Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 [SPOILERS]

[Cikomyr]

So!! Just came back from seeing it.

Man. This movie feels more intimate yet more epic in scope. It doubled down on character interaction, and dared going for really dramatic stuff.

Ego was a ****ing imbecile. Who admits to killing a boy's mother?!?

I loved it. Yandu's death and funerals were so goddamn emotional :'-(

[Razade]

Wow. Spoilers dude? The film doesn't even release until tomorrow in the states. Normally I don't care but like..really?

The movie was great though.

[t209]

Well, crud.
I thought that Peter Quill's mom got cancer from Pete's dad radiation energy.
Just like Spiderman Reign or Peter David's Hulk run.

[Frozen_Feet]

The start was a bit chaotic but the movie got better rapidly after introducing Ego. Drax and Mantis were high parts of the movie. Best space comedy since... errr, since... the first Guardians of the Galaxy? There doesn't seem to be all that much competition...

[Cikomyr]

Wow. Spoilers dude? The film doesn't even release until tomorrow in the states. Normally I don't care but like..really?

The movie was great though.

This is why i put the massive SPOILER tag in the thread title. If you cant read it, then you certainly cant read my post either.

Edit: oh man..the quotes..

"He may have been your father, but he sure as hell wasnt your daddy"

"You look like Mary Poppins!"
"Is he cool?"
"...yhea"

Also, +1 for David Hasselhoff Cameo.

And Stalone's role was awesome. Pure awesome. I want to see a story about Ravager Stalone.

[Kantaki]

I loved it.

The „fight-scene” at the beginning was one of the best ever.
Actually... make that everything with little Groot.:smallbiggrin:
Ego's confession was amazingly stupid, but no one ever claimed he's smart.
Besides, it got us Starlord's Pac-Man mode so I guess it was worth it.

The various mid-credits scenes were nice too.
And of course everybody dances. Drax exempted.:smallamused:

[Dienekes]

Very fun movie, really enjoyed it.

Was very surprised when they went ahead and introduced Tommy Flanagan as a character just to space him two scenes later.

Really the only problem I had with it, was that Ego just told Peter he killed Pete's mom. Like wouldn't this make more sense and be just as quick.

Ego sets up everything about how he loved his mom, and the purpose. Then he links his energy to Peter. Peter sees everything, and we watch as Ego creates kids across the galaxy and in each one the mother gets used up and dies shortly after. It's revealed that Ego was just using Peter's mom and never really had feelings for her.
Peter gets angry, confronts Ego about it, how he's been lying about everything. And Ego says something like "To be fair, I didn't know you'd see everything. None of the others survived this long." Peter "That doesn't make it better!" And the story goes along just as it was before.

[Strigon]

Really the only problem I had with it, was that Ego just told Peter he killed Pete's mom. Like wouldn't this make more sense and be just as quick.

Ego sets up everything about how he loved his mom, and the purpose. Then he links his energy to Peter. Peter sees everything, and we watch as Ego creates kids across the galaxy and in each one the mother gets used up and dies shortly after. It's revealed that Ego was just using Peter's mom and never really had feelings for her.
Peter gets angry, confronts Ego about it, how he's been lying about everything. And Ego says something like "To be fair, I didn't know you'd see everything. None of the others survived this long." Peter "That doesn't make it better!" And the story goes along just as it was before.

Meh, I like it this way better. It shows how bat-crap crazy he was that he had a genuine shot at happiness, but he literally killed it to further his "purpose". Your way he's just an unfeeling, god-like supervillain, and there are enough of those already.

Plus, this actually gives him a reason to have feelings for Star Lord.


But man, that movie had some consistently fantastic humour. Drax and Mantis, as mentioned before, but let's not ignore Rocket. And Baby Groot, because who could forget Baby Groot?

[Thrudd]

I don't have a problem with Ego's confession. He's a celestial, a living planet, he doesn't think like people do. Look at how much different an outlook one can have just being different mortal species, like Drax and everyone else, then imagine how much more difference there would be between an immortal, billion year old being and mortals. He literally can't care or understand the feelings or thoughts of beings that are basically bacteria to him. Luckily, the bacteria were able to find a weakness and take him down anyway.

[Dienekes]

Meh, I like it this way better. It shows how bat-crap crazy he was that he had a genuine shot at happiness, but he literally killed it to further his "purpose". Your way he's just an unfeeling, god-like supervillain, and there are enough of those already.

Plus, this actually gives him a reason to have feelings for Star Lord.


But man, that movie had some consistently fantastic humour. Drax and Mantis, as mentioned before, but let's not ignore Rocket. And Baby Groot, because who could forget Baby Groot?

Hmm, totally fair. And you're right, that it lowers the whole love set up.

But I still want there to be a reason for the reveal. Him just saying out of the blue "Oh by the by I killed your mommy." Felt dumb.

I still think revealing the murder through the connection, would have fit better.

[Pex]

It was superduperawesomesticfreakingadelicious!

There was one part I didn't like, the opening scene. I was interested in watching the Guardians battle the interdimensional monster, not dancing baby groot. However, that was the marketing, the kids wanted it, and I can at least be grateful it was done in the beginning to get it over with. Groot was no Wesley Crusher or Scrappy Doo. He had legitimate purpose, contributed meaningfully, and did not foul things up.

Also gotten out of the way early is the gratuitous shirtless scene so Chris Pratt can show off his buff chest. It is half the reason why he got the part in the first movie, and he was even more buff with defined pecs. Yeah, I noticed. :)

About 45 minutes into the movie I realized I didn't yet know what the plot was. This is not a criticism. The Sovereign issue was something, but it didn't have the weight to carry the movie. Not knowing the comic lore kept me ignorant, allowing me to enjoy the movie and get that "Oh snap!" feeling when the plot punchline finally revealed itself. It's a plot that's been done before, but I was able to be surprised by the reveal.

Not that I minded they didn't do it, but when stuff happens on Earth it would have been a good opportunity for an Avengers or Agents of Shield cameo. Stan Lee's cameo was stupid. I did like the Hoff.

[Strigon]

Hmm, totally fair. And you're right, that it lowers the whole love set up.

But I still want there to be a reason for the reveal. Him just saying out of the blue "Oh by the by I killed your mommy." Felt dumb.

I still think revealing the murder through the connection, would have fit better.

Oh, make no mistake, I agree that the way he blurted it out was... peculiar. I think they were going for this bombshell moment where you're meant to realize that he's not just selfish, he's completely insane.
In theatres, I quite liked the way it came out; I was expecting some twist, but it still had an emotional punch there. It's only now, upon reading your complaint that I realize how weird the execution was. Revealing it through the connection very well could have fixed it.

[Cikomyr]

Not that I minded they didn't do it, but when stuff happens on Earth it would have been a good opportunity for an Avengers or Agents of Shield cameo. Stan Lee's cameo was stupid. I did like the Hoff.

It is probably the single most meta uber-conspiracy wink to the fans ever.

Stan Lee tells about his cameo appearances of all Marvel Movies to the Watchers?! Opening the possibility that this entire movieverse is nothing but the rambling of an old man and the imagination of the Watchers, including the Old Man inserting himself everywhere in the narrative?!?

[Dienekes]

Also gotten out of the way early is the gratuitous shirtless scene so Chris Pratt can show off his buff chest. It is half the reason why he got the part in the first movie, and he was even more buff with defined pecs. Yeah, I noticed. :)

...

Stan Lee's cameo was stupid. I did like the Hoff.

Mate, Pratt got hired when he was about 60 lbs overweight.

And having Stan Lee being the storyteller to the Watchers is great. Though, having him shout to a leaving audience that he still has stories to tell is a little sad.


Speaking of sad, anyone feeling a bit sorry for Gamora? Knowing exactly what's going to happen to her when she confronts him in the Infinity Gauntlet, which is what everything has been leading up to.

[Erys]

Fantastic movie.

Stan Lees Cameo was a hoot.



Speaking of sad, anyone feeling a bit sorry for Gamora? Knowing exactly what's going to happen to her when she confronts him in the Infinity Gauntlet, which is what everything has been leading up to.

Do we? Not like Disney's MCU runs parallel to the comics...

[Pex]

Mate, Pratt got hired when he was about 60 lbs overweight.

He had to diet and exercise to show he can look the part. His candid underwear picture which he purposely posted was famous on mainstream internet sites, not that I know anything about non-mainstream internet sites. :smallredface: :smallbiggrin:



Speaking of sad, anyone feeling a bit sorry for Gamora? Knowing exactly what's going to happen to her when she confronts him in the Infinity Gauntlet, which is what everything has been leading up to.

Not me since I don't know what's going to happen because I don't know the comic.

[Dienekes]

Fantastic movie.

Stan Lees Cameo was a hoot.



Do we? Not like Disney's MCU runs parallel to the comics...



Not me since I don't know what's going to happen because I don't know the comic.

****. I meant Nebula. But, anyway. They probably won't follow the comics directly, at all. But she's still going off alone to kill Thanos. Which pretty perfectly sets her up for how she starts in Infinity Gauntlet. So I'm guessing some reference to it will be happening.

For those interested:

Thanos gains the Infinty Gauntlet turns her into a half living half dead monstrosity so she can live in the eternal agony of dying.

While Thanos is distracted she steals the Gauntlet from him. Undoes everything he has done but ends up going all "A god am I" with it and basically everyone in the galaxy comes together to kick her ass.

In the comic she comes off as a pathetic jerk so while the torment is horrifying you don't really feel sorry for her. Just distaste and pity. Now she is just another broken person to watch destroy herself.

[Legato Endless]

I don't have a problem with Ego's confession. He's a celestial, a living planet, he doesn't think like people do. Look at how much different an outlook one can have just being different mortal species, like Drax and everyone else, then imagine how much more difference there would be between an immortal, billion year old being and mortals. He literally can't care or understand the feelings or thoughts of beings that are basically bacteria to him. Luckily, the bacteria were able to find a weakness and take him down anyway.

It's not different thinking, it's just megalamania. Ego gets people just fine, he's just too far gone to care. It's how he managed to seduce members of so many species. His confession isn't ignorance (he knows it sounds really bad) it's just something he can't help. He can't maintain that facade, and now he's finally found a son 'who gets it' so he's gonna overshare. Personally it felt to me more like the final veil slipping than a real twist. Ego's plan is laid out pretty succinctly in the first 5 minutes of the film. Ego isn't some vast presence beyond the ken of mere mortals, he's a guy who took a shallow look around the universe and could not emphasize. He's a callous narcissistic manchild who never grew up. He doesn't have any real self control. It's why he's petty, impatient, and why he confesses.

[Pex]

I like Starlord's reaction to the news. It was immediate lose the celestial eyes and start blasting. It was foretold in Gamora's earlier comment that if Ego is really evil they would kill him. There was no moral quandary. Poof, you're evil, die!

[BRC]

Ego's whole thing was that he felt alone in the universe. Which makes it ironic that

1) His endgame was to literally make himself alone in the universe, by converting every planet to himself.

and
2) When he found somebody he connected with, he killed them so they wouldn't tempt him away from his "Purpose".

By this point he had already done whatever it is he does to Peter to bring him onboard with the whole "Ego-ize the galaxy" plan. He basically assumed that Peter was another version of himself, and would understand why killing his mother was justified.

But...



The opening sequence tells us what this movie is about. Personal connections and relationships with a backdrop of epic space opera and an 80's soundtrack.
The Guardians are fighting a giant monster, that is happening (epic space opera), but the literal FOCUS of the scene is on Baby Groot, dancing around. The other Guardians only really enter focus to interact with Groot in a parental manner. Making him spit out a bug, pausing the fight to return his cheerful wave, ect ect.

And that's basically the thesis of the film. It's priorities are, in this order, comedy: heartfelt personal moments, Epic Space Opera. I think there's a comedy beat at least once every two minutes or so, dramatic scenes get undercut by Taserface, or the fruit not being ripe, or an extended off-screen sequence of Quill trying to find tape.

Which brings us back to Ego, Ego's big plan was Epic Space Opera. But, that takes backseat to personal relationships. Quill doesn't snap out of his daze until Ego's crimes become personal. Destroy the galaxy? Sure. Wait, you KILLED MY MOTHER! Heck No.

Some of the comedy beats were unnecessary in my mind, but it worked anyway. The movie was a ton of fun, that said, I have some Beeves (Plural of beef)

1) So, Rocket's whole arc of realizing that he's acting out in order to drive people away is a solid one. However, I think they pushed it a little too hard. Specifically with the whole Asteroid Scene. Have Quill and Rocket bicker over who was the better pilot? Sure, but having them constantly switching who was in control back and forward? That goes beyond "I'm acting out to drive people away" and more "I have no sense of self-preservation".

2) The Gamora/Nebula arc was a good one, and while it hit all the right beats, I feel like it was a little bit underdeveloped. Nebula's take on the whole thing, while solid, happens when Gamora isn't there. Like, I can list the moments where the proper information was exchanged, and the right things happened, but I can't say I really felt like the sisters understood each other, except that suddenly things started happening that make sense in the context of the sisters understanding each other.

3) There was a lot of stuff about Ego that makes a lot of sense, but could have been made explicit. In his little presentation to Peter, he shows that his image of "Average Sentient Life" was a white american human male from the 80s, and this is the form he uses throughout his presentations to represent himself. It makes sense, as he's giving Peter an anthropocentric version of his life's story, and later on is just using that image as a stand-in, but it makes a lot more sense that he took a bunch of forms, rather than the idea that he spent millennia traveling as an american guy from the 80s.

[Leewei]

Ego's whole thing was that he felt alone in the universe. Which makes it ironic that

1) His endgame was to literally make himself alone in the universe, by converting every planet to himself.

and
2) When he found somebody he connected with, he killed them so they wouldn't tempt him away from his "Purpose".

By this point he had already done whatever it is he does to Peter to bring him onboard with the whole "Ego-ize the galaxy" plan. He basically assumed that Peter was another version of himself, and would understand why killing his mother was justified.

But...



The opening sequence tells us what this movie is about. Personal connections and relationships with a backdrop of epic space opera and an 80's soundtrack.
The Guardians are fighting a giant monster, that is happening (epic space opera), but the literal FOCUS of the scene is on Baby Groot, dancing around. The other Guardians only really enter focus to interact with Groot in a parental manner. Making him spit out a bug, pausing the fight to return his cheerful wave, ect ect.

And that's basically the thesis of the film. It's priorities are, in this order, comedy: heartfelt personal moments, Epic Space Opera. I think there's a comedy beat at least once every two minutes or so, dramatic scenes get undercut by Taserface, or the fruit not being ripe, or an extended off-screen sequence of Quill trying to find tape.

Which brings us back to Ego, Ego's big plan was Epic Space Opera. But, that takes backseat to personal relationships. Quill doesn't snap out of his daze until Ego's crimes become personal. Destroy the galaxy? Sure. Wait, you KILLED MY MOTHER! Heck No.

Some of the comedy beats were unnecessary in my mind, but it worked anyway. The movie was a ton of fun, that said, I have some Beeves (Plural of beef)

1) So, Rocket's whole arc of realizing that he's acting out in order to drive people away is a solid one. However, I think they pushed it a little too hard. Specifically with the whole Asteroid Scene. Have Quill and Rocket bicker over who was the better pilot? Sure, but having them constantly switching who was in control back and forward? That goes beyond "I'm acting out to drive people away" and more "I have no sense of self-preservation".

2) The Gamora/Nebula arc was a good one, and while it hit all the right beats, I feel like it was a little bit underdeveloped. Nebula's take on the whole thing, while solid, happens when Gamora isn't there. Like, I can list the moments where the proper information was exchanged, and the right things happened, but I can't say I really felt like the sisters understood each other, except that suddenly things started happening that make sense in the context of the sisters understanding each other.

3) There was a lot of stuff about Ego that makes a lot of sense, but could have been made explicit. In his little presentation to Peter, he shows that his image of "Average Sentient Life" was a white american human male from the 80s, and this is the form he uses throughout his presentations to represent himself. It makes sense, as he's giving Peter an anthropocentric version of his life's story, and later on is just using that image as a stand-in, but it makes a lot more sense that he took a bunch of forms, rather than the idea that he spent millennia traveling as an american guy from the 80s.

...the soundtrack was 1970s music. Peter's mom had been collecting the songs for years before meeting his father and conceiving him in 1980.

70's music has a large influence of 60's Folk, with far less keyboard and digital effects, but usually with electric bass and guitar. Punk and Metal were present, but very raw; Funk was in full swing, as was Disco, but these don't feature in the sound track. Hard Rock (now "classic Rock") came onto the scene, using much of the same instrumentation, but with more energetic rhythm, and more aggressive guitar. New Wave grew in popularity at the end of this decade as well, bringing synthesizer into play.

80's music, by comparison, had prevalent New Wave influences -- loads of synthesizer, and often (yech) drum machines, as well as Rap and Hip Hop. Hard Rock was supplanted by Metal. Fleetwood Mac certainly was still very popular in the 80's, but their featured song, The Chain, was released in 1977.

[BRC]

...the soundtrack was 1970s music. Peter's mom had been collecting the songs for years before meeting his father and conceiving him in 1980.


I cede to your greater knowledge.

[Leewei]

I cede to your greater knowledge.


Something about kids and staying off mah lawn. :)

[lt_murgen]

Stan Lee's cameo was stupid.


It is probably the single most meta uber-conspiracy wink to the fans ever.

Yup. The idea is that Stan Lee is working for the Watchers, in all of the movies he has appeared in. All of them. Not just the MCU, but the Fantastic 4, the X-Men, Deadpool, and so on.

[Aedilred]

It was superduperawesomesticfreakingadelicious!

There was one part I didn't like, the opening scene. I was interested in watching the Guardians battle the interdimensional monster, not dancing baby groot. However, that was the marketing, the kids wanted it, and I can at least be grateful it was done in the beginning to get it over with. Groot was no Wesley Crusher or Scrappy Doo. He had legitimate purpose, contributed meaningfully, and did not foul things up.
I thought the opening dance-sequence scene was pretty much pitch-perfect, if a little too long. "Heroes battle big monster" scenes are ten a penny and watching them zap around for a few minutes going pew-pew pointlessly wouldn't have added much to the film, I think. People in the audience have likely seen such scenes more than a dozen times before in the MCU alone; what's one more going to give us? Increasingly the obligatory battle sequences are the least interesting part of any MCU film they're in. Credit to this one for making the final fight between Quill and Ego entertaining in parts with bits like Pac-man, although there were still a few too many shots of them just flying around punching each other.

We got to see the interesting parts of the opening battle at the end of that scene, along with how they defeated it, and we can fill in the rest of the fight with our imaginations - which are, regardless of what media might try to persuade us, almost always going to provide us with something better than they can actually deliver on screen anyway.

Stan Lee's cameo - yeah, those got old for me a while ago. Part of the problem is that he's a terrible actor, so give him more than one line and he kills the scene. His best cameos to date, in my opinion at least, have been the blink-and-you'll-miss-it variety where he's only on screen for a moment and doesn't speak, as in Iron Man and Guardians vol. 1. His first cameo might have been ok; the post-credits one was really pushing it.

