Written by Tyrone Bruinsma In the modern pantheon of mainstream directors whose blockbuster works are undeniably their own-Zack Snyder, Michael Bay, Christopher Nolan and Patty Jenkins. One director has been both a near creative genius and audience pleasing million-dollar ticket generator-James Gunn. From humble origins, paying his dues and go through a fair share of struggles-Gunn had made himself one of the most beloved directors in recent memory and I’d like to take us back to explore the entirety of his legacy. EARLY WORK Gunn’s early work started at the cinematic schlock factory Troma under Lloyd Kaufman. His most notable work with the company was as a lead creator on 1997’s Tromeo and Juliet. The film is often touted among Troma’s best works alongside The Toxic Avenger and got Gunn a solid amount of attention. He then wrote a low budget superhero comedy called The Specials, directed by Craig Mazin who’d go on to be the creative lead on the incredible 2019 Chernobyl miniseries. Gunn’s first mainstream work was as an uncredited writer on 2001’s Thirteen Ghosts. He only wrote 4 jokes for the film, with the movie mostly being a serious supernatural tale. While not a critical or financial success, the film has gained a cult following and did allow for Gunn to have more notice in the Hollywood sphere-especially considering his next film project. SCOOBY DOO In 2002, the long-awaited live action Scooby Doo film was released with James Gunn as the movie’s writer. Originally, Gunn supposedly had developed the script as a mature rated comedy-but obviously Warner Brothers wanted their children’s property to remain a children’s property. Even during the Dark Knight era, Warner Brothers never considered to make a dark version of Scooby freaking Doo. The closest we ever got to a dark version Scooby Doo was the 2010 series Mystery Incorporated that I want to say was Gravity Falls attempt, but Gravity Falls actually came out after. So, that series would be better defined as Twin Peaks with Scooby Doo. Going back to the 2002 film, Gunn’s script was relatively ambitious considering the film had an $85 Million Dollar Budget and dealt with an extreme amount of content. After opening with a pretty decent imitation of the cartoon’s logic in live action, the gang break up and only reunite upon being invited to Spooky Island by Rowan Atkinson’s character. The film acts like a faithful version of the cartoon, a self-parody and a subversive edge when the monsters turn out to be real. There’s also this edge of it being a softened down teen sex comedy like American Pie, including a rather in-depth sub-plot about behavioral teaching. I feel like this was a dig at film studios not understanding teenagers and young adults while trying to condition how they act. That’s a lot considering Scooby Doo was pretty much a series of campfire mysteries with a comedic edge. It serves well as a feature length adaptation in live action, and that’s largely thanks to the pitch perfect casting. The main 5 cast are both visually accurate and spot on to their characters, with Matthew Lillard (who was also in Thirteen Ghosts) as Shaggy being beloved by pop-culture for his dedication to the role. Freddie Prince Jnr’s portrayal of Fred is delightfully a jerk, Sarah Michelle Gellar is perfect as a Daphne trying to avoid her original damsel role and Linda Cardellini is just perfect as Velma in every way. The film is visually engaging from a production design and color standpoint with the haunted castle segment being my favorite of the entire film. Unfortunately, it falls apart due to the lacking CGI even by 2002 standards and Raja Gosnell’s direction. Raja Gosnell started off in the industry as an editor, working on the likes of Pretty Woman, Home Alone and Mrs Doubtfire before making his directorial debut with the forgettable Home Alone 3. After being rejected by the cast of the horror film Ravenous as a replacement director, Gosnell directed the surprise hit Big Momma’s House before being tapped to direct Scooby Doo. Unfortunately, most of his work would be classified as critically mauled box office hits like Beverly Hills Chihuahua and the live action Smurfs films. Scooby Doo was the biggest budget film he’d worked with at the time and unfortunately his direction ranges between perfunctory and lazy. I’d like to believe this was a deliberate choice to emulate the simplistic style of the show, but considering the script was an attempt at elevating the material-that directorial style would not work. The only moment I can think of that demonstrates a unique directorial choice is an extreme close up of some minor villains laughing to both sinister and comedic effect. Upon initial release, the film was critical derided for its writing and derivative feeling. Over the 20 years it’s been out however-it’s earned a cult following and the consensus seems torn on it being a trash fire adaptation or misunderstood classic. Personally, I think it has a lot going for it, but it does end up feeling like a watered-down ambitious work. It’s not something I’d frantically switch off, but not something I’m constantly feeling the need to revisit. I think what makes the film feel like a lesser work is that 4 years