Ant-Man Edgar Wright Leaves Ant-Man!! - Part 1

[Ant-manic]

Great post. Always wanted Rudd or Fillion as Pym, not Lang. And using Lang as the main character than Pym is really a disgrace to Pym fans.

but it makes perfect sense to an actual Ant-man fan. hopefully, they'll make that Pym movie one day.

I felt that it is too big a change not to use Hank as the hero and not pairing him with Janet. It is a total waste of a great character.

Is it too late for Marvel to use Hank Pym though? As the main hero instead of Scott Lang?

God i hope so.

 

[Ant-manic]

I think they can reshoot some scenes in AOU to have Rudd appear as Pym and be the creator of Ultron. Shouldn't be that hard.

I think Marvel need to quickly change the script. It has gone too far and I doubt fans of Hank Pym will appreciate the changes made by Wright.

I am a fan or Wright's cornetto trilogy but I think he f***ed the characters and premise for an Ant-Man movie. I'd rather it being a sci-fi film than a heist film. Pym is too important in Marvel lore to be a background character. He is basically the smartest guy in Marvel when Reed isn't around.

how does not being the lead of the movie make him less smart? and how is it not a sci fi movie and involve a shrinking protagonist.

 

[The Question]

Also, how does being the driving force of the plot constitute being a "background character?"

I mean, granted, I haven't read the script of seen the movie yet. But it seems pretty clear that Hank Pym is one of the primary reasons that the events of the film happen, and I imagine that he'll probably have a roughly equal amount of screen time to Scott Lang. I don't see how "background character" seems likely.

 

[Chance Jackson]

Im sorry but the notion "disney might not want to handle a thief as a main character" is beyond ridiculous.... disney's gone much darker than that.

That notion is just laughably ignorant

this ain't some slasher flick this a 150 million budget movie and alan horn has only chairman of Disney relatively recently. He's the same guy who put out a statement to the effect of "disney is having a tough time justifying keeping the current release date of cap 3" (since batman vs superman is set to come out at the sametime) he is extremely risk averse nothing Disney has done before him matters here

 

[warhorse78]

Now here's a question everyone is avoiding I have asked this for months. Why should the general public care about this property?? Now before someone uses the why care about the Guardians. Well they have cool trailers.

It's a superhero film about a guy rescuing his kid. That could be an episode of Agents of SHIELD.

No one knows the villain of the film is. Can someone honestly tell me who it is?? Then how do you market the film? From the director of some cult classics come the guy who talks to ants. Give me something to care about. Every MCU I went 1st day. Give me a reason to go see this BESIDES a director!!!

I made a thread asking the same question, and all I got were dick remarks for responses.

 

[Ant-manic]

Also, how does being the driving force of the plot constitute being a "background character?"

I mean, granted, I haven't read the script of seen the movie yet. But it seems pretty clear that Hank Pym is one of the primary reasons that the events of the film happen, and I imagine that he'll probably have a roughly equal amount of screen time to Scott Lang. I don't see how "background character" seems likely.

i was quite curious to see just how much of the action was dictated by Pym (as a character). all speculation but i think Wright had something truly different planned out. his take on Pym seemed much more grown up; like he was a mentor but not neccessarily a nice guy.

 

[Darkraid]

how does not being the lead of the movie make him less smart? and how is it not a sci fi movie and involve a shrinking protagonist.

What I meant was that he is too important to be another hero's mentor.

Being old makes him not available to the Avengers anymore.

I think Marvel had it wrong there.

They should make Pym young and the main hero of Ant-Man 1.

They can create the heist elements and have Lang succeed Pym in the sequel while Pym and Janet joins the Avengers using his name as his code name.

Wright can now make stand alone films as many as he wants with Scott Lang.

Well, maybe I'm just a little bias in Hank Pym. I feel that making him old is a waste of character.

 

[Ant-manic]

What I meant was that he is too important to be another hero's mentor.

i'm not sure what this means. how can someone be too important to mentor someone?

Being old makes him not available to the Avengers anymore.

unavailable as an active hero but not as a scientist or from an experienced hero angle.

They should make Pym young and the main hero of Ant-Man 1.

ideally, i guess. i wouldn't like it because i'm in my 30s. i've already waited a decade for an Ant-Man movie. time is precious.