[Hagashager]

I liked it. I thought the humor was pretty on point. There were a few instances where I thought the humor was a little forced, and the soundtrack, though good music in-and-of-itself, also felt a bit shoe-horned.

Most of what I felt has already been said by previous posters. I would add one thing:

Yandu. I actually really liked the characterization of Yandu in GotG Vol. 2, however, like with a previous poster's criticism of Nebula, I think it felt a bit underdeveloped.

My reason for that is because much of the emotional character-building in this moving was not even remotely addressed in the previous movie. It took a little while for me to switch gears on Yandu from, "minor comic-relief antagonist of Starlord" to actual "fully fleshed out father figure." The same goes for Nebual and her relationship with Gamora.

I get the impression James Gunn may not have realized he'd be going for a more personal, "Slice of Life" style story with the sequel, if he had, he'd've probably prepared the audience with a bit more depth on the above mentioned characters beforehand.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

My reason for that is because much of the emotional character-building in this moving was not even remotely addressed in the previous movie.

Interesting. I'd say quite the opposite: that in the previous movie, he was so obviously a father figure to Quill that a lot of it felt re-treading in this one. Thankfully, it was not bad because he was effectively "adopting" Rocket, so it wasn't a duplication, but there wasn't character development as such. Just like in the previous film, he comes across as a parent to his band of ne'er-do-gooders more than their captain.

GW

[Darth Ultron]

It was a good movie, much like the first one a nice mix of action, comedy and drama.

It's a bit of a nitpick that Dad finds Long Lost Son, like at the ten minute mark. And that planet Ego was ''right next'' to ''random clash landing planet''. But it can be explained as Ego was hunting down Peter as soon as he heard about ''the human that used an infinity stone''.

The movie takes a bit to ''fool the audience'' that Ego is just a Long Lost Dad who wants to reconnect with his son and play ball. Anyone with a bit of sense knows this is fishy.

Also the bit where Mantis ''starts to tell the Big Secret'' and then, um, does not to pad the movies run time is silly.

It also lacks the ''galaxy peril '', as we only see Earth and maybe one other planet. It does not give a sense of ''the whole galaxy'' in trouble.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

It's a bit of a nitpick that Dad finds Long Lost Son, like at the ten minute mark. And that planet Ego was ''right next'' to ''random clash landing planet''. But it can be explained as Ego was hunting down Peter as soon as he heard about ''the human that used an infinity stone''.

I believe you missed a few details of the exposition. He first finds them as they escape the planet they were hired to protect, not at the crash land, so it's not a coincidence. They are famous enough that tracking them down wouldn't be hard even for non-dieties. He just follows them there. Most important, though, it is shown that the crash land planet is hideously far from Ego, since it takes 750 jumps or something ludicrous like that to get there. Ego just has better tech and dispenses with the jumps entirely. But Rocket & co take their sweet time catching up.

Grey Wolf

[Douglas]

It also lacks the ''galaxy peril '', as we only see Earth and maybe one other planet. It does not give a sense of ''the whole galaxy'' in trouble.
I'm not sure if we actually see the Ego-izing growth happening on more than one non-Earth planet, I wasn't taking note of that detail at the time, but it's clearly stated to be thousands of planets multiple times, and the visualization of it when the plan is explained shows the blue stuff spreading to cover many planets at once. I got a very clear sense that a huge swath of civilization was threatened, though perhaps not the entire universe as Ego's vision of "everything is me" seemed to imply.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

I'm not sure if we actually see the Ego-izing growth happening on more than one non-Earth planet, I wasn't taking note of that detail at the time, but it's clearly stated to be thousands of planets multiple times, and the visualization of it when the plan is explained shows the blue stuff spreading to cover many planets at once. I got a very clear sense that a huge swath of civilization was threatened, though perhaps not the entire universe as Ego's vision of "everything is me" seemed to imply.

It is also heavily implied that he planted one of those flowers in every planet were he had a fling, and the sheer number of dead progeny alone tells you that is quite a large number of them.

GW

[Pex]

It was quick takes, but they did show several planets being threatened by Ego, even Sovereign. The focus was on Earth I suppose for the audience to relate better since they made a necessary big deal of the Dairy Queen area.

[Aedilred]

It also lacks the ''galaxy peril '', as we only see Earth and maybe one other planet. It does not give a sense of ''the whole galaxy'' in trouble.

I wasn't watching closely enough (and am not familiar enough with Marvel fluff in any case) but it looked like we saw Earth, Xandar, the Sovereign world, the Kree homeworld, and maybe one other planet, and that just in close-up.

Which is actually pretty much all the inhabited worlds we've seen in the film series to date, given that the Kyln and Knowhere aren't really planets. They couldn't very well show us scenes from a thousand planets. Though it might have been nice to have given us a brief shot of Asgard or Jotunheim (maybe they did and I didn't notice).

[JoshL]

Caught this over the weekend, and absolutely loved it.

If I had a complaint (and it's not one, really), it was Ego explaining the song Brandy. I picked up on the significance at the beginning, but I'm very familiar with the song (and saw the first movie, so I knew what was going on). Ego explaining it seemed really heavy handed to me, but I understand the average moviegoer isn't going to be looking for narrative parallels and symbolism in the background music, no matter how many times they focus on that particular song (even drawing attention to the lyrics by having his mom sing it). So I won't say it bothered me, but it did seem a little dumbed down.

But I'm not expecting artfilm in a movie starring a trash panda ("it's so much worse!") and I can't wait to see it again! So far, I have liked almost every sequel to the Marvel films better (exception for Iron Man 2, which I still liked, just not as much). Almost missed Ben Browder's part, didn't recognize him until the end of the scene! Which means it is time for a Farscape rewatch!

[Keltest]

I wasn't watching closely enough (and am not familiar enough with Marvel fluff in any case) but it looked like we saw Earth, Xandar, the Sovereign world, the Kree homeworld, and maybe one other planet, and that just in close-up.

Which is actually pretty much all the inhabited worlds we've seen in the film series to date, given that the Kyln and Knowhere aren't really planets. They couldn't very well show us scenes from a thousand planets. Though it might have been nice to have given us a brief shot of Asgard or Jotunheim (maybe they did and I didn't notice).

I rather suspect that Asgard and Jotunheim would have thrown Ego out. Jotunheim is a generally hostile kind of place, and Asgard looks like its pretty strictly controlled. They never would have let him just plant some foreign space plant in their soil, it could (and did) do all sorts of unpleasant things.

[Aedilred]

If I had a complaint (and it's not one, really), it was Ego explaining the song Brandy. I picked up on the significance at the beginning, but I'm very familiar with the song (and saw the first movie, so I knew what was going on). Ego explaining it seemed really heavy handed to me, but I understand the average moviegoer isn't going to be looking for narrative parallels and symbolism in the background music, no matter how many times they focus on that particular song (even drawing attention to the lyrics by having his mom sing it). So I won't say it bothered me, but it did seem a little dumbed down.
I think the explanation was not so much for the benefit of those who wouldn't be able to piece together the song's connection to Ego as it was for the sake of those who weren't familiar with the song. I was vaguely aware of it but wouldn't have known the lyrics, and my brain hadn't clicked into gear properly when the film started to pay attention to what Meredith was singing. Even so, it might better have been left as an easter egg, but I guess it did give an in-character prompt for Ego to explain about his "purpose".

Conversely to you I think this is the first Marvel sequel I have liked more than the original.


I rather suspect that Asgard and Jotunheim would have thrown Ego out. Jotunheim is a generally hostile kind of place, and Asgard looks like its pretty strictly controlled. They never would have let him just plant some foreign space plant in their soil, it could (and did) do all sorts of unpleasant things.

Presumably he can change his form, though, and isn't stuck looking like Kurt Russell. He could likely have presented himself as a Frost Giant and passed without too much trouble in Jotunheim. Asgard might be trickier because of Heimdall, but if Loki can craft Heimdall-proof illusions then I'm sure Ego could too. They likely wouldn't have wanted him planting something on their planet, it's true, but nor would the Earth authorities. It's not like he put it in the White House lawn; the likelihood is only Meredith knew about it and she might have been the only one of his lovers he told about the plant.

[Keltest]

I think the explanation was not so much for the benefit of those who wouldn't be able to piece together the song's connection to Ego as it was for the sake of those who weren't familiar with the song. I was vaguely aware of it but wouldn't have known the lyrics, and my brain hadn't clicked into gear properly when the film started to pay attention to what Meredith was singing. Even so, it might better have been left as an easter egg, but I guess it did give an in-character prompt for Ego to explain about his "purpose".

Conversely to you I think this is the first Marvel sequel I have liked more than the original.



Presumably he can change his form, though, and isn't stuck looking like Kurt Russell. He could likely have presented himself as a Frost Giant and passed without too much trouble in Jotunheim. Asgard might be trickier because of Heimdall, but if Loki can craft Heimdall-proof illusions then I'm sure Ego could too. They likely wouldn't have wanted him planting something on their planet, it's true, but nor would the Earth authorities. It's not like he put it in the White House lawn; the likelihood is only Meredith knew about it and she might have been the only one of his lovers he told about the plant.

Well, Jotunheim is a ball of ice, isn't it? Plant life doesn't typically thrive in a pure ice environment.

[Kato]

I did quite like the movie. I think there were some minor things that bothered me... Like Drax being degraded to 90% idiot, gimli style. Or groot being stuck as a baby. And I feel mantis could have been handled better. Or action wise the almost total lack of interesting fights. I mean, most were fun to watch. But interesting..? And the Stallone character.. Or having him in the role.. Eh.

Anyway, I enjoyed it a lot. About on par with the first one.

[Leewei]

Drax provided an enormous amount of somewhat fart-joke comic relief. It's a credit to Bautista that he got the payoff he did from some of those lines.

[Strigon]

So, a week or so ago I rewatched it, and the first time I saw it I entered the theatre on the tail end of the opening fight; just in time for Drax to take the credit.
As a result, I missed Baby Groot's ELO dance the first time, and it was worth going again just for that scene alone.

[Klaatu B. Nikto]

I think there was a very brief tie in to Thor: Ragnorok during the Rocket-Yondu rescue sequence.

It was one of the first jumps: there's 2 guys beating the snot out of each other with maces on what looks to be Sakaar or whatever world Thor ends up on in his movie.

[Dilvish]

Caught this over the weekend, and absolutely loved it.

If I had a complaint (and it's not one, really), it was Ego explaining the song Brandy. I picked up on the significance at the beginning, but I'm very familiar with the song (and saw the first movie, so I knew what was going on). Ego explaining it seemed really heavy handed to me, but I understand the average moviegoer isn't going to be looking for narrative parallels and symbolism in the background music, no matter how many times they focus on that particular song (even drawing attention to the lyrics by having his mom sing it). So I won't say it bothered me, but it did seem a little dumbed down.

But I'm not expecting artfilm in a movie starring a trash panda ("it's so much worse!") and I can't wait to see it again! So far, I have liked almost every sequel to the Marvel films better (exception for Iron Man 2, which I still liked, just not as much). Almost missed Ben Browder's part, didn't recognize him until the end of the scene! Which means it is time for a Farscape rewatch!

Which scene had Ben Browder? I didn't recognize him.

[Darth Ultron]

I'm not sure if we actually see the Ego-izing growth happening on more than one non-Earth planet

We see ''Sovereign world'' and Xandar that I remember. But the focus sure was on the Dairy Queen Earth Monster. (did you notice the Ye Old 1980's Dairy Queen, and the change to the more modern 2000's Dairy Queen? )

So...anyone know who the Reavers who ''get the band back together'' at the end are......

The only one I knew off hand was Krugar the ''sorcerer supreme of the 31st century'', the orange half man, half worm guy that does magic, or, er, programs.

Is Stalone someone, or just ''Old Reaver guy''?

[Razade]

So...anyone know who the Reavers who ''get the band back together'' at the end are......

The original Guardians of the Galaxy from the comics.

[JoshL]

Which scene had Ben Browder? I didn't recognize him.

He was one of the Sovereign; during the first failed attack, he's the one who was standing next to the high priestess being critical of the attack. Short bit, but he had a couple lines.

[Darth Ultron]

The original Guardians of the Galaxy from the comics.

Um..wait, you mean the REAL Guardians of the Galaxy? Starhawk? Vance Astro? Marty? Charle-27? Nikki? Um...well makes sense they all knew Youdu then.

A guess the ''Marvel Cinimatic Universe'' changed all of them into ''nothing like the comics but the same name''.

So...was Stalone Vance Astro then?

[Razade]

Um..wait, you mean the REAL Guardians of the Galaxy? Starhawk? Vance Astro? Marty? Charle-27? Nikki? Um...well makes sense they all knew Youdu then.

A guess the ''Marvel Cinimatic Universe'' changed all of them into ''nothing like the comics but the same name''.

So...was Stalone Vance Astro then?

No, they call him Starhawk right when they introduce him on the ice brothel planet. Vance Astro isn't in the movie. The other people are Michael Rosenbaum as Martinex, Ving Rhames as Charlie-27, and Michelle Yeoh as Stakar's female counterpart Aleta Ogord. Also included in the team are the CG characters Krugarr and Mainframe, with the latter voiced, in an uncredited cameo, by Miley Cyrus.

[Darth Ultron]

No, they call him Starhawk right when they introduce him on the ice brothel planet. Vance Astro isn't in the movie. The other people are Michael Rosenbaum as Martinex, Ving Rhames as Charlie-27, and Michelle Yeoh as Stakar's female counterpart Aleta Ogord. Also included in the team are the CG characters Krugarr and Mainframe, with the latter voiced, in an uncredited cameo, by Miley Cyrus.

Hummm...might need to go see the movie again.

So...this is Mainframe ''once was the Vision and downloaded myself into a planet'', right? Not the ''I'm Tony Starks pet LMD Iron Man copy'', right?

[Razade]

I don't know and I doubt it matters. The MCU doesn't operate under comic canon and that's a great thing.

[Rodin]

I don't know and I doubt it matters. The MCU doesn't operate under comic canon and that's a great thing.

It's pretty awesome for those of us who don't read the comics, as they've done a great job of removing that as a requirement for enjoyment while still leaving in enough references for those who have read. I periodically find myself dizzy as the discussion in these threads goes off on a tangent about background characters that are super relevant in the comics but fulfilled a minor supporting role in the films.

[Demonjazz]

I did quite like the movie. I think there were some minor things that bothered me... Like Drax being degraded to 90% idiot, gimli style. Or groot being stuck as a baby. And I feel mantis could have been handled better. Or action wise the almost total lack of interesting fights. I mean, most were fun to watch. But interesting..? And the Stallone character.. Or having him in the role.. Eh.

Anyway, I enjoyed it a lot. About on par with the first one.

I wouldn't exactly say that Drax was really degraded to an idiot. For one, he probably became more humorous because he drew from later parts of the comics. But I think the entire point of Drax is well... He got a new family so he's over a lot of his previous sadness. He's kind of... Riding a high so to speak at the time of the movie, and I think that it was supposed to be adding to the movie's themes of Choosing your family instead of it being chosen for you.

[AvatarVecna]

Ego was a ****ing imbecile. Who admits to killing a boy's mother?!?

I won't say that it'd be a universally stupid claim to make, just that there's a time and a place. What he needed to do was get Starlord completely on his side in regards to the "great purpose" thing, maybe even wait long enough that Celestial!Starlord watched his friends/family die in front of him, so that he could realize how much it hurts to get attached to mortals; such a mindset would be much more useful to Ego in terms of bringing Starlord around to thinking "hey, maybe mortal life isn't so valuable?" as well as the whole "I killed your mother because I loved her so much that she would've tempted me to abandon my purpose". What's ridiculous to me is just how impatient this millions-of-years-old immortal. He spent millions of years realizing his power and purpose, and boned his way from one end of the galaxy to the other trying to get just a single child who could rule the galaxy with him as father and child (which by the way, I was surprised they didn't more directly quote SW E V, but okay), and yet he waits like two seconds to reveal that every single aspect of Starlord's tragic backstory is basically directly his fault.

[Dienekes]

I did quite like the movie. I think there were some minor things that bothered me... Like Drax being degraded to 90% idiot, gimli style. Or groot being stuck as a baby. And I feel mantis could have been handled better. Or action wise the almost total lack of interesting fights. I mean, most were fun to watch. But interesting..? And the Stallone character.. Or having him in the role.. Eh.

Anyway, I enjoyed it a lot. About on par with the first one.

I mean in the first movie Drax's crowning achievement was drunk dialing Ronan. And losing.

Sure he beat up a few mooks but all told he's always been the weakest of the cast in relevance. He doesn't keep them together like Quill, he isn't the voice of reason like Gamora, he doesn't come up with the plans like Rocket, and in terms of physical victories Groot is the one that does the most in the first film.

While I wish he was more violently active, since he was my favorite character in the comics, where he was the guy they sent to kill literally everyone (and I mean it. He killed everyone at Knowhere in one comic, briefly). And he was smart at least at first, even in the comics they have really dumbed down the character (which I guess was fair since he was originally an idiot then they gave him smarts for my favorite iteration, so I guess it's fair if they take them away again).

In any case, I don't think he's really much stupider in this movie. He only really does one thing dumb which was jumping into the monster. The rest was just culture clash.

[Keltest]

I won't say that it'd be a universally stupid claim to make, just that there's a time and a place. What he needed to do was get Starlord completely on his side in regards to the "great purpose" thing, maybe even wait long enough that Celestial!Starlord watched his friends/family die in front of him, so that he could realize how much it hurts to get attached to mortals; such a mindset would be much more useful to Ego in terms of bringing Starlord around to thinking "hey, maybe mortal life isn't so valuable?" as well as the whole "I killed your mother because I loved her so much that she would've tempted me to abandon my purpose". What's ridiculous to me is just how impatient this millions-of-years-old immortal. He spent millions of years realizing his power and purpose, and boned his way from one end of the galaxy to the other trying to get just a single child who could rule the galaxy with him as father and child (which by the way, I was surprised they didn't more directly quote SW E V, but okay), and yet he waits like two seconds to reveal that every single aspect of Starlord's tragic backstory is basically directly his fault.

That's part of his character I think. It is literally inconceivable to him that these mortal things that Starlord got hooked up on matter all that much. To him, that's not "oh my god you destroyed my life" kind of stuff, that's "oh my god, you picked a flower out of my garden" stuff, if even that.


I mean in the first movie Drax's crowning achievement was drunk dialing Ronan. And losing.

Sure he beat up a few mooks but all told he's always been the weakest of the cast in relevance. He doesn't keep them together like Quill, he isn't the voice of reason like Gamora, he doesn't come up with the plans like Rocket, and in terms of physical victories Groot is the one that does the most in the first film.

While I wish he was more violently active, since he was my favorite character in the comics, where he was the guy they sent to kill literally everyone (and I mean it. He killed everyone at Knowhere in one comic, briefly). And he was smart at least at first, even in the comics they have really dumbed down the character (which I guess was fair since he was originally an idiot then they gave him smarts for my favorite iteration, so I guess it's fair if they take them away again).

In any case, I don't think he's really much stupider in this movie. He only really does one thing dumb which was jumping into the monster. The rest was just culture clash.