prior to the film-a superior Scooby Doo adaptation was made in the form of Zombie Island. The direct to tv animated film had the darkness of a decent horror film combined with the main characters’ comedic execution. I make no exaggeration when I say Scooby Doo on Zombie Island is the best adaptation of the series that already made the monster’s real. After that was a string of other animated films like the Witch’s Ghost and The Loch Ness Monster that were at the very least solid works. The live action film’s attempted edge is lessened by its darker, subversive tone already having been done better. Despite critical reviews, the Scooby Doo was a box office success and a sequel was put in order-with the hopes of a 3rd one being developed as Gunn’s directorial debut. In 2004, Scooby Doo Monsters Unleashed was released and I consider it a better film than the first. I hold no nostalgic value to the original cartoons as these films were my only childhood experience of the series, so the references to classic monsters aren’t why I love it. The reason I think Monsters Unleashed is a superior film is due to it being funnier and Gosnell having developed his directing chops in that time. While the first film had rather lazy direction, the sequel has a much more distinct voice behind the camera in capturing both horror and comedy. It just feels closer to the cartoon while being a solid elevation. The cast all does a great job again with new comers Seth Green, Peter Boyle and Alicia Silverstone doing excellent work too. It just feels more fun, more lively and visually engaging that the original film-even if it does lack the creative production design of the first in its 2nd half. Unfortunately, that wasn’t enough to save this film. Despite receiving better reviews, this was only a slight improvement. The main killer was the box office returns and Warner Brothers’ changing priorities. The first film made $275 million dollars, but the sequel only made over $180 Million. Warner Brothers had major hits with Ocean’s 12, Troy and the Prisoner of Azkaban. All earned far more that-with WB focusing more on Harry Potter and Christopher Nolan’s in production remake of Batman Begins (then titled The Intimidation Game). The series was relegated back to a cartoon show format, with only occasional live action tv films until a feature length animated 3D film in 2020 that everyone promptly forgot existed. But while the 3rd film was cancelled-2004 saw another film written by James Gunn released to much greater success. DAWN OF THE DEAD 2004 also saw the remake of George Romero’s Dawn of the Dead hit screens to box office success and positive reviews under the penmanship of Gunn and directorial vision of Zack Snyder. Due to the online anger towards Gunn over the Scooby Doo films, he felt he was unfit for the project. But critic Harry Knowles who despised the idea of remaking Dawn of the Dead posted a glowing review of Gunn’s script on Ain’t It Cool News. This helped remove Gunn’s doubt in his work for the better. While the film was Gunn’s story, the creative say over the film’s tone and style was Zack Snyder. Snyder had worked as a commercial director at Propaganda Films alongside many mainstream directors like David Fincher, Michael Bay and Gore Verbinski. He’d chosen the project to be his feature length debut and I think it was a smart decision. Gunn and Snyder both developed the film as less pure horror and leaned heavier into action, though that didn’t remove some terrifying sequences. The film is one of the better horror remakes of the early 2000’s like The Ring, The Grudge and the Texas Chainsaw Massacre. While it’s not superior to its original, the film works as a modernised updating that showcases Snyder’s gift for visual storytelling and badass images. While the late George Romero initially dismissed the film, he softened to it over time. And after the release of Snyder’s 2021 zombie action flick Army of the Dead, many returned to Dawn of the Dead-reappraising it as a modern masterpiece in the zombie genre. One could argue without Dawn of the Dead, the long standing tv show The Walking Dead may not have been picked up and other horror remakes wouldn’t have been made. After having 3 Hollywood screenplays under his belt to moderate success, Gunn was finally given directorial reigns over his own film-a 2006 body horror film that took time to be appreciated. SLITHER In 2006, Gunn released his directorial debut-a dark comedy body horror film named Slither. The story follows an alien parasite that infects Michael Rooker before slowly beginning to consume him and the whole town. While initially disregarded by some horror fans as a rip-off of 1986’s Night of the Creeps, Gunn’s actual influence stemmed from David Cronenberg’s Shivers and the existential horror manga Uzumaki by Junji Ito. In my own appraisal, Slither is a comedic take on Lovecraftian horror-like if From Beyond or The Color Out of Space was deliberately trying to be funny. It’s got moments of genuine body horror that might trigger the gag reflex and darkly comedic moments that reflects Gunn’s sensibilities. It’s essentially a story about alien worms taking over people’s bodies in a small town, a premise ripe for