"Guardians of the Galaxy" - currently 100% on RT

[SunnyD]

Jeremy Jahns briefly mentioned the end scene during his review. He didn't say what it is, but he did mention

Spoiler

that it made him ask, (paraphrasing) "Are they really going to do that or is it just a fun little teaser?"

Not really a spoiler, but some people don't want to know anything. So, I'll hide it.

Anyway, I'm going to see it tonight at 7:30.

Actually, apparently it's also in a scene IN the movie itself too. That's why I asked earlier if it was just a cameo or not.

 

[Phoenix86]

If you're talking about the typical mid/end-of credits cameos that these Marvel flicks do, I assume it is hinting towards a future movie.

The next Avengers is Age of Ultron, correct? And I do believe, without any real knowledge

Spoiler

Iron Man

is involved in this Guardians flick, or with the Guardians, anyhow.

Either way, the current Marvel IP, aside from the X-Men stuff, has been pushing all the stories to an ongoing plot with everyone involved. I'm still giddy over the Thanos appearance at the end of Avengers--now with Drax and Gamorra (not sure what has happened to them since the 90s), I'm hoping there is some Infinity something something in the works.

The only problem with the current IP, imo, is that Fantastic Four is still owned by whoever made those turds...and they also own Silver Surfer. I give a generous helping of shit what happens to the FF, but this keeps Silver Surfer in complete obscurity.

You remember Thor? That movie that came out quite a while back. The scene with the destroyer in the beginning, where it's protecting the vault. As the camera is sweeping down a hallway we catch a glimpse of other items in the vault.

 

[TheAdvocate]

I used to read comics but never this one. I see its PG-13. Tonight is girls night for wifey. I was thinking about taking my two boys (ages 8, and 4-going-on-14) to see this.

Based on the comic, how many F-bombs, etc should I expect? The 8 year old is dying to see it and can handle a little, but I'm not enough of a bad parent to subject the younger one.

 

[smackababy]

I used to read comics but never this one. I see its PG-13. Tonight is girls night for wifey. I was thinking about taking my two boys (ages 8, and 4-going-on-14) to see this.

Based on the comic, how many F-bombs, etc should I expect? The 8 year old is dying to see it and can handle a little, but I'm not enough of a bad parent to subject the younger one.

Looks like one F bomb, and it is mouthed, not even said.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2015381/parentalguide?ref_=tt_stry_pg

 

[mikeymikec]

RT is pretty much the best thing to go by. IMDB is garbage. The Dark Knight Rises is an 8.6? Really... It was better than Toy Story? I think not.

You would compare the two? Why?

 

[HN]

RT is pretty much the best thing to go by. IMDB is garbage. The Dark Knight Rises is an 8.6? Really... It was better than Toy Story? I think not.

You would compare the two? Why?

GotG and Step Up: All In are currently sitting at 88%. decisions decisions

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/guardians_of_the_galaxy/
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/step_up_all_in/

 

[Puppies04]

Both of your posts in this thread indicate you have absolutely no idea how Rotten Tomatoes works.

Here, I'll explain it to you.

First off, the reviewers cannot be just any random guy off the street. It has to be a reviewer with a real readership. They actually have the criteria for acceptance listed right on their website. Yeah, it can be a blog, but it has to be a well-read blog. You can't just have Joe Schmoe Blog with 1000 readers and get accepted as a reviewer.

If a reviewer gives it a positive review (eg. 3 out of 5 or 5 out of 5), it is considered a positive.
If a reviewer gives it a negative review (eg. 1 out of 5 or 2 out of 5), it is considered a negative.

Then they add up the numbers of positives and negatives and provide a score. 25/25 is excellent for a pre-release movie. Based on that score, I'd expect the score (over 100 reviewers) after the movie is actually released to be over 75% possibly as high as 85% or more, but the range may be something like 70% to 95%. On Rotten Tomatoes, anything 60% or better is considered positive.

If you want an average on the ratings, then go to Metacritic.com where they average them all out and give out a metarating.