I think Drax plays an important role in showing that the Guardians aren't just a dysfunctional group of heroic sociopaths that happen to travel together without murdering each other, but that they actually are a family that cares about each other. He's completely open and up front about the love he has for these maniacs, and most importantly, he's the only one of them who actually understands this "family" thing.

[AvatarVecna]

That's part of his character I think. It is literally inconceivable to him that these mortal things that Starlord got hooked up on matter all that much. To him, that's not "oh my god you destroyed my life" kind of stuff, that's "oh my god, you picked a flower out of my garden" stuff, if even that.

See, I think that even if he doesn't understand the why, he understands that Starlord's hung up on these things. The "you left my mother to die" thing was Starlord's biggest complaint about his dad leaving, rather than the years he spent as a child-slave on a pirate ship, and Ego (while not understanding why), knew enough to tiptoe around the issue at the time. Did he assume that as soon as Starlord was hooked up to the Celestial Network that he'd stop caring about all those things?

...actually, a possible explanation just occurred to me, although it's not presented this way in the movie: maybe Ego knew that he couldn't hide that information from Starlord once he got hooked up to the Celestial Network? Like, once Starlord stopped being all amazed and became one with the network, those "memories" or whatever would be his, and the jig would be up? So Ego maybe confessed when he did because he knew he couldn't keep the lie up any longer, so he tried to sneak it in while Starlord was still marveling at the network's vastness.

I still think it could've been handled better, and that Ego understanding of mortals having hang ups would tell him to maybe keep quiet on this until a more opportune moment, but it doesn't exactly ruin the movie for me either.

[huttj509]

See, I think that even if he doesn't understand the why, he understands that Starlord's hung up on these things. The "you left my mother to die" thing was Starlord's biggest complaint about his dad leaving, rather than the years he spent as a child-slave on a pirate ship, and Ego (while not understanding why), knew enough to tiptoe around the issue at the time. Did he assume that as soon as Starlord was hooked up to the Celestial Network that he'd stop caring about all those things?

...actually, a possible explanation just occurred to me, although it's not presented this way in the movie: maybe Ego knew that he couldn't hide that information from Starlord once he got hooked up to the Celestial Network? Like, once Starlord stopped being all amazed and became one with the network, those "memories" or whatever would be his, and the jig would be up? So Ego maybe confessed when he did because he knew he couldn't keep the lie up any longer, so he tried to sneak it in while Starlord was still marveling at the network's vastness.

I still think it could've been handled better, and that Ego understanding of mortals having hang ups would tell him to maybe keep quiet on this until a more opportune moment, but it doesn't exactly ruin the movie for me either.

My impression of that was just that it was a moment of, well, being wrapped up in his own ego.

He was asked why he left, didn't come back. He's mentally drawn back into his feelings for Peter's mother, the desire to stay, the knowledge that he had to complete his purpose, and he starts rambling. He want his son to understand. He loved Peter's mother. It hurt every time he had to leave. He wanted to stay, but couldn't, so he did what he needed to in order to be able to do what he needed. Oops, did I just say that last part out loud?

I think he truly did have feelings for Peter's mom. Thinking about her hurt. I know my own feelings from a relationship that ended 8 years ago where I still find myself somewhere and thinking "that would make a good gift for...oh..." His rambling saying too much felt understandable to me, based in a similar feeling writ large.



As to Drax, particularly in the initial fight... So my thoughts on the first one was "it feels like someone was running a Star Wars RPG and everyone wanted to play Han Solo, but they all had slightly different ideas of what made him cool." The Drax scene felt similar. I can ABSOLUTELY see my party's barbarian tomorrow trying something similar in a fit of "this will be awesome!", as the rest of us yell at her what a stupid idea that is.

[JadedDM]

What's ridiculous to me is just how impatient this millions-of-years-old immortal.
I actually kind of wonder if maybe impatience is what ultimately led to Ego's downfall. I mean, what's the difference between Peter and all of the other progeny he fathered? Why was Peter the only one to be able to tap into the light? Because he was half-human? I mean, maybe. 'Humans are special,' and all that. But part of me wonders if the real difference was that Peter was an adult. The rest were brought to Ego as children. It's entirely possible that they could have tapped into the light, too, but were just too young at that point. And that had Yandu brought Peter as a child, he would have failed and been killed, too.

[Aliquid]

See, I think that even if he doesn't understand the why, he understands that Starlord's hung up on these things. The "you left my mother to die" thing was Starlord's biggest complaint about his dad leaving, rather than the years he spent as a child-slave on a pirate ship, and Ego (while not understanding why), knew enough to tiptoe around the issue at the time. Did he assume that as soon as Starlord was hooked up to the Celestial Network that he'd stop caring about all those things?I think that's a completely reasonable thing to assume.
He has a massive ego and thinks that all existence should revolve around him... actually he thinks all existence should BE him. With that mindset, he likely believes that Peter already is just an extension of him, especially once he is hooked into the network. Talking to Peter is just talking to himself, there is no distinction. Peter would obviously see things in the EXACT same light, as long as it was explained to him.


So Ego maybe confessed when he did because he knew he couldn't keep the lie up any longer, so he tried to sneak it in while Starlord was still marveling at the network's vastness.That would require Ego to stop and look at something from another person's perspective... I don't know if he can do that.


I still think it could've been handled better, and that Ego understanding of mortals having hang ups would tell him to maybe keep quiet on this until a more opportune moment, but it doesn't exactly ruin the movie for me either.For Ego, human hang-ups are trivial. The only thing about any other entity that matters is how much it adores him.


The first reveal of history that only shows Peter's mom: Purpose is to make Peter feel special and adore Ego as a wonderful father.
The second reveal of history that shows everything: Now that it is clear that Peter can be of use, it is time to move beyond simple adoration and get him up to speed on the plan. Of course he will be on board... the universe will become him too. Who wouldn't want that? Who wouldn't dismiss all other issues to reach that goal?

[SteveMB]

...actually, a possible explanation just occurred to me, although it's not presented this way in the movie: maybe Ego knew that he couldn't hide that information from Starlord once he got hooked up to the Celestial Network? Like, once Starlord stopped being all amazed and became one with the network, those "memories" or whatever would be his, and the jig would be up? So Ego maybe confessed when he did because he knew he couldn't keep the lie up any longer, so he tried to sneak it in while Starlord was still marveling at the network's vastness.

I like that idea, because it doesn't depend on the premise that "Ego just doesn't understand how the lowly worms think" (notwithstanding the fact that he clearly does understand it well enough to engage in creepy emotional manipulation).

[Leewei]

Ego is a megalomaniac, but he is also somewhat sentimental. When push comes to shove, his sentiments always take the back seat to his goals. He loved Meredith Quill, and apparently countless others. He's immortal, however, while they are short-lived. In his millions of years, they pass in the blink of an eye. His children also age and (by Ego's viewpoint) quickly die without being able to touch the light.

Peter Quill was the first of thousands of children to touch the light. He would live forever, would be a successor to Ego. Ego was not dumb enough to take Quill's cooperation for granted. He believed, in time, Quill would come around to his perspective on things. Really, all he was doing was extinguishing a brief life just a little faster so he could move ahead with his plans without distraction.

This is all just fridge logic, though. Had the movie revealed this, it would have worked far better for me. As it stands, though, it's still very enjoyable.

[Keltest]

Ego is a megalomaniac, but he is also somewhat sentimental. When push comes to shove, his sentiments always take the back seat to his goals. He loved Meredith Quill, and apparently countless others. He's immortal, however, while they are short-lived. In his millions of years, they pass in the blink of an eye. His children also age and (by Ego's viewpoint) quickly die without being able to touch the light.

Peter Quill was the first of thousands of children to touch the light. He would live forever, would be a successor to Ego. Ego was not dumb enough to take Quill's cooperation for granted. He believed, in time, Quill would come around to his perspective on things. Really, all he was doing was extinguishing a brief life just a little faster so he could move ahead with his plans without distraction.

This is all just fridge logic, though. Had the movie revealed this, it would have worked far better for me. As it stands, though, it's still very enjoyable.

I think it works better the way they did it. Peter doesn't actually care why Ego killed his mom, only that he did. He isn't going to give Ego a chance to elaborate or explain, he's just going to shoot him until he falls apart - which he did.

For that matter, Ego doesn't need Peter's cooperation at all, just his presence. He gave up on convincing him right quick, because the part of peter that is upset is not a part that is necessary for his plans to go off, and not a part that he cares about for any other reason either.

[Legato Endless]

What's ridiculous to me is just how impatient this millions-of-years-old immortal.

Why? Old age in real life is no particularly guaranteed purifier of shortsightedness or impulsiveness. Ego being patient despite being a petulant man-child in every other aspect would be less consistent to his character.


He spent millions of years realizing his power and purpose, and boned his way from one end of the galaxy to the other trying to get just a single child who could rule the galaxy with him as father and child (which by the way, I was surprised they didn't more directly quote SW E V, but okay), and yet he waits like two seconds to reveal that every single aspect of Starlord's tragic backstory is basically directly his fault.

No, Ego spent millions of years desperately trying to make his goal happen faster. The Ego who runs everywhere seeking new life and new women to sleep with is premised on him being fundamentally impatient. If Ego were able to serenely wait, he wouldn't have needed a son at all and just slowly consumed the Galaxy. Now there's a middle ground where an immortal plots to make things more efficient and calculatingly manipulates his way towards that, but that isn't Ego. His impatience makes perfect sense, because it's a distillation of his childishness.

[Darth Ultron]

My impression of that was just that it was a moment of, well, being wrapped up in his own ego.

Yup.

Also....Ego's plan of ''lets be the universe'' would have appealed to lots of people.

Like say I found out I was a Celestial Being and could obliterate everything and make it all me.....I know what my answer would be...Muuhahahahahahahaha!

[Dienekes]

Yup.

Also....Ego's plan of ''lets be the universe'' would have appealed to lots of people.

Like say I found out I was a Celestial Being and could obliterate everything and make it all me.....I know what my answer would be...Muuhahahahahahahaha!

That sounds... fantastically boring. Who would I argue with? Where are the challenges? Who do I get to feel smug and superior over?

[AvatarVecna]

Like say I found out I was a Celestial Being and could obliterate everything and make it all me.....I know what my answer would be...Muuhahahahahahahaha!

...aaaaand sigged.

[Keltest]

...aaaaand sigged.

Made even more unintentionally hilarious by the followup quote about blaming glyphstone.

[Kantaki]

Though it might have been nice to have given us a brief shot of Asgard or Jotunheim (maybe they did and I didn't notice).

Despite his ill-timed confession I think Ego would have been smart enough to realize that it would be better to stay away from those places.
Even if he thought he could get away with it* half-celestial asgardians/frost-giants sound a bit to powerful to be a good idea**.
And even if that wasn't deterrent enough, there is no way he could have retrieved the kids with his choosen method.
On the other hand there's that confession and his stupid plan, so I wouldn't put it past him.


*Considering how little it took to kill him I have no doubt the asgardians could have taken care of him easily.

[Cikomyr]

Made even more unintentionally hilarious by the followup quote about blaming glyphstone.

:smallbiggrin:

[AvatarVecna]

Made even more unintentionally hilarious by the followup quote about blaming glyphstone.

That was entirely intentional on my part, I assure you. Normally newer quotes go last, but in this case, the extra bit of humor was just too tempting. :smallbiggrin:

[AvatarVecna]

*Considering how little it took to kill him I have no doubt the asgardians could have taken care of him easily.

I mean...wasn't he originally a Thor villain? Like, some nearby race was afraid Ego would subsume them, so Thor came by and wrecked Ego and made him promise to stay on his side of the metaphorical car?

[Darth Ultron]

That sounds... fantastically boring. Who would I argue with? Where are the challenges? Who do I get to feel smug and superior over?

Well, it's only two galaxies in the whole universe.....

[Dienekes]

Well, it's only two galaxies in the whole universe.....

So now I have to get some of me to go work to make contact with other galaxies just to feel smug to others? But I already had that in this galaxy, before they were all me-ified.

And there's not like I actually gained anything by me-ifying the galaxy other than saying I did it. This whole venture sounds like a lot of work for no real gain.

[Aedilred]

*Considering how little it took to kill him I have no doubt the asgardians could have taken care of him easily.

Well this is something that I have no doubt will be forming a Cracked article in a few months' time. Given the control Ego has over his environment it should have been trivially easy for him to kill, or at the very least, stop the Guardians when they attacked his core. After all, he is the planet, and can reshape it at will. Creating giant rock tentacles to chase them around was probably the least effective way he could have dealt with them. Removing all the breathable air would have cleared up half of them. Failing that, turning their immediate environment or just the ground under their feet to magma would have killed them pretty much instantly. Or a hundred other trivial solutions. And because Peter is apparently immortal unless the core is destroyed he can do so without any fear for how it will affect his plan.

Obviously that would have made for a poor ending to the film, and presumably would, if questioned, be justified in that he was distracted and angry and not thinking entirely straight. But by rights the Guardians should never even have come close to killing him, and I'd imagine Asgardians or Jotuns wouldn't do substantially better if he were actually cooking with gas. The way he casually destroyed the entire Sovereign fleet in his initial appearance indicates that he is much more capable of defending himself than the final battle made it appear.

[Keltest]

Well this is something that I have no doubt will be forming a Cracked article in a few months' time. Given the control Ego has over his environment it should have been trivially easy for him to kill, or at the very least, stop the Guardians when they attacked his core. After all, he is the planet, and can reshape it at will. Creating giant rock tentacles to chase them around was probably the least effective way he could have dealt with them. Removing all the breathable air would have cleared up half of them. Failing that, turning their immediate environment or just the ground under their feet to magma would have killed them pretty much instantly. Or a hundred other trivial solutions. And because Peter is apparently immortal unless the core is destroyed he can do so without any fear for how it will affect his plan.

Obviously that would have made for a poor ending to the film, and presumably would, if questioned, be justified in that he was distracted and angry and not thinking entirely straight. But by rights the Guardians should never even have come close to killing him, and I'd imagine Asgardians or Jotuns wouldn't do substantially better if he were actually cooking with gas. The way he casually destroyed the entire Sovereign fleet in his initial appearance indicates that he is much more capable of defending himself than the final battle made it appear.

I think it was implied that there was a finite amount of attention he could be focusing on any one thing at any given moment, and unless he was deliberately focusing on an area then he is oblivious. Note that he let Nebula and Gamora stumble upon the skeletons in his closet, and seemed mostly unaware that groot was even close to his core until he started getting the other guardians under control.

[Hagashager]

Reading all of these posts reminds me of a conversation between my brother and my father when District 9 came out.

Dad: "That was crap, why didn't the main guy just use his robo-suit to kill the military? they obviously couldn't compete with him."
Brother: "Because then we'd have no movie."
Dad: "it's bull**** is what it is."
Brother: "IT'S A MOVIE! ya wanna waste $15 for a 24 minute, logical anecdote?"

All of the arguments being presented make perfect sense, and for the spirit of debate, are fun to have, but I think it's important to remember that all of our logic right now would essentially nullify the existence of any given film.

remember kids, tropes exist for a reason, and it's not just to be edgy and cynical. :smallbiggrin:

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Well this is something that I have no doubt will be forming a Cracked article in a few months' time. Given the control Ego has over his environment it should have been trivially easy for him to kill, or at the very least, stop the Guardians when they attacked his core. After all, he is the planet, and can reshape it at will. Creating giant rock tentacles to chase them around was probably the least effective way he could have dealt with them. Removing all the breathable air would have cleared up half of them. Failing that, turning their immediate environment or just the ground under their feet to magma would have killed them pretty much instantly. Or a hundred other trivial solutions.

IIRC, it took him millennia to accrete the planet around himself. That suggests he does not, in fact, have any of those abilities you think he should have except the basic ones he did show: limited manipulation of limited amounts of material. At no point is he shown to be omnipotent, nor even close to it.

GW

[Legato Endless]

So now I have to get some of me to go work to make contact with other galaxies just to feel smug to others? But I already had that in this galaxy, before they were all me-ified.

And there's not like I actually gained anything by me-ifying the galaxy other than saying I did it. This whole venture sounds like a lot of work for no real gain.

There's also the fact that in Ego's place you've already got an entire planet for yourself to reshape as you like. I'm not exactly sure what wiping out everyone does for you unless you're super into genocide or you've decided you've absolutely nothing better to do with your life.

[Aedilred]

Reading all of these posts reminds me of a conversation between my brother and my father when District 9 came out.

Dad: "That was crap, why didn't the main guy just use his robo-suit to kill the military? they obviously couldn't compete with him."
Brother: "Because then we'd have no movie."
Dad: "it's bull**** is what it is."
Brother: "IT'S A MOVIE! ya wanna waste $15 for a 24 minute, logical anecdote?"

All of the arguments being presented make perfect sense, and for the spirit of debate, are fun to have, but I think it's important to remember that all of our logic right now would essentially nullify the existence of any given film.

remember kids, tropes exist for a reason, and it's not just to be edgy and cynical. :smallbiggrin:
Oh, absolutely, I'm not for a second saying that there was anything wrong with the way the film did it, from the point of view of making an entertaining film. I don't think it was something that occurred to me until after the film ended and in no way affected my enjoyment of it.

My remark about Cracked was intended as an allusion to the way they periodically do hatchet jobs on beloved films picking up on tiny (and often erroneous) nitpicks and claiming that it ruins everything.



IIRC, it took him millennia to accrete the planet around himself. That suggests he does not, in fact, have any of those abilities you think he should have except the basic ones he did show: limited manipulation of limited amounts of material. At no point is he shown to be omnipotent, nor even close to it.
It took him millennia to create the planet, but given his later facility one presumes he's now got better control of his powers than he did then. The implication I got there was that he seemed to be learning. Given what he has built - not to mention the organically changing nature of his displays and ship - I think it is fair to say he has powers beyond those he demonstrated on screen in the final battle. That's without mentioning the way he destroyed the Sovereign fleet, which was well away from his planet and so presumably somewhere he should have been less powerful than he appeared to be when trying to stop the Guardians. A character who could do that had no business being defeated in the way he was.

As I say, it doesn't actually bother me, but when it comes to his relationship with other beings and species I think it is worth bearing in mind that his power level is apparently largely determined by the requirements of the plot at that moment. There doesn't appear (to me) to be any reason to suppose the Asgardians would have found it any easier to destroy him than the Guardians did, and hence no particular reason for Ego to avoid Asgard -both because relative to Ego the difference between the power of an Asgardian and the Guardians (leaving aside that Peter is half-Celestial himself) is negligible, and because from what we see in this film his power can be assumed to vary to the point that no matter who his adversary, killing him is anywhere between impossible and surprisingly easy depending on the story being told.

[Douglas]

I think Ego is limited by attention, power, complexity, and time, and all of these worked against him in the battle with the Guardians but were non-factors or easily worked around when he destroyed the Sovereign fleet.

I don't think he blew up the Sovereign fleet with an exercise of raw power. He had a ship there, presumably armed with some highly advanced weaponry, effectively amplifying his available destructive power many times over. He knew the fight was coming, it was all in one spot, and he had lots of time to prepare.

