Rocket, who survived animal experimentation and became a member of the Guardians, is seriously injured. His friends try to treat him, but a device inside his body prevents the healing. The friends set out to find the decryption key to disable the device.
I read about the conflict in “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3” in this frustrating situation. Rocket is injured and cannot receive the treatment that could save him because the control mechanisms implanted by the person who modified him remain within his body.
Heroes are ready to save the universe. This time, it is for the sake of one friend. However, this small endeavor felt more urgent than a large-scale space war. The friends do not care how capable the rocket is. They do not give up, even if there is a device that prevents treatment. Because there is a friend who needs to be saved, they are searching for a way. The important question here is not whether they can defeat the enemy. It is whether they can cherish those they want to save, without changing them to their own will. The person who wants to make life better and those who want to save their current friend are facing off. From the very beginning, it is clear who is truly on the side of the rocket. The film relentlessly emphasizes this difference, contrasting the rocket’s past with the friends’ present.
I like this movie because it does not abandon a friend even when they cannot prove their worth.
Rocket was seriously injured. His friends are trying to treat him. However, an internal mechanism is preventing the treatment. To save him, they must first find the password.
The rocket was a companion that traveled through space with the Guardians. Now, the friends are searching for the code so that he can get back on his feet.
I believe this frustrating beginning perfectly illustrates the conflict in this film. The control exerted by the person who created the rocket remains within him even as he is dying. His friends attempt to break through that control in order to save him.
I think this movie is good because it not only portrays the rocket with sympathy, but also emphasizes that all living beings should be saved, regardless of whether they have proven their usefulness.
There is no qualification process for saving a friend
In this film, it is not only the wound that prevents the rocket’s healing. The idea that the one who creates life should also determine its purpose is what stands in the way.
The rocket is a character who survived animal experimentation and became a member of the Guardians. The modifications made to him by the scientist, High Evolusionary, remain as implants within his body. Even after escaping the laboratory, he has not fully regained control of his own body.
Therefore, the search for the decryption key for the treatment is not simply an excuse for an adventure. The friends must release the controls that are controlling Rocket’s body. It is not enough to simply have the desire to save someone; that desire must be translated into concrete action.
Heroes who traverse the universe look for a code to save a friend. Is it a hospital, or a login screen?
Although the process is absurd, the underlying thought is horrifying. The person who modified the body have the authority to prevent treatment, while the person who is actually suffering does not. In this situation, the rights of the creator of the modification take precedence over the right of the individual to live.
I like that the friends don’t acknowledge that authority. Instead of waiting for permission or explaining the value of Rocket, they go looking for the code. Their attitude is: if someone can be saved, they will first open a way to save them.
The character, Rocket, is usually a talented and capable individual, skilled in combat. However, he is currently incapacitated and unable to assist his friends in their mission. The film places him in a crucial position within the story precisely because of this.
There is no need to calculate that he must be saved because he can become active again. My friends do not demand that Rocket prove his worth. I found this natural progression particularly welcome in this film.
The scientist attempts to achieve the desired outcome while manipulating life. The Guardians aim to heal their injured friend, hoping for their friend’s continued survival. Both groups interact with living beings, but their intentions are completely opposite.
Here, the film focuses not on the feeling that it is a shame to lose a great hero. It is about the feeling of not abandoning a friend who is in a state where nothing can be done to help them. What Rocket needs is not an opportunity to explain his usefulness, but an opportunity to receive treatment.
However, simply saying the right things does not automatically make a film compelling. So, how does the film make us understand why the characters need to save Rocket?
What Rocket needs is not a display of skill, but a friend
This film alternates between the present-day rescue and a friendship from the past. As a result, I found myself rooting not for Rocket’s ability, but for the time he would spend living with his friends.
Currently, the colleagues are trying to find the password to disable the device that is preventing treatment. In the past, a young rocket dreamed of going to a new world with its laboratory friends. On one side, people are working to save their friend, while on the other side, people are waiting for the day their friend will be able to live.
As these two stories intertwine, the significance of the rescue operation changes. The code is not the key to completing the mission, but rather a means to give Rocket back his tomorrow. It allows the audience to understand the friends’ urgency without lengthy explanations.
