‘Guardians of Galaxy’ Won’t Be in ‘Avengers 2′; Marvel Phase Two Films All Standalone?

Published 2 years ago by , Updated June 13th, 2013 at 10:56 am,

Guardians of the Galaxy in Avengers 2 Guardians of Galaxy Wont Be in Avengers 2; Marvel Phase Two Films All Standalone?

There’s still a long road to go until The Avengers 2 hits theaters in 2015 – but as always, loyal fans have been filling the gap with titillating (and often raucous) speculation about what Phase Two of Marvel’s Movie Universe will bring. The second phase kicked off this summer with Iron Man 3; it continues this fall with Thor: The Dark World; then in spring/summer 2014 we’ll see Captain America: The Winter Soldier and the already controversial Guardians of the Galaxy before Avengers 2 is up to bat.

Given Marvel Studios’ history, fans (including us here on the Screen Rant staff) have long assumed that the Phase Two lineup was intentional – the natural progression of an overarching storyline (starting at the end of Avengers) that would culminate in Avengers 2. However, today we have news from Avengers 2 director (and MCU shepherd) Joss Whedon that is changing our entire perception of what Marvel Phase Two might bring. Get your geek hats on for this one.

joss whedon3 Guardians of Galaxy Wont Be in Avengers 2; Marvel Phase Two Films All Standalone?

Bleeding Cool spoke to Whedon – whose Shakespeare adaptation Much Ado About Nothing is now in theaters – and when the subject of Marvel Movie Universe came up, Whedon had the following to say:

We’re following Guardians at Shepperton [Studios, with Avengers 2] but we won’t be swapping cast members. Every movie is its own thing and has to be. Unless I take a lot of peyote and write a very different draft… and I’m not ruling that out.

Upon scrutiny, that comment is somewhat revealing in the sense that it has long been an assumption amongst fans that Thor: The Dark World would further a cosmic-based storyline that ran through Guardians of the Galaxy - which would in turn be the springboard for a cosmic threat at the center of Avengers 2. What Whedon said about “Every movie is its own thing…” somewhat upsets that entire design.


Avengers 2 – Will It Be Earth-Based?

Marvels The Avengers Review starring Robert Downey Jr. Scarlett Johansson and Smauel L. Jackson1 Guardians of Galaxy Wont Be in Avengers 2; Marvel Phase Two Films All Standalone?

The end of Avengers set the classic Marvel villain Thanos up as the “big baddie” for Phase Two, and Whedon himself previously confirmed Thanos would appear in both Guardians and Avengers 2though later on, the company line did change a bit, so as to suggest that a character like Thanos could be saved for Phase Three. In my own feature article, I asked the question “Where Should ‘Avengers 2′ Take Place?”, weighing the pros and cons of an Earth-based story (featuring, say, a rival team of villains) vs. a space-set story (featuring a villain like Thanos).

Captain America The Winter Soldier Bucky art 570x320 Guardians of Galaxy Wont Be in Avengers 2; Marvel Phase Two Films All Standalone?

‘Captain America: The Winter Soldier’ Artwork

My opinion was (and still is) that a sequel featuring a rival team of villains like The Masters of Evil would definitely be a compelling scenario (very Dark Knight in its own way – yeah I said it!); not to mention, one that could easily be born out of the terrestrial storyline of Captain America: The Winter SoldierGuardiansmeanwhile, would be left free to establish itself on more independent terms, while setting up a story arc not for Avengers 2, but rather the storyline to come in Phase Three. Based on what Whedon said, that could certainly be the case.


NEXT PAGE: Villains and Storyline for Marvel Phase Two….


The Master of Evil (featuring Quicksilver & Scarlet Witch)?

Avengers 2 Masters of Evil Guardians of Galaxy Wont Be in Avengers 2; Marvel Phase Two Films All Standalone?

The next thing to consider also comes from the mouth of Whedon himself. In the last month, fanboys’ brains have all been bent over the news (from Whedon) that the characters of Quicksilver and his sister Scarlett Witch would be appearing in Avengers 2. It just so happens that Quicksilver is also being featured in Bryan Singer’s currently-in-production movie, X-Men: Days of Future Past. There was much confusion over which studio (Marvel – or Fox, which has the rights to the X-Men franchise) would be entitled to the characters – but apparently both are.

However, as anyone who has picked up a comic knows, Quicksilver and Scarlett Witch didn’t start on the right side of the law.

Quicksilver Scarlet Witch Ultimates Avengers Guardians of Galaxy Wont Be in Avengers 2; Marvel Phase Two Films All Standalone?

In the comics, the pair are the children of Magneto, and fought alongside his Brotherhood of Evil Mutants. Clearly Magneto isn’t paying a visit to The Avengers; Whedon’s version of the characters won’t be mutants, will be British, but could still be the reluctant villains they originally were in the comics.

In other words: they could be introduced via a bad guy team like the Masters of Evil, rather than the Brotherhood of Mutants. Such a development would fall in with what Whedon meant when he previously said the pair wouldn’t “make things easier for the Avengers team; furthermore, a scenario like The Masters of Evil dividing and conquering the Avengers would also fit with the more personal and painful team story Whedon has been hinting at for the last year.

