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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well the problem was he wasn't making either in skill, or in timely fashion, or in tone the movie Marvel wanted him to make. So he is gone.

Or, the problem was that Marvel was wrong about this one. That is also a possibility. They are not movie making gods. They are humans and humans can and inevitably will make mistakes.

if they get Spielberg to direct Dr Strange---I would be happy---if they get somebody else because Spielberg and marvel don't see eye to eye---then I want Dr Strange to get made and be good. I won't waste my time worrying about how 'lost Spielberg.'

for me it's the character far more than the director. I am an Ant-man fan---that's my first interest.

I want Ant Man to be made and to be good as well. But when a movie studio parts ways with an extremely talented writer/director over "creative differences," it is possible that it's because the studio wants to take the wrong approach with the film and it will not end up being good. Movie studios are made up of people, and sometimes people make bad calls, even people who make good calls ninety nine times out of a hundred. So, some people are concerned.

I'm hoping that this is not the case. I'm hoping that both Marvel and Wright had phenomenal ideas for this film, but they just also happened to be mutually exclusive ones. But I think it's disrespectful and dangerous to dismiss people's concerns with a mentality of "Marvel Studios can do no wrong." They can. They are people. People can make mistakes.
 
Did he accuse me of that? I'm a DC fan but I'm not a DC fanboy, just ask anyone in the Batman or Superman forums. I think I even had my Nolan membership card revoked after 2012 lol.

He said something along the lines of "I'm not surprised at you criticising the CU movies because I know from you previous posts you love the recent DC movies."

Because you know, you cant POSSIBLY be a fan of both DC and Marvel.
 
Me and Krystal share the same pov on this. I wish TheQuestion would get the idea instead of doing this: "Marvel isnt perfect either" yadda yadda yadda stuff. Actually they ARE perfect at this point. They know best. Thats why theyre making billions of dollars. Accept that.

I won't accept that, because it's not true. It is in fact demonstratively false. To say that they're perfect is completely absurd. No one is perfect. That's not how the world works.

Also, how much money you make overall isn't an indicator of the quality of your individual projects.
 
Holy CRAP TheQuestion! You will not accept that Marvel Studios has made highly successful, very entertaining super hero movies since 2008!! Youre in Denial dude. I cant argue with people who refuse to accept the facts.
 
He said something along the lines of "I'm not surprised at you criticising the CU movies because I know from you previous posts you love the recent DC movies."

Because you know, you cant POSSIBLY be a fan of both DC and Marvel.

If he bothered to read my reviews on both Man of Steel and Rises he would know I wasn't fond of either. I won't lie and say I love both equally, I am a Batman guy and by extension a DC guy, but I do like several Marvel characters too. In truth though I'm more of a movie guy than a comic guy, I just like good movies regardless of the studio.
 
Holy CRAP TheQuestion! You will not accept that Marvel Studios has made highly successful, very entertaining super hero movies since 2008!! Youre in Denial dude. I cant argue with people who refuse to accept the facts.

I accept that Marvel Studios has made highly successful, very entertaining super hero movies since 2008. At no point have I ever denied that. At no point have I ever said anything that suggests that I do not believe that to be true. I have, in fact, agreed with you on that point several times. Please point out anything I have said that sounds like a denial of that fact.
 
If he bothered to read my reviews on both Man of Steel and Rises he would know I wasn't fond of either. I won't lie and say I love both equally, I am a Batman guy and by extension a DC guy, but I do like several Marvel characters too. In truth though I'm more of a movie guy than a comic guy, I just like good movies regardless of the studio.

Same here, though I am both a movie and comic guy, have been a fan of both for a while. But I like Marvel and DC characters, more so Marvel, though I am a huge Superman fan, he is main interest in the DCU, and I am also a fan of other characters like Hellboy, Transformers, TMNT and a few others.

But according to some on here if you criticise one you are not a fan of them :whatever:, and if you are a fan of one you cant possibly be a fan the other either, its silly.
 
I have to agree with JMC that not every movie needs to be in the MCU.

Let me phrase it this way, imagine Marvel makes 20 movies (which will happen soon), which is the best of the three outcomes?

1) 20 movies that have nothing to do with one another;
2) 20 movies that are all greatly interconnected;
3) 17 or 18 movies that are all greatly interconnected, and then 2 or 3 movies that take place in parallel universes with very different styles and tones.

It seems obvious to me that option #3 is best.
 
I'm pointing out that the concerns people have shouldn't be dismissed.

What excuses have I made?

"Marvel's track record is outstanding, so there's no way they had bad judgement about this" isn't an excuse?

And, as far as quality film making goes, how is Marvel's track record better than Edgar Wright's?

Seriously?

Maybe a couple billion people now know the MCU and most enjoy the movies and then ask the average person about Scott Pilgrim and get a blank stare.

But you made your point--Marvel and Wright "same quality stuff"---that's all that needed to be said.
 
