Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 (2023) - Gunn & Co. saved the best for last

♥♥♥♥♥

 

The band of funny-looking characters are assembled before a uniquely colorful galactic backdrop on this poster for James Gunn's Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3

A previously unknown implement in Rocket Raccoon's body, (member of the Guardians of the Galaxy), is threatening to end his life within 48 hours. Star-Lord Peter Quill and the rest of the Guardians will have to go back to Rocket's creator's HQ and steal the component needed to cancel his death.

 

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 is written and directed by great Missouri filmmaker James Gunn (Slither (2006)) as the 3rd and last film in his Guardians trilogy (2014; 2017) based on the Marvel Guardians of the Galaxy comics.

The long and troubled gestation process for this film has undoubtedly contributed to the fireworks of invention, comedy, narrative and emotion that takes place on screen here in a stunningly spirited piece of mega-movie-making. Incredibly, Vol. 3 revolves around Rocket Raccoon's birth as an experiment animal, locked in with three other lovable animal friends, unaware of their hopeless fates as mere experimental ingredients for a hateful, cynical creator. Bradley Cooper (War Dogs (2016)) and Linda Cardellini (Austin Found (2017)) (voicing Lylla the otter with robotic arms) and the ambitious score by John Murphy (Kick-Ass (2010)), - along with the masterful animated visuals, - help make this at first bizarre storyline work wonders. The film grabs you emotionally with this dark deliverance tale, (I admit to (involuntarily) tearing up no less than 3 times during Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3.) 

There's cheeky fun en masse, - Dave Bautista's (Dune (2021)) Drax is still highly amusing, but also Cosmo the space dog and Will Poulter's (Detroit (2017)) turn as the mean but also dumb golden boy Warlock are humorous. No less fun are the design inventions: Aliens, suits, a record number (23,000 across 1,000 actors) of prosthetics and so on alert your eyeballs to most every second of the film, as you simply have to look at these strange, wild (and often very funny) creations of invention. 

Gunn brings back the musical sequences that his films are famous for, sometimes making Vol. 3 seem like a really good-looking, incredible music video. High-points include Beastie Boys' No Sleep till Brooklyn and Florence and the Machine's Dog Days Are Over, which end the film on a very thrilling and movingly positive high note. 

The cast are all back with an excitement and wish to be here in this specific film that is palpable, as they pulled together with multitudes of fans to make Gunn's Vol. 3 happen. Also a major asset is Chukwudi Iwuji's (Dynasty (2019, TV-series)) villain The High Evolutionary, the creator scientist who creates and destroys with equal cool, never satisfied or affectionate about his creations. Iwudi's chilling character is among the strongest villains in comics adaptations and another majorly important leg for the film's success.

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 as created by Gunn, - it wouldn't have been like this with anyone else at the helm, - is a wild and expansive work of creative energy. It's a little much, yes, and it could definitely be argued to be too much. But then the awesome power of another sequence leaves the criticism void, and anyway it is perhaps a point in itself in this series of being member of a team, a band of friends and colleagues, something greater than one's own abilities and faults, - and in this way it is different from all the other much more individually focused superhero movies, - that it has to be too much. But Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 is too much in the greatest way imaginable.

Related posts:

 

James Gunn: 2017 in films - according to Film Excess [UPDATED I]
2017 in films - according to Film Excess 

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (2017) - Gunn returns Marvel's top franchise in fine shape 
2014 in films and TV-series - according to Film Excess [UPDATED II]
2014 in films and TV-series - according to Film Excess [UPDATED I]
Guardians of the Galaxy (2014) - Get giddy with this pretty awesome, the silliest summer blockbuster of the 2014 

Dawn of the Dead (2004) - Snyder's great remake of Romero's classic (writer)

 

 

Watch a trailer for the film here

 

Cost: 250 mil. $

Box office: 723.4 mil. $ and counting

= Box office success (has returned 2.89 times its cost to date)

[Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 premiered 22 April (Disneyland Paris) and runs 150 minutes. Gunn helming a third Guardians film was announced around the release of the 2017 2nd film. But in July 2018, Disney fired Gunn for some old tweets with inauspicious jokes concerning rape and pedophilia. Gunn explained and took responsibility for the tweets but was fired nonetheless. Within days 300,000 fans had signed a petition to hire him back, and the cast of the first two films also came forward in strong support of rehiring him. In October 2018 Disney rehired him without announcing it publicly yet. Gunn in the meantime became involved with several other projects that demanded his attention, meaning that the Guardians film was delayed around 3 years due to the firing. Shooting took place from November 2021 - May 2022 in London, England and in Georgia. The film opened #1 to a 118.4 mil. $ first weekend in North America, where it spent another weekend at #1 and the next 3 still in the top 5 (#2-#3-#3-?), grossing so far 304.7 mil. $ (42.1 % of the total gross to date). The 2nd and 3rd biggest markets are China with 72.3 mil. $ (10 %) and the UK with 36 mil. $ (5 %). IMDb's users have rated the film in at #153 on the site's Top 250 list, sitting between The Thing (1982) and Finding Nemo (2003). Gunn has been hired to head Marvel's competitor DC Comics coming movies and is set to return as director with Superman: Legacy (2025). Chris Pratt (Onward (2020)) returns in Garfield (2024); Cooper in Maestro (2023). Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 is certified fresh at 82 % with a 7.30/10 critical average at Rotten Tomatoes.]

What do you think of Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3?

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013) - Jackson returns with overrated, artificial-looking turkey

♥

 

A hobbit atop a giant mountain of gold and an even bigger dragon's eye behind that hobbit make up this poster for Peter Jackson's The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug

The traveling group of Bilbo the Hobbit, Gandalf the Grey and a bunch of dwarfs continue their adventure and reach the dragon Smaug in its desolate mountain.

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug is written by co-writer/co-producer Fran Walsh (King Kong (2005)), Philippa Boyens (The Lovely Bones (2009)), Guillermo del Toro (Crimson Peak (2015)) and co-writer/co-producer/director, New Zealander master filmmaker Peter Jackson (Bad Taste (1987)). It is the 2nd film in his Hobbit trilogy, adapting The Hobbit (1937) by J.R.R. Tolkien (The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (1954)).

There are no fun scenes in the follow-up to Jackson's so-so The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012). It is a long CG fantasy bereft of charm and credibility: Seeing the ugly dwarfs survive anything and everything and defeat even the strongest orc time and again is neither fun nor thrilling. 

The film also has quite a few digressions, and because it is the middle part of one story, which had been torn into atoms, the story's general direction is often consequently blurred to me. 

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug ends in a long scene at Smaug's (the talking dragon's) place. - Fascinating? No, not really. And the animation in the film is so bizarre that the beautiful locations used do no longer seem like real places. The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug is a horrid film.

 

Related posts:

Peter Jackson: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012) - Jackson's megalomania gives birth to the first third of an enormous fantasy whopper

The Lovely Bones (2009) - Despite qualities, Jackson's metaphysical crime drama is a wasteful jumble 
The Frighteners (1996) - FX-driven ghost comedy madness
Top 10: The best big flop movies reviewed by Film Excess to date
Braindead/Dead Alive (1992) - Jackson's best film ever is a gore classic!   
Bad Taste (1987) or, Peter Jackson's Hungry Aliens in New Zealand 

 

Watch a trailer for the film here

 

Cost: 191 - 250 mil. $ (different reports)

Box office: 959 mil. $

= Big hit (returned 4.34 times its cost)

[The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug premiered 2 December (Los Angeles) and runs 161 minutes. Shooting took place from March 2011 - July 2012 in the UK and in New Zealand, including in Wellington, with reshoots in May 2013. The film opened #1 to a 73.6 mil. $ first weekend in North America, where it spent another 2 weekends at #1 and then one more in the top 5 (#3), grossing 258.3 mil. $ (26.9 % of the total gross). The 2nd and 3rd biggest markets were Germany with 88 mil. $ (9.2 %) and China with 74.7 mil. $ (7.8 %). It was the 4th highest-grossing film of the year worldwide. The film was nominated for 3 Oscars, winning none: It lost Best Sound Mixing to Gravity, Sound Editing also to Gravity, and Visual Effects to Gravity as well. It was also nominated for 2 BAFTAs and a Grammy, among other honors. It sold home video copies for more than 107 mil. $ additionally in North American alone. Jackson returned with the last in the Hobbit trilogy, The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies (2014), also the next appearance for star Martin Freeman (Fargo (2014-15)). Ian McKellen (The Dresser (2015, TV movie)) returned first in Miss in Her Teens (2014). The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug is certified fresh at 74 % with a 6.80/10 critical average at Rotten Tomatoes.]