Finally: Avengers vs. The Masters of Evil is a succinct (but epic enough) storyline to contain in one film.


No Grand Saga?

Marvel Cosmic Universe Movies Guardians of Galaxy Wont Be in Avengers 2; Marvel Phase Two Films All Standalone?

With Whedon now creating distance between Guardians and Avengers 2, and Iron Man 3 already throwing fans for a bit of loop in terms of its changed tone and isolated position within the Marvel Movieverse, suffice to say that people may want to start re-examining their expectations of what Marvel Phase Two is going to deliver.

Most of us expected a big interwoven saga, slowly unfolding a chapter at a time – but in reality, what we could be getting is something more akin to what Phase One was: isolated stories with just the loosest threads of connection, and an Avengers 2 culmination that only kinda requires you to have seen the other films (because, you know, Thor can just show up out of the blue! No explanation needed!).

avengers 2 small banner Guardians of Galaxy Wont Be in Avengers 2; Marvel Phase Two Films All Standalone?

That’s not to say a more standalone approach is inherently a bad thing. In fact, given the continued behind-the-scenes troubles plaguing Marvel Studios (contract negotiations) and the risk that Guardians of the Galaxy could be the next Green Lantern (read: a disappointing misstep), cushioning Avengers 2 - a guaranteed cash-cow – from the fate of other Marvel projects is probably the SMARTEST move. I mean, if people end up hating Rocket Raccoon in GotG, it would be pretty awkward for Marvel to discover that fact as Robert Downey Jr. is jumping back and forth in front of a green screen, pretending to be standing next to him on the set of Avengers 2...

What’s your take on Whedon’s quote? Think Avengers 2 will still “go cosmic”? Or is an Earth-based standalone story (possibly featuring villains like The Masters of Evil) seeming more likely now?


Iron Man 3 is currently in theaters. Thor: The Dark World will be in theaters on November 8, 2013, Captain America: The Winter Soldier on April 4, 2014, Guardians of the Galaxy on August 1, 2014, The Avengers 2 on May 1, 2015, Ant-Man on November 6, 2015, and Doctor Strange sometime after that.

Source: Bleeding Cool

« 1 2View All»

Follow Kofi Outlaw on Twitter @ppnkof
Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. I think that GOTG is just like The Avengers like The Nova Corps is just a rip of S.H.I.E.L.D

    • Nope, Nova Corps is nothing like SHIELD. Nova Corps is more of a space police or militia and SHIELD is an espionage agency akin to the CIA.

      GOTG is similar to the Avengers much like X-Men or any other team-based super hero group is.

      • Shield is the NSA and it’s Prism data gathering program lol

        Nova corps is a militarized UN peacekeeper force

    • I think you should pick up a comic book. This way you don’t have to think. You will know.

      • Comment aimed at Rsherd.

    • Nova Corps is in interplanetary police force. SHIELD is an Earth based spy agency.

      Same goes for GOTG and Avengers, except they were both written around the same time

      • Nova Corps is a rip off Green Lantern Corps. However, thats not to say that Nova (Richard Rider, not the other one, hated him), is not an interesting character in his own right.

  2. I never really expected the guardians to appear in A2, no shock there… even for Whedon, that’s too much to juggle. And the story takes place in an alternate future so James Gunn can do what he wants with GotG.

    Maybe by A3.

    I’m very curious to see if Guardians gets a sequel, and if THAT film will occur within the Avengers timeline/universe.

  3. Ken Watanbe as real Mandarin please

    • It’s too late now my friend, time to get over it already.

  4. Despite a number of bumps in the road, Green Lantern was in fact a success. It was the critics who in their over-bearing ways scared the studio out of making Green Lantern #2, #3, and maybe even The Flash, who were the failures.

    Future heroes for Avengers: Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch, Goliath (Hank Pym) and Wasp. Maybe later Vision & Black Panther, but further down the line.

    Future baddies for The Avengers: Ultron, Kang, Skrulls, Whirlwind, Radioactive Man, Diablo, a REAL Mandarin.

    I HAVE SPOKEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • Thank goodness they’re not making any more GL movies, the first was pretty much terrible.

      You’ve spoken, but you haven’t said anything that we haven’t heard you repeat a hundred times already.

      • Seriously. EVERY Marvel article.

      • Somewhat gawky and a little too bent on failed fun for sure, but “terrible” is too big a word IMHO. There was some good stuff in it. Sinestro was spot-on.

      • 101 times, Mr. dirt-oink. Hee-hee. Someone’s gotta stand up for the downtrodden (“GL”), like a voice crying out in the wilderness (Hey, Salome, put down that head-chopper!)
        Besides, if I grumble, cajole, and wish-list enough about heroes and villains for future Avengers flicks, maybe–just maybe–someone who has the powers to make decisions will spot it and take heed.

        • I agree that somebody needs to do GL justice on screen, but I’d like a reboot to forget that mess.

          • Even though you have totally different creative sources and directions in the film production of Green Lantern as opposed to the decades of history from comic book writers, I still find it ironic that the GL movie only served to further my “opinion” of Marvel having the better stories; universe(s); characters; etc..

