Guardians of Galaxy Vol 2 reviews

people are loving it

twitter.com/slashfilm/status/854197961361727488

twitter.com/ErikDavis/status/854197804792664064

twitter.com/AnnaJKlassen/status/854197218751860738

twitter.com/GermainLussier/status/854196351760048128

Other urls found in this thread:

twitter.com/mikeryan/status/854198271346176000
hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/guardians-galaxy-2-first-reactions-press-screening-994610?utm_source=twitter&utm_source=t.co&utm_medium=referral
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

anyone leak the post-credits scenes yet?

Under which hashtags are they posting?

>Mantis and Drax steal the movie.
Sounds great.

Do we have any leaks of this yet? Seems weird that it comes out so soon and nothing has been leaked yet.

4 post credit scenes

twitter.com/mikeryan/status/854198271346176000

>>Tearjerker
>>Pratt and Diesel both cried during it
Dead Yondu.

Pros:
>James Gunn is based
>Likable characters
>Made by proper fans
>Has a solid tone
>Good art/costumes/makeup/sets/FX
cons:
>baby groot
>synergy ruins the comic versions by making them shittier alternatives to the film characters

>>James Gunn makes sure he ones up everyone.
Based.

...

good, whilst the first one was focus-group bullshit this one actually has a chance of being good as long as disney actually gave gunn proper control this time (now that he's associated with a high-performing film)

hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/guardians-galaxy-2-first-reactions-press-screening-994610?utm_source=twitter&utm_source=t.co&utm_medium=referral

I'm getting it's the first one on steroids.Hyped as fuck.

...

...

Wtf i hate gotg vol 2 now

Based.

>InSneider

Disney snipers, man. They may have just streamlined it and implanted head-bombs into the whole cast and crew.

Out of 3 DCU films, there isn't one that's even as good as a 2.5 yet. So FUCKING sad. LOL!

>Out of 3 DCU films, there isn't one that's even as good as a 2.5 yet.

All 3 of them are great films.

Better than Guardians of the turd jokes I can tell you that much

>Do we have any leaks of this yet? Seems weird that it comes out so soon and nothing has been leaked yet.
Well the audience are all pro critics who does this for a living. You don't leak when it would hurt your own career. They are all writing their reviews and will publish them on the same day as everyone else.

@91638188
>All 3 of them are great films.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
(You)

91638188
At least put a little effort, my dude.

well... people loved the first one, and dr strange too. that didnt hel to get into the billion dollar club.
Same with this one... dont get your panties wet user, is a dumb movie with a dumb plot "Ill do anything for my friends... that i just met", dont overthink about it.
And the most popular character says a fucking word....

All 3 of the DC movies had a really well done villian that felt like a threat to the main characters, action scenes that don't look T.V tier and the final battle wasn't meant to be comedic in neither of the films.

While literally all Marvel films after Avengers have been just dumbed down action flicks with stupid quips that break tension.

I will give them that Civil War is easier to follow compared with BvS but maaaan that was a fucking dumbed down movie with tone issues all over the place, no real politics, both character were ''wrong for the right reasons'', way to play it safe, assholes.

Is basically Winter Soldier with a different third act.

Of fucking course that BvS is a better film than that turd, a movie about two heroes clashing with each other based on their ideals and morals with a bad guy pulling the strings and making people not trust the heroes and the heroes not trusting each other while building up future movies in a way that doesn't hijack the film

Like reading a fucking comic, its not perfect but at least is trying to do some shit instead of doing the same film yet again

Just give me a single MCU movie that takes risks plot wise, just one, one that you can say is about the interesting plot and the action and stupid jokes play a second part to it

>All 3 of the DC movies had a really well done villian
Didn't even need to read the rest.

>that didnt hel to get into the billion dollar club.
You know we're not making money of this movie, right? Who gives a shit

Don't fed (you)s to dumb shitposters and their companywars, user.

>>All 3 of the DC movies had a really well done villian

Marvel hasn't made a single good bad and Gotg2 is the same old shit, Baby Groot kills Ego at the end pressing the button while trying to look cute, fucking embarrasing ''lol they planned that since the movie started??? GREAT WRITTING SO FUNNY''

...

>Who gives a shit
/tvirgins/

91638462
Doesn't make your dumb statement any more true

>All 3 of the DC movies had a really well done villian
Double kek.

I heard that moon girl makes a cameo

I'm just here to laugh at all of you.

CAN'T STUN THE GUNN

>Baby Groot kills Ego
is this a joke????

Not possible. Everything Inhuman related is automatically BTFO out of the MCU along with their overlord Ike the Kike.
Even Kamala is projected appear in that shitty New Warriors sitcom.

>two heroes clashing with each other based on their ideals and morals with a bad guy pulling the strings

They fought solely over a kidnapped mom.

