Yes, only because they should be going back to Nicole Perlmanthose who support his firing, aren't you disgusted that they're still using his script????
The only person who says this is Gunn himself. Perlman and others have said that Nicole's script is still mostly what is in Guardians of the Galaxy 1. Gunn actively fought against Perlman getting any kind of story credit for the original movie, even though Nicole (not Gunn) is the reason Guardians of the Galaxy even got green-lit by Marvel in the first place.
Q. Aside from, as you mentioned, the tone and the comedy that James added, and a couple of new characters, is it safe to say that the core story is what you came up with?
Perlman: Yeah, the core story is definitely the same. All the major set pieces and how the team comes together and the relationships between the characters, these are all things that were very painstakingly worked out in advance by many, many, many versions until we found the right ones that worked the best. You know, there are dozens of Guardians of the Galaxy characters. So the five team members that are in the movie were the five that I liked the best. So it's nice to see they're in the film.
We will have to agree, there was some eh spots in G2.
Nothing you said here really pushes me away from my stance that Nicole was a bigger influence on GOTG1 than GunnThat's non-sense. That's what she said:
Source: https://www.scriptmag.com/features/interviews-features/nicole-perlman-guardians-of-the-galaxy
Claiming that the major set pieces and core story are the same, when these characters are based of another medium and other screenwriters have done the same without getting the kind of name recognition that Perlman has is bs. Yes, she did a great job with Vol. 1, got credited and Gunn elevated the material. The songs, the weird humor, the heart? It's reportedly from Gunn, same for the eye for visuals, that got amped tenfold with Vol. 2.
I give credit to Perlman, Yost, Kyle and Pearson for Vol. 1 and Ragnarok, but those are Gunn's and Waititi's babies, and it shows.
Nothing you said here really pushes me away from my stance that Nicole was a bigger influence on GOTG1 than Gunn
Marvel's latest film, Guardians of the Galaxy, has been a runaway hit, earning more than $90 million in its opening weekend. Critics are also enamored, lauding the movie for its quirky humor, which subverts the genre's usual self-seriousness, and its taut and clever script, which was co-written by Nicole Perlman and director James Gunn.
As several outlets have pointed out, though, "co-written" is perhaps not the most accurate term for how Perlman and Gunn divided their duties. Perlman—the first female writer credited on a Marvel film—spent more than two years combing through the obscure Guardians comics and drafting the film's initial story. Gunn, known for helming offbeat hits like Super and Slither, then did an expansive rewrite, which he claims gave the film its irreverent sensibility and major character arcs. This co-writing-without-collaboration isn't a novel situation in Hollywood, but Perlman and Gunn have given differing descriptions of their contributions to the final script.
Is there beef between the two? Should there be? Even if their rapport is hunky-dory, it's in question whether Perlman's work was pushed to the background so Gunn could better assume the title of "writer-director." This is a familiar conversation—it was just last year when John Ridley and Steve McQueen fought over the writing credit for 12 Years a Slave—but the Guardians controversy has an added layer: the question of whether gender played a role in designating, and publicizing, authorship credit.
Much of that controversy started with the recent BuzzFeed profile of Perlman, which offers an insightful look at how the writer snagged the Guardians gig and produced the first script treatment. The short version of that story: In 2009, Perlman joined the Marvel Writing Program, an incubator of sorts where writers are brought in to help develop Marvel properties into potential film franchises. From around half a dozen of Marvel's lesser properties, Perlman chose Guardians of the Galaxy, and spent the next two years devouring its back catalog and reinterpreting the characters for the big screen. She was "given an enormous amount of creative freedom" by Marvel, who essentially told her to "come up with a good story."
