Shocker: Guardians of The Galaxy Will Tie-In To Avengers 3

Shocker: Guardians of The Galaxy Will Tie-In To Avengers 3

image

You're surprised by this, right? No really, be honest. Totally surprised.

Let's cut to the chase: Entertainment Weekly has a big profile of Guardians of The Galaxy complete with new set photos (not yet online), and it features quotes from Director James Gunn that officially confirm what everyone has suspected/totally known since the film was announced. Brace yourselves: Guardians will definitely have a connection to Avengers 3.

Describing Thanos - first seen in one of the stingers for The Avengers - as the "head of the snake" in Guardians, Gunn told EW, and I quote, that he is "definitely connected to Avengers 3." This is obviously as surprising as the news that Thanos, the hulking, giant purple alien bent on collecting all of the Infinity Gems ("stones" in the Marvel Cinematic Universe) will be motion-captured CGI onscreen in GotG, which was also confirmed in the EW story, and we appreciate your thanks for bringing you this important news.

Gunn also gave some details into the MCU version of Peter Quill/Starlord's origins. "[H]e was abducted from Earth (Missouri) at age 8 and raised in a group of thieves and smuggles called the Ravagers," Gunn says, continuing that "He's good with the ladies and a little bit of a dick and very lucky." Meanwhile, Zoe Saldana's Gamora also has a slightly different origin. "Thanos slaughtered [Gamora's] family and Nebula's, then raised them together as siblings. They were bio engineered to become living weapons, so he's really good at killing people."

We'll be sure to share the images from EW's article as soon as they're online. In the meantime, enjoy the new image up top, which came from James Gunn's twitter. So, now that the obvious has been confirmed, let's speculate in comments about just how they'll tie the films together (aside, obviously, from the Infinity Stones quest). My honest guess is that the Guardians stinger will have them interact directly with one of the established members of The Avengers, setting them up for a return when Thanos reveals his ugly head come Avengers 3.

Source: Entertainment Weekly via Comic Book Movie and Bleeding Cool.

Permalink

My mind has officially been blown. I had no idea this was happening... :-)

I just saw The Winter Soldier last night, so I'm loving the Marvel Universe right now. My guess as to the post-credits scene is the same thing. These guys, or one of them anyway, will link up with an Avenger (Thor seems the most likely, or someone from that world) and hand over one of the Stones. Or perhaps the scene will show Thanos acquiring one of the stones for a change. Is he allowed to attack Asgard? Or perhaps he raids the vault of The Collector. Or The Collector hands one of the stones over. He did have that interesting line of, "One down, five more to go."
Whatever it turns out to be, I'm super excited to see it.

Ugh, I'm hoping it's minor. I quite love the Marvel movie universe these days, but this looks stupid and I have little intention of seeing it.

Then again, I'll probably be watching it eventually anyways as I tend to watch everything, so I likely won't miss out on any connections regardless. Still, I'd rather not see things I like connected to things that look dumb.

Who knows, maybe it won't suck. So for the trailers are just looking like a lot of attempts at humor that fall flat, and I'm somewhat biased against the Marvel stuff that strays into 'weirder' territory.

That's fine and I can't wait to see Thanos, but is anyone else a little turned off hearing the whole, "Our leading man is a flirtatious ass; our leading woman is an emotionless killer - when those two get together...uh-oh!"

*sigh*

... Wait, so it WASN'T seen as connected to Avengers? I mean, Avengers 3 will basically be a belt buckle that will tie all their movies together, so it only makes sense.

I should hope so. It would frankly be out of place when you think about it. You have the GotG who hop around the universe and do whatever it is they are doing. It would be nonsensical for them not even speak of Thanos, the mad Titan. I hope they don't change his origin. Gamora is an emotionless killer in the comics, so I wouldn't have it any other way. Peter Quill has always been kind of dickish. I mean... am I the only one who has read GotG over the years?

Baresark:
I should hope so. It would frankly be out of place when you think about it. You have the GotG who hop around the universe and do whatever it is they are doing. It would be nonsensical for them not even speak of Thanos, the mad Titan. I hope they don't change his origin. Gamora is an emotionless killer in the comics, so I wouldn't have it any other way. Peter Quill has always been kind of dickish. I mean... am I the only one who has read GotG over the years?

I've read some Guardians, and have no idea what this team is. What happened to Vance Astro, Charlie, and Yandu?

Well, I can understand Thanos being connected to Avengers 3, especially after finding out what Avengers 2 is covering in the MCU... But, having GotG being connected to Avengers 3?