They can create the heist elements and have Lang succeed Pym in the sequel while Pym and Janet joins the Avengers using his name as his code name.

it'd make more sense to just transition to Giant-man. that's how it is in the comics.

Wright can now make stand alone films as many as he wants with Scott Lang.

that's what was happening. it's why they were making an Ant-Man movie.

Well, maybe I'm just a little bias in Hank Pym. I feel that making him old is a waste of character.

it certainly could be a waste; if they decide to waste Douglas' potential. using someone like Michael Douglas makes me want to know Pym's backstory. and there's still plenty of time to tell that backstory; expanding the marvel universe in the process. it's not like they've reduced Pym to a scientist. he's an actual superhero who has managed to stay under the radar long enough to choose a successor.

 

[thalidomide]

Not really an Ant-Man fan, but it's funny how other people see this as "Marvel's Downfall" smh...

 

[Loki882]

Quite frankly, I've always found the scientist aspect of Pym to be much more interesting than the superhero aspect.

 

[Wheels]

Not really an Ant-Man fan, but it's funny how other people see this as "Marvel's Downfall" smh...

Not even close. Even if Ant-Man fails Marvel should be okay. I'd only start to worry if GOTG fails as well.

 

[TheVileOne]

In the words of Hot fuzz when they quoted Bad Boys 2, "This **** just got real."

Posted by Wright on Twitter with the caption, "SELFIE."

http://screenrant.com/ant-man-edgar-wright-james-gunn-joss-whedon-reactions/comment-page-1/#comments

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

It's not even just Malekith. The whole movie suffered. I've grown to not like it .... and it disappoints me very much considering how much of a Thor fan I am and how excited I was for that movie.

Taylor screwed with the Shakespearian Techno-Vikings a little too much. Visually some things needed to be dirtied up, but he took it a little too far. At one point in the movie both Thor and Odin both lost their English accents and were suddenly speaking almost Welsch-like. The third act lacked serious stakes, muddled in Saturday afternoon cartoon-ish exploits.

Wow, I find this statement shocking and hilarious coming from you Rock, considering how doggedly you defended the movie when it came out, calling people who complained about it haterz and trolls, and even arguing with people about its quality when they had seen the movie and you hadnt.

So after all of the criticism and names you called people on the Thor 2 boards for not liking the movie, you now agree with them? Ha ha irony indeed.

 

[chamber-music]

I think they will announce another director by the end of this week or they will scrap the whole movie.

 

[cherokeesam]

In the words of Hot fuzz when they quoted Bad Boys 2, "This **** just got real."

Posted by Wright on Twitter with the caption, "SELFIE."

http://screenrant.com/ant-man-edgar-wright-james-gunn-joss-whedon-reactions/comment-page-1/#comments

Interesting photo choice of Buster Keaton there. Screenrant breaks down the message behind the picture:

As CBM points out, the edited photo is of actor Buster Keaton (featuring a Cornetto ice cream cone) who in 1928 made the self-described “worst mistake of [his] career” by leaving independent film to join MGM. Wright is essentially comparing this to joining Marvel, implying that forfeiting his creative freedom to join big studio Marvel could have been equally as bad for him. And so, back to more original works for Wright. Up for another Simon Pegg and Nick Frost comedy after The World’s End?

So Wright is essentially firing a parting shot, lamenting ever having worked with the Big Bad Corporation in the first place.

Prima donna. I've got no sympathy for him. He took someone else's intellectual property and tried to twist it into something it was never intended to be, and now acts all shocked and hurt that the original property owners are reclaiming it after indulging his whims and vanities for eight years.

 

[The Question]

ISo Wright is essentially firing a parting shot, lamenting ever having worked with the Big Bad Corporation in the first place.

Prima donna. I've got no sympathy for him. He took someone else's intellectual property and tried to twist it into something it was never intended to be, and now acts all shocked and hurt that the original property owners are reclaiming it after indulging his whims and vanities for eight years.

Wow. That's an incredibly petty and close minded way of putting it.

I mean, seriously? "Whims and vanities?"

 

[cherokeesam]

Wow. That's an incredibly petty and close minded way of putting it.

