Why are people treating James Gunn as if he is some "talented director"?

[Casual Shinji]

Well, the guy has made at least two very good movies. If that doesn't qualify as being a director with talent, I don't know what does.

And just like Sam Raimi and Peter Jackson he transitioned into the multi-million dollar blockbuster without losing his own voice. That's always nice to see.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

1. The Hobbit movies awesome and at times it was extremely faithful to the source I mean the first scene when Bilbo first made Gandalf was straight right out of the books.

Its better than both these Marvel and DC movies combined.

And they are certainly no where near as terrible then the Star Wars Prequals.

Now onto your point.


2. I agree exactly what you meant despite the whole thing with the Hobbit I just said but again I am just bothered by his "underdog" staus among the internet despite his past mediocre filmography.

1. You're welcome to your opinion, but when I say "Hobbit" I meant the trilogy of films he made. Also I never compared it to Marvel, DC or Star Wars so I don't see why you brought that up. Though with that said, Avengers Assemble and Age of Ultron grossed a combined 3 billion dollars worldwide, while the hobbit trilogy (that's 3 films) grossed 3 billion (about a billion per film). By your own standards, at least from what I gathered above, that makes Avengers a superior film series by about half a billion extra butts in seats per film.

Take note, I don't think that highly of Avengers. I enjoy them as cinema flicks but that's about it.

Regardless I stand by my assessment.

2. Your thread title is "Why are people treating James Gunn as if he is some talented director" (You'll note that this is distinctly different to "underdog" status). To which people explain and demonstrate why they feel as such, to which you respond that he's not the second coming of Christopher Nolan and that films regardless of quality are in fact potentially forgettable, as if Nolan is some sort of litmus test for talent or that culture moving on is somehow a flaw of the film/director and not just a symptom of time.

I don't know of a single instance beyond this thread where Nolan and Gunn are even mentioned in the same body of text. In fact, this thread pops up on the first page in google if you type "James Gunn next Christopher Nolan" into Google, and it's the ONLY instance where both people are mentioned in the same context.

But let's focus on "underdog" status for a second. What constitutes an Underdog? Typically an underdog is someone or something that is unassuming, something not well known, but has shown potential... just potential. Even a glimmer. Whether or not he had full directorial control over Guardian is unimportant, he still directed and wrote the film and it worked. Really well I might add. Either you're devaluing his contribution or over estimating how much interference (and talent) Disney execs had in the production.

But this again forgets that he has demonstrated potential BEFORE guardians was even made. Slither is a well regarded cult classic. Super is a polarizing but still well regarded film where much of the flak comes from the films hard to swallow themes and whether they worked for the film or not.

The fact he released doozies makes him more of an underdog, not less of one, because coming from a banal/mediocre background is the very definition of Underdog. Underdog: Someone that isn't expected to do well. Having your name on a blockbuster like Guardians with an "underdog" status certainly raises a few eyebrows and have people take notice, but it doesn't mean people think they are dealing with Kubrick reincarnated.

I called him Underdog becuase undeadsuitor summed up what I think he is on the internet right now.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

I don't know if this is supposed to be a troll thread or not. But then again it's already April 1st here in my country. Although Sam I admire your kayfabe on being a DC troll.

I am not DC troll and I don't completely hate Marvel. The only thing I really do hate is the comedy/humor which I find extremely corny.

I went to see Deadpool in theaters, I am going to see Captain America Civil War. (Captain America is the one guy that is making good solo movies)

I have watched nearly every Marvel movie in that came out with the exception of Thor and Ant Man. The thing I am excited for the most from these Marvel movies is Thanos because I want to see him wreck shit up that Infinity Gauntlet and he looks like a hype villain that hopefully will blow Ultron and Loki out of the water.

I just have this one problem with James Gunn and GOTG.