horror and comedy in equal measure. The cast is excellent with Michael Rooker, Elizabeth Banks and Nathan Fillion leading a game set of actors. The direction on display is excellent, the score is great and I liked a micro-flashback displaying this parasite’s past. It’s pretty much a buffed-up version of what Gunn would’ve made at Troma and the ultimate dark pay-off that runs counter to normal version of this film easily cements that. However…despite me knowing all the good in it, and giving it a recommendation-I personally felt the film was missing something. It’s one of those puzzling films like 2016’s The Jungle Book remake where all the pieces fit and I can’t say it’s bad-but it lacks something to fully sell me. This isn’t because it’s a horror comedy, 2006 had other scary yet comedic films like Snakes on a Plane or Severance, and I thoroughly enjoyed both. I do recommend checking out Slither as it’s one of the better directorial debuts of the 21st Century. I just found it was missing something to make me love it. Unfortunately, despite positive reviews and a massive cult following-Slither made only $12 Million against a $15 Million budget. Some critics believe its failure killed horror comedies-though the success of Tucker and Dale VS Evil or Attack the Block would disagree. But Gunn had put his name out there as a viable director-making his next project one to watch. SUPER After Slither, Gunn’s next film would be the darkly comedic and low budget superhero film Super that came out in 2010. Gunn has shelved the script for the project earlier, but his ex-wife Jenna Fischer (aka Pam from The Officer) recommended the brilliant Rainn Wilson as the lead role. Gunn’s Super follows Rainn Wilson as Frank Darbo, a guy with the worst luck in life who takes up being a superhero to compensate for his mid-life crisis. The style is great, the dark humor was solidified as a specialty of Gunn’s and every cast member was excellent. Rainn Wilson proved his leading man status and the supporting cast of Elliot Page, Kevin Bacon, Michael Rooker, Nathan Fillion and Liv Tyler as Frank’s wife all do fantastic work. It’s delightfully violent and is an excellent look at superhero films. Premiering at the Toronto Film Festival in September 2010, the film was lambasted by many as a rip-off of Kick-Ass that came out earlier that year in March. The Mark Millar comic turned film by director Matthew Vaughn was a sleeper hit and critical darling. But Gunn and Millar defended each other’s work and rebutted the “theft” allegations. The truth is both films were different aside from the initial premise of regular people wearing costumes. But, just like Slither-despite knowing it works…I’m just not in love with Super. And to be honest, I wasn’t a fan of Kick-Ass either. I’d go on to appreciate Vaughn’s later works X-Men: First Class and Kingsman: The Secret Service more than Kick-Ass. And while I can enjoy Gunn’s early directorial work-I’ve grown fonder of his recent work. Super received critically mixed reviews, though it has a rabidly passionate fanbase and only grossed $590’000 against its $2.5 Million budget. Despite this, Gunn had earned the interest of a particular studio that was bolstering its Superhero film catalogue. But before we can look at that-we have to touch on two collaborative efforts he made before that. LOLLIPOP CHAINSAW / MOVIE 43 In 2012, the video game Lollipop Chainsaw was released as a collaboration between Japanese auteur Suda51 and James Gunn. The premise of a high school cheerleader who kills zombies with her zombie killing family is a solid frame work for Gunn’s humor. While the game definitely capitalizes on the exploitative nature you’d expect, there’s enough nuance and genuine humor to see a player through the game. There’s not too much to say aside from Tara Strong’s voice performance being genuinely excellent, the film’s marketing success largely due to model Jessica Nigri and it being a critical and commercial success. Unfortunately, I can’t exactly say the same for Gunn’s follow up release. In 2013, Gunn was many names attached to a project known as Movie 43. Movie 43 was effectively a sketch comedy anthology film like Amazon Women on the Moon or The Kentucky Fried Movie and despite being a modest success grossing $32 Million against a $6 Million budget, the film is considered one of the worst films ever made and I agree. A film that begins with Hugh Jackman having testicles on his chin and only gets worse isn’t a recipe for critical acclaim. While produced by the Farley Brothers, the film brought on directors like Steve Carr (Paul Blart Maul Cop), Steven Brill (Little Nicky), Elizabeth Banks (Pitch Perfect 2) and Brett Ratner (A massive sexual predator who made Rush Hour). Gunn’s directorial entry into the film was a segment called Beezel starring the previously mentioned Elizabeth Banks and Josh Duhamel. The premise is a male 2D animated cat named Beezel has sexual feeling for its owner Anson and hates the girlfriend, Amy. I will say that it’s the best segment of the film because Gunn had already mastered bad taste comedy, but that’s not saying much. It’s still a one joke premise that features moments like: Beezel jerking off, Beezel dreaming