I mean, seriously? "Whims and vanities?"

Petty, hell.
Eight years to get this off the ground. Eight years, and all he's done is dabbled with other projects and put this one on the back burner. That's *all* that "Ant-Man" has ever been to Edgar Wright --- a whim and a vanity. Meanwhile, the principals in his story have taken on a much weightier role in a far more ambitious and lucrative enterprise that grew up while Wright dragged ass. Wright is too conceited to tether Hank, Janet and Scott to the MCU because he just doesn't give a damn about the MCU or the vital roles that these characters play within it. He has no respect for his employers and no respect for the source material.

 

[The Question]

Petty, hell.
Eight years to get this off the ground. Eight years, and all he's done is dabbled with other projects and put this one on the back burner. That's *all* that "Ant-Man" has ever been to Edgar Wright --- a whim and a vanity. Meanwhile, the principals in his story have taken on a much weightier role in a far more ambitious and lucrative enterprise that grew up while Wright dragged ass. Wright is too conceited to tether Hank, Janet and Scott to the MCU because he just doesn't give a damn about the MCU or the vital roles that these characters play within it. He has no respect for his employers and no respect for the source material.

Wow, I had no idea that you had the power to read Edgar Wright's mind and glean an in depth understanding of the pre-production and scheduling process over at Marvel Studios and Edgar Wright's own personal opinions on the projects he works on.

You know, if you didn't have that ability, it would almost sound like you're projecting a bunch of assumptions onto something you don't have a first hand understanding of entirely because a writer/director took creative liberties that you wouldn't have taken in his position. And that would be silly.

 

[cherokeesam]

Wow, I had no idea that you had the power to read Edgar Wright's mind and glean an in depth understanding of the pre-production and scheduling process over at Marvel Studios and Edgar Wright's own personal opinions on the projects he works on.

You know, if you didn't have that ability, it would almost sound like you're projecting a bunch of assumptions onto something you don't have a first hand understanding of entirely because a writer/director took creative liberties that you wouldn't have taken in his position. And that would be silly.

Stow the sarcasm and personal insults; I'm hardly in the mood for them.

It doesn't take "projection, assumptions and mind-reading" to read what has actually been quoted over the years, including the fact that Wright's plans for the movie were radically different from even the most basic of comic-book canon for these particular characters. The impasse has been chronicled for eight years; Marvel is now finally opting out and reclaiming their characters to better align them for inclusion in the MCU, which anybody who's read even a handful of Marvel Comics knows full well means membership in The Avengers. That's what these characters are actually known for.

 

[The Question]

Stow the sarcasm and personal insults; I'm hardly in the mood for them.

It doesn't take "projection, assumptions and mind-reading" to read what has actually been quoted over the years, including the fact that Wright's plans for the movie were radically different from even the most basic of comic-book canon for these particular characters. The impasse has been chronicled for eight years; Marvel is now finally opting out and reclaiming their characters to better align them for inclusion in the MCU, which anybody who's read even a handful of Marvel Comics knows full well means membership in The Avengers. That's what these characters are actually known for.

The problem here is the assumption that different is bad. You have a very narrow definition of what respecting the source material means.

Also, what impasse? Everything that's been chronicled for eight years has shown pretty clearly that Marvel was okay with Wright's take on the characters. The notion that they've secretly had reservations about it this whole time and that them and Wright parting ways is Marvel "reclaiming" their characters to rework them into a more literally comics accurate interpretation is pure speculation.

 

[cherokeesam]

The problem here is the assumption that different is bad. You have a very narrow definition of what respecting the source material means.

Also, what impasse? Everything that's been chronicled for eight years has shown pretty clearly that Marvel was okay with Wright's take on the characters. The notion that they've secretly had reservations about it this whole time and that them and Wright parting ways is Marvel "reclaiming" their characters to rework them into a more literally comics accurate interpretation is pure speculation.

I'm not assuming "different is bad." I have nothing but respect for Wright's Cornetto trilogy and Scott Pilgrim. I have every reason to believe that his take on Ant-Man would be equally as entertaining and refreshing. I also have every reason to believe, through Wright's own commentary, that these characters would be entirely INO and standalone, and separate not only from The Avengers, but the MCU proper.

