James Gunn on the movie's scope.
http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=39971
I liked his comparison - 'If The Avengers are like The Beatles, then the Guardians are like The Rolling Stones.'
😄
marvel is very high this as they have already prepped a sequel..
Originally posted by BruceSkywalkerIt's good they are confident, and I hope the movie is awesome. But it will ultimately depend on how big a hit it is. Months leading up to it's release, DC & Warners were talking about quickly shooting back-to-back Green Lantern sequels. Either they disbelieved the turkey they were about to birth, or it was a ploy to drum up positive perception of the film ahead of time.
marvel is very high this as they have already prepped a sequel..
Originally posted by roughrider
It's good they are confident, and I hope the movie is awesome. But it will ultimately depend on how big a hit it is. Months leading up to it's release, DC & Warners were talking about quickly shooting back-to-back Green Lantern sequels. Either they disbelieved the turkey they were about to birth, or it was a ploy to drum up positive perception of the film ahead of time.
i agree
Majority of the naysayers claiming this will bomb are people who's knowledge of the MU, mostly come from cartoons in the 90s. Their main arguments are the characters aren't popular with the GA and characters like Rocket Raccoon and Groot may turn some people off.
The reason the first argument doesn't work is because if popularity is an issue, then that would mean that no original movie can ever be successful. As no one knew or cared about the characters beforehand. Guardians may not have a huge built in fanbase, but unlike original films, it has pre-existing fans.
Everyone's gotta start somewhere. Iron Man was pretty much an unknown B-lister before his movie. Afterwards his popularity skyrocketed. Same with Thor. There's also Blade. He was a barely-C-list character who went on to spawn three movies(although the third one wasn't good) that made a lot of money, a cable TV series, and an animated mini-series. And there's also Hellboy. Nobody knew who he was before his movies and they also made a lot of money.
As for Rocket Raccoon and Groot, any outlandish fantasy/sci-fi concept sounds utterly ridiculous out of context. Those two are no different. If Marvel felt they had to go really out of their way to sell those characters or the film would severely suffer, they wouldn't have used them.
And in regards to a possible sequel, it would make sense considering Thanos is supposed to be the big bad in Avengers 3 and is heavily connected to Guardians.
Ah even Agents of Shield gets like 8 million viewers every week(much more than great shows like Arrow), which just shows how big the Marvel brand is right now. So yeah if GOTG is good with the MCU backing it up, it has a very good chance of being a big hit.
In fact which MCU movie wasn't a big hit? Just TIH and that was in the MCU's first year of movies. But every single MCU movie since then has been a major hit.
AoS is on ABC. And shows on ABC tend to get far more views than on the CW. So it's not surprising AoS has more viewers than Arrow even though Arrow is one of CW's biggest shows.
Anyway, we will see how big GotG ends up being. I personally am really looking forward to it, moreso than any other super hero movie. But I think it will be a difficult sell to the GA.
Originally posted by KCJ506
Majority of the naysayers claiming this will bomb are people who's knowledge of the MU, mostly come from cartoons in the 90s. Their main arguments are the characters aren't popular with the GA and characters like Rocket Raccoon and Groot may turn some people off.The reason the first argument doesn't work is because if popularity is an issue, then that would mean that no original movie can ever be successful. As no one knew or cared about the characters beforehand. Guardians may not have a huge built in fanbase, but unlike original films, it has pre-existing fans.
Everyone's gotta start somewhere. Iron Man was pretty much an unknown B-lister before his movie. Afterwards his popularity skyrocketed. Same with Thor. There's also Blade. He was a barely-C-list character who went on to spawn three movies(although the third one wasn't good) that made a lot of money, a cable TV series, and an animated mini-series. And there's also Hellboy. Nobody knew who he was before his movies and they also made a lot of money.
As for Rocket Raccoon and Groot, any outlandish fantasy/sci-fi concept sounds utterly ridiculous out of context. Those two are no different. If Marvel felt they had to go really out of their way to sell those characters or the film would severely suffer, they wouldn't have used them.
And in regards to a possible sequel, it would make sense considering Thanos is supposed to be the big bad in Avengers 3 and is heavily connected to Guardians.
I agree. Every franchise has to start somewhere
Trailer debut is next week, February 18!
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/MarvelFreshman/news/?a=94480
Originally posted by roughrider
Trailer debut is next week, February 18!http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/MarvelFreshman/news/?a=94480
