Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 Is a Marvel Superhero Movie Made in Poor Taste. And It's Better for It.
In 2018, director James Gunn was fired from the film for gross tweets. But this comic book sequel shows the value of his gross-out sensibility.
It's easy to forget, but James Gunn, the schlock visionary behind Marvel's first two Guardians of the Galaxy films, almost didn't get to make a third entry. In the summer of 2018, Gunn was fired from his job directing the movie, which was then in development, after right-wing trolls dug up a slew of old tweets that were in decidedly poor taste, and which included jokes about violence toward children.
But poor taste was, of course, precisely the point. Before Gunn landed at the helm of a top-tier comic book franchise, he was a low-budget gross-out horror provocateur. His filmmaking career started with Troma Entertainment, the company most famous for the Toxic Avenger franchise, and his credits included work on films like Tromeo and Juliet, a hyperviolent, sexually explicit, gleefully vulgar reboot of Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet. Shock, outrage, ultraviolence, and scatological humor were the tools of Gunn's trade and he crafted a public persona to match.
When evidence of that persona resurfaced, executives at Disney decided to give Gunn the boot. The famously family-focused company didn't want to be associated with his brand of black comic grotesquerie.
Gunn, in turn, went to Marvel's chief rival in the superhero movie business, the DC Comics universe of characters, to make another superhero movie with a brand more forgiving of his past image. That film, 2021's sequel-reboot Suicide Squad, was an exuberantly violent but ultimately sentimental romp that not-so-subtly dealt with themes of cancellation by murderous (starfish monster–controlled) mobs.
The movie served as a kind of personal therapy—and a job interview. Late last year, Gunn was put in charge of rebooting the DC Comics movie universe, giving him creative supervision over the entire universe, including characters like Superman, Wonder Woman, and Green Lantern.
In the interim, however, Gunn was rehired on the third Guardians of the Galaxy film, which hits theaters this weekend. The sequel—Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3—has all the trademarks Gunn has become known for: clever musical cues and spectacular setpieces, snark and sentimentality, an outsider sensibility melded to warmth and heartfelt emotion.
Also, a lot of pretty weird, pretty gross stuff: Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 isn't nearly as violent as any Troma film, or as Gunn's Suicide Squad. But its cast includes a quartet of monstrous-looking experimental half-robot animals that would be terrifying if they weren't imbued with such sweet personalities. There's a scene set on a massive biological spaceship/station that the protagonists have to cut through to enter like they're performing surgery on some gloopy spaceborne Cthulhu. The central story revolves around animal mutilation and experimental biological modifications that viewers are meant to see as inherently cruel and dehumanizing. There are jokes about murder and feces. There's even an amusingly gratuitous F-bomb.
Gunn, who both directed and co-wrote the film, has shaved off enough of the rough edges of this material to keep it within the PG-13 confines of the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU). But what's notable about the movie's pulp grotesquerie isn't just its presence. It's that these bits are often the movie's best—the most entertaining, the most amusing, the most shocking, the most poignant.
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 isn't quite a great movie. But it's a better-than-average superhero film. And it's a superior Marvel movie precisely because of all the ways it incorporates Gunn's oddball, often outrageous, obsessions. It's Gunn's penchant for schlocky, freaky biological vulgarity and quippy crudeness that makes the movie stand out from the crowd. Along with Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings, it's easily one of the best post-pandemic entries in the struggling MCU mega-franchise. Yes, there's nothing in the film quite as graphic or explicit as in the tweets that got Gunn axed from the project back in 2018. But Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 is in deliriously and delightfully poor taste—and better for it.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Gross tweets not as bad or worse than mean tweets?
Only bad when Progs are shown the rules they apply to everyone else. Those darn trolls
I am making a good salary from home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone,
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
Here is I started.…………>> http://WWW.RICHEPAY.COM
Start now earning every week more than $5,000 by doing very simple and easyhome based job online. Last month i have made $19735 by doing this online jobjust in my part time for only 2 hrs a day using my laptop. This job is justawesome and easy to do in part time. Everybody can now get this and startearning more dollars online just by follow instructions here…………
.
.
