I stopped reading here because factually it's incorrect and set the tone for a clear bias as you headed into the film.
To me, when a company hires some like Edgar Wright they know what they are getting. He first wrote a treatment in 2003 and began actively working on the film with Marvel in 2006. That's 8 years of pre-production development. If Marvel only realized two months before shooting that they were never going to get what they wanted from Wright, I think the blame more or less rests fully on their shoulders. Besides, hiring screenwriters to work on the script behind the director's back is a really dick move.
I'm not a die-hard Wright fan (I didn't much care for "The World's End") so this is not me being biased. If the facts behind the split eventually come to light and prove otherwise, I will revise my stance. But this isn't the first time that Marvel has stamped down on the vision of a director that
they hired. Granted, they own the characters and are financing the movie, but you should work out all of these details before you sign a contract. Some of these directors have been happy being merely work-for-hire and not having much say in the final direction of the film. If the director's vision aligns with Marvel then of course they are given more leeway and have an obviously different working experience with the studio.
But this is also why big-name directors will never work on a Marvel movie, because they want final cut and will never get it. This is why Ava DuVerany passed on Black Panther and Patty Jenkins didn't do TDW (but is now doing Wonder Woman at DC).
Obviously these decisions aren't affecting Marvel much because their films are still raking in the dough, but it does affect my enjoyment of these movies and why I will be more cautious when deciding to see one of them in theaters or not. I really enjoyed
Iron Man 1 &
The Incredible Hulk, and still liked (but to a slightly lesser extent)
Thor &
Avengers: Age of Ultron. Beyond that, I've found their films to be average & forgettable, or downright annoying (like GotG or Ant-Man).
I've still kept seeing their movies because I
want to like them; TDW was the only film I didn't see in theaters. It also helps to renew my interest that Marvel is still starting new franchises with new creative teams. Doctor Strange is intriguing to me because of Benedict Cumberbatch and Tilda Swinton (not because of Scott Derrickson). Even though I thought TWS was an average film with a bad screenplay, I'm still going to see Civil War because it's a storyline that I've been looking forward to for years. But if I don't like it (or still get the same meh feeling I did from TWS), I doubt I'll be seeing Infinity War. I barely decided to go see AoU because I really didn't care for the first Avengers (the only reason I went was to due to the "must see" status that a film that size has), but luckily I really enjoyed it. My fondness (and misconception) of that film due its bad trailers also partially influenced me to go ahead and see Ant-Man.
Didn't mean to type that much. Anyone who actually does manage to read that great, big wall of text gets my utmost respect (especially if you don't agree with me).
I thought Ant-Man was a genuinely clever movie, but of course, different people have different tastes. By the way, just out of curiosity, how come GotG is ranked as your least favorite? I thought it was loads of fun.
I thought the script was really dumb. Aside from a single gag or two the jokes weren't funny; the plot was formulaic and cliche; Glenn Close, Benicio Del Toro & Lee Pace were criminally wasted; and I just didn't care about any of the characters because they either irritated the hell out of me (Starlord, Rocket & Groot) or were too dumb to sympathize with (Gamora & Drax).