Based upon the Marvel Comics series created by Dan Abnett and Andy Lanning
Screenplay Written by James Gunn and Nicole Perlman
Directed by James Gunn
** (two stars)
When I first saw the trailers for "Guardians Of The Galaxy," Director James Gunn's adaptation of the reasonably obscure Marvel Comics series as well as the latest addition to the Marvel film universe, I was honestly taken somewhat aback by the cavalier, nearly tossed off attitude that was presented. It almost seemed as if what we might be seeing with the finished film would be perhaps the anti-Marvel movie, filled with heroes who were not virtuous, adorned with petulant and even murderous personalities and equally tart tongued mouths who somehow save the day anyway, despite their respective terrible natures. The prospect of seeing a Marvel movie like that certainly confused me as I watched those trailers. I mean--were they actually making a giant, big budget sized joke of everything we have been viewing since the Marvel "Phases" officially began in 2008? The possibility of something that sardonic and subversive was definitely intriguing to me and my curiosity was piqued, despite my sense of comic book movie fatigue. Maybe this film would give the genre a different kind of shot in the arm?
Well...after seeing the completed film this afternoon, I have to say that while the film does indeed contain all of those aforementioned qualities of cavalier, petulant, tart tongued anti-heroes, "Guardians Of The Galaxy" is unfortunately a much more pedestrian, run of the mill movie than it ever needed to be. It is reminiscent of any Summer movie blockbuster from this year or years past and it really doesn't offer very much that is necessarily fresh. In fact, the earlier Marvel films, as directed by the likes of Jon Favreau, Kenneth Branagh, Shane Black and especially Joss Whedon, have all accomplished everything that Gunn and his film have set out to do and in much better and more idiosyncratic ways to boot. For a film that wants us to think that it is waving its "freak flag" higher and prouder than all else surrounding it in our cineplexes, it is also clear that Marvel didn't want Gunn and his rag-tag band of interstellar scoundrels to step too far outside of the box, for they are indeed building a franchise that has to sell. That being said, "Guardians Of the Galaxy" is not a bad movie by any means whatsoever. Just a sadly uninteresting one, especially considering its potential to be the most unique film playing in theaters right now or even in the entire Marvel films canon.
"Guardians Of The Galaxy" stars the terrific Chris Pratt as Peter Quill, a self-described space outlaw nicknamed "Star Lord", who was abducted by aliens from Earth as a child in 1988 immediately following the death of his Mother from cancer. After Quill steals a spherical object known as The Orb, he is immediately pursued not only by a band of space pirates called The Ravagers led by the blue skinned, Southern twanged Yondu (a game Michael Rooker), but also by the assassin Gamora (Zoe Saldana), and a pair of bounty hunters, the homicidal, genetically engineered raccoon Rocket (voiced by Bradley Cooper) and his tree humanoid companion Groot (voiced by Vin Diesel), whose only utterances are a guttural "I am Groot."
Finally, there is the matter of the evil warlord Ronan The Accuser (Lee Pace), a radical member of the fanatical Kree alien race and who also serves as an underling for the malevolent Thanos, who wishes to obtain The Orb for his own dire purposes.
Soon, Quill, Gamora, Rocket and Groot are all captured and imprisoned in The Kyln and eventually meet up with the inmate Drax The Destroyer (Dave Bautista), who is ferociously plotting revenge against Ronan for the murder of his family. The quintet plot a jail break and then team up to retrieve The Orb and stop Ronan at his own destructive plans for universal domination.
Essentially, that is the basic plot of "Guardians Of The Galaxy" minus all of the intricate back-stories and connections between alien races and so on. As with all of the Marvel films thus far, James Gunn has delivered a most handsome production filled with an A list visual sheen and the level of top flight special effects that we have come to expect from films like these. While Gunn certainly ensures that his film is not a big budget spectacle that exists without a story and only serves to be a clothesline to hang those special effects upon, I had wished, however, that an even more reckless nature had been attached to the proceedings. It is a film that feels as if it is just itching to break free from those Summer movie chains and cliches, and even the Marvel universe itself, and exist completely within a universe of its own. But, it just remains stalled, spinning its wheels frantically as it just gives us everything that we have ever seen before.
"Guardians Of The Galaxy" simply is not as clever, or as irreverent as it thinks that it is. Let's face it, dear readers. If you trade The Orb for the Tesseract, and Quill for Iron Man, "Guardians Of The Galaxy" is basically a reboot of Joss Whedon's "The Avengers" (2012), as it essentially carries the exact same story with a collective of prickly individuals forced to band together for the greater good. And besides, who is going to be even more clever or irreverent than Robert Downey Jr.?