Against the Guardians, he had a bunch of separate enemies to track and fight at the same time, and only so much attention to go around. He wasn't expecting a serious fight so he didn't have any technological weaponry on hand, limiting him to direct applications of his power. He could potentially have created weapons to then use, but high tech devices are highly complex and finicky things and he didn't have the time to pay attention to every 50 micron section of a weapon big enough to be useful.

So, he's caught without his force multipliers, with no time to make any, and forced to frantically juggle something like five fights at the same time. He resorts to clumsy tentacles and telekinetic force because anything better requires either time or preparation.

[Legato Endless]

I think Ego would probably lose to the Asgardians assuming they remember they have a vault full of super weapons. Ego might be able to resist the Casket of Eternal Winters, I don't think he'd be able to tank a rainbow to the face from the full attention of the planet cracking Bifrost.

[InvisibleBison]

About the "Why didn't Ego instantly kill the Guardians?" discussion:

I got the impression that Ego's ability to perceive events in his planet was fairly limited by default, and he needed to manifest an avatar of some sort to improve it. As I recall, he was making a giant face in the wall of the cavern right before Mantis put him to sleep, and when he fought with Quill he did so using his human form. That makes his use of giant tentacles to subdue the Guardians more understandable: He can't simply disintegrate them because he can't see them clearly enough to do so, and is forced to rely on cruder tactics that don't require such precision.

[Strigon]

To my mind, Ego would wreck the Asgardians.

Let's give a quick play-by-play of the fight, shall we? Star Lord opens up with a salvo from his handheld weapons, that catches Ego off guard, because who would expect your infant son to shoot you? This stings Ego, and maybe weakens his form. Then, while he's focused on Star Lord, a multi-ton ship lands on his "body", which pretty clearly sends him reeling for a few moments.

I'll admit, the next few moments are hazy to me, but IIRC they somehow obliterate his body, and then they're off to the core. Losing his body is clearly a significant blow to Ego, and he blacks out. He also loses track of the Guardians, no longer having eyes on them.

The Guardians start drilling, and Ego finds them. Now, at this point, I'd like to remind you that manipulation of matter and energy seems to take focus, and the more powerful or delicate the manipulation, the more focus it likely takes. He has just woken up to somebody drilling a hole into his brain, so he starts thrashing about like any of us would. Hence, rocks and random energy blasts. The Guardians scatter, dividing his attentions once more, and then Mantis puts him to sleep. Note that, right before she did this, roughly half of them were about to be obliterated, and I suspect the others would have followed quickly.

Skipping to where he wakes up, things are even more hectic, because the golden oldies have joined the fray. And he has no real way of knowing what Rocket and Groot are up to. Eventually, his focus has to be split from the core to the surface, where Drax and Mantis are hanging out, but once again - after having a moment to collect his thoughts - he gains the upper hand to the point where there really is no contest. And he did all this while rebuilding a perfect replica of the human body. Of course, Star Lord wins, but really, the fight was all down to circumstances.

First, they were lucky enough to start the battle on the surface of the planet. The Asgardians would need to stage a landing operation.
Secondly, every time the Guardians had the upper hand, it was only because Ego couldn't focus. He was caught off guard, he had just woken up, et cetera. Conversely, whenever Ego collected his thoughts and took an account of the situation, the tide turned within seconds to his favour. Again, the Asgardians couldn't do this. They can't force him to sleep, nor would he trust them enough to lower his guard, I believe. They'd have to fight there way onto the planet, then through the core, with him fully awake every step of the way. I just don't see it happening.

[Legato Endless]

First, they were lucky enough to start the battle on the surface of the planet. The Asgardians would need to stage a landing operation.

Why? They own an interstellar gateway operated by a man who can see almost everything in the physical universe. Why wouldn't they just teleport onto Ego the same way they do everywhere else?


They'd have to fight there way onto the planet, then through the core, with him fully awake every step of the way. I just don't see it happening.

Couldn't they also just aim their rainbow Deathstar that shoots (by all appearances) nigh instantly across the galaxy and just blow him up from the safety of Asgard?

[Aedilred]

Why? They own an interstellar gateway operated by a man who can see almost everything in the physical universe. Why wouldn't they just teleport onto Ego the same way they do everywhere else?

Couldn't they also just aim their rainbow Deathstar that shoots (by all appearances) nigh instantly across the galaxy and just blow him up from the safety of Asgard?

I'm not entirely sure how the Nine Realms interact with the rest of the Galaxy as seen in Guardians et al. Are they just nine worlds that happen to be linked by Yggdrasil, or are they different dimensions, or what? I get the impression that Bifrost only works for transport between the Nine Realms and given that they appear to be single worlds, presumably it therefore couldn't be aimed at Ego. It's an area the films haven't really dealt with; I don't know if the comics go into more detail (well, they probably do, but in the sense that's useful and relevant to the MCU). In any case, using the Bifrost for destroying Jotunheim doesn't seem like something the Asgardians would actually do: Loki's use of it for that purpose appeared shocking and Thor would rather destroy it than let it proceed, so in all likelihood transport to Ego's surface is the best the Asgardians could manage, assuming it even works that way.

[Strigon]

Why? They own an interstellar gateway operated by a man who can see almost everything in the physical universe. Why wouldn't they just teleport onto Ego the same way they do everywhere else?



Couldn't they also just aim their rainbow Deathstar that shoots (by all appearances) nigh instantly across the galaxy and just blow him up from the safety of Asgard?

Gonna be honest, I know next to nothing about the Asgardian's most powerful weaponry; I'll freely admit that.
But this gateway, to my knowledge, doesn't just allow them to teleport anywhere in the universe. Again, I could be wrong, but it always seemed to me it was a gateway linking only a few destinations of importance to the Asgardians. Besides, while they may get a few planetside before Ego could react, doesn't it transport them above the surface, then drop them really quickly? Or am I losing my mind?
If it just drops them, then once Ego has noticed, I don't think he'd have trouble blasting anyone who hasn't made it yet out of the sky.

As for their rainbow Death Star? I don't know. If they can, then good on them, they win. But I suspect it has limitations; maybe it has a limited range (Ego's planet was pretty far out there), or perhaps he could block it. We really haven't seen what he could do beyond tossing rocks around, but from the way he took out an entire fleet while away from his planet, it seems there's a lot more to his powers.

[Leewei]

Ego did wipe out 50 attack craft from the Sovereign in the bat of an eye pretty early on in the movie. This may have been his craft, but it sure didn't look like it. Fridge logic here, but it seems likely he was holding back so as not to kill the one he needed to "blossom."

[Keltest]

Ego did wipe out 50 attack craft from the Sovereign in the bat of an eye pretty early on in the movie. This may have been his craft, but it sure didn't look like it. Fridge logic here, but it seems likely he was holding back so as not to kill the one he needed to "blossom."

I dunno, weren't the Sovereign ships basically guns with rockets and a camera glued on to them? The zerglings of space warfare, if you will.

[Leewei]

I dunno, weren't the Sovereign ships basically guns with rockets and a camera glued on to them? The zerglings of space warfare, if you will.
Sure, but was there anyone at Ego's core that could take a hit those ships couldn't? From Ego's perspective, the entire final assault was pretty much a zerg rush.

[Starbuck_II]

Reading all of these posts reminds me of a conversation between my brother and my father when District 9 came out.

Dad: "That was crap, why didn't the main guy just use his robo-suit to kill the military? they obviously couldn't compete with him."
Brother: "Because then we'd have no movie."
Dad: "it's bull**** is what it is."
Brother: "IT'S A MOVIE! ya wanna waste $15 for a 24 minute, logical anecdote?"

All of the arguments being presented make perfect sense, and for the spirit of debate, are fun to have, but I think it's important to remember that all of our logic right now would essentially nullify the existence of any given film.

remember kids, tropes exist for a reason, and it's not just to be edgy and cynical. :smallbiggrin:
Actually, answer is he is a pacifist. Killing humans is abhorrent to him. Fighting in general really.
He is sort of a unexpected hero, but then again, he isn't much.

[Legato Endless]

I'm not entirely sure how the Nine Realms interact with the rest of the Galaxy as seen in Guardians et al. Are they just nine worlds that happen to be linked by Yggdrasil, or are they different dimensions, or what?

Yeah it's pretty hazy in the films proper. I think they're merely planets directly connected to Yggdrasil, but when I saw the first Thor I'd assumed they meant different dimensions.


I get the impression that Bifrost only works for transport between the Nine Realms and given that they appear to be single worlds, presumably it therefore couldn't be aimed at Ego. It's an area the films haven't really dealt with; I don't know if the comics go into more detail (well, they probably do, but in the sense that's useful and relevant to the MCU).

The films don't explain it, but apparently in the Dark World prequel comic, the Bifrost is used to transport an army led by Thor to other planets outside the Nine Realms to pacify the unrest following Thor destroying the bridge.


In any case, using the Bifrost for destroying Jotunheim doesn't seem like something the Asgardians would actually do: Loki's use of it for that purpose appeared shocking and Thor would rather destroy it than let it proceed, so in all likelihood transport to Ego's surface is the best the Asgardians could manage, assuming it even works that way.

That's two very different situations though. The first is Thor stopping genocide against a people they're in an uneasy peace with. I don't see why the Asgardians would have any moral scruples about unleashing their wormhole death ray against a monster planet trying to consume the universe. Between the fact that Loki's deception based sorcery was taught to him by the queen of Asgard and Odin didn't blink unleashing the Destroyer against soldiers who had no chance against it, the Asgardian Warrior culture seems pretty willing to get dirty and practical when the need arises.


But this gateway, to my knowledge, doesn't just allow them to teleport anywhere in the universe. Again, I could be wrong, but it always seemed to me it was a gateway linking only a few destinations of importance to the Asgardians.

The network seems to exist beyond merely the nine realms, which I think function more as primary nodes than simply the only destinations, which is why the Dark Elves can destroy the cosmos in Thor 2. The MCU wiki says it can go to the Nine realms and countless planets beyond.


Besides, while they may get a few planetside before Ego could react, doesn't it transport them above the surface, then drop them really quickly? Or am I losing my mind?

It's a pretty standard energy beam to the ground, and people materialize out of it. The one unique feature is leaving an pattern burned into the ground where it hits. Also it's pretty.


As for their rainbow Death Star? I don't know. If they can, then good on them, they win. But I suspect it has limitations; maybe it has a limited range (Ego's planet was pretty far out there), or perhaps he could block it. We really haven't seen what he could do beyond tossing rocks around, but from the way he took out an entire fleet while away from his planet, it seems there's a lot more to his powers.

There's no range limitation as far as I can tell, but Ego being able to stop the beam? I don't know. Ego seemed pretty vulnerable to the standard directed energy weapons of the Guardians, though obviously none of that did lasting harm. If Peter can just mangle Ego's avatar with a quick barrage, I'm assuming a stream several orders of magnitude larger would just obliterate him, since he's not particularly durable so much as his vastly superior mass allowed him to endure the Guardians attacks easily.

[Pex]

There's one scene I wasn't clear on, and I'm half-serious.

Was Ego claiming to be David Hasslehoff or that he could take on the appearance of him if that's what Peter wanted because he idolized him?

[BWR]

There's one scene I wasn't clear on, and I'm half-serious.

Was Ego claiming to be David Hasslehoff or that he could take on the appearance of him if that's what Peter wanted because he idolized him?

The latter.

[Vogie]

I think the Ego confession goof in this movie is similar to Doctor Strange's confrontation with Dormammu - incredibly old seemingly Immortal entities have little concern for time, as a concept, to consider when acting.

Ego is shown as acting like a kid, which makes sense, as he's been peerless his entire life. If they went route of a multi-year-montage where Ego & Starlord have a huge blast creating and having a series mind-expanding moments where Peter can get a grasp of his immortality, there wouldn't have been that face-heel turn. Instead, he jumped "ahead", disregarding Peter's emotional journey, and let loose the confession so Starlord can have a visceral, mortal, reaction.

I would have loved to see a bit more of Peter harnessing the powers of raw creation. I do think having a "home base" with a ton of power to return to, from time to time, would be awesome. I do wonder if they're now going to avoid mentioning his celestial heritage going forward.


There's one scene I wasn't clear on, and I'm half-serious.

Was Ego claiming to be David Hasslehoff or that he could take on the appearance of him if that's what Peter wanted because he idolized him?

It was the latter of the two. He was playing off the previous conversation of who Peter would tell other kids that his father was.

[Shamash]

One thing. Adam Warlock!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Also, never before a movie made me feel so sad for not being able to whistle.

[Aedilred]

One word. Adam Warlock!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That's two words. And too many exclamation marks.

[Shamash]

That's two words. And too many exclamation marks.

Dang it! I guess I was too excited for basic math. Adam Warlock may be my favorite marvel character! He is a young, powerful and competent wizard (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?521635-What-s-up-with-the-clumsy-wizard-archetype-in-media) from space. What more is there to ask?

[Dienekes]

Dang it! I guess I was too excited for basic math. Adam Warlock may be my favorite marvel character! He is a young, powerful and competent wizard (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?521635-What-s-up-with-the-clumsy-wizard-archetype-in-media) from space. What more is there to ask?

Never particularly liked him when he was part of the Guardians of the Galaxy team, honestly. His solutions always felt like ass-pulls to me. Everyone else has to work and fight to accomplish their goals. We see Drax get torn up, we see him maneuver around Knowhere and try to uncover the Skrull plot. We see Gamora sacrifice her safety to try and stop a bomb that tears at her flesh. We see Rocket try to make a plan on how to destroy a target.

Then we see Adam. He says some words and the plot fixes itself. Except when he doesn't say words, for reasons that were never explained. Or when he just leaves. Or when he turns evil. Actually I kind of liked him when he turned evil.

Now, he does work well when matched against Thanos in the whole Infinity Gauntlet thing. Because we get a limit for him. He can't do squat against Thanos.

[digiman619]

Saw the film this afternoon. It was okay. There was a lot to like, but it felt like it was trying too hard. When it was good (like the stuff between Gamorra & Nebula and Yondu & Rocket), it was great, but a lot of it felt heavy-handed. It's like they took aspects of the original and thought "If some is good, more is better!" and messed with the comedy/drama ratio. Also, Drax feels wrong. In the first film, his defining quirk was "doesn't get metaphors". Here it feels like it's "doesn't understand personal boundaries"

All things considered, it's okay, but to me, it's a solid C as opposed to the B+ the first one was.

[Luz]

Am I the only one who didn't like the minion baby Groot? Yeah? Ok, I will just stand in the corner over there.

[Dragonexx]

http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/000/706/058/3cd.png

[lord_khaine]

Am I the only one who didn't like the minion baby Groot? Yeah? Ok, I will just stand in the corner over there.

Its alright, i can keep you company, im also used to the Heresy signs anyway from 40k.

But i think in baby Groot and Drax Guardians of the Galaxy went a little to much "paint by the numbers". At least the inclusion of cute mascot thing and a funny idiot was a touch forced.

[thompur]

One thing. Adam Warlock!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Also, never before a movie made me feel so sad for not being able to whistle.

Yeah, that was my reaction! Would it be greedy of me to hope for an appearance by Pip the Troll?:smallbiggrin:

[Dallas-Dakota]

Saw the film this afternoon. It was okay. There was a lot to like, but it felt like it was trying too hard. When it was good (like the stuff between Gamorra & Nebula and Yondu & Rocket), it was great, but a lot of it felt heavy-handed. It's like they took aspects of the original and thought "If some is good, more is better!" and messed with the comedy/drama ratio. Also, Drax feels wrong. In the first film, his defining quirk was "doesn't get metaphors". Here it feels like it's "doesn't understand personal boundaries"

All things considered, it's okay, but to me, it's a solid C as opposed to the B+ the first one was.

This, this so much.

Though for me the first was a B+ and now is a B carrying mainly on comedic value. They made more (extreme) jokes and that saved the day.
That also failed badly in some scenes though. Case in point: The ''wink'' joke being doing too many times in too short of a time in the start of the movie.

They just tried to get too much of everything in one movie. I loved Yondu this movie but suddenly he was a serious dad figure...wait what? After adjusting to his new role I liked it a lot...but still...

I really liked that there were already antagonists set up at the start of the movie so it could actually be viable for Ego not to be a villain story-line wise.

[BWR]

Am I the only one who didn't like the minion baby Groot? Yeah? Ok, I will just stand in the corner over there.

I didn't dislike him but I didn't much care for him.

[SaintRidley]

Damn, Batista just kills it. Absolutely loved every Drax scene.

[The Eye]

The Sovereign may be my new favorite alien race. The use of remotely piloted combat ships is something I always wondered why was not done by other highly advanced races.

It seems so obvious to me, why risk lives?

Finally it was done in a movie (Apart form that other one where it was used as a plot twist).

[Aedilred]

My favourite thing about the Sovereign was how, despite being genetically engineered for perfection, they're somehow kind of rubbish.

[Douglas]

The remote piloting thing was funny, especially with how it was set up to look like a bunch of arcade game machines. And when they're down to one ship, everyone starts looking over the last guy's shoulder.

For a reason to not use remote piloting, transmission lag or even jamming could be a serious problem beyond short distances.

[SaintRidley]

The remote piloting thing was funny, especially with how it was set up to look like a bunch of arcade game machines. And when they're down to one ship, everyone starts looking over the last guy's shoulder.

For a reason to not use remote piloting, transmission lag or even jamming could be a serious problem beyond short distances.

It also set up enough material from which to consider the gamification of war.

[Keltest]

It also set up enough material from which to consider the gamification of war.

I dunno, things will be pretty good when I can settle conflict via a game of StarCraft or Overwatch instead of, like, shooting people.

[Douglas]

I dunno, things will be pretty good when I can settle conflict via a game of StarCraft or Overwatch instead of, like, shooting people.
The only way it would work without being vulnerable to a rogue combatant rejecting the framework would be if the "game" is played out with physical machines in a real battlefield.

Though... all major nations shift more and more completely to remote controlled machine warfare. Governments put huge resources into making and popularizing the most realistic StarCraft-like game(s) ever to provide practice simulation. And when war breaks out, the top ranked ladder players in the country are tapped to command.:smallbiggrin:

[Dienekes]

The only way it would work without being vulnerable to a rogue combatant rejecting the framework would be if the "game" is played out with physical machines in a real battlefield.

Though... all major nations shift more and more completely to remote controlled machine warfare. Governments put huge resources into making and popularizing the most realistic StarCraft-like game(s) ever to provide practice simulation. And when war breaks out, the top ranked ladder players in the country are tapped to command.:smallbiggrin:

The rise of the Korean Empire.

[Douglas]

The rise of the Korean Empire.
And now I want to read a story with this as the premise.:smallamused:

[SaintRidley]

And now I want to read a story with this as the premise.:smallamused:

It's not exactly the rise of the Korean empire, but the manga Legend of Koizumi gives us a look at a world where all international conflict is solved via mahjongg played by the heads of state. Might scratch your itch while you await that story being written. Also features Moon Hitler.

[Chimmon]

It's not exactly the rise of the Korean empire, but the manga Legend of Koizumi gives us a look at a world where all international conflict is solved via mahjongg played by the heads of state. Might scratch your itch while you await that story being written. Also features Moon Hitler.