about having oral sex with Anson, Beezel drenching Amy in urine and Amy beating the ever-loving crap out of Beezel with a shovel. Surprisingly; zoophilia, urophilia and animal abuse are not the grossest or creepiest jokes in Movie 43…but it’s still weird. Gunn actually claims Elizabeth Banks roped him into it as the producers pretty much annoyed everyone involved into working on the project. Yes, Movie 43 is one of the worst films ever made. It’s not funny, transgressive, challenging or even very shocking-it’s just cringeworthy. I’m glad that only a year after this, Gunn had a blockbuster success that shot him into the mainstream. GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY 1 + 2 In 2012, Marvel and Disney achieved the first ultra-successful cinematic universe crossover with The Avengers. The film earned near universal acclaim and made over $1 Billion rapidly. This was the same year Marvel began talks with hiring James Gunn to direct a curious Marvel property: Guardians of the Galaxy. The comic was a collection of lesser-known Marvel characters, so it was deemed a risky venture for the studio. The initial script was written by Nicole Perlman, who’d been part of Marvel’s film writing program since 2009. She’d previously been an uncredited writing consultant on 2011’s Thor and would go on to do story work for Captain Marvel and Pokémon: Detective Pikachu. She chose to write a script for Guardians of the Galaxy herself and upon Gunn’s hiring-he did a substantial rewrite to make it his own. 2013 saw Iron Man 3 gross over a billion dollars, Thor: The Dark World made $200 million more than the first, and in March of 2014 Captain America: The Winter Soldier earned over $700 Million and some of the best reviews in the franchise. So, there was considerable pressure if James Gunn’s Guardians of the Galaxy would succeed. But ultimately, Gunn’s first blockbuster attempt succeeded: earning more than The Winter Soldier, positive reviews and becoming an instant fan favorite. People loved the humor, the cast, the style and Gunn’s choice for needle drop music. From the opening title sequence of Star Lord dancing to “Come and Get Your Love”, people were hooked. Guardians does exemplify one of Gunn’s genuine gifts as a storyteller: making stories about casts of characters with their own damage. They might be broken or even evil, but Gunn treats them with love-even if they’re not worth loving. From his Scooby Doo and Dawn of the Dead scripts, Slither and especially Guardians of the Galaxy-his films are ensemble pieces about people who need to help themselves. It’s very similar to how the Coen Brothers handle less than likeable casts in Blood Simple, Fargo, The Big Lebowski, No Country for Old Men or Hail Caesar. Gunn just has a gift for treating his characters properly, with Chris Pratt’s Starlord and Bradley Cooper’s Rocket Raccoon embodying that the most. Guardians of the Galaxy is easily one of the best Marvel films alongside the first Iron Man, The Winter Soldier, Civil War, Thor: Ragnarok and Black Panther. At its worst: it’s a fun blockbuster movie that’s funny. At its best: it’s a successor to sci-fi franchises like Star Wars with genuine heart. Having cemented his status in the Marvel universe as a talented director, Gunn began working on a sequel. Now, there was a shift beginning in Marvel that was largely due to Gunn himself. While the Marvel films from Iron Man to Thor were filmed on celluloid, they were shot digitally starting from Captain America: The First Avenger. From The Avengers onwards: the Marvel films had a very grey and flat visual style that made them look sometimes dull. While the dialogue, action sequences and effects were impressive-the colors just didn’t pop. Other blockbuster action films like Pacific Rim, Michael Bay’s Transformers, Max Fury Road and many DC films looked far more interesting. There was also criticism for many Marvel movies having generic music aside from the classic Avengers theme. Gunn’s colorful use of style and music in Guardians of the Galaxy gave Marvel a push to make a change. So, Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 released in 2017 as a truly gorgeous film that looked superior to its original in every way. But I think the sequel is very much a mixed bag for me. The film still received positive reviews from critics and made over $860 Million, with some critics thinking it was a genuinely beautiful film. My feelings are torn because on the one hand, the film looks absolutely gorgeous-but occasionally looks very messy or cheap. It’s use of humor can be really funny or very unfunny, with Gunn often ending an emotionally powerful sequence with a dumb joke. My mixed feelings about it are that many movies try to undercut genuinely emotional beats with a joke for the sake of not making audiences sad, but Gunn seems to have a more deliberate choice here. I’m still not 100% sure how I feel about it. It’s a far more emotionally nuanced story than the first film that made me cry at the end; dealing with themes of toxic masculinity, complicated fathers and surrogate families. Like I said, some critics (many with complicated relationships to their own fathers) found something gut wrenching about