The animals in the laboratory are modified and live together. However, even the hopes they share with one another do not belong to the scientists. They dream of a day when they will live together outside the laboratory, a day that may or may not come with the success of the experiments.
In that moment, I felt a pang of anxiety. I was less concerned about how impressive the rocket was, and more worried about how much time Rocket had left to spend with those friends. The movie didn’t captivate me because of its technical prowess, but because of the time I was spending with them.
The High Evolutionary is a scientist who modifies animals in an attempt to create perfect life forms. To them, these animals are merely experimental subjects used to achieve their goals. In contrast, the film focuses on the enduring bonds of friendship and the hopes that cannot be quantified or recorded in any result sheet.
The important thing here is not to prove that the rocket is special. There is a desire to live together with a friend, even if they are not as clever as the rocket. The film does not treat this feeling lightly, compared to the rocket’s abilities.
Therefore, the flashback scenes do not merely explain the secret of birth; they also expand the scope of life that we hope to save. Before choosing who will help the team, we see that each person has a day to live.
In the later hallway combat, I felt the same strength. It was a scene where several teammates worked together to clear a path. Rather than focusing on how strong one individual is, moving forward together suits this team.
The friends who dreamed of a life outside the laboratory together, and the colleagues who are now paving the way, overlap in my thoughts. Although the scale of the conflict may differ, the feeling of not leaving anyone behind remains the same. Therefore, will the film also respect the lives of those who came to save the rocket, according to the same standard?
Quill’s desperation and Gamora’s rejection are both respected
This team becomes better friends when they don’t force each other into specific roles. Pratt reveals Quill’s fear of losing a friend. Saldana maintains a distance from Gamora, despite Quill’s expectations.
Chris Pratt plays Peter Quill, the leader of the Guardians. While searching for the code to save Rocket, Pratt emphasizes Quill’s urgency over his usual swagger. When his friend’s life is at stake, he abandons any pretense of being cool.
At this time, I came to like Quill more as a person than as a leader. It wasn’t because Rocket was needed in combat again, but because Quill didn’t want to lose him. Pratt seized the objective of the rescue operation with that urgency.
On the other hand, Gamora, played by Zoe Saldana, does not fulfill Quill’s wishes. This Gamora, who comes from a different timeline, has no memories of having a romantic relationship with Quill. Saldana does not display any affection towards Quill when interacting with him.
Quill, just because it is your memory, Gamora is not obliged to remember it too.
Her decisiveness is admirable. While Gamora assists with the rocket rescue, there is no reason to repay that help with a romantic relationship with Quill. Saldana does not mix comrades in arms with romantic partners.
It is also important to note the relationship between this and the story of the rocket. The one who created the rocket seeks to transform life into the form they desire. Quill, too, must distinguish between the image he desires and the person before him if he wants to cherish Gamora.
Just because Gamora is helping Rocket does not mean she has to accept Quill’s expectations. The film portrays a person holding both cooperative feelings and feelings of rejection simultaneously. Rescuing someone does not mean making decisions on their behalf.
Bradley Cooper voices the rocket, supporting the scenes in which Rocket dreams of a future with his laboratory friends. The first thing that comes across in his voice is not exceptional talent, but a desire to live together. Here, I longed for the time I could enjoy more than what the rocket could accomplish.
Karen Gillan, who plays Nebula, cares for the rescued children and finds a place outside the conflict. However, the regret that she could not further develop this aspect of her character is more attributable to the script than to the actress herself.
Simply hearing about a character’s desires is often enough to evoke feelings. However, in order to emphasize the importance of life, did the film really need to show so much suffering?
The criticism that it is painful is valid, but the claim that it merely peddles suffering is wrong
I agree with the criticism that it is difficult to watch the suffering of the animals. However, I do not agree with the statement that this film only uses suffering to elicit tears.
The animals in the laboratory have already been modified. High Evolution treats their bodies as expendable materials, inflicting injuries on them and discarding them if the desired results are not achieved. For these animals, even the experience of pain is not a reason to protect themselves.
