Ant-Man The best way that Marvel can fix this

[babykhris]

I was ok with Pym not being Ultron's creator since the Next Avengers animated film lol

 

[The Question]

Part of my comfort with changes to the source material comes from my childhood exposure to folklore. King Arthur was originally just a bad ass warlord who fought Vikings. Then one day a writer thought he should have a mentor, so he plucked Merlin from a totally different story and plopped him into Arthur's backstory. Then the French got their hands on Arthurian legend and thought that there should be a badass French guy who dual wields swords and is Arthur's BFF but is totally a way better fighter than Arthur and ends up running off with Arthur's wife because DRAMA, and that's where Sir Lancelot came from. And originally Arthur had an evil half sister called Morggaine, and she had a half sister (who was unrelated to Arthur) who was a sorcerers named Morgan LeFay, and the two of them worked together to make Arthur's life a living hell, but then later writers thought that was two complicated so now Arthur just has one magic wielding half sister named Morgan LeFay who has no other siblings. And originally, Morggaine had a son named Mordred, who was Arthur's nephew, but then one writer realized the possibilities in the fact that Arthur and Morggaine weren't raised together, so now Mordred is Arthur and Morggaine's ****ed up inbred son born from unwitting incest.

Arthurian Legend as we know it is a patchwork of changes and additions to the source material down through the ages, and the works are enriched because of it. That's how I look at comics.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Part of my comfort with changes to the source material comes from my childhood exposure to folklore. King Arthur was originally just a bad ass warlord who fought Vikings. Then one day a writer thought he should have a mentor, so he plucked Merlin from a totally different story and plopped him into Arthur's backstory. Then the French got their hands on Arthurian legend and thought that there should be a badass French guy who dual wields swords and is Arthur's BFF but is totally a way better fighter than Arthur and ends up running off with Arthur's wife because DRAMA, and that's where Sir Lancelot came from. And originally Arthur had an evil half sister called Morggaine, and she had a half sister (who was unrelated to Arthur) who was a sorcerers named Morgan LeFay, and the two of them worked together to make Arthur's life a living hell, but then later writers thought that was two complicated so now Arthur just has one magic wielding half sister named Morgan LeFay who has no other siblings. And originally, Morggaine had a son named Mordred, who was Arthur's nephew, but then one writer realized the possibilities in the fact that Arthur and Morggaine weren't raised together, so now Mordred is Arthur and Morggaine's ****ed up inbred son born from unwitting incest.

Arthurian Legend as we know it is a patchwork of changes and additions to the source material down through the ages, and the works are enriched because of it. That's how I look at comics.

Saxons. Not Vikings.

 

[The Question]

Saxons. Not Vikings.

My apologies.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Also, Mordred (or Medraut as he was usually referred to as) pre-dates the first mentions of his mother by centuries. In the oldest reference he is always either referred to as being either Arthur's cousin or his nephew. The first real complete version of the legend as told by Geoffrey of Monmouth, Mordred is the one who Arthur leaves in charge of the kingdom in his absence and ends up betraying him and seducing Guinevere. This role later went to Lancelot.

So yeah, you are right about all the changes over the centuries.

 

[The Question]

Also, Mordred (or Medraut as he was usually referred to as) pre-dates the first mentions of his mother by centuries. In the oldest reference he is always either referred to as being either Arthur's cousin or his nephew. The first real complete version of the legend as told by Geoffrey of Monmouth, Mordred is the one who Arthur leaves in charge of the kingdom in his absence and ends up betraying him and seducing Guinevere. This role later went to Lancelot.

So yeah, you are right about all the changes over the centuries.

Thank you for clarifying those points. I actually didn't know those ones.

But yeah, that's my point. Stories change in their retelling. That's the fun part.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Just look at Iron Man. How often do you see the classic Tony Stark anymore? Even in the comics he acts like RDJ version now. I don't see that ever changing because of its popularity.

Sean Connery had a similar effect on James Bond. Fleming even wrote it into the books afterwards to give Bond a Scottish background. That still shows up as recently as Skyfall in the films.

 

[Ant-manic]

We get Black's Mandarin/The Real Mandarin is still out there.Coulson makes the ultimate sacrifice/You can still catch him Tuesdays at 8 on ABC.And so on.There's no reason to believe they can't find an approach with Pym that will make (most) everyone happy.

yeah, they'll show his adventures in the past.

 

[TheVileOne]

Not to nitpick, but we aren't talking about Arthurian lore here.

Comics are modern myth yet. And the comics to movies have already changed greatly.

And again, I'm not going to yell and scream about Lang over Pym, but simply I prefer Pym over Lang. And we have to acknowledge that yes, Lang has been a marginal character over the years at best.

 

[The Question]

Not to nitpick, but we aren't talking about Arthurian lore here.

Comics are modern myth yet. And the comics to movies have already changed greatly.

But, like, what's the difference? What makes changes in Arthurian Legend any different from changes in comic book adaptations? My whole point is that changes from the source material aren't a bad thing, and are a very natural part of storytelling.

And again, I'm not going to yell and scream about Lang over Pym, but simply I prefer Pym over Lang.

