Press Release BVHE Press Release: Guardians of the Galaxy (2023) (4k UHD Combo) (Blu-ray) (1 Viewer)

[Ronald Epstein]

“A BRILLIANT END TO A BRILLIANT TRILOGY”


– Ian Sandwell, Digital Spy








Get ready for one last ride with the galaxy’s most beloved band of unlikely heroes! Marvel Studios’ Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3
is available to buy only at Digital retailers on July 7 and arrives
on 4K Ultra HD™, Blu-ray™ and DVD on August 1.






​

BURBANK, CA (June 22, 2023) – The galaxy's favorite band of misfits are back for one final adventure, and it may be their most dangerous yet. James Gunn’s epic conclusion to the Guardians trilogy is “full of heart, humor, and action” (Ross Bonaime, Collider) and “an absolute must-see” (Molly Freeman, Screen Rant). Raising the stakes to new levels, the team must protect one of their own from a mysterious new villain in a thrilling adventure full of the spectacle, humor and heart that fans have come to expect. And of course, an awesome soundtrack! Marvel Studios’ Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 arrives at Digital retailers on July 7 and on 4K Ultra HD, Blu-ray and DVD on August 1. Fans can add the film to their collection and access exclusive bonus content including deleted scenes, a gag reel and audio commentary by James Gunn.





Film Synopsis


In Marvel Studios’ Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3, our beloved band of misfits is looking a bit different these days. Peter Quill (Chris Pratt), still reeling from a terrible loss, must rally his team and embark on a dicey, action-packed mission to defend the universe and protect Rocket. Meanwhile, a new, unpredictable force threatens to bring the Guardians down for good. Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 is written and directed by James Gunn.





Bonus Features*


FEATURETTES

• The Imperfect, Perfect Family - View the evolution of the Guardians through the cast and crew’s passion for each other and the entire franchise. Join this tight knit “found family” as they leave behind a legacy and recount their best memories wrapping up this epic trilogy’s final film.
• Creating Rocket Raccoon – Director James Gunn talks about bringing Rocket to life and how personal the character is to him. Uncover BTS footage, the research and development of the visual effects process, and the inspiration for Rocket through conversations with cast and crew.

DELETED SCENES

• The Perfect Society – The High Evolutionary reveals his mission to perfect the universe.
• The Search for 89P13 – Behemoth brings not-so-good news to The High Evolutionary.
• Annoyed Peter – Peter gets annoyed while altering the shield.
• A Burning Escape – Peter runs back to grab his music player before escaping a blazing inferno on the Arête.
• Knowhere After the Battle – The High Evolutionary is brought back to Knowhere and locked up while Kraglin recruits Adam Warlock.

GAG REEL

• Take a look at some of the fun outtakes on set with the cast and crew of Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3

DIRECTOR’S COMMENTARY

• Watch the film with audio commentary by director James Gunn.

*Bonus features vary by product and retailer


Cast


Chris Pratt as Peter Quill/ Star-Lord
Zoë Saldaña as Gamora
Dave Bautista as Drax
Karen Gillan as Nebula
Pom Klementieff as Mantis
Vin Diesel as Groot
Bradley Cooper as Rocket
Sean Gunn as Kraglin
Chukwudi Iwuji as The High Evolutionary
Will Poulter as Adam Warlock
Maria Bakalova as Cosmo
Linda Cardellini as Lylla
Nathan Fillion as Master Karja
Sylvester Stallone as Stakar Ogord



Directed by

James Gunn


Produced by

Kevin Feige, p.g.a.


Executive Producers

Louis D’Esposito
Victoria Alonso
Nikolas Korda
Sara Smith
Simon Hatt


Screenplay by

James Gunn


Product Specifications


U.S. and Canada Street Date
Digital: July 7, 2023
Physical: August 1, 2023


Product SKUs
Digital: 4K UHD, HD, SD
Physical: Cinematic Universe Edition (4K UHD + Blu-ray + Digital Code), Blu-ray Combo Pack (Blu-ray + Digital Code) & DVD


Feature Run Time
Approx. 149 minutes



Rating
U.S.: Rated PG-13
Canada: Rated PG


Aspect Ratio
Digital: Dynamic (1.85:1 and 2.35:1)
Physical: Dynamic (1.85:1 and 2.35:1)


U.S. Audio


4K: English Dolby Atmos and 2.0 Dolby Digital Descriptive Audio, Spanish 7.1 Dolby Digital Plus , French 5.1 Dolby Digital Language Tracks