Not to get further off topic, but there's also a web-fiction (web-serial? web-story? Not sure what the right classification is) called "The Gam3". It's about a massive virtual reality game, invented by aliens as an alternative to war. All conflict is resolved in-game, and the only galactic fleet of ships that exist in the real world enforce victory (and prevent any other real-world crime or fleets being built.)

Alas, it seems to have been abandoned. The last update happened half a year ago.

[Pex]

The only way it would work without being vulnerable to a rogue combatant rejecting the framework would be if the "game" is played out with physical machines in a real battlefield.

Though... all major nations shift more and more completely to remote controlled machine warfare. Governments put huge resources into making and popularizing the most realistic StarCraft-like game(s) ever to provide practice simulation. And when war breaks out, the top ranked ladder players in the country are tapped to command.:smallbiggrin:

You may be on to something. You can even have machine soldiers. Give them human-like skin for infiltration. Put it in control of missiles for complete accuracy to shoot down enemy missiles. Make it like an internet in the skies. We can call it Netsky or something.

[Douglas]

You may be on to something. You can even have machine soldiers. Give them human-like skin for infiltration. Put it in control of missiles for complete accuracy to shoot down enemy missiles. Make it like an internet in the skies. We can call it Netsky or something.
Hey now, my idea was strictly limited to remote control; it did not include automating the decision making process, only allowing it to be done (by humans) offsite.

[KillingAScarab]

My favourite thing about the Sovereign was how, despite being genetically engineered for perfection, they're somehow kind of rubbish.Per the credits sequence clip (2 of 4) they also now have motivation to create Adam Warlock (http://marvel.wikia.com/wiki/Adam_Warlock_%28Earth-616%29). I recall people saying Adam Warlock's cocoon was visible in the background of the Collector's place in the first Guardians of the Galaxy movie, so I thought he would have already been running around and thought nothing of the Sovereign being gold-skinnned. Either way, one can hope kettle head (http://marvel.wikia.com/wiki/Herbert_Wyndham_%28Earth-616%29) and his blend of eugenics and Pokémon-science will not be involved in the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

[Darth Ultron]

Per the credits sequence clip (2 of 4) they also now have motivation to create Adam Warlock (http://marvel.wikia.com/wiki/Adam_Warlock_%28Earth-616%29). I recall people saying Adam Warlock's cocoon was visible in the background of the Collector's place in the first Guardians of the Galaxy movie, .

To be fair it is just ''a'' cocoon.......and there are more such characters. It could, for example, be Her/Kismet.

[Vogie]

To be fair it is just ''a'' cocoon.......and there are more such characters. It could, for example, be Her/Kismet.

The director has said that Yes, the cocoon in the first movie was supposed to be Adam Warlock's... and Yes, he does kind of regret that.

Thankfully, it's something specifically stated in the movie, so it's not really an official retcon of sorts.

[KerfuffleMach2]

The start was a bit chaotic but the movie got better rapidly after introducing Ego. Drax and Mantis were high parts of the movie. Best space comedy since... errr, since... the first Guardians of the Galaxy? There doesn't seem to be all that much competition...

Well...I mean...Spaceballs...

Totally loved it. However, I didn't get quite the same feeling of excitement as the first. Not exactly sure why. So, I still prefer the first. But this one was freaking great.

[Aedilred]

Well...I mean...Spaceballs...

Galaxy Quest
Hitch-Hiker's Guide
Mars Attacks, I guess.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Well...I mean...Spaceballs...

Totally loved it. However, I didn't get quite the same feeling of excitement as the first. Not exactly sure why. So, I still prefer the first. But this one was freaking great.

I liked this one better - strangely (given most other people's reactions), I just never bought into the team in the first film - to me, it felt like it became a team way too quickly in the prison. But that's just IMnpHO. My suspension of disbelief was never broken in this one, which allowed me to enjoy it a lot more.

GW

[Kyberwulf]

I watched it. I liked it

The opening scene though. I liked it, because it was nostalgic for me. It reminded me of doing a raid boss in WOW. Everyone getting ready, and then someone is off doing something not paying attention. Usually me.

As for the movie. The whole thing felt off. Not in a bad way. I liked the move, but it was ... adequate, is the word I would use. The movie is good, yet it seems to be trying a little to hard. It's the movie we would have gotten in Guardians of the Galaxy, the first movie, if the world knew what the comics were about. The first one did so well because no one knew what they were about. The big question is still unanswered in Volume two, as it was in the first one. Why are they together. In the first one they were kind of forced together and stayed together for a flimsy reason. Same thing in this one.

The characters felt... off. I don't know how to explain it. Starlord was the same as he was in the first one, just a little not as funny. Green chick, see seem less alien, and more.. like a girl in green paint. Drax, in the first one was oblivious yet, funny. In this one he just seemed a little mean, and kind of like someone who is drunk. Rocket, just seemed mean. In the first one he was more sarcastically witty. Groot. I have more to say about him. I don't know why, it seemed like they just took every one and... bent them. They are still likable and cool. The best way I can explain it, is it feels like we missed out of a movie somewhere. The last one ended everyone was a team, and they were all pretty optimistic. This one opens up and continues, like something happen to fracture everyone. It doesn't give us a real reason for the subtle changes in everyone. I still like everyone and the actors are still good. though.

Groot. Yeah, I don't get what he is suppose to be in this movie. They treat him like a toddler. Yet they bring him on all the dangerous missions. That's as bad as Tony bring in Peter Parker into the Civil War. Except, all the opponents actually want to kill him. In most cases, he doesn't really do anything to help. I just didn't get what they were trying to do with him.

I like Yaundo? He was pretty cool. The whole thing with Peter was pretty effective. When he died, I felt more for his death then I was suppose to feel for Logan's death. Although, man was he overpowered. That arrow of his.

The assassin girl. Yeah, she didn't even need to be in this movie. The said thing is they only put her and Gamora in for.. I don't know what they were in the movie. Which is kind of sad.

The plot, was adequate. I think what threw this movie off was just the weirdness of how the characters were acting. The inconstancy of trying to tell a serious movie, with trying to shoehorn in comedic aspects. Stuff like the Pacman thing. That seems more like it should have been in an Adam Sandler movie. Little things like trying to shoehorn in moments. Like the whole playing catch thing, made the plot predictable as Shyamalan. Oh, here is the perfect world... SURPRISE!.

I guess what I want to say is, this felt like two different movies jammed into one. They put that background stuff in the movie so the other Guardians would have something to do while Peter has his own movie. I think they lost something in this movie. The background story has a lot more going for it then the main story. It has more for most of the characters to do. I kind of wish, for this movie they didn't do the Starlord finds his dad movie. I think it would have been better if it focused on the internal conflict of the team. There is enough motivation in the movie, were they could have did a story were everyone is being seduced away from being a team. Garmora finding her sister and going for revenge against Thanos, Rocket becoming more reckless and wanting money, Groot going with him. Drax and Starlord meeting Kurt Russel and being lured away. The only thing that really worked for me in this movie, is Yaundo. He is the only one to really have a serious arch in the story by serious I mean one that isn't shoehorned in by the plot. In the following movie, they could have did the whole "Starlord is Jesus" thing. Then it would have felt a little more impact when the characters came back for him. I mean, Gamora walking away from revenge. Rocket finding his reason to be with other people. No offense, but Drax and Groot just seem to be followers.

[Amazon]

I really liked Mantis, I wonder how they are going to deal with a non-combatant and emphatic character in such a violent setting, but she has a lot of potential!

Her emphatic powers were done right, not the usual "telepathy by other name" and I really hope they explore it even further.

Emotions are just so much better than gratuitous violence. :smallsmile:

[Kantaki]

I watched the movie almost a month ago and the whole „Taserface” thing still makes me laugh.:smallbiggrin:
The name is just so incredibly dumb.:smallbiggrin:
I mean Taserface.:smallbiggrin:

[Kyberwulf]

I forgot about mantis. She was goos.. but kind of racist

[Amazon]

I forgot about mantis. She was goos.. but kind of racist

Racist? How come?

[Aedilred]

As for the movie. The whole thing felt off. Not in a bad way. I liked the move, but it was ... adequate, is the word I would use. The movie is good, yet it seems to be trying a little to hard. It's the movie we would have gotten in Guardians of the Galaxy, the first movie, if the world knew what the comics were about. The first one did so well because no one knew what they were about. The big question is still unanswered in Volume two, as it was in the first one. Why are they together. In the first one they were kind of forced together and stayed together for a flimsy reason. Same thing in this one.
... This one opens up and continues, like something happen to fracture everyone. It doesn't give us a real reason for the subtle changes in everyone. I still like everyone and the actors are still good. though.
I'm inclined to agree that the group felt a bit thrown together in the first film and that's one of the reasons why the gelling seems off, I think. But as the film comes close to belabouring at times, they're together largely because they feel like they don't have anyone else, and so the level of companionship they get from the team is important to them. That's particularly so in the cases of Drax and Gamora, who are pretty explicitly there because they've lost everything else important to them and now the Guardians are the only friends they have. Perhaps for the more ego-driven characters it's a little different. Peter clearly cares about Gamora at least (again, this was a bit rushed in the first film, but nevertheless evident) but given that he's the recognised leader of the team it's not a question of him tagging along with anyone else: he's getting to do what he wants, but now in charge of his own band. Having grown up with the Ravagers this is almost certainly something that feels pretty natural to him. Rocket is still the most mercenary member and seems mostly tied into the team through Groot. When he joined up with them at the end of the last film it was initially at Groot's urging and then he was distraught over Groot's death so likely latched onto them as comfort. He seems the most likely of them to go their own way, and also feels like he should be taken more seriously than he is as a team leader, so is often in conflict with Peter. Yet, as Yondu identifies, and as was apparent once or twice in the first film, Rocket is mostly front. He's probably not going to leave the team because deep down he needs it as much as Drax and Gamora do.

Although the timeline isn't clear, by this point they've been together for months if not years, so many of the edges will have rubbed off their relationships. What we see therefore is the carping of people who've spent a lot of time together in close company and find their companions infuriating but indispensible: rather like family, as the film again identifies.

As for the changes in Drax's character in particular, he seems to have come to terms with the death of his wife and daughter, having avenged them on Ronan. He still harbours a grudge against Thanos but it seems less immediate, and after his sobering experience when Ronan kerb-stomped him in the first film he probably has a fairly realistic idea of his chances against Thanos anyway. So we're seeing a different side to him, a lighter side where he feels free to express himself more, not single-mindedly focussed on revenge. It was evident in the first film that he's quite prepared to laugh his head off (even if his sense of humour is a little alien at times) and that side of his personality now has more time to express itself.

In short, character development.


Groot. Yeah, I don't get what he is suppose to be in this movie. They treat him like a toddler. Yet they bring him on all the dangerous missions. That's as bad as Tony bring in Peter Parker into the Civil War. Except, all the opponents actually want to kill him. In most cases, he doesn't really do anything to help. I just didn't get what they were trying to do with him.
Did you stay for the end credits? In one of the songs there (Guardians Inferno) this is lampshaded in the lyrics.

He's clearly capable of looking after himself: witness the scene where Yondu and Rocket break out of gaol. Whether he's able to help: he's willing to try, and sometimes can, but he's still learning. Let's not forget that Groot in vol.1 wasn't always as on-message as Rocket and the others might have liked either.

Why are they bringing him on the dangerous missions? Maybe, given that he's actually pretty strong and tough, it's less dangerous for them to bring him along than it would be to leave him on the ship unsupervised. Or maybe they tried leaving him behind and found it was impossible, because he escaped and came with them anyway. In any case we only see them take Groot on one dangerous mission, right at the start, and we don't know how he got there or why or even if it was the first time they'd done it. The rest of the film, things were happening to them and therefore to Groot as well, so he was inevitably involved.


The assassin girl. Yeah, she didn't even need to be in this movie. The said thing is they only put her and Gamora in for.. I don't know what they were in the movie. Which is kind of sad.
More thematic family stuff. Also presumably setting up Nebula's role in Infinity War and reconciling her and Gamora, in which she'll likely play a part but I don't know what. And driving quite a lot of the plot for the first half of the film, providing the reason for the Guardians to meet the Sovereign, and then enabling the mutiny against Yondu.


I watched the movie almost a month ago and the whole "Taserface” thing still makes me laugh.:smallbiggrin:
The name is just so incredibly dumb.:smallbiggrin:
I mean Taserface.:smallbiggrin:

Apparently the director believes Taserface to be the "dumbest comic book character ever", and initially denied that he would ever put him in a film, then reconsidered and decided to put him in for the express purpose of mocking him.

[Kyberwulf]

Uh.. how could you not see an obviously Asian character. A foreign Asian one at that. The only thing she was missing was the trade sepretist accent. Lol

[Razade]

Uh.. how could you not see an obviously Asian character. A foreign Asian one at that. The only thing she was missing was the trade sepretist accent. Lol

What the hell are you talking about? There was nothing Asian about Mantis except for the person they picked for the actor. She's French, Russian and Korean by heritage. She's French Canadian by where she was born.

[Kantaki]

Apparently the director believes Taserface to be the "dumbest comic book character ever", and initially denied that he would ever put him in a film, then reconsidered and decided to put him in for the express purpose of mocking him.

To be fair, his name is Taserface:smallbiggrin:.
Not mocking him would be an achievement in itself.

I never heard of this guy and I started laughing the moment he introduced himself.:smallbiggrin:
Had they taken him serious, it would have made the movie worse.
And that would have been a shame because it was awesome.

[Amazon]

Uh.. how could you not see an obviously Asian character. A foreign Asian one at that. The only thing she was missing was the trade sepretist accent. Lol

I'm really curious to know what were the racist indicators that you persived on this perceived character.

[Ranxerox]

I'm really curious to know what were the racist indicators that you persived on this perceived character.

I can't speak for Kyburwulf, but here (http://www.cbr.com/guardians-galaxy-vol-2-mantis-joke/) is an article make the case that Mantis is a racist portrayal.


For the record, while I really liked Mantis, I can't really disagree with the article. It is possible for a character to be awesome on an individual level and still reinforce racist stereotypes. Say for instance a really clever and funny, black pimp or a smart and deliciously evil Arab terrorist. Sure they may be great characters viewed in isolation, but viewed in the collective of media portrayals of the groups in question they add to already too common depictions of the groups in question.

Preemptive argument - Before anyone say that the character can't be racist because she is an alien, I'm calling BS on this. Antenna or no, people watching the movie see an Asian woman and are likely to perceive her as such. Consequently, Mantis is able to reinforce or help tear down stereotypes involving Asians.

[Aedilred]

For the record, while I really liked Mantis, I can't really disagree with the article. It is possible for a character to be awesome on an individual level and still reinforce racist stereotypes. Say for instance a really clever and funny, black pimp or a smart and deliciously evil Arab terrorist. Sure they may be great characters viewed in isolation, but viewed in the collective of media portrayals of the groups in question they add to already too common depictions of the groups in question.


On the other hand, bending over backwards to avoid such portrayals can draw attention to it in itself. Spooks had that problem in its first series, where despite the whole basis of the show being counter-terrorist operations in the aftermath of 9/11, they spent the whole time battling animal rights activists, Fathers for Justice, right-wing extremists and renegade army officers, with nary an Arab terrorist to be seen. The context and the preposterous nature of some of the plots they had to concoct to justify why the groups were a threat to national security was, after a while, really begging the question, and led to derision in some quarters that they wanted to engage with edgy, contemporary plots but were at the same time doing so with kid gloves concerning anything that might be controversial.

Later on they seemed to be a little more confident and felt able to include non-white, non-secular, often foreign adversaries in their plots without fretting too much about offending anyone by the mere fact of doing so, and the show improved as a result.

I do have to agree that it's possible to include characters that are completely non-human and nevertheless pretty racist. The Trade Federation from the Star Wars prequels has already been mentioned; Watto is another one, and the same criticism has been levelled at Jar-Jar.

[Ranxerox]

On the other hand, bending over backwards to avoid such portrayals can draw attention to it in itself. Spooks had that problem in its first series, where despite the whole basis of the show being counter-terrorist operations in the aftermath of 9/11, they spent the whole time battling animal rights activists, Fathers for Justice, right-wing extremists and renegade army officers, with nary an Arab terrorist to be seen. The context and the preposterous nature of some of the plots they had to concoct to justify why the groups were a threat to national security was, after a while, really begging the question, and led to derision in some quarters that they wanted to engage with edgy, contemporary plots but were at the same time doing so with kid gloves concerning anything that might be controversial.

Later on they seemed to be a little more confident and felt able to include non-white, non-secular, often foreign adversaries in their plots without fretting too much about offending anyone by the mere fact of doing so, and the show improved as a result.

I do have to agree that it's possible to include characters that are completely non-human and nevertheless pretty racist. The Trade Federation from the Star Wars prequels has already been mentioned; Watto is another one, and the same criticism has been levelled at Jar-Jar.

Anti-Islamic sentiment was running very high post 9/11 to the point that people were attacking Sikhs in the streets because they were seeing their turbans and mistaking them for Arabs. So, under the circumstances I appreciate the desire not to stoke existing fires. No doubt it cost them some interesting plot lines and probably some viewers, but IMO it was the right things. Now, if after the fires of the moment cooled down, they allowed themselves foreign adversaries, that is fine.

Totally agree with you about the Star War prequel aliens. They were really bad.

[Thrudd]

Finding some kind of racist stereotype in the character of Mantis says more about the person seeing and claiming that than it does about the movie and the character, imo. Making that connection is a real stretch - the author of that CBR article is trying to stir up controversy where there is none. It seems to me like people "see an Asian actress" and then decide that her role must somehow reflect the heritage they believe she has, and look for every possible way they can think of that this character is somehow similar to their own stereotype of Asians. All in the name of pointing out how racist the movie makers and everyone else is, of course.

[Ranxerox]

Finding some kind of racist stereotype in the character of Mantis says more about the person seeing and claiming that than it does about the movie and the character, imo. Making that connection is a real stretch - the author of that CBR article is trying to stir up controversy where there is none. It seems to me like people "see an Asian actress" and then decide that her role must somehow reflect the heritage they believe she has, and look for every possible way they can think of that this character is somehow similar to their own stereotype of Asians. All in the name of pointing out how racist the movie makers and everyone else is, of course.

You are telling me that the "submissive Asian women" isn't a stereotype? I have heard about submissive Asian women my whole life. Now, if it isn't a stereotype where you come from, well, good on you and yours, mate. Because, it is definitely a stereotype in my neck of the woods. Maybe that makes my neck of the woods barefoot and backwater, but I can tell you that there is a lot of barefoot and backwater out there, and depictions in the media that give credence to the local prejudices don't help things.

[Amazon]

I can't speak for Kyburwulf, but here (http://www.cbr.com/guardians-galaxy-vol-2-mantis-joke/) is an article make the case that Mantis is a racist portrayal.


For the record, while I really liked Mantis, I can't really disagree with the article. It is possible for a character to be awesome on an individual level and still reinforce racist stereotypes. Say for instance a really clever and funny, black pimp or a smart and deliciously evil Arab terrorist. Sure they may be great characters viewed in isolation, but viewed in the collective of media portrayals of the groups in question they add to already too common depictions of the groups in question.