Bruce could have been removed from the film entirely and it would have gone exactly the same way. While he was turned against Superman ideologically, he was basically Luthor's B-plan which Luthor chose to play first rather than second, the A-plan being Doomsday.

Luthor manipulating Bruce to turn against Clark makes no sense when the kryptonite was in Luthor's hands, and he neither helped Bruce get it nor anticipated that he would. Before Luthor even knew Bruce was after it, he was manipulating Bruce through the Wayne Enterprises employee.

It's trash.

Just the local retard. Feel free to ignore him.

>Double kek.
Its true.

General Zod was a badass.
Enchantress was hot as fuck and really cool visually, that final battle with Diablo was impressive and I loved the tribal look of his transformation.
Lex Luthor was GREAT and you I don't give a shit if you disagree, if you get over the fact that he is a different take on the character, you can have a lot of fun with Eisenbergs performance, he adds a lot of details to the character and the way he talks, just great to listen to.

Not to mention that the were in the film for more than 5 minutes


And what does Marvel have? a rock

>Baby Groot kills Ego at the end pressing the button while trying to look cute, fucking embarrasing ''lol they planned that since the movie started??? GREAT WRITTING SO FUNNY''

YOU FUCKER!!!

>They fought solely over a kidnapped mom.
Stopped reading beyond this point.

Let me guess, you also think that they stopped fighting because their mom had the same name? idiot.

can ayone confirm this? I want to spoil this TURD YOU DON'T WHAT A REAL TURD IS of a movie to everybody!

91638566
>Enchantress was hot as fuck and really cool visually
>Lex Luthor was GREAT
This is what a "good" villain is for this retard. The funny part is that Zod, the only decent antagonist in the DCEU, only gets a generic "i-i'ts badass!!!".
Stop embarrassing yourself already dude. It's fucking sad.

>fun
>fun
>fun
>fun

jesus

...

>Let me guess, you also think that they stopped fighting because their mom had the same name?
They literally did.

It's a fucking quip to make fun of the MCU, you fucking retards.

>director no one respects or obeys
>starring Gal Gadot
It was going to be a shitfest no matter what.

>no one actually calling it good
>only calling it "fun"

Ahahahahahahahahhahahaahahahahaha

>fun sucks, I'm only into pain and suffering

Sup Forums (Sup Forums) is gonna bitch about this movie for a year because "normies". It's obscenely transparent that some of you fuckmothers are going to take the contrarian stance no matter how dumb and you were always going to no matter what.

Zod would've been better as a robot.

Leave it to a disgruntled mouseketeer to wager in deceit and villainy

>>Lex Luthor was GREAT

I agree.

You are not so bad user, don't go to the Guardians of the Galaxy premier in 2 weeks

So are there any DCEUfags/anti-MCUfags who are actually surprised by this?

>""""""""""""""""""people""""""""""""""""""

i love memes

Surprised by your typical nu-male film "critic" crowd being enamored by quips, colors, and fun? Surprised by another generic Marvel Studios production being given a pass?

'no'

>The funny part is that Zod, the only decent antagonist in the DCEU

Michael Shanon is crazy IRL, he did a great job with the character, you could feel his anger and dissapointment towards the council and his disdain for Clark.

Also that final Battle was great and it didn't look like a tv show

According to a french review the trailers only spoiled the first 15 minutes. And oh boy, Gunn just confirmed there are 5 post credits scenes.

Denial can lead to shock.
For a couple months now fanatics were going "nobody cares bout GotG 2!" because that's the party line and that's what their echo chamber said.

Meanwhile actual audiences watching the trailers lose their shit at baby groot.

>>no one actually calling it good
>>only calling it "fun"
MY SIDES

>5
Damn. I better stay outta the threads.

>Surprised by another generic Marvel Studios production being given a pass?
What's the pass for, exactly?

>t, Baby Groot kills Ego
what?

HOLY SHIT that Moon!

Its fun bro calm the fuck down!

>Gunn just confirmed there are 5 post credits scenes.

you mean 4 stupid jokes and one actual after credits scene?

>Ant-Man is my favourite MCU film
okay then, there are much better MCU movies than Ant-Man though

Is fun bad? If so, why?

>synergy ruins the comic versions by making them shittier alternatives to the film characters
I mean, that already happened years ago and I have a hard time blaming any one involved in the movie for that.

>Is fun bad?
fun is used as a generic praise that doesn't said shit about the film.

You can praise elements of the film without really spoiling it and specially after all the noise about ''muh base Gunn!!!!'' only getting the generic ''fun'' reaction is not a good sign.

at the very least is a shill sign

>DCucks are willfully illiterate

No, I just point out that the ideological conflict was completely one-sided. The closest Clark comes to having a real issue with Bruce is foreshadowed in their meeting at the gala, and in the (admittedly improved over the theatrical cut) Ultimate edition scenes in which he investigates Gotham.

