Hm.. given James Gunn's track record I find it highly unlikely that he would end his beloved Guardians Trilogy on a note anywhere close to as bad and messy as say something like Thor 4. It was at least a somewhat entertaining mess, but still a mess. And the Guardians were in it, oddly enough, and couldn't save it (but then again they were only in the first 10 or 15 min or something).
Some good early reactions...
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/guardians-galaxy-3-first-reactions-095037580.html
I think the premiere is/was today...
https://www.heyuguys.com/guardians-of-the-galaxy-3-premiere-interviews/
Reviews are rolling in. It just had the premiere and the review embargo has been lifted...
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/guardians_of_the_galaxy_vol_3
Agreed with Estacado for the most part. It goes in the lower-middle of MCU movies.
It's a bit of a disjointed mess. Seems to jump from 1 inconsequential pointless scene to another. Desperately needs a better edit.
Has some emotional scenes but once again there's zero consequence to anything. Main characters die just to immediately be brought back to life. One in an identical way to a previous movie.
Several of the actors said this was the final time they'd be playing their roles but there's nothing to suggest that's actually true other than there's a different Guardians line up at the mid credits.
I actually liked the the high evolutionary. A completely over the top unhinged sociopath.
Doesn't have anything to fit it in with the Kang story arc.
Anyone hoping for it to save the MCU from continuing to languish in mediocrity is going to be disappointed.
5/10.