mZuzek said:
Sensing quite a bit of insecurity in this post... that's fine, I feel insecure at the moment too. Anyways, I didn't get into the specifics because I didn't want to. You started your review off by "getting out of the way" (which is still saying it) that the movie tries to hard to be like its predecessor, using as an example only one line..? Does Quill's first line in the movie being a nod to the first one automatically write the whole thing off as a rehash? I mean, as much as you wanted to get this out of the way early, so does the film - the first 20-25 minutes or so are very much more of the same, to get the audience going, bring back the Guardians as they know and love. From there on out it's a completely different movie and I struggle really hard to understand how some people think it's the same. In fact, you don't, either. Because you go on to criticize the things this movie does different. You criticize that the Guardians are split apart, saying the movie isn't as good when they're not together - this is an expectation molded on the first movie and is something Vol. 2 does different. You criticize, hm... oh okay, maybe that's as far as this goes. Still, I disagree with some of your other criticisms. Saying there's no resolution to the Rocket vs. Quill thing is pretty crazy, because there was - only there didn't have to be a cliche "I'm sorry, dude" scene or an apology letter like in Civil War, no, they handled it in a more subtle way because that's how it works in real life. I'm pretty sure you already had a fight with a family member that didn't end too well, but overnight you thought about it and when you both woke up the other day, you know you were both wrong and just move on as if nothing happened. This is what we almost get here - with Quill learning to let go of his ego and entitlement, and Rocket learning to allow himself to care for others over the course of the movie, when they both meet each other again they don't need to apologize because they already understand it's all good. I said we almost get this situation, because there is a proper apology later in the film, which is of course Rocket's last line. Anyways. |
😂😂 Talk about insecurity. You’re projecting all over the place. You created strawman arguments and said my review conformed to them when it didn’t. I appreciate you actually pointing out what you take issue with because then I can clarify where I was coming from. I used the a-holes line as an example so I would not have to make a laundry list of how this film does try to replicate the feel and tone of the first. I picked that line because after the prologue it’s the first thing we get. It was a long review already and unnecessary lists didn’t seem warranted. And it trying to be or not be like the first film has nothing to do with my overall score. I examine a film on its own merits. And yes, sometimes sequels do exist in the light of their predecessor. But it not being a carbon copy or being a carbon copy has nothing to do with my critique of the film. I was giving context to why it might not be as good. Whether you buy that context is up to you. But I don’t write my reviews based on what people will like. It’s about how the film makes me feel.
What I took issue with is that you painted my review not only inaccurately but in a light you felt comfortable arguing in. Again, your three main strawman arguments are nowhere in my review. That was the only reason I responded. And again, for someone who claims to love this film so much, you spend more time talking about how other people see the film rather than how you do. Perhaps you see those flaws and need to explain them away. No idea why else you would bring them up when I didn’t.
As for the group chemistry, are you saying it does not exist? Because yes, that comes from the first film. Do we pretend we don’t know this group of actors is good together? Oh but wait. As I said, the film pops more when the group is together. A film that so bluntly talks about family and then splits up said family for a majority of the film (leading to an unfocused narrative) is going to affect how you see the film. Now maybe you prefer the group spilt up. Vek can tell you in other shows and films I see splitting up the main casts actually dilutes the product unless you’re telling a more engaging story. I didn’t find all those stories engaging as I stated in my review. They have high points and lows. You can disagree as you see fit.
Do I think Rocket grew as a character? Sure. But the film takes a large portion of that opening sequence to establish a conflict. That we don’t see a resolution to said conflict is notable. You can say “Well I think they handled it off screen”. That’s fine. But I don’t really give credit for what’s not there. I do like that Rocket made the hard choice for the group in closing the ship’s doors. And I like his bonding with Yondu and how it affects him in the finale. That’s all good stuff. The problem is it does not match exactly with the beginning. You can say he pushes people away and that’s what he did to Quill so now that he cares about Yondu by extension he cares about Quill. I can even buy that. But my comment about the Rocket/Quill conflict was in context of the overall plotting. Not of the one particular grievance. Again, you can pull it out of context and say “See? This I don’t agree with” and we can hash it out. Maybe you’ll convince me. Maybe you won’t. That’s part of the experience this rewatch is supposed to engender. But don’t start off saying “He’s doing X” when I’m doing Y. Especially when you add “I’ve gotten better at dealing with this”. Because no, my friend, you haven’t
