Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol 2

Spon Farmer

Podge_irl wrote: »

Sorry, you are correct. He issued a public apology in the past though it was not about these specific tweets.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/guardians-galaxy-director-james-gunn-395796

I stand by my assertion that this is not a revelation or new insight for Disney though.

Okay, now I'm confused.

A lot of people have been saying that Gunn apoligised for the rape and peadophile "jokes" in 2012 but the apology in that link seems to be for remarks he made about women and homosexuals. There is nothing regarding children.

On what do you base your "assertion" that Disney knew? Just because it was in an interview does not mean that Disney knew about that.

And this article does not comments about peadophilia. So even if Disney knew about the particular comments he was apologising for here, it does not mean they knew about the peadophilia ones.

Honestly, and no offence to anyone here, but it seems to me that NO-ONE except Disney and Gunn actually have a clue about what is really going on.

Spon Farmer

Deleted User wrote: »

Why should he get any punishment? These were addressed, by Gunn, years ago. They were addressed before Disney hired him

Can you post a link to where Gunn addressed the issue that Disney fired him for?

Spon Farmer

2 Scoops wrote: »

I'm in favour of gun control measures too, and admittingly I lean strongly on the right politically. My point is the divisive nature of how Hogg in this case went about it, profanity filled rants and personally attacking people aren't going to achieve anything only feigned mob hysteria and death threats for those involved.

I'm against boycotts or calling for people to be fired. I don't like the culture that exists now and my view is that if you don't like somebody ignore them or change the channel or don't buy their movies. When one social media mob go after prominent figures on one side there will be a retaliatory reaction from the other. I've said years ago something is off about Cernovich, he's a nasty individual but he's using the same rule book groups like media matters use to target conservative figures.

I've nothing else to add and I don't want to get into a political discussion. What Gunn "joked" about is disgusting and he threw stones in a glass house after attacking prominent conservatives and insulting Trump supporters. This culture of trying to get people fired shouldn't exist but it does and I don't feel sorry for him in the least.

Gun control measures where?

What is wrong with our laws on the matter?

Tony EH

Sad Professor wrote: »

The wording is weak and equivocating, but fair play to them. I'm fascinated to see if a bunch of A-list actors issuing a statement can make a multinational corporation back down and admit that they screwed up. I guess the public reaction will decide. Disney will do whatever is best for its bottom line.

They're already crapping themselves with the Star Wars fiasco, what with them running to George Lucas for help to "right the ship", if latest reports are to be believed. So this self-induced Gunn shot wound is a disaster on top of a disaster (or at least a rocky road) and the last thing they need right now.

I think Disney shot their mouth off, in fear of further repercussions and the worry that James Gunn might be found out to be more than just a bad comedian. But, they moved far too quickly, out of fear of a Twitterati crucifixion, and have made a rod for their own back. But Gunn's firing is just part of the current climate of "OH MY GOD! HIT THE NUKE BUTTON!" style of reaction to these type of "revelations". Chris Hardwick seems to be another guy that was jettisoned without any real investigation before pressing eject. He's been reinstated as host on 'The Talking Dead', though. So, it's not beyond Disney to do the same with James Gunn and even though the scenarios are rather different and the accusations against Hardwick were much worse, the overreaction from TPTB was the same.

It'll be interesting to see if this "actor revolt" will have an effect though. It's an interesting development, if not entirely out of left field.

pixelburp

Spon Farmer wrote: »

You are talking about Gunn's movies there.

I'm talking about the comments on twitter that got him fired.

