city burials

I haven't seen a lot of the Marvel Studios films (just Guardians of the Galaxy and Iron Man, really), but even if it wasn't the best I think Guardians of the Galaxy was definitely something special. It was as thrilling as you'd expect any action movie to be, but it was also a tremendously silly concept from the start and it relished in that silliness. And I think that's a great thing.

 

In some movies, writers will avoid certain characters and concepts entirely because they're worried that their lighthearted silliness will make it harder for people to take the rest of the movie seriously (the best example I can think of off the top of my head is Tom Bombadil in The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, who didn't appear at all in the movie). Even superhero movies will typically attempt to present their characters very seriously and either omit or reinvent characters who are silly or ridiculous on a conceptual level. So it's great to see a movie that can successfully jump from suspenseful action to playful silliness and back to suspenseful action with reckless abandon.

I wonder if this is what happened with Frozen, too. I watched Frozen ages after it came out, after hearing how amazing it was over and over, and came out feeling it was very overrated. Which seems to be what people think of GotG nowadays,  (I went to see like the day after it came out, and loved it) Hype can be negative,I suppose.

I went to see Frozen because I'm a sucker for Hans Christian Andersen and remakes of classic tales and how storytelling transforms said stories over time. These and various other factors played a huge role in how much I enjoyed the movie.

 

I do not care for superhero films, nor do I really care about comic books. I went in because it was a hyped movie, and I kinda didn't get it. It was okay and I liked it, but I felt kinda jipped because it had giant celestial beings and world destroyers and they merely made a cameo in the entire movie and the plot was only about the inferior humanoid meatlings. I mean, they mentioned gross aliens with tentacles, but the coolest aliens to look at were avatars, an anthro raccoon and a tree. What's up with that? (Biggest gripe with the movie, and that's not a bad one, really).

Hype can be negative,I suppose.

 

I honestly don't think this is true (at least, in regards to a film's quality). It's been my own experience that no amount of hype will affect my viewing and personal judgement of a movie. I imagine lots of other people are the same way, and that had the film not been hyped you're overall opinion of the film would have remained the same.

 

At least, I think that's a sensible thing to say. After all something's 'hype' is pretty much just an indicator of how many people are interested in, or enjoy, a particular thing. And if something has a large following you are going to naturally wonder if you'll like it to. But it doesn't mean you will, and no amount of public interest will change if you like something or not.

 

I don't know if any of that even made sense. I hope it did.

Well, it's more that how much you enjoy something is related to what you expectations are going in. For this reason, it's best to not have any expectations, generally. If you see a lot of people saying that something is the best movie ever, or something like that, it is possible that it will set up expectations, though--often, ones that it'll be hard to meet.

 

It's hard to say whether the experience is the same with hype or without, since there's not really any way of watching a movie in both ways. Either you let yourself be affected by hype, or you don't, and in either case there's no easy way of knowing how things would have been otherwise.

Eh, I kinda think personal preference plays more of a role than expectations. People built up Frozen way more than they should have, and even I admit it wasn't as grand as everyone made it out to be. I still loved it, and that's because it was a fantabulous experience with Idena Freaking Menzel. (I have seen it at least seven times by now).

 

As I stated earlier, the reason I didn't care as much for Guardians of the Galaxy is because I'm really not that into Marvel (or DC for that matter), nor do I really like superhero movies. Honestly anyone can write a huge report with an objective view on why something is good and how everyone should love it, but honestly that basis lies its roots in opinion and there are lots of people with different tastes out there. The majority of movie goers seemed to love this movie. In this case I just wasn't one of them because it wasn't my thing. (It was still fun, though).

I liked the Guardians, but then again, I like Star Trek as well, so I have a preference for that sort of genre. I don't consider it in league with the other Marvel films like Captain America: The Winter Solider (less comedy, more heart) or Iron Man (less heart, more down-to-earth and gritty), because it's not technically in the superhero genre. It's a space opera like Trek.   

 

I saw Frozen, and I thought it was okay, but I don't like that genre as much, so it didn't strike me as good as Guardians. It doesn't strike me as unusual that those preferences could be reversed though.   

THANK YOU. I thought it was overhyped. It was entertaining, a 12-year-old's dream, but was too set on making jokes to ever properly let you connect with the characters. Plus it was somehow both repetitive and inconsistent (for example, somehow the chick had almost as many taking-it-literal jokes as the guy who was SUPPOSED to, and for some reason he obviously abandoned that role at some point because people were making metaphors and idioms left and right and he didn't seem to notice). It was great for what it was trying to do, but I think back at the things I saw people saying before I went to see it, like "best Marvel movie" and "nearly perfect" and "possible best movie ever" and I just... no. No it isn't.

 

It was more or less what I would've expected from it, given the trailers. Funny, memorable, but not incredible.