13 thoughts on “The SportsAlcohol Podcast: Guardians of The Galaxy”

1. Since I wasn’t there for this recording (or even just to talk about it with you guys), I have a LOT to say.

   The New Pixar

   Let’s start with the caveat that I generally bristle at ANY use of “The New So-and-so” to describe something. But I’d say that in broad strokes (the way the stupid “the next…” phrase is generally used) that Marvel works as “the next Pixar.” They’re probably never going to be in awards contention, and they don’t have the critical backing that Pixar did at its peak (let’s say the decade between Toy Story 2 & Cars 2), but I think the comparison at least holds in the way the studio name means something positive and consistent to audiences. Really, beyond just Pixar, it’s a Disney thing. Disney is playing the game differently from other studios, and really cultivates a trust and loyalty from their audience. They have their own brand, Pixar, Marvel, and eventually Star Wars (I’m kind of curious if they’ll try and make Lucasfilm mean something or if they’ll just stick with Star Wars). It’s definitely worked on me, and I think Jesse’s point about consistency is right on. By now, I’m pretty convinced that a Marvel Studios movie will be up my alley.

   I’m also interested in the Pixar/Marvel comparison because I wonder when the Marvel Studios wave will break. They were both purchased by Disney after five or six hit films, and both of them had/have presumptive mega-hit sequels as their eleventh films (Toy Story 3 & Avengers: Age of Ultron) that also happen to be coming out just as the success narrative of the studio starts to show cracks (Pixar had more sequel announcements and the Brenda Chapman/Brave situation, while Marvel has the Edgar Wright/Ant-Man situation). But maybe because of the connected universe thing and because they didn’t have the perceived artistic purity of Pixar, sequels (and the two or three pictures per year schedule) could do the opposite for Marvel in terms of public opinion (though I guess I should note here that I think the media and internet overstate the “Pixar’s glory days are behind them” narrative, and a critically-revered-and-successful movie or two could change the story for them). Like, people will look forward to Cap 3 or Guardians 2 and if a couple of non-sequels pop with audiences in the next phase then they can daisy-chain a series of trilogies out indefinitely (or at least until they make a run of real misses).

   Why did people go see Guardians?

   I think Jesse’s rundown of the luck of their release date was smart and right, but I think Rob’s point about it looking fun is also crucial. Hindsight, I know, but I thought that first trailer that Marisa didn’t like was kind of genius. You’re right that people generally didn’t know the characters or the comics at all, but that’s what that first teaser was all about. It just said that there are a bunch of disreputable folks (including an angry raccoon and a smiling tree man) having a space adventure. And I know you didn’t think it was funny at all either, but I still hold that it had a fizzy, fun vibe (including that song cue) that played for audiences (my anecdotal evidence here is that my dad was interested enough to ask about it after we saw the trailer). And it kind of gets to the real secret ingredient of Marvel movies so far (okay, it’s not a secret, but they’ve done it really well). They get you to love their heroes. They’ve cast them insanely well (and re-cast well when they needed to; I wouldn’t have even counted Norton as a miss until we saw Ruffalo as Banner and he was PERFECT), and the movies have really exploited whatever particular charisma the actors bring to the roles.

   Also, here’s some more anecdotal evidence from the NYC SportsAlcohol.com crew’s outing on Saturday. Michael R., the most comics literate of us (he at least knows about Thanos and the infinity gauntlet stuff) still didn’t know the Guardians of the Galaxy. After the movie, people not only seemed on board with the five Guardians and ready to see what they did next, but there was also much discussion about the mystery of Star-Lord’s father. Harald enjoyed it, particularly Rocket, but noted that he didn’t know or have a connection to the characters beforehand like he did with the Avengers. We also got Sara as a last minute attendee thanks to the reviews and “the Chris Pratt of it all,” despite her fear/hatred of raccoons.

   Reply

2. Rocket and Groot
   Yes! We were also talking about how we’d totally watch a series of Rocket & Groot adventures. Short subjects? Holiday special? The little dancing Groot went over HUGE.