And I'm saying they're not mutually exclusive in the discussion. Have you actually seen Slither or Super! - or even his Troma work? Heck the fact the word 'Troma' can be mentioned should be clue enough to Gunn's sense of humour. They're not ... 'family friendly' and that's being polite. His films wouldn't have got him hired in the first place, were Disney applying the same moral purity they suddenly possessed over ancient history tweets. His films are a far more permanent, vocal expression of Gunn's outlooks than any sh*tty attempts at edgelord humour on Twitter.

batgoat

pixelburp wrote: »

And I'm saying they're not mutually exclusive in the discussion. Have you actually seen Sliver or Super! - or even his Tromeo work? Heck the fact the word 'Troma' can be mentioned should be clue enough to Gunn's sense of humour. They're not ... 'family friendly' and that's being polite. His films wouldn't have got him hired in the first place, were Disney applying the same moral purity they suddenly possessed over ancient history tweets. His films are a far more permanent, vocal expression of Gunn's outlooks than any sh*tty attempts at edgelord humour on Twitter.

Now that I think about it, Peter Jackson's horror film era had stuff that is brash and vulgar and completely unlike his later stuff. Reality is, everyone has a past and Gunn's isn't particularly abhorrent, just of a time.

pixelburp

pixelburp wrote: »

And I'm saying they're not mutually exclusive in the discussion. Have you actually seen Sliver or Super! - or even his Troma work? Heck the fact the word 'Troma' can be mentioned should be clue enough to Gunn's sense of humour. They're not ... 'family friendly' and that's being polite. His films wouldn't have got him hired in the first place, were Disney applying the same moral purity they suddenly possessed over ancient history tweets. His films are a far more permanent, vocal expression of Gunn's outlooks than any sh*tty attempts at edgelord humour on Twitter.

Sliver or Slither?

Frank Bullitt

Deleted User wrote: »

https://mobile.twitter.com/prattprattpratt/status/1023971830598692864

Proper level of support from Pratt there

Jesus, reading the comments under that, the internet is full of Rambos on their high and mighty horse, on the crusade to punish everyone for anything.

Sad Professor

Gunn unlikely to be rehired according to Variety. According to their sources, Iger made the call to fire him, Disney have very high moral standards (funny), and they own the actors.

https://variety.com/2018/film/news/james-gunn-disney-wont-rehire-guardians-of-the-galaxy-1202892424/

Agent Coulson

The ending to infinity war would be an easy way to get rid of the cast if Disney didn’t want the hassle of dealing with the actors going forward.

Lithium93_

Agent Coulson wrote: »

The ending to infinity war would be an easy way to get rid of the cast if Disney didn’t want the hassle of dealing with the actors going forward.

Yeah, but Pratt and Co are contracted for how many movies? Would Disney want the hassle of firing them all mid-contract for standing up for their fired director?

If they think their handling so far has been a PR headache...

Sad Professor

It's not like the actors threatened to do anything if Disney didn't rehire Gunn. Hell, they didn't even explicitly say he should be rehired. They just said they were encouraged that other people thought he should be rehired. It was a weak statement, carefully written to ensure it wouldn't upset Disney.

Penn

Agent Coulson wrote: »

The ending to infinity war would be an easy way to get rid of the cast if Disney didn’t want the hassle of dealing with the actors going forward.

I'd disagree.

The ending to IW basically has to be completely undone due to some of the other victims of it (Spiderman, Black Panther, Doctor Strange). It's pretty much a case where all the victims of the snap have to come back. That said, Rocket and Groot could be recast easily enough as they're just voices, and Gamora could be written out as she was killed pre-snap. But Pratt and Bautista would be sorely missed imo.

Sad Professor wrote: »

It's not like the actors threatened to do anything if Disney didn't rehire Gunn. Hell, they didn't even explicitly say he should be rehired. They just said they were encouraged that other people thought he should be rehired. It was a weak statement, carefully written to ensure it wouldn't upset Disney.

Yeah, I'd say they're so heavily locked into their contracts for another film that they know they can't really do anything. It was more of a "We support him and hope he gets to come back" than anything else.

pixelburp

Sad Professor wrote: »

Gunn unlikely to be rehired according to Variety. According to their sources, Iger made the call to fire him, Disney have very high moral standards (funny), and they own the actors.

https://variety.com/2018/film/news/james-gunn-disney-wont-rehire-guardians-of-the-galaxy-1202892424/

And with that is another notch of bad PR in Disney's belt; not only a bad decision made, but now revealed as one based off totally hypocritical sanctimony from the studio.