this film. I can appreciate that, but I still can’t divide my mixed feelings on the matter. I’d still give both his Guardians films a recommendation, but I personally prefer the first one and they’re absolutely the films that made him an indie darling turned blockbuster auteur. One thing that Disney has done is allowed for sometimes very new directors to gain a foothold in the Hollywood machinery and make their own works. Gunn’s skill was using the Marvel mechanism to not only thrive as a visionary, but to make it his own. THE BELKO EXPERIMENT Between his Guardians of the Galaxy films, Gunn produced a film that he had previously written back in 2007. While originally intending it to be his second film after Slither, Gunn instead was proceeding with a divorce and chose to be with his loved ones as opposed to working. After working on Super and signing on to Guardians of the Galaxy, MGM approached Gunn about making the film. Gunn was busy with his Marvel films, but agreeing to produce with complete control. Filming took place in 2015, with Australian horror director Greg McLean of Wolf Creek fame directing the project. The film was a dark comedy horror film that could best be described as Battle Royale meets The Office, where workers in an office complex are ordered to kill each other. The movie premiered at the Toronto Film Festival in 2016, before being widely released in 2017. It received mixed reviews and barely doubled its $5 Million budget. The film’s box office failure was likely due to a very competitive market at the time-being released the same month as juggernauts like Logan, Kong: Skull Island and the billion-dollar Beauty and the Beast remake. I’m not the biggest fan of this film, largely because it feels unchanged from when Gunn must have written it in 2007. Gunn’s writing abilities have been constantly evolving with each project, and I worry this film’s attempts at satirizing the Western Office workplace didn’t fold through. This might also be due to Greg McLean’s lacking directorial voice. While having started strong with the horror masterpieces Wolf Creek and Rogue, his later filmography Wolf Creek 2, The Darkness and Jungle lacked to energy of his first few works. I get that it’s supposed to be a commentary on the toxicity of the modern workplace in how co-workers are pitted against each other to “win” (Survive) and the higher ups are always the ruthless ones capable of setting up this scenario and surviving. I also get how it’s supposed to show how one’s morals and character can change in a survival scenario. Ultimately though, I found it lacked any real punch in its jokes, kills or attempt at intelligence. Also, while Gunn’s script does attempt to give depth to even the smallest screen time cast-it’s not his strongest set of characters. It really is just Battle Royale in an office building without much to offer. After watching this film, I found a superior equivalent in the form of 2006’s previously mentioned Severance. While different in plot, tone and style-both are survival horrors that act as dark comedies surrounding the western workplace. Severance was a superior film in both its horror and comedy, with The Belko Experiment falling short of anything beyond a novelty by 2017 standards. ATTEMPTED CANCELLATION Unfortunately, Gunn’s success was stalled in 2018 when he became the target of a coordinated smear campaign by right wing conspiracy mongers. Gunn was an avid critic of Donald Trump and so alt-right political commentator Mike Cernovich (a man known for bigoted conspiracy theories and falsely accusing multiple political opponents as pedophiles) encouraged like-minded followers to create a false narrative around Gunn. Before being assigned to Marvel, Gunn (like many comedic entities) used to make very disturbing jokes on Twitter. Cernovich and right-wing followers created the false narrative that Gunn was a paedophile and tried to tie it in to the #MeToo movement in order to destroy Gunn’s public image. This attempt at character assassination with old comedic tweets initially worked as Gunn was promptly fired from Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 that was set for production soon. Disney took this rapid measure due to not initially knowing the source of the accusations, but many of Gunn’s friends and peers defended him-seeing the rouse that it was. Cernovich has been a denier of date rapes, promotes the concept of White Genocide as an effort by non-white persons, and has claimed multiple times that Hollywood elite and members of the American Liberal party are all pedophiles with child sex rings. This was an attempt to silence Gunn and de-platform him from his work through lies, empowered by conspiratorial thought. Gunn immediately maintained radio silence as people like Chris Pratt and especially Dave Bautista came to his aid on social media. Now, when Marvel loses a director for a film that’s shortly about to begin production-they find a new director quickly. When Patty Jenkins left Thor: The Dark World, Game of Thrones director Alan Taylor was quickly chosen. When Edgar Wright left Ant-Man, Peyton Reed was quickly chosen. But when Gunn was fired-Marvel did not hunt for a new director. Although fans