Edgar Wright Leaves Ant-Man!!

[jmc]

I totally felt genuine love for the characters in TWS. It made me feel as if the Russo's went out on a quest to a) show why Cap is still relevant and b) prove he wasn't a propaganda character.

I dunno, to me anyway it felt like more about love for a kick ass action spy movie than the character himself, which there's nothing wrong with cause the end result was still great.

 

[chamber-music]

It might have just been an overall style/tone thing. Like, Wright may have wanted to make the film really stylized and weird and not have the climax of the movie be a big expensive action sequence but instead be something else more creative, and Disney was all "NO STICK TO FORMULA YOU SWINE." I could see that being a thing.

Marvel guys louis d'esposito were talking about how they loved wright's style and I can imagine some of those old fashion suit types at Disney not being into it.

 

[cherokeesam]

Marvel guys louis d'esposito were talking about how they loved wright's style and I can imagine some of those old fashion suit types at Disney not being into it.

I strongly doubt the rift had anything to do with stylistic differences or major rewrites to the script. The reports are indicating that Disney execs were having trouble with the morality of the script (Wright and Cornish have always shaded more towards R-rated fare than the family-friendly Disney empire would like) and with Wright's stubborn refusal to integrate these characters into the shared universe Marvel Studios is creating.

The touch-ups that Marvel added to the script were most likely elements to that end --- i.e., a little less heavy on adult language and themes, and storylines that would thread Hank and Scott into the MCU (i.e., the Avengers). Wright didn't want any part of that, so he walked.

 

[titansupes]

It doesn't matter how hard he hit her. He hit her and that's not ok

That's bull****! He did not hit her! He did naaaahhtt...

 

[Xeno-noesis]

That's bull****! He did not hit her! He did naaaahhtt...

You just won 100 internet points! Well played.

 

[dark_b]

I strongly doubt the rift had anything to do with stylistic differences or major rewrites to the script. The reports are indicating that Disney execs were having trouble with the morality of the script (Wright and Cornish have always shaded more towards R-rated fare than the family-friendly Disney empire would like) and with Wright's stubborn refusal to integrate these characters into the shared universe Marvel Studios is creating.

The touch-ups that Marvel added to the script were most likely elements to that end --- i.e., a little less heavy on adult language and themes, and storylines that would thread Hank and Scott into the MCU (i.e., the Avengers). Wright didn't want any part of that, so he walked.

Edgar Wright is not mentally challenged. he knew that he was making a PG13 summer Marvel movie.

 

[The Question]

Oh no guys .... The Question has been looking forward to this movie for years (so he says) .... more like looking for yet another reason to rag on the MCU LOL

That was uncalled for.

 

[Mike Murdock]

I strongly doubt the rift had anything to do with stylistic differences or major rewrites to the script. The reports are indicating that Disney execs were having trouble with the morality of the script (Wright and Cornish have always shaded more towards R-rated fare than the family-friendly Disney empire would like) and with Wright's stubborn refusal to integrate these characters into the shared universe Marvel Studios is creating.

The touch-ups that Marvel added to the script were most likely elements to that end --- i.e., a little less heavy on adult language and themes, and storylines that would thread Hank and Scott into the MCU (i.e., the Avengers). Wright didn't want any part of that, so he walked.

Reducing the adult language is fine with me, same with greater integration into the MCU (although, as an origin film, I tend to think it probably should stand alone more anyway). It's the adult themes I'm concerned about. To me, both Pym and Lang are flawed characters and the movie portraying them that way appeals to me. I hope the changes maintain some degree of moral ambiguity. The best way, perhaps, to handle it is to make it a bit of a redemption story.

In other words, I hope the rewrite wasn't radical. It was Wright's baby, so I can see him being wary of too many changes. But I hope whatever caused him to want to leave was small enough that the edge of the movie can still remain.

 

[Mysteryman]

Hey, I have been looking forward to it to.
Don't Rag On The Question for doing the same or act like he is the only one who wants to see it .

 

[darpavader]

"We changed, frankly, some of the MCU [Marvel cinematic universe] to accommodate this version of Ant-Man. Knowing what we wanted to do with Edgar and with Ant-Man, going years and years back, helped to dictate what we did with the roster for Avengers that first time''

To me this quote Feige was maybe a public warning to Wright. In other words, we have already made changes for you, don't take it too far.

 

[DACrowe]

Ant-Man's been off limits to anyone but Wright before the MCU as we know it even existed. Since Iron Man was still on the drawing board. That's precisely why he wasn't in Phase 1 or 2. They tried their best to keep him out to accommodate Wright's take.

I was under the impression that Marvel kept putting it off. They did not want him in Phase 1 or Phase 2 as it didn't fit their strategy for either. That is why Wright made The World's End during the "Phase 2" era.

At least, that is what the reports seemed to indicate.

 

[DACrowe]

You're crazy. Talk about hyperbole. One director helmed one of the highest grossing films of all time. His absence would be felt. The other can't even gross over $80 million domestically.

Please stop talking.