The film does not gloss over the harsh treatment. It juxtaposes the animals, who look forward to a future of coexistence, with the scientist, who does not even consider such a possibility. Once you understand the animals’ desire to live together, the scientist’s coldness becomes even more difficult to bear.
I believe there are times when this level of intensity exceeds what is absolutely necessary. This is because, even after accepting the fact that these lives are precious, one must still endure further suffering. What moves the heart and what exhausts the heart are different things.
Especially if you were expecting lighthearted space adventures, this laboratory setting will be a significant burden. It is even more so for audiences sensitive to depictions of animal abuse. This is not a film that can be enjoyed casually simply because it features cute companions.
It is not necessarily true that reducing the suffering depicted in a film automatically makes it a better film. This is because it is important to show whose bodies are being sacrificed in the pursuit of the “perfection” that the scientist speaks of. However, there is no need to continue to burden the audience with the same weight of knowledge if they already understand this fact.
The reason I ultimately support this film lies in its subsequent actions. The past is not closed off with an explanation that portrays rockets as pitiful. The current rescue operation challenges the judgment of a scientist who decides who is worthy of being saved.
“Okja” also captures the pain that animals endure and the friendship that arises in opposition to it. The criteria I use when watching both films are the same: it’s not just about loving animals, but about what we are willing to do for their lives.
This film does not end simply with the fact that the audience cried. It shows friends who continue to move forward even while carrying sadness. Understanding someone’s pain is not just about looking at them; it is about helping them to live.
I will not specify the extent of the help offered. However, the film does not confine the feelings of concern for a single person to a limited space. It also does not impose the condition of only saving those who have proven their abilities.
However, why does this otherwise powerful film sometimes stray from the main narrative while focusing on other characters when it concentrates on saving lives?
One life is enough, but it carries too many characters
A story already urgent enough with Rocket alone also makes room for Adam Warlock. The strength of the narrative, which emphasizes the importance of caring for every life, is mixed with the burden of having to address every character without omission.
Adam Warlock is the individual who attacks Knowhere, the home of the Guardians of the Galaxy. His actions lead to a rescue operation when he seriously injures Rocket. He is assigned a clear task at the beginning, and he exerts a significant influence on the unfolding events.
The problem lies in what comes next. While Rocket’s past and the present rescue are intrinsically linked, Adam’s story doesn’t quite connect as strongly. Every time the focus shifts to Adam, I find myself wanting to return to Rocket.
It does not mean that Adam does not deserve to live. Valuing all life and giving time to all individuals are different things. A film does not necessarily have to address the latter just because it aims to convey the former.
It tries to cover life in the universe, the team’s history, and even the next character. It’s a heavy burden.
In my view, this burden stems from the fact that it is the final installment in the series. While bringing to a close a team that has been together for a long time, it must have been difficult to leave behind characters introduced earlier. However, the fact that there are so many farewells does not make up for the story’s lack of focus.
When placed side-by-side with “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2,” the shortcomings become even more apparent. Both films explore the question of whether those who have given someone life have the right to determine their worth. However, in this case, the question is directly linked to Rocket’s body and his medical condition.
While the second installment focused on the relationship with the father, the third installment attempts to break free from the judgment of the one who created it. Is it permissible to sacrifice a life simply because a perfect result was not achieved? Even considering Rocket’s past and the rescue of his friends, this question is sharp enough.
I wanted the film to linger longer on that narrow and profound struggle. Each time Adam appears, it is not necessarily any clearer why the rocket needs to be saved. Sometimes, all that comes to mind is simply that there is a character left to deal with next.
It’s not that the 150 minutes is too long, but rather that it momentarily deviates from the most crucial story, which is a shame. However, even after considering this weight and the tangential elements, it still retains the power to fundamentally change the reasons for saving a life.
I like friends who reach out without asking for anything in return
I like this movie because it doesn’t stop at simply portraying the rocket as pitiful. It shows the pain, and then motivates the friends to help the creature survive. The reason to help isn’t about exceptional ability or future reciprocation.
Because he is alive. The film places that very reason at the heart of a grand space adventure. Even when the rocket can do nothing, his friends do not give up on him.
