No, they didn't. He couldn't play by Marvel's rules, so he split. That's on Whedon, and Whedon alone
Disney fires James Gunn from "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3"
- Thread starter Lawrence B
- Start date
- Status
No, they didn't. He couldn't play by Marvel's rules, so he split. That's on Whedon, and Whedon alone
Tell that to Justice League. And Avengers 2. *shiver*
Kevin Smith is a walking NC-17 movie. He does not know how to self-censor even when he's at a convention talking to a little 12-year old girl and saying she was [___] when mallrats came out. He would be 10x more dangerous than Gunn, who at least watches his P's in Q's these days.
Last edited:
That seems like ridiculous scare mongering. MCU has had its best run ever as of late, Gunn was a decent director but there's quite a few people who could do that job.
I know this is veering off-topic, but what I think is most likely rather than entering an endless reboot cycle they will institute a torch-passing cycle. So we'll get female Thor, Miles Morales Spiderman, etc... Some of this torch-passing is sort of baked into the cake already (like the way Doctor Strange occupies the job slot of sorcerer supreme). They just make all the heroes function like job slots.
This way they hold onto the same continuity and avoid direct comparisons due to the gender and ethnicity swapping.
Liked both of those a lot more than I like most Marvel yard goods - and I want to see the argument that either wasn't better with Whedon in charge than it would have been otherwise. He pretty much did all that could be done with Justice League, a cake that was half-baked when he took it on.
I could see that eventually but in the immediate future I think they will do new characters, while having Evans, Downey and co just do small appearances.
There's so many cool characters they can introduce, Nova, Spiderwoman Jessica Drew, She-Hulk, Quasar, Adam Warlock, Namor etc
I expect we will see a couple of those get solo movies, whilst Spiderman, Dr Strange etc have a sequel or two.
Also, whilst some of the originals have said they want to stop, will they REALLY say no to the truckload of cash when it pulls up in the driveway?
Treating Infinity War and Avengers 4 as the same project would run afoul of the "Salkind Clause," a clause the Screen Actors Guild insists on in contracts after the Salkinds split Dick Lester's The Three Musketeers into two films and tried to treat them as a single project and not pay the actors for The Four Musketeers. I'm confident that the actors on Infinity War/4 knew they were signing on for two films and being paid for two films well before filming began. I hate linking to a Devin Faraci piece, but he explained how the Salkind Clause applies to Inifnity War in this old essay.
Huh? Gunn is responsible for two GoTG films that did well at the box office (but neither were the top B.O. earners in the MCU even if you don't count the 3 Avengers fiilms to date); so I don't see how the director for two MCU films no longer being involved generates "extra buzz" WRT the MCU.
The MCU has already had a few under performing films in terms of box office receipts in the 20 films they've released - and the other MCU films already in various stages of production. In the long run this will be a small blip and may lead to GotG 3 being the last film featuring those characters. (a caveat: I believe their work in Avengers 4 is already 'in the can' so I don't count it as affected much either way by this.)
I'll agree with Justice League... it was terrible from Man of Steel...
But, Avengers 2 is all him. I think a better script would've helped and the direction is pretty meh. I think the Russo Brothers showed they were more than just capable of dealing with an ensemble cast. But, to be honest, I haven't watched A2 all the the way through more than once. I couldn't finish it the second time.
It looked like Whedon did well enough on A2 given the shit that Marvel required the script to pedal.
I've managed to make it through relatively few Marvel movies once, so I've not been tempted to go for twice. I think I'd have thought better of Doctor Strange if I'd just turned it off before the big third act action "climax" - and that's probably true of most of them.
I've managed to make it through relatively few Marvel movies once, so I've not been tempted to go for twice. I think I'd have thought better of Doctor Strange if I'd just turned it off before the big third act action "climax" - and that's probably true of most of them.
He's proven he can work within a studio's content limits when he directed several episodes of the Arrowverse shows. He's a big enough comics fan that I could see him keeping himself at PG-13 level if it meant directing a comic book movie.
Kevin Smith is also incredibly overrated
I don't know. I think the MCU's best run was back in 2014. I don't think the franchise has really topped itself in regard to storytelling ever since. However, 2018 is proving to be a hell of a lot better than 2016-2017.
I heard that most of the obvious candidates to replace Gunn aren't really available right now. However, I could be wrong.
So I guess it goes downhill from here.
He is also a star on the rise. Why would he want to get in the middle of this mess? Also why not just let him do the next Thor movie?
Jason
Not overrated. Just someone who works better as a small independent director on smaller products. I think he has even said this when explaining why he didn't do "Green Hornet."
Jason
Nah, he's definitely overrated.
- Status