Honestly, it has given me a little pause about the MCU in future. I'm not advocating a full on boycott, but equally I don't feel like I should reward Disney for making stupid, contradictory decisions.

kerplun k

pixelburp wrote: »

And with that is another notch of bad PR in Disney's belt; not only a bad decision made, but now revealed as one based off totally hypocritical sanctimony from the studio.

Honestly, it has given me a little pause about the MCU in future. I'm not advocating a full on boycott, but equally I don't feel like I should reward Disney for making stupid, contradictory decisions.

Yeah, I think a lot of people feel the same. The GOTG brand is defiantly tainted, and by extension, so is the MCU.

The whole debacle was orchestrated by a group that has a political agenda, who, by and large, would not traditionally be the type of audience that go see these types of movies. Disney’s refusal to rehire Gunn will only impact fans of the franchise, the very people who were in favour of reinstating him. So, by refusing to reverse this decision, they have essentially p1ssed off the one group of people who would support these films, to appease a bunch of people who couldn’t care less about the MCU.

Personally, as a fan of the MCU, I will no longer blindly go see these films, which is a direct result of cr@p that went on here. Going forward I’ll only turn up to exceptionally well-reviewed properties of the MCU.

IMO, the MCU has lost a lot of good will here both from fans and critics, which I think will have an adverse effect on how these properties will be received and reviewed in the future.

The knives are defiantly out here. The next GOTG better be a home run, because, if it’s not and Disney produces their usual MCU Shtick, everyone will be out for blood and fans will turn on them, which could mean big trouble for the MCU.

I’ve been a big fan of this franchise, but maybe this whole thing is a sign that it needs to come crashing down.

pixelburp

Yeah, Disney could be on a hiding to nothing here, depending on how certain chips fall.

The key is how much fan upset (I should start avoiding 'outrage', given how loaded a word it has become these days) will translate into a demonstrable drop in box office - and even then that's only if Gunn's replacement isn't any good, or indeed if GotG3's reviews aren't stellar. And if the bad press persists, which it well might given everything is now under a microscope.

The MCU has been lucky in the sense it has avoided any kind of true fan or tonal backlash; plenty of ink has been spent about its intentionally safe, occasionally bland aesthetic, but none of that has every really appeared in the form of under-performance. Safe does better than a risk. This spat though has happened with the MCU's hottest property - one whose intentionally off-kilter approach endeared itself precisely because it set itself aside from the rest of the cinematic universe.

One thing I'm certain about though: I don't envy the poor chump that has to step into Gunn's shoes. Any sense of timeline here regards a decision?

Penn

pixelburp wrote: »

One thing I'm certain about though: I don't envy the poor chump that has to step into Gunn's shoes. Any sense of timeline here regards a decision?

I think it was due to start filming early 2019 for a 2020 release, likely the usual May MCU release. Given Gunn was a writer on the film too, it's probably unknown at this stage if Disney will push for it to be rewritten so Gunn isn't credited for that either.

pixelburp

Just thinking on Bob Iger's hypocrisy over this 'family friendly' image he's claiming motivates the decision - has anyone pointed out the Deadpool franchise his company's inheriting when that Fox deal is finalised? I mean obviously the whole thing stinks of dissembling from Iger and we could pick out plenty of examples - but it seems particularly apt given Wade Wilson is about to become a Disney property once more. Unless he's also going to be sanitised as to not upset the poor dears in ... "rural" America.

Penn wrote: »

I think it was due to start filming early 2019 for a 2020 release, likely the usual May MCU release. Given Gunn was a writer on the film too, it's probably unknown at this stage if Disney will push for it to be rewritten so Gunn isn't credited for that either.

