Marvel Reveals Official Guardians of the Galaxy Synopsis

[RJ Dalton]

Yes, tell the whole world what's going to happen in your movie before it's released, therefore destroying all the tension and excitement of the first viewing. BRILLIANT!!!!

 

[Olas]

I'm really only interested in this because it appears to unironically feature a talking raccoon. I could care less about green black widow, generic white guy[footnote]Who I just KNOW is going to end up being the central lead character who has to be introduced to everything so we can learn about the universe.[/footnote], burn victim Putin, or mini-treebeard[footnote]Really the only character who looks truly alien, not that he looks interesting.[/footnote].

 

[ninjaRiv]

I think everyone's main point is that your claim to be a writer has nothing to do with what you said. I'm just throwing that out there. Also, that you based everything on an image and a short synopsis, which is not something a writer should ever do... I'm just saying.

Not only did you get the original point, but I think you touched upon an interesting point in itself.

Synospes suck. It's something writers should know, it's something agents acknowledge, it's something publishers seem to be aware of. Coming up with a decent summary is hard and often times comes off bad.

I don't think that's where you were going, but I also think that it doesn't take a writer's perspective to specifically understand that a good writer can make a cliché fest work and a bad writer can ruin an awesome idea.

No, that's pretty much exactly what I meant (although, was a bit drunk and tired when sending the post...). A Synopsis is only supposed to get people interested but it's very difficult to do that with only a handful of sentences. Even a short synopsis for something like Blade Runner could make it sound like a bad movie.

 

[Baresark]

I have to say, while I am looking forward to the this more than anyone I know (the space opera/adventure kind of Sci Fi has has always appealed to me), I can't stand Batista. He is a shitty ass actor. He is big and angry looking, that is it. So, technically I guess he could be a pretty good fit for Drax, but the I have never heard him deliver a line that even remotely convinces me that he is anything but a really horrible actor who transitioned from Pro Wrestling. I am still looking forward to this, though is Bradley Cooper gonna deliver lines in a British accent? Rocket Raccoon has always read with a British access in the comics. I don't like Vin Diesel too much as an actor, but all he has to do is say variations of his name like an intergalactic Pokemon, so that is good. Still, with all the doubts the casting choices has left me with, I am still very much looking forward to this movie, as a comic lover. Nice to see Ronin making an appearance as a villain, means we could see an awesome Kree Empire featured in the movie, as he is the Accuser of said people (on and off).

 

[Saltyk]

Look, there's going to be a raccoon strapped with every gun known and unknown to man unloading said guns in gratuitous fashion while most likely piggy-backing on the shoulder of a giant sentient tree yelling it's name over and over again and flailing around while most likely firing it's own platitude of weapons in a gratuitous fashion

In Space

Fuck you, I'm going to see this movie and I'm going to enjoy it.

You know what? I like this comment! I really do. I'm with ya, brother. I mean when you put it like that, how can this not be awesome?

Also, that tree is going to be voiced by Vin "Iron Giant" Diesel. So imagine that voice as it bashes enemies with said raccoon perched on it's shoulder.

Yeah, I don't care if it looks silly. It looks like it will be a fun crazy romp. After some of the more "super serial and dark" comic book movies, I'm liking Marvel's dedication to fun more and more.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Well doesn't this look fucking stupid. Dammit people, FUN and STUPID don't NEED to go hand in hand. I don't have to like Citizen Kane to know it.

 

[JenSeven]

Well doesn't this look fucking stupid. Dammit people, FUN and STUPID don't NEED to go hand in hand. I don't have to like Citizen Kane to know it.

And fun and stupid can go hand in hand. There are plenty of examples for that.
Let's name a few.
Monty Python And The Holy Grail.
The Big Lebowsky.
Bill And Ted's Excellent Adventure.
A Fish Called Wanda.
O Brother, Where Art Thou?
Dogma.
Reservoir Dogs

None of these movies have a story that is particularly deep or meaningful and still are a great amount of fun.
And if someone were to write a synopsis on any of these, they would look completely stupid and dumb too, generic even in some cases.
Let's not base our assumptions on a single picture, the names of a few actors and a very brief synopsis till we have actually seen the movie. We don't know what it is, what it looks like or any details.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Well doesn't this look fucking stupid. Dammit people, FUN and STUPID don't NEED to go hand in hand. I don't have to like Citizen Kane to know it.

