Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (Gunn, 5/5/2017) Movie • Page 25

He worked for Troma Films, it was more of a gimmick or character than anything else. Without Gunn, there is no Volume 3 for me.

 

James Gunn worked with Troma and considered himself an edgy provocateur and ambassador of bad taste. It was a brand, one that was sick and absolutely wrong of course. He has been clear on how he views that past and how he has changed, and the people who know him personally can back him up on that.

 

That note from the actors actually makes me feel kinda gross.

Our culture has offered us PLENTY reminders of "the enormous responsibility we have to ourselves and to each other regarding the use of our written words when we etch them in digital stone." I get that it must suck to watch this happen to somebody you've worked with and who you care about deeply and wish to work with again in the future, but, like, no part of this story is surprising. This is not a new story. If this is the first "learning experience" of this kind that these actors have run into, then they haven't been paying attention to our culture.

If Disney felt it appropriate to fire him, then that's their decision to make. They hired him to do a job for them, and if they no longer want him to work for them based on super gross things he said in the past, that's their choice. Petitioning them to change their mind is silly. He wasn't elected by the people to make these movies. He was selected and hired by a company, and that company gets to fire him if something comes out about him that they aren't okay with. He is not irreplaceable by a long shot. To everyone saying "there is no Volume 3 without him," you're stating a preference, not a fact, and some of you will probably thoroughly enjoy the third movie when it comes out regardless.

He said gross things. That doesn't mean he's a criminal, and he's certainly not being "put on trial," but if this is how the company that hired him wants to force him to be accountable for the gross things he said, then they have every right to do so. I don't know, something about the actors speaking out in that manner just rubs me the wrong way. They could've done it without being preachy about "the court of public opinion" and "weaponizing mob mentality" when what they're talking about is a dude getting fired from his job for joking about being a pedophile on a 100% public platform with the intention of other people reading it, even if it was years ago.

 

I must be clear that I don't expect that they will reinstate him (or should, at this point). I just think people should be able to understand why others can defend James Gunn. It's not some cut and dry moral situation. People can be 'problematic' and still good.

 

They should reinstate him. The firing was a bad decision done under manipulative pretenses for the sake of optics. And, not reinstating him (after waiting long enough to pretend their actions were what made him get fired) is worse optics in the long run. Plus, it's a grotesque parody of accountability to pretend him losing his job is justice.

That being stated. I hate the "both sides" *moderate* rhetoric of the statement. And, I wish people put this much effort into fighting for marginalized voices in Hollywood.

And, while I'm glad there's clear evidence James isn't the same person now that he was then, and I adore the films he made... Maybe these studios should be smarter in whose platforms they elevate? Cool that it worked out in this instance, but in general, people should have to grow up before getting tent pole franchises, not while working on them. (Again, think of the marginalized voices who could get that platform instead.)

Plus, as someone whose favorite comic book movie franchise ever is Guardians of the Galaxy... I still disagree that Guardians 3 couldn't work w/out James. I want it with him, and it'll be better with his voice, but it's not like Nicole Perlman w/ Taika Waititi (or a new talent) couldn't make a worthy third film.

 

I love that the actors voiced their support for him. I don't know how much it does in the real world - I can't see them breaking contracts and actually refusing to work on the film for instance - but I think it does still actually mean something in this day and age for them to speak up, especially when there is so much PR talk and fluff that goes on at press junkets and such.

I think Disney hiring him back is the least likely out of all options here. I would think they would cancel the film altogether before hiring him back for it.

Replacing him with Kevin Smith would be AWFUL. Terrible. Horrendous.

 

Didn’t Nicole Perlman write a lot of the first Guardians film? She is the main reason I’m looking forward to the live action Pokémon movie.

 

She wrote the initial draft but James did a heavy rewrite

 

Both James and Nicole herself tend to downplay her contributions to the final film (though James does to a greater extent). But, it was her script that got the film green lit to start with, before he ever came into the picture. At this point, I would completely trust her to finish their story.