Really? Because I recall that why Joss Whedon fans were ecstatic when he got the Avengers gig (myself included), many Marvel fanboys got pretty pissy about it as they wanted Jon Favreau or at least an action director. And one of their main complaints is that Joss Whedon was "too TV" and that he had only directed one movie that made $38 million worldwide (a good $40 million less than Hot Fuzz).

This is getting a little off topic but dissing Wright, a true artist, because he hasn't made a blockbuster is kind of ignorant. Before Whedon made Avengers he was in a similar boat with even less experience. I know, because fanboys where whining then too before seeing Avengers in the theaters.

 

[Mike Murdock]

I certainly was always supportive of Whedon, but I agree completely that his prior film success was limited. That being said, an Avengers movie certainly has name recognition to help it do well. Ant-Man is also an obscure character. It could have been a double hurdle.

That being said, I'd have no doubt that it would have been Wright's most successful movie.

 

[DACrowe]

It's funny you bring up this thing about directors leaving their mark. Having watch X-Men the other day what's come to my attention is the emotional difference between Marvel's MCU and other superhero movies. In most of the movies with the exception of IM and Avengers there seems a real hollowness in the Marvel movies, an emotional disconnect that is very noticeable compared to other movies and I think this comes down to directors being hired just to direct as opposed to being hired to bring something of their own to the table. They lack soul for lack of better word.

Ok, for starters, I'd appreciate you not putting words in my mouth I didn't say with regards to Fox. Secondly, whilst I have given Marvel lip it's been in areas when it's been deserved, mostly in areas of shoddy business and creative practices. Third, I'm a Nolan fan, don't deny it, but I'm not beyond criticising the man, feel free to read my Rises review. Lastly, I hate to break it to you but I actually really like Winter Soldier, but as good as Winter Soldier is the one thing that stood out to me has how it lacked an emotional core, it's a great action movie with some good themes but in light of DoFP (and to a much lesser extent ASM2) it's in retrospect still missing something, and it's the same thing that I feel is absent from a lot of the MCU films. Directors may have been able to a leave a mark of sorts within the MCU, but they are still missing soul because of the MCU. The only times I can feel the genuine love for the characters has been in Avengers and Iron Man and that's because those directors were in fortunate positions.

I would agree with all of this. While I wouldn't call Singer an auteur (he did make Jack: The Giant Killer after all and Valkyrie), he clearly has a love and passion for the X-Men characters and it shined through in X1 and X2 because Fox didn't care what he did with the property that much back then as long as it was cheap and they gave him relatively unlimited resources for DOFP. And all three outings got fans something special.

Not that I am saying Fox is better than Disney. Fox is also the studio that micromanaged X3 to hell and thought that a Wolverine prequel without a script was A-OK, because fans would still show up.

But still, Marvel is so determined that every movie fit into a certain aesthetic that any sort of depth or creativity can be hamstrung. It is the trade-off I guess for them being able to produce two movies a year, plus TV shows. They will be faithful and many. But like a TV show that has a 24-episode season, don't expect any of them to aspire for individual greatness or long-lasting depth. Which is a shame in its own right, I think.

 

[Suzanne78]

There is a lot of TWS talk in this Ant-Man thread…

Anyways, well then. It'll be interesting to see how quickly Marvel rebounds from this. And where Wright goes now.

 

[Rocketman]

It's starting to appear that Marvel Studios is a tyrannical machine not suitable for artistic/creative directors with vision. The movies are 100% made by producers and CEOs, with a director's name conveniently slapped on the poster. If it's a matter of the studio heads knowing the characters better than anyone, and therefore making better movies that are faithful to the comics, that's fine. But the result is going to be that NO ONE in Hollywood will touch them with a ten-foot pole because of their reputation. They won't get names like Favreau or Norton or Wright. They probably won't even get non-names like Alan Taylor. They need to be careful. I personally can imagine the entire studio not going beyond Phase 3, or maybe even an incomplete Phase 4. Let's be honest, will there REALLY be an Avengers 4 or Avengers 5? Probably not. It will all end sooner rather than later.

 

[Suzanne78]

Or Marvel will get no-names like the Russos. That worked out well for them. Really well, in fact. And they made (IMO) a cinematic, emotional marvel of a movie. One that continues to make me teary when I see it (just my $.02). Also, their director roster list is pretty impressive so far, the Wright situation notwithstanding. Black, Whedon, Gunn, Branagh, Favereau… Favreau left on his own terms and still has a good relationship with the studio. Branagh and Johnston weren't asked to come back b/c the studio wanted a different direction with the franchises. As much as I love TFA, I'm glad Marvel found the Russos - they did everything I could've hoped for in a Cap movie.

I'm really still having a hard-time with the gloom-and-doom predictions for everything. EVERY studio does this - WB, Fox, Sony, etc. Marvel's one of the ones on top, so of course the blogosphere is having a major field day writing clickbait articles and we are kvetching over every little misstep. It happens. It's a business. Fox is now climbing out of the X-Men sinkhole that it's been due to studio mismanagement and poor product and is doing so with a vengeance. Sony's struggling right now. WB's still in the beginnings of doing something special with their properties and they have made many mistakes along the way. Now it's Marvel's turn. It's business as usual in Hollywood. And while this is big for the fans that frequent these messageboards, it's not even a blip on the radar to the rest of the moviegoing public.