Now Here ————————————->> https://Www.Coins71.Com
Depends on who’s making the tweets. I think we can be 100% sure that if Gunn was anywhere to the right of Stalin (which is what passes for “far right” in Hollywood) and had made some tweets comparing the behavior of progressives to fascists, he would not have been brought back. But since he has the Right political views, all can be forgiven once the initial furor is passed. Besides, he only made some tweets about raping children, what’s the big deal? Right wing trolls are so uptight, am I right?
Mike, great work. I appreciate your work since I presently make more than $36,000 a month from one straightforward internet business! I am aware that you are now making a good living online starting sb-05 with merely $29,000, and they are simple internet operational chores.
.
.
Just click the link——————>>> http://Www.smartjobs1.com
That was before the Floyd riots, too–after that, they fully embraced rad-left ideology and everything they’re produced since then has been tainted with the stench.
Disney’s “family focus” is on diddling little kids.
Only right wing closet pedophiles think Disney is grooming.
Ok, groomer.
It’s projection all the way down.
I have made $18625 last month by w0rking 0nline from home in my part time only. Everybody can now get this j0b and start making dollars 0nline just by follow details here..
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
Here is I started.…………>> http://www.apprichs.com
oh no! not “tweets in poor taste”!
(years later) “Damn, all our directors suck. will you come back and work for us?” Lol
That’s what I got from this too, LOL!!! I’d have loved to be a fly on the wall at that meeting.
In the summer of 2018, Gunn was fired from his job directing the movie, which was then in development, after right-wing trolls dug up a slew of old tweets that were in decidedly poor taste, and which included jokes about violence toward children.
We’re leaving out some context here–Cernovich and other alt-right personalities dug those tweets up specifically because Gunn had supported Roseanne Barr getting kicked off her own show due to her own provocative social media posts. This was a case of the left’s repressive tolerance getting shoved down their own throat.
This was a case of the left’s repressive tolerance getting shoved down their own throat.
Not only that but as I pointed out above, if Gunn wasn’t a far left ideologue himself we can be sure he would still be persona non grata in Hollywoke. Case in point: Gina Carano. All she did was make fun of the whole pronouns in your twitter bio bullshit (“Beep/Bop/Boop”) and make a couple of posts correctly calling out the left for behaving like actual fascists and she’s still shit-canned for it. So they’re still a bunch of hypocritical shitheads.
My pronouns are I/You.
This was a case of the left’s repressive tolerance getting shoved down their own throat.
Only it wasn’t.
Gunn’s making movies.
Roseanne was excised from a character and series that was her sole creation.
What happened with Gunn wasn’t all that different from what happened with Mel Gibson.
I don’t know if Disney is deliberately putting out bad marketing on this film or if the movie really is that bad, but based on what I saw in the trailer, this isn’t something that would warrant more than one viewing, and only for people who really liked the first two (note: I thought they were all right, but Gunn has Taika Watititi’s tendency to be far too in love with his own jokes. Unlike Watitii, however, Gunn does have some understanding of when to let dramatic moments breathe a little).
The movie seems completely soulless, and the cast acts as if they’re just phoning it in so they can get the whole thing over with and move on. We’ll see how Flash does when it comes out, but I suspect this movie is ultimately going to be the final nail in the coffin for comic book movies, and because of Mario’s success, there will be more attention put on doing video game movies instead. Don’t be surprised to see projects on Zelda and Metroid being put into development in the next year or two.
… because of Mario’s success, there will be more attention put on doing video game movies instead. Don’t be surprised to see projects on Zelda and Metroid being put into development in the next year or two.
Mario, and The Last of Us also seemed to be pretty successful. Metroid would be right up their alley considering it has a female protagonist. Of course they’ll still fuck it up by turning her into a ridiculous Mary Sue because they have no idea how to write good characters anymore. And of course, if they do a Zelda adaptation they’ll most likely race swap Link because white men = evil.
And of course, if they do a Zelda adaptation they’ll most likely race swap Link because white men = evil.
It won’t be a 50/50 split between Link rescuing Zelda and Link and Zelda fighting off Gannon/the forces of evil, it will be 100% the latter and Zelda won’t be a princess discovered to be of some celestial divine birthright, she’ll just be a princess in command of warrior-peasants like Link. He’ll arduously labor through quests because he’s inexperienced and she’ll be in charge because her mom is the queen.