   Bautista
   I liked him in Riddick and he was still a great surprise! He’s one of three (four, if you count Urban’s cameo) cast members I remember from that movie, and I found him likeable and wryly funny, but I still was kind of disappointed when the rumors of Jason Momoa as Drax ended up with Bautista in the role. And the trailers made him just look brooding and intense, so what a huge delight to find him so funny! I agree with Jesse that he’s got good screen-presence (I’m still chuckling about the way he settles in with his hands folded on his stomach after telling Star-Lord that he wasn’t paying attention during the big roundtable scene).

   Pratt
   I’ll speak up for finding Star-Lord funny in the movie! Pratt’s hugely charming and while I think he does excellent straight-man work throughout, he’s also got his own funny bits of business. Off the top of my head, there’s when he’s explaining the finger-across-the-throat gesture to Drax (“You know this, right? Everybody knows it.”), when he tells Gamora about what happened before Yondu rescues them (“Something incredibly heroic…”), and his reaction when the Pursuer calls him Star-Lord (“Finally.”). And that Pollock line got a pretty big laugh. Also, as Jesse mentioned, I loved his character minutes into the film as the title came up onscreen over him dancing on an alien world. I’m afraid to ask which of his “laugh lines” you didn’t like?

   Villains
   Yeah, Ronan was the second Marvel Phase Two villain (along with Malekith in Thor) that had an intriguing motivation but ends up mostly being at all interesting because of the visual (as opposed to dramatic) work done in their scenes. He was certainly a formidable threat, and Pace sells him as scary, but he continues the Marvel movie tradition of the heroes being way more interesting than the villains. (Note: I’m just fine with this tradition thus far.)

   Nebula has some of the same issues, and I liked Jesse’s point that she’s a “sort of realized character” in that I found her interesting (I found the bits we get about her relationship with Thanos and Gamora were quite intriguing), but she mostly gets to wait around and look cool (I DID find that makeup awesome and thought Gillen brought a slinky-menacing physicality to the role that was pretty cool). And I was kind of looking forward to her showdown with Gamora just because it’d give us another scene between the twof of them (male privilege: it didn’t even occur to me that this was relegating them to a “girl fight”). Glad she survived to show up again, not least because I thought her exit was great.

   Reply

   1. All of those Pratt bits are certainly fine, and I definitely laughed at the black-light line — that was something a little more akin to what I was hoping for with Pratt in the role. A lot of his other best moments are more conversational than his wisecracking, which is fine, except there’s a lot of wisecracking/sarcasm that I just didn’t find all that funny or productive. His business with Groot’s one sentence — “the first 89 times you said it,” “I have a feeling the answer will be I Am Groot,” etc. — is pretty pedestrian. Him calling the bad guy “turd blossom” at the climax doesn’t really do it for me either, wit-wise. That kind of stuff just feels generic to me, rather than anything that tells us about who he is besides Movie Wiseguy. As I said, a lot of the movie’s biggest laughs are behavioral, not joke-jokes, and a lot of the proper jokes aren’t all that well-written (and/or didn’t have much room for Pratt to improve them, just keep them from seeing worse because he’s a super likable dude). First-level stuff. Insert Mildly Irreverent Remark Here. In a way, they do too good a job of imitating the Han Solo vibe that’s so often (over) emphasized as a key ingredient to Star Wars — in that Solo isn’t a particularly funny character, nor is he all that surprising or dangerous despite his reputed status as a scoundrel.

      Reply

      1. “They got my dick message!”

         I’d still say that the hit-to-miss ratio puts him on the funny side. Though perhaps that’s in part because I think the behavorial stuff is what I first think of for Pratt. Like, Andy on Parks and Rec certainly has funny lines, but so much of what’s funny about that character is the dopey innocence of his smile and Pratt’s physicality and way of spinning line deliveries. And I thought this role took good advantage of all that. So though I wouldn’t count “turd blossom” as a demerit (and if you want character from it, it works because he’s a little bit country), even if it had bothered me, it is also immediately preceded by “Dance off, bro,” and “Listen to these words,” and “Subtle, but I’m taking it back.”

