Guardians of the Galaxy

[Elandyll]

It's too bad that Marvel could/would not partner with Hasbro to make the Micronauts movie (supposedly in development, with JJ Abrams at the helm). Their X-Men/ Micronaut mini series was excellent imo.




I have been involved in the Marvel -verse since the late 70s (admittedly less since hitting adulthood), and I have never heard about those guys (Guardians of the Galaxy).

This being said, with Marvel's movie track record, I am willing to give them a chance to win me over

[500_Days_of_Night]

If they're going the whole cosmic route, they GOT to get the rights back to the Fantastic 4, Silver Surfer... etc. Especially the Silver Surfer. Hopefully they'll suck it up and strike a deal to use the properties eventually.

[khan1670]

I'm sorry, but is this questioning the appearance of a racoon while simultaneously asking for a reboot of Howard the Duck????

Seriously????

Originally Posted by duggie walker

Is that seriously a racoon?

Everything else is niche-appeal. Personally, I'd like to see DEATHLOK and a proper reboot of HOWARD THE DUCK but it'd be potluck whether the public would take to them.

My only caveat is that an excellent script can turn anything around. I wasn't at all sure thet THOR would work either and that turned out well. So hopefully, it's that confidence that has them going ahead with this. Though I really can't see my enthusiasm encompassing a space-racoon teaming with THE AVENGERS.

[khan1670]

If Marvel wants to do a space adventure movie, they should stick to a smaller group and perhaps someone people might actually know.

I'd go for a Nova movie with some other cosmic guest stars going against Thanos. Hell throw Drax the Destroyer in (he's in GotG) as he's got a personal vendetta against Thanos.

However, yes I agree the freaking Racoon would be stupid as hell, he should be dropped.

There not going to have solo movies for every character so why go for a team movie who the general public knows next to nothing about?

[onyxbfly]

Originally Posted by cinemaphile

I truly think a GotG film would be Marvel's first FLOP.
While some of their films have featured lesser-known characters (like Iron Man), GotG is almost completely unknown outside of hardcore comics people, and they are a little more out-there (not to mention silly-looking).

If Marvel does proceed with a film based on this, they certainly should not try to position it as a major blockbuster release, because it won't be. On the contrary, I would think it will not do well at all.

Least we forget all 3 Punisher movies?

[vegeta88]

This is a bad move by Marvel. It will flop. Marvel will die. People will riot. Society will collapse into sectarian violence. And the world will end.
... or at least that is what it sounds like.

I don't know anything about these characters. They seem a bit out there and different from the norm. Isn't that what people have been asking for who are critical of the repetitious nature of superhero movies? Like another poster here, I didn't have a whole lot of hope for Thor being a very successful or even very good movie. I was totally proven wrong. I know people have different opinions on each Marvel film, but they have all been excellent for me. Each gets between 4 and 5 stars out of 5 for me. While I have no excitement for the particular property, you can bet Marvel will get my butt in that seat.

On the flip side, if the movie is not successful or good, what happens? Nothing. Marvel is successful enough to take risks. I am beyond happy that they are planning two movies a year and that they are all in the same universe. Nothing like this has happened in the history of movies. It is an awesome time to be a fan like me.

[cinemaphile]

Originally Posted by Tony208

Please no... these guys aren't even B-listers, they're C-D.

Exactly

[mlittle3]

Originally Posted by Tony208

Please no... these guys aren't even B-listers, they're C-D.

This.

Of course, I knew if Avengers were successful Marvel films would do something dumb like this.

[MD-Blu]

I was hoping and wanting a Black Widow movie.

[NARMAK]

I don't understand how comic centric people seem to think just because something isn't well done or known in the comic universe that it somehow won't become a success on the big screen at all.

I couldn't care if they used obscure properties that have fallen out of the limelight. Should Marvel do the same stellar job they've done with the rest of their MCU properties, this will be worth watching. Marvel is on a roll and i don't think they're gonna do anything to wreck what they got going on, even if they are taking a risk.

I'm looking forwards to this, racoon and all. If Hulk can be brought to life in an acceptable manner for audiences, Heck, Gollum might be a better example, then i have total faith this racoon can totally work. People seem to be writing this off without even having seen anything which is sad, and shouldn't be done. Once you seen a trailer etc, it's easier to form an opinion but not just based on words alone. Pictures are worth thousands of worths after all

[Captain Kirk]

The best way would be to introduce them through a Thor movie. They fought Loki and the inhuman assassins on Asgard. Why not just use Loki and Thor as a backbone to the movie? That way you have a recognized character arc and a setup for Avengers 2 with Thanos.

I'm biased though as this just gives more excuses to keep Loki tied up with everyone.

[Snicket]

No more Loki!!!!

Guy had his time, now it's just getting old. Let's move on to something fresh.

[Walts Ghost]

Originally Posted by Snicket

No more Loki!!!!

Guy had his time, now it's just getting old. Let's move on to something fresh.

At least as the bad guy. I don't mind him being a supporting character, because he's that important to the Thor storyline, but he has been the villain twice now. Time to do something different.