Preemptive argument - Before anyone say that the character can't be racist because she is an alien, I'm calling BS on this. Antenna or no, people watching the movie see an Asian woman and are likely to perceive her as such. Consequently, Mantis is able to reinforce or help tear down stereotypes involving Asians.

I don't agree with this article in some points:

-Characters have to follow their original appearances from the comics.
That's not real, the MCU is very different form the comics, Antman, vision and scarlet witch are the bigger examples.

-70s Mantis is less problematic:
You mean an Asian alien from Vietnam, born and raised by a male cult to be the mother of a MALE super alien who also knows kung-fu is less problematic than the movie version of her?

-Ego is wiser and good father figure to her:
He's not, it's quite clear she is in the equivalent of an abusive relashionship, the fact he took her and raised her as an servant is perceived as problematic by all the characters except Star Lord.

-Movie Mantis is not aware of her own internal (and external) strengths.
She is! One of her first scenes is her interacting with the others and using her powers, the part where she uses her power to feel Drax memories of his daughter was very touching and something a true emphat would do.

-Reinforce the idea that a woman is only useful when she is attractive to the men around her.
It does not, it discuss how attractiveness is something subjective.

-Empathic powers and heroes are only useful in fights.
That's not true and it's something lacking in the world in general, noncombatant roles are just as important as combat roles, a girl doesn't have to fight to be cool or a hero.

-Matis is an object of a potential romance for Drax.
What? I didn't get that at all, he said she reminded him of his daughter for goodness sake!

-Mantis needs to use her empathy to reinforce her martial skills.
As I said before, a character doesn't need to be violent to be relevant, make a difference or even be cool. That idea of "be a badass to be cool" is part of patriarchy and consequently part of the problem.

Preemptive argument - I swear I didn't realise she was asian.

[Ranxerox]

I don't agree with this article in some points:

-Characters have to follow their original appearances from the comics.
That's not real, the MCU is very different form the comics, Antman, vision and scarlet witch are the bigger examples.

Article never said that. Article said "It was inevitable that Marvel would change a lot about Mantis in bringing her to the MCU." It didn't place a judgement on this.



-70s Mantis is less problematic:
You mean an Asian alien from Vietnam, born and raised by a male cult to be the mother of a MALE super alien who also knows kung-fu is less problematic than the movie version of her?

The 70's Mantis is problematic but Asian representation wasn't exactly an issue in mainstream consciousness back in 1973. What is GotG's excuse?



-Ego is wiser and good father figure to her:
He's not, it's quite clear she is in the equivalent of an abusive relashionship, the fact he took her and raised her as an servant is perceived as problematic by all the characters except Star Lord.

The article never says that he was a good father figure to her. It says that he is wiser, which he would have been since he found her when she was a larva, and that he raised her to be a servant. The fact that he raised her to be a servant to him makes it pretty clear that the relationship was abusive.



-Movie Mantis is not aware of her own internal (and external) strengths.
She is! One of her first scenes is her interacting with the others and using her powers, the part where she uses her power to feel Drax memories of his daughter was very touching and something a true emphat would do.

Yeah, that was a great scene with Drax. I did mention that I really liked the character. However, I think the article writer was referring to her lack of faith in her ability to calm Ego against his will. Indeed, her description of her ability to alter people's emotions on the ship seemed to strongly undersell the power that she displayed.



-Reinforce the idea that a woman is only useful when she is attractive to the men around her.
It does not, it discuss how attractiveness is something subjective.

Yet is does this by having her be repeatedly insulted by another character and even internalizing his opinion. That doesn't seem a bit problematic to you?



-Empathic powers and heroes are only useful in fights.
That's not true and it's something lacking in the world in general, noncombatant roles are just as important as combat roles, a girl doesn't have to fight to be cool or a hero.

The article never says this.



-Matis is an object of a potential romance for Drax.
What? I didn't get that at all, he said she reminded him of his daughter for goodness sake![QUOTE]

I hope they don't go that route. However, they did spend a lot of time building up the relationship between Drax and Mantis, so they might. My money is on her winding up with Adam Warlock (yes, it would be better if she didn't "wind up" with anyone), and it being revealed that Drax is heart broken by it.

[QUOTE=Amazon;22039672]
-Mantis needs to use her empathy to reinforce her martial skills.
As I said before, a character doesn't need to be violent to be relevant, make a difference or even be cool. That idea of "be a badass to be cool" is part of patriarchy and consequently part of the problem.

I completely agree, but you aren't going to find any support for that position in the movie. After all this a movie where the big problem was solved by a superhero fist fight and using a bomb to blow up Ego's brain.

The scene with her crying for Drax's pain was cool, but if it did anything to help Drax that wasn't shown. It would be great if at the start of the next movie she was shown helping the other GotG with their emotional issues. I'm not overly optimistic here though, since emotionally well adjusted superheroes don't really seem to be a thing.

Like I said I really liked Mantis. I think she will be a great addition to the team. All of the other members are thieves, killers and assassins. Her innocence will make for nice contrast. Still, she is submissive and emotionally abused, and those are consistent with a stereotype about Asian women.

Liking something doesn't mean it is necessary to defend everything about it. You can enjoy something and still acknowledge it's faults. Neither the makers of GotG or Steve Englehart all those years ago set out to make a racist stereotype. They both set out make a really cool character and they both succeeded. It is just that there was and still is room for improvement here, and it is fair to call it out.

[Kantaki]

Yeah, that was a great scene with Drax. I did mention that I really liked the character. However, I think the article writer was referring to her lack of faith in her ability to calm Ego against his will. Indeed, her description of her ability to alter people's emotions on the ship seemed to strongly undersell the power that she displayed.

To be absolutly fair we are talking about Ego. Dude is effectively a god power-wise.
Even if it wasn't for the fact that he raised her- and most likely instilled her with a lot of fear/respect -it would be more than understandable that she doubts that she can affect him against his will.

[Legato Endless]

-Empathic powers and heroes are only useful in fights.
That's not true and it's something lacking in the world in general, noncombatant roles are just as important as combat roles, a girl doesn't have to fight to be cool or a hero.


The article never says this.

Yes it does. The writer implicitly presumes the second of Mantis' two issues that need fixing is her lack of fighting ability. It's the lesser issue, but he's wholly proceeding from the idea this is intrinsically problematic.


Instead of being a kickass cosmic hero in her own right, the Mantis portrayed in Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 was little more than a stereotype and the butt of numerous jokes.

This would be fair on it's own.


Mantis gained empathic powers, limited precognition, and incredible martial arts skills, which at one point she used to take down Thor...

So might this. But the rest of the language puts it in a different light.


She does have her empathic powers, but there is no suggestion that she is also precognitive, or that she has any martial training. This Mantis is not a cosmic power in her own right, but a servant who can perform an interesting trick.

Much more worrisome than Mantis’ depowering, however, is the dramatic change in her characterization

Mantis loss of fighting ability is problematic.


Sadly, this is not atypical for the Marvel Cinematic Universe, which has been widely criticized for its treatment of female supporting characters. In what may be the most egregious example, Hope Van Dyne in Ant-Man was initially portrayed as a complete badass who could own Scott Lang in combat. Yet, despite being better qualified in every way, Hope was kept out of battle.

Hope is the worst example, because she was denied the ability to fight. Not Jane the satellite the girlfriend. Not the damsel prize Pepper turned into in IM3. Hope is the worst, because she could have fought, dammit.


There is hope, however. Because Mantis was in so little of Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, it would be relatively easy to reinvent her. Vol. 3 could lean hard into how Mantis uses her empathy to reinforce her martial skills.

All of the phrasing of the article concerning fighting ability proceeds from the conclusion a noncombat Mantis lacks agency and potency. I can definitely see the issue the author is pointing out racially. At the same point, he's also proceeding from the reductive attitude that female protagonists must be action girls to be empowered. When the author says he wants to see a kickass female protagonist, he doesn't just mean figuratively strong, there's an element of physical violence assumed.

[Aedilred]

Anti-Islamic sentiment was running very high post 9/11 to the point that people were attacking Sikhs in the streets because they were seeing their turbans and mistaking them for Arabs. So, under the circumstances I appreciate the desire not to stoke existing fires. No doubt it cost them some interesting plot lines and probably some viewers, but IMO it was the right things. Now, if after the fires of the moment cooled down, they allowed themselves foreign adversaries, that is fine.

Totally agree with you about the Star War prequel aliens. They were really bad.

Oh yeah, I understand why they did it. But producing a series depicting counter-terror operations in the post-9/11 era to take advantage of the contemporary climate and then not include any Arab antagonists... it was a bit "Hamlet without the prince" - and pretty obviously so.

The earlier post seemed to imply however that to have included Arab terrorists in such a setting would have been inherently racist, by furthering negative perceptions. I disagree. Obviously there has to be sensitivity but it's possible to take that too far.

[Amazon]

Yes it does. The writer implicitly presumes the second of Mantis' two issues that need fixing is her lack of fighting ability. It's the lesser issue, but he's wholly proceeding from the idea this is intrinsically problematic.



This would be fair on it's own.



So might this. But the rest of the language puts it in a different light.



Mantis loss of fighting ability is problematic.



Hope is the worst example, because she was denied the ability to fight. Not Jane the satellite the girlfriend. Not the damsel prize Pepper turned into in IM3. Hope is the worst, because she could have fought, dammit.



All of the phrasing of the article concerning fighting ability proceeds from the conclusion a noncombat Mantis lacks agency and potency. I can definitely see the issue the author is pointing out racially. At the same point, he's also proceeding from the reductive attitude that female protagonists must be action girls to be empowered. When the author says he wants to see a kickass female protagonist, he doesn't just mean figuratively strong, there's an element of physical violence assumed.

And don't forget:
"The movie never explores how Mantis’ empathic powers might be useful in a fight (by filling her opponents with fear, for instance), and while she is briefly able to put Ego to sleep, she is knocked unconscious almost immediately, missing the entire climactic battle."

[Kyberwulf]

I liked Mantis. I mean aside from the stereotype, I didn't see much wrong with her. The whole arguing about her fighting ability, is kind of moot. Just because she didn't fulfill the WHOLE Asian Stereotype doesn't mean she doesn't have the ability to gung fu.

Aside from the Submissive Geisha archtype. I think Mantis had a good character arch. I mean as much as one could in this HUGE cast of characters. If it is true she lived her whole life, pretty much alone. In the end she stood up to her "master" and saved the day. I don't think you have to be some Physical commando to be a hero. Even in a action show.

[Ranxerox]

Yes it does. The writer implicitly presumes the second of Mantis' two issues that need fixing is her lack of fighting ability. It's the lesser issue, but he's wholly proceeding from the idea this is intrinsically problematic.


If of all the assertion that I made, this is the only one that people wish to disagree with me on, I'm inclined to count that as a win.

[Razade]

If of all the assertion that I made, this is the only one that people wish to disagree with me on, I'm inclined to count that as a win.

Can't have that then. Sloppy argumentation and attempting to declare yourself the winner because no one really cares can't happen on my watch! :smalltongue:


Article never said that. Article said "It was inevitable that Marvel would change a lot about Mantis in bringing her to the MCU." It didn't place a judgement on this.

Yes it did. It immediatly begins to bemoan how the change made her a sterotype. It offers what she was and then complains she doesn't live up to that. The entire


The 70's Mantis is problematic but Asian representation wasn't exactly an issue in mainstream consciousness back in 1973. What is GotG's excuse?

It doesn't need to have one? Firstly it doesn't need one if it was portraying Asians poorly but since it doesn't actually do that and that's just a flat assertion of the article through tons of misunderstandings and just looking for things to be offended by...it doesn't need one at all really.


The article never says that he was a good father figure to her. It says that he is wiser, which he would have been since he found her when she was a larva, and that he raised her to be a servant. The fact that he raised her to be a servant to him makes it pretty clear that the relationship was abusive.

Hey! Something we agree on!


Yeah, that was a great scene with Drax. I did mention that I really liked the character. However, I think the article writer was referring to her lack of faith in her ability to calm Ego against his will. Indeed, her description of her ability to alter people's emotions on the ship seemed to strongly undersell the power that she displayed.

Yeah, she wasn't confident in her powers. That's not really a problem is it?


Yet is does this by having her be repeatedly insulted by another character and even internalizing his opinion. That doesn't seem a bit problematic to you?

No it's not problematic because Drax is that insulting and rude to everyone else. He's not actually even trying to be rude. He doesn't go "you're ugly and weak so you disgust me". That was Drax in GotG1. He's come along way. He accepts Mantis for who she is even if that isn't the person he wants her to be. He doesn't single out Mantis. How often does he totally rip Starlord down? The whole movie? Oh right. The whole movie. This is just Drax being Drax.


The article never says this.

Do I have to go over this one when everyone else has? I don't think I do. Can I just say you're wrong for all the reasons others have already listed and move on? Because I'm going to.



Like I said I really liked Mantis. I think she will be a great addition to the team. All of the other members are thieves, killers and assassins. Her innocence will make for nice contrast. Still, she is submissive and emotionally abused, and those are consistent with a stereotype about Asian women.

Are...they? If Pom wasn't half Korean would we even be having this discussion then? Or would it just be "women are often stereotyped as submissive and emotionally abused". That statement to me is more sexist and racist than Mantis's portrayal is.


Liking something doesn't mean it is necessary to defend everything about it. You can enjoy something and still acknowledge it's faults. Neither the makers of GotG or Steve Englehart all those years ago set out to make a racist stereotype. They both set out make a really cool character and they both succeeded. It is just that there was and still is room for improvement here, and it is fair to call it out.

Sure but it'd be nice if people didn't go around looking for reasons to be offended.

[Sholos]

On the CBR article:

Man, the last time I saw that much cherry picking, I at least got a basket of cherries out of it! Amazon already did a good job refuting the stuff about Mantis, but I'd like to add on a couple of things. Very briefly, I'll point out that the article's claim that Drax calls Mantis dumb at every turn is absurdly false. Not once in the entire film does he even imply that she is less intelligent. Less experienced, yes. He even compares her to his daughter because of how innocent she is. But never does he call her dumb. Now, the article also claims that Drax is being mean and insulting when he calls Mantis ugly. That's, again, simply false. He's calling her ugly, yes, but not to denigrate. In fact, he points out that, in his opinion, ugly people have an advantage in knowing that people won't try to be close to them just because they're attractive. As for the potential romance angle? Drax becomes physically ill at the thought of being intimate with Mantis, so I'm pretty sure that's a no-go.

Now as for the rest of the article...

-Brings up the tripe about "Oh poor Hope! Never got to be Wasp even though she's more qualified! Why is Marvel so sexist!?"
I keep thinking that people who say this never actually watched Ant-Man. The fact that Hope is more qualified than Scott is brought up a few times during the movie, mostly by Hope explicitly stating her desire to be the one to do the job. It's never implied that she couldn't do it just as well. What is stated, though, is that Hank doesn't want her to do it and the only reason he's letting Scott do it is because he doesn't care if Scott lives or dies. The fact that he comes around to getting Hope involved is kind of one of his character arts and shows that the studio is right there with people in saying that she shouldn't be left out. But no, because there's a vague semblance of a man doing something that a woman could do (regardless of context), it must be sexist and misogynistic.

-Claims that Black Widow's defining character trait is her infertility
Look, I don't know about anyone else, but when I think of Black Widow, her infertility is the last thing to come to mind (if at all). Her defining traits and character moments are many, and I find it suspect when anyone tries to argue that this is the most important one. In fact, even in that scene, I'd say it's more defining that she's empathizing with Bruce about the whole, "I'm a monster thing," than anything else. Which, by the way, is the only reason she brings up the "can't have children" thing. Because Bruce brings it up first as an example of something he can't do and why he's terrible. Why does literally everyone forget that it's Bruce who's torn up about that and feels the need to mention it? Is it because no one cares about men who want children? Is it because no one even thinks that a man could have a desire for fatherhood? Nah, must be sexism and misogyny again.

[Kyberwulf]

If she wasn't obviously an Asian sterotype.. Then no we wouldn't be having this conversation.

[Razade]

If she wasn't obviously an Asian sterotype.. Then no we wouldn't be having this conversation.

She isn't so why are we?

[lord_khaine]

If she wasn't obviously an Asian sterotype.. Then no we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Its the other way around. If she obviously was an Asian stereotype, then we would not have anything to discus.
But there is doubt, so we have something to discuss.

And also god lord, there are few things that ruin other forms of media more, then people running around looking for something to be offended by.

[Kyberwulf]

I never said I was offended. Just made an observation. People got offended by that observation.

[SuperPanda]

Mantis was a fine character. I completely missed the "Asian women are weak" "messaging" in her character because A) she wasn't weak, B) I've been watching Agents of SHIELD where the Asian woman is the Calvary, and C) Movie:Mantis isn't obviously Asian.

Does she have somewhat oval eyes? Yeah, she does. So does Nebula and she's played by the actress I'm assuming Disney would cast in a live action adaptation of Brave. The unnatural skin color takes that off the table, and again - see Gamora and Nebula. Bone structure? I've lived in China for long enough that I no longer know what "Asian bone structure" is suppose to look like because there is so much variety.

So is it personality?

I'd say the defining traits Mantis has are innocence and kindness. The latter you'd expect from an empath and the former from a child. Throughout the story she's presented as a child - even Drax comments that she reminds him of his daughter.

Her relationship to Ego? She's his slave (Servant is a nice word for it but the relationship is abusive and she clearly has no freedom). Her innocence can come from an equal amount of social awkwardness (she's never really been around other people) and youth.

She is powerful and doesn't know it - How would she have any decent way to gauge her power? The only person she really knows is Ego. Prior to the final battle there is no sign she'd ever been pushed to use her power apart from her being clearly very afraid of Ego.

All in all I saw a socially maladjusted individual with amazing talents who was in need of a family while there happened to be a very dysfunctional family that might be in need of her.

I understand the desire combat negative representation. It is a part of a system which can have really nasty effects in the world. It might be a small part, but like Tolkein's magics it is subtle and persistent. The whispers of a thousand stereotypes whisper their way into our minds and slip past our filters without our knowing it. Still. Those stereotypes aren't meaningfully dismantled by replacing them with other "nicer" ones. They are dismantled by making complex characters with whom we can practice a little, well a little empathy.

There were an awful lot of "submissive Asian women" in Amy Tan's The Joy Luck Club but it also helped break down that stereotype by showing us how each of those women gained that trait - whether through their parent's beating it into the, trying to beat it out of them, running from painful failures, trying too hard to be modern, trying to hard to be traditional, or just desperate to be loved.

The book showed that submissive behavior as dysfunctional, but it also showed it as human. Mantis's "submissive" is given enough just enough subtext and backstory that it reminded me of Lindo's story "The Red Candle." Both are young when they are taken away from home by their new "family" (Though Mantis was much younger). Both are treated as servants and threatened for bad behavior. Both are told that they have no power over their own future. Both have to use their observations of others to find a way out of their situation. Both find power and determination inside that they didn't know they had.

Lindo goes on from that story to become a very powerful and confident women who none-the-less is unable to allow anyone around her to be in control of anything. Her need to assert her self-worth and her lack of trust nearly destroys her relationship with her own daughter. I would be very happy if Mantis winds up on a similar "rebellious" progression in the next story before finding a balance between being "strong" and "vulnerable" which allows her to be part of a family. I'd even be willing to stomach that involving a Drax romance story though I really hope they don't go that route.

