Skip to main content

Guardians of the Galaxy: Vol 3 (2023) - the olive garden of the MCU

If I had it to do over again, I would have waited for streaming.

A melodrama is constructed for strong emotional appeal. The sensational tug on your inner feely-wheelies takes precedence over the story. There is dialogue which is bombastic and excessively sentimental. Characters are flat as a pancake. The struggle is against some outside force. Music plays a big part in setting the tone and informing the audience.


And THAT is “Guardians of the Galaxy: Vol 3” (2023). Sprinkle in some visual spectacle and a dash of camp, and you have the James Gunn space soap opera. Not opera - soap opera. It is a giant, velvet drawstring bag on his MCU legacy. The film has lots of shouting. Lots and lots of it. Lots of spittle. Lots and lots of it. Lots of ‘bum-bum-buuu ummmm’ moments. Lots and lots of it. Lots of tears on top of too much makeup. Lots and lots of it. *sigh*


The action setups were game quests with exposition cut scenes between. Many of the jokes were set up - remind you of the set up 20 minutes later - punchline 20 minutes after that. Some of the jokes were set up and then forgot to hit the punchline entirely. There was interpersonal conflict between main characters, but at this stage in their shared history I would have thought these issues would have been worked through long ago.


If there is one thing that I don’t need in a 150-minute movie, it is 20+ minutes of denouement. Holy moly I was ready for it to wrap up. If there is another thing I don’t need, it is a cast party integrated into the movie. It was a spectacle meant to tell me this party was over. It actually told me that my rear-end was ready to stand. I wonder if there are theaters where the audience joined in. I wish I had.


What did I like?

The little bit that Elizabeth Debiki was on screen. They changed her makeup quite a bit, and made her simper and whimper more, but still a great role. There is an exchange with her and the big bad guy that I thought was brilliantly written. This version of Drax was the Drax from the first 10 minutes of the first film - the one who took everything literally. That was good for some laughter in the theater. The new ship they got was cool even if incomprehensibly complicated. The who’s on first / where’s on third kerfuffle before the final fight could have been great, if they would have skipped the drawn own ‘escalating stakes’ that were resolved as soon as they squeezed in some of the umpteen effects shots they paid for.


This movie is fine. If you are looking for a similar tone to the first two installments, you will be a bit disappointed. There are aspects of those films here but that is not what the movie is.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Big Deal on Madonna Street (1958) - it is a good deal better than the remakes

I got around to watching the original 1958 comedy caper film - the one that "Welcome to Collinwood" was pantomiming. "Big Deal on Madonna Street" is hilarious. It is 25 minutes longer than the remake and never once did I feel the need to check my watch. I even paused to go refill my water glass. There will be no problem telling who is who or how the story goes - it is well shot and characters are unique. The story is a simple and fun. Comparing the "BDoMS" and "WtC" - they are identical in terms of characters and scenes. "Big Deal on Madonna Street" street is terrific, and "WtC" is a slog. The biggest difference is seen in the dialog. In "Big Deal" the people just talk, like you might expect people to talk. They are funny, but not odd. The colloquialisms happen, but they aren't hard to see through. In "WtC", they are using a vernacular to make sure you are immersed deep in an Eastern European ethnic nei...
Post a Comment
Read more

Alien: Covenant (2017) - Jason X in a toga

A film that raises big questions—about gods, monsters, and the cost of creation—and then answers them with pseudo-intellectual hooha and a bunch of splatters. It’s poetry for meatballs. A creation myth written by someone who forgot the difference between being mysterious and confounding. There’s a premise here. But it never shows up on screen. The director described the film as having [layers of metaphor].  By minute 20, my response to him would be: “Uh nah bruh … you ain’t that deep.” The characters are emotionally unbalanced idiots. This crew is supposedly trained for deep interstellar colonization. No backup plan. No safety protocols. No sense of hierarchy or mission discipline. They panic, scream, and grieve like they’ve just lost soulmates—they are too young to have known each other or been through anything more severe than a power point presentation. They lack agency. They don’t make decisions—they react, flail, and sometimes avoid shooting themselves or blowing themselves up...
Post a Comment
Read more

"Cocaine Shark" (2023) - Not since "Suburban Sasquatch" ...

Mark Polonia has made almost 80 films since 1985. That is 2+ per year. There was a 3 year pause in his proliferation after his twin brother & production partner John died in 2008. If you consider that he (they) didn’t really start cranking out this entertainment until 2000 - it is more like 3 per year. If he keeps at it as long as they did, he will pass Richard Thorpe and William Beaudine (credited as directing ~180 each). Wowzers. His particular craft is low-low budget. Lower than Roger Corman or Lloyd Kaufman even. Polonia’s production values are limited. You get 2 or 3 sets with plenty of establishing shots to fill the transition. You get special effects and creatures which look like they were assembled by a junior high art class. You will see the same actor playing multiple parts, married couples acting together, and a lot of the same names showing up in multiple different releases. You will see the same people + sets in 2 or 4 of these movies in a room; I assume many of them a...
Post a Comment
Read more