Taika Waititi Steven S. DeKnight

Tyler Perry

Seven DeKnight already said he won't.

Mr. J Madea goes to space

Edgar Wright

It's funny you mention Talalay -- I had Toby Haynes as another of my potential directing choices for GOTG 3, and he also directed some Doctor Who.

I won't. Taika wasn't even able to honour a movie title, he would be unable to tone down his own style and ideas for the sake of James Gunn.

If Even Taika Waititi also says the same thing too, I wonder how folks who advocate for him to do guardians vol 3 will honestly feel about it....

RavensWolves Why does it need to be a high profiled director? Neither James Gunn, the Russo Brothers, nor Jon Favreau were high profiled so what are you talking about?

vigorlilover High Profile meaning you have heard their name before. NONE of the directors you named made their film directorial debut making a Marvel film. (Yes, for the Russo brothers "Winter Soldier" was their third film.) The reason I feel it will be extremely difficult to get a named director for this film is because of how Disney has handled this. No matter how well GotGv3 is received, no matter how much money it makes, the question will always be "Could James Gunn have done better?". No matter how happy the set, no matter how drama free the production is from here on out, all of the cast members will be asked some form of "Would you have preferred working with Gunn?" question. No director wants that. These problems will make the Justice League movie "Which director ruined the movie more" online controversies pale in comparison.

This isn't the first time a filmmaker was removed from a project they had put their heart and soul into, amid negative coverage. Edgar Wright developed the Ant-Man project, and then late into development he was removed due to growing animosity and creative conflict with the studio. But that didn't ultimately matter, he was replaced and the cast & crew all worked hard with the new filmmaker Peyton Reed, and the rest is history. With Gunn, he publicly stated he understood Disney'd decision and the entire thing ultimately arose due to his own remarks and past behavior -- like it or not, no matter who set the ball rolling to get him fired, he sent those tweets and he posed in those photos for the pedophilia-themed party, and so on. Meanwhile, GOTG as a brand is so huge and popular, and most of the mainstream public likely doesn't even remember the name of the director behind the first two movies (that's just the nature of the business), none of this is likely to hurt the third film's performance. By the time the film is completed, this will all be water under the bridge for most people, and any cast who still harbor negative feelings are unlikely to voice those in interviews promoting the film -- I've been to plenty of press junkets for these movies, and when journalists ask tense questions that would require an answer that might offend or insult someone else on stage, people just don't answer or they give a very diplomatic answer. So I don't remotely think this will really be a problem of the sort you are talking about. Justice League is a VERY different situation, the director was removed after principal photography and another director took over, changing the final result significantly within a rushed schedule. The negative press reports, the negative reception the theatrical release faced, and the facts of what transpired in production & reshoots makes it highly unlikely the GOTG situation will come anywhere close to the same level of controversy by the time the film releases.

Mark Hughes Hi, I did not mean to be antagonistic towards your podcasts, and if I came off that way I apologize. I am a subscriber and I do like this channel. I just was trying to write something short and to the point. That being said... Disney handled this completely wrong. They could have "suspended" Gunn for a week or two, then came out with a statement "Upon careful consideration we have decided to find a new director for GotGv3..." And a lot of this would have gone away. But their rather rushed decision, to a political situation, only added fuel to the fire. This differs greatly from the Edgar Wright situation as; A) He (EW) quit and was not fired; B) Did not have two already successful Marvel films on the same subject, C) Was not publicly asked to be rehired by the cast; and D) Did not have one of the main stars comparing his leaving to 'Appeasing Cyber-Nazis' or something close to it . It does not matter what the box office actually is when comparing it to a "what if" scenario. GotGv3 could have a bigger box office then Black Panther and A3:IW combined and still there will be speculation over if Gunn could have brought in more seats. This is not going away any time soon. Unlike Edgar Wright, Gunn also has influenced Marvel movies OUTSIDE his own films. Is the next space film going to show a "Gunn" influence"? In A4 are they going to publicly promote that Rocket's lines were written by Gunn, in the same way they promoted Gunn's influence on A3:IW? Is there going to be another director round table with Gunn? I am sure the press junkets will be super nice to the director and cast to their faces (They want to be invited to the next Disney Junket, right?) but TV show hosts don't have to be so diplomatic. And all you need is one of them to ask the question and get an interesting response for the rest to run with it. Also keep in mind these questions could be asked to the cast members when they are promoting things that AREN'T a Marvel/Disney film. While at the premiere of the next say F&F will Vin D. or Bautista remember to be diplomatic about it? What if a fan yells something out? And even if the cast is ALWAYS perfect, the headline could be "Bautista tries to avoid being controversial at the (fill in the blank) event". I brought up Justice League not in the manner in which directors were handled, nor in the circumstances of the change, but in the way the fans reacted to it. There is still a call for a 'Snyder Cut' of that film. The perception out there is that the film could have done better if, (choose a director) had more influence on the film as a whole. And that is going to reverberate forever around it. This is going to be a similar problem, but since the Marvel films have (in my opinion) a stronger following this is only going to be felt more. No matter how well it does, there will be a perception of 'It could have done better if', and that will haunt it and it's director forever. This is not the first time Disney has fired a director (Patty Jenkins) but they bungled this big time. And I feel it will be very hard to find a willing director to step in after all of this controversy without the public blessing of Gunn (and Disney has put themselves in position where that is not feasible). But just to show I am not anti-speculation fun; here are my two picks; Guillermo del Toro and The Wachowski sisters. Thank you!