         Reply

         1. You’re right that Pratt does a lot of what turns Andy into a great character on P&R through physicality and delivery. But I don’t know that I saw much unusual or interesting physicality in this movie apart from a few glimmers. Pratt’s a pro and there aren’t really any problems with his performance that I wouldn’t attribute to writing/directing, but I was a little surprised by the degree to which I felt like any number of guys could have played Starlord (as the part was written) about as well. Not to say that Pratt is bad in the movie — just that it’s not exactly a Downey-level owning of the movie and redefining of his career.

            And: jokes about dance-offs are kinda hacky! If I’m generous, cute. Like bits where someone’s going “guys?? guys??” looking for validation. Not what I’d call especially funny. Like I said, kinda first-level (where in this case “first” can be substituted for “DreamWorks”).

            Reply

            1. “I felt like any number of guys could have played Starlord.”

               …including/especially, the previously mentioned Ryan Reynolds! In the podcast, it came up that Reynolds is probably seething at Bradley Cooper for waltzing in and getting a successful comic-book movie off the bat that doesn’t interfere with his Oscar career. Really, though, I think the ire should be directed at Pratt, whose “cute, but also funny and goofy!” vibe is a lot closer to Reynolds’ bread-and-butter.

            2. Basically, Ryan Reynolds should be mad at everyone. Though I think of Cooper as closer to Reynolds than Pratt because of the crucial smarm factor. Pratt has very little smarm — although yes, I do think that if you were casting this movie three or four years ago, Reynolds would have been at the top of the list.

            3. And the big payoff to the dance-off joke was him actually saying, “I’m distracting you!” I feel like someone could’ve put a real joke there. I think what Jesse is calling the “first level” stuff is what I picked up on in that first trailer (he’s giving them the finger–oooh, edgy!) and why I was so, “Oh no!” about it.

            4. I’ve probably been defensive here because I laughed hard and consistently (and then spent the rest of the evening trading favorite lines with friends) at what Jesse described as not all that well-written comedy. And fair enough if I’m just complaining that you don’t find lame or juvenile stuff as funny as I do (like, giving the finger isn’t a brilliant or clever joke, but I’ll still probably laugh if you do it). But I did laugh at that dance off! And I don’t think I’ve seen that used as a distraction in any recent adventure movies.

               But actually I’m interested to see if I’m wrong here that Pratt did anything special in the movie. I guess it’s hard to tell except anecdotally, but I certainly walked out thinking he’d basically earned a leading man career in this movie. Yeah, not Downey-sized (i.e. one of the biggest stars on earth right now), sure, but more along the sorta-revelatory lines of Hemsworth or Evans. I acknowledge that I’m clearly in the minority here between the podcast and the comments, so maybe he won’t be any more well-liked after this than a Ryan Reynolds. But between the charming leading man stuff and the Pratt-ian bits of business like when he falls down in Rocket’s snare on Xandar or drops the orb when showing it to the Collector (I also think he’s really GOOD at the kind of attitude comedy that Jesse generally disdains), I’m surprised to hear you think his performance was so interchangeable.

            5. It’s not that I disdain attitude comedy (Bill Murray! Downey, for that matter! Sam Rockwell!) or even Pratt’s performance… just that in terms of lines or moments that made me LLOL, and stuff we were repeating and talking about a lot in the days since seeing it, it was much more Rocket and Groot and Drax than Starlord. Pratt was involved in many moments I liked (that slapstick fight where they all meet, delightful), as he’d have to be as the leading man, so I don’t mean to discount his contributions. I just felt them leaning harder on “Pratt’s saying this in the middle of a big space opera, that will make it hilarious” than I would have preferred (or than I can find really laugh-out-loud funny, anyway).

3. If you didn’t go with us on Saturday, you really missed out on getting to hear Maggie’s rendition of the post-movie word from the women’s restroom: http://maggielehrman.tumblr.com/post/93799030281/things-said-to-no-one-in-particular-by-the-lady-in-line

   Reply

4. I think all of my pre-movie Guardians of the Galaxy problems would have been solved if the first teaser trailer was just Dancing Baby Groot.

   Reply
5. Pingback: The 'Guardians of the Galaxy' Soundtrack: Maybe Just Don't

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.