 

[Neurotic Void Melody]

Super was pretty good, not sure why the mixed reception. I prefer its more screwed up, conflicting dark take on a person trying to be a hero more than kickass. Kickass is still more style than substance and definitely not as mature as it pretends to be. I don't think it's necessary to be worrying about some alleged consensus if you do not agree with it. Seems like a lot of needless hassle that can easily be avoided.
Oh, he did Slither? Sweet, that film is certainly memorable...maybe i should rewatch in current state of mind.

 

[Calibanbutcher]

Anyone who doubts the man should go watch PG-Porn immediately.

Anyone who doubts the man an desperately wants to watch the filmic equivalent of being given a nice biscuit, laced with highly psychoactive substances, and then being treated to a combination of a relaxing spa day with intermittent kicks to the ole family jewels should go watch super. Coincidentally one of my favourite movies.

 

[springheeljack]

I think James Gunn deserves more praise as being someone who understands comedy. I mean watch Humanzee or the series Pg Porn that he made they are hilarious.

 

[elvor0]

1. The Hobbit movies awesome and at times it was extremely faithful to the source I mean the first scene when Bilbo first made Gandalf was straight right out of the books.

If that isn't an april fools, them's fighting words.

"at times it was faithful" Yeah...maybe just that first scene. Hyperbole aside, The Hobbit movies were a horrendous cacophony of bloat, poor cgi, misguided alterations, frivolous side plots, anachronistic bollocks, false tension, tiring action sequences and style over substance movie making stretched over 9 draining hours.

The Hobbit movies are literally Jacksons Lucas Prequels, upto and including the crummy love plot.

 

[Fappy]

I think James Gunn deserves more praise as being someone who understands comedy. I mean watch Humanzee or the series Pg Porn that he made they are hilarious.

Damn, got ninja'd!

Yeah, his PG Porn series is great. He's got a real knack for comedy, which is what made GotG work so well imo.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

1. The Hobbit movies awesome and at times it was extremely faithful to the source I mean the first scene when Bilbo first made Gandalf was straight right out of the books.

If that isn't an april fools, them's fighting words.

"at times it was faithful" Yeah...maybe just that first scene. Hyperbole aside, The Hobbit movies were a horrendous cacophony of bloat, poor cgi, misguided alterations, frivolous side plots, anachronistic bollocks, false tension, tiring action sequences and style over substance movie making stretched over 9 draining hours.

The Hobbit movies are literally Jacksons Lucas Prequels, upto and including the crummy love plot.

1. Bloat that was referenced in the bigger Tolkein universe. With the obvious exception of that Elf chick.

2. Poor CGI? POOR CGI!!! The Dwarves Beards is were CGI'd and I was completely fooled into thinking they were real. And Peter Jackson makes CGI better then most production companies WETA digital > ILM.

3. Frivilous Side Plots, again stuff that was in Tolkein's bigger universe.

4. Anachronistic Bollocks. I have no idea what Anachronisitc means.

5. False Tension...... Next Question.

6. Tiring Action Sequences, then you must be easily bored because I found the action excitiing and badass. Seeing Thorin charging towards in Army of Orcs saying "DU BEKAR!!!" Always gets me

7. Oh and people can sit through watching the extended cut of Lord of the Rings without getting Tired? At least this movie did not have boring scenes like Treebeard.

And how dare you compare this to George Lucas. The acting in this movie in perticular blows the Prequals out of the water.

 

[Zhukov]

Because he made a film based on a comic that is better than any DC comic film that has ever been or will ever be made.

They should give whoever is currently directing Suicide Squad the boot and hand it to Gunn. Completely reboot the production if necessary, crippling costs be damned!

...

Huh. Y'know, I typed that as a friendly dig, but now that I think about it he would have been fucking perfect for a Suicide Squad movie. And this is coming from someone who was only lukewarm towards Guardians.

 

[hermes]

I think the comparison with Raimi and Jackson is not uncalled for.

As them, Gunn started getting into movies through B-list horror movies (charming but low budget), which helped cement his career as a niche favorite. He is, quite simply, part of the newest generation of movie makers the broke through into the mainstream (the previous great generation being the one of Lucas, Spielberg, etc), and he is one of the people that seems to kept his personal touch and sensibilities after breaking through.