Blu-ray: English 7.1 DTS-HDMA and 2.0 Dolby Digital Descriptive Audio, Spanish and French 5.1 Dolby Digital Language Tracks

DVD: English, Spanish and French 5.1 Dolby Digital and English 2.0 Dolby Digital Descriptive Audio Language Tracks

Digital: English Dolby Atmos (UHD only, some platforms), English 5.1 & 2.0 Dolby Digital, Spanish 5.1 & 2.0 Dolby Digital, French 5.1 & 2.0 Dolby Digital, English Descriptive Audio 2.0 Dolby Digital (some platforms)


Canada Audio


4K: English Dolby Atmos and 2.0 Dolby Digital Descriptive Audio, Spanish 7.1 Dolby Digital Plus , French 5.1 Dolby Digital Language Tracks

Blu-ray: English 7.1 DTS-HDMA and 2.0 Dolby Digital Descriptive Audio, Spanish and French 5.1 Dolby DigitalLanguage Tracks

DVD: English, Spanish and French 5.1 Dolby Digital and English 2.0 Dolby Digital Descriptive Audio Language Tracks

Digital: English Dolby Atmos (UHD only, some platforms), English 5.1 & 2.0 Dolby Digital, Spanish 5.1 & 2.0 Dolby Digital, French 5.1 & 2.0 Dolby Digital, English Descriptive Audio 2.0 Dolby Digital (some platforms)


U.S. Subtitles

4K: English SDH, Spanish and French Subtitles

Blu-ray: English SDH, Spanish and French Subtitles

DVD: English SDH, Spanish and French Subtitles

Digital: English SDH, French, Spanish (some platforms)


Canada Subtitles

4K: English SDH, Spanish and French Subtitles

Blu-ray: English SDH, Spanish and French Subtitles

DVD: English SDH, Spanish and French Subtitles

Digital: English SDH, French, Spanish (some platforms)


Thank you for supporting HTF when you preorder using the link below. As an Amazon Associate, HTF earns from qualifying purchases. If you are using an adblocker you will not see link.

See on Amazon See on Amazon

 

[Todd Erwin]

Seems very light on extras, and should have included the Holiday Special.

This will be interesting to see with the alternating aspect ratios. The theater I saw it in, which was standard width, should have had the changing aspect ratios but instead screened the 2.39:1 version.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

The theater I saw it in, which was standard width, should have had the changing aspect ratios but instead screened the 2.39:1 version.

Same here - I saw the RealD 3D version specifically at a 2.40:1 theater to see that version, and the IMAX 3D version to see the 1.90:1 version, but then my two attempts to see the changing aspect ratios version were at theaters that mistakenly programmed the 2.40:1 version. That’s the one I’m most interested in seeing, which matches stylistically the first two films. I missed the oomph of having the screen appear to grow larger during key scenes. For me, that the image actually changes size during the film is a pleasing stylistic choice that emulates how panels in comic books change shape and size depending on the action being shown. Glad to have that chance on home video at least.

 

[sleroi]

I don’t want to sound like “that guy” or derail this thread, but since I own the first two in 3d it would have be nice to have that option on the third one.

If I recall, enough fuss was made about part 2 potentially not being released in 3D that James Gunn assured us that there would be a 3D release and sure enough the Best Buy limited steel book 4k/3D combo was announced.

I’m not holding my breath, but again it would be nice.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

I don’t want to sound like “that guy” or derail this thread, but since I own the first two in 3d it would have be nice to have that option on the third one.

If I recall, enough fuss was made about part 2 potentially not being released in 3D that James Gunn assured us that there would be a 3D release and sure enough the Best Buy limited steel book 4k/3D combo was announced.

I’m not holding my breath, but again it would be nice.

I would love it, but something tells me that Disney is still gritting their teeth that they were forced to release Avatar 2 in 3D after essentially being the frontrunner in killing the format a few years back.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I don’t want to sound like “that guy” or derail this thread, but since I own the first two in 3d it would have be nice to have that option on the third one.

If I recall, enough fuss was made about part 2 potentially not being released in 3D that James Gunn assured us that there would be a 3D release and sure enough the Best Buy limited steel book 4k/3D combo was announced.

I’m not holding my breath, but again it would be nice.

It is likely that this will receive a 3D/4K combo pack release in Japan, as has been happening for other Marvel movies recently.

