Guardians of the Galaxy 2

  • Thread starter Thread starter Della
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Della

Guest
My dh and I saw a matinee showing of GOTG2 yesterday. Along with the ubiquitous chase scenes and shoot-outs, it raised some good questions about divinity–what it is and what it should be.

SPOILER ALERT!!!

Like the Q, Quill’s father is a “god”–a “celestial” as he calls himself. He was careful to say that it meant “small ‘g’ god,” which I thought a good point to make. As I believe, a powerful being might pose as God, but being God is another matter entirely.

Anyway, what are your thoughts about the film–about the divinity issue or anything else? 🙂
 
I’m not familiar with any of the Marvel characters apart from the films. 😊 The only superhero comics I ever read was Superman, which probably dates me. 😛

Most other-media-to-film adaptations aren’t so much adaptations as reinventions, in my experience. Very few remain faithful to the original author’s ideas/intentions. 🤷
 
Della said:
My dh and I saw a matinee showing of GOTG2 yesterday. Along with the ubiquitous chase scenes and shoot-outs, it raised some good questions about divinity–what it is and what it should be.

SPOILER ALERT!!!

Like the Q, Quill’s father is a “god”–a “celestial” as he calls himself. He was careful to say that it meant “small ‘g’ god,” which I thought a good point to make. As I believe, a powerful being might pose as God, but being God is another matter entirely.

Anyway, what are your thoughts about the film–about the divinity issue or anything else? 🙂
Click to expand...
I know that in the case of Thor and the other Asgardians, the Marvel writers and editors established at some point that they aren’t really gods in the sense of supernatural beings, but rather beings that are perceived to be gods by virtue of their powers which are beyond mere mortals’ comprehension (yet can ultimately be explained by science if it’s sufficiently advanced). So the Marvel universe has established that non-supernatural god-like beings do exist, and I would assume these ‘Celestials’ would be more of the same.
 
tomarin said:
I know that in the case of Thor and the other Asgardians, the Marvel writers and editors established at some point that they aren’t really gods in the sense of supernatural beings, but rather beings that are perceived to be gods by virtue of their powers which are beyond mere mortals’ comprehension (yet can ultimately be explained by science if it’s sufficiently advanced). So the Marvel universe has established that non-supernatural god-like beings do exist, and I would assume these ‘Celestials’ would be more of the same.
Click to expand...
I got the impression that even Ego knew he wasn’t a god, but merely a very powerful being–much more powerful than other sentient life in the galaxy. He certainly didn’t have the attributes of the real God, except he thought he ought have the right to remake the galaxy as he saw fit. Bad idea, bad person.
 
I’m glad you enjoyed it, and for what ever reason felt good about the little ‘g’ god reference.

I don’t like Marvel. I think it’s quite possibly occult related in ways that other fictional ‘Universes’ aren’t.
 
The character in question is actually Ego the Living Planet, though it creates a Kurt Russell-shaped avatar to make babies with (no, really). Ego does call himself a Celestial, though.

The first Guardians movie featured a brief, silent shot of a “proper” Kirby Celestial during an explanation of the history of the Infinity Stones, as well as a setting (“Knowhere,” the Collector’s base of operations) that was built into the titanic skull of another, dead Celestial.

The movies have also featured an Elder of the Universe (the aforementioned Collector) and will soon feature another (the Grandmaster), though the only hint that they are ancient cosmic entities is that the Collector survived an explosion that took out a goodly portion of his collection.

The movies are actually doing pretty well in portraying Kirby-style visuals (and a Ditko-style Dark Dimension in Doctor Strange). I’ve enjoyed all of them so far, though to varying degrees.
 
Della said:
My dh and I saw a matinee showing of GOTG2 yesterday. Along with the ubiquitous chase scenes and shoot-outs, it raised some good questions about divinity–what it is and what it should be.

SPOILER ALERT!!!

Like the Q, Quill’s father is a “god”–a “celestial” as he calls himself. He was careful to say that it meant “small ‘g’ god,” which I thought a good point to make. As I believe, a powerful being might pose as God, but being God is another matter entirely.

Anyway, what are your thoughts about the film–about the divinity issue or anything else? 🙂
Click to expand...
I saw the movie on opening night I thought it was good I thought the first one was better but that’s usually the case with sequels. I mean even if he was a god he certainly acted much more like a demon. I have to say in case people haven’t seen the movie yet “I’m Mary Poppins, y’all!”
 
I enjoyed it though didn’t think it was as good as the first. I was a little annoyed by the Ego character. Frankly having seen a lot of scifi in my time that plot (super being wanting to remake the universe and kill everyone) has been done to death in my opinion but hey it’s a movie that never takes itself too seriously. I particularly enjoyed the soverns (gold people). I think doctor strange was a better movie and Winter Soldier is the best. I also enjoy the Thor movies especially the Loki character. The last Avengers movie wasn’t the same without a funny cameo with him. I’m really looking forward to seeing what they did with Wonder Woman (not Marvel but DC I think). Also the promos for Thor Ragnorock (next sequel) look good. One movie I thought was good but the didn’t get much notice was Ghost in the Shell but that was from Anime originally and not everyone gets Anime. Not me tipically but it was different yet entertaining.
 
I wonder why they never bothered to put the Submariner in a movie of his own. He’s an interesting anti-hero, for sure. And a vestige from the Golden Age of Super Heroes, when Marvel was Timely Comics.
 
In the first Guardians of the Galaxy, it’s mentioned that Knowhere is actually the head of an ancient Celestial.

So yeah, they introduced Celestials in the last movie.
 
adamhovey1988 said:
I saw the movie on opening night I thought it was good I thought the first one was better but that’s usually the case with sequels. I mean even if he was a god he certainly acted much more like a demon. I have to say in case people haven’t seen the movie yet “I’m Mary Poppins, y’all!”
Click to expand...
LOL - I agree with you. And I love PacMan!
 
Next you’ll be saying my name needs mucking about with. 😉 Just kidding.
 
That’s true that he’s not A list. I should just be happy they made a ‘Doctor Strange’ film (and it was pretty good for a superhero movie).
 
That makes me think of “Marvel Girl” which was the superhero alias of Jean Gray in the original X-Men, created by Stan Lee. It probably seemed like a cool name at the time, but boy does it sound silly today. When the comic was re-invented by Chris Claremont, he never used that name for her, as best I remember. They certainly never used it in the movie adaptions.

Although to be fair to Stan Lee, the staying power of his characters (and their names) is remarkable - the names of The Hulk, X-Men, Spider-Man, Iron Man, Doctor Strange etc. have never dated. But, he did have his off-moments.
 
tomarin said:
I wonder why they never bothered to put the Submariner in a movie of his own. He’s an interesting anti-hero, for sure. And a vestige from the Golden Age of Super Heroes, when Marvel was Timely Comics.
Click to expand...
From what I have read, Namor is one of those characters that Marvel licensed out, and the ownership situation with him is spread out over multiple studios and sufficiently confusing that he’ll probably never get a movie.

DC’s movie version of Aquaman seems to be going for a more Namor-plus-90s-Aquaman look and attitude, though, so we have that to look forward to.
 
Ah yes, I had forgotten about Len Wein. I think he just wrote one issue of the new X-Men, or a few issues, before Claremont took over.

Personally I never understood why Stan Lee’s Uncanny X-Men wasn’t successful. I have read some of the early issues and I thought it compared favorably with the early Hulk, Avengers etc.

About Claremont, yeah he was a really gifted writer but he lacked a clear overall vision for the comic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top