I suggested it earlier that Taika Waititi would be a good choice, but honestly at this point he doesn't deserve that particularly poisoned chalice.

brianregan09

The absolute hyperbole in some of the comments here is laughable , The whole thing needs to come crashing down ........I mean really ?

Gunn made some horrible comments , granted they were years ago and he apologized etc these guys that went finding these tweets are been blamed , A gun is no good without ammo which is what these tweets were by Gunn he should have deleted them.

It's great that the cast have come out and said they understand , I don't think Disney will have any further problem with this once all the furore and Bs dies down , of which there is a lot

The last 2 films Black Panther and Infinity War have been there biggest wins so far and with there tentpole film for all the little girls out there coming out next Captain Marvel can't see why the whole thing will come crashing down

as for Guardians it will definitely survive, the current iteration as is a pretty poor copy of the Comic Guardians so a new voice won't be bad at all behind the helm the rest of them will fall in behind what ever new director , look at Thor Ragnarock Chris Hemsworth was thinking of hanging up the hammer a change of direction and all of a sudden he's mad to stay on for more

Nah I honestly will not be day one-ing the next Guardians flick. It's Gunn's baby and would have had faith there. It'll be an after great review visit for me only

flazio

Well, they have drafted in late replacements before, albeit for different reasons. Remember Ant Man was supposed to be Edgar Wright's project.

kerplun k

brianregan09 wrote: »

The absolute hyperbole in some of the comments here is laughable , The whole thing needs to come crashing down ........I mean really ?

C’mon dude. You’ve just picked one part of my post and based your whole argument on this. If you read what I was saying you’ll see that I meant disney have blown the good will they’ve built up with fans which helped us fans overlook some of the flaws of the MCU.

There’s no doubting this has left a bad taste in some fans mouths. As Pixelburp said, it’s pure hypocrisy.

Do you think Disney CEO Bob Iger will pull out of the multi, multi, multi billion dollar deal to buy Fox, a network which CURRENTLY airs a TV show called Family Guy which has a character who is openly a pedophile and chases kids?.... you bet your bottom dollar he won’t.

I won’t be as quick to give Disney my money after this sh1t show, and I can assure you, many many fans feel the same.

People are making the mistake that this is about James Gunn, but it’s not, in fact, most people would probably agree that GOTG could have done with a change in direction and fresh face.... but not like this.

The whole thing stinks, and I don’t like it. Not one bit.

brianregan09

Yeah but that's Family Guy an adult show aimed at an Adult Demographic, I know we're all adults and we love these marvel movies but they are aimed at mostly kids (sadly) But I can see where they are coming from .

Yes it was career assassination to a degree I agree with everyone there, But Disney couldn't just sit there and do nothing about it as it was major news when it broke (even though the tweets were 10 years old)

I don't think there past transgressions about all the propaganda and racism should really be used as an argument either as they were all from a different time , In this time sadly you can't fart in the wrong direction without offending some one. So Disney made a decision on the fly that they thought it was right and now they're caught between a rock and a hard place, I don't think for one second they'll lose any of there fanbase including myself

also loved Guardians 1 but I feel he butchered some of them in the 2nd only Rocket , Groot and Gamora are really like there counterparts , Turned Drax into a punchline ,Starlord into an idiot , I'd be glad to see a fresh take on them long before any of this happened

pjohnson

Disney seemed ok with RDJ and he has an actual criminal record?

Stone Deaf 4evr

pjohnson wrote: »

Disney seemed ok with RDJ and he has an actual criminal record?

Iron man was the first film in the MCU though, RDJ was probably hired for a song.
Plus, now that they've built and absolute billion dollar franchise machine, they'll be a lot more gun shy about any potential bad publicity.