and outlets pushed for Taika Waititi of Thor: Ragnarok to helm the film, he did not want to. The likely reason was due to Marvel, Disney and the industry knowing that the firing was a knee jerk reaction and held no merit. No director wanted to steal a film (and series) that rightfully belonged to Gunn. So, Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 was delayed and Gunn smartly maintained silence. What complicated matters was Gunn was an executive producer and uncredited writer/director on many other Marvel films, Gunn wasn’t a gun for hire (pun not intended)-he was integral to the Marvel family. What was also happening at the time was Disney’s 20th Century Fox merger. Disney couldn’t just buy the soon to be retitled 20th Century, they had to gain the approval of many parties and countries. To avoid possible controversy-Disney CEO Alan Horn held off rehiring Gunn until the merger’s competition. So, for the rest of 2018, Gunn was silent while Guardians 3 was put on hold. In late 2018, Gunn was hired as the writer and director of DC’s second Suicide Squad film. This was due to not only DC modelling their first Suicide Squad film on Gunn’s Guardians of the Galaxy, but because DC (and most people) realizing Disney’s firing was a mistake and were happy to guarantee Gunn work. By the time Captain Marvel released in 2019 and the 20th Century Fox merger had completed-Gunn was reinstated as the writer and director of Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 after completing The Suicide Squad. In an attempt to ruin the career of James Gunn for criticizing Donald Trump: the right-wing conspiracy mongers merely stalled his career for about half a year and guaranteed him a second film job. Most persons recognized the smear campaign for what it was and no one takes this event seriously. BRIGHTBURN One minor victim of Gunn’s controversy was a film he was producing that involved relatives of his-2019’s Brightburn. A promotional event at Comic Con with Gunn’s appearance was cancelled due to the current controversy and Sony largely limited advertising to the film. Brightburn was a relatively simple premise-what if the story of Superman was a horror movie about a psychopathic child? The film was a somewhat intense and occasionally very dark film, that felt more like Rob Zombie’s Halloween remake with Michael Myers as Clark Kent. The film was a moderate success making $30 Million against a $12 million budget, and the money was impressively used. This film cost the same amount as another low tier superhero film Chronicle in 2012, but managed to achieve a stronger quality of filmmaking. The most interesting idea was committing to a dark superhero universe with suggested horror equivalents of Wonder Woman as a witch and Aquaman as a sea monster. And I did enjoy a confirmation that Brightburn exists in the same universe as James Gunn’s Super with a picture featuring Rainn Wilson’s character featuring in the film. While there are moments I like within the film, I and many others felt it lacked a genuine punch to its premise. It’s certainly an effective enough dark thriller, I feel it lacked the themes and narrative pull Gunn is often so good at in his own writing. So, I do hope the universe can be expanded with Gunn at the helm for a stronger result. But I will say I’m happy he was able to accept DC’s offer to direct The Suicide Squad because I believe it’s Gunn’s magnum opus. THE SUICIDE SQUAD Jumping back, in 2014-DC was building their planned Extended Universe with Zack Snyder as the series architect. While Snyder was handling Batman V Superman and the planned two Justice League films, Patty Jenkins was hired to direct Wonder Woman, James Wan was hired to direct Aquaman and David Ayer was hired to direct The Suicide Squad. Ayer was previously a Submarine Sonar Technician in the US Navy before becoming a filmmaker. He started off writing films like Training Day, The Fast and the Furious and Swat before becoming a director in 2005. He gained notable attention for writing and directing the 2012 crime drama End of Watch. After this, he cemented himself with the brutal yet awesome World War 2 tank film-Fury in 2014 that caught Warner Brother’s attention for the project. While Ayer was given control over Suicide Squad, he was only given 6 weeks to write the script-starting out a long problem filled production. The Suicide Squad in comics and on film was a simple premise-The Dirty Dozen, but with DC villains. The film would feature characters like Deadshot, Harley Quinn, El Diablo, Killer Croc, Captain Boomerang and appearances from Batman and The Joker. After initial filming, Batman V Superman was released to a largely negative response from audiences. This lead not only to 2 Justice League films being reduced to one, but Ayer’s darker tone for Suicide Squad would also be changed. Reshoots took place to lighten the mood, though some theorize it was also to change the villain focus in the story. In the editing process, Ayer’s cut was competing with a trailer studio’s edit. The studio edit won out, with many sub-plots, character motivations and sequences being removed. Though not known at the time, over the years the film has been out-more details were