            I will admit, however, had I been a lifelong fan of GL i’d be appreciating it just for being up in the screen and at least having top notch production value and CGI.

            For instance, I don’t get all the hatred on X-Men: The Last Stand; X-men Origins: Wolverine; even Spiderman 3 (the studio did screw up that movie, tho. And come to think of it, “emo Peter Parker” was cringe-worthy; even though I found it funny.

            FF: Rise of the Silver Surfer was cool just as well for seeing the SS up there doing his thing. Just the scene where he says ” I am Norrin Radd” was something I’ve waited for many, many years.
            I’m waiting for the reboot for -hopefully- the definitive fantastic Four movie(s).

            • X3 suffered from many things, mostly from Brett Ratner directing and from its overcrowdedness resulting in the characters’ lack of exposition. Wolverine Origins was a sanitized PG-13 whereas it should’ve been rated R, and also screwed up a lot of stuff, including the Deadpool character. Spider-Man 3 was crammed with too many villains; the studio enforced the Venom character whereas Raimi had absolutely no care for him, which couldn’t end good. The Silver Surfer was pretty much the only thing that was not a huge disappointment in FF2: they didn’t even try to fix everything that was wrong in the 1st movie (among which was the cheesy latex Thing), Doom was a joke and Galactus was a giant cloud.
              BTW, “emo Peter Parker” was in TASM, not Spider-Man 3.

    • Green Lantern was neither a critical nor a financial success. And for that matter, most audiences didn’t like it either. It has a 26% approval rating among critics and a 47% approval rating among audiences on Rotten Tomatoes and it barely made back it’s $200 million production cost. Basically, a failure on all counts.

      • Making back the production cost could hardly be considered a failure. Not a success, I’ll grant you that, but not a failure either. Only a waste of time.

        • Not a success = failure

          • The absence of something is not its contrary.

            • It is if that’s what the definition of the word is.


              • Your link sends to a blank page. Since you’re into definitions, maybe you should check that of contrary.

                Anyway, point is: THEY DIDN’T LOSE MONEY.

                • Alright, smart guy. Considering I majored in Cinema and Cultural Studies and most of my time on college was spent consistently writing academic essays, I an aware of what the word “contrary” means.
                  And if you had been able to follow the link, it would have brought you to the primary definition of the word “failure” which is:

                  “an act or instance of failing, or proving unsuccessful; lack of success”

                  And yes, the movie profited $19 million, which maybe covered it’s advertising campaign. Couple that with industry analysts’ statements that the movie “FAILED to perform to expectations” and that “Green Lantern needed to make $500 million to be considered financially solid” then what you end up with is a spectacular failed attempt at a viable super hero franchise.

                  • I think the lesson here is that , as fans, “failure” and “success’ are completely subjective; even arbitrary at times. One fan might base his opinion of success the way the studios do in dollars but we all know movies that tanked financially that we love anyway ; another might base it on how it compares to the comic he read and the enjoyment or lack thereof awhile reading it. Or some like to base it on the love/hate of the____ (director, writer, actor).

                    It’s an open-ended argument. Do like mayonnaise or don’t you? We could be here for days.

                    • Yes the film’s success is subjective in terms of individual fan reception, however most sources support that the majority of fans didn’t enjoy the movie. However, my original argument was with Goldilocks who claimed Green Lantern was “in fact a success”. Sure, maybe to him it was, but he didn’t specify that so I simply offered some empirical data that supported the contrary (that word’s for you, Bfg666).
                      Then I started to be debated on the definition of the word “failure”. And then it was insinuated that I didn’t have a firm grasp on the definition of a simple word like “contrary” and I defended myself with extreme prejudice. And yes, I do like mayonnaise, thank you for asking.

                    • Don’t flatter yourself, Shpshepklkffff, your “extreme prejudice” is only in your mind, I don’t feel hurt one bit. Also, I have no use for your bragging about your studies and academic essays. I tend to find patronizing people pretty despicable. You might wanna try to keep cool and level-headed.

                    • You almost had the high road until you sophomorically mocked my name. Anyway, I’m bored with this echange.

    • First off Hank Pym will be in his Ant Man gear not his Goliath gear, hence the Ant Man movie. And the Chitauri from the first Avengers movie were the ultimate universe version of Skrulls so you can count that out too. And why would they use Diablo ? Aside from the fact that he is mainly a Fantastic 4 villain he kinda blows.

      • Also, I suspect the Kree will make an appearance at some point, maybe GOTG.

      • the movie Chitauri and the Ultimate universe Chitauri are NOT the same thing. They’re quite different. In fact the movie Chitauri was just introduced to the 616 comics universe.

      • Goliath was better than Ant-Man, at least in my opinion, in the comics.
        The Chitauri could not change shape like, say, a Skrull, or absorb powers like a Super-Skrull.
        As for Diablo, he would have to be the brains behind a bigger threat, or an instigator,m or something. Of course, the way source material gets rewritten in some films, maybe they would accidently write him good??