Currently on Metacritic.com it's 77, based on the reviews of 12 critics.

http://www.metacritic.com/movie/guardians-of-the-galaxy

See I heard it works like this

1. Big suitcase full of money
2. ?????
3. 25/25
4. Profit

 

[Eug]

GotG and Step Up: All In are currently sitting at 88%. decisions decisions

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/guardians_of_the_galaxy/
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/step_up_all_in/

Step Up All In only has 8 reviews. GotG has 113 now.

As I said earlier, 25/25 is difficult to achieve but 3/3 is easy. 7/8 is promising though, if you like that genre that is. (This isn't the type of movie that gets everyone reviewing it, but that should be obvious.)

Note though, like Metacritic, RT actually does provide score averages. It's hard to see but it's there. Step Up All In is 5.6/10 whereas GotG is 7.6. However, that's not RT's main focus.

 

[smackababy]

You would compare the two? Why?

Because, I literally looked at the IMDB top 250 and picked two movies that were in the wrong spots.

How about this: 62 movies ranked above Citizen Kane, with only maybe 3 or 4 legitimate contenders for number 1? And that 62 includes gems like Dark Knight Rises and Django Unchained. IMDB rankings are so full of shit.

GotG and Step Up: All In are currently sitting at 88%. decisions decisions

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/guardians_of_the_galaxy/
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/step_up_all_in/

You don't know that is a bad movie though. You just assume it is because it is the 4th (maybe?) sequel to a street dancing movie that once had Nick Cannon (I think?). For all you know, it could be an amazing, well shot allegory about the racial tensions brought about in inner city America and the obstacles one must do to overcome them. I mean, I doubt it, but it is possible.

 

[mikeymikec]

Because, I literally looked at the IMDB top 250 and picked two movies that were in the wrong spots.

How about this: 62 movies ranked above Citizen Kane, with only maybe 3 or 4 legitimate contenders for number 1? And that 62 includes gems like Dark Knight Rises and Django Unchained. IMDB rankings are so full of shit.

I agree completely (except about DKR, it promised so much, rushed everything and so bollocks'd up the execution), it just seemed to me that you wanted to compare Toy Story with a film that wasn't a children's flick

I think part of IMDB's scoring problem is how people relate to it. If you thought a film was 'nothing special', yet average, watchable, competently delivered, do you give it a 7 or a 5? I think most people give it a 7, which is why so many bollocks movies are rated 7.x. Are such people really saying that 69% or so of movies are not that good, or is that their way of saying they enjoyed it?

 

[smackababy]

I agree completely (except about DKR, it promised so much, rushed everything and so bollocks'd up the execution), it just seemed to me that you wanted to compare Toy Story with a film that wasn't a children's flick

I think part of IMDB's scoring problem is how people relate to it. If you thought a film was 'nothing special', yet average, watchable, competently delivered, do you give it a 7 or a 5? I think most people give it a 7, which is why so many bollocks movies are rated 7.x. Are such people really saying that 69% or so of movies are not that good, or is that their way of saying they enjoyed it?

DKR is a worse movie than Toy Story by ever metric except Batman's per minute. The fact that DKR is rated so highly is nothing but Nolan fanboy behavior; see Memento, it was good but it wasn't that fucking good.

And the problem with the scoring is that they are given a number, which is picked arbitrarily (or at extremes: like the movie it is a 10; hate someone in it, like Miley Cyrus, it is 1). The simple RT metric of "like it / didn't like it" simplifies the rating system to be a lot less bias. If 70% of people liked a movie, there is a good chance it will be enjoyable. That doesn't mean 70% of people think it is a 10 or most people think it is a 7 out of 10.

 

[KeithTalent]

DKR is a worse movie than Toy Story by ever metric except Batman's per minute. The fact that DKR is rated so highly is nothing but Nolan fanboy behavior; see Memento, it was good but it wasn't that fucking good.

And the problem with the scoring is that they are given a number, which is picked arbitrarily (or at extremes: like the movie it is a 10; hate someone in it, like Miley Cyrus, it is 1). The simple RT metric of "like it / didn't like it" simplifies the rating system to be a lot less bias. If 70% of people liked a movie, there is a good chance it will be enjoyable. That doesn't mean 70% of people think it is a 10 or most people think it is a 7 out of 10.

