[TheBlueMarvel]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lordbest

I'm not sure I agree. For a start, Han Solo wasn't a ladies man, and he wasn't particularly personable. Whereas much was made ofthe point that Starlord was a ladies man, to the point he couldn't remember his lovers names. Because that is so very original and not at all sexist. If anything your description of comic Starlord sounds more like Han Solo than Pratt's Starlord

You don't have to agree, my 'word' isn't law. However, in my opinion, it's pretty obvious. Han is a glib/sardonic, smuggler/thief/pirate, great pilot (attached to his ship in ways that seem more significant than any other relationship on screen), and cagey fighter that must be cajoled/persuaded to 'join the cause'/'do the right thing.' When I review that checklist, MCU Peter Quill pretty much possesses ALL of these qualities.

With regard to Han being a womanizer (or not), with only one real on-screen interaction with a human female as reference, Han ultimately (it takes a while and stands in stark contrast to formerly treating her like shit - a popular tactic of men that think they've mastered manipulating women) makes a pretty hard play for Leia in ways consistent with that of a self proclaimed "ladies' man." Their first on screen kiss features him invading her personal space (she even offers protest), followed up by extreme confidence that she'd eventually succumb to the pressure of his 'roguish charm' (and thanks to the wonders of movie scripting, she does relent...even falling in love with this dude that consistently mocked her LOLOL). Those aren't really the actions of a wilting wallflower.

Again, there's no need for you to agree. That said, I'm fairly confident in my assessment of Starlord as a 'Han-archetype' for modern audiences.