What do you think of The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug?

Howard the Duck (1986) - Legendary flop is more duck than turkey

♥♥♥

 

The duck called Howard is lounged with a Rolling Stones magazine on this colorful poster for Willard Huyck's Howard the Duck

From Duckworld lands Howard the Duck on earth, where he gets a girlfriend from a rock band and tries to get back home. - But a dark emperor stands in his way!

Howard the Duck is written by co-writer/producer Gloria Katz (American Graffiti (1973)) and co-writer/director Willard Huyck (French Postcards (1979)), based on the Marvel Comics character created by Steve Gerber and Val Mayerik in 1973.

It is a really strange and childish vision, which has become an incredibly thorough but completely demographic-less explosion of color with groundbreaking visual effects, a rad villain (Jeffrey Jones' (Valmont (1989)) character becomes Dark Overlord of the Universe) and monster. There's also an impressive ultralight flight chase sequence and many fine, bizarre moments, even if the duck-related humor is likely to cause a mild headache. Howard the Duck is a unique film to be sure.

Watch a trailer for the film here

Cost: 37 mil. $

Box office: 37.9 mil. $

= Huge flop (returned 1.02 times its cost)

[Howard the Duck was released 1 August (North America) and runs 111 minutes. Executive producer George Lucas was reportedly the one who drew attention to Marvel's duck character and suggested to make the film as a live-action rather than an animation. Shooting took place from November 1985 - March 1986 in California, including in San Francisco. The film opened #3, behind holdover hit Aliens and fellow new release Friday the 13th Part VI: Jason Lives, to a 5 mil. $ first weekend in North America, where it left the top 5 in its 2nd weekend and grossed 16.2 mil. $ (42.7 % of the total gross). Universal production chief Frank Price was reportedly fired over the film's disastrous flop; and Lucas had to sell his company's CGI animation arm to Apple Computer's Steve Jobs, - the company which later became Pixar Animation Studios. The film made in excess of 1 mil. $ on its 2011 DVD release. Huyck never directed again but did write a few screenplays, mostly for TV movies. Lea Thompson (Thin Ice (2011)) returned in Some Kind of Wonderful (1987); Tim Robbins (Dark Waters (2019)) in Saturday Night Live (1986, TV-series) and theatrically in Five Corners (1987); and Jones in The Pest (1997). Howard the Duck is rotten at 13 % with a 3.90/10 critical average at Rotten Tomatoes.]

What do you think of Howard the Duck?

Garfield/Garfield: The Movie (2004) - Davies' comical cat in dull movie debut

♥♥

 

An amusing poster for the movie adaptation of the famous comics feline, Peter Hewitt's Garfield

Lazy house cat Garfield's owner John acquires a dog to make an impression on a girl, but when said dog gets stolen by an amoral TV host, Garfield gets overlooked, and so he decides to get the woof-meister back!

Garfield is written by Joel Cohen and Alec Sokolow (Toy Story (1995), both), based on the long-running same-titled 1978-? comics by Jim Davies (U.S. Acres (1986-89)), and directed by Peter Hewitt (Bill & Ted's Bogus Journey (1991)).

Both script and direction are uninspired, and Breckin Meyer (King of the Hill (2000-10)) and a stiff-as-an-ironing-board Jennifer Love Hewitt (Heartbreakers (2001)) are inauthentic and bereft of charm as the film's main human stars. Bill Murray (Coming Attractions (1978)) voicing the title character is the film's biggest draw.