  5. I’m okay with all of this, but I just don’t get how GotG is part of Phase 2 if they’re not going to be in Avengers 2?

    • Its a movie coming out in the second phase of marvel movies. Not all movies are directly tied to avengers 2. Some movies are simply expanding and exploring the vast universe that is the MU. They all play in the same universe but to think just because They HAVE to show up in the next Avengers is a little crazy. In some movie down the line when a the cosmos is in jeopardy then that would make sense but I’d rather they deal with their own things until that time comes… If it ever does. Afterall the Marvel-199999 is not the marvel-616.

      • “In some movie down the line when a the cosmos is in jeopardy then that would make sense”

        Avengers 3?

        • @FILTHpig, Put a +1 on that!

      • I get what you mean. What I meant is how is it considered part of the same universe if there are no ties to anything else in the MCU? Like who’s to say it’s not in the same universe as, say, the X-Men movies are something instead? (Just to be clear, I know that Marvel owns GotG movie rights and Fox owns X-Men movie rights, so it obviously wouldn’t be a shared universe there, I was just trying to make a point.) I was just trying to bring up the question of why not just say Marvel is making a GotG movie its own thing rather than say it’s part of Phase 2 of the MCU, when in actuality it’s its own thing.

        But I completely get what you’re getting at. It’s technically the same thing as in comics, just because each hero doesn’t cross over into another series every issue, doesn’t mean they’re not part of the same universe. I just thought it was a little weird to do the same thing with the movie universe I guess. Although, now that I think about it, there is still a tie between GotG and Avengers 2 that we know of…Thanos.

        • Thanos will be in both movies

        • I think there will be some scenes on earth, thanos will be referenced, they will undoubtedly introduce alien species that will play a part in future MU films (kree hopefully). The “connective tissue” is there but agree some people (gen public) might be somewhat confused that everything doesnt tie up neatly in Avengers 2. Marvel has set a precedent with their movies all tying together so they’ll have to manage fan expectations to a degree to get themselves out of that position.

  6. They don’t have to be in it…just Rocket Raccon needs to be in it.

    • Umm, no. He needs to never have existed.

  7. All this says to me is that Marvel is playing it safe with GotG…
    They realize it’s a “risk” and don’t want to mess with the formula that made The Avengers the 3rd most successful film of all time.
    So, can you really blame them?
    I don’t. Even if you’re a fan and have read GotG you’re not being honest with youreself if you don’t think it’s risky. Like tons of people have been saying if your main character is a gunslinging, talking raccoon there’s going to be people who will say WTF??? and will stay away.
    If it turns out great, is well received by critics & fans and becomes a hit then you’ll see a sequel and a crossover into The Avengers 3.

    • Han Solo was a leader and a gunslinger. Chewbacca was also a walking carpet just like Rocket. I’m sure at 1st people were like “WTF???” to that of Star Wars. However after learning about them, they learned to love them. Key word here, “learning.” People just need to learn about the Guardians… and they will.

      • Wookiees look like nothing on Earth. Making an alien being look exactly like a species from Earth is plain stupid considering the variety of life forms on our planet alone. Also, a talking raccoon is just the silliest, most ridiculous idea. It works in the Disney universe, not in the Marvel universe. Same goes for Howard the Duck or Beta Ray Bill.

        • Then don’t watch it… that’s what I do with X-Men movies now.

          • I will watch it nonetheless. For tie-ins. And who knows, I might just be pleasantly surprised. I doubt it, but you never know. After all, it’s not the filmmakers’ fault if the character was designed this way and the film might still be enjoyable despite him. I just don’t expect much from it. I still continue watching the X movies for the very same reason: a faint remainder of hope. The new Wolvie looks promising.

            • @bfg666, Did you like any of the MIB movies?

              • They have nothing to do with Marvel but yes, I have seen the first two. Not bad in the brainless absurd fun category. Not exactly what I expect of a Marvel movie.

                • @bfg666, Seeing that you liked the MIB movies. Did you have a problem with Frank?

                  Rocket is pretty much the same character just artificially made.

                  • Like I said, not the same universe and not the same tone. MIB went full throttle on the silly comedy and I don’t expect that from a MCU movie. We’ll see how they handle GotG, I’m just expressing a quite understandable doubt.

                    • Despite it being a different universe, it doesn’t matter when comparing two very similar characters based off of a furry creature from Earth with similar personality traits and the same supportive role to the lead protagonist.

                      You don’t know Guardians. It’s practically a comedy trying to be serious. They are a team up misfits and f*ck ups. Look at Chris Pratt’s background. It is bcuz of his comedy & serious roles, he will be perfect for Pete.

                      If anything by your logic, you shouldn’t of been so bummed out about Rocket being a raccoon. After all, Marvel is a different universe than ours.

                    • Not sure I want an overtly (and overly) tongue-in-cheek movie set in the MCU. A little humor is good but it mustn’t detract from the seriousness of the issues at stake. I’d say the perfect template is Whedon’s Avengers.

                    • @bfg666, Tbh I didn’t find Whedon’s humor all that compelling. He’s just not funny at all. James Gunn on the other hand is. Gunn knows how to blend comedy with seriousness. So don’t worry about the template bcuz Guardians is right up Gunn’s alley.

