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

[Keyser Soze]

Notice how I emphasized the word "if" there? I never assumed that what I described there is what happened. If I had, I wouldn't have said if in bold and italics.

If in bold and italics, with an added "maybe" and "it seems" in case it wasn't enough that you were merely making a suggestion of a possibility.

 

[Mike Murdock]

Honestly, I've defended Wright's idea throughout and I think it would have been a good opportunity, but there is something juvenile about his parting shot. It suggests an inability to work with a big studio and meet a middle ground when it comes to vision. Let's keep in mind that Marvel seeks out directors who have done things they like rather than a pedigree with big movies (they rely on the rest of the staff to make up for that). They wanted Wright because they like his work. But a Marvel movie inevitably has compromises. If Wright was unwilling to compromise at all, that's on Wright. Nothing against that, he can be happy doing good but small films. But the shot at the end seems a bit much given how long they still kept him around in spite of their disagreements.

 

[TalismanRing]

Wright and Disney don't seem to have any issues with each other since the rumor is his next project may be the film re-make of TV series Night Stalker with Johnny Deep. (hmm Dark Shadows didn't teach anyone any lessons? Also, not exactly cutting edge independent cinema.)

http://www.deadline.com/2014/05/ant...-get-excited-about-kolchak-the-night-stalker/

Very interesting since Feige was his biggest champion and had delayed the filming around Wrights schedule as well as re-arranging the members of the Avengers. It really looks like it was indeed creative differences and Feige not thinking Wright's latest or completed Ant Man vision or tone fit into the MCU. Maybe they just waited too long and Wrights version might have worked during the first or second phase but not the third. Or maybe it simply does come down to that rumor of Wright not wanting to use as much coverage as Marvel wanted.

 

[Ant-manic]

Honestly, I've defended Wright's idea throughout and I think it would have been a good opportunity, but there is something juvenile about his parting shot.

it is disappointing. but we don't have the context for his hard feelings. they might have really done something insulting to him. Whedon's not taking sides per se. but he did seem to sympathize with Edgar Wright.

 

[Ant-manic]

Wright and Disney don't seem to have any issues with each other since the rumor is his next project may be the film re-make of TV series Night Stalker with Johnny Deep. (hmm Dark Shadows didn't teach anyone any lessons? Also, not exactly cutting edge independent cinema.)

http://www.deadline.com/2014/05/ant...-get-excited-about-kolchak-the-night-stalker/

Very interesting since Feige was his biggest champion and had delayed the filming around Wrights schedule as well as re-arranging the members of the Avengers. It really looks like it was indeed creative differences and Feige not thinking Wright's latest or completed Ant Man vision or tone fit into the MCU. Maybe they just waited too long and Wrights version might have worked during the first or second phase but not the third. Or maybe it simply does come down to that rumor of Wright not wanting to use as much coverage as Marvel wanted.

seems like something that should have been worked out prior to casting.

 

[Mysteryman]

We can only guess what Feige thinks about all of this.
He has not said anything official yet .

 

[TalismanRing]

seems like something that should have been worked out prior to casting.

Maybe they both thought there was room for compromise and it would eventually get done but then it didn't. Sometimes when you have so much time and effort invested it's hard to pull the plug even though you probably should have done it while ago.

But they waited until the were at the altar to call off the wedding. So awkward, messy, expensive and with gifts to be returned. The only question left is if the bride decides to marry the groomsman since most of the wedding expenses are non refundable and it's especially a shame to waste the dress and the 13 tier cake.

 

[The Question]

Maybe they both thought there was room for compromise and it would eventually get done but then it didn't. Sometimes when you have so much time and effort invested it's hard to pull the plug even though you probably should have done it while ago.

But they waited until the were at the altar to call off the wedding. So awkward, messy, expensive and with gifts to be returned. The only question left is if the bride decides to marry the groomsman since most of the wedding expenses are non refundable and it's especially a shame to waste the dress and the 13 tier cake.

That's not how making movies works.

 

[TalismanRing]

Er yes, I'm being a tad glib and facetious. Hence the sarcasm emoticon since that's the closest I could find.

 

[The Question]

Er yes, I'm being a tad glib and facetious. Hence the sarcasm emoticon since that's the closest I could find.

Ah, I misread your use of the sarcasm emoticon. I thought you were using it to highlight your sass, not to emphasize that you didn't mean what you were saying and were in fact pouting out the ridiculousness of such arguments. My apologizes, I totally misread that social cue.