I've seen her say that comedy isn't her biggest strength, so a Guardians 3 written by her would likely need assistance there. But, with Guardians 3 being this cast's 4th or 5th film together, if we got a filmmaker with the right comedic sensibilities, I think a lot of that could organically come out during shooting.

 

Just watched Valerian the other day and now I'm wanting to rewatch this. Wonder how this will hold up on a rewatch I remember last time thinking the humor was too much.

 

I watched Infinity War again last light and I actually thought the Guardians were more well written and the comedy hit more than in Guardian's 2, so I don't think James Gunn is the only one who can do Vol 3 at all.

 

If I'm not mistaken, didn't Gunn assist in the writing for the GOTG sections?

 

Yeah, remember reading an article about it around the time Infinity War released.

 

Oh I have no idea, that would make sense though, kinda like how Joss assisted on other films after Avengers. I still think they were mostly under a different director and still came out organically feeling like the characters.

 

Yeah! I think a lot of it has to do with the "family-styled" environment that Gunn cultivated on set and everyone's trust in each other's instincts with the characters. Seems like there was a decent amount of improvisation for the GOTG series. I.E. Batuista ad libbed the "invisible" line (again if I'm remembering correctly).

 

That's amazing with true, that was maybe my favorite joke of the whole movie haha.

 

haha agreed. I said after the movie that IW had the best comedic moments of the year as of that point, and the GOTG portions were a big reason for that

 

Everything with the Guardians so far has been filtered through James Gunn. He had some kind of producer role pretty early in Infinity War's development, and he had some dialogue rewrites. We haven't seen yet what the Guardians characters are like without his personality.

That being said, I'm not worried about that. He has a pretty specific flavor that'll be noticed when it's gone. But, even within just Marvel directors, Taika Waititi and Shane Black have done similar enough things for me to think that won't be missed.

The biggest loss here is a narrative gift. His only film that's 100% his is Guardians 2, which also happens to be easily the best Marvel film at balancing an ensemble cast's various seemingly disconnected plot lines into a cohesive, effective narrative whole. I can't think of a modern genre film that nails this as well outside of The Last Jedi. Ant-Man and the Wasp attempted something similar and kinda worked, but the payoff isn't nearly as good.

Now, I don't think Guardians 3 needs to be another narrative with as many moving pieces. I see more people who complain about the multiple plot lines in Guardians 2 & Last Jedi than I see who appreciate how well every piece of both films works towards a unified thematic whole. So, maybe scaling back is what the franchise needs now anyways.

If we want another film where multiple characters get their own effective stories that play off of each other well, though, James Gunn has big shoes to fill.

 

In response to Chris Pratt sharing the message sent out by the cast. People are fucking disgusting. I can't believe this piece of garbage is a trauma counselor. Whether you're for or against Gunn, this is just a fucked up thing to say to a victim.

 

There is a 0% chance that person is actually a trauma counselor.

 

According to Variety, Gunn could return, but it'll likely come down to Bob Iger.

 

It’s so weird to hear Disney respect Igers vacation time in this respect, especially since I haven’t heard that as an explanation for holding off on a decision in forever

 

Via Variety:
"Disney insiders say the company was not aware of the offensive tweets and was taken aback when they were recirculated." Absolute horseshit. There's no way a company like that, which is known to do thorough vetting, didn't know about them.

Also, I don't know how I missed this stuff:
"In 2012, the director apologized for a blog post he wrote in 2011, titled “The 50 Superheroes You Most Want to Have Sex With.” In the it, Gunn speculated that Iron Man could “turn” the lesbian Batwoman into a heterosexual, labeled Gambit a “Cajun fruit,” and called Batgirl, who is a teenage mother in the comics, “easy.” Facing a backlash, Gunn said he regretted making “poorly worded” statements."

I'm glad he's changed and no longer making comments like that, but holy shit that's awful.

 

Rumor has it that Jon Favreau and the Russo brothers are on Disney's list with Taika. The only problem is that they are all busy with other projects. Disney is considering the option of looking outside of their familiar faces if none of the directors can commit before the end of the year.

 

Welp, guess it's all up to Michael Bay now.