I feel like I should have put two and two together just out of curiosity a lot sooner...

Okay, I admit you got me. I figured that Marvel was just flexing their creativity by doing GotG. Can't have all their stories happen on Earth, so they branch out into a Firefly like series. Honestly I wouldn't mind see any of their other books come to life.Plenty of material to go through. I vaguely recall the Infinity gauntlet arc (emphasis on vaguely) and I thought it took in quite alot of the Marvel universe. Almost on par with the Secret Wars. Large scale conflict and all that. The gems gave Mr Purple the dominion over the universe and what not, or at least made him a force to be reckoned with.

Arawn:
The gems gave Mr Purple the dominion over the universe and what not, or at least made him a force to be reckoned with.

Something like that. When he had all the gems, he was almost on level with the Living Tribunal iirc. They've got most of the key players in place now, with Gamora and Drax in. They basically just need Silver Surfer and Adam Warlock.

But as much as I love Infinity Gauntlet, I'm not sure how well it would actually work. A big part of it was seeing Thanos crush all these cosmic figures, who the moviegoing public wouldn't recognize or appreciate the power levels of. I mentioned the Living Tribunal above, but how many people know who that is?

vid87:
That's fine and I can't wait to see Thanos, but is anyone else a little turned off hearing the whole, "Our leading man is a flirtatious ass; our leading woman is an emotionless killer - when those two get together...uh-oh!"

*sigh*

Yeah, but I'm tired of the mandatory pair-off in general. Mostly because it almost always involves some sort of obvious conflict that is probably arbitrary and will be resolved halfway through the movie.

Benpasko:
I mentioned the Living Tribunal above, but how many people know who that is?

Thanks to decades of comic reading, I do. Which likely demonstrates your point. I doubt many people without a collection that could be seen from space if lit on fire do.

I'm gonna have to go with Spoony on this one...Marvel is about due for a major flop (it's the Law of Averages, my friends), and I've got a feeling this one could be it. It's not based on anything in particular (my feeling, that is) as I honestly haven't seen much or even heard much about GotG, and I certainly don't know them from the comics so I can't point to anything in particular that just screams "this will be a bad movie."

Just a feeling I've got. :P

RJ 17:
I'm gonna have to go with Spoony on this one...Marvel is about due for a major flop (it's the Law of Averages, my friends), and I've got a feeling this one could be it.

I think it'll become a cult classic, but yeah I don't see this doing very well.

RJ 17:
I'm gonna have to go with Spoony on this one...Marvel is about due for a major flop (it's the Law of Averages, my friends), and I've got a feeling this one could be it. It's not based on anything in particular (my feeling, that is) as I honestly haven't seen much or even heard much about GotG, and I certainly don't know them from the comics so I can't point to anything in particular that just screams "this will be a bad movie."

Just a feeling I've got. :P

Just because you, or many others outside the marvel fandom haven't heard of GOTG, doesn't mean it will flop.

Thor was quite risky, not many people out side the fandom had heard of him, and even they had, they would think of the actual Norse god, and not a super hero. But look how them films turned out. Admittedly more people knew he was, but as i said, outside the fandom? Not so much. Hell, pretty much all the Marvel films have been risky, even before Iron Man. Daredevil springs to mind and look how that turned out.

Marvel and Disney have obviously planned this for a very long time they knew exactly what they were doing and what they wanted to happen from the first Iron Man film. I honestly don't think we are going to see a huge flop, GOTG maybe the weeker of the films, but it certainly won't flop.

Put the Marvel logo on a film now a days and everyone will pile into the cinema.

arc1991:

RJ 17:
I'm gonna have to go with Spoony on this one...Marvel is about due for a major flop (it's the Law of Averages, my friends), and I've got a feeling this one could be it. It's not based on anything in particular (my feeling, that is) as I honestly haven't seen much or even heard much about GotG, and I certainly don't know them from the comics so I can't point to anything in particular that just screams "this will be a bad movie."

Just a feeling I've got. :P

Just because you, or many others outside the marvel fandom haven't heard of GOTG, doesn't mean it will flop.

I've heard of them before. The purpose of putting "(my feeling, that is)" is that my feeling isn't based on anything in particular. I haven't heard much about this specific movie, to clarify, not GotG itself.

The long and short of it is that I have nothing to base this feeling off of, but that doesn't change the fact that I do have a feeling this is going to be Marvel's first big flop with this new universe that they're building.