Whether you are fond of his movies or not, you have to admit the public love stories of underdogs that endure and succeed after been given the chance on the big leagues.

 

[RedDeadFred]

His 3 full movie credits ranged from mediocre to pretty damn good so I guess the answer to your question would be: because he is.

We get it, you didn't like GotG. Apparently critics and audiences did. That's just how it goes sometimes. You're free to call him an untalented direction if you want, but don't be surprised when people don't agree with you.

 

[elvor0]

1. The Hobbit movies awesome and at times it was extremely faithful to the source I mean the first scene when Bilbo first made Gandalf was straight right out of the books.

If that isn't an april fools, them's fighting words.

"at times it was faithful" Yeah...maybe just that first scene. Hyperbole aside, The Hobbit movies were a horrendous cacophony of bloat, poor cgi, misguided alterations, frivolous side plots, anachronistic bollocks, false tension, tiring action sequences and style over substance movie making stretched over 9 draining hours.

The Hobbit movies are literally Jacksons Lucas Prequels, upto and including the crummy love plot.

1. Bloat that was referenced in the bigger Tolkein universe. With the obvious exception of that Elf chick.

2. Poor CGI? POOR CGI!!! The Dwarves Beards is were CGI'd and I was completely fooled into thinking they were real. And Peter Jackson makes CGI better then most production companies WETA digital > ILM.

3. Frivilous Side Plots, again stuff that was in Tolkein's bigger universe.

4. Anachronistic Bollocks. I have no idea what Anachronisitc means.

5. False Tension...... Next Question.

6. Tiring Action Sequences, then you must be easily bored because I found the action excitiing and badass. Seeing Thorin charging towards in Army of Orcs saying "DU BEKAR!!!" Always gets me

7. Oh and people can sit through watching the extended cut of Lord of the Rings without getting Tired? At least this movie did not have boring scenes like Treebeard.

And how dare you compare this to George Lucas. The acting in this movie in perticular blows the Prequals out of the water.

1. Some of it was, most of it wasn't. And even with the events that are written by Tolkien, they still make the films bloated, /especially/ when paired with a load of stuff that never happened, even in ancillary material. Most of the stuff with the necromancer is completely reshuffled and redistributed thus making the wizards look dense as fuck and Galadriel unfeasible powerful.

The Hobbit is a very tightly paced book, clocking in at a mere 300 pages, its a book I would recommend everyone should read in their life because its more or less flawless. Attempting to suddenly cram all this extra bollocks that most of the time doesn't mesh well or outright screws with itself totally ruins the pacing and narrative structure.

2. Poor CGI in that it all feels weightless and green screeny as hell,. Fuck this scene in particular(excuse the sound). This scene actually offends me it's so bad.


Ian McKellan actually wept at the appalling amount of Green Screen present in The Hobbit.

3.No, there was no side plot with discount Griemar Wormtongue in Lake town, nor all that stuff with Bard, nor with Keili and the Elf Chick. Nor with Legolas beyond him /maybe/ having been present in the Elven Kings hall. Nor with the Dwarves splitting up in Laketown, nor with dying Keili and Kingsfoil, nor with Beorn chasing them through the woods, which makes the next scene not make sense, Nor with that stupid chase through the mines with video game set pieces from Smaug, Nor with the Orcs, nor with Azog, which leads me on to my next point....

4.Anachronistic Bollocks: In the wrong time. Azog should be dead, having had his head removed by D?in in the battle Thorin is wrongly depicted as having removed his arm. Legolas just warps the space time continnium

5, 6. The tension is false, because the orcs are constantly persuing them, yet nothing EVER comes of it, thus causing tiresome action sequences, with people CONSTANTLY being fucking saved at the last second, again removing tension. It's bad cinematography with no pay off to most of the action sequences.All that bollocks with Discount Wormtongue and Bard is a complete waste of time despite its attempts to provide tension because nothing happens as a result.