And fun and stupid can go hand in hand. There are plenty of examples for that.
Let's name a few.
Monty Python And The Holy Grail.
The Big Lebowsky.
Bill And Ted's Excellent Adventure.
A Fish Called Wanda.
O Brother, Where Art Thou?
Dogma.
Reservoir Dogs

None of these movies have a story that is particularly deep or meaningful and still are a great amount of fun.
And if someone were to write a synopsis on any of these, they would look completely stupid and dumb too, generic even in some cases.
Let's not base our assumptions on a single picture, the names of a few actors and a very brief synopsis till we have actually seen the movie. We don't know what it is, what it looks like or any details.

With the exception of Bill & Ted's whatever none of those movies are "stupid". Monty Python is sketch comedy in movie form, Big Lebowsky is California noir with a stoner replacing the detective archetype, O Brother retells Odyssey through Depression Era story (don't confuse stupid characters with stupid movie; same for Fish Called Wanda). Dogma is bad but nowhere near stupid. What's stupid about Reservoir Dogs? Again, stupid, incompetent characters don't necessarily make stupid movies.

This Galaxy movie looks stupid. It's set in a series of movies that take themselves seriously. It's not a parody of anything and it's not going down as a comedy. It's another Joss Whedon-y superhero action movie with lots of CGI and stupid-looking stock sci-fi characters trying to out-sass each other.

 

[Therumancer]

Mmm interesting roster, isn't Drax a villain and I thought that green woman was Mantis? Also isn't Star-Lord is a a cyborg of some kind? Lastly man Rocket Racoon look slim compared to his comicbook apperance.
Either way I am more hype up!

Drax The Destroyer is kind of grim, but he's more or less a hero:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drax_The_Destroyer

Basically he's a hero who was specifically created to hunt down and kill Thanos. As his wiki points out though they kind of powered him down over the years, I personally suspect because Thanos has been far more popular as a villain and a guy running around as a hero who is more or less his equal and hates his guts kind of ruins him in some people's minds.

He's a human in an artificial body. Played correctly Bautista is a good choice, since he's kind of a one note character and should largely be lurking around as a prop and doing some fight scenes, not really "acting" or doing drama.


Starlord has undergone several changes through the years. He HAS been a Cyborg. Classically he's a human-alien hybrid born on earth, and something of a jerk, he winds up getting the role of Starlord only after being rejected for the mantle originally. He's kind of a cross between Judge Dredd, Batman, Space Ghost, and Han Solo if you'd have to define him. Like Drax he was GREATLY powered down, as the wiki points out he lost most of his cooler stuff about a decade ago, and I have no idea if he ever replaced it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Lord

For the most part he's kind of the baseline guy who is brains and gear/gadgets over brawn and innate powers, and tends to act as the leader of the group when he's together with the Guardians.


I'll be honest in saying I'm less thrilled with the inclusion of Rocket Racoon and Groot. Groot is a mess, being a tree monster that once terrorized earth as a villain, and honestly I've never quite really gotten the point of having him with the Guardians as a good guy. His big gimmick seems to mostly be strength and durability (which is redundant, especially with Drax) and most importantly the freak ability to get killed and regrow from a sprig. Rocket Raccoon is pretty much what you get when you give an Ewok a tail, a gun, and an attitude. I mean he's okay, but always struck me as one of those weird characters that was better to say "hey, this exists in our wild, weird, and expansive universe" rather than to bring to the forefront too often. I guess a lot of people like him, and I feel he's okay, but honestly it seems like a mistake to put him into a movie when there are so many other things they could do instead, not to mention the sheer cost to CGI animate Rocket and Groot is probably going to be a staggering amount of the budget.

It will be interesting to see, and I think it's cool some of Marvel's lesser known properties are getting some love, but honestly I do think "Guardians Of The Galaxy" is going to be a massive gamble, more so than their other projects.

I also confess to some concern that there will be other marvel characters like "Moondragon" showing up in this that deserve some serious love/attention, and won't wind up getting it due to being cast entirely off the cuff.

Also I am wondering if Rocket Racoon will have/mention Gideon's Bible at all and what kind of reaction that might get.

 

[BiscuitWheels]

Well doesn't this look fucking stupid. Dammit people, FUN and STUPID don't NEED to go hand in hand. I don't have to like Citizen Kane to know it.

And fun and stupid can go hand in hand. There are plenty of examples for that.
Let's name a few.
Monty Python And The Holy Grail.
The Big Lebowsky.
Bill And Ted's Excellent Adventure.
A Fish Called Wanda.
O Brother, Where Art Thou?
Dogma.
Reservoir Dogs

None of these movies have a story that is particularly deep or meaningful and still are a great amount of fun.
And if someone were to write a synopsis on any of these, they would look completely stupid and dumb too, generic even in some cases.
Let's not base our assumptions on a single picture, the names of a few actors and a very brief synopsis till we have actually seen the movie. We don't know what it is, what it looks like or any details.