Blazer

Wouldn't mind seeing the same directory of Thor Ragnarok take over. He really transformed the Thor character and would be nice to see something similar done to gotg.
Feel sorry for Gunn..as this rate with all this metoo and gender bull**** it will be impossible to make a movie to keep everyone happy if people get insulted over every little thing.

Stone Deaf 4evr

Blazer wrote: »

Wouldn't mind seeing the same directory of Thor Ragnarok take over. He really transformed the Thor character and would be nice to see something similar done to gotg.
Feel sorry for Gunn..as this rate with all this metoo and gender bull**** it will be impossible to make a movie to keep everyone happy if people get insulted over every little thing.

the bigger problem - and not just in in this case, is that its always trial by social media. Theres no such thing as a internal review with your employer or a full investigation and review, its a case of 'oops, the hyenas are baying, better throw em a body'

Tony EH

In a parallel case, it seems that the NYT have stuck by a journo, after some of her tweets from years ago were used to against her, by interested parties. Sarah Jeong tweeted such things as "Dumbass fucking white people marking up the internet like dogs pissing on fire hydrants", "#cancelwhitepeople", "white men are bullshit".

She claims this was in response to tweets levelled against her, such as "dog-eating gook" and "If I saw you, I would sock you in your lesbian face".

I'm not sure that that's a good enough excuse myself and wonder, if Sarah Jeong was whitebread Sam Young, who tweeted "Dumbass fucking black people", would the NYT still be so vehement in their defence?

In any case, this is a disturbing trend that is happening now, where there are vested interest political groups trawling the likes of Twitter, specifically looking for tweets that don't cover their issuer with any kind of glory. In the end, I think it's probably a good thing that the NYT have given two fingers to those who are seeking to make a mountain out of this for their own political purposes.

I just hope that when it does comes to Sam Young's time, that the NYT acts in the same manner, lest they smash a lot of eggs all over their own faces.

pixelburp

Where it gets into a tricky grey area are circumstances like these, where any accusations of racism are off the bad of already pretty racist, ****ty abuse anyway. I think there's a distinction to be made between the premeditation of the remarks, alongside their intent; so overlapping with Gunn's remarks, that there's a sense of the journalist merely attempting a (semi) joking scream back - while the racism towards her was just openly antagonistic and hostile.

I've seen it said before when it comes to racism/sexism/homophobia: that it's all well and good talking about the higher moral ground, that it's incumbent on the victims to endure bullying with stoic, quiet dignity - but then if faced with nearly daily (hourly?) abuse sent towards me, about my very appearance & being, I can't honestly say I wouldn't flip out and tell some trailer-trash to sit on it.

Anyway, looping back with the case of James Gunn, there's definitely an overlap here with an intentional lack of context: those hounding Jeong are cynically parking any context or mitigating circumstances - all part of a political agenda from the alt-right.

What a time to be alive.

Sad Professor

I couldn't care less about her tweets but Jeong brought that on herself. She was part of the mob that started holy war over a totally innocuous line in an article by Amber Frost in Jacobin a few years ago, and then celebrated Matt Bruenig being fired from Demos for offending Clinton supporters, falsely claiming he harassed her. These people have empowered companies to fire people for bullsh*t reasons and yet they are described here and elsewhere as "extreme left" which is laughable. All of that probably makes her ideally qualified to write for the NYT though.

Anyway, Gunn's firing had nothing to do with Disney's moral standards. They are a corporation, they don't have moral standards. Their firing of Gunn was a purely performative act designed to stop a PR sh*tstorm before it started. In that sense it was probably successful. The support for Gunn has been pretty half-hearted from what I can see with most people too nervous about the tweets to take a strong position on whether he should be re-hired, instead talking about "redemption", "change" etc, all of which Disney will probably take as a sign that they made the right choice.

With some luck the gamergate toads and the liberal identitarians will wipe each other out. God knows they belong together.

pixelburp

I should add I'm not pretending to have heard nor cared about Jeong before this blew up, just that like the case with Gunn, any context or cause is being intentionally ignored for the purposes of a political soapbox or character assassination.