 

[DA_Champion]

I tried Cornetto ice cream for the first time.

It's not bad. Comparable to Drumstick imo.

Might be different ingredients in Australia.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Give me a break. I don't resort to the "haters and trolls" argument. That's for 5 years olds when they run out of argumentation. My beef was with people casting failure on the movie before they saw it - namely yourself and a few others.

Yet to did resort to calling people haters back then, funny that. People were not casting failure on the movie, merely airing things that worried them, yet you made things worse by jumping down our throats and saying we were against Marvel, which was not the case at all. I have seen you say the same things to people in this very thread because they dare to criticise Marvel for whats happened here. You also called me a 'DC Lover' many times, is that not a thing for 5 year olds as well? You were arguing about the movie with people who had seen it when you hadnt, is that not childish and blind fanboyism all rolled into one?

You find my comments hilarious because you do not have the capacity to admit when you were wrong. Fortunately I do. Try it some time then come talk to me.

Ha ha, this comment just shows how much you live in your own little bubble, I have been on this board for 13 years and admitted plenty of times I was wrong, Thor 2 was simply one of the ones were I was right.

At the same time, I take it you didnt read my review of TWS were I stated Marvel bounced right back IM3 and Thor 2? Or do you only pipe up when people dare to have negative things to say about Marvel? I dont want an argument but why do you feel its your responsibility to defend Marvel in everything they do when they have made plenty of mistakes, and I am a die hard Marvel fan myself and can admit this. Try THAT sometime and then come back to me.

Give you a break? Stop jumping down peoples throats for having a go Marvel EVERY time then.

 

[DA_Champion]

Damn, this board has been around for 13 years?

 

[DA_Champion]

Yet to did resort to calling people haters back then, funny that. People were not casting failure on the movie, merely airing things that worried them, yet you made things worse by jumping down our throats and saying we were against Marvel, which was not the case at all. I have seen you say the same things to people in this very thread because they dare to criticise Marvel for whats happened here. You also called me a 'DC Lover' many times, is that not a thing for 5 year olds as well? You were arguing about the movie with people who had seen it when you hadnt, is that not childish and blind fanboyism all rolled into one?



Ha ha, this comment just shows how much you live in your own little bubble, I have been on this board for 13 years and admitted plenty of times I was wrong, Thor 2 was simply one of the ones were I was right.

At the same time, I take it you didnt read my review of TWS were I stated Marvel bounced right back IM3 and Thor 2? Or do you only pipe up when people dare to have negative things to say about Marvel? I dont want an argument but why do you feel its your responsibility to defend Marvel in everything they do when they have made plenty of mistakes, and I am a die hard Marvel fan myself and can admit this. Try THAT sometime and then come back to me.

Give you a break? Stop jumping down peoples throats for having a go Marvel EVERY time then.

I remember feeling alone in hating Thor 2. It was one of the worst movie theatre experiences I've ever had. Now, less than a year later, it's generally acknowledged as ****. I feel vindicated.

 

[TheFuture]

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.

Pretentious? I don't think you've watched his films. There's a simplicity and charm to his films, which is pretty much the opposite of pretentious filmmaking.

Maybe you've just seen Scott Pilgrim and that is what you're basing your opinion on, but don't confuse pretentious characters for pretentious filmmaking.

 

[cherokeesam]

Notice how I emphasized the word "if" there? I never assumed that what I described there is what happened. If I had, I wouldn't have said if in bold and italics.

Yes, we're operating under assumptions on any side of this argument. But I'm basing my speculation about what drove the wedge between Wright and Marvel on rumors from El Mayimbe. Granted, "Eh Maybe" is a highly unreliable hit-or-miss source, but I'll give him brownie points for correctly awarding the Daredevil casting call to the obscure choice of Charlie Cox just within the past 24 hours. That being said, Mayimbe was very specific in what caused Wright to divorce Marvel:

The prep on this film has been forever and it was impossible to be behind schedule because the entire production was out on hiatus by Marvel for duration of the script's rewrite. Families left homes to work on the movie in Atlanta and were now suddenly in limbo. So about the rewrite... About 3 months ago, Marvel had notes. The meat of the notes were about the core morality of the piece, must include franchise characters. etc., These notes came from the big four at Marvel. Joe Cornish and Edgar Wright did two drafts to try and answer the notes without compromising their vision. 6 weeks ago Marvel took the script off them and gave the writing assignment to two very low credit writers. One of the writers were from Marvel's in house writing team. Edgar stayed cool, agreed to stay on the project, and read the draft. The script came in this week and was completely undone. Poorer, homogenized, and not Edgar's vision. Edgar met with Marvel on Friday to formally exit and the announcement went out directly after. Edgar & Joe were upset by the sudden, out of nowhere lack of faith in them as filmmakers. Fiege had always batted for them but this felt like it came from the higher ups. Where does this leave the cast? Well, it is believed they don't have the option to walk like Edgar did.