The action sequences just go on and on and on, with poor cinematography, boring fight choreography, inconsistent choreography, where some moments is grounded, and then suddenly turns into anime physics and back again. There's more to action scenes than just lobbing explosive chaotic messes around and calling it entertainment. The CGI armies, while necessary, bleed into each other constantly. Rather than being a part of the scene, they just exist and not enough effort was made to breath life into them, nor differentiate them properly from each other.

7. Yeah, I can watch the LOTR extended cut because I find it engaging, but not The Hobbit. Whats your point?

EDIT: Watch out for the edits.

 

[Ihateregistering1]

Screenwriting and directing aren't the same thing.

Slither was almost universally liked, and Super was pretty well-reviewed.

Guardians of the Galaxy was a major accomplishment. It took a fairly unknown Marvel property (unlike Spiderman, The Hulk, X-Men, etc) starring a talking raccoon and a living tree, with the first action outing by the guy known for playing the fat goofy dude in 'Parks and Rec', and became a box office mega-hit.

 

[ThreeName]

Like as if he was the next Quintin Tarantino

is now treated like the next Christopher Nolan?

Ironically, both directors who have made exactly one good movie each. Amazing. It's like poetry, it rhymes.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

1. The Hobbit movies awesome and at times it was extremely faithful to the source I mean the first scene when Bilbo first made Gandalf was straight right out of the books.

If that isn't an april fools, them's fighting words.

"at times it was faithful" Yeah...maybe just that first scene. Hyperbole aside, The Hobbit movies were a horrendous cacophony of bloat, poor cgi, misguided alterations, frivolous side plots, anachronistic bollocks, false tension, tiring action sequences and style over substance movie making stretched over 9 draining hours.

The Hobbit movies are literally Jacksons Lucas Prequels, upto and including the crummy love plot.

1. Bloat that was referenced in the bigger Tolkein universe. With the obvious exception of that Elf chick.

2. Poor CGI? POOR CGI!!! The Dwarves Beards is were CGI'd and I was completely fooled into thinking they were real. And Peter Jackson makes CGI better then most production companies WETA digital > ILM.

3. Frivilous Side Plots, again stuff that was in Tolkein's bigger universe.

4. Anachronistic Bollocks. I have no idea what Anachronisitc means.

5. False Tension...... Next Question.

6. Tiring Action Sequences, then you must be easily bored because I found the action excitiing and badass. Seeing Thorin charging towards in Army of Orcs saying "DU BEKAR!!!" Always gets me

7. Oh and people can sit through watching the extended cut of Lord of the Rings without getting Tired? At least this movie did not have boring scenes like Treebeard.

And how dare you compare this to George Lucas. The acting in this movie in perticular blows the Prequals out of the water.

1. Some of it was, most of it wasn't. And even with the events that are written by Tolkien, they still make the films bloated, /especially/ when paired with a load of stuff that never happened, even in ancillary material. Most of the stuff with the necromancer is completely reshuffled and redistributed thus making the wizards look dense as fuck and Galadriel unfeasible powerful.

The Hobbit is a very tightly paced book, clocking in at a mere 300 pages, its a book I would recommend everyone should read in their life because its more or less flawless. Attempting to suddenly cram all this extra bollocks that most of the time doesn't mesh well or outright screws with itself totally ruins the pacing and narrative structure.

2. Poor CGI in that it all feels weightless and green screeny as hell,. Fuck this scene in particular(excuse the sound). This scene actually offends me it's so bad.


Ian McKellan actually wept at the appalling amount of Green Screen present in The Hobbit.

3.No, there was no side plot with discount Griemar Wormtongue in Lake town, nor all that stuff with Bard, nor with Keili and the Elf Chick. Nor with Legolas beyond him /maybe/ having been present in the Elven Kings hall. Nor with the Dwarves splitting up in Laketown, nor with dying Keili and Kingsfoil, nor with Beorn chasing them through the woods, which makes the next scene not make sense, Nor with that stupid chase through the mines with video game set pieces from Smaug, Nor with the Orcs, nor with Azog, which leads me on to my next point....

