[ SECRET POST #2779 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2779 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.







Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 047 secrets from Secret Submission Post #397.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

It's not a children's movie. It's a sci-fi action adventure movie.

[kallanda_lee]

Also he's not really silly, or no more sillier than the rest.

[herpymcderp]

Well that's my point. Everything is silly, because they knew that a large part of the audience was going to be children.

[insanenoodlyguy]

You're a child! And so is your mom!

[herpymcderp]

Then that makes you a pedophile.

spoilers? ish

[herpymcderp]

It's fully a kid's movie. Not an onscreen kiss to be seen, funny moments that involve dancing plants, no one dies graphically (most of the enemies are dealt with by being knocked out), curse words are kept to an absolute minimum, happy ending is heaped on way more than necessary...

They knew what they were doing making it PG-13. They knew the animated tree man and talking raccoon would be a draw for younger audiences. It's absolutely something meant for children to be able to watch it, ergo, kid's movie.

Re: spoilers? ish

[(Anonymous)]

kid's movie =/= movie that's appropriate for kids

Re: spoilers? ish

[herpymcderp]

Are you a toy collector?

Re: spoilers? ish

[(Anonymous)]

no

i have no qualms with liking children's media if i like it, i just don't think GotG was. children were the secondary audience, not the primary audience. ergo, it was not a children's movie. that's my standard anyway. but fair enough if you disagree.

Re: spoilers? ish

[morieris]

And it has a shit load of toys - essentially, it DOES double as a kid's movie, but that isn't a problem or anything.

Re: spoilers? ish

[herpymcderp]

I never meant to imply it was. I enjoyed it quite a bit despite (because of?) the inherent silliness. I'm not ashamed to enjoy things that were designed with kids in mind.

Re: spoilers? ish

[(Anonymous)]

Uhhh no, all of those elements does not make it a kids movie. Maybe kids can watch it without being emotionally scarred, but you are very silly if you think that was the target audience.

(and at what point are most of the enemies dealt with by being knocked out? seems like everyone is killed...)

Re: spoilers? ish

[(Anonymous)]

Seriously, Groot stabs soldiers through the stomach and whips them back and forth against walls. That's not death by being knocked out, that's death from being impaled.

Re: spoilers? ish

[herpymcderp]

That happens once or twice. The rest of the time people are punched (no weapons) or death happens off screen. There is no visible blood or gore.

I mean, hence the rating. It's PG-13 because 13 year olds are expected to be able to watch the thing without parents around, and kids younger than that can be admitted at a parent's discretion.

Beyond just the general tone of the movie, the fact that toy lines are now being announced leads me to believe that children below age 13 were very much part of the target demographic.

Re: spoilers? ish

[(Anonymous)]

It's PG13, dude. sure, some kids will get in and probably enjoy it, but if kids were the target audience, they would've made it PG. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles is PG, and a kids movie. Not Guardians.

I mean, what exactly do you qualify as kids? and what demographic do you think is making the movie a commercial success?

Re: spoilers? ish

[herpymcderp]

The fact that you can take your kids to see it is what's making it a commercial success.

I'm not saying they were the primary target audience, but seriously? If someone thinks that movie wasn't intended to be viewed by children, I'd question how many children's movies they've actually consumed.

I qualify anyone under age 14 as a kid, I do lump pre-teens into the kid category for a couple of reasons, but that's not an argument I really want to have.

Re: spoilers? ish

[otakugal15]

Yet the Racoon is the one who has hell of a mouth on him, not to mention Peter Quill himself ("you said yourself, bitch. we're the guardians of the galaxy" not exactly a line you want 9 year-olds to say.). Not exactly a kids movie when it's rated PG-13.

Re: spoilers? ish

[mekkio]

Not to mention it can be pretty violent. Not in the Hannibal way but that one scene with Youndu where we finally see his whistle arrow in action left me going, "Whoa." That wasn't exactly a kid friendly scene.

Re: spoilers? ish

[herpymcderp]

Hahaha depends on how you parent. My 2 year old nephew already knows a half dozen "bad" words (my family all talks like sailors, we've all slipped up a dozen times around him).

Which was my earlier point, really. Everything in that movie is pretty well not going to traumatize a child, hence the rating. It's up to parental discretion as to whether or not you want to expose your kids to mild violence or the occasional curse word.

Re: spoilers? ish

[mekkio]

sex =/= adult film.

I am tired of people thinking that if a movie isn't jammed packed with violence, sex and cursing, it's an automatic kids' movie. No, it's a movie for everyone to enjoy. There's a time and place for everything but not every movie needs those three things to be enjoyed by adults.

Re: spoilers? ish

[herpymcderp]

Yeah, sure, I would agree. But that's pretty much the prevailing wisdom with censorship in the modern age (no sex, no explicit violence, no drug abuse? it's okay for kids) and I have to take averages into account when I make a general claim, right? I can't really work with someone's individual morality or parenting style unless I'm given specifics.

I can't say I strongly agree or disagree with those rules or anyone's rules regarding what a child should be allowed to consume, either. The reality is that the majority of our entertainment is based on ...well, pretty base, horrible acts. Murder, mainly. Whether it's part of our nurture or part of our nature is a debate for sociologists, of which I am not one.

I would really argue that the tone of the movie (lighthearted, silly, not serious) is what makes it a kid's movie more than anything else.

Re: spoilers? ish

[(Anonymous)]

Having things that appeal to children doesn't make it a movie FOR children. It makes it an all-round film with stuff that appeals to kids.

Also, did you somehow miss the blacklight joke? Jesus christ.

Y'know what other film doesn't have a kiss? Pacific Rim. That film's a 12. It's probably less people-violent than GotG.

Re: spoilers? ish

[herpymcderp]

Yeah, but you know who wouldn't get that black light joke? A kid.

Pacific Rim is also not less violent, but it is more graphically violent. Blood, torn limbs, screaming, an atmosphere of general fear and mayhem... these are things that GotG did not have but PR had in spades.

The tone of GotG (ie. lighthearted, not explicit, inherently silly) is what makes it a movie that I feel was designed with a younger audience in mind. It's not necessarily simply the parts which encompass it, but the way they're handled.

Re: spoilers? ish

[(Anonymous)]

No one dies graphically? I don't think we watched the same movie.

Re: spoilers? ish

[montage]

lmao it's rated M though?