With the exception of Bill & Ted's whatever none of those movies are "stupid". Monty Python is sketch comedy in movie form, Big Lebowsky is California noir with a stoner replacing the detective archetype, O Brother retells Odyssey through Depression Era story (don't confuse stupid characters with stupid movie; same for Fish Called Wanda). Dogma is bad but nowhere near stupid. What's stupid about Reservoir Dogs? Again, stupid, incompetent characters don't necessarily make stupid movies.

This Galaxy movie looks stupid. It's set in a series of movies that take themselves seriously. It's not a parody of anything and it's not going down as a comedy. It's another Joss Whedon-y superhero action movie with lots of CGI and stupid-looking stock sci-fi characters trying to out-sass each other.

Oh, so you've seen it already, have you?

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Well doesn't this look fucking stupid. Dammit people, FUN and STUPID don't NEED to go hand in hand. I don't have to like Citizen Kane to know it.

And fun and stupid can go hand in hand. There are plenty of examples for that.
Let's name a few.
Monty Python And The Holy Grail.
The Big Lebowsky.
Bill And Ted's Excellent Adventure.
A Fish Called Wanda.
O Brother, Where Art Thou?
Dogma.
Reservoir Dogs

None of these movies have a story that is particularly deep or meaningful and still are a great amount of fun.
And if someone were to write a synopsis on any of these, they would look completely stupid and dumb too, generic even in some cases.
Let's not base our assumptions on a single picture, the names of a few actors and a very brief synopsis till we have actually seen the movie. We don't know what it is, what it looks like or any details.

With the exception of Bill & Ted's whatever none of those movies are "stupid". Monty Python is sketch comedy in movie form, Big Lebowsky is California noir with a stoner replacing the detective archetype, O Brother retells Odyssey through Depression Era story (don't confuse stupid characters with stupid movie; same for Fish Called Wanda). Dogma is bad but nowhere near stupid. What's stupid about Reservoir Dogs? Again, stupid, incompetent characters don't necessarily make stupid movies.

This Galaxy movie looks stupid. It's set in a series of movies that take themselves seriously. It's not a parody of anything and it's not going down as a comedy. It's another Joss Whedon-y superhero action movie with lots of CGI and stupid-looking stock sci-fi characters trying to out-sass each other.

Oh, so you've seen it already, have you?

I'm as entitled to be sceptical as you are to be hopeful. What are these marketing ploys for anyway?

 

[Reaper195]

Could not be less impressed. Superhero genre in comics has been hemorrhaged with cliches and terrible writing for decades, and now they are bringing it all to big screen. Sorry, but as a writer, I just dont see a single interesting thing in this. Story looks boring, characters look boring (Bautista is a terrible actor), and this whole thing looks so damn silly. Sorry to the fans, but I just cant take this seriously one bit.

Watch it as shit blowing up. Also, go in with incredibly low expectations. I was expecting nothing out of The Avengers, and ended up with an entertaining movie that had plenty of destruction. Too many people go in expecting the writing quality of The Sopranos, or Breaking Bad. And then they wonder why Transfers was so bad. If you go into those movies wanting, and expecting, nothing more than a series of epic action scenes, you will not be disappointed.

I long ago stopped going to the movies to see something deep and well written. And when I do see something deep and well written, I'm even more surprised and excited.

 

[Something Amyss]

No, that's pretty much exactly what I meant (although, was a bit drunk and tired when sending the post...). A Synopsis is only supposed to get people interested but it's very difficult to do that with only a handful of sentences. Even a short synopsis for something like Blade Runner could make it sound like a bad movie.

They're also horribly unfruitful for the creators. I mean, unless there really is nothing other than the synopsis. then it can mask your crappiness, I suppose.

I've gotten to the point where I rarely read the jacket blurbs because they are very likely not going to pitch me. At worst, they turn me off the product. I start in on reviews, where I can generally parse for information from a series of what people do and don't like about the book. I do this less with movies, because I usually stream them and don't lose much for trying. Netflix. I love it.

So yeah. Writers have to make these things short to the point of being unable to cram almost any useful information in.

And Blade Runner would sound even worse now that everyone's done it.

 

[OldDirtyCrusty]

I've seen Slither, Super and a few bits of the game LC. I'm pretty optimistic about this one. It depends a bit on Marvel and if they are letting Gunn work his magic.

 

[Quiotu]

Anyone get the feeling that this movie being successful will also be the catalyst for the Deadpool movie finally being made? You figure if this amount of crazy works in theaters, then they should be okay cranking it to 11 and let Wade go full retard on the big screen.