                      Also, I posted the panels of Rocket’s introduction in the comic but this site isn’t letting me post it right away. It says, “Your comment is awaiting moderation.”

                      If you really want a better understanding of everything. Like discover about the Guardians for yourself, instead of hearing the bs I and others gotta say, read:

                      “Annihilation: Conquest – Starlord” Issue #1

                      It’s only 4 issues and $2 each at the Marvel Digital Comic store. It’s free to make an account. However you only have to read issue #1 to see how the Guardians team was unofficially formed.

                    • A matter of taste. Don’t tell me the shwarma scene didn’t crack you up! You might not be receptive to Whedon’s humor but believe me, he has plenty, as anyone familiar with his work since Buffy would tell you (Dr. Horrible’s Sing-Along Blog, anyone?).

                      I’ll probably look into the comics before seeing the movie to get a sense of what to expect. Thanks for the advice.

                    • Yeah, JW’s humor is for a select audience. You have to have the required taste. The only parts I found funny were the parts where there was no humor attached. Like the part where Banner said he tried killing himself and the Hulk only spit the bullet out. That had me dying for some reason bcuz I can physically imagine Hulk doing something like that.

                      Yeah, np! It’s a quick read. Only 26 pages and we might see huge similarities between the movie and that one particular issue. All you would have to do is replace the Kree with the Nova Corps and we might get those exact scenes.

                      The writers of that issue saluted James Gunn after all.

        • @Bfg666 in the comics, Rocket Racoon looks like an earth racoon… Because he IS an earth racoon. He was taken an genetically modified/enhanced to be bipedal and intelligent and talk etc.. The planet he’s on.. There are other weird animals that have hotten the enhancement treatment. How do you feel about a talking walrus? Lol anyways, point is this is sci-fi/fantasy gotta have an open mind about this stuff. If it’s handled well and there’s a certain internal logic that makes sense for him to exist within that universe then people will buy it, kids will love it etc. at face value sure it seem odd but until we see how its treated in the film itself then i find it a little early to condemn the film on a few off beat characters. When all the other aliens etc are seen, pretty sure a talking racoon will fit right in.

          • Oh, didn’t know that, I thought he was just an alien designed by a lazy artist. Anyway, I’m not condemning the movie in advance, I’m just highly doubtful. Apart from very few exceptions like Planet of the Apes, I usually have issues with the anthropomorphization of animals. I never liked TMNT for example, even as a kid. And something tells me RR will be more Michelangelo than Caesar… We’ll see.

            • Rocket’s personality would make him more Raph than anything.

              • You know what I mean.

      • …..and “learning” is 1/2 the battle ;-)

    • Yes, they will say, “WTF” but directly after that (and a bit of a pause for dramatic effect)…..they will be screaming, “That’s so AWESOMEEEEEE!”

      And “tons” of people haven’t been saying that. I would say you and the other dissenters are in the minority.

    • I have some very big doubts about Guardians. With a raccoon space-ranger zapping off big guns & talkin’ it how he’s walkin’ it, and someone’s talking walking Venus fly-trap hogging the screen, it will take away the seriousness (yes, there is such a thing) of the threat The Avengers face. What’s next, a team-up between the Smurfs, Keebler Elves, Lil’ Green Sprout, Poppin’ Fresh, & the Tidy Bowl Man?
      Don’t get me wrong, I hope this movie does OK, but I will be pretty doubtful until the big screen proves to me otherwise on this one.

      • You need to expand your imagination a bit is all… I’ve got something for that.

        • share the wealth

      • Ditto.

        • I was dittoing Blondie, in case anyone was wondering.

          @Filth, imagination (or lack of) is not the issue here. Being an artist, I have plenty of that, with or without helpers. No, it’s a matter of suspension of disbelief.

          • @bfg666, So you hate on the (false) image of something before trying to understand the true image.. Yeah, that makes sense.

            If you read Goldie’s comments on Guardians, you’ll know Goldie lacks imagination and knowledge on anything Marvel Cosmic.

            From your comments, you hate on Rocket and then once you find out what he is then you have a change of heart. Please know what you’re talking about before posting. Don’t be like Goldilocks.

            • Thing is, from the first announcement of the movie until now, RR has been presented as a plain alien looking like a raccoon, not as an actual raccoon abducted and experimented on. That’s a major difference. The former would’ve been utterly ridiculous. I’m only doubtful about the latter, not hateful, and I wouldn’t have been so opposed to him if the distinction was made from the get-go.

              • Glad you think that way. Now I won’t read your comments as if you were another Goldilocks lol

                bcuz yeah, Rocket was artificially made to be a chief law officer for a galactic criminally insane asylum. To keep the insane at bay, the scientists artificially engineered animals to oversee the asylum. This way the insane will be kept calm by being served by cute anthropomorphic animals and not a fat ugly nurses.

                • Let’s hope they take time to show this in the movie.

                  Fat ugly nurses? What about hot sexxxy nurses, Elle Driver style?