And unlike most of the other recent Marvel films, this one doesn’t have any forced subtitles/English translation subtitles, so the fact that the Japanese editions don’t include those in English won’t affect the viewing experience here.

For better or worse, after seeing it theatrically several times, my opinion on the 3D is that Gunn and his team didn’t put the same effort into it as they did for the earlier two films. But I’ll still get and watch the Japanese 3D edition should there be one.

 

[Jake Lipson]

should have included the Holiday Special.

I agree. But obviously the company wants to keep that as a Disney+ exclusive.

Anyway, the extras that are included seem pretty standard for a Marvel Blu-ray these days. They've been skimping on extras here for a long time. The more detailed Assembled documentary will be a Disney+ exclusive too.

I saw it with the shifting ratios in a Cinemark XD theater on its opening night. Personally, I'm not a huge fan of shifting aspect ratios in general, but it worked well enough. Gunn wasn't shifting ratios for single shots in specific scenes, so it was less distracting than it can be. I wonder why Disney went with the shifting aspect ratios on disc for the first time instead of restricting it to Disney+ as they have in all other cases?

Guardians has long been my favorite MCU sub-franchise. I took the time to write a letter to Bob Iger and Alan Horn asking them to consider rehiring James Gunn after he was fired. I'm glad he ended up getting to make the film that he wanted to make, but it is sort of ironic that after asking for his reinstatement, I ended up liking this film the least of any film the Guardians appeared in for a prominent role. (Love and Thunder was worse, but that doesn't count because they were quickly dispatched cameos.)

Although I don't have a problem with the ending in general, I just found the mood of the film too grim and depressing and didn't go back to see it a second time. I'll revisit it on disc. I look forward to hearing the commentary track where Gunn can explain his choices on this film.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I wonder why Disney went with the shifting aspect ratios on disc for the first time instead of restricting it to Disney+ as they have in all other cases?

Because the shifting version wasn’t the IMAX version. Disney+ doesn’t have exclusives on shifting versions per se, they have exclusives on 2D presentations of the IMAX versions. It just so happens that many - but not all - of those IMAX presentations for other films were shifting. For Guardians Vol 3, the IMAX version was a constant 1.90:1. I imagine Disney+ will offer that presentation as an option.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

Because the shifting version wasn’t the IMAX version. Disney+ doesn’t have exclusives on shifting versions per se, they have exclusives on 2D presentations of the IMAX versions. It just so happens that many - but not all - of those IMAX presentations for other films were shifting. For Guardians Vol 3, the IMAX version was a constant 1.90:1. I imagine Disney+ will offer that presentation as an option.

And we know that, when given the opportunity, James Gunn prefers a taller aspect ratio. The Suicide Squad was 1.85:1.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

And we know that, when given the opportunity, James Gunn prefers a taller aspect ratio. The Suicide Squad was 1.85:1.

I don’t know if it’s a preference per se but an acknowledgment that more theatrical presentations today are taller than wide, and that movies have longer afterlives on TV than they do on the big screen. Although, as my father likes to say, that may be a distinction without a difference.

 

[Todd Erwin]

I don’t know if it’s a preference per se but an acknowledgment that more theatrical presentations today are taller than wide, and that movies have longer afterlives on TV than they do on the big screen. Although, as my father likes to say, that may be a distinction without a difference.

More newer or remodeled theaters have gone to standard width rather than standard height screens, which has really diminished the impact widescreen used to have.

 

[Indy Guy]

I think the most image information should the version selected for the disc. If the tall sequences are cropped for widescreen or visa versa then shifting the aspect ratio can be irritating.
For the few that have 2.35 widescreens the 16x9 shift meant to add impact actually reduces the size and resulting impact.
You can't win! Just film movies one way or the other. Since film itself is no longer involved, costs should not matter either way.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

More newer or remodeled theaters have gone to standard width rather than standard height screens, which has really diminished the impact widescreen used to have.

It's been that way since the 80s, and most screens can't even be bothered to adjust the masking.

 

[Todd Erwin]

It's been that way since the 80s, and most screens can't even be bothered to adjust the masking.

Most theaters built in the 1980s, at least those built by Edwards Cinemas in Orange County, CA, were built with fixed 2:1 screens that cropped EVERYTHING. When many were converted to digital, the screens were replaced with fixed 1.78:1 but no longer cropped the image to fit, allowing the projector to adjust the image by letterboxing where needed. Most screens only have fixed masking for the edges of the actual screen.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

Most theaters built in the 1980s, at least those built by Edwards Cinemas in Orange County, CA, were built with fixed 2:1 screens that cropped EVERYTHING. When many were converted to digital, the screens were replaced with fixed 1.78:1 but no longer cropped the image to fit, allowing the projector to adjust the image by letterboxing where needed. Most screens only have fixed masking for the edges of the actual screen.