So, according to LR's source, Feige and Company (i.e., "the big four at Marvel") specifically told Wright to change the morality of the story to be palatable to Disney (read into that what you will --- my own guess is that it was simply about language, violence and adult themes, all items that have generally pushed Wright films into an R rating before) and to specifically include franchise characters; i.e., Avengers.

So maybe Eh Maybe's wright oldrazz and maybe Eh Maybe's wrong, but his source definitely seems to echo the narrative of the development (or lack thereof) of this project since 2006. In the end, the sticking point was the same it's always been: Edgar Wright wanted to take Avengers out of the Avenger Universe to make a standalone movie, and that flew directly in the face of everything Marvel Studios is trying to do in creating this shared multiverse.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

Yet to did resort to calling people haters back then, funny that. People were not HHHRRRNNNGGHHHHH!

Is this thread about Edgar Wright or crying about something that happened a year ago? let it go plz

 

[Keyser Soze]

Yes, we're operating under assumptions on any side of this argument. But I'm basing my speculation about what drove the wedge between Wright and Marvel on rumors from El Mayimbe. Granted, "Eh Maybe" is a highly unreliable hit-or-miss source, but I'll give him brownie points for correctly awarding the Daredevil casting call to the obscure choice of Charlie Cox just within the past 24 hours. That being said, Mayimbe was very specific in what caused Wright to divorce Marvel:

So, according to LR's source, Feige and Company (i.e., "the big four at Marvel") specifically told Wright to change the morality of the story to be palatable to Disney (read into that what you will --- my own guess is that it was simply about language, violence and adult themes, all items that have generally pushed Wright films into an R rating before) and to specifically include franchise characters; i.e., Avengers.

So maybe Eh Maybe's wright oldrazz and maybe Eh Maybe's wrong, but his source definitely seems to echo the narrative of the development (or lack thereof) of this project since 2006. In the end, the sticking point was the same it's always been: Edgar Wright wanted to take Avengers out of the Avenger Universe to make a standalone movie, and that flew directly in the face of everything Marvel Studios is trying to do in creating this shared multiverse.

IF this article is legit, it's telling that we're both reading the same article and yet drawing very different speculation from it. You read that and seem to take it as Wright being uncooperative with Marvel and stubbornly acting against their wishes for the shared universe, and this being a continued detente over multiple years ultimately resulting in Wright's departure, which places Wright in the wrong. I read that as Marvel and Wright previously being on the same page as regards the direction of the movie, only for Marvel to suddenly change their minds 3 months ago and start demanding changes, and for Wright to try to be a team player and roll with those changes and follow the studio notes, only for the film's script to be taken away from him and replaced with what he felt was an inferior product that he couldn't put his name on, which to me puts Marvel more in the wrong: not for having their own vision for these characters, which it's well within their right to do, but for suddenly changing their minds at the 11th hour and going back on a previously-agreed direction.

Most likely the reality of the situation lies somewhere in the middle, with some mutual miscommunication and conflicting interests coming to a head and resulting in Wright's exit being necessary, where neither party is fully "in the wrong" or "in the right". But we may never know the specifics.

 

[TheVision]

Im not a huge fan of Wright or anything, but hes made some fun movies. The bottom line is this is the Marvel Cinematic Universe, not the Marvel Cornetto Universe. Whatever really happened, apparently Wrights vision wasnt good enough to make a big hit movie. Marvel doesnt want 30 million dollar culty flops, they want Billion dollar hits.

 

[DA_Champion]

Im not a huge fan of Wright or anything, but hes made some fun movies. The bottom line is this is the Marvel Cinematic Universe, not the Marvel Cornetto Universe.

Indeed, they can't have diversity of tone and content.

