The Avengers The Avengers: News and Speculation - Part 27A sub-se - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 51

[Splat]

Hank & Janet can't even get a solo book, why would they get a solo movie? They just aren't popular enough yet. And before someone brings up Blade again he's an exception, not the rule.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

I honestly don't care if ant-man ever gets a movie and won't lose sleep over it being shelved.

 

[Hurm...]

I can't see Ant-man having his own film.

Ant Man. Marvel film or not. How the hell do you market that.

 

[Poni_Boy]

Uh...you do realize that Ant-Man started as a solo character. His stories ran in Tales to Astonish for a year before Avengers began (and several years after as well), hence Avengers was a Justice League type book of previously-existing characters coming together to form a team. They all had individual books before forming the team.

While Ant-Man & Wasp are key to the Avengers and should be worked into future Avengers films, they could also exist in at least one, non-Avengers film. Their powers could be very cool on film. It's been a while since we've seen shrinking powers on film, and we've never really seen them applied to an espionage-type story. Ant-Man and Wasp could show another aspect to Avengers, just like Hawkeye and Black Widow. In fact, maybe the couple-aspect to Hawkeye and BW (if they're treated that way in Avengers) could work against the Pyms being treated that way.

I think the Pyms could work in a solo film. Smaller budget (less than $100 million). Hank is a SHIELD scientist. Maybe he's dating Janet, or she's another SHIELD scientist, although her being outside the secret agent realm would offer a refreshing perspective for audiences. They gain their powers, and SHIELD uses them for espionage. Or Pym has to prove the usefulness of his discovery to SHIELD. He pulls in Janet, maybe accidentally, to help him expose some suspected bad guys (AIM as an offshoot of SHIELD traitors?) and prove his worth. Sounds like classic Hank Pym.

Tying them into Fury and SHIELD will give them a good marketing boost and help flesh out the onscreen Marvel universe. Given the smaller budget, their film won't have to make hundreds of millions to be a success. Have Fury and maybe another Avenger cameo (Hawkeye and Black Widow). It'll add just another piece to the Marvel puzzle.

I just don't think every Marvel movie needs to have a huge budget. Street-level and lower-tier characters don't need huge budgets. But they could still offer interesting stories and films and find accepting audiences.

1) And he hasn't had a solo book since. What does that tell you?

2) Sounds like unnecessary retooling of the character. If you have to change the story that much, it's probably because he won't work on his own to begin with.

3) Another unnecessary piece. They already have a SHIELD movie in the works. If they want to survive post-Avengers they need non-Avengers stories to be spotlighted in solo films.

4) I agree, but that just ain't gonna happen anymore. The game changed with Disney expecting huge profits.

 

[Crimson King]

 

[Poni_Boy]

I can't see Ant-man having his own film.

Ant Man. Marvel film or not. How the hell do you market that.

I'm sure that's what Disney asked Marvel last year

 

[Xeno]

And he changed that when Pym was being worked into the modern era MCU.

That's why I said "or an original character"

As long as they're not going to allow Wright to trap Hank & Jan in a 60's parody universe, I'm fine with there being no Ant-Man movie. Those two characters belong in The Avengers' universe, not off somewhere separate. Replacing Pym with Lang or some new character would be wrong, too, because it would mean that Pym wasn't the inventor/developer of the miniaturization process.

 

[Crimson King]

I'm sure that's what Disney asked Marvel last year

It's not like "Spider-Man" is any better. It's all in the character.

 

[Poni_Boy]

It's not like "Spider-Man" is any better. It's all in the character.

Are we really comparing the marketability of Marvel's longstanding #1 most iconic character to Ant-Man? Really?

 

[Poni_Boy]

Hank & Janet can't even get a solo book, why would they get a solo movie? They just aren't popular enough yet. And before someone brings up Blade again he's an exception, not the rule.

Seconded.

The thing about Blade that some people forget is that they expected the film to do horrendously. That's why they pushed the envelope with dialogue and gore. It was just going to be a Wesley Snipes action vehicle like the dozens that get released every year and no one cares about (i.e. Shadows and Lies - Cuba Gooding Jr, Catch .44 - Bruce Willis, In the Cold Somthing-Somthing - Henry Cavill and Bruce Willis... I get ALL the press releases for this garbage). The proof that it was so un-expectantly is proven with the inflated budgets and poorer storylines in the sequels.

 

[Nova2113]

I presume you're referring to Them! Great film.

you what show use to creep my out... Anyone remember that show back in the day that use to be on MTV i think (before it turned into the reality TV channel) ... I think it was called Joe's Apartment - where it had the talking cockroaches and how they use to swarm all around... that's what I see every time I think of a Ant-Man flick... makes my skin crawl

 

[marvel_freshman]

Hilarious video interview with Hiddleston
[YT]fGmlkBu6Xko&feature=youtu.be[/YT]

 

[Pond]

you what show us to creep my out... Anyone remember that show back in the day that use to be on MTV i think (before it turned into the reality tv channel) ... I think it was called Joe's Apartment - where it had the talking cockroaches and how they use to swarm all around... that's what I see every time I think of a Ant-Man flick... makes my skin crawl

I remember the movie.

