-A great Rozsa score and the presence of a young Julie London can not conceal the fact that this "rural noir" is a giant snooze-fest all-around. What a waste of my time.
When I was 12, the big comic book movie I had to look forward to was SUPERMAN IV: THE QUEST FOR PEACE.
Clearly, in 2014, things in the genre have gotten better -- now every summer offers the season of comic book movies I wish I had when I was growing up. However, there's also something called too much of a good thing, and with this -- the 11th Marvel Studios comic book film to hit theaters in the last six years (to say nothing of comic book flicks from other studios) -- I can safely say I can live, happily, without watching another one of these films for the rest of the year.
That's not to say GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY, James Gunn's adaptation of one of the more obscure Marvel titles, isn't without its fun attributes: the opening half is decidedly different than every other, typical super-hero film, with some interesting creatures and a mix of disparate heroes who team up to save the world. Chris Pratt seems fairly comfortable as Peter Quill, and generates good chemistry with Zoe Saldana, though the stunt "casting" of Vin Diesel seems like the easiest check the actor has ever cashed (did he record his lines in an airport flying into his next project?).
Alas, just when things start getting interesting, the movie falls right into a typical Marvel collage of ADD editing, mediocre villains (I already forgot who the bad guy was in this film) and wall-to-wall action with (as you guys have said already) multiple false endings and epilogues that just, frankly, exhausted me. I mean, whether it's THE AVENGERS, or THOR THE DARK WORLD, or IRON MAN 3, or this film -- is there anyone out there who's really going "wow, this climax is amazing! I've never seen anything like it!" This film, like every other Marvel picture, adheres essentially to the same formula -- cross-cut between two or three different fights, watch a CGI rendered apocalypse almost happen, throw in a cute joke or two, then cut to an ending that sets up another sequel. And like most modern movies, the film just never breathes -- sure, you get a moment or two where characters relate to each other, but whereas films 20 years ago would actually stop and take time to develop characters, movies like this today are content to do so in a few quips of dialogue. It just doesn't result in a dramatically engaging experience -- more a good looking, entertaining and yet superficial picture with nothing going on underneath the surface.
The humor is also more "cute" than laugh out funny, but whatever, I still liked this film. I'd even go see a sequel to it...in 2017, which has already been announced...but certain critics comparing this film to RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK or STAR WARS need a whack in the head. Or at least a fresh visit to when movies weren't pre-fab franchises adhering to the same blueprint that's churning out thoroughly competent/entertaining and yet increasingly forgettable blockbusters off the same assembly line.
GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY - I don't even know what grade to give it as this was one of the most bizarre films I've seen in a while (the tag at the end of the film was really weird). Lol...the humor, as Andy said, isn't LOL humor but more "cute" than anything else (thank you Marvel for keeping it light). I pretty much agree with what Andy said in his review. For me, the unfamiliarity with the characters/world of GOTG was a minus as was the 70s/80s soundtrack mix (I get it...or at least I think I do...but it was still a distraction). One thing I thought did work to an extent was the development of the characters from selfish jerks to people/animals/things growing into friends/family - maybe they could have done that better but, overall, I think it worked. The bizarre-ness of the world the film portrays is both a strength (it keeps you watching) and a weakness (it's just....weird). So I'm ultimately torn. Tyler's score is unmemorable as is 98% of the garbage that passes for film music nowadays. Maybe I'll give the film somewhere in the range of 5 to 7 out of 10?
Here's one thing on GUARDIANS that I couldn't believe -- for all the talk about the "refreshing song soundtrack," could they have possibly chosen a more cliche-ridden and overused track than "Aint No Mountain High"? I thought that song had gone on moratorium by this point. Every time I hear it, I think back to one of the last truly funny 'Family Guy' episodes, where Peter becomes addicted to "chick flicks" and sits in the theater audience, laughing, clapping and singing along to that song! lol. Plus the Jackson 5's "ABC"? I guess it's "new to the core audience" of kids who wouldn't know, but geez, talk about cliched choices.
The one thing I did appreciate about the film was that the heroes had their own respective voices. Whereas you just know in the upcoming JUSTICE LEAGUE movie you're going to have a whole bunch of similarly brooding, dour super-heroes, in GUARDIANS you had a wide cross-section of characters with their own unique personalities who had to work together. I did like that element -- I just wish there was a little more development and less bombast in the second half...plus something other than a "magic rock" which seems to be the driving plot device in EVERY Marvel produced movie.
One last thing too on Vin Diesel -- I remember back to when Marlon Brando got what was an absurd amount of money for 15 minutes in SUPERMAN. Here, Diesel had no involvement in this film other than showing up in post to record "I am Groot" 50 different times. If they thought Brando's pay check was obscene back in the '70s for the work he contributed, I'm betting Diesel bettered him one here!
Finally, a summer movie for adults! Well-written and performed adaptation of a John Le Carre novel (thankfully less obtuse and impenetrable than the baffling Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy) boasts the final leading performance by the late Philip Seymour Hoffman (*sigh*), and is smart, suspenseful and compelling, even if it never quite becomes truly engrossing. Plus, Rachel McAdams is somewhat miscast (her "German" accent wanders all over the place). Still, in this particular summer, I'll grasp at anything that isn't a $250 million franchise pic aimed at fifteen-year-olds.
No, must have been a licensing thing just for the theatrical release.
That score is seriously horrific... I felt there were a few good scenes in the movie, but Kurtzman & Orci just stuffed so much into the film, they were buried under the weight of their TRANSFORMERS-like chaotic script.
Nice to see you review The Railway Man, Andy - and like it.
It also great to have a commentary included on the disk. The other region releases have been very thin as far as special features are concerned.
It was disappointing not to see the original documentary on the meeting between Eric and Nagase in the supplements. I'd love to have seen some of the TIFF red carpet interviews too, where my 78 year old Mother was thrown to the lions ("Just walk through and we'll see you at your seat.") and charmed everyone.
Well-written and performed adaptation of a John Le Carre novel (thankfully less obtuse and impenetrable than the baffling Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy) boasts the final leading performance by the late Philip Seymour Hoffman (*sigh*), and is smart, suspenseful and compelling, even if it never quite becomes truly engrossing. Plus, Rachel McAdams is somewhat miscast (her "German" accent wanders all over the place). Still, in this particular summer, I'll grasp at anything that isn't a $250 million franchise pic aimed at fifteen-year-olds.