But, also with "The Avengers," Whedon made that film burst from the screen as if it were the pages of a Marvel comic springing to vibrant life directly from the pages. In fact, that film was so terrific, solely from a audio/visual presentation that is mirrored the sounds I heard inside of my brain when I read those comics as a child. Whedon made the special effects truly special as they filled with me awe and sensation and the brilliantly, beautifully orchestrated and choreographed extended war sequence was one for the ages, as he somehow juggled those plates of character, humor, story and spectacle ingeniously.
"Guardians Of The Galaxy" on the other hand, seemed to follow the beats that are now too familiar with these kinds of movies. It adhered to the structure when it should have been breaking free from it. It should have kept us guessing to the motivations of the film's characters rather than following a strict and deeply well worn path the entire time. From characters to the special effects, you knew precisely where "Guardians Of The Galaxy" was heading for the whole running time with no sense of real surprise or unpredictability. It was just all "been there, done that" and for a film that has a walking, talking tree and a smart mouthed, machine gun wielding raccoon, we deserved much better and most certainly, a more inventive and creatively dangerous one.
Think of films like Director W.D. Richter's "The Adventures Of Buckaroo Banzai: Across The 8th Dimension" (1984) or even Director Terry Gilliam's "The Adventures Of Baron Munchausen" (1989) to see other examples with a similar framework but are so astoundingly unique that there have just not been any films like either of those before or since. Marvel certainly had an opportunity but somehow and ironically, for a studio that champions the heroic and brave, the powers-that-be were just not brave enough to throw caution to the wind and make "Guardians Of The Galaxy" really stand out.
In fact, if anything, "Guardians Of The Galaxy" owes nearly every single frame of its film to George Lucas' "Star Wars" saga, most notably the original 1977 masterpiece and even the first installment of the much (and in my opinion, unfairly) maligned prequel trilogy, "The Phantom Menace" (1999). Each of those films, just as "Guardians Of The Galaxy" has emulated, detailed the origin story of how the most unique band of individuals and misfits aligned themselves together and became heroes. And frankly, even the climax to "Guardians Of The Galaxy" felt lifted from "Return Of The Jedi" (1983) and "The Phantom Menace" as we are given an aerial dogfight, a ground battle and some interpersonal rock 'em-sock 'em simultaneously. In some ways, it felt as if Gunn designed his film to maybe be the movie that some "Star Wars" fans wished they had received with the prequel trilogy. A film that had action from one end to the other and nearly every character existed as some variation of Han Solo, complete with wisecracks and one-liners.
Certainly, what else is Chris Pratt doing but providing a devil-may-care cockiness that cannot help but to remind us all of Harrison Ford's iconic work as the mercenary Han Solo? What are Rocket and Groot but Han Solo and Chewbacca? Gamora is definitely more Solo than Princess Leia and all of those bounty hunters on Quill's trail is nothing more than an updated version of Jabba The Hutt's minions all after Han Solo over the course of three films. And in doing so, this negates any sense of true originality from these oddball characters that we have been introduced to.
While all of the characters within "Guardians Of The Galaxy" are well conceived, it is in their execution where all of the problems and shortcomings lie. Ronan, for instance, is as bland a villain as they come, with no sense of danger or fright or evil to be had. And as for the actual dialogue and line readings, did any of you feel like all of the characters were either just yelling or screaming their lines to varying volumes? That was more than distracting to me because louder does not equal rebelliousness. And then, there were the pop songs that are so ubiquitous in the movies that they should be banned forever from usage and pop culture jokes which were stale by the fourth "Shrek" movie.
Even with all of those criticisms, there were aspects about the film that I did enjoy. Despite the pedestrian song choices (I mean--why not, say Frank Zappa?), I did enjoy how the Walkman served as a motif throughout the film with regards to Peter Quill's emotional state and inner pain. I also really enjoyed the characters of Rocket and Groot very much. Rocket's impassioned soliloquy about his aloneness in the universe provided an angry pathos that the film could have used much more of and I have to give Vin Diesel credit for somehow finding a variety of ways to say those three words of "I am Groot," to ensure that different meanings would be apparent to us in the audience. But, on the other hand, isn't it odd and perhaps a bit sad that the most interesting characters in the film are the computer generated ones? And yes, I have to say, that the film's post end-credit sequence gave me the biggest and most honest laugh of the entire movie.
James Gunn's "Guardians Of The Galaxy" is a near miss for me. But I haven't given up though. With the inevitable sequel, which Gunn will write and direct, already announced and confirmed for a July 28, 2017 release date (there's that assembly line movie-making again), perhaps...perhaps with the origin story out of the way, that will free Gunn up to make something truly outside of the box.
If not, then you might as well just call the next film "Guardians Of The Marvel Bank Account."
No comments:
Post a Comment