus, Quill was abducted when he was about 10. He might just not be familiar with the really bad swear words.
__________________
Last edited by Nephthys on Aug 14th, 2014 at 05:54 PM
Gender: Male Location: 4th Street Underpass, Manhattan
Again, disagree. The humour felt very natural, for instance when quill was giving the middle finger in the prison
It was an all-ages family film. It has a talking raccoon and sentient tree for heaven's sake. Like I said, there were adult themes, but this film is clearly meant to be something you could take your whole family to if you wanted. This isn't Watchmen or Blade.
I didn't even notice the a-hole thing until you mentioned it, and considering they got away with "batshit", I'm willing to forgive them for their oh-so-distracting censorship. And you're seriously arguing that Quill didn't swear realistically enough? How many PG-13 space operas have you seen? Star Trek must have been a real bytch for you. Also, I'm pretty sure the potential genocide of an entire planet is quite gritty.
Nope I did not read it. Don't really see the need. While there are many potential rated-R films that got neutered to PG13 for potential BO gain, there are films, such as this one, that the PG13 rating is perfect for.
First off, bratty kids in theaters are the responsibility of their parents. Secondly, if you don't think there are Rocket Racoon toys waiting at Toys-R-Us for the 8-10 years who just saw the movie, you're delusional. The film was clearly meant for all ages. It's not Riddick.
As far as character development goes, as I said, it's not great, but it was enough to get me invested into the movie. When going into an all-ages comic book sci fi action comedy with a talking raccoon, I'm not expecting TDK-level character development.
Don't have time to refute her entire article, but in short, I disagree.
The film's not amazing, but it was perfectly put together as far as a formulaic film goes. I got exactly what I expected and nothing lower.
A comic book film doesn't need big shows of power to be entertaining. TDK relied more on it's drama than Batman's fists, and this relied more on humor than Drax's fists. There's nothing wrong with that. This film's not MOS which was all about showcasing superpowers (I did like that film), it's more about comedy and thematic light-heartedness.
Again, disagree. Tropes and cliches can quite enjoyable if done right. Pacific Rim is a great example. And again, when I say perfect, I mean the formula and balance between action and comedy were all distributed perfectly. The characters were not especially deep, but considering the nature of the film, they did not need to be.
TBH, this was far funnier than Tony's couple of quips in The Avengers. I've never seen IM breakdance to distract a villain.
Prometheus sucked. You got it in your top 50. Therefore you suck. Th logic is undeniable.
Whoa, when did I put FvsJ in my top 50? It's a guilty pleasure. The films listed in my profile aren't what I consider the objective best films I've seen. Otherwise films like A Streetcar Named Desire would be on there.
That was one of the 2-4 funny moments in the film. I listed another: the "He's just gonna say 'I am Groot' again" moment was hilarious, too. That's classic Pratt stuff. Immature and smartass.
Actually, it wasn't, and that is not disputable. It was PG-13.
"Parents are urged to be cautious. Some material may be inappropriate for pre-teenagers."
Why are we even discussing this? Is it not clearly obvious that this was not an "all-ages" film?
Do you really think topics the movie covered such as the vicarious sexual exploits of Quill and topics such as rape are appropriate for children? If you do, you're definitely far more liberal as a parent than I am.
That's not an appropriate nor is it a logical statement to make for why you think the film is an "all-ages" film.
"Pan's Labyrinth has fairies, toads, friendly fauns, and so forth!"
If I were to try and state the same thing you are, here, I would say, "This movie has a giant plant-like creature that has his arms chopped off, while seemingly screaming in pain, when he is first introduced. His companion is introduced as a psychopathic, gun-loving, hard-nosed bounty hunter who is not opposed to killing people. Ladies and gentlemen, these are not creatures for children. Do not go into this movie expecting Big Bird and Oscar the Grouch."
The MPAA does not agree with you. The MPAA thinks parents should be strongly cautioned against allowing even pre-teens into the film, much less 5-year-olds. They are guidelines, however. Some parents have sex with strangers in front of their children so, clearly, there are different values that parents wish to instill in their children. I won't judge you for having a liberal view on what children should be exposed to. We can agree to disagree on this topic because it is about morality and what parents should allow their children to watch.