Sad Professor wrote: »

[...]

With some luck the gamergate toads and the liberal identitarians will wipe each other out. God knows they belong together.

I dunno, I've seen that argument suggested for criminal gangs in general, but we're usually the ones caught in the crossfire. Ideally this entire cultural blip will keep itself within the US, and bar some attempts by professional talking-heads, has stayed on that side of the Atlantic.

Sad Professor

pixelburp wrote: »

I should add I'm not pretending to have heard nor cared about Jeong before this blew up, just that like the case with Gunn, any context or cause is being intentionally ignored for the purposes of a political soapbox or character assassination.

I dunno, I've seen that argument suggested for criminal gangs in general, but we're usually the ones caught in the crossfire. Ideally this entire cultural blip will keep itself within the US, and bar some attempts by professional talking-heads, has stayed on that side of the Atlantic.

Too late, the internet has no borders. :pac: But yeah, the culture wars are definitely to a large extent a US thing. The issues with race and gender are especially specific to the US due to its history of militarism and racism and denial of class. While some of these things resonate here, they don't really make sense outside the US context.

batgoat

Like Jim Jefferies segment on it.
https://youtu.be/7p-ghIPBuGI

He's really not backing down on it.
Man is loyal to an amazing degree.

https://twitter.com/DaveBautista/status/1026244855058649095?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

brianregan09

Pity he wasn't so against his character basically becoming a walking one liner

Because that is at all comparable or noteworthy

brianregan09

Nah wasn't comparing just a side note on what they did to Drax .

Seems a pretty stubborn step to take from him, I mean he's not a mega star dripping with leading roles , I'm all for sticking to your guns and stuff but I think he's doing his own career a disservice here

brianregan09

brianregan09 wrote: »

Nah wasn't comparing just a side note on what they did to Drax .

Seems a pretty stubborn step to take from him, I mean he's not a mega star dripping with leading roles , I'm all for sticking to your guns and stuff but I think he's doing his own career a disservice here

Which is what is admirable. He knows who brought him to that level and is standing by him.

pixelburp

brianregan09 wrote: »

Nah wasn't comparing just a side note on what they did to Drax .

Seems a pretty stubborn step to take from him, I mean he's not a mega star dripping with leading roles , I'm all for sticking to your guns and stuff but I think he's doing his own career a disservice here

He may not be a megastar, but he has a tidy little career and is part of an extremely well loved property - maybe even the most well-loved, in the MCU. I don't think it can be understated just how popular Guardians managed to make itself, and a large part of that was down to the casting & their chemistry (not to mention Gunn's script). The use of nostalgic soundtracks was just icing on the cake to really take advantage of the zeitgeist.

I don't think this is the downfall of the MCU, but it's the first and demonstrable chink in its armour and suddenly the chat isn't about Guardians 3, Avengers 4 or anything - it's about Disney making a balls of the closest thing to a Hollywood Open Goal. To be totally catty about it - they've pulled a DC

brianregan09

Don't get me wrong before the 1st film to most people Guardians were nobodies and an absolute unknown quantity and your spot on it was Gunn and the cast that made that work.

I do feel the sequel wasn't as good though the whole idea of having Ego the living planet being Quill's father was awful and unnecessary use of that character when Quill's father in the comics would have worked just aswell , They had Batista have a few funny lines in the 1st one but they fully made him into a walking punchline in the 2nd , It was a good movie but not on a par with the 1st one

Can another director come in and do a good job , of course it would be silly to suggest otherwise

As for Big Dave I really like him I was so excited to see him get a role in 007 and I do hope he goes on to bigger and better things , I rather him to the Rock

As for Marvel pulling a DC , I don't know about the reason DC's issues are always brought up is they haven't made a good movie in there extended universe bar Wonder Woman, I think this and many other things like actors and directors falling out of favor (norton, terrence howard, hugo weaving, natalie portman, edgar wright,wheedon) or whatever reason are all brushed under the rug because Marvel consistently makes great films and there just coming off the back of there 2 biggest selling films and biggest successes in Black Panther and Avengers 3 and there taking aim at the female audience next with Captain Marvel, I don't think DC is even in the same stratosphere any more

Basq

brianregan09 wrote: »

Can another director come in and do a good job , of course it would be silly to suggest otherwise

Unfortunately he also wrote them.. which, while they were directed with flair, the writing is where they excelled.

