Nictarion Posted March 30, 2015 Share Posted March 30, 2015 Veltigar, What did't you like about GotG? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sj4iy Posted March 30, 2015 Share Posted March 30, 2015 Veltigar, What did't you like about GotG? Yeah, I'm confused, too. I went into GotG thinking it would be utter crap and was delightfully proven wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veltigar Posted March 30, 2015 Share Posted March 30, 2015 Veltigar, What did't you like about GotG? I was expecting Marvel to produce a great movie. The idea of GotG was so daft and the trailers so good that I was sure it was finally going to happen. In the end it was slightly better than the usual crap Marvel churns out, but that's not saying much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veltigar Posted March 30, 2015 Share Posted March 30, 2015 Also, another movie that was a total disappointment: Anchorman II. That movie makes me physically sick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nictarion Posted March 30, 2015 Share Posted March 30, 2015 I was expecting Marvel to produce a great movie. The idea of GotG was so daft and the trailers so good that I was sure it was finally going to happen. In the end it was slightly better than the usual crap Marvel churns out, but that's not saying much. Hmm...I couldn't disagree more. From the lead actor, to the music, to the SFX, I thought GotG was a ton of fun. The real only weakness was the villain imo, but everything else was so good it was a minor thing for me. :dunno: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nictarion Posted March 30, 2015 Share Posted March 30, 2015 Also, another movie that was a total disappointment: Anchorman II. That movie makes me physically sick. That I agree with, wish I could get the time back i wasted watching that PoS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veltigar Posted March 30, 2015 Share Posted March 30, 2015 Yeah, imo Chris Pratt was great. For the rest though: the music was better utilized in the trailer, the action setpieces were boring as ever, the humour was inconsistent and some jokes were just funnier in the trailer, the villain was bland as ever, Groot was fun but he was also their deux-ex-machina out of everything, Gamorra was underwritten, Merle was better in tWD (and I think tWD is terrible) and there was no sense of danger. ETA: Also Thanos is one boring villain. At least going by his appearance in GotG Despite all that though, GotG was still better than pretty much every other Marvel movie (Cap 2, Iron Man and the Avengers excluded). That I agree with, wish I could get the time back i wasted watching that PoS!It was a shameless cashgrab and everyone involved should be ashamed of themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sj4iy Posted March 30, 2015 Share Posted March 30, 2015 Hmm...I couldn't disagree more. From the lead actor, to the music, to the SFX, I thought GotG was a ton of fun. The real only weakness was the villain imo, but everything else was so good it was a minor thing for me. :dunno: I agree with this. It was fun...most movies these days seem to forget that and try to be too dramatic. GotG was never like that- they took every opportunity to poke fun at everything without ever taking themselves seriously. The villain was weak and there were plot holes, but those could be overlooked simply because I was enjoying myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronn Stone Posted March 30, 2015 Share Posted March 30, 2015 Whereas I was bored to tears by GotG. Didn't care about the characters, hated the music when it was new - hated it still. Didn't think it had a truly clever line in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HexMachina Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Smaug and Bilbo were the best part of the Hobbit movies.The dwarves had their moments, but Jackson seemed intent on turning them into comic relief/video game characters.The elves were laughable.However, I won't crow about the book being better, because despite its status as a 'children's novel', it's also full of plot holes and terrible characterization (we don't even learn most of the Dwarves' names, the Dwarves in general are horrible and selfish people, and Gandalf disappears without a trace and reappears as befits the story and with no explanation). I don't understand why people are so forgiving of these deficits if they are written for 'kids' than if they were written for 'adults', but so it goes.1) we learn all of the dwarves names.2) what's wrong with the characterisation? It's a children's novel, the main characters are fleshed out sufficiently for what the book is aiming to do.3) the dwarves are not horrible and selfish at all, save when it comes to the Arkenstone. They are willing to help out Bilbo long before he does anything for them. And even with the Arkenstone, it's mostly Thorin. Besides which, that is the entire point of that part of the book.4) all of Gandalf's disappearances and reappearances are explained in the book.People are so 'forgiving' of these (supposed) deficits because it's a children's novel, and it's held to different standards to an adults novel. Do you really think a child cares about every character we meet in the novel has a full history and back story to explain their thought processes and actions? You obviously don't like the book. That's fine, you are entitled to that opinion. But it seems you are trying to hold a children's novel to entirely unrealistic standards (besides which, some of your criticisms are factually incorrect) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theda Baratheon Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 I'm watching Stardust for the second time this week so obviously I love that one but I've never actually read the book so don't know how good of an adaption it is. It's just a really, really good fantasy film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HexMachina Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 I'm watching Stardust for the second time this week so obviously I love that one but I've never actually read the book so don't know how good of an adaption it is. It's just a really, really good fantasy film.I knew I liked you for a reason :p Seriously, I only watched it for the first time last year and I loved it. It's everything I could ask for in a feel-good fantasy film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theda Baratheon Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 I knew I liked you for a reason :P Seriously, I only watched it for the first time last year and I loved it. It's everything I could ask for in a feel-good fantasy film. You should watch Ladyhawke if you haven't; an 80s fantasy movie with a beautiful young Pfeiffer - it's a great film!!! :P Stardust is