[Aedilred]

On the "Is Mantis Asian?" thing - I might be misremembering the film but doesn't she have quite a pronounced Asian accent? I mean, I disagree with much of the criticism being thrown at the character but I was in no doubt in the cinema that there were Asian elements to the way she was portrayed, if only because of the actress (who I was otherwise unfamiliar with, but was clearly Asian despite the makeup/CGI).


Its the other way around. If she obviously was an Asian stereotype, then we would not have anything to discus.
But there is doubt, so we have something to discuss.

And also god lord, there are few things that ruin other forms of media more, then people running around looking for something to be offended by.

Well, to be fair, there are people who'll argue black is white and up is down if they think it'll discredit the points of "SJW"s. Triumph of the Will is just a nice film about marching, guys, if you want to read anything else into it that isn't there then you're just looking for things to be offended by and ruining a great piece of art!

And to be fair, things which are obvious to some people aren't obvious to others. After all, I think relatively few filmmakers set out to be deliberately offensive.

However I also agree with your second point. There's a line somewhere between "things that are actually offensive" and "inoffensive things that people have chosen to complain about". Unfortunately the line is not particularly clear, and is perhaps rather a large grey area with lots of room for interpretation.

[Silfir]

I was actually impressed by Mantis' strength of character. Think about it; she lives her entire life under the thumb of a murderous, all-powerful immortal being, and yet she mustered the courage to revolt against Ego - because she wanted to save Peter, a guy she barely knew; because she understood that some things are more important than being alive. If that isn't agency... Not sure I could do that.

[theNater]

And also god lord, there are few things that ruin other forms of media more, then people running around looking for something to be offended by.
Can we agree to put a "both sides" clause on that? For every time I've seen someone say "this minor thing proves everyone involved in this production is a racist jackass!", I've also seen someone respond to "this may not have been optimal from a racial sensitivity standpoint" with "how dare you accuse everyone involved in this production of being a racist jackass!".

[Legato Endless]

Can we agree to put a "both sides" clause on that? For every time I've seen someone say "this minor thing proves everyone involved in this production is a racist jackass!", I've also seen someone respond to "this may not have been optimal from a racial sensitivity standpoint" with "how dare you accuse everyone involved in this production of being a racist jackass!".

Agreed. Part of the problem is people like to view racism as something wholly objective and therefor dis/provable. But cultural constructs are owned by everyone and no one. A little reluctance to come to concise conclusions would be helpful.

[Lethologica]

On the "Is Mantis Asian?" thing - I might be misremembering the film but doesn't she have quite a pronounced Asian accent? I mean, I disagree with much of the criticism being thrown at the character but I was in no doubt in the cinema that there were Asian elements to the way she was portrayed, if only because of the actress (who I was otherwise unfamiliar with, but was clearly Asian despite the makeup/CGI).
I heard it that way as well. Youtube clips leave me reasonably sure I'm not just imagining it.

[Kyberwulf]

You could be the most amazing character of all time. And still be a stereotype. You could be a stereotype, and still be an amazing character. One doesn't automatically preclude the other.

[Erys]

On the CBR article:

Man, the last time I saw that much cherry picking, I at least got a basket of cherries out of it!

Seriously.

Its sad so many people have to nitpick everything to death. I feel we as people could be better than a bunch of pathetic whiners, crying and getting uppity over insignificant details about fictional characters.

[Kyberwulf]

Ah.. by whining and crying and getting uppity about people whining crying and getting uppity.

[Erys]

Ah.. by whining and crying and getting uppity about people whining crying and getting uppity.

Saying I believe we as people can be better... is "whining and crying and getting uppity" in your eyes?

How very odd.

[BWR]

Saying I believe we as people can be better... is "whining and crying and getting uppity" in your eyes?

How very odd.

You conveniently left out the part where you insulted a whole bunch of people for disagreeing with you on something.

[Rodin]

And to be fair, things which are obvious to some people aren't obvious to others. After all, I think relatively few filmmakers set out to be deliberately offensive.


Heck, I totally missed the racial stereotypes in the Star Wars prequels. I'm not sure if that makes me particularly egalitarian or simply inobservant.

That said, Mantis definitely didn't bother me, even in retrospect. My pet peeve has always been women who are meant to be combat trained not getting to do any of the fighting (a common anime problem), and the converse problem of any woman with agency having to be an action hero who is "just one of the guys". Mantis managed to avoid both - a noncombatant shoved into a dangerous situation, who acted first to warn the crew knowing the danger, and then used her powers to keep the villain suppressed to buy the team precious time.

[BWR]

Heck, I totally missed the racial stereotypes in the Star Wars prequels. I'm not sure if that makes me particularly egalitarian or simply inobservant.


Most of the so-called racial stereotypes in the PT didn't register for me because the stereotypes supposedly used (I am still not entirely convinced) don't exist here. Gungans were just annoying amphibians with a silly accent and neimoidians were just greedy gray-green people with another silly accent.

[Erys]

You conveniently left out the part where you insulted a whole bunch of people for disagreeing with you on something.

You mean the rest of the line where I describe the childish behavior?

Yeah, I stand by the belief that we, as people, can do better than being that.

[Kyberwulf]

You mean you get on a morally high horse.. and point out childish behavior.. rather childishly.?

[Erys]

You mean you get on a morally high horse.. and point out childish behavior.. rather childishly.?

Clearly I am mistaken in my hopes of people being better... :smallannoyed:

[Cikomyr]

I just dont see Mantiss as being submissive.

Shy, introvert, awkward and eager to not be all these things? Sure. But submissive?! No way. She proves to be her own agent for the totality of the movie, making her own choices.

[lord_khaine]

mhm.. dont think there is any higher ground left at this point... :smalltongue:


I just dont see Mantiss as being submissive.

Shy, introvert, awkward and eager to not be all these things? Sure. But submissive?! No way. She proves to be her own agent for the totality of the movie, making her own choices.

And yeah.. i guess so.. i mean she was a servant to Ego, so submissive behavior is to be expected

[Pex]

https://s26.postimg.org/iacmnyiax/threadderail.jpg

[Strigon]

And yeah.. i guess so.. i mean she was a servant to Ego, so submissive behavior is to be expected

Yeah, when you're living on a sentient planet that can wipe out a fleet, there's a limit to how much control you can exert.
But in truth, is there any reasonable act of rebellion she didn't perform? And, not only that, but she began her rebellion of her own accord, with no encouragement from anyone else.

[Kitten Champion]

I came back from it just now. An enjoyable movie, comfortable with slowing down and focusing upon these characters somewhat seriously while being this Kirby-esque kaleidoscope of creative visuals within this Gunn-esque immature-yet-self-assured tongue-and-cheek SF universe.

The opening sequence was the best part.

Also nice seeing Ben Browder in yet another wacky colourful SF setting even if it was a brief appearance. I assumed the last would've been Doctor Who - but there he was.


On the "Is Mantis Asian?" thing - I might be misremembering the film but doesn't she have quite a pronounced Asian accent? I mean, I disagree with much of the criticism being thrown at the character but I was in no doubt in the cinema that there were Asian elements to the way she was portrayed, if only because of the actress (who I was otherwise unfamiliar with, but was clearly Asian despite the makeup/CGI).

She's a half Korean, half French-Canadian actress who primarily worked in French and South Korean pictures playing a character apparently initially designed as a half-Vietnamese half-German with some convoluted backstory about being a Celestial Madonna or something. I plead ignorance on that as the only comics I've read her in were the Abnett and Lanning 00's run where she was the team psychologist and served more as a framing device for the characters to talk to the reader.

I do recall her being green, but I suspect that the presence of another character in that colour would've been seen as unwise. I also think they directed her to utilize her accent to give her dialogue a degree of strangeness to the ear for the sake of her characterization as awkward and child-like.

As to her strength of character, my view of it was she was strongly influenced by empathizing with Drax and his deep sense of personal loss and grief that her willingness to comply with Ego was frayed. Once the actual galaxy was at stake with Peter manifesting Celestial power that feeling became resolve to action, even with full knowledge of Ego's god-like power and the rather unlikely expectation that she'd survive such a betrayal.

I will say though, and have alluded to it above, but Gunn has a sort of frat-boy sensibility that's evident particularly in his humour that I could see as grating at points and was evident at a bit of the humour at Mantis' expense. It doesn't define the characters though, more of a surface element imposed on their dialogue and interactions.

[Lethologica]

There is at least one component of the connection between Mantis' interactions with Drax and her rebellion against Ego that is even more direct. This is likely the first time Mantis has been exposed to the grief of a parent for the loss of their child--a grief particularly pertinent to Ego's brand of monstrosity.

[Keltest]

There is at least one component of the connection between Mantis' interactions with Drax and her rebellion against Ego that is even more direct. This is likely the first time Mantis has been exposed to the grief of a parent for the loss of their child--a grief particularly pertinent to Ego's brand of monstrosity.

That's actually... wow, I didn't even notice that. here she is, all this time, thinking Ego's a relatively normal being, and then an actually emotionally healthy person comes along and just shatters her perceptions of Ego.

[Cikomyr]

mhm.. dont think there is any higher ground left at this point... :smalltongue:



And yeah.. i guess so.. i mean she was a servant to Ego, so submissive behavior is to be expected

It was more out of a desire to help/be useful and not knowing anything better. She had the innocence of a child. Thats not submission, its merely ignorance.

But as it was posted just above, the moment she started learning about other people and how they acted, she only remotely hesitated in deciding for herself. She wasnt submissive to anyone.

[Kyberwulf]

Wasn't submissive to anyone?

I think "innocence" is being highly romanticized.

She knew what was going on. We don't know how many of Ego's children she helped to kill, or let be killed. And her being strong was a character trait, it was derived from a guy telling her what to do. She didn't believe in herself until Drax pretty much became her new master.

[Cikomyr]

Wasn't submissive to anyone?

I think "innocence" is being highly romanticized.

She knew what was going on. We don't know how many of Ego's children she helped to kill, or let be killed. And her being strong was a character trait, it was derived from a guy telling her what to do. She didn't believe in herself until Drax pretty much became her new master.

You are imagining the most ****ed up things.

[Kyberwulf]

Yeah? I don't see how. How many children did they go pick up bring back and murder?

I can't see how you can assume anything else.

I don't see how you can call Drax anything else. The speed in which they turned friends could only be summed up in one word. Martha.

That is another thing. Why did they need the reavers to go pick up the kids? I just realized this. HE claimed he needed Youndu to go pick up Starlord because he couldn't go back to Earth, otherwise he would want to stay. That implies that he could have cured Starlord's mom. Okay, but why would he need Youndu to go back for other children? enough that Youndu was able to discern what Ego was doing to the children he did pick up. Does that mean he had a bunch of people he cared for to much to go back to other planets, that's why he needed to hire Youndu?

Now in the interim. Does that mean that He stopped going to other planets and planting his seed, in more then one sense. IN doing so, are there other agents that collect the children from those hosts? That is the only way Mantis could really remain innocent. Is if he stopped going from planet to planet in between the years of Starlords abduction and the point he met up with him. That could explain why he hasn't really been in Starlords life though. He was to busy seeding women and bedding planets, collecting kids and murdering them. IN which case Mantis isn't really innocent.

I mean, think about how many brothers and sisters Starlord must have out there.

[Aedilred]

I don't see how you can call Drax anything else. The speed in which they turned friends could only be summed up in one word. Martha.
So I don't know what you mean by that, but equating friendship with mastery - that's kind of screwed up.

Drax helped to give Mantis the confidence to believe in herself and no longer need a "master". This process was a bit rapid, but firstly, she's an empath, so that'll save a lot of time; secondly, I don't think it would have been a good use of screen time to pad the film for that purpose, especially since the basis for the criticism is so flimsy as-is.


That is another thing. Why did they need the reavers to go pick up the kids? I just realized this. HE claimed he needed Youndu to go pick up Starlord because he couldn't go back to Earth, otherwise he would want to stay. That implies that he could have cured Starlord's mom. Okay, but why would he need Youndu to go back for other children? enough that Youndu was able to discern what Ego was doing to the children he did pick up. Does that mean he had a bunch of people he cared for to much to go back to other planets, that's why he needed to hire Youndu?
Laziness? Time and motion? After the first few it probably became apparent that the chances of each next offspring being able to do what he needed were slim - and he has a lot of kids. Might as well hire someone to deal with the tedium of fetching them all and focus on doing something more interesting. Yondu almost certainly wasn't his first courier. It seems he wasn't even that fussed that Peter "got away", since he didn't come looking for him actively until after he heard about the Infinity Stone.

[Kyberwulf]

Yeah, that's my point though. He could have been going around getting other species preggers, then just collecting babies, or having other people collect babies.

Another thing. You would think he would be able to get rid of bones pretty easy. Break them down or something. Why did he keep the bones in one area?

[Algeh]

Another thing. You would think he would be able to get rid of bones pretty easy. Break them down or something. Why did he keep the bones in one area?

Bonepit! Like a ballpit, but made of bones. Clearly this is the answer.

On a things-we-haven't-been-talking-about-but-bug-me note, it annoys me that the scene I most remembered from the trailer was Mantis getting hit by something, and then that actually ended up being a thing in the movie that perhaps would have felt more dramatic if I hadn't seen it over and over in promos for a month.

[Razade]

Yeah, that's my point though. He could have been going around getting other species preggers, then just collecting babies, or having other people collect babies.

Another thing. You would think he would be able to get rid of bones pretty easy. Break them down or something. Why did he keep the bones in one area?

Because he was a god like being and didn't care about the minutia.

[Starbuck_II]

Because he was a god like being and didn't care about the minutia.

No, he needed the bones for the Bone Throne. He had enough blood for the Blood God, of course, already.

[Grim Portent]

On the ship Mantis did say Ego needed her help to sleep because he had thoughts about his progeny, which could be taken in several ways.

I assume he felt a measure of guilt over all the children he'd killed over the years and couldn't sleep as a result.

The bone pile was probably something akin to a graveyard and a midden combined. A place he could keep his (murdered) children close but also out of sight and mind. Being an immortal psychopath he didn't bother to give them graves or anything, since it was purely for his benefit rather than out of any respect for them.

[Bohandas]

I think I'm too big of a D&D nerd; Did this movie remind anyone else of a combination of Baldur's Gate and the Ragnorra and Atropus campaigns from Elder Evils (and possibly a little of The Dunwich Horror)?

Edit:
And also the Ghostbusters videogame

[Bohandas]

My favourite thing about the Sovereign was how, despite being genetically engineered for perfection, they're somehow kind of rubbish.

They seemed childish. Like none of them ever developed emptional maturity.


The Sovereign may be my new favorite alien race. The use of remotely piloted combat ships is something I always wondered why was not done by other highly advanced races.

It seems so obvious to me, why risk lives?

Finally it was done in a movie (Apart form that other one where it was used as a plot twist).
They also did it in The Phantom Menace, which also showed the method's vulnerability; take out the control point and you take out the whole fleet

[Keltest]

They seemed childish. Like none of them ever developed emptional maturity.


They also did it in The Phantom Menace, which also showed the method's vulnerability; take out the control point and you take out the whole fleet

I mean, that mostly shows the Trade Federation are idiots who don't know how to protect their ship very well. "fly into the hangar and shoot things" should not be a viable tactic for taking out a command ship unless you at the very least have an actual bomber.

[Lethologica]

They seemed childish. Like none of them ever developed emptional maturity.
Highly deliberate. The fleet evokes an arcade. Those who are born perfect need not grow and mature. That would imply prior imperfection.

[Bohandas]

It was quick takes, but they did show several planets being threatened by Ego, even Sovereign. The focus was on Earth I suppose for the audience to relate better since they made a necessary big deal of the Dairy Queen area.

Plus there was probably a product placement deal with Dairy Queen

[Starbuck_II]

Highly deliberate. The fleet evokes an arcade. Those who are born perfect need not grow and mature. That would imply prior imperfection.

Just like Elves! This is how I view them in D&D, just like Sovereign.

[Cikomyr]

The Sovereign may be my new favorite alien race. The use of remotely piloted combat ships is something I always wondered why was not done by other highly advanced races.

It seems so obvious to me, why risk lives?

Finally it was done in a movie (Apart form that other one where it was used as a plot twist).

Which plot twist?

[Talakeal]

Which plot twist?

Ender's Game?

[Bohandas]

He's immortal, however, while they are short-lived. In his millions of years, they pass in the blink of an eye. His children also age and (by Ego's viewpoint) quickly die without being able to touch the light.

Peter Quill was the first of thousands of children to touch the light. He would live forever, would be a successor to Ego. Ego was not dumb enough to take Quill's cooperation for granted. He believed, in time, Quill would come around to his perspective on things. Really, all he was doing was extinguishing a brief life just a little faster so he could move ahead with his plans without distraction.


Plausible, especially since IIRC even a lot of IRL religions depict their deities as thinking in this manner (It's basically the premise of both the "foundations of the earth" speech in the Book of Job and the famous "Destroyer of Worlds" speech from the Bhagavad Gita/Maha-Bharata)


Ego is shown as acting like a kid, which makes sense, as he's been peerless his entire life.

Really all the villains in the movie did. Ego was a manchild, the Sovereign ran their airforce out of a video arcade, and even Nebula spent most of the movie fighting with her sister.


No, Ego spent millions of years desperately trying to make his goal happen faster. The Ego who runs everywhere seeking new life and new women to sleep with is premised on him being fundamentally impatient. If Ego were able to serenely wait, he wouldn't have needed a son at all and just slowly consumed the Galaxy. Now there's a middle ground where an immortal plots to make things more efficient and calculatingly manipulates his way towards that, but that isn't Ego. His impatience makes perfect sense, because it's a distillation of his childishness.

Another example of his impatience is that his planet appears to be mostly hollow


And there's not like I actually gained anything by me-ifying the galaxy other than saying I did it. This whole venture sounds like a lot of work for no real gain.

Plus it wasn't particularly Ego-ifying anyway. The neither did the blobs of ego-terrain look like the landscape of his planet nor did they turn beings touched by them into body doubles of his avatar (contrast The Master and Agent Smith {tangential note: Speaking of Agent Smith I half expected Ego to directly rip off that "The purpose of life is to end" line from Smith's monologue in Matrix 3})

[Aliquid]

******?Dude, spoiler

[Lethologica]

Dude, spoiler
I don't think that spoiler is comprehensible without having already read/watched the relevant media. But better to err on the side of caution, I suppose.

[Talakeal]

Dude, spoiler

I considered it, but I couldn't think of any way to answer the question without spoiling it, as the title itself is a spoiler, and without a title you would have no way of knowing what was being spoiled. In the end I figured spoilers for a 32 year old book wasn't really worth the trouble.

[Vogie]

I considered it, but I couldn't think of any way to answer the question without spoiling it, as the title itself is a spoiler, and without a title you would have no way of knowing what was being spoiled. In the end I figured spoilers for a 32 year old book wasn't really worth the trouble.

I agree... as other noteworthy 1985 books that were made into movies include Contact, The Handmaiden's Tale, The Polar Express, The Cider House Rules, The Accidental Tourist, The Postman and ... He's going to want some milk.