RJ 17:
(it's the Law of Averages, my friends)

I'm pretty certain the law of averages can only be applied over a large quantity of data. Assuming that something is going to occur in a specific case because it is due to occur as the previous cases are exceptionally far from the assumed average is actually the gambler's falacy.

Revnak:

RJ 17:
(it's the Law of Averages, my friends)

I'm pretty certain the law of averages can only be applied over a large quantity of data. Assuming that something is going to occur in a specific case because it is due to occur as the previous cases are exceptionally far from the assumed average is actually the gambler's falacy.

image
Why must we all be so literal all the time? Lighten up, my friend, it's simply a way of saying "sooner or later they're going to slip up", and I've got a feeling this is going to be their "sooner".

*dons a top hat and monocle.* I say, I can be a Buzz Killington too, if you prefer. With that said, I thought it would be very droll if we all sat down and looked at etchings. Would you like to join me?

I'd never heard of Guardians of the Galaxy until Bob mentioned it in some video or another.

I'm super excited to see this because the trailer makes me laugh and the idea of a gun toting space raccoon is enough to sell me on the movie as a whole. The fact that Bradley Cooper is playing a raccoon, that the music is going to be unbelieveably out of place and thus funny (assuming they stick to the kind of music likely to be found on the walkman of a kid who was abducted at some point in the 80's???), and that the kid in question has turned into what appears to be the best kind of space douchebag makes me extremely anxious to see this.

I'm 100% on board, let's do this thing.

RJ 17:

Revnak:

RJ 17:
(it's the Law of Averages, my friends)

I'm pretty certain the law of averages can only be applied over a large quantity of data. Assuming that something is going to occur in a specific case because it is due to occur as the previous cases are exceptionally far from the assumed average is actually the gambler's falacy.

image
Why must we all be so literal all the time? Lighten up, my friend, it's simply a way of saying "sooner or later they're going to slip up", and I've got a feeling this is going to be their "sooner".

*dons a top hat and monocle.* I say, I can be a Buzz Killington too, if you prefer. With that said, I thought it would be very droll if we all sat down and looked at etchings. Would you like to join me?

Except that you're saying that this particular movie will fail, not that it is likely that any random one of the whole set will fail. Your sample size is effectively one.

RJ 17:
It's not based on anything in particular (my feeling, that is) as I honestly haven't seen much or even heard much about GotG, and I certainly don't know them from the comics so I can't point to anything in particular that just screams "this will be a bad movie."

Just a feeling I've got. :P

I've always been one to say 'trust your instincts.' I, however, am really looking foreward to Guardians of the Galaxy. But, the reason I'm looking foreward to it is because GotG looks so weird/ out-there. I don't expect many to share my views on that one.

I've heard Iron Man is a member of the Guardians of the Galaxy, lately in the comics. Maybe Stark is getting into privatized space flight and bumps into the Milano. But, what I would love to see is the Red Skull, whom I believe wasn't killed but was teleported into space somewhere, show up at the end and somehow point the Mad Titan at Earth.

Also, Star Lord is from my home state. I find that hilarous.

I don't know why people are predicting that THIS movie is going to be Marvel's big flop when there's an Ant-man movie in the pipeline. If anything, this looks to be right up the general public's alley: sci-fi action-adventure with some humor? People should flock to the theaters.

Ant-man on the other hand... a lot of people who saw the demo reel say it was the shit, but honestly, do you see people going to see an Ant-man movie?

Then again, I thought Pacific Rim deserved to be a box-office smash, and people went to see Grown-ups 2.

Revnak:
Except that you're saying that this particular movie will fail, not that it is likely that any random one of the whole set will fail. Your sample size is effectively one.

I'd love to hear how you came to that conclusion, seeing as how my sample consists of

Captain 1
Captain 2
Iron Man 1
Iron Man 2
iron Man 3
Thor 1
Thor 2
Avengers

All of them have been pretty successful, hence my saying "they're due for a flop", and this next one could be it.

RJ 17:

Revnak:
Except that you're saying that this particular movie will fail, not that it is likely that any random one of the whole set will fail. Your sample size is effectively one.

I'd love to hear how you came to that conclusion, seeing as how my sample consists of

Captain 1
Captain 2
Iron Man 1
Iron Man 2
iron Man 3
Thor 1
Thor 2
Avengers

All of them have been pretty successful, hence my saying "they're due for a flop", and this next one could be it.

Nope, unless you can prove that the previous events would change the likelihood of later ones then they are in no way part of your sample. You could say that any one of them is likely to flop. You cannot say, after having noticed that none of the others flopped, that the next is going to. It has the exact same chance of flopping as any previous film (assuming that the previous events have no impact on the later ones, which you have presented no argument that they do).