They’ve (mostly) realized they can’t take the hill by force without losing the war, but they are not yet ready to stop wasting everyone’s resources skirmishing in the foothills and retreat to the peace and prosperity of mutually-decided neutral territory.
OoT did involve Zelda assisting with magic. She doesn’t seem to be a pushover as Sheik either. I’m happy with her being a strong and competent character, but Link is the hero of the story. From what I’ve heard Mario is basically comic relief in his own movie while Peach is a Mary Sue.
And of course, if they do a Zelda adaptation they’ll most likely race swap Link because white men = evil.
I doubt Nintendo would allow that. Rumor is that Illumination had planned to portray Mario as a buffoon and butt of jokes in the Mario movie, and Miyamoto stepped in and told them, “No, Mario’s a hero, you need to show him as such or this movie won’t get released.”
Being a Japanese-run company, Nintendo’s not as vulnerable to Human Rights Campaign CEI pressures as American corporations are.
See just above. I expect turning Mario into Homer Simpson or Mario and Luigi into Beavis and Butthead is a bridge too far for Nintendo, but Zelda as Lara Croft will have Nintendo execs stroking their chins.
they’ll most likely race swap Link because
white men = evil.Hyrulians are in short supply here on Earth.
It’s very uneven. And the third act could use some restructuring. and the soundtrack is probably the weakest part. But it’s a pretty good movie nonetheless. It’s biggest problem is that it would have been better served as two movies, with the first properly setting everything up and the second finishing it all off.
Metroid has definitely been one worthy of more attention. They’ve developed some story to it over the years. Even Star Fox could find some success in a Top Gun meets Star Wars framing.
Zelda has always been a property you would think they could migrate to movies and tv (though the old cartoon wasn’t great)
I’ve watched the Mario movie, and it was also quite soulless.
Here’s the thing. I like low-stakes movies. Luca is one of my favourite movies. I also like medium-stakes movies. Inside Out and Coco used to be my favourite movies before I watched better movies. They’re still good movies, though. And Soul’s also good. I also like high-stakes movies. Puss in Boots: The Last Wish and Spiderman: Into the Spiderverse are some of my favourite movies. But the Super Mario Bros movie had an identity crisis. It had apocalyptic stakes, but it didn’t feel like anything could go wrong. It just felt boring. Like, why did Mario lure Bullet Bill into the portal? Because that was what was necessary to progress the story? It just felt like it was going through the motions. The Sonic the Hedgehog movie was much better.
Although, in spite of its problems, the Super Mario Bros movie was still highly regarded by most people and was a financial success. And the Sonic the Hedgehog movie was also successful. You’re probably right, more video game movies will be made in the future. I do wonder, what game would Disney adapt into a movie? Club Penguin? Kingdom Hearts?
Must they have Gunn direct all their shitty comic book movies, both Marvel and now giving him free rein over DC? Are guaranteed cosmic sized returns on their yuan that fucking important?
MCU could do a movie about a superhero that is a reanimated turd and Suderman would give it a good review
I find it a bit ridiculous that as most of these hack journalists are these days Peter Suderman struggles with the truth. His claim of “right wing trolls” attacking James Gunn is totally false. It was a pack of left cancel culture idiots who went after James. This is basically the standard these days. Hey Peter, don’t add your spin to a store. State the facts as they are, clearly you’re not proud of your leftist compatriots or you wouldn’t completely lie in your article.
>>Tromeo and Juliet, a … reboot of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet.
you’re kidding.
You clearly haven’t seen Cannibal! The Musical.
>> The famously family-focused company didn’t want to be associated with his brand of black comic grotesquerie.
Um…
>> Along with Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings, it’s easily one of the best post-pandemic entries in the struggling MCU mega-franchise.
OK, you’re obviously smoking crack. Who was the bad guy in Shang Chi?
The sister! Nope, she was just misunderstood but despite being horrible is really a good guy.
The dad! Nope, he was just misunderstood but despite being horrible is really a good guy.
Was there a bad guy?
Yea, he was a cartoon. We finally met him in the last 10 minutes of the film.
Did Shang Chi beat him?
Uh, no, we had another cartoon do that. A dragon.
Shang-Chi was garbage, and shame on you for defending it.
Does anyone at Reason review movies for being movies? Or do they only ever talk about how a movie is a reflection of some aspect of current politics?
It is an ideological political magazine, after all.