4.Anachronistic Bollocks: In the wrong time. Azog should be dead, having had his head removed by D?in in the battle Thorin is wrongly depicted as having removed his arm. Legolas just warps the space time continnium

5, 6. The tension is false, because the orcs are constantly persuing them, yet nothing EVER comes of it, thus causing tiresome action sequences, with people CONSTANTLY being fucking saved at the last second, again removing tension. It's bad cinematography with no pay off to most of the action sequences.All that bollocks with Discount Wormtongue and Bard is a complete waste of time despite its attempts to provide tension because nothing happens as a result.

The action sequences just go on and on and on, with poor cinematography, boring fight choreography, inconsistent choreography, where some moments is grounded, and then suddenly turns into anime physics and back again. There's more to action scenes than just lobbing explosive chaotic messes around and calling it entertainment. The CGI armies, while necessary, bleed into each other constantly. Rather than being a part of the scene, they just exist and not enough effort was made to breath life into them, nor differentiate them properly from each other.

7. Yeah, I can watch the LOTR extended cut because I find it engaging, but not The Hobbit. Whats your point?

EDIT: Watch out for the edits.

Oh and Lord of the Rings had such brilliant choreography:

https://youtu.be/kyevhryWKHk?t=79

CGI has been a huge improvement from the CGI of some of the CGI of Lord of the Rings, I mean have you seen the Wargs?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3GFYKIwJ9Y

And your upset about Legolas running on rocks? Where were you when Legolas singlehandedly killed an elephant:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDVnl2-_66E

 

[Antonio Torrente]

Sam I gotta to ask you something, what is wrong with you? Are you being paid by Warner/DC to shit on Marvel/Disney?
This is a serious question, you sound like a bitter person and for some reason you sound like Marvel violated you in a personal level.

Because every week, I see you comment negatively (i.e. finding negativity in just about everything Marvel) on threads that has a positive reaction to the MCU.

Also why is it that being joyous is childish and stupid? Isn't that what most comicbook fans hate about the 90's? CBs being brooding, grimdark and with lots of angst. And somehow is a champion of the trope Silly Rabbit Idealism Is For Kids.

It makes me wonder what your childhood is like.

I gonna be the first to admit that I am huge Marvel fan but I won't go to the lengths you are doing because in the long run it's tiring and not worth fighting over.

My life is already full of shit and negativity so why would I go to a movie or read something that will add to that negativity?

But then again this is the internet and we have that power that we can say whatever we want without repercussion.

P.S. Yeah I sounded like a conspiracy nutjob, time to put on my tinfoil hat.

 

[WonkyWarmaiden]

1. The Hobbit movies awesome and at times it was extremely faithful to the source I mean the first scene when Bilbo first made Gandalf was straight right out of the books.

If that isn't an april fools, them's fighting words.

"at times it was faithful" Yeah...maybe just that first scene. Hyperbole aside, The Hobbit movies were a horrendous cacophony of bloat, poor cgi, misguided alterations, frivolous side plots, anachronistic bollocks, false tension, tiring action sequences and style over substance movie making stretched over 9 draining hours.

The Hobbit movies are literally Jacksons Lucas Prequels, upto and including the crummy love plot.

1. Bloat that was referenced in the bigger Tolkein universe. With the obvious exception of that Elf chick.

2. Poor CGI? POOR CGI!!! The Dwarves Beards is were CGI'd and I was completely fooled into thinking they were real. And Peter Jackson makes CGI better then most production companies WETA digital > ILM.

3. Frivilous Side Plots, again stuff that was in Tolkein's bigger universe.

4. Anachronistic Bollocks. I have no idea what Anachronisitc means.

5. False Tension...... Next Question.

6. Tiring Action Sequences, then you must be easily bored because I found the action excitiing and badass. Seeing Thorin charging towards in Army of Orcs saying "DU BEKAR!!!" Always gets me

7. Oh and people can sit through watching the extended cut of Lord of the Rings without getting Tired? At least this movie did not have boring scenes like Treebeard.