                  • In this day and age, I don’t see them taking the time to show any of that. They didn’t even show that when Rocket first joined the Guardians.

                    This was his intro:



                    The origins of Rocket weren’t revealed until after the (25 issues of) Guardians Vol.2 ended.

                    After that was Annihilators and at the end of each issue was the unraveling of Rocket’s origins.

                    • I’ve seen those panels before but thanks for posting them. Very cool.

                      Maybe I’m thinking too much about the lowest common demonstrator strategy studios take for movie goers. That they would be into accepting the theory. Plus it’s still ewok-ish.

                    • @bartnj, Np man! My pleasure!

                      Because I’ve read every issue of Vol 2, I have already grew to like Rocket a lot.

                      Having said that, IMO the only risk this movie has is Rocket.

                      Not everyone is open to a “lower life form” as a supportive character in a Super Hero universe. After all, what’s so “Super” of a “lower life form?”

                      Hopefully all will change if the movie is accepted by the Cosmic fans and the word of mouth inspires others to see it.

                • Now THAT is cool and makes “sense”. To me.

  8. “because, you know, Thor can just show up out of the blue! No explanation needed!”


    It gets explained in the first 20 seconds.

  9. I’m more excited for Guardians of the Galaxy and Captain America 2, then Avengers 2.

    • Avengers 2 has a fair chance of kicking major ass since it’s written and directed by Joss Whedon. Not so sure about the other two, especially Cap 2 considering the first movie.

  10. So what’s the point of making a Guardians of the Galaxy film if it isn’t going to connect to Avengers? Thanks…

    • It doesn’t have to direct connect. Some of the more powerful cosmic characters can have an effect on us in Earth, but battle the GotG in a galaxy far far away (sorry… couldn’t resist).

      Also the talks of having a setting in a future Earth in a different timeline could suggest a time travel twist with a cosmic baddie coming from the future to battle the Avengers on Earth in a modern setting, after battling the Guardians in the future. It could be a twist where they want to come back to destroy S.H.E.I.L.D. or Stark or someone for what they will create for the future.

      I just don’t know how keen they are with doing any sort of Time Travel plot with X-Men:DoFP coming out

    • Oh, when you put in that way it all makes sense (no sarcasm). And also to comment on the whole Green Lantern thing. I don’t like the Green Lantern but it could of been worst (Catwoman, Batman and Robin, X3, SuperMan 3-Returns). GOFG wouldn’t bomb because Marvel isn’t stupid enough to release one of their movies around the same time as another famous movie franchise (WB made that mistake with GL by releasing the same time as HP8, Captain America, and Cars 2). Thanks for the explanation Ray.

  11. The comic and the movie take place in present day. Where are people getting 2027 and 2045??

  12. I think the Masters of Evil is a bit too ambitious for a single film with trying to introduce all those bad guys (plus QS and SW)

    I’m still holding out hopes for Ultron and Vision. Including SW does help lend credence to that.

  13. Bing in the Leader and Ultron i say. and have the team go against Ul;tron and have hulk go against leader army of Mutants. haVE BANNER RETURN TO NORMAL AND DEFEAT tHE lEADER with his intelligents. it would be cool to see a super villain prison and Banner walk down the halls to come face to face with The Leader smiuling and some great intelligent diologue.

  14. GotG will in NO WAY bomb like Green Lantern.
    Marvel is way smarter than that.

    • They missed a big opportunity by not linking guardians in a post credit scene for iron man considering the revenue that brought in. If they continue this stand alone method Guardians may very well sink like john carter. Talking racoons and trees in space with not well known actors in lead roles is a hard sell already. Unless they start linking it in to the marvel universe to succeed it’s going to have to be the next Star Wars.

      • Im kinda with you on that one!! They should link them with the post credit scenes, these Marvel movies are seen by a TON of ppl and if Marvel wants GOTG to be a big hit and not just a mediocre success they nned to connect GOTG with THIS Marvel universe, I really dont care if GOTG or RR is in Avengers 2 but Marvel really does need to connect them in some loose kind of way to this universe or most of the ppl that see the next 2 Marvel movies will not know about the GOTG movie

        • Not know? How could they, considering how much it’s been discussed for some time now?

      • I have a problem with the post credit scene for IM3 but I’m glad they didn’t use it to promote GoTG. That is such a different movie from Iron Man 3 that people would just go “huh?”

        I think the reason they decided not to go with a more relevant post credit scene is because they felt like it would be the last Iron Man movie for a while, so they decided to go with something that might be fun.

        The problem I do have with it is that it could have been used to lead into a new Hulk movie, which I really believe Marvel should do as I felt like Mark Ruffalo was an incredible Dr. Banner. But there’s no real sign that Marvel is doing a Hulk movie anytime soon, which I feel is a serious oversight on their part.

        Regardless, it was a waste of Mark Ruffalo. If he was going to be in the movie at all, it should have been part of the main story.

        • Besides, I think the Thanos tease at the end of Avengers is enough to make people aware that there might be a space opera movie coming.

          I also think they might promote GoTG via a post credit scene of Thor 2 as well.