TheQuestion: Youve been saying this entire time that Marvel isnt perfect, Marvel makes mistakes too etc. Of course noones perfect but the FACTS are MARVEL has a great track record for their releases (Iron Man 1 2 3, Thor 1 2, Cap 1 2, Avengers etc) and are at the top of their game. What youve been doing this whole discussion is acting as if MARVEL doesnt know what theyre doing and everything theyve done so far doesnt matter. Youre wrong and I think youre talking jibberish only to stick up for Edgar Wright (Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz, Worlds End, Scott Pilgrim).
 
Seriously?

Maybe a couple billion people now know the MCU and most enjoy the movies and then ask the average person about Scott Pilgrim and get a blank stare.

But you made your point--Marvel and Wright "same quality stuff"---that's all that needed to be said.

I asked in terms of quality. Not popularity or marketability or profitability, but quality.
 
I asked in terms of quality. Not popularity or marketability or profitability, but quality.

In capitalism, quality is defined by profitability, which is not just box office gross, but the effect on the box office gross of sequels and spinoffs, sales of merchandise, et cetera.
 
I asked in terms of quality. Not popularity or marketability or profitability, but quality.


And I think that you makes a person with extreme bad taste with a fetish for a certain director.

Hott Fuzz vs Iron man
Shaun of the Dead vs CA: TWS

If that is your true opinion I will be happy to ignore anything else you say because we live in "different universes" if you will.
 
I have to agree with JMC that not every movie needs to be in the MCU.

Let me phrase it this way, imagine Marvel makes 20 movies (which will happen soon), which is the best of the three outcomes?

1) 20 movies that have nothing to do with one another;
2) 20 movies that are all greatly interconnected;
3) 17 or 18 movies that are all greatly interconnected, and then 2 or 3 movies that take place in parallel universes with very different styles and tones.

It seems obvious to me that option #3 is best.

My thing is I just think too much importance has been placed on the MCU thing when most of the movies don't affect one and other. At the moment, it's still comes across to me as glorified fan service and not something that is actually important to the overall series. I see no reason why something like Ant-Man has to be connected to the MCU other than comic history, which to me isn't a valid reason to do it. If there's a good movie that can still be made I see no reason why it shouldn't be made, if the stumbling block is that it doesn't connect well to the MCU then maybe there's needs to be a rethink about the studio objectives, because they are potentially letting go of good, and maybe even great ideas simply because it doesn't fit into a particular mold.
 
And I think that you makes a person with extreme bad taste with a fetish for a certain director.

Hott Fuzz vs Iron man
Shaun of the Dead vs CA: TWS

If that is your true opinion I will be happy to ignore anything else you say because we live in "different universes" if you will.

Edgar Wright is not the mediocrity you make him out to be, his movies are well-liked by critics and gross well for their budgets.

Hott Fuzz, 91% on RT with 7.7/10
Shaun of the Dead, 91% on RT with 7.7/10
Scott Pilgrim, 82% on RT with 7.5/10
The World's End, 89% on RT with 7.4/10

Cumulative Budget: ~98 million
Cumulative Gross: ~205 million
 
And I think that you makes a person with extreme bad taste with a fetish for a certain director.

Hott Fuzz vs Iron man
Shaun of the Dead vs CA: TWS

If that is your true opinion I will be happy to ignore anything else you say because we live in "different universes" if you will.

Must we all be so negative? So much of the internet is hehe...can't we have different opinions and still get along?
 
TheQuestion: Youve been saying this entire time that Marvel isnt perfect, Marvel makes mistakes too etc. Of course noones perfect but the FACTS are MARVEL has a great track record for their releases and are at the top of their game. What youve been doing this whole discussion is acting as if MARVEL doesnt know what theyre doing and everything theyve done so far doesnt matter. Youre wrong and I think youre talking jibberish only to stick up for Edgar Wright.

No, I haven't been doing that. I have not been acting like Marvel doesn't know what they're doing or that everything they've done so far doesn't matter. I'm saying that their good track record doesn't mean that it isn't possible for them to make a mistake, and to assume that they have not and cannot because they're made high quality films before is absolutely ridiculous. It does not make any kind of logical sense.

And, beyond ridiculousness, it's not good for Marvel Studios. To give them a total free pass, to never look at any decision they make critically, will only eventually lead to reinforcement of bad decisions. It will only make the movies worse. You say you only care about the movies being as good as they can be? The only way to do that is to entertain the notion that it is possible for Marvel to make mistakes and say so vocally. Otherwise, they might get complacent, and that's never good for art.

I am hoping, praying to God, that they didn't make a mistake. That the movie will be fine. I want that to be true. And I understand that there is a not small likelihood that it is true. But if it isn't, then the fans have to call them on their mistakes.

That's how it's supposed to work. Blind devotion doesn't help anyone. Marvel has made mistakes in the past. Both of the Thor movies are seriously flawed. I like them both a lot, but on the whole they're not great. And The Incredible Hulk had a lot of good moments, but it was a pretty weak movie as well. Now, on the whole, Marvel has had more successes than failures. The last batch of movies have all been phenomenal, and Guardians of the Galaxy looks like it will be the best one yet. But we can't act like it's impossible that they'll ever make a mistake again. That's naive, and that is denying reality.