awesome though, I love it to bits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramsay B. Posted April 1, 2015 Share Posted April 1, 2015 ETA: Also Thanos is one boring villain. At least going by his appearance in GotG GotG lived up to the hype and I have no problem with what they showed of Thanos so far but his voice is just dumb. I wish they went with a cliched, deep English accent from Cumberbatch or someone like that. Brolin's voice coming out of Thanos is weird to me. The Mad Titan is easily my favorite comic character and hope they don't fuck him up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stannis Eats No Peaches Posted April 1, 2015 Share Posted April 1, 2015 I become angry every time I think about the third Hobbit film. I had low expectations going in and it was worse than I thought it was going to be, so I guess that qualifies for the thread. :P The Hobbit trilogy as a whole utterly failed to meet my expectations sadly.Guardians of the Galaxy surpassed my expectations in a good way. I wasn't expecting much going in, but I ended up really enjoying it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sj4iy Posted April 1, 2015 Share Posted April 1, 2015 1) we learn all of the dwarves names.2) what's wrong with the characterisation? It's a children's novel, the main characters are fleshed out sufficiently for what the book is aiming to do.3) the dwarves are not horrible and selfish at all, save when it comes to the Arkenstone. They are willing to help out Bilbo long before he does anything for them. And even with the Arkenstone, it's mostly Thorin. Besides which, that is the entire point of that part of the book.4) all of Gandalf's disappearances and reappearances are explained in the book.People are so 'forgiving' of these (supposed) deficits because it's a children's novel, and it's held to different standards to an adults novel. Do you really think a child cares about every character we meet in the novel has a full history and back story to explain their thought processes and actions? You obviously don't like the book. That's fine, you are entitled to that opinion. But it seems you are trying to hold a children's novel to entirely unrealistic standards (besides which, some of your criticisms are factually incorrect)Uh, wrong.1. I do like the book. Better than LotR, actually. That doesn't mean I gloss over its obvious deficits. LotR is plodding and spends too much time on unnecessary descriptions, while TH has the exact opposite problem- half of the story is left out and important things are barely described at all.2. Children's books shouldn't be held to a different standard just because they are for children. That's underestimating the intelligence of kids. Plenty of authors DON'T do that and write amazing works of literature.3. The Dwarves aren't differentiated in the books at all...names are hardly important when the characters rarely do anything to distinguish themselves from the group. They are also quite cowardly and very selfish and honestly make you dislike them immensely.The movies were bad, the book is okay. However, I've argued with enough Tolkien purists and have no wish to repeat myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stannis Eats No Peaches Posted April 1, 2015 Share Posted April 1, 2015 3. The Dwarves aren't differentiated in the books at all...names are hardly important when the characters rarely do anything to distinguish themselves from the group. They are also quite cowardly and very selfish and honestly make you dislike them immensely.I disagree. While there are too many dwarves for all of them to be memorable, I remember being very fond of Balin. Obviously Thorin is memorable, as are Fili and Kili for being the ones who die and Bombur springs to mind too. I realise that remembering 5 out of 13 is hardly good, but saying none of them are differentiated is clearly an exaggeration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polishgenius Posted April 1, 2015 Share Posted April 1, 2015 I'm watching Stardust for the second time this week so obviously I love that one but I've never actually read the book so don't know how good of an adaption it is. It's just a really, really good fantasy film. Why do you hate Neil Gaiman so? :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nictarion Posted April 1, 2015 Share Posted April 1, 2015 Why do you hate Neil Gaiman so? :(I'm a huge Neil Gaiman fan, and I haven't read it either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HexMachina Posted April 1, 2015 Share Posted April 1, 2015 Uh, wrong.1. I do like the book. Better than LotR, actually. That doesn't mean I gloss over its obvious deficits. LotR is plodding and spends too much time on unnecessary descriptions, while TH has the exact opposite problem- half of the story is left out and important things are barely described at all.2. Children's books shouldn't be held to a different standard just because they are for children. That's underestimating the intelligence of kids. Plenty of authors DON'T do that and write amazing works of literature.3. The Dwarves aren't differentiated in the books at all...names are hardly important when the characters rarely do anything to distinguish themselves from the group. They are also quite cowardly and very selfish and honestly make you dislike them immensely.The movies were bad, the book is okay. However, I've argued with enough Tolkien purists and have no wish to repeat myself. I disagree entirely, but especially with point no. 2 and 3. It's got nothing to do with "underestimating" children's intelligence, it's called knowing your audience. A child doesn't care that we don't have an abundance of information about every single character we meet, that we don't have heavy philosophical issues raised, that every scene is not described in excruciating detail etc etc. A children's book should be concise, get to the point straight away. I don't understand why you think it should be held to the same standard as a normal novel. Children are different to adults, they have different tastes/interests, and a book targeted at children should reflect this.As to the dwarves, I misunderstood, since you did say they weren't all named, which they are. But even so, many of them have some fleshing out. Balin for example, as Stannis Eats No Peaches said, asp do Fili and Kili, I would also add Dori, who is particularly kind and often carries Bilbo and tries to go back and rescue him when necessary. I really don't understand how they are selfish and make you dislike them, you're going to need to explain that a bit more. And yeah, I am a Tolkein fan. That got nothing to do with why I'm defending the book on this occasion though. It's more to do with you holding it to an unrealistic standard for a children's novel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.