Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 2

Saw this one last night.

Wasn't impressed. Jokes about vomit (and seeing characters vomit while other characters literally point and laugh), shit, burps, etc. Some real bottom-of-the-barrel low-brow humour in there. Plot is lazy and predictable, the "twist" doesn't make any sense, and there's a whole bunch of attempted sentimentality forced into the last ten minutes for characters we don't even care about just so their death can have an impact - and even then it still does not.

Soundtrack was obviously decent, performances were fine. Effects were decent, and the opening titles were actually really fun. Also the dynamic between Drax and Mantis (the new chick with antennae) was enjoyable. Easily the best part of the film.

Would probably go a 5/10. Pretty average. For reference's sake, I gave the first one a 7/10.

Anyone else seen it yet? What did you think? Also happy to answer any questions.

Also, not even exaggerating, the credits had four mid-credits scenes and another post-credits one. Fucking ridiculous.

Other urls found in this thread:

boards.Sup
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

5/10 is about right, felt like a Reddit and Morty episode

>performances were fine


*Nebula snarls approvingly*

>every Marvel movie must be better in every aspect than it's predecessor

He didn't compare it to the first one though

>5/10. Pretty average
That's never been how it works and you know it.

It's how it used to work and how it should work though.

What are the post credit scenes?

Is Adam Warlock in this?

what kind of stupid fucking comment is this?
jfc so its a free pass to be as shitty as possible now? wtf is wrong with you?

>Jokes about vomit (and seeing characters vomit while other characters literally point and laugh)

There is an anti-temperance thread where people get drunk and vomit: boards.Sup Forums.org/gif/thread/10455160#top

I saw the Rottentomatoes score on GoTG 2 and it looks like a good movie.

It's mediocre

Kind of.

His pod is in a credits scene. The Sovereign, the gold people, are incubating him as an evolution of their race to hunt the Guardians. Their leader names him 'Adam' and then it cuts to black before the pod opens.

>I saw the Rottentomatoes score
kill yourself

Well I saw the Rottentomatoes score of GoTG2 the night before, when all the reviews were coming in and people were talking about it as they were appearing. The score was much higher. I saw the updated score, it's still high.

Sounds like a Seth McFarlane movie

I thought it was super comfy capeshit and was better than I expected it to be. It's exactly what the type of movie the first was. Just a fun colourful space fantasy adventure that doesn't take itself too seriously. Honestly, if you're expecting anything other than this it's your fault for going in with those expectations. That's like the equivalent of seeing a Pixar movie and complaining that there was no horror in it.

That's a weird thing to quote me saying.
I'm simply saying that this film wasn't very good. I only even mentioned my rating of the original because I felt it would provide a frame of reference for my comments.
Sometimes sequels are better than the original (Winter Soldier) and sometimes they aren't (Iron Man 2).
Again, I'm not really sure what your point is.

That's how it works for me. I give a 5/10 to average films, a 0/10 to abysmal ones and 10/10 to masterpieces.

What are all the after credit scenes?

Okay, let me try to remember....
1. Blue guy's second-in-command practicing with the whistle-arrow thing after blue guy dies
2. Sylvester Stallone's character talks about how the Ravagers are all friendly with each other again.
3. Gold chick says that she's created something/someone to kill the Guardians that she calls "Adam" (possibly Adam Warlock? Dunno).
4. Groot is in his early teens with a messy room and Chris Pratt tells him off.
5. A follow-on from Stan Lee's cameo. Earlier he was chatting to aliens, now they are leaving him and he's complaining that he doesn't have a ride home.

2-4 may not be in the right order.

See point 3.

I don't understand why you're linking that.
As for the RT score, it's currently sitting at 87% and it was at 91% as I left the theatre last night. I expect it to keep dropping and nestle around 82ish.
The only people I'd recommend it to are those who have seen every single other MCU film and don't want to miss out on one.