Garfield is a far-fetched and by-the-numbers exploitative attempt at cashing in on Davies' beloved creation. It will entertain children without giving them anything real in return for their time and attention. It is a fairly vapid flick.

 

 

Watch a trailer for the film here

 

Cost: 50 mil. $

Box office: 203.1 mil. $

= Big hit (returned 4.06 times its cost)

[Garfield premiered 6 June (Los Angeles) and runs 85 minutes. Murray has explained his performance in the film as given due to his mistakenly thought that (master filmmaker) Joel Coen had co-written the script, not Cohen, - but the anecdote is described by Sokolow as "complete horse shit." Shooting took place from March - June 2003 in the UK and in California, including Los Angeles. The film opened #4, behind holdover hit Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, fellow new release The Chronicles of Riddick and holdover hit Shrek 2, to a 21.7 mil. $ first weekend in North America, where it spent one more weekend in the top 5 (#5) and grossed 75.3 mil. $ (37.1 % of the total gross). The 2nd and 3rd biggest markets were 17.4 mil. $ (8.6 %) and Spain with 10.1 mil. $ (5 %). Roger Ebert gave it a 3/4 star review, translating to two notches over this one. Despite Murray's later story about his involvement (given in 2010 in GQ magazine), he returned with Meyer and Love Hewitt for flop sequel Garfield: A Tail of Two Kitties (2006). Hewitt returned with Zoom (2006). Murray returned first in The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou (2004). Garfield is rotten at 14 % with a 3.60/10 critical average at Rotten Tomatoes.]

 

What do you think of Garfield?

A Monster Calls (2016) - Bayona forgets the sugar in overly gloomy adaptation turkey

♥

+ Most Deserved Flop of the Year

A picturesque poster for J.A. Bayona's A Monster Calls that indicates darkness and a pledge for hopefulness

Our hero is a cowed boy, whose mother is gravely ill, who strikes up a fantastic companionship with a living, talking, walking tree that tells him three mysterious stories.

Under the guise of dealing with a serious topic for children and adults alike (acceptance of loss), A Monster Calls serves a humor-bereft, permanently sad plate of so-called family fodder. It is possibly meant to be more inviting because of its tree giant character, who functions as a kind of therapist for the boy.
Lewis MacDougall (Pan (2015)) plays the boy, who not only has an exhausted, dying mother, - another role that Felicity Jones (Albatross (2011)) has mysteriously won, - but also a grandmother (played by Sigourney Weaver (Chappie (2015))) with no warm feelings for him, a father (Toby Kebbell (Kong: Skull Island (2017))) who is a selfish bastard, no friends and in fact a school routine that seems to be made up largely of his getting bullied and beaten.
Whatever this depressing fantasy drama wants to teach us is unclear, - just as the tree's taxing parable-like stories. The darkness conjured up in A Monster Calls isn't suited for adults, youngsters or children. It is written by Patrick Ness (More Than This (2013)), adapting his own same-titled 2011 novel, based on an idea by Siobhan Dowd (A Swift Pure Cry (2006)), and directed by great Spanish filmmaker J.A. Bayona (The Impossible/Lo Imposible (2012)). A Monster Calls may work as a novel, but it absolutely doesn't as a film. Furthermore the previously very impressive filmmaker Bayona isn't felt in this sorry slush, which is a real disappointment.

Related posts:


J.A. Bayona: 2016 in films - according to Film Excess [UPDATED III]

2016 in films - according to Film Excess [UPDATED II]
2016 in films - according to Film Excess [UPDATED I]
2012 in films and TV-series - according to Film Excess [UPDATED III]
2012 in films and TV-series - according to Film Excess [UPDATED II]
2012 in films - according to Film Excess [UPDATED I]
2012 in films - according to Film Excess
Top 10: The best true story movies reviewed by Film Excess to date 
The Impossible/Lo Imposible (2012) - The 2004 tsunami depicted in one of the strongest disaster films ever