Saying that "they're due for a flop" is the definition of the gambler's fallacy, which is a fallacy for a reason.

I fucking love math.

Edit- to be more specific, they aren't part of your sample size because you aren't considering them as part of this specific conclusion, rather they are part of the argument for it. Your sample size for your conclusion is just GotG.

Revnak:

RJ 17:

Revnak:
Except that you're saying that this particular movie will fail, not that it is likely that any random one of the whole set will fail. Your sample size is effectively one.

I'd love to hear how you came to that conclusion, seeing as how my sample consists of

Captain 1
Captain 2
Iron Man 1
Iron Man 2
iron Man 3
Thor 1
Thor 2
Avengers

All of them have been pretty successful, hence my saying "they're due for a flop", and this next one could be it.

Nope, unless you can prove that the previous events would change the likelihood of later ones then they are in no way part of your sample. You could say that any one of them is likely to flop. You cannot say, after having noticed that none of the others flopped, that the next is going to. It has the exact same chance of flopping as any previous film (assuming that the previous events have no impact on the later ones, which you have presented no argument that they do).

Saying that "they're due for a flop" is the definition of the gambler's fallacy, which is a fallacy for a reason.

I fucking love math.

Edit- to be more specific, they aren't part of your sample size because you aren't considering them as part of this specific conclusion, rather they are part of the argument for it. Your sample size for your conclusion is just GotG.

Yeah, you are just my favorite type of person to talk to. So on that note, I'm just going to consider everything you say to be a thrilling yarn about a bridge. Have a pleasant weekend.

RJ 17:

Revnak:

RJ 17:
I'd love to hear how you came to that conclusion, seeing as how my sample consists of

Captain 1
Captain 2
Iron Man 1
Iron Man 2
iron Man 3
Thor 1
Thor 2
Avengers

All of them have been pretty successful, hence my saying "they're due for a flop", and this next one could be it.

Nope, unless you can prove that the previous events would change the likelihood of later ones then they are in no way part of your sample. You could say that any one of them is likely to flop. You cannot say, after having noticed that none of the others flopped, that the next is going to. It has the exact same chance of flopping as any previous film (assuming that the previous events have no impact on the later ones, which you have presented no argument that they do).

Saying that "they're due for a flop" is the definition of the gambler's fallacy, which is a fallacy for a reason.

I fucking love math.

Edit- to be more specific, they aren't part of your sample size because you aren't considering them as part of this specific conclusion, rather they are part of the argument for it. Your sample size for your conclusion is just GotG.

Yeah, you are just my favorite type of person to talk to. So on that note, I'm just going to consider everything you say to be a thrilling yarn about a bridge. Have a pleasant weekend.

Math ain't a "thrilling" yarn about a bridge. Math makes things fucking work. If you don't think that it's awesome that all the previous flips of a coin have no impact on the later ones, if that can't blow your mind or change your life, then you are the boring one. If you aren't impressed by how having a significantly large sample still leads to the overall distribution of outcomes being comparatively closer to the projected average despite that fundamental rule of statistics, you are the one who is essentially just making meaningless speeches about meaningless things, ignorant of the awesome logic that surrounds us.

If you consider it boring to be corrected, to have the ignorance of your statements laid out before you for you specifically to see, such that you can learn something meaningful about the world around you and attain a greater grasp of the world that you exist within, then you are the one who is dull, trivial, and meaningless, or at the very least you will never be able to become less so in any meaningful way.

You are restricted by your brain's inherent misunderstanding of statistics such that you can never truly "get" statistics, and you refuse to overcome it. You are limited by your far too common sense, and you will never have anything meaningful to say about anything related to probability if you cannot grasp the basics of it. Your meaningless comment is just a waste of our time with it's appeasement of our primitive monkey brains. Jon, you are the bridges. You have always been the bridges. You will always be the bridges.

I. FUCKING. LOVE. MATH.

Everyone forget about those two Hulk movies? I hear they totally didn't flop at all.

Michael Law:
Everyone forget about those two Hulk movies? I hear they totally didn't flop at all.

Surprisingly both made a profit, the Marvel reboot exceeding expectations (which were low after the Ang Lee's versions expected high performance).

Oh wow really?
That is kind of amazing haha.
Critically though, both were flops for sure. Not well received. Though I thought the one with Tim Roth was fine. I hope they bring him back as Abomination.

Yup Marvel is got things planned out and is gradually crafting their movie universe while...DC... can't even figure out how to lay the first brick.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here