We had a Cineplex Odeon 6-plex open in Lethbridge in 1988, set up for constant image width as opposed to height, so I remember the masking moving either after the trailers played, or before the entire feature started. This is now a 10-screen with stadium seating in some screens. Later, when I worked at a Cineplex Odeon 14 screen multiplex [still film], we would get Scope trailers for flat films so we didn't have to switch lenses or adjust the masking mid-presentation. The Galaxy 10-plex where I live now started with film, but switched to digital about 2 years after opening. When it opened, it had hybrid masking [sides and top] so hwn scope features played, the screen would expand horizontally AND contract vertically slightly. Now with all presentations being digital, they don't even bother adjusting the masking, with the exception of their Ultra AVX screen [D-Box, 4K projection and Dolby Atmos].

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Because the shifting version wasn’t the IMAX version. Disney+ doesn’t have exclusives on shifting versions per se, they have exclusives on 2D presentations of the IMAX versions. It just so happens that many - but not all - of those IMAX presentations for other films were shifting. For Guardians Vol 3, the IMAX version was a constant 1.90:1. I imagine Disney+ will offer that presentation as an option.

I saw it in IMAX in the constant 1.9;1 presentation and really enjoyed it in that format. Having said that, I'm curious to see what this version offers, curious enough to buy it on disc, which hasn't been the case with other MCU movies since Disney started offering the IMAX versions as Disney+ exclusives.

 

[Jake Lipson]

You can't win! Just film movies one way or the other. Since film itself is no longer involved, costs should not matter either way.

I don't think it's a cost issue. The directors who choose to use shifting aspect ratios believe that it adds something to the experience they are creating for the audience. I usually don't particularly care for this approach myself. But I would not presume to tell James Gunn or Christopher Nolan or whomever how they should frame their movie. That's their decision.

 

[Indy Guy]

The filmakers choice has their desired impact when viewed on a standard 16x9 panel, but the aspect shift on a 2.35 widescreen reduces the image size and impact dramatically.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

That’s true, but it’s worth pointing out that the specification for home displays and consumer content is a 16x9 display container - a 2.35 display for a home user is out of spec. That’s not an attempt to open up a debate on the merits of 2.35 vs 16x9 but simply to point out that it’s unrealistic to expect an out of spec setup to be a consideration among studios and content creators when they’re mastering for home entertainment.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

I think the most image information should the version selected for the disc. If the tall sequences are cropped for widescreen or visa versa then shifting the aspect ratio can be irritating.
For the few that have 2.35 widescreens the 16x9 shift meant to add impact actually reduces the size and resulting impact.
You can't win! Just film movies one way or the other. Since film itself is no longer involved, costs should not matter either way.

I don't think it's a cost issue. The directors who choose to use shifting aspect ratios believe that it adds something to the experience they are creating for the audience. I usually don't particularly care for this approach myself. But I would not presume to tell James Gunn or Christopher Nolan or whomever how they should frame their movie. That's their decision.

That’s true, but it’s worth pointing out that the specification for home displays and consumer content is a 16x9 display container - a 2.35 display for a home user is out of spec. That’s not an attempt to open up a debate on the merits of 2.35 vs 16x9 but simply to point out that it’s unrealistic to expect an out of spec setup to be a consideration among studios and content creators when they’re mastering for home entertainment.

Here's the thing: with pre-IMAX shifting aspect ratios [think Brainstorm, Brother Bear, The Crocodile Hunter: Collision Course, and several others], the idea was to increase the width and increase the scope [pun fully intended]; this still happens in films like Life of Pi and Wes Anderson films post-Grand Budapest Hotel. It is possible to replicate this type of presentation at home with a CIH setup, but at the expense of resolution. With the IMAX multi-aspect ratios, it's about completely filling the field of view for the audience. I saw Dunkirk in film IMAX, and IMAX presentations only increase height; they never increase width. These are necessarily limited at home by the 1.78:1 screen, as there is no consumer 1.44:1 display, and you would need a massive one to replicate the film IMAX experience. The IMAX enhanced versions that appear on Disney+ replicate the digital IMAX experience, but on a much smaller scale.