 

[metaphysician]

Given that you're speculating, allow me to return with some speculation of my own. Could it be that the project was equally on the backburner for Marvel as it was for Wright? Could it be that it suited Marvel Studios just fine to hold off until after Avengers secured their branding power before moving onto riskier properties like Ant-Man? If Wright got this far with his altered vision of the Ant-Man mythos, it was with Marvel's approval, and surely by now Marvel Select have earned our trust in at least being true to the spirit of the source material. If this didn't meet their standards, they wouldn't have greenlit it. And once the MCU shared universe took off, Wright could have had his chance to leave then, but Marvel obviously believed his vision for Ant-Man was still compatible with their vision for the MCU. Whatever differences emerged, must have happened relatively recently for things to get this far.

This tends to be what I think. Its why I doubt that any "creative differences" are about high level concepts like "60s Hank Pym, Scott Lang as the modern successor"; those kind of things had long since been greenlit.

Honestly, I think if anything, the most likely scenario is "Ant-Man production was far behind schedule with no hope of catching up", as everyone discovered that Edgar Wright is not actually capable of functionally operating in a big studio environment.

 

[metaphysician]

Not necessarily to feed into fanboy complaints, but there is a certain level of expectations that must be met. If the movie has scenes that don't fit in with the rest of the MCU, then they shouldn't be included, regardless of the director's vision.

Think of it on a smaller scale. Let's say that someone has written a movie, but is having trouble with one scene in the middle of the script. They hand it off for someone else to help out, and in the process they write a scene where the main character gets killed or paralyzed or wins the lotto or has sex with the antagonist. It can destroys or severely alter the course of the story. In essence, that is what Wright (and every other director and writer) are doing if they produce an MCU film or TV series. They get a "scene" out of a much bigger "movie" and get to add their own touch, but they cannot deviate from the original course.

It wouldn't make sense for Ant-Man to come out and Pym's talking about how great a job he has working for S.H.I.E.L.D. when it doesn't exist anymore because it was destroyed in CA:TWS. There's a lot that must be maintained in the story so that the continuity of the franchise can remain intact.

This is, btw, why I don't really blame Marvel for Thor 2. Yes, Marvel almost certainly forced the inclusion of more Loki stuff. However, frankly, Taylor should have realized from the getgo that actually killing off Loki was a dumb idea that wouldn't fly. The MCU is a toybox, and the directors are allowed to play with the toys and add new ones. Taking a toy that is already in the box, and breaking it? That requires approval, and you shouldn't whine if the answer is "no, put it back when your done."

 

[TheVision]

^^ I like the toy analogy. If you watch the GOTG trailer, its clear James Gunn was able to go pretty wild with his ideas but still manage to stay inside Marvels guidelines (looks great!). Edgar Wright sounds like he wanted to go outside the guidelines resulting in a offbeat tone/style that wasnt what Marvel wanted and when they tried to reign it in to fit, he didnt like it and left.

 

[jbr]

The new THR story is pretty close to Latino Review's:

Wright, 40, is an irreverent British filmmaker, and sources say Marvel had been unhappy with his take on Ant-Man for weeks. Originally set to begin shooting June 2, the production had been put on hiatus while Feige ordered revisions of the script that was co-written by Wright and Joe Cornish. According to sources, Wright had been willing to make revisions earlier in the process. But the new rewrites took place without Wright's input, and when he received Marvel's new version early during the week of May 19, he walked, prompting a joint statement announcing his exit "due to differences in their visions of the film."

The main difference seems to be who was insisting on the major changes. Feige or like Latino (and Playlist) indicated, someone higher up.

 

[Dark Raven]

This tends to be what I think. Its why I doubt that any "creative differences" are about high level concepts like "60s Hank Pym, Scott Lang as the modern successor"; those kind of things had long since been greenlit.

Honestly, I think if anything, the most likely scenario is "Ant-Man production was far behind schedule with no hope of catching up", as everyone discovered that Edgar Wright is not actually capable of functionally operating in a big studio environment.

I could see this as a factor. Before, Marvel tolerated him because production hadn't started or wasn't about to start. It was just in the script phase, and he was allowed to make his other movies. Now, when it comes to the crunch, maybe now they can see that his procrastinating ways are so rampant that it is just not practical to work with him.

It's a bit like a woman dating a man who appears rather Bohemian and a free spirit. But once they actually come to settle down, she might see the extent of his ways and that he is completely messy, irresponsible and has no sense of direction for his life, and she will realise they're not actually compatible after all. Before, she saw him in a limited capacity, but now having to actually live together is another matter. That could be the same with Marvel and Wright, even though before they seemed to be fine with his vision and film making methods.