 

[The Question]

I don't think it's clear that Marvel Studios is a soulless tyrannical "art" factory. Really, the reason I was shocked by this is because it feels so uncharacteristic of them. To me, the defining aspect of the MCU films has been their willingness to take risks with their properties. Iron Man 3 was a 90s style action film with a lot of political and cultural satire, a lot of dialogue and investigation scenes, and a lot of action beats that had Tony Stark outside of the suit being MacGuyver. The Winter Solider was a gritty 70s style political thriller that was venomously critical of American foreign policy. Guardians of the Galaxy is shaping up to be a weird character driven 1980s style Sci-Fi adventure film directed by James Gunn of all people, and the behind the scenes intel suggests that Marvel actively encouraged him to be as James Gunn-y as possible. Marvel has done a lot of stuff to break the usual superhero formula and give their filmmakers the opportunity to be themselves, so to see them part ways with Edgar Wright over "creative differences" is very shocking, and some worry a sign of a looming paradigm shift in their movie making.

 

[Mysteryman]

Most likely , it will be another Russo Bros unknown.
Somebody we do not know who has a lot of talent .
I wish them well.

 

[babykhris]

Why is no one getting the REAL issue...SDCC is around the corner and Wright has NOTHING to show!!! Marvel goes big during SDCC and Wright was dragging his feet.

To make matter worse he was doing an Ant-Man film not about Pym, but Lang. Be honest could you see Lang having an impact in the MCU after his film? Wasp I could see, but not Lang.

Reality Marvel films are designed to SELL toys...Just like Star Wars films and cartoons. Iron Man, Thor and Cap get new outfits every show to sell more toys. Quick question who was the villain in the Ant-Man film?? An old Hank Pym. Yeah kids are going to run out and buy a Kirk Douglas action figure.

From the beginning I thought this film was a BAD idea because NO one cared about the character just the director.

If I had control I would say screw Lang. Go with Pym and Jan. Those are the people the average person know. So we would have to explain while the janitor is suddenly the hero in the movie...If you went to a Captain America film would u accept US Agent as the hero? Would you accept Thunderstrike in a Thor film.

Pym is a big part of the current 616 is Lang even active?

 

[terry78]

unless you plan to finance in this crap yourself thats how its always going to be in this industry

 

[Poni_Boy]

I'm not saying marvel is 100% innocent here, but given how Shane Black, the Russo Brothers, James Gunn, and Joss Whedon all have had successful working relationships with marvel it's clear that it is more than possible for a talented unique film maker to play within the boundaries set by the studio, and that these people know what they're getting into when they sign on to make a marvel film.

It's about compromise. Moreso than with any other studios. People need to remember that Wright signed on to do this movie waaaay before Marvel Studios became a household name for blockbuster cinema. The leeway he had was exponentially bigger because the risks were minimal. They probably looked at Ant-Man like The Incredible Hulk. If it wasn't well received (for whatever reason) they could just do a soft reboot. No so anymore. It's natural that the people who are going to shell out the cash -- not only the $200+ mil to produce, market and distribute this movie but also keeping in mind how this one will affect future financial success -- want to be involved in a supervisory capacity. Seems to me it's more like Wright wanted to make the movie he's been waiting to make for eight years. And he can't make that anymore. So, to me, it's a good thing they parted ways.

Most likely , it will be another Russo Bros unknown.
Somebody we do not know who has a lot of talent .
I wish them well.

God I hope so. There's no better place for hungry directors to get serious street cred than by helming a Marvel Studios movie right now. I've been a fan of Favreau, Whedon, Black and Gunn for years, but if it wasn't for their Marvel movies the GA wouldn't be able to see why they're worthy of attention.

 

[The Question]

To make matter worse he was doing an Ant-Man film not about Pym, but Lang. Be honest could you see Lang having an impact in the MCU after his film? Wasp I could see, but not Lang.

I don't understand this. What is fundamentally lacking about Scott Lang?

If I had control I would say screw Lang. Go with Pym and Jan. Those are the people the average person know.

The average person doesn't know Hank Pym from Eric O'Grady.

 

[babykhris]

I don't understand this. What is fundamentally lacking about Scott Lang?



The average person doesn't know Hank Pym from Eric O'Grady.

Nothing is wrong with Lang per-say, but when you look at comics and cartoons they focus more on Pym than Lang.

I see Lang more as a FF member than an Avenger. I agree the average person don't know the difference, but does the average person care about Ant-Man??

 

[The Question]

Nothing is wrong with Lang per-say, but when you look at comics and cartoons they focus more on Pym than Lang.

I see Lang more as a FF member than an Avenger. I agree the average person don't know the difference, but does the average person care about Ant-Man??

Scott Lang has been a member of The Avengers for a larger chunk of his career than he's been a member of the Fantastic Four.

Sure, the comics and cartoons focus more on Pym than Lang, but as far as setting up a franchise and creating a good story goes, what does that matter?

And no, I doubt the average person gives a damn about Ant Man at all. Which is why the person behind the helmet doesn't really matter as far as the GA is concerned.