>Sean Gunn's character tries using Yondu's fin and arrow and stabs Drax in the throat accidentally
>Sly Stallone as Starhawk gathers together a group of Ravagers in honour of Yondu - these characters are all from the original 1969 version of the Guardians of the Galaxy - potentially for their own spinoff
>Leader of the Sovereign hatches Adam Warlock to hunt the Guardians
>Groot enters puberty leaves shitloads of leaves and vines over his room because he's jacking off so much. He won't stop playing video games and Quill yells at him.
>Stan Lee shows up as an informant for the Watchers, sitting on an asteroid in a spacesuit telling them about the last time he was on Earth as a Fedex delivery guy (in Civil War). It's implied all his cameos are the one character who's been sent to observe different events. The Watchers get bored and leave before he finishes.

First one was better. This one had a lot of down moments, like the 2 girls interacting and all of EGO before the fight started. And the comedy seemed way too forced. They used the Drax laughing at inappropriate situations gag about 6 times. It wasn't terrible. But I was hoping it would be Guardians 1 tier. Mid tier marvel movie.

I don't understand whether it was a film that was exactly what you expected it to be or if it exceeded your expectations; you seem to be implying both.

If a film is what you expect it to be, that doesn't make it good. That doesn't really make any sense to me. And I don't think it was "exactly what the type of movie the first was" at all. The closest the first game to body-humour was when Pratt said a blacklight would make the interior of his ship look like a Pollock painting - and even then, that was one of the weakest gags of the film.
This one has characters graphically vomiting at one point, and at another engaging in an extended argument over who's shit is largest and where they're going to hide it to get revenge upon each other.

it is for any critic who's worth anything.

So, Sup Forums, did you laugh at the movie?

>If a film is what you expect it to be, that doesn't make it good.

Why not? It was a fun action blockbuster with some nice visuals and a meme jokes. Therefore it was good at being what it advertised itself to be. What were you expecting it to be? Were you expecting something dark and deep? Why did you even watch it?

>Why not?
Because there are more factors determining the quality of a film than what an audience member expects its overall quality to be.
By your logic, we should all know how good any film is by the time we've watched a trailer or two. That's patently ridiculous.

>What were you expecting it to be?
In terms of quality? Pretty much where it was, a 5/10, average film. That's generally where I try to keep my expectations for most films before I've seen them - so I don't get my hopes up or go in with an unfair bias against it.
I honestly don't see why calling a film average is offensive. It's not bad. It's just a standard mid-year blockbuster.

>Were you expecting something dark and deep?
No darker than an alien murdering countless women and their children.

>Why did you even watch it?
Because I was hoping I'd enjoy it. I see a film every week and as I said in the OP I thought the first one was pretty good.

>The Watchers get bored and leave before he finishes.

Fucking pottery.

>>If a film is what you expect it to be, that doesn't make it good.
>Why not?
nigga you for real?

>if a film looks like absolute shit and then you see it and it turns out it is absolute shit then that means it's 10/10
Pretty sure he's trolling at this point, mate.

The biggest let down in this movie for me (which no one else seems to mention) is Chris Pratt. He was the one that held the first one together but in this one, he's just there to keep the plot going. No good lines, no smarmy charm, just super bummed out and then way too schmaltzy. This was even before Ego showed up. The rest of the movie was just as good as the first but what let it down was just the fact that the main plot wasn't handled super well.

still deserves a 7

Was a decent flick. Very comfy. Autists wouldn't understand.

>I gave the first a 7/10
I want plebs to leave.

Are you saying 7/10 is too high or too low?

This isn't the video game industry, retard.

Too high, the first was a 5/10.
Not a bad movie, but it's just mindless entertainment. Pretty much all capeshit can't pass a 5/10 for that reason.

Judging the visuals in this movie, we're getting there. Fast

I'm afraid Sup Forums is going to love it.

The first one was probably a 6 or 6.5/10 if you compare it against other movies of the capeshit genre. Against most other movies, it's probably a 4/10

>aliens
>not knowing who the watchers are

Are there any pics of Stallone?
There seems to be no promo material.

>we should line up to watch mediocre/shitty MCU movies every 4 months

GotG 2 was honestly pretty comfy. It was a solid sequel to the first one, and a pretty decent Summer blockbuster.

next to rouge one it was the best movie going experience i've ever had

I've heard of them but I wouldn't be able to tell you what they look like (until now, obviously). I was more of a DC reader growing up.

You're right, I can't find any either.

If they plan on shitting out ten of these bland things a year and suffocating all non-Disney competition, then Marvel can at least TRY to up the ante, or at the very least MATCH it.