I love Marvel comics and Marvel studios more than I can put into words. But, to borrow an analogy from Senator Al Franken, you can't love Marvel like you're a child and Marvel is mommy who is wonderful and perfect and never does anything wrong. You've got to love Marvel like a grownup. That entails cherishing it's beauty, celebrating it's victories, and also, when it makes a mistake, letting it know because you care and because you want the best for it.

Nothing I've said so far has been gibberish. I've made my case, I've backed up my views with arguments and reasoning, and I think I've been fairly articulate. Eloquent, even, if you'll forgive a moment of vanity. You might not agree with me, and it would not at all be unreasonable if you've tired of arguing with me (I can be tiring), but Jesus Christ, man, do me the courtesy of not condescending to me.
 
And I think that you makes a person with extreme bad taste with a fetish for a certain director.

Hott Fuzz vs Iron man
Shaun of the Dead vs CA: TWS

If that is your true opinion I will be happy to ignore anything else you say because we live in "different universes" if you will.

I asked you to explain how Marvel's track record for quality is better than Edgar Wright's track record for quality. How does that make me a person with extreme bad taste and a fetish for a certain director? My only point was to say that Marvel and Edgar Wright have made a roughly equal number of good movies. :huh:

And I don't get the "Hott Fuzz vs Iron man/Shaun of the Dead vs CA: TWS" thing. What did you mean by that? :huh:
 
Holy God guys give it a rest already. It's the same people saying the same thing over and over again. At this point your opinions are well-voiced and understood by anyone who's read these Ant-Man threads the past week.

0016.gif
 
Last edited:
totally my fault for being in the Edgar Wright Leaves Ant-Man thread! LOL.

I don't care about Edgar Wright and I'm in a forum with people who do.

I care about ant-man and there are threads concerning the future of the movie!
 
So you're saying it's profitable for both the comic line and the movie universe to have their characters connected?

Well then I guess it's here to stay.

the minor characters will get their chance eventually anyway---like Luke Cage, Iron Fist, etc.

Nobody "lost their movie" because they decided to start by building the Avengers team as their first big project.

I daresay Runaways and Cloak & dagger both would work better as television series anyway.
 
I don't think anything The Question has said is unreasonable. If this was any other situation, for any other film, where a director with a proven track record for quality movies were to suddenly depart the project mere weeks before shooting was set to begin, and if reports were emerging that the split was because of the studio demanding last minute script changes before getting their own in-house guys to rewrite the script without said director's consent... most rational people would be taking the director's side. Taking all allegiances out of the equation and simply looking at the situation, most would conclude that, if the intel was accurate, the studio was at least acting erratic. But because it's Marvel Studios, those deductive skills get thrown out of the window and it becomes "MARVEL ARE PERFECT PARAGONS OF VIRTUE AND EDGAR WRIGHT IS THE WORST KIND OF SCUM," flying in the face of all the evidence as presented.

The studio doesn't always know best. You guys should read some of the stories about behind-the-scenes on Alien 3: a team of half-a-dozen Fox lawyers on set every day, with the authority to make on-the-spot script rewrites DURING FILMING if they felt it best "protected the brand." First-time feature director David Fincher near abandoned doing film altogether after it, the experience was so negative and he felt he had so much of his own creative freedom undermined. Are we to argue that Fox were automatically in the right, just because Alien and Aliens were both excellent and therefore their judgement going forward should have been accepted unquestioningly? Was David Fincher just a grunt who should have shut up and done what he was told, or does the career he went off to have once given more creative freedom suggest that maybe he knew best and should have been left alone to make the film he wanted to make?
 
So you're saying it's profitable for both the comic line and the movie universe to have their characters connected?

Well then I guess it's here to stay.

the minor characters will get their chance eventually anyway---like Luke Cage, Iron Fist, etc.

Nobody "lost their movie" because they decided to start by building the Avengers team as their first big project.
Yep. I think the universe thing has caught on with the GA too which wasn't a given by any means. As long as each solo film makes a good effort to make the connection not have a negative effect on their own film (even a quick acknowledgement can be enough, don't need Fury & Widow turning up in every film), I think it benefits everyone.
 
Holy God guys give it a rest already. It's the same people saying the same thing over and over again. At this point your opinions are well-voiced and understood by anyone who's read these Ant-Man threads the past week.

Yeah, at this point we're going in circles.

I think it's fair to say this. They had disagreements on some details (the extent of which is unknown), Marvel felt there wasn't time to let Wright do another rewrite if it was going to go into production in time, they had someone else do the rewrite, Wright wasn't happy with it and stepped down from the project. Maybe if they had unlimited time, they could hammered something out they both were happy with, maybe there was some disagreement that would never be worked out. I don't think any of us know, but, in the end, it doesn't really matter. Marvel still has to be comfortable with a movie they're bankrolling. It's a shame it didn't work out with Wright. I'm hopeful the movie as a whole will still work out, but we'll have to wait and see.
 
What part is Simon Pegg going to play in the Kolchak movie?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,269
Messages
22,077,596
Members
45,877
Latest member
dude9876
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"