And how dare you compare this to George Lucas. The acting in this movie in perticular blows the Prequals out of the water.

1. Some of it was, most of it wasn't. And even with the events that are written by Tolkien, they still make the films bloated, /especially/ when paired with a load of stuff that never happened, even in ancillary material. Most of the stuff with the necromancer is completely reshuffled and redistributed thus making the wizards look dense as fuck and Galadriel unfeasible powerful.

The Hobbit is a very tightly paced book, clocking in at a mere 300 pages, its a book I would recommend everyone should read in their life because its more or less flawless. Attempting to suddenly cram all this extra bollocks that most of the time doesn't mesh well or outright screws with itself totally ruins the pacing and narrative structure.

2. Poor CGI in that it all feels weightless and green screeny as hell,. Fuck this scene in particular(excuse the sound). This scene actually offends me it's so bad.


Ian McKellan actually wept at the appalling amount of Green Screen present in The Hobbit.

3.No, there was no side plot with discount Griemar Wormtongue in Lake town, nor all that stuff with Bard, nor with Keili and the Elf Chick. Nor with Legolas beyond him /maybe/ having been present in the Elven Kings hall. Nor with the Dwarves splitting up in Laketown, nor with dying Keili and Kingsfoil, nor with Beorn chasing them through the woods, which makes the next scene not make sense, Nor with that stupid chase through the mines with video game set pieces from Smaug, Nor with the Orcs, nor with Azog, which leads me on to my next point....

4.Anachronistic Bollocks: In the wrong time. Azog should be dead, having had his head removed by D?in in the battle Thorin is wrongly depicted as having removed his arm. Legolas just warps the space time continnium

5, 6. The tension is false, because the orcs are constantly persuing them, yet nothing EVER comes of it, thus causing tiresome action sequences, with people CONSTANTLY being fucking saved at the last second, again removing tension. It's bad cinematography with no pay off to most of the action sequences.All that bollocks with Discount Wormtongue and Bard is a complete waste of time despite its attempts to provide tension because nothing happens as a result.

The action sequences just go on and on and on, with poor cinematography, boring fight choreography, inconsistent choreography, where some moments is grounded, and then suddenly turns into anime physics and back again. There's more to action scenes than just lobbing explosive chaotic messes around and calling it entertainment. The CGI armies, while necessary, bleed into each other constantly. Rather than being a part of the scene, they just exist and not enough effort was made to breath life into them, nor differentiate them properly from each other.

7. Yeah, I can watch the LOTR extended cut because I find it engaging, but not The Hobbit. Whats your point?

EDIT: Watch out for the edits.

Oh and Lord of the Rings had such brilliant choreography:

https://youtu.be/kyevhryWKHk?t=79

CGI has been a huge improvement from the CGI of some of the CGI of Lord of the Rings, I mean have you seen the Wargs?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3GFYKIwJ9Y

And your upset about Legolas running on rocks? Where were you when Legolas singlehandedly killed an elephant:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDVnl2-_66E

Look, I enjoy The Hobbit trilogy more than most but even I can say that most of the things people point out as bad or wrong about the movies are warranted. I accept that they aren't perfect, or even accurate to the book, and I just don't care.

OP, just enjoy the movies you like and don't get angry when someone comes along and hates on them. Accept it as a differing opinion and move on.

 

[Ieyke]

Because he's pretty damn good.
Spoilers: Before they hit it big, a lot of directors are hired to make movies they don't really care about (Scooby Doo), or make stuff that only a niche audience cares about (a lot of the stuff Gunn's made).
Now he's making big stuff that he loves and has the respect to ask for the budget to do other movies he wants to make with the resources he needs to make them good. He doesn't need to make Scooby Doo anymore, and now he could do a bigger crazier version of something like Super.