Sadly this goes absolutely nowhere because Clark is given nothing to do for most of the movie. He never actively takes much of a stance against Batman past this point. Part of that is inherent in the whole purpose of the movie, from its opening "MANKIND IS INTRODUCED TO THE SUPERMAN" onwards: a movie about Superman as seen from the ground. Superman (not Clark) has a monolithic public image to be viewed from anywhere on Earth, so anyone can have an opinion on him (if not a correct one). But Batman is just a legend, and Clark doesn't even investigate that legend. We never see the way the world and Clark view Batman because he's kept invisible and unknown. It's impossible to make this a conflict with two ideological sides when one side is so hidden that the other can't even take a stance towards them.

It could have been handled by portraying the "legend" of the Batman that has developed over all the years Bruce has been Batman. That's something you can take a stance towards, but Clark never gets to do this.

So instead Luthor kidnapping Martha is shoehorned in to push Clark towards fighting Bruce, even though this makes no sense, per the previous post:
Clark had no other reason to fight Batman because the one reason he might was cut out of the movie, not followed up on, and replaced by WACKY LEX.

So fun is like "kino"?
Cuz I thought it was like, a descriptor of experience.

>''fun'' reaction is not a good

Fun IS a good thing you stupid cocksucker

That argument is bullshit tho. It only takes one writer to make everything work again. Though if he's referring to Marvel completely ignoring the DnA run characterizations then he has a point since the movie is the reason Bendis took the book.

>We never see the way the world and Clark view Batman because he's kept invisible and unknown.
We do kind of see how those hostages or whatever were as scared of him as the bad guys were and getting into Clark's head is kind of pointless given how little is in there.

'fun' and 'good' are swapable terms.


You'll never get anyone to realize it, though.

Calling one of these flicks "fun" instead of a true quality declaration is the bubbling up of these shill reviewers latent repressed moral subconscious

>I have a hard time blaming any one involved in the movie for that.

I blame the HACK that's got free reign to do as he pleases in the movie, A.K.A James Gunn.

Is his retarded ass vision

>IP count doesn't go up
>still forcing the 'fun' doesn't mean 'fun' narrative
weeew

So how come when we or they call a movie "bad" that's not a valid quality declaration?

Except Bendis' barely took things from the movie. He did his own shitfest, his own shitty plots and didn't even gave the characters the characterization from the flick, he just hamfisted his quippity-repeat-after-me 'personality' he always does.
The one who ate the movie and kept memeing was Humphries and his Star-Lord run is already forgotten by everyone.

>they call a movie "bad" that's not a valid quality declaration?
>bad
>not a valid quality declaration

Bad is just a meaningless word without any kind of argumentative weight, user. People just use it to meme :^)

It is a valid quality declaration, but its just wrong. Duh

>Except Bendis' barely took things from the movie. He did his own shitfest,
that sounds like the movie and jesus fuck Bendis and movie GotG really feel like they belong together

Do you ever listen to yourself?
>the bubbling up of these shill reviewers latent repressed moral subconscious
Say that out loud, maybe to another person who's considered at least moderately intelligent by someone besides yourself, and see what kind of reaction you get.

If everyone in your life thinks you're crazy, it could be because you're crazy.

Found the shill

What'd they get you this time? Tickets to Avatar Land?

You're entitled to your opinion and I won't debate you why you think that. However, I'm glad you agree with the main point that the movie should not be blamed for the horrible quality of the GotG comic after the DnA run ended.

go to bed Zack "the hack" Snyder

>first movie is "fun"
>somehow surprised when the sequel is also "fun"

They should have known already seeming how both MoS and BvS went.

Post credits 3: Rocket notices Groot eating something and hide it from him. "Are you eating a symbiote? Damn thing is gonna kill itself trying to bond with you." Rocket takes it out of his mouth and throws it into the airlock. Camera pans out to show it being jettisoned and reveals that it's venom.

Some people expected them to make the sequel better not funner

It's a edit?
Don't know a shit of moongirl

Come on

Nobody here believes you

we all know Sony is making their standalone Venom box office bomb so there's not a chance they would let Disney use Venom for anything

>I'm glad you agree with the main point that the movie should not be blamed for the horrible quality of the GotG comic
I still blame the movie.

The look of the character was changed to make it look like the movie and that's when the comics started to suck

>Some people expected them to make the sequel better not funner
weeeeeeeeeeeeew lad

Good thing you already saw the movie and not basing your entire opinion of the movie in 5 tweets you read 10 minutes ago.

The movie put the gun in Bendis's hand but he pulled the trigger

its real, the whole comics is like this

Now, you're blaming the look of the characters for the book not being good? Heh.