[Cikomyr]

Ender's Game?

/Facepalm

I feel stupid

[lord_khaine]

But there wasnt any remote controlled ships in Enders game?
Those ships had crew and everything. They were just commanded remotely, but there really isnt anything unusual in that.
(besides how sensible it is to keep your commander at a safe distrance from the fighting)

[Giggling Ghast]

Is ... is it safe to come in here? Is the racism talk over? I'd like to share my thoughts.

I quite enjoyed it. No, I LOVED it. I know other people have said it was inferior to the first film, but I only really noticed two flaws: one, the first act is a bit too jokey (which gets a little exhausting), and a couple of the scenes where Ego and Peter are just standing around chatting were a bit fake.

But yeah, I laughed most of the way through. I liked Rocket's arc, I liked Yondu's arc, I liked Peter's arc, I lived Gamora's arc, and I really liked Mantis, who reminds me a little of Merrill from Dragon Age 2. I remember nearly squealing in glee at the climax where Peter starts fighting his dad to The Chain by Fleetwood Mac.

I was also seriously shocked by the enormity of Ego's evil, as I'm used to him being kind of a joke villain in the Marvel universe. How many of his own offspring did he murder? How many mothers did he seduce and then leave childless? How many people die in the Expansion, even as brief as it was? :smalleek:


Another thing. You would think he would be able to get rid of bones pretty easy. Break them down or something. Why did he keep the bones in one area?

Because families are often buried together. Seems rather obvious to me.

He didn't need to "hide" them, to be clear. It's not like Ego ever gets visitors (or if he does, they presumably do not survive very long).

[Giggling Ghast]

It also lacks the ''galaxy peril '', as we only see Earth and maybe one other planet. It does not give a sense of ''the whole galaxy'' in trouble.

The scene clearly shows multiple planets being overwhelmed. Xandar was one of them.

Given that he had been "seeding" planets for thousands of years, he presumably could have destroyed most of the life in the galaxy. (The only places spared would be space stations and ships, and if they couldn't ever land on a habitable planet to re-supply ...)

[Giggling Ghast]

As a final aside to the discussion about Mantis' portrayal: Pom Klementieff is actually French. That's really her natural accent, albeit exaggerated a touch for the character. Check out this interview.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxCBMe7z8so

[lord_khaine]

Given that he had been "seeding" planets for thousands of years, he presumably could have destroyed most of the life in the galaxy. (The only places spared would be space stations and ships, and if they couldn't ever land on a habitable planet to re-supply ...)

That really is a very short while for making any sort of noticeable dent in the galaxy. And as such any place with the power to save itself would be spared.

[Giggling Ghast]

That really is a very short while for making any sort of noticeable dent in the galaxy.

Given that there's warp jump technology in GotG, he could travel from habitable planet to habitable planet with ease. The dent could be quite sizeable.

[Eldan]

So, just so it. Overall opinion, before I read the thread: a bit meh.

First of all, man was this ever American. So many big speeches directly into the camera about love and family and apple pie. I get it. Stop repeating yourself.

Then, well, many of the action scenes felt too long. Especially the finale. Too many repetitive explosions and giant glowing things crashing into each other.

Also, the jokes. Not enough of them and about half fell flat.

I mean, still a decent movie over all, but no where close to the original and not one of Marvel's best. It looked very pretty.

[lord_khaine]

Given that there's warp jump technology in GotG, he could travel from habitable planet to habitable planet with ease. The dent could be quite sizeable.

Im not saying that the biggest holdup is the travel time anyway. Its likely more building a new body to match each new alien specie, then learning enough about it to seduce a member and make a child. That does seem like something that can take years.


First of all, man was this ever American. So many big speeches directly into the camera about love and family and apple pie. I get it. Stop repeating yourself.

I get you on this, it really get unusually grating in the end. You kinda need to learn to zone it out.

[Giggling Ghast]

I don't think he ever did change species. At least, that's not what his diorama implied.

As to how he was able to charm all these different females while looking human ... well, where do you think Peter gets his pelvic sorcery from? Ego either has a buttload of natural charm or unnatural abilities that mess with their heads. Or possibly both. He is basically a demigod, after all.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

I don't think he ever did change species. At least, that's not what his diorama implied.

I think that was a careful lie to continue to ingratiate himself to Quill. I do not think he was lying when he said he found his mom to be specially special, but I do think it was a bit of a lie to show himself in his human form when interacting with all the other child-bearers: a way to always look the most appealing to his audience (Quill), rather than a literal truth.

GW

[Pex]

So, just so it. Overall opinion, before I read the thread: a bit meh.

First of all, man was this ever American. So many big speeches directly into the camera about love and family and apple pie. I get it. Stop repeating yourself.

Then, well, many of the action scenes felt too long. Especially the finale. Too many repetitive explosions and giant glowing things crashing into each other.

Also, the jokes. Not enough of them and about half fell flat.

I mean, still a decent movie over all, but no where close to the original and not one of Marvel's best. It looked very pretty.

Maybe if you weren't such an "Americanist" you'd have appreciated it more.

[lord_khaine]

I don't think he ever did change species. At least, that's not what his diorama implied.

As to how he was able to charm all these different females while looking human ... well, where do you think Peter gets his pelvic sorcery from? Ego either has a buttload of natural charm or unnatural abilities that mess with their heads. Or possibly both. He is basically a demigod, after all.

It actually did, the real diorame he showed Peter later on, had him assume a different alien shape for each world he visited. The red jacket stayed on, so it was easy to miss though.


Maybe if you weren't such an "Americanist" you'd have appreciated it more.

By.. Americanist.. you mean someone not from America.. right? :smallconfused:

[Eldan]

I just mean that the Big Emotional Speech (TM) is a very American trope. A lot of telling instead of showing of emotions.

[Silfir]

It's so utterly unnecessary to make this into an "American" thing. There are plenty of US-made movies that dodge the trope just fine. If you see it a lot in movies made by US studios, that has a lot to do with the fact that pretty much all of the big budget action flicks made in the first place are made by US studios.

The baseless generalizing bothered me and I'm not even American. Thoroughly unnecessary.

[Pex]

It's a comic book movie with sci-fi elements, a bit of humor, and a talking raccoon. Shakespeare it is not.

[Dienekes]

It's a comic book movie with sci-fi elements, a bit of humor, and a talking raccoon. Shakespeare it is not.

Amusingly, Old Shakey is probably the worst offender when it comes to stopping the action to have characters monologue about love, family, and their feelings.

He's just so stereotypically American like that.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Amusingly, Old Shakey is probably the worst offender when it comes to stopping the action to have characters monologue about love, family, and their feelings.

He's just so stereotypically American like that.

You, sir or madam, just won the thread.

H/T

GW

[Legato Endless]

Heh.

I'm a little puzzled that people talking about their inner world is bad writing now? Nonverbal acting is great and all, but if no one ever says what they feel, that's rather cutting oneself off at the neck when it comes to depicting psychological realism.

[Eldan]

Okay, okay, okay, calm down. I didn't mean it like that. It's a thing that shows up in a lot of American movies, is the only thing i wanted to say here.

Really, my problem with the people talking about their feelings was twofold: it got repetitive since they did it several times and the movie started to drag for me a bit towards the end anyway, and it didn't really seem reflected in what was happening. For all the talk of family, these people really didn't see all that familial with each other.

[Bohandas]

Okay, okay, okay, calm down. I didn't mean it like that. It's a thing that shows up in a lot of American movies, is the only thing i wanted to say here.

Really, my problem with the people talking about their feelings was twofold: it got repetitive since they did it several times and the movie started to drag for me a bit towards the end anyway, and it didn't really seem reflected in what was happening. For all the talk of family, these people really didn't see all that familial with each other.

I think the idea was that they were like a dysfunctional family. Certainly they reliably got along much better than Nebula and Gamora did at the beginning of the film or than Ego and Starlord did at the end.

[Bohandas]

I just realized something. I originally got the impression that Ego really did love Starlord's mom but just loved world domination more, but if that was the case, why not just take her with him if he didn't want to return to Earth until he'd remade it?

[Pex]

Okay, okay, okay, calm down. I didn't mean it like that. It's a thing that shows up in a lot of American movies, is the only thing i wanted to say here.

Really, my problem with the people talking about their feelings was twofold: it got repetitive since they did it several times and the movie started to drag for me a bit towards the end anyway, and it didn't really seem reflected in what was happening. For all the talk of family, these people really didn't see all that familial with each other.

That was the point.

Starlord wanted Daddy.
Rocky didn't want to be close to anyone, except Groot.
Gamora hated her sister.

They were so wrapped into themselves they didn't see they already had what they wanted. The only one who did was Drax, having dealt with his family issues the previous movie as well as not understanding subtlety. His personality flaw ironically allowed him to see the forest when the others were hiding behind trees.

[Kyberwulf]

There is a lot wrong with this movie.

I would say, she would probably have something to say about him going from port to port.

[Thialfi]

I just realized something. I originally got the impression that Ego really did love Starlord's mom but just loved world domination more, but if that was the case, why not just take her with him if he didn't want to return to Earth until he'd remade it?

What I understood was that Peter's mother was tempting him to give up his dream of conquering the universe to be with her. Where they were didn't so much matter, it was all about what he wanted to do when he was with her. What kind of being she made him want to be. These thoughts scared him, so he had to remove the temptation.

[Shamash]

What I understood was that Peter's mother was tempting him to give up his dream of conquering the universe to be with her. Where they were didn't so much matter, it was all about what he wanted to do when he was with her. What kind of being she made him want to be. These thoughts scared him, so he had to remove the temptation.

I wonder why he didn't just lived happily with her, waited for her natural death since he's an immortal and then continued with his crazy megalomaniacal plans later? Why not have both you are IMMORTAL!

Geez! Just as youth is wasted on the young immortality is wasted on the immortal.

[Leewei]

I wonder why he didn't just lived happily with her, waited for her natural death since he's an immortal and then continued with his crazy megalomaniacal plans later? Why not have both you are IMMORTAL!

Geez! Just as youth is wasted on the young immortality is wasted on the immortal.
I'd guess that Ego had been through all that before, and that the lingering heartache he felt afterward made him determined to become more shallow, and to treasure the experience rather than the woman.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

I wonder why he didn't just lived happily with her, waited for her natural death since he's an immortal and then continued with his crazy megalomaniacal plans later? Why not have both you are IMMORTAL!

Because the longer he was with her, the less appealing a universe in which only he existed was starting to be. Effectively, her morals and outlook were starting to rub on him, and he got to the point where he had to choose viewpoints: universe unification, or allowing others to exist. Spending a few more decades with her would only make the temptation to abandon his outlook stronger.

It reminded me a bit of the fact that the single most common reason to go from homophobia to acceptance of gay people is to talk to a gay person - and therefore, that something a lot of homophobes find themselves doing is, as they start to realise that there is nothing wrong with gay people, they immediately cut ties with them before they fully change their minds.

Grey Wolf

[Giggling Ghast]

Yes, I suspect Ego felt he would lose his resolve to remake the universe if he allowed his River Lily to come live with him.

A rather horrifying thought entered my head this morning. Ego used Mantis to help him sleep, but what if he had an ulterior purpose in initially saving and then raising her? (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/WifeHusbandry)

[Kantaki]

Yes, I suspect Ego felt he would lose his resolve to remake the universe if he allowed his River Lily to come live with him.

A rather horrifying thought entered my head this morning. Ego used Mantis to help him sleep, but what if he had an ulterior purpose in initially saving and then raising her? (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/WifeHusbandry)

Thanks. Now I have to scrub my brain.

[Rogar Demonblud]

AAARRRRRGGHHHH!!!!!

*headdesk headdesk headdesk*

Now that that's out of my system...

I went to Guardians last night. First, the theater having moved all start times to ~5:30 makes it tricky to get there after work. But I finally twigged to the priestess' name reference. Given my age, I previously heard 'Ayesha' and thought Haggard. Last night, I finally realized she's the entity also known as Her and Kismet.

[Vogie]

But there wasnt any remote controlled ships in Enders game?
Those ships had crew and everything. They were just commanded remotely, but there really isnt anything unusual in that.
(besides how sensible it is to keep your commander at a safe distrance from the fighting)

That is correct - However, they weren't referring to the humans. The Formic, or "Buggers", were a collection of Hiveminds. When Ender turned the Little Doctor towards their homeworld, it killed all but one of the hiveminds, which eliminated all of the Formic ships. The only one who had succeeded in that prior to Ender was Mazer Rackham, who had destroyed a hive queen accidentally, by disobeying orders, flying a poorly armed ship where he wasn't supposed to, and shooting down a ship, that just so happened to have a queen onboard. That queen was the hivemind of the entire brood that was trying to invade the earth at the time, so he basically made the entire Formic Armada braindead with a single strike.

[lord_khaine]

Yes, I suspect Ego felt he would lose his resolve to remake the universe if he allowed his River Lily to come live with him.

A rather horrifying thought entered my head this morning. Ego used Mantis to help him sleep, but what if he had an ulterior purpose in initially saving and then raising her?

I would almost envy the innocent of those able to get freaked out about such a minor thing :smalltongue:

Honestly though, this seems extremely unlike. I dont think I-Cant-Wait-a-Week-To-Tell-How-I-Killed-Your-Mother-Ego has the patience for that sort of thing.
I also think she is far to valuable for him. Helping him fall asleep fullfills a unike purpose thats rather hard to replace. Unlike prospective mothers who he can find at any given planet he cares to visit.


Spoiler: Evidently a spoiler...


Ahh thats what they were talking about.

[Keltest]

I wonder why he didn't just lived happily with her, waited for her natural death since he's an immortal and then continued with his crazy megalomaniacal plans later? Why not have both you are IMMORTAL!

Geez! Just as youth is wasted on the young immortality is wasted on the immortal.

He did specifically say he couldn't handle watching her die.

[Giggling Ghast]

On the other hand, lord khaine, if her empathic abilities were that important to him, Mantis' usefulness would end when her lifespan ran out, so her progeny would potentially be useful to Ego even if they didn't inherit his abilities.

[Kyberwulf]

Yeah, like i said, Mantis is the very essence of a token asian character.

You could have taken her out of the movie and it wouldn't have changed a thing. MAYBE the end were she put him to sleep. That wasn't so much needed though.

[Giggling Ghast]

She alerts Gamora and Drax to the danger posed by Ego and buys the Guardians time, albeit only a little. She arguably contributed more than Drax, who was pure comedic relief.

Does every female heroine need to be an ass-kicker to be relevant?

[Dienekes]

Yeah, like i said, Mantis is the very essence of a token asian character.

You could have taken her out of the movie and it wouldn't have changed a thing. MAYBE the end were she put him to sleep. That wasn't so much needed though.

Couldn't any of the cast except Ego and Quill have been written out?

Mantis reveals Ego's plot and puts him to sleep. She does more than Gamora or Drax does.

[Kitten Champion]

Couldn't any of the cast except Ego and Quill have been written out?

Mantis reveals Ego's plot and puts him to sleep. She does more than Gamora or Drax does.

Mantis role in the plot is fairly perfunctory to get Mantis the character into the ensemble. The movie is primarily character-focused with very little plot that actually needs justifying once you break it down. Mantis' purpose is to help the writers explore these characters - Drax in particular, but she has some nice character scenes with Peter and Gamora as well - and provide the cast with a distinct voice for their interactions which are central to every Marvel movie. Similar to Nebula with Gamora, Yondu with Rocket, and both Gamora and Ego with Peter -- Groot's pretty much purely comic relief but his character has nowhere to go anyways.

So, yes, you could cut her from the plot easily but that's insignificant to the wider direction of the movie.

[Kyberwulf]

Yeah, except they cut away from her when she was about to do her big revel After Gamora already did the whole exploring and finding stuff out. She already told them what they already knew.

[Giggling Ghast]

Gamora only notices something is odd about Ego when Mantis nearly spills the beans to Drax. Her subsequent argument with Quill leads her out to the field, which is when Nebula attacks. That leads to the discovery of the boneyard, which she later reveals is Ego's children.

[Erys]

Yeah, except they cut away from her when she was about to do her big revel After Gamora already did the whole exploring and finding stuff out. She already told them what they already knew.

You might want to watch the movie again.

You have the order of events clearly confused...

[Rogar Demonblud]

I think the reference is to the second explanation, where Gamora shows up and demands answers. The film cuts away to another scene to keep ratcheting up tension.

[Aedilred]

I think the reference is to the second explanation, where Gamora shows up and demands answers. The film cuts away to another scene to keep ratcheting up tension.

That sort of thing does usually frustrate me, but I can forgive it so long as a film/book doesn't lean on it too heavily to keep the reader in the dark even while viewpoint characters are informed.

[Jallorn]

So I have a theory about Ego and why Starlord was the first successful crossbreed. It's because Ego actually loved Peter's mother. He never talks about loving any of the others, the kindest thing he even has to say about the kids was, "I made it painless." But with Peter's mother, he waxes poetic, especially about the music she introduced him to. And I don't think this is manipulation or dissembling. The most Ego really shows is discretion in the information he reveals, not outright fiction, especially not to Peter. I think Ego really did love Peter's mother, and given the themes of the film, of family and love, and how Yondu and Peter access their power, not with their mind, but with their hearts, that it was the engagement of his heart that truly served Ego's purpose.

And it's another sign of Ego's failing, that he chose the grand cerebral purpose over the mundane but more uplifting love. He chose himself over a family. And he never realized what the key was.

[Aedilred]

Alternatively, is it possible that the Infinity Stone is responsible? Perhaps holding it somehow "activated" that portion of Peter's "genetics", and consequently made him able to handle the god-stuff Ego wanted him to do. There didn't seem to be any particular suggestion that he had any extraordinary abilities prior to holding the Stone.

[Giggling Ghast]

Every theory is equally valid in the absence of evidence to the contrary. Maybe it was because Ego loved Meredith, maybe it was because the Infinity Stone changed him, maybe it's because Ego's avatar is basically human and thus Earthers are the most compatible species. Maybe it was just random chance, or maybe it was the will of Eternity itself. Who knows?

[Aedilred]

Every theory is equally valid in the absence of evidence to the contrary. Maybe it was because Ego loved Meredith, maybe it was because the Infinity Stone changed him, maybe it's because Ego's avatar is basically human and thus Earthers are the most compatible species. Maybe it was just random chance, or maybe it was the will of Eternity itself. Who knows?

What the hell is this? You've got it all wrong! There can be only one valid theory and we must fight to the death to establish which it is. You must be new around here. :smallwink:

[Rogar Demonblud]

Sorry, death duel privileges are suspended until you fix your avatar to remove that farking annoying Photobucket dial.

[Aedilred]

Sorry, death duel privileges are suspended until you fix your avatar to remove that farking annoying Photobucket dial.

Since Photobucket broke it, Photobucket can fix it. I've had enough of their nonsense and I'm too lazy to re-upload all my images.

[Bohandas]

Since Photobucket broke it, Photobucket can fix it. I've had enough of their nonsense

Well obviously don't pay them (I sincerely hope that nobody's actually upgraded because of this stunt). Just put that particular image somewhere else

[Rogar Demonblud]

Or just delete the link and go without an avatar. Because they aren't going back on this.