To say that James Gunn’s history with the Marvel Cinematic Universe has been tumultuous would be a massive understatement. After delivering two overwhelmingly successful critical and financial hits, Gunn was shockingly fired as the director of Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 for a series of controversial tweets he made a decade prior. While Gunn was ultimately restored as the series’ director, he took his break from Marvel to make a film for the studio’s biggest rival at DC with The Suicide Squad. As Gunn departs the MCU for good to become the new creative head of DC studios, it’s more evident than ever before that his uniquely weird sensibilities are what the franchise really needs right now.
The creative dips in quality over the course of Marvel’s post-pandemic era have come from refusing to heed the lessons left behind by Guardians of the Galaxy and Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2. The two films proved that it was possible to have an installment that functions as a Marvel movie, but embraces the director’s vision. This has been the formula for creating the best films of the franchise, yet few filmmakers have been granted the same opportunities since. It’s become clear that a franchise that’s so heavily focused on inner connectivity needs to value the individuality that James Gunn proved was essential. That means things need to stay weird!
The MCU Embraced James Gunn’s Directorial Vision
Early on, the MCU was much more open to different interpretations; Thor is unquestionably a Shakespearean epic inspired by Kenneth Bragnah’s interest in stagecraft, Iron Man bears a resemblance to Jon Favreau’s early dark comedies, Joe Johnston tributed his own past with Captain America: The First Avenger, and The Avengers still felt like the epic crossover that Joss Whedon would have featured in one of his television shows. However, the franchise’s reliance one formula threatened to erode it, and Guardians of the Galaxy felt like a breath of fresh air when it debuted in 2014. Gunn worked within the parameters of including a few credits stingers and setting up the Infinity Saga like he was supposed to, but it was within a wacky team up, 1970s-inspired campy adventure based on an obscure line of characters that most general audiences had never heard of. It was seen as an underdog, and Gunn proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that audiences would be up for a major shift in tone.
Most notably, Guardians of the Galaxy provided a gateway for those that hadn’t ventured into the MCU before. While it’s fun to see how these series reference each other, it can be overwhelming for those that are catching up to be told they need to watch over thirty movies, countless hours of streaming shows, and be well-informed about the future events that are being set up. Anyone who wants to only watch Guardians of the Galaxy movies is content to do so; while they may miss a few references to the characters’ other appearances, the Guardians of the Galaxy trilogy tells a complete story arc on its own. That can’t be said of any other individual series or movie within the franchise; sure, Captain America: Civil War is a great movie, but you can’t expect someone to watch it if they can’t recognize all the characters in the massive final brawl.
Sadly, some of the filmmakers who were initially able to take those sorts of chances weren’t able to hold on to them in the same way that Gunn had. While Ryan Coogler created a game-changing cultural moment for black cinema with Black Panther, Black Panther: Wakanda Forever was weighed down by connections to other films, cameos from Disney+ characters, and setting up the future without doing enough to support the present. Taika Waititi completely radicalizes the Thor franchise with his comedic space opera Thor: Ragnarok, but the nearly unwatchable Thor: Love and Thunder felt like a project that he made out of obligation. Scott Derrickson even left the production of the sequel to his horror-themed Doctor Strange film because he wanted to go too dark, and Marvel’s recent directorial struggles have indicated that this is the result of a larger issue. Gunn’s idea was to make a goofy film inspired by the music and sci-fi film he grew up with; it didn’t feel like he was executing a task list of chores.
James Gunn’s Movies Stand Out Within the MCU
What’s interesting is that any issues within the Guardians of the Galaxy films are inherent to the individual franchise itself, and not because of forced connections to other movies. Those that objected to Gunn’s decision to make a hang-out movie with Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 or the graphic violence against abused animals that is so integral to Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 are responding to specific creative choices, not forced parameters heaped upon them by the studio. Similarly, the post-credit scenes for the Guardians of the Galaxy films are for the future of these characters specifically, not advertisements for another project that doesn’t interest them. The decline in quality over the course of Phases Four and Five has indicated that the reliance on bridging connections is what’s hurting it most. This has even affected the box office, which has seen a serious decline. The MCU used to deliver nothing but runaway hits, but the Marvel logo alone isn’t enough.
James Gunn’s success is because he was making something safe, and pursued his own creative interests. There was no guarantee that audiences would get invested in a volatile talking raccoon, a sentient tree, a stone-faced monster, a green alien assassin, and a self-described “loser.” There was certainly a chance that resting the emotional core of a film on a soundtrack consisting of various pop classics spanning multiple generations would be seen as cheesy. Gunn inserted mature themes in his films; there’s paternal abuse, depression, alcoholism, grief, heartbreak, and gender inequities mixed in within the spectacle. Sure, not every director who takes those chances will see favorable results, but isn’t that more interesting than failing because of a pre-ordained task list?
