James Gunn’s Shocking Truth: Marvel Was Screwed, Not Dead!

by

James Gunn is clearing the air about his recent controversial Marvel comments.

Speaking as a passionate movie enthusiast, I’d rephrase that statement like this: In an interview with Rolling Stone, Gunn shared his thoughts about how Marvel, in my opinion, has been stifled by corporate demands and the relentless pursuit of non-stop content creation.

Currently on “Threads”, he’s made it clear about his interpretation – Marvel isn’t deceased, but they were severely affected by choices he attributes to circumstances beyond their control.

“They were screwed by the situation”

I didn’t mean “they were killed off” in the sense that they’re gone forever, but rather, they were negatively impacted by circumstances beyond their control.

He subsequently expressed his disapproval towards the industry’s focus on streaming services over the past few years, which he refers to as a “streaming-first mentality.

Gunn stated that the obsession with prioritizing streaming over everything else has led to the demise of many positive aspects. This is because it created an unattainable demand for ‘content’, leading to movies being released on television before they had a chance for a proper theatrical release, among other issues,”

or more concisely:
“Gunn argued that the excessive focus on streaming has led to numerous drawbacks, such as rushing movie releases and more.

Gunn added that things are improving.

“The insanity has died down & balanced out everywhere. Thank God,” he said.

Is too much content really to blame?

It appears that excessive reliance on content as an explanation is a common defense in the industry, suggesting that most streaming services – aside from Netflix – have struggled due to factors other than their content offerings.

However, is too much content really to blame?

In my reply to Gunn’s post in “Threads“, I said, “It wasn’t an overabundance of content that did them in; it was a focus on the agenda instead of the story. That’s an important takeaway. How did things turn out for you?

I wasn’t instructed to avoid reading comic books because there was too much material during the development process for Marvel’s Disney+ series. Similarly, having a vast amount of content wasn’t the primary factor leading them to transform decades of subpar comics into the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU).

The reasons behind Benedict Cumberbatch’s absence in WandaVision, the introduction of America Chavez in Multiverse of Madness, Anthony Mackie taking over as Captain America, Hailee Steinfeld becoming the new Hawkeye, She-Hulk’s actions, the creation of the Ms. Marvel series, the failure of Secret Invasion, and the perceived emasculation of both Daredevil and Kingpin in Daredevil: Born Again can be explained by various factors such as casting decisions, storyline development, and creative choices made during production. Each of these changes reflects different approaches to adapting Marvel characters for film and television, taking into account the actors’ abilities, audience preferences, and the unique aspects of each character’s narrative.

Marvel isn’t the only one with numerous examples across various streaming platforms and Hollywood. Yet, it seems they’ve encountered financial difficulties. Shocking, isn’t it?

Additionally, it encompasses Gunn himself, whose personal objectives found their way into the storyline of ‘Creatures Commandos’, a plot that seems utterly nonsensical. It appears that this theme might carry over to ‘Superman’ as well.

I’m wondering if Gunn plans to discuss the diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives within Marvel? Was the decision to transform Cosmo into a female character part of the storyline? Did any of these examples relate to the plot in any way? Why not make Krypto female as well in the storytelling process?

I ask again: How’d it work out???

Read More

2025-06-18 00:22