      • I agree with you about the fact that they should link GotG with the rest of the Marvel Universe to promote it down the road (and all the reasons you listed too), but I don’t get why people say they should have done a post-credit scene about GotG in IM3… it’s way too early in my opinion. There is still the next Thor movie, then the next Cap movie before GotG. Putting it in a post credit scene now would make people either get all excited and waiting for a movie that won’t come out soon, and/or they will have completely forgotten about that post-credit scene when the movie will come out.

        The Phase One post-credit scenes didn’t really have anything to do with the story of the movie they were in, so I don’t see why GotG should have been in IM3.

        As for GotG not showing up in Avengers 2, I don’t really mind. The movie is called “Avengers”, is it not? It supposed to be about the Avengers battling a, or several, villains. I don’t have any problem with Marvel and Disney making a GotG movie, and no problem either of the characters not showing up in another movie. There’s nothing wrong with stand-alone movies. Personally, I’m not interested, but I can see that a lot of people are enthousiastic about the movie, so I hope it’s going to be good. I don’t think I’ll go see it in theatres, though. Sorry.

    • If Green Lantern had dumped the cornball humor and written Hal Jordan as more serious, and had a bit better plot, it would have been much better. The bedroom scene did not add to the suspense, either. But overall for a first effort, it was not all that bad–and it is the only GL film we have right now. DC/Warner backing out on doing more GL flicks for now, and postponing Flash, just show again they don’t really know what they are doing, and instead always panic and trot out yet another time-worn Batman or Superman flick. YYAAWWNN!!! I will say, however, that the Man of Steel flick looks like it could change that yawn to a smile on me, as it looks pretty good. If DC/Warner don’t get some good flicks going, like Flash, GL #2, JLA–something!!-by the time JLA rolls around, all they’ll hear is empty echoes in the movie theater or slamming exit doors, when the popcorn runs out, because everyone is heading to the theater down the street to see some more Marvel flicks. They may be creating their own trouble with their deer-in-the-headlights stance.

      • Wow, I actually agree with you here.

        That makes me feel so… weird.

  15. I, personally, am not surprised about this. Guardians of the Galaxy will be based in the same universe as the Avengers, and that’s enough for me. There will likely be references made to events that happened in GoTG by people in the know: such as possibly S.H.I.E.L.D. or other powerful beings (Thanos, Loki & Odin, perhaps the Collector, who might appear in Avengers 2 or related movies) and most likely Nova, who is the only character that I can see “crossing over” from a GoTG movie into an Avengers-related movie. Either way I think this is a very good move by Marvel. If they play their cards right, GoTG could become its own thing, and possibly initiate a “cosmic version” of the Marvel films, just like in the comic books. That could be something they could do more of later in the future when they’ve stopped making as many Earth-based superhero films (which might happen once Robert Downey Jr. retires, at least for a while).

    • If they released one “cosmic” movie every two years I’d be ecstatic. That includes an Inhumans or a Doctor Strange movie, anything alien or otherworldly.

      I’m really holding out hope for a second GOTG.

      • A second GOTG flick? I am just hoping they don’t crash and burn on the first one. In the meantime, go water your tree, and give the raccoon a butter-cookie (they like those).

        • Comedy is not your thing Goldi. Whatever you do, don’t quit your day job at Wal-Mart.

      • Why Guardians of the Galaxy before “The Inhumans”??? And why not a Secret Invasion plotline that could thread thru a few movies where the culmination in the war shows a lot of the characters we saw onscreen to be Skulls infiltrating. Haha.

  16. “what we could be getting is something more akin to what Phase One was: isolated stories with just the loosest threads of connection, and an Avengers 2 culmination that only kinda requires you to have seen the other films”

    Looks like they’re building their MCU in the same fashion as its original comics counterpart: each series, though having more or less loose interconnections, can be read independently and doesn’t suffer from doing so, even if reading the whole lot gives the sense of a bigger picture. Love it!

    • I think what you said here is a good idea. Serials may be fun, but they don’t really deserve the name when there’s more than a year between each one.

  17. Well, at least now I know I won’t HAVE to see this movie. I was only interested in it because of how much it would tie into Avengers. As a stand alone movie, I think I’ll pass.

    I’m curious if there’re other people like me who will skip this now because of it being stand alone. This might hurt the film.

  18. Maybe someone here can help me out. I’ve read comics since I was 10 (45 now) so seeing The Avengers onscreen was a complete nerdgasm that I’ve waited to splooge over for around 30 years. And it didn’t disappoint.

    However, I found the “Guardians of the Galaxy” announcement a bit strange
    I’ve seen the name before but I don’t think I’ve ever read the stories. I’m not a fan of Captain marvel, or Nova, or any of that stuff.

    Was someone clamoring for a GOTG movie somewhere and I missed it?

    I am totally looking forward to it, I am. It gives Marvel a chance to establish a universe ( literally) in galactic terms, and a bunch of characters to reside in said universe. Like an “Avengers” in space.

    But really, WTF with a gun-wielding raccoon??? Seriously, not only does it look stupid and childish (in the sense that all comics are not written for grade schoolers).

    I don’t get the raccoon dude at all. I went and read the comics but still don’t see it.