Watch a trailer for the film here

Cost: 43 mil. $
Box office: 47.2 mil. $
= Huge flop
[A Monster Calls premiered 9 September (Toronto International Film Festival) and runs 108 minutes. Focus Features bought the book rights in March 2014. Filming took place from September 2014 - ? in England and Spain. The release was pushed from October 2016 to December and January for a more auspicious competition situation. The film opened #40 to a 30k $ first weekend in 4 theaters in North America, where it widened to a gravely underwhelming wide premiere at #12 with 2 mil. $, its peak domestically, where it only played 5 weeks and grossed a paltry 3.7 mil. $ (7.8 %). The only market where the film was a sure hit was in Bayona's native Spain, where it grossed 28.1 mil. $ (59.5 % of the total gross). North America was the 2nd biggest market, and the UK was the 3rd biggest with 3.5 mil. $ (7.4 %). The film won 9 Goya's (Spain's Oscar) out of 12 nominations. Despite the costly flop, Bayona is directing Universal's major tentpole Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom (2018). A Monster Calls is certified fresh at 87 % with a 7.6/10 critical average at Rotten Tomatoes.]

What do you think of A Monster Calls?

War for the Planet of the Apes (2017) - Reeves and Co. astonish with truly spectacular film that finishes the Ape circle

♥♥♥♥♥♥

+ Best Sci-Fi Movie of the Year

Without giving much away, this poster for Matt Reeves' War for the Planet of the Apes indicates the seriousness that marks the film

War for the Planet of the Apes is the 9th movie in the Apes franchise, following the 5 in the original series (1968-73), Tim Burton's unsuccessful reboot of the original film, Planet of the Apes (2001) and the two previous entries in the new 'trilogy', (which may not be a trilogy because more chapters could manifest depending on the performance of War), Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011) and Dawn of the Planet of the Apes. It is written by Mark Bomback (Live Free or Die Hard (2007)) and New-Yorker master co-writer/director Matt Reeves (Cloverfield (2008)), who also directed the previous film, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes.

When ape leader Caesar's wife and oldest son are killed by an evil human colonel and his forces, he leaves his group on a quest for revenge that takes huge tolls and teaches him more about himself and the colonel.

It seems just plain unlikely that War is as good as it is. Following the somewhat disappointing Rise of the Planet of the Apes, I missed Dawn and have yet to watch it. War for the Planet of the Apes is the only Apes sequel or reboot to reach the height of the very first film, which broke new grounds for science fiction in terms of scope and technical elements (effects, costumes, makeup and prosthetics) and showed its possibilities with a thought-provoking - and much copied - story of humans, exploration and apes with deeper, underlying, very timely themes of racism, segregation, democracy, science, religion and man-created (nuclear) doom.
In War for the Planet of the Apes, we meet a perverted, militarized, fascism-resembling army gathered around a colonel who has sacrificed his own humanity in a quest to save the human species. - The type of wrong decision that makes a leader dangerous. Elements of the story are as universal as they are thematically timeless: War and destruction; fight for survival against the stranger, the other kind or race and its progeny vs. peaceful co-existence and a respect for earth and the universe and the sufferings and losses of others.
The powerful narrative is told in a cinematography (by Michael Seresin (Foxes (1980))) with a delicious kind of texture and depth to it, combined with a sound universe and with a great, grand score (by Michael Giacchino (Star Trek Into Darkness (2013))) that seem to have a direct line to the original classic film. War doesn't have a single showy camera tracking or an unnecessary cut; it is fixed, most of the time, on the faces of the apes and humans involved in the scene, and its relaxed pace feels assured in the strength of these faces, lines spoken and the underlying narrative. There is something a bit old-fashioned about this, but in the best way possible: It takes its time to tell its compelling story in its own pace, and again and again scenes astonish and show real depth that would have been lost with any other, faster, flashier, more 'current' approach.
Of course a primary part of the spectacle that this huge film also contains lies in these very faces, especially in the faces of the apes, which in War actually seem to have more humanity and relatable emotion to them than the faces of the humans, who are for the most part unwise brutes. It is impossible to overstate the brilliance of the visual effects accomplishments in War for the Planet of the Apes, especially in creating the faces of the ape characters, which are modeled using acting performances from a talented cast. It is inevitably impossible to ascertain for an outsider, just how much of the greatly affecting performance onscreen is thanks to the actor involved and how much to the team of visual effects wizards who crafted the ape, but Andy Serkis (Wild Bill (2011)), who has made it into his personal specialty to give life to later animated characters in this way, (he was Gollum, King Kong and Captain Haddock, among others), is certainly deeply felt in his truly great lead performance as Caesar, a portrayal that is as dramatic as they come, simply, and deserves great recognition. The other ape performances that go over and beyond what I have ever seen before and truly touch audiences include Steve Zahn (A Perfect Getaway (2009)) as Bad Ape, Judy Greer (Californication (2007-12)) as Cornelia and especially Karin Konoval (The Quality of Life (2008), TV movie) as Maurice. War also has a terrific child performance from Amiah Miller (Lights Out (2016)) as Nova and Woody Harrelson (Play It to the Bone (1999)) a magnetic lump of muscle and mean determination as the Colonel, a character with clear linkage to Marlon Brando's Colonel Kurtz character in Apocalypse Now (1979).
For those familiar with the original film, War ties neat strings that lead up to the universe that meets Charlton Heston's astronaut Taylor in the first film, which must be some 20-25 years after the events of this film.
War for the Planet of the Apes is a rare science-fiction film that is both compelling, breathtaking, deeply moving and meaningful. Furthermore, you are guaranteed to regret it, if you miss seeing this in a cinema, so make sure that you don't!