The high score was awarded because the film effectively weaves together Rocket’s past and the present-day rescue, demonstrating this faith through action. However, the depiction of unnecessarily prolonged suffering and the loose pacing of Adam Warlock resulted in a deduction.
If you’re curious about how people who have spent a long time together come to treat one another, these 150 minutes will not be wasted. Even more so if you remember Rocket only as a colleague who was good at making jokes. This time, you’ll encounter the life he has lived behind those jokes.
On the other hand, if you are looking for a lighthearted space comedy, it is best to avoid this film. It is also difficult to recommend it as a suitable adventure for young children. If you are sensitive to depictions of animal abuse, you should choose this film with particular caution.
When watching, I hope viewers do not focus only on where the code is found. Comparing the way the scientist treats the animals to the way the friends treat the rocket makes the film more clear. Also, remember that Gamora has no memory of having a romantic relationship with Quill.
Next, I recommend watching “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” and “Okja.” The former is a story about finding oneself in the context of relationships with parents. The latter focuses on the lives and friendships of animals, rather than the mystery of Rocket’s origins.
I prefer these friends who reject the idea that something is not worth saving, rather than those who claim to have saved the universe.
I like friends who reach out without asking for anything in return
I like this movie because it doesn’t stop at simply portraying the rocket as pitiful. After showing its vulnerability, it motivates its friends to fight for its life. The reason to save it isn’t because of any exceptional ability, but simply because it is still alive.
The scientist modifies living beings to achieve their desired outcomes. Friends search for a way to heal the rocket so it can continue living. I believe this difference is what makes this film more memorable than a grand battle.
My rating is 4 out of 5 stars. The current friends go to rescue the rocket that they once dreamed of living together in. This connection demonstrates the belief that life is more important than usefulness. However, the intensity with which it repeatedly shows the suffering of animals, who are already enduring enough pain, and the loosely connected story of Adam Warlock, detract from the overall score.
If you are curious about how people who have been together for a long time change the way they interact with each other, rather than about space combat, then I recommend this film. For the audience who remembers the character as a witty colleague, this 150-minute film is worth the time. It is a film where the reasons for wanting to rescue someone are as important as the speed of the rescue.
On the other hand, if you are looking for a light space comedy or adventures suitable for children, it is better to avoid this film. Especially if you are sensitive to depictions of animal abuse, it is best not to watch it. This is not a film where laughter softens the pain.
When watching, I hope viewers do not focus only on where to find the code. It is beneficial to compare the way scientists treat animals with the way friends treat rockets. It is also important to remember that Gamora is a separate individual who does not share Quill’s memories of romance.
Next, we will be watching “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” and “Okja.” The former raises questions about breaking free from the judgments of those who gave us life. The latter focuses on Rocket’s past, interpreting it not as a secret of his origin, but as a story of animal life and friendship.
I prefer these friends who reject the idea that something is not worth saving, even more than those who claim to have saved the universe.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Can I watch the third installment without having seen the previous two?
The rescue operation to save the rocket is understandable. However, the relationships within the team and Quill’s attachment to Gamora feel unfamiliar. For first-time viewers, it is recommended to watch the previous two installments first.
Is this a movie suitable for viewing with young children?
I would not choose this film for a family adventure, as it features scenes that depict animals being modified and treated as experimental subjects, which can be quite disturbing. Children who are sensitive to animal suffering should be especially cautious when considering this film.
Why does Gamora not treat Quill as a lover?
This Gamora is a character from a different timeline. She did not experience the romance that Quill remembers. It is better to view her as a separate individual who is forming a new relationship, rather than thinking of her as a lost lover who has returned.
Is this film a direct adaptation of a single volume of the original manga?
While based on the Marvel Comics team and characters of the same name, the film does not directly adapt a single volume of a specific comic book. It is not a film that requires you to have read the original work to understand it. The relationships between the characters, established in the previous film, are more important.
Can you expect lighthearted action?
The late-game combat sequences in the corridors, where the team works together, are undoubtedly enjoyable. However, the film’s core focuses on Rocket’s painful past and the friends who are trying to save him. Expecting a lighthearted space comedy with a runtime of 150 minutes may feel burdensome.