    P.S. How funny is i t that there will be a “Guardians of the Galaxy” movie when there still is no Justice League movie. Make mine Marvel.

    • What exactly do you still not get after you supposedly read the comics? Have you read the newest GOTG comics? Maybe try Googling his origin or reading more current books featuring RR and the GOTG.

      If that fails, and you still can’t wrap your head around the concept, I would suggest that you just avoid the movie.

      Although, to be honest, I felt the same way about those stupid Ewoks in ROTJ. I still hate them, even tough that was a pretty good movie overall.

      • First you accuse me of lying about having read the comics.
        Then you ask me if I’ve read the comics.
        Then you suggest I google the comics.

        I really didn’t expect anyone to feel so strongly about my honesty when I said I read the comics. Or to take away from what I wrote that I was asking for advice on whether I should see the movie or not?

        I don’t know who you are, filthpig, but you’re all over the place, man. Take your meds and move on. There’s nothing for you here.

        I mean, really. You’re defending ewoks and I’m supposed to take you seriously?

        • Sorry to barge in but what part of “stupid Ewoks in ROTJ. I still hate them” is defending them, exactly?

          • No part. You’re absolutely correct. You’ve bested me. I am exposed. You win. I yield to your superior comprehension.
            Have a nice day. ;-)

            • @bartnj, Tbh it is way too early to ask if this movie is worth seeing or not from your prospective. I’d wait for the trailer.

              However it sounds like you’re curious about expanding your prospective by picking up the comics.

              If you still want to read the comics, the best way to learn about them is to take advantage of the latest issues from Marvel NOW!. They are only 3.1 issues in so far and the 4th issue will be coming out next week.

              Marvel NOW! relaunched Guardians of the Galaxy to get people who don’t know about them, on the ball for the movie. They will be more interactive with Earth’s Mightiest and have drove deeper into Star-Lord’s origins. The Vol 2 series never once mentioned his origins so this is great for newcomers.

              Hope you’re satisfied with the advice.

        • I had doubts that you had even read the comics because you said yourself that didn’t think you’ve “ever read the stories”. Then you said that you “went and read the comics… so, which is it? I wasn’t sure, so I just suggested a couple of different ways you could learn more: one was reading the newest material (Vol 3, Marvel Now) or the other by simply looking up the RR origin on Google.

          I fail to see how I need meds for offering that info to you, but I think I’ll take you up on that offer and start the self-medication immediately! ;)

          • Meds? Yes, please. Share the wealth my friends. See how quick all misunderstandings are dissolved.

  19. I don’t follow the comics much, so I’m sure there’s a plethora of villains to choose from, but I still think Thanos could be mentioned or even revealed as the plotter behind the villain in 2 but if they are 100% going to make an Avengers 3 then he should be left for that. I think it’s smart business to not tie GotG directly in until you know it’ll do well. Then those characters can either get a sequel or at least pop up in phase 3 films leading into Avengers 3 and then it’s a huge team up to fight the being with enough power to destroy the entire planet.

    And this is just my opinion, no more valid or less so than those it opposes, but why is there such odd hatred toward small furry creatures being involved in sci-fi or fantasy type films? I liked the Ewoks and thought they served a purpose. Yes, I think the Empire was cooler than the Rebellion but to me it’s no different than American Indian tribes taking on the US government other than the Ewoks won. To say it’s unrealistic for either a racoon or Ewok to take down larger or more technologically advanced beings is somewhat silly given that these are stories involving things that don’t exist in the first place.

    • I think what I was saying, was that , for me, a raccoon just doesn’t look as badass as The Hulk or Black Bolt or whoever. It’s just something I like about comics, the visuals. And the power behind what the visuals suggest. Which for the most part can be summed up with the word “badassery”

      SO , when i read comics or watch sci-fi movies, I , personally, do not get the same sense of “coolness” from watching a raccoon or ewoks kicking ass as I do a dude with a light saber or phaser or whatever.

      And it’s not a size thing, as in they are small compared to a typical human. The Yoda fight scenes were one of the few cool things about the prequels I could point to and say “yeah. badass”
      But there’s no hatred.

  20. I think they would be smart to keep gotg and avengers 2 separate. I’m not optimistic so far based on the characters and some of the casting. Most recently been implied that a trash-tv soap opera (Hollyoaks) actor will feature in this film, he got blind drunk and told fans apparantly as well as revealing spoilers. Combine that guy with a furry little creature as the ‘heart of the movie’ and I can’t say I’m feeling enthusiastic. Someone needs to take control of this movie if fans are to be expected to pay for a ticket.

  21. I cannot wait to see the avengers 2 I already seen the first one cool but I cannot wait to see the second is gotta awesome

  22. I feel like Richard rider as Nova prime would’ve been a better foray into the cosmic marvel universe. He would’ve been easier to slip into the current marvel universe by developing a single character (a splash of Wendell quasar and starlord would’ve been a nice tease) and then the transition into gotg could easily come later. Don’t get me wrong I love GotG to bits but it feels like we’re jumping the’Gunn’

  23. they can take tobey has spiderman if andrew is not working