Guardians of the Galaxy thoughts

[owlmoose]

We got around to seeing GotG this weekend. It was fun and I enjoyed it. Fortunately I had been warned about the casual sexism in advance, so it didn't punch me in the face quite as badly as it otherwise might have. I did, however, roll my eyes a lot. Other people have already said more or less what I think and have done it better, so I will refer you to them. I also felt the villains were underdeveloped -- Ronan is the worst MCU antagonist so far, even less compelling than the barely-there villain of Thor 2, and the others (Nebula, Thanos, the Collector) were barely more than cameos. (It occurs to me that this has been a problem throughout Phase 2 of the MCU -- of the films released so far, only CA:TWS had a fully-realized antagonist.) On the other hand, I liked the main team a lot, and I look forward to seeing more of them. Let's hope that they're saving the other antagonists for the next film, or possibly Avengers 3.

I do have to say that I'm pretty excited about the prospects for how this might tie in to the wider cinematic universe. To my recollection, no one ever said the word "Kree" during Agents of SHIELD, but based on how they appear in GotG, I am about 95% certain that the alien whose blood was used to revive Coulson and Skye was Kree. And when I mentioned this theory to renay, who happened to be watching that exact episode at the time, she concurred:

Nay: *rewatches**
Nay: If that's not Kree
Nay: I will eat my iPhone

This would help tie the events of GotG to what's happening on Earth, more closely than just the Tesseract being an infinity stone. But more importantly, which Marvel superhero not-yet-seen in the MCU got their powers from Kree technology? Why, Carol Danvers, aka Captain Marvel.

Now, I'm not saying that the Kree already being on Earth guarantees that they're going to make a Captain Marvel movie. But it sure makes the prospect a hell of a lot more likely. Add to that the fact that Katee Sackhoff has been dropping mysterious Tweets about a secret project and meetings with Stan Lee, and I'm getting more excited about the possibility than is probably healthy.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I also saw Guardians of the Galaxy this weekend and pretty much loved it. I didn't find it that sexist but I'd read the original comics (not this team, but the original one with Power Princess) and so this was leaps and bounds better than that. I actually had on problem with the villeins, but again, I know the back story so it was easier for me to cruise along with less info. I will be interested to see what Brent thinks of it, since he has absolutely no background on any kind in Marvel Comics beyond the already released movies.

Given what was released at ComicCon, we will be definately be seeing more of the Guardians. What I'm wondering is, are they changing Star Lord's back story? The whole "mystery daddy" thing doesn't jive with his dad being a known factor from the comics, so I'm guessing that will be a big point of divergence.

As for a Captain Marvel (Carol Danvers) movie, it would be fun but given the whole Captain Mar-Vell back story, kinda complicated. Still, if they can make it work without wrecking the mythos, I'm all for it.

[jeanniemac]

The above comment was me, btw. For some reason, dreamwidth didn't long me in when I came here from LJ.

[owlmoose]

I have always felt pretty strongly that if a comic-based movie require knowledge of the comics backstory to make sense, then it has failed. It's one thing if there are easter eggs only accessible to comics readers -- those are like an extra, a fun treat. But in terms of plot and character motivations, the movies *have* to stand alone. I wouldn't go so far as to say that GotG failed in those terms; there was just barely enough exposition that we understood why Ronan and Nebula made the choices they did, but the characters were flat, especially in comparison to some of the other MCU antagonists. I would have liked much, much more.

For the same reason, I don't care about them preserving the comics mythos exactly to make a Carol Danvers movie. If they have to make up something entirely new for the MCU, that's totally fine by me. She's a fantastic character who could easily carry a film, and Marvel is waaaaaaay overdue for a film with a female lead. Black Widow would have been my first choice, but Carol Danvers would make me extremely happy as well. (Let's be real: I want both!)

As for the sexism, if you're curious to learn what other people, including me, saw that bothered them, I really recommend that you read the two articles I linked. It's not the most egregiously sexist movie I've ever seen, not by a long shot. But there's more of it than in most of the other MCU films, so it stands out in comparison. Compare, for example, how Gamora is shot as compared to Black Widow in the Avengers and Cap 2: the images of Gamora are much more male-gazey, lingering on breasts and butt and thighs, in a way that images of Natasha are not. This is not to slam on Gamora as a character *at all* -- I loved her, I thought her writing was pretty good, and I want to see more of her. But she's more objectified by the cinematography and blocking than any other MCU heroine so far. Again, this is not a cardinal sin or anything. But in an Marvel film, it's jarring, and I hope it's just this one director and not the beginning of a trend.