That's where things get a bit murky. According to the BuzzFeed piece, Perlman's script did have a good story—good enough for Marvel to green-light its production—but that story doesn't seem to be the one that ended up on screen. Gunn's rewrite changed the major villain of the film, added several crucial secondary characters, and reshaped the dialogue to fit his comedic vision. Perlman hasn't disputed those changes; in an interview with the Hollywood Reporter she noted that Gunn "definitely bumped the humor up and added some characters and deepened the scenes." Her phrasing, though, implies that Gunn was merely honing her template, and that the central story and characters were entirely her creation.
Gunn has pointedly contested that premise. In the BuzzFeed profile, he acknowledges that "the original concept" was in Perlman's treatment, but states that "the story and the characters—those were pretty much re-created by me." In a roundtable interview transcribed by FilmDivider, he went even further, maintaining that "in Nicole's script everything is pretty different … the story is different, there's no Walkman, the character arcs are different, it's not about the same stuff. But that's how the WGA works. They like first writers an awful lot."
Gunn isn't wrong—WGA rules are notoriously complex, and do, with good reason, protect first writers—but his impolitic putdowns of Perlman's script aren't too endearing. Still, I'm not convinced that there's more at issue here than a known jerkcontinuing to be a jerk. Perlman's work was primarily concept development and character selection. It seems safe to say that the film's dialogue—specifically, the repartee and raunchy humor that audiences have been responding to—are Gunn's additions, as they are fairly of a piece with his former work. That's still conjecture, of course, but it's also corroborated by Perlman, who has conceded that she is "not primarily a comedy writer, but it needed to be a comedic project. Like, this is a project that has always been irreverent. It's always been tongue-in-cheek." The rewrite of a writer-director was always expected. In this case, that writer-director happened to be one with a cohesive and crackling vision but a big and offensive mouth.
That's a separate problem. As Sady Doyle tweeted, there's definitely some have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too cognitive dissonance occurring when Guardians is billed as the first Marvel movie written by a woman and the director is "constantly, publicly thrashing her script." But Gunn, by all accounts, did write the majority of Guardians as it's seen on screen, and Perlman, for her part, hasn't suffered from a dearth of publicity. That's as it should be—her work was fundamental to the film's creation. A cynic could say that Marvel has trumped up her role to bask in PR praise, but I prefer the optimistic take: that Perlman's credit, though marred by Gunn's petulance, is a rare and deserved triumph that indicates slow headway in a male-dominated industry.
Why? Some folks need to die in the next Avengers. Why not the GotG? The series is in total disarray. Let's start fresh.
That Walkman was so much more important than the core of the storyShe was not. That's like saying that Yost and Kyle are a bigger influence on Thor: Ragnarok than Taika, when both have written the "major story points and set pieces" of both Thor: Ragnarok and Thor: The Dark World, hence, non-sense. Without Gunn's reworking of the script, Vol. 1 could be yet another The Dark World, just like Ragnarok could be yet another The Dark World without Taika.
What's more:
Source: http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat...er_nicole_perlman_vs_director_james_gunn.html
Why? Some folks need to die in the next Avengers. Why not the GotG? The series is in total disarray. Let's start fresh.
Nice argument. It's true though, the walkman - and the songs - are at the very heart of the story. It's well reported how Gunn wrote himself into Rocket and how the theme of redemption is something that he brought up.That Walkman was so much more important than the core of the story
Raimi being reduced to cinematic universe replacement choice would be sad.
That Walkman was so much more important than the core of the story
Just scrap Guardians 3, make the next movie a Guardians/Thor crossover named Asgardians of the Galaxy directed by Waititi
Some new GOTG 3 info from James Gunn's brother:
https://www.tulsaworld.com/scene/co...cle_523cea85-c4a8-5599-af6d-4d60a41ca4d2.html
It's good news for the film that Disney still wants to make it. I wonder if this means we see a scenario where James Gunn serves as a behind the scenes director or consultant for the film.
I'd feel kind of dirty to watching it.
Kind of like when watching the NFL Right now.
You know someone is getting screwed. :/
Just scrap Guardians 3, make the next movie a Guardians/Thor crossover named Asgardians of the Galaxy directed by Waititi
It isn't basically the same thing. Name the writers of the last five MCU movies. Think of the last interviews you've watched with them.
