Guardians of the Galaxy 3: The Guardians the MCU Needs

Guardians of the Galaxy 3 is in fact the best film since Endgame, as if that means anything at all.

The New York Times called Guardians of the Galaxy 3 an apparent reminder that the original was nothing more than a one hit wonder. At this point, audiences might be thinking the same thing about the MCU as a whole. With miss after horrible miss, the MCU has been reduced to ash, so desperate for a hit that they have used their own lack of quality control as a marketing tool. “The best film since Endgame,” tauts every trailer, which isn’t exactly convincing of the MCU’s production in the post-Endgame landscape. Perhaps even more depressing, Guardians 3 has been marketed as a must see for the MCU because it’s…actually a movie. “The most emotional film of the year” and like quotes follow up every desperate attempt at reminding the audience of the MCU’s long-extinct standards, as if this movie should be praised for the bare minimum of making the audience feel anything at all. In this way, before the film has even begun, the MCU has established its assembly-line movie making process as reality, and that Guardians 3 is the return to form apparently even the studio itself is aware it needs. Expectations were high entering the theater, Feige held his breath the second the runtime started, and I, shockingly, found myself in a seat, actually excited for an MCU film. While I hardly agree with the Times, Guardians 3 is undoubtedly the best film since Endgame and a strong piece in the MCU canon that says about as much as Groot does in the entire trilogy. At this point, it’s a miracle if an MCU product is watchable, and I can at least say Guardians of the Galaxy 3 managed to surpass that incredibly low bar with heart, inconsistency, and jokes abound. 

Guardians 3 opens unlike previous MCU films: with personality. A dark tone drowns the movie in a depressing cool color palette and equally devastating soundtrack. One thing is certain: the guardians are lost, broken, and filled with self-loathing. Every character is shown to hold some level of trauma, immediately establishing strong, personal themes characteristic for the Guardians trilogy. Suddenly, Adam Warlock interrupts the mosaic of depressed heroes when attacking Rocket on behalf of the High Evolutionary, the film’s antagonist. Left in severe condition, Star-Lord and gang reintroduce the familiar themes of family when unabashedly committing to saving their friend’s life regardless of the consequences…which are proven to be far greater than imagined when Star-Lord comes face to face with trauma manifested: Gamora. Reluctantly rejoining the group, Guardians 3 then sets off on an escapade of surprising inconsistencies for a writer like Gunn.

While that may sound negative, inconsistent implies there are both elements to love and hate. For example, the opening half hour has the aforementioned character introductions and dramatic tone that felt unique in the current MCU. Similarly, the actual structure works: Star-Lord faces an event brought on by his own mistakes that sends him onto a new path he believes will bring him his greatest desire, saving Rocket, when it really brings him closer to his character’s need, to confront his past in Gamora. However, what felt far more familiar was the pacing nightmare the first half reveals itself to be. This results in massive tonal whiplash, no doubt even felt in this review when the depressing montage of the Guardians is jarringly interrupted by the most over the top, “comic book” fight scene introduced by a slapstick edit and cheap joke. The camera whips and jerks in artificial ways that genuinely left me disoriented and confused as Warlock breaks the already broken team. This cinematic equivalent to being shaken in a snowglobe is not overly present, as the film does actually look like a movie for its runtime with contrast in its lighting, but as you can tell just from reading that sentence, that is quite the low bar to meet. Long takes and close-ups are tools in other films, but a breath of life in Guardians 3, which speaks to how dead the rest of the MCU as of now has been.

Back to the fight scene, the guardians don’t even battle as a group, not for character reasons, but simply just to be more of a bore. Essentially, not even action could save the opening minutes of Guardians 3, yet I didn’t find myself hating it either. Again, the film reflects my sentiments regarding the MCU as a whole: it’s inconsistent. 