Could Thor: Ragnarok have been made without Taika Waititi? Presumably.. but it would have been HUGELY different as his style and sparking writing was littered all over it.

It's a shame to see Gunn go.. he clearly loved doing these movies.

What i won't be glad to see the back of are the ridiculous brigade of keyboard warriors on social media when anyone shows any support for Gunn.

brianregan09

Yeah but didn't Edgar Wright also leave with a full script completed I'm pretty sure they'd work off that and make changes

Gbear

brianregan09 wrote: »

Yeah but didn't Edgar Wright also leave with a full script completed I'm pretty sure they'd work off that and make changes

It'd be great if they saw this third film as a bit of a shot to nothing so just handed it over, lock, stock and barrel, to someone like Wright, gave him the space to work he wasn't given for Antman to tempt him, as well as a dumptruck of cash.

I can't really see the actors going on revolt or anything. Disney can't really back down at this point or forever weaken their hands in these kinds of situations.

They should probably sack someone involved in the decision though, for being a plum.

If they get a good guy in who shows respect for the previous work done then I think everyone will get on board.

ScrubsfanChris

brianregan09 wrote: »

Yeah but didn't Edgar Wright also leave with a full script completed I'm pretty sure they'd work off that and make changes

Not quite, Marvel wanted new writers (Adam McKay and some un-named) to come in a do a new draft of the more or less completed script Wright and Joe Cornish had written.

Wright left because he felt he would no longer be directing his vision/story, only reason he signed on in the first place.

We'll never know how much of their script was reworked, but it was enough for Wright to leave.

pixelburp

Ant Man doesn't feel like a good comparison either as the end product, for me, ranks as the most ostensibly bland and aggressively "OK" of the MCU output, bar perhaps Dr Strange. That when people complain about the mediocrity or sameness of the franchise - that's the film I think of.

We can't know for sure what Edgar Wright's version might have been like but his CV speaks of a creativity and energy the eventual Ant Man simply doesn't possess. My worry for GotG3 is Marvel hire another Peyton Reed and the air goes out of the MCUs more vibrant, off beat brand.

ERG89

Really enjoyed GOTG but the sequel was a real drop off in quality. I imagine a lot of the cast don't want it to be seen to end though so don't want to change anything.

Lithium93_

Batista willing to walk if Gunns's script isn't used for Guardians 3.

https://www.shortlist.com/entertainment/exclusive-dave-bautista-interview-james-gunn-guardians-of-the-galaxy-firing-quit-twitter/368730

Where I’m at right now is that if Marvel don’t use that script, then I’m going to ask them to release me from my contract, cut me out or recast me.

I’d be doing James a disservice if I didn’t.

pixelburp

Wow, OK, so now things truly have escalated. Brave move by Batista, his loyalty is to be admired and puts the rest of the cast in a suddenly awkward situation - especially if that joint statement was as much as they thought they'd need to make. Couldn't interesting if this becomes an "I'm Sparticus" moment or not...

ScrubsfanChris

All of the principle GOTG cast signed a (supposedly) 6 picture deal from the start. So fat chance he gets released from his contract after just completing 3.
Natalie Portman tried to do the same when Patty Jenkins was shown the door on Thor Dark World.

No douth if he quits under contract Disney will bankrupt him in court just because.

Im not siding with Disney here obviously, but thats just what is going to happen.