[Captain Kirk]

The Inhuman Assassins would be the main villains, just controlled by Loki. Loki will forever be embedded with this group of films (and Thor always), so I don't see the problem. Plus, maybe not here, but he has a huge following so they'll do what they need to when it comes to profitability.

Also, there would be several new villains introduced before we get to this film so it wouldn't be like having him was a dull rehash. It would be more of a rejuvenation at that point in time.

[csdot]

the recent Guardians of the Galaxy comics are awesome, even if theyre not A list characters theres potential for a great movie. audiences dont have to know who they are to enjoy them. believe it or not theres thousands and thousands of movies that arent even based on a comic book with characters nobody ever heard of prior to their release.

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by csdot

the recent Guardians of the Galaxy comics are awesome, even if theyre not A list characters theres potential for a great movie. audiences dont have to know who they are to enjoy them. believe it or not theres thousands and thousands of movies that arent even based on a comic book with characters nobody ever heard of prior to their release.

No, but the new ones that are generally have some REASON to be made--In Marvel's case, so that they can be cross-promoted with other movies from the studios. If they don't have a reason (besides "No one's done them yet!), they just sort of show up, flounder in the middle of nowhere and die off from starvation, like Daredevil, Ghost Rider and Punisher: War Zone.

I'm sure the memo for doing a GotG movie--like the Ant-Man movie--has ancient DNA traces in some desperate pre-Marvel Studios memo from the late 80's/early 90's, when Stan Lee was wondering what other movie projects Marvel could sell to "regular" non-comic-reading studios completely out of context. (And no, Lee didn't do Howard the Duck, that was Lucas/Katz/Huyck's idea of "A comic book movie for people who'd never heard of the character". Lee DID want to do a TV series for Dazzler without mentioning the X-Men, though, way back when they were doing that kind of thing.)
And then, like Edgar Wright's Ant-Man, retro-fitting the old memos back into the production context of the NEW memos, with some thin tie to fitting them back into the Avengers Movie Initiative. In GotG's case, that would be "Well, uh....Thanos is in it--There ya go! "

...Judges? Uh, looks like a "no".
If you want to explain Thanos for Avengers 2, try rebooting the F4, and put him in THAT.

[csdot]

Originally Posted by EricJ

No, but the new ones that are generally have some REASON to be made--In Marvel's case, so that they can be cross-promoted with other movies from the studios. If they don't have a reason (besides "No one's done them yet!), they just sort of show up, flounder in the middle of nowhere and die off from starvation, like Daredevil, Ghost Rider and Punisher: War Zone.

I'm sure the memo for doing a GotG movie--like the Ant-Man movie--has ancient DNA traces in some desperate pre-Marvel Studios memo from the late 80's/early 90's, when Stan Lee was wondering what other movie projects Marvel could sell to "regular" non-comic-reading studios completely out of context. (And no, Lee didn't do Howard the Duck, that was Lucas/Katz/Huyck's idea of "A comic book movie for people who'd never heard of the character". Lee DID want to do a TV series for Dazzler without mentioning the X-Men, though, way back when they were doing that kind of thing.)
And then, like Edgar Wright's Ant-Man, retro-fitting the old memos back into the production context of the NEW memos, with some thin tie to fitting them back into the Avengers Movie Initiative. In GotG's case, that would be "Well, uh....Thanos is in it--There ya go! "

...Judges? Uh, looks like a "no".
If you want to explain Thanos for Avengers 2, try rebooting the F4, and put him in THAT.

what on earth are you talking about?
GotG have ties with The Avengers, and certainly with Thanos. theres nothing random about it. are you suggesting every Marvel movie has to be an Avenger?

[Salvador Nogueira]

Marvel's been doing SO WELL with its movies that I can even go wrong once and not suffer much. I think a Guardians movie is a tough sell to a general audience. But not if they use the next few movies (Iron Man 3, Thor 2, Captain America 2) to somehow set it up for it. They got pretty good at in-movie marketing, so...

Funny thing is: while Marvel is discussing third-grade characters for movie (no offense to Guardians' fans, but they are not very well known out there), Warner/DC can't even make their own filmmakers to agree on setting up the mood for a future Justice League film. Nolan says his Batman ends now, Snyder said his Superman won't fit a future Justice League context, and Green Lantern... well... enough to say they're thinking of rebooting it after one movie...

[Agent Bond]

Fu** Guardians of the Galaxy! Just make one on Rocket Raccoon.

[mlittle3]

Originally Posted by Salvador Nogueira

Marvel's been doing SO WELL with its movies that I can even go wrong once and not suffer much. I think a Guardians movie is a tough sell to a general audience. But not if they use the next few movies (Iron Man 3, Thor 2, Captain America 2) to somehow set it up for it. They got pretty good at in-movie marketing, so...

Funny thing is: while Marvel is discussing third-grade characters for movie (no offense to Guardians' fans, but they are not very well known out there), Warner/DC can't even make their own filmmakers to agree on setting up the mood for a future Justice League film. Nolan says his Batman ends now, Snyder said his Superman won't fit a future Justice League context, and Green Lantern... well... enough to say they're thinking of rebooting it after one movie...

Why would anyone want to see a Justice League movie? I just dont see how it works and I love Batman and like Superman.