While action and structure may have made these films work in the past, the focus has always undoubtedly been the characters, and I’m glad to say Gunn’s heart and passion still shines in this aspect. Various character’s are given arcs that relate to the themes of the film: Rocket must learn to love himself despite his imperfections, Star-Lord must accept this new Gamora for who she is while accepting his flawed decisions, and Nebula learns to value connection over calculated proficiency. In this world of self-antagonizers, the end goal is to find love and acceptance in the myriad of complexities and contradictions that make up this gang of misfits, two elements that encapsulate the human nature of the Guardians that have always made them unique. However, the sloppiness returns in more ways than one. Character dynamics are shockingly minimal, specifically between Star-Lord and other team members. It wasn’t until Groot and Star-Lord teamed up halfway through the film for the first dynamic fight scene that I realized I’m not sure if we’ve ever seen the team at their fullest potential, that is until a fantastic fight later in the film where the hectic cinematography seen in the opening minutes blossoms, presenting a truly innovative and exciting set-piece for the audience. And it’s this quality that generates the throughline of inconsistency that cripples Guardians 3. While Rocket may act as a solid narrative and emotional base, the use of his flashbacks is inconsistent at best. While the High Evolutionary is delightfully evil and frames the themes of the entire film, he is also the most one note villain since…well, to be honest most MCU antagonists have the same issue of flaccidness. I appreciated the themes of family, self-sabotage, the futile pursuit of perfection, the acceptance of one’s flaws and so on, but their development was contradictory, with the film often refuting its own points in what I found to be explicit ways. Similarly, even as a critic who views “plot-holes” as the lowest and most decrepit form of film criticism, there were glaring moments of senselessness that left me questioning the level of drafting the script was given. While some arcs are introduced strongly and conclude with equal measure, others are seemingly forgotten halfway through the film, taking a completely different direction than what was promised based on the opening minutes. Even the worldbuilding felt confused, with some planets being explained with nuance, while at the same time there are characters with names one could find in a “baby’s first sci-fi book” like binglesnort or something to that effect. 

Then there’s Adam Warlock, who has controversially taken a…role in this film. Neither present nor forgotten, Warlock is a clear demonstration of “writing yourself into a corner.” Being established all the way back at the end of Guardians of the Galaxy 2 with years of waiting between, one might expect Warlock to be more than a side-character. Yet, that’s all he is, and while neatly tying into the film’s themes, he does so in the same way as every other character, therefore providing no variation and proving his pointlessness as a result. The film’s last notable writing woe has to be the comedy, which isn’t all “he’s right being me, isn’t he?” level of cliche, but sometimes dares to reach that point, which had me concerned when my theater exploded the closer it reached that threshold. 

Which is what made the theater experience honestly a bit depressing. After nearly vomiting in the earlier action scenes, I was delighted when the cinematography reached its potential for a violent, weird, explosive battle that embodied the Guardians' goofy energy that set them aside from the rest of the MCU, but my theater was not. Dead silent, I tried to quiet my squeals of excitement when the camera shifted through a freshly made hole in the side of an enemy's stomach. What I mean to say is that what once made Guardians special is seemingly too far out for modern MCU fans. Even something as relatively tame as a shot other than the shot-reverse-shot format is too challenging, too weird, and for that, I can at least appreciate the more distinct tone Guardians 3 gives to its audiences, as it may be the last film that does so in the MCU for quite some time. 

And that is this film’s greatest strength, much as it has been for the Guardians trilogy as a whole: its personality. Guardians 3 has the catchy soundtrack, it has the f-bombs, it has the silly aliens. “This isn’t your average MCU film” is a mantra that has always followed these heroes, and the distinguishing grit melds with emotionally vulnerable themes of family better than those of any other MCU product. Similarly, Guardians 3 ends on a note so cheesy I couldn’t help but smile, something I find myself doing less and less during these products masquerading as art. While Guardians 3 may be inconsistent, while it may mark the end of any level of expression in this homogenized universe, while it may confuse and frustrate just as much as it entertains, it can also easily be appreciated for the fact that, yes, it is in fact a movie that made me feel. If that’s the highest praise I can muster for “the best film since Endgame,” despite its many positive elements, maybe Guardians 3 only works to prove how manufactured movies have become.