Related posts:

The Apes franchise: Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011) or, Ape 3.1: Mad Apes!
Battle for the Planet of the Apes (1973) or, The Final Ape!  
Conquest of the Planet of the Apes (1972) or, The Ape Uprising   
Escape from the Planet of the Apes (1971) - The enjoyable if farfetched second Apes sequel
Beneath the Planet of the Apes (1970) - Decent follow-up to the SF milestone  
Matt Reeves: Top 10: Best franchise movies

2017 in films - according to Film Excess [UPDATED I]
2017 in films - according to Film Excess
Cloverfield (2008) or, It Tore Her Head Off!

Watch a trailer for the film here

Cost: 150 mil. $
Box office: 186.4 mil. $ and counting
= Too early to say
[War for the Planet of the Apes premiered 11 July (UK and Ireland) and runs 140 minutes. Bomback and Reeves were given a longer period to write the script for War than they had been given for Dawn, and they saw and were inspired by countless classic movies, including all the Apes films, Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back, Ben-Hur, The Ten Commandments, Bridge on the River Kwai, The Great Escape, The Outlaw Josey Wales, Apocalypse Now and others. Shooting took place in British Columbia, Canada, including Vancouver, from October 2015 - March 2016. The film opened #1 to a 56.2 mil. $ first weekend in North America, significantly lower than Dawn's 72.6 mil. $ debut, and took a sharp 62.9 % drop in its second week, dropping to #4. The film has yet to open in several major markets, including Germany, France, Japan and South Korea, but it has not gotten a Chinese release, a major problem for such an expensive film, which is suffering an underwhelming performance in North America. Reeves and Bomback are already booked to write and direct The Batman, starring Ben Affleck, Jeremy Irons, J.K. Simmons and Joe Manganiello, which should shoot in spring 2018. War for the Planet of the Apes is certified fresh at 94 % with an 8.1/10 critical average at Rotten Tomatoes.]

What do you think of War for the Planet of the Apes?

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (2017) - Gunn returns Marvel's top franchise in fine shape

♥♥♥♥

+ Best Action Movie of the Year

A stuffed, eye-popping, deliciously colorful poster for James Gunn's Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2

Peter 'Star-Lord' Quill leads the Guardians in space, as they are saved by a mysterious stranger with tremendous powers, who just might be Quill's mysterious biological father...