revealed as did Snyder’s original vision of Justice League after the film’s initial release in 2017. When Suicide Squad released, it was labelled by many as one of the worst films of the year, but ended up grossing over $745 million and even won best Hair and Makeup at the 89th Academy Awards. After Zack Snyder and fans pushed for his version of Justice League to be released became a reality-many did the same for David Ayer’s original Suicide Squad cut. While a studio head stated no intentions were made to release Ayer’s original cut, many continue to push for it. Personally, I enjoyed Suicide Squad-despite the broken mess it clearly is and the structural problems within. I find it enjoyable as a kind of trashy action film that shows Ayer’s strength in writing a surrogate family within a military/law enforcement environment. I would like to see Ayer’s original version and what it might’ve set up for Snyder’s DC universe. Despite the negative reviews, it was universally agreed that Margot Robbie’s portrayal of Harley Quinn was the best part of the film and she was a perfect embodiment of the character. After Suicide Squad, Ayer was originally tasked with developing a sequel-but opted to develop a Gotham City Sirens film that appears to be shelved. While Margot Robbie, Cathy Yan and Christina Hodson were developing Birds of Prey-DC searched for a new director for the Suicide Squad sequel. In Mid-2017, the directors considered were Mel Gibson (Braveheart), Ruben Fleischer (Zombieland), David Espinosa (Safe House), Jonathan Levine (Warm Bodies) and David S Goyer (Blade Trinity). The eventual front runner was Jaume Collet-Serra who directed films like Non-Stop and The Shallows, but declined in order to direct The Jungle Cruise for Disney. Gavin O’Conner of The Accountant was eventually hired to write and direct the film, but eventually left after it was discovered his script coincidentally resembled Birds of Prey. Funnily enough, Ruben Fleischer and David Espinosa went on to direct Venom and Morbius for Sony respectively. After James Gunn’s firing from Guardians of the Galaxy 3, he was hired to writer and direct the film. Fortunately, the production went off without issue as DC had learned their lessons about micromanaging projects and changing course mid-production. James Gunn’s The Suicide Squad is my favorite film from Gunn and the best of his efforts. It feels like an accumulation of all his best ideas. It has the dark humor from his Troma days, the team and broken characters from his Guardians of the Galaxy films and even the ultra-dark elements from the end feels ripped straight out of Slither. Mixing his skill as a blockbuster superhero director with his darkly comedic sensibilities is what he was meant to do-an R-Rated superhero film where the cast are literally meant to be expendable.
Something the first Suicide Squad failed to achieve was the sense of its characters being able to die at any moment. Only two team members really perish, with neither feeling that well-earned. Gunn makes you care about every member, no matter how brief they appear before many of them perish in grizzly and hilarious ways. While the film is a successor to the first film, a satire on CIA level missions and the story of sad broken people trying to be better-it’s actually the AAA version of an 80’s action film. After watching it, it reminded me mostly of Rambo: First Blood Part 2 where a criminal is sent in to a foreign country to do some sketchy stuff. It feels like a parody, homage and big budget version of those kind of films. I’d say it does a better job of that than any of the Expendables films that directly attempt to be an homage to that era of action filmmaking. The Suicide Squad is just funny, wickedly dark, has some great action scenes, features an amazing cast with Sylvester Stallone’s voice performance of King Shark being the highlight, and is one of my favorite DC films. Even the ultimate bad guy monster who should be incapable of being understood carries that sad feeling Gunn treats all his characters. There aren’t many people in Hollywood would could have used Starro the Conqueror the way Gunn did and made it work so well. The film is a masterclass in comedic payoffs, character writing on every level and blockbuster filmmaking and will likely stand as Gunn’s best work. While it received critical acclaim, it underperformed at the box office-likely due to HBO Max and unsafe cinemas during COVID. FUTURE What does the future hold for Gunn? Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 is his current focus, but he’s also going to be a lead creative in a Wiley Coyote and Road Runner film. More than likely, Gunn will work with Marvel and DC moving forward while working on his own passion projects. I’d like to see the Brightburn universe expand with him more directly involved and would love to see him handle the Suicide Cast he set up. But, I’m ultimately happy for Gunn to pursue whatever he wants. After receiving critical lashings and a smear campaign while making admirable work-Gunn deserves to create his passions. He’s a positive representation in the industry for sensibilities that go against the grain, auteur attitudes in blockbuster filmmaking and the importance of creative freedom. Gunn is an inspiration and source of positivity to many-showing that even if someone feels broken about themselves, they’re still worth loving even if they feel they’re not. I think he’s been making his projects avenues and paths for exploring himself, bettering who he is and giving inspiration to those who deserve to hear that. Personal ranking of James Gunn’s directorial filmography from Favorite to Least Favorite. -The Suicide Squad -Guardians of the Galaxy -Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 -Slither -Super EDITORIAL NOTE – “Superhero Fatigue” and Older Director Comments. A personal note I found that’s never unpacked as much is the notion that over the last decade, people are suffering from “Superhero Fatigue”. This notion is the belief that there’s too many superhero movies and people are tired of it, with some suggesting the genre will die out like the Western. I do not believe this. Superhero Fatigue would imply that audiences are growing tired of the films and not wanting to see it. This was suggested around 2014: a year which featured the releases of X-Men: Days of Future Past, The Amazing Spider-Man 2, Captain America: The Winter Soldier and Guardians of the Galaxy. Also released that year was the arthouse drama Birdman that appears to be a direct criticism of the genre. But if audiences were so tired of the superhero genre-then they would stop seeing them. Since 2014, films like the Avengers sequels, Civil War, Black Panther, Aquaman, Captain Marvel, Spider-Man: No Way Home and Joker have all earned over a billion dollars globally each. Audiences love the superhero genre. I believe the superhero fatigue claims are not found in the increased amount of superhero films, but the exposure of them on social media. Superhero films used to have one or maybe two releases a year in the 90s or early 2000s. In comparison, there are often at least 100 of several other genres each released every year now. Superhero releases going from 2 to 5 or 7 a year isn’t saturation. What can feel saturating is the social media attention, news coverage and studio attention given to superhero films during production, marketing, release and post-release. And it can’t be ignored that many of the critics are older film commentators and older filmmakers. There’s been many quotes from filmmakers like Martin Scorsese, Francis Ford Coppola, Jane Campion, Denis Villeneuve, Roland Emmerich and Ridley Scott about their distaste with the genre. Back when Martin Scorsese was disregarding Marvel (he meant superhero movies in general), that was likely due to an element not spoken about. Studios liked Warner Brothers, Sony, Universal and Disney don't seek auteur/director driven solo films anymore. They want Superhero franchises and Big Blockbuster genre films based on material that they can expand/tie in to other projects. So, directors like Martin Scorsese and Ridley Scott are prioritized less over tentpole franchises. They’re clearly frustrated that despite their legendary status, studios give less focus/desire for their one-shot passion projects. Scorsese himself desired for superhero films to not crowd out other films and Ridley Scott went so far to say "Their scripts are not any fucking good”. Personally, I think the dismissal and anger towards superhero films by such filmmakers is disrespectful to creators and their industry peers That's not throwing a genre under the bus, that's throwing writers and directors under the bus. People like James Gunn, James Mangold (nominated for an Oscar for writing Logan), Christopher Nolan, Ryan Coogler, Chris Terrio, Patty Jenkins and plenty more are gifted creators in the filmmaker sphere. Films like Batman Begins, Spider-Man: Into the Spiderverse, Logan, Joker, Guardians of the Galaxy, The Suicide Squad, The Dark Knight, Spider-Man 2, Iron Man and Wonder Woman have excellent screenplays and their writers don’t deserve to be attacked for it. Many older directors feel pushed out by the Superhero/Franchise wave made by younger filmmakers, so they lash out at the wrong people. The reality is, studios want their continuous superhero franchises-but directors can’t tell studios as a whole that they’re terrible for making them. Doing so would be burning bridges, so they turn to criticize the genre and those who work on it. This is short sighted, anger at studios preferring a different genre of film and throwing shade at other filmmakers isn’t a positive mindset. Filmmakers who criticize the superhero genre were often criticized themselves for similar reasons when they were starting out. Anger is fine, but anger towards those who are succeeding appears backward and petty. You can dislike superhero films and you can dislike the studio system for wanting to focus on them. But bad-mouthing the creators of those films who are just trying to create their vision evokes the glass houses argument. If a filmmaker like James Gunn can make superhero films that serve not only studio tentpole purposes as well as be a personal vision by the creator, why can’t others?
0 Comments
|
Tyrone BruinsmaThis is the Official Blog/Magazine for filmmaker, writer and content producer Tyrone Bruinsma Categories
All
|