Agree on DKR, totally disagree on Memento, and no possible way that a cartoon is better than either of them.

KT

 

[smackababy]

Agree on DKR, totally disagree on Memento, and no possible way that a cartoon is better than either of them.

KT

First off, Toy Story isn't a cartoon. Secondly, Memento is a decent movie, but it wasn't THAT good.

 

[Ichinisan]

Agree on DKR, totally disagree on Memento, and no possible way that a cartoon is better than either of them.

KT

Serious? TS3 was WAAAY better than TDKR.

 

[SunnyD]

First off, Toy Story isn't a cartoon. Secondly, Memento is a decent movie, but it wasn't THAT good.

Arguing that 3D animation a la Toy Story isn't a cartoon is like an alcoholic saying a wine cooler isn't an alcoholic beverage.

 

[KeithTalent]

Arguing that 3D animation a la Toy Story isn't a cartoon is like an alcoholic saying a wine cooler isn't an alcoholic beverage.

Aye, this.

KT

 

[zinfamous]

Arguing that 3D animation a la Toy Story isn't a cartoon is like an alcoholic saying a wine cooler isn't an alcoholic beverage.

agree with the first, disagree with the second!

 

[tynopik]

I used to read comics but never this one. I see its PG-13. Tonight is girls night for wifey. I was thinking about taking my two boys (ages 8, and 4-going-on-14) to see this.

Based on the comic, how many F-bombs, etc should I expect? The 8 year old is dying to see it and can handle a little, but I'm not enough of a bad parent to subject the younger one.

http://kids-in-mind.com/g/guardiansofthegalaxy.htm

 

[Hugo Drax]

I hope the movie is better than the trailer. The trailer does not impress, the one liners in the trailer were not funny either.

 

[JEDI]

how much did vin diesel got paid to say "I am groot" over and over again thruout the movie?

and heck, why even bother using vin diesel?
you could have gotten anybody to say those 3 words at a fraction of the cost.

if u want vin diesel in the movie, then let him be Drax the destroyer. he has the physique for it

 

[Eug]

^^ Well, this is the same movie that has an Oscar-nominated actor playing a raccoon.

 

[JEDI]

^^ Well, this is the same movie that has an Oscar-nominated actor playing a raccoon.

scrap both Bradley cooper and vin diesel, and hire robin Williams to do the raccoon if you're going to spend that kind of $$$

(and use a computer generated voice to do Groot. an intern probably couldn't screw it up since it's only 3 words.)

btw- where's iron man?
thought marvel was going to tie guardians to someone familiar to bring in the crowds?
in the original series with Charlie 7, they found Captain America's shield.

 

[Eug]

I have not yet seen the movie, but seriously, some reviews said that Bradley Cooper's voice acting was phenomenal, and that Vin Diesel actually changed the intonation of his 3 words to suit each scene, and it actually works.

 

[bearxor]

Movie was amazing. Lived up to expectations.

End credits scene was, I think, just a fun joke. I don't think they're going to do another movie on that character.

WAY more Marvel cosmic in the movie than I expected. GotG will definitely be in Avengers 3.

 

[Aikouka]

One thing kept popping into my mind throughout the entire movie. So, I remember hearing about how filming for this movie finished up awhile back. I just did a search, and according to Wikipedia, Gunn finished filming in October 2013... and post-production finished... the beginning of this month! This was mostly on my mind, because over the weekend, I heard that Duncan Jones had already finished filming for the WarCraft movie back in May (Wikipedia)... and that the movie doesn't come out until 2016.

So, considering all of that, while watching the movie, it was pretty crazy just how many scenes are pretty much full CGI -- as in there isn't a single human actor in the scene. As the credits scrolled, it was hard to miss the huge wall of text that was the name of all of the animators on the film. They literally filled the entire screen with names only separated by a single dot ( like this: ● ) for probably about 10-15 seconds. Damn. Damn damn!