This "speculation" on the impasse is based on eight years of rewrites that Marvel kept sending back. Marvel does *not* have a history with micromanaging the creative end of their films, but only with issues like continuity that would prevent these films from fitting seamlessly within the developing structure of the MCU. The Shared Universe is Marvel Studios' raison-d'etre. It's why the studio was created in the first place, to get away from the old CBM program of "separate but equal" into an actual integrated universe that all these heroes share. You know, just like in the comics.

 

[The Question]

I'm not assuming "different is bad." I have nothing but respect for Wright's Cornetto trilogy and Scott Pilgrim. I have every reason to believe that his take on Ant-Man would be equally as entertaining and refreshing. I also have every reason to believe, through Wright's own commentary, that these characters would be entirely INO and standalone, and separate not only from The Avengers, but the MCU proper.

What are the reasons you have to believe that the characters would have been entirely "in name only" and separate from the Marvel Cinematic Universe?

This "speculation" on the impasse is based on eight years of rewrites that Marvel kept sending back. Marvel does *not* have a history with micromanaging the creative end of their films, but only with issues like continuity that would prevent these films from fitting seamlessly within the developing structure of the MCU. The Shared Universe is Marvel Studios' raison-d'etre. It's why the studio was created in the first place, to get away from the old CBM program of "separate but equal" into an actual integrated universe that all these heroes share. You know, just like in the comics.

And yet, up until very recently, everything seemed to be chugging along just fine. We have no idea why Marvel and Wright parted ways. There are several competing narratives coming out about it. The main one that refers to rewrites says that the ordered rewrites came from someone at Disney, not Marvel Studios, and that Wright complied with the rewrites until they produced a low quality script, not because his ego was bruised about having to integrate his film into the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Other reports say that this had nothing to do with rewrites, and this was the result of Wright not being able to keep up with the schedule on a production this big after Marvel changed the release date.

Either of those might be true. Neither of them might be true. What you're saying might be true, and it might not. But we don't know. Acting like you know for certain why Wright and Marvel parted ways is baseless assumption, and it's pretty clear that it's stemming from your opinion that his creative decisions where somehow disrespectful to the characters, an opinion that Marvel Studios might not share.

 

[HarryOsborn]

In 2010 Edgar Wright stated the film would be a standalone, and not associated with the avengers. In 2007 wright said the movie would take place in the 60s and the modern era, with Pym being the original ant-man. The movie was announced the come out I believe in 2008 and has just been getting pushed back. Edgar Wright hasn't even really been working on it, just his weird cornetto films that all of 6 people paid to see in theaters. Shawn of the dead is a cult hit but it didn't pull big numbers for a reason. The guys a pretentious prick and I'm glad to be rid of him. A guy like Pym could have been the next tony stark, but nope they went with Lang who's about as useless as you get in the superhero world.

 

[HarryOsborn]

Also I don't see how a guy named "ant-man" is any more of a joke than a guy names "spider-man". He shrinks, he grows, and he's a genius. The fact people keep acting like this is a spoof movie is absolutely stupid.

 

[The Question]

In 2010 Edgar Wright stated the film would be a standalone, and not associated with the avengers.

Okay. What's wrong with that?

In 2007 wright said the movie would take place in the 60s and the modern era, with Pym being the original ant-man.

Okay. Again, what's wrong with that?

The movie was announced the come out I believe in 2008 and has just been getting pushed back.

What's your point?

Edgar Wright hasn't even really been working on it, just his weird cornetto films that all of 6 people paid to see in theaters. Shawn of the dead is a cult hit but it didn't pull big numbers for a reason.

What does the box office draw of his previous films have anything to do with anything? And you know that a director can work on multiple projects at once, right?

The guys a pretentious prick and I'm glad to be rid of him.

In what way is he pretentious?

A guy like Pym could have been the next tony stark, but nope they went with Lang who's about as useless as you get in the superhero world.

1: Says you.

2: Hank Pym's still in the movie. They both are.

Also I don't see how a guy named "ant-man" is any more of a joke than a guy names "spider-man". He shrinks, he grows, and he's a genius. The fact people keep acting like this is a spoof movie is absolutely stupid.

No one has been acting like this is a spoof movie.