"Destroy the world" concepts are common even in rated G movies. A "destroy the world" concept does not, even in and of itself, constitute being "gritty." Guess what? It's just a commonly used trope.
You should pay attention to the content in PG-13 movies, more. Watch for clear pandering to the MPAA so that they can earn themselves a PG-13 rating. Haven't you noticed the "unrated and uncut" versions of films being released for movies that were PG-13 in the theater? It is because they have to unrealistically cut back the content of the film to earn themselves the PG-13 rating.
Have you noticed that when you see a preview for a movie, it says, "This film has not yet been rated"? That is because they are trying to cut back the adult elements to earn the PG-13 rating. Watch for the next time you see that: 99 times out of 100, it is due to them having a difficult time with cutting off pieces of the film to fly under the R-rating radar. The 1 out of 100 times is usually a budgeting/post-production issue where they literally have not gotten the movie completed and reviewed by the MPAA, yet.
How do you know what was cut out and what was not considered due to the content of the film? You say it was "perfect" but it clearly wasn't if there is still evidence of them taming down content such as "a-hole." inb4 "it was part of his character." Clearly, the movie was not "perfect" for a PG-13 rating. Are are you forgetting when Groot impaled 8-12 of his enemies, and smashed them against the walls, ceiling, and floor? But! Hey! It's okay that he did that! We didn't show the bodies getting torn to shreds and tons of blood so it is okay!
If the movie was perfectly made for a PG-13 rating then my ass is small.
Covered this already: you're factually incorrect. You may have a point if the movie was G or even PG and I would agree with you and concede the point.
Fair enough. I was definitely invested in the movie because I enjoyed it and I wanted to see it to the end. Perhaps we agree 100% on this particular point I'm just more vocal about the elements I did not like?
You can put that type of spin on anything to make it sound like that. That's not a fair way to portray things. Here is another way to state something similar, but very different in conclusion, to what you're saying:
"When going into a comic book sci fi film set in the theme of galactic pirates, which is not intended for pre-teens and younger, you should expect alien creatures who are psychopaths who enjoy murdering other sapient species."
But, hey! It's okay, right? Because they made jokes while doing it. lol
Fair and I expected the same. I did not expect it to earn any higher than an 8 on my scale and it didn't. But I Like going into films that I expect will be mediocre and they blow me away like Equilibrium and Ingourious Basterds.
I agree. I have not disliked any of the Punisher movies.
Those Batman films were not setting up an overarching story that has them battling an ultimate bad-guy who is absurdly well passed the superhuman category. This movie does...but falls flat to showcase our heroes as being contenders.
You know what it could have taken? Just some quick dialogue in the prison saying stuff about how badass Drax is. The film didn't even do that. These are the types of things that are discussed and corrected when a script is drafted and reviewed. This is one of the reasons I think the character development felt hasty.
Well, I agree with you, mostly. But where I disagree is on the technicalities of it is. The movie exists specifically to bring in more money AND to continuing driving the story towards the big bad AND combine two major movie groups into 1. GotG is supposed to be a "carry-over" movie that carries us over when all of this shit finally comes together in a massive but ridiculously fun combination of super-hero teams. Execs are sitting in their offices, rubbing their juicy balls, just thinking about it.
__________________
Last edited by dadudemon on Aug 14th, 2014 at 07:46 PM
I do not think you disagree. I just think you disagree with my application of criticisms on this film. You seem to state the same things I do and where we differ is only on how it applies to this film.
It wasn't for me.
Also, the Dancing was lame and unbelievable. At that point, it was clear that they were trying too hard to be funny and it was uncomfortably in cringe territory.
How dare you utter such a sacrilege! You will be spanked and you will be bereft of your cake!
KMC Community Forums
Aug 14th, 2014 12:19 PM
No cheating: do not use google to find problems with the film. List your specific problems. 