There are expectations on directors way beyond writers in interacting with the media. And interacting with the media is an opportunity to bring attention to controversy.
Him as a writer gives Disney and Marvel Studios the opportunity to gauge the potential for drama. And it opens the door for their next move with Gunn.
They didn't fire him arbitrarily. They have obligations to their shareholders, decisions are made based on avoiding risk. This move would give them enough information about his future with the MCU to make the next move.
There's something to that idea, especially now that we have a MCU Valkyrie that ldoesn't look like a Red Sonia reject.
That's trueFrankly that's the more logical approach anyway.
GotG 3 always felt like it should be a new beginning anyway because most arcs have already been wrapped up.
Frankly that's the more logical approach anyway.
GotG 3 always felt like it should be a new beginning anyway because most arcs have already been wrapped up.
And Nebula as well, probably.That's true
Starlord's and Rocket's in Vol 2, and Gamora's and Drax's in Avengers 3 and 4.
That's true
Starlord's and Rocket's in Vol 2, and Gamora's and Drax's in Avengers 3 and 4.
And by the time this movie would even start filming, Disney will have absorbed the Fox rights which means the MCU can really go all out with Cosmic Marvel stuff, including Annihilation.Exactly there's nothing left other than to launch a wider Cosmic MCU line.
Asgardians of the Galaxy would do that .. and give us Rocket and Thor.
And by the time this movie would even start filming, Disney will have absorbed the Fox rights which means the MCU can really go all out with Cosmic Marvel stuff.
I doubt Raimi would be willing to jump back in considering his experience with Spider-Man 3 and the compromises he had to make courtesy of studio interfering with his vision of the film versus them wanting Venom to be the heavy.
Even Quill's mother's mixtapes are done with.Exactly there's nothing left other than to launch a wider Cosmic MCU line.
Asgardians of the Galaxy would do that .. and give us Rocket and Thor.
Quill's mixtapes are done and he's even interacting with Earthlings again. His story is about as done as you can get.Even Quill's mother's mixtapes are done with.
Still if Gunn felt the need to write another script I'm assuming it's great and I definitely wouldn't want to lose it.
I'd watch that.
Or Gunn isn't exactly that genius and was just going to use GOTG3 to set the stage for some post Avengers 4 cosmic Marvel stuffPeople saying that the Guardians story is done because Quill's mother mixtapes are done and that he is back to interacting with Earthlings makes me think that what Gunn has actually envisioned for these characters completely flew over their heads.
Said the dude that clearly hasn't a clear grasp on what their story is about. It's not about Quill reconnecting with Earthlings or it ended because Quill's mother mixtapes ended. It's about a dysfunctional family maturing in an universe where they should have probably have become villains, but ended up as a family of scoundrels turned heroes. Gunn has clearly a plan, and I hope he is able to direct the Guardians one last time.Or Gunn isn't exactly that genius and was just going to use GOTG3 to set the stage for some post Avengers 4 cosmic Marvel stuff
If you've payed attention to what myself, excelsior, and drewton have said in this thread you'd probably know what we've covered all of that stuff too. Most of the character's arcs are completed (or mostly forgotten about - see Drax) and Guardians 2 was all about them truly uniting as a family.Said the dude that clearly hasn't a clear grasp on what their story is about. It's not about Quill reconnecting with Earthlings or it ended because Quill's mother mixtapes ended. It's about a dysfunctional family maturing in an universe where they should have probably have become villains, but ended up as a family of scoundrels turned heroes. Gunn has clearly a plan, and I hope he is able to direct the Guardians one last time.
You're trying to be snide but if you remove the Walkman, and everything that implies in Guardians 1, you have a widely different movie with a widely different tone. There are SO many moments in that film that are made because of the soundtrack.That Walkman was so much more important than the core of the story
Why? Some folks need to die in the next Avengers. Why not the GotG?