 

[mkilban2]

i'm kind of afraid to think of the future of the avengers team. I feel like potentially adding AntMan/Wasp/Black Panther/Dr. Strange/plus whatever other speculations and only dropping maybe MAYBE Hulk that the movies might get out of hand.

Sure it works on a Cartoon show like EMH, or in a video game but on the big screen it might be too much for not enough time. You'd be trying to fit a season's worth of heroes appearances and how they work together into 3 hours which takes 15-20 30 min. episodes.

 

[Obi-Ron]

For the record: Ant-Man was the star of Tales to Astonish for years. All this talk about how he never headlined his own title is inaccurate.

 

[wobbly]

It's not like "Spider-Man" is any better. It's all in the character.

In fairness to Dr. Pym, 'Spider-Man' does sound a lot better than 'Ant-Man', without knowing a thing about the characters. Spiders just invoke a stronger reaction in (most of) us than Ants do.

Kinda like Batman sounding far better than Ratman.

 

[Poni_Boy]

i'm kind of afraid to think of the future of the avengers team. I feel like potentially adding AntMan/Wasp/Black Panther/Dr. Strange/plus whatever other speculations and only dropping maybe MAYBE Hulk that the movies might get out of hand.

Sure it works on a Cartoon show like EMH, or in a video game but on the big screen it might be too much for not enough time. You'd be trying to fit a season's worth of heroes appearances and how they work together into 3 hours which takes 15-20 30 min. episodes.

That's why the solo films exist, to build up the character storylines so they don't have too much exposition in the ensemble ones. Also, Avengers isn't the only "team" movie Marvel has their eye on.

 

[Poni_Boy]

For the record: Ant-Man was the star of Tales to Astonish for years. All this talk about how he never headlined his own title is inaccurate.

The thing is, Tale to Astonish wasn't Ant-Man's book. Hulk and Namor (and some lesser known characters) had solo runs under that title. There has never been -- to my knowledge -- an "Ant-Man" comic series.

 

[wobbly]

Ant-Man shared 'Tales to Astonish' with other stories from #35 to #49, then he became Giant-Man from #50 to #69 (sharing the book with the Hulk from #60).

From issue #70 the Sub-Mariner and the Hulk shared the book until it ended at #101, was renamed as 'The Incredible Hulk' picking up with the same numbering at #102.

 

[mara]

The thing is, Tale to Astonish wasn't Ant-Man's book. Hulk and Namor (and some lesser known characters) had solo runs under that title. There has never been -- to my knowledge -- an "Ant-Man" comic series.

Just checked Marvel Digital comics and this is what I found:
Ant-Man & the Wasp (2010 - 2011)
Irredeemable Ant-Man (2006 - 2007)
Can't get anymore details, keep getting an error page every time I click to see what it is so Idk...

 

[mkilban2]

That's why the solo films exist, to build up the character storylines so they don't have too much exposition in the ensemble ones. Also, Avengers isn't the only "team" movie Marvel has their eye on.

I know it's not the only "team" movie, but I can just see it getting a bit out of hand overall somewhere down the line. But then again its impossible for me to speculate what is or isn't going to happen 4-10 years down the line whether it be Black Panther, Gaurdians of the Galaxy, Ant-Man, or whatever the hell else Marvel has that's interesting to more than just comic book readers (I have no idea who potential characters/teams could be)

 

[wobbly]

Just to add, Ant-Man and others could well have had their own titles but Marvel comics were actually distributed by DC comics in those early days and under the terms of that deal they were limited to how many books they could publish each month. It was just 8, so they had to be picky which ones they put to press.

 

[Aztec]

Are we really bringing this up again? This film has not one, not two, not three, heck technically not even four...but five Marvel Franchises* rolled into one!!! And you people are worried about a lack of Ant-Man? Seriously? Ant-Man?

*SHIELD really is it's own franchise when you think about it. They didn't have their own movie but they were introduced and developed throughout the five films.

Franchises in Avengers:
1) Iron Man
2) Thor
3) Hulk
4) Captain America
5) SHIELD

Is that really not "epic" enough for you?

 

[Poni_Boy]

Ant-Man shared 'Tales to Astonish' with other stories from #35 to #49, then he became Giant-Man from #50 to #69 (sharing the book with the Hulk from #60).

From issue #70 the Sub-Mariner and the Hulk shared the book until it ended at #101, was renamed as 'The Incredible Hulk' picking up with the same numbering at #102.

I thought it was something like that since I have a TTA with Namor headlining it.

So, I'm guessing it's safe to say that Ant-Man has never headlined his own solo book, yes?

 

[Poni_Boy]

Are we really bringing this up again? This film has not one, not two, not three, heck technically not even four...but five Marvel Franchises* rolled into one!!! And you people are worried about a lack of Ant-Man? Seriously? Ant-Man?