The sequel to crowd-pleasing hit Guardians of the Galaxy (2014) sees its writer-director James Gunn (Slither (2006)) return with a new vision and story, set in the same universe of hijinks and colorful, witty glee as the first one. Gunn did not write this based on any single Guardians comic book, - but the film has a staggering 10 (!) additional character writing credits listed, (which I won't deign to award more space here.)
Chris Pratt (Her (2013)) is still an ideal Quill, who goes through a larger dramatic arc here, as he searches out his father and his feelings about him versus stepfather Yondu. Michael Rooker (Undisputed (2002)) is back as the flawed, ostracized Yondu, who seeks redemption, and he is great in the part. SPOILER Kurt Russell (The Barefoot Executive (1971)) turns out to be Quill's biological father, a God with his own planet by the name of Ego, who unsurprisingly turns out to be less benign than the first shots of him leads us to believe, (scenes which also implicitly poke fun at Russell's own voluminous hairdo in the 1980s.)
Vol. 2 has many storylines, and it may not be clear all the time, which is the main one, but much of this also comes from its ambition to further our connection with each of the Guardian characters. The first film was similar in this, which is also why you will likely have a hard time recounting the plot of the film today, (if you haven't rewatched it recently.) - The Guardians movies seem to be more about the fun had along the way than the actual stories involved. - Which is fine, especially because they are fun and dazzling. The use of 3D makes sense here, and the film makes use of music in untraditional ways, which heightens the enjoyment. (Only I found that Pratt sometimes seems to be pushed together when in full character in the screen's middle, making him appear at those times disproportional and stocky.)
Zoe Saldana (Blackout (2007)) is still a cool fan-boy fantasy as Gamora; Dave Bautista (Spectre (2015)) is one of my favorite parts of the film and gets to laugh loudly several times, which is for some reason hugely enjoyable. Vin Diesel (Strays (1997)) returns for another one of the easiest top billings perhaps in cinema history, voicing now adorable Baby Groot's "I am Groot" several times, (and to be fair, this time in no less than 16 languages, for different major markets, I read.) The film also has Sylvester Stallone (Rocky V (1990)) in a fairly small part that seems likely to build in the next movie; Pom Klementieff (Borderline (2011)) is funny as Mantis, who shares some good scenes with Drax, and Elizabeth Debicki (The Night Manager (2016), miniseries) is an icy and comic villain in all-gold.
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 is light and breezy good entertainment that announces the coming of the summer blockbuster season with a joyous roar. The visuals and CGI is top notch, but the CGI is also so ubiquitous that we are not as awed as we otherwise might have been by its most impressive aspects. Somehow the overall feeling isn't as real as in the first film and there are significantly fewer wow-moments. It is also a bit long and definitely not made with anything resembling a less-is-more attitude. Instead it is more of all the stuff Gunn served so appealingly and enthusiastically in the first film.
And, luckily, that still seems to go over very well.

Related posts:

2017 in films - according to Film Excess [UPDATED I]
2017 in films - according to Film Excess
2014 in films and TV-series - according to Film Excess [UPDATED II]
2014 in films and TV-series - according to Film Excess [UPDATED I]
Guardians of the Galaxy (2014) - Get giddy with this pretty awesome, the silliest summer blockbuster of the 2014

Watch an official trailer for the film here

Cost: 200 mil. $
Box office: 431.5 mil. $ and counting
= Too early to say
[Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 premiered 19 April (LA) and runs 136 minutes. Shooting took place in and around the Pinewood Atlanta Studios in Atlanta, Georgia from February - June 2016 with reshoots in November 2016. It is the first film to be shot with an 8K resolution camera, the Red Weapon 8K. More sets were created for the shoot than for the first film. If the above-stated cost is accurate, which it may not be, it is down 13.9 % from the ballooned 232.3 mil. $ budget of the first film. Vol. 2 has opened on 400 IMAX screens in China as part of its release in the country, the highest number of such screens ever for a release. It opened to a stellar 146.5 mil. $ first weekend in North America (up 55 % from the first film's 94.3 mil. $), and has already become the 6th highest grossing film of the year. Gunn is already announced to be coming back for a third Guardians movie. Vol. 2 has already gained traction onto IMDb's user-generated Top 250: It sits at #211, between The Princess Bride (1987) and Star Wars: The Force Awakens (2015). Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 is certified fresh at 81 % with a 7.1 critical average at Rotten Tomatoes.]

What do you think of Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2?