I'm not sure how preferring one character over the other is a factor here. We're getting both characters at once.

And we have to acknowledge that yes, Lang has been a marginal character over the years at best.

Okay. Why does that matter?

 

[TheVileOne]

The Question, obviously a lot of this matters. Eight years later, no movie. Release date, but no director.

So clearly some of this matters. What does it matter? It matters because creatively it sounds like Edgar Wright, Marvel, and Disney couldn't get on the same page with what they wanted. Edgar Wright wanted to make the movie out of his favorite comic. He wanted to do his own thing not connected to the MCU. What he wanted was the Scott Lang origin story. And well, Scott Lang has never been that big of a character in the Marvel Universe.

Now that the MCU is the biggest movie franchise of all time...well they want all these things to be more like the MCU.

That's why it matters.

 

[The Question]

The Question, obviously a lot of this matters. Eight years later, no movie. Release date, but no director.

So clearly some of this matters. What does it matter? It matters because creatively it sounds like Edgar Wright, Marvel, and Disney couldn't get on the same page with what they wanted. Edgar Wright wanted to make the movie out of his favorite comic. He wanted to do his own thing not connected to the MCU. What he wanted was the Scott Lang origin story. And well, Scott Lang has never been that big of a character in the Marvel Universe.

Now that the MCU is the biggest movie franchise of all time...well they want all these things to be more like the MCU.

That's why it matters.

How is Hank Pym more like the MCU than Scott Lang?

And remember, we don't know why they parted ways.

 

[TheVileOne]

It's not just about Scott Lang. It's about Marvel/Disney wanting everything to properly lineup with Phase 2 and 3, etc.

Marvel and Wright couldn't come to an accord on the creative direction they wanted to go. So obviously this matters. You can't be in denial about it.

 

[DrCosmic]

Are you implying the inclusion of an adaptation of young Pym and his story would be ''less good'' than Wright's vision? Allow me to remember you Wright is no longer at the helm of this movie. We don't know the reasons behind all this, for this is pure speculation. But as I stated before:

''We don't know why Wright left. We can only assume and speculate. But if I were to assume, then I'd say Wright left because Marvel's revised script is nothing like we were promised and nothing like his vision. Sure, chances of Old Pym and Lang being there are high. They can't simply get rid of the actors. That's not possible, I think. The only thing I'm concerned is the script not being that good and resulting into a movie and big screen debut for Ant-Man that is ''less than ideal'' for lack of a better term.''

At this moment, you're just wanting to see old Pym and young Lang for the sake of having a change, and not worrying about the quality of the film.

Regarding Ultron, you really think Whedon is going to translate Ultron's origin, word by word, idea by idea, to the big screen? You really think Stark is going to be the sole creator, father of Ultron? See, this is a problem. You're instantly assuming Stark is his creator due to the teaser trailer and because he's known for creating AI (which I'm not sure if it's been referenced or not, I know it's mentioned in the prelude, but as I far as I know, the preludes are not canon). I don't think it's going to be that simple, just like the Avengers and the whole situation that lead them to band together was not simple.

And yes, it's true, I like reading comic books and playing games more than watching MCU movies. So I would love him having that push. If age does not matter, then you can't say he wouldnt contribute anything to the team, as he can easily go through the things you're mentioning. If you are going to say ''well, X or Y would not contribute anything to the team'', then I guess we'd be stuck with the current Avengers + Wanda, Pietro and Vision. Why would you add She-Hulk, Tigra, Hercules, Wonder Man, Beast (assuming they had rights to him), Mockingbird, etc, when you already fill your quota of smart, funny, strong, energy, quick, spy, jerk Avenger?

Yes, doing a typical superhero movie would be less good than examining an experienced retired hero through another anti-hero's origin. The only reason I desire change is for quality reasons, as I've stated. They're not separate. Now, Marvel's re-writes are another story entirely, it seems very possible it'll go in a Thor 2/IM 2 direction, which would be bad, but unavoidable at this point, unless they pretty much scrap the project and return it to its original priority which is close to none.

On Ultron (that's a jump, what is this based on?) I go by what the filmmakers state, same with Ant-Man. I don't have any assumptional beliefs beyond I don't assume that Feige and Whedon are liars.

But you do ask an interesting question about adding Avengers. For me, I would not add an Avenger unless they had both a unique role and voice in the team. I would not do a film in the MCU unless it had a unique story to tell and an interesting lead character. I find myself creative stretching to add Black Panther or Ms. Marvel who have significant unique elements, but are very similar in terms of abilities to other characters. Marvel hasn't figured it either. I would be hard pressed to add She-Hulk, Tigra, Hercules, Wonder Man, Beast, Mockingbird, Swordsman or the like as Avengers. I mean, I could add them very easily, but they'd be redundant, by definition.

If I had to:
- She-Hulk would be Banner's cousin and later the team's lawyer, subverting the ideas that superheroes are supposed to punch things (though she would punch something at some point). She'd have her fourth wall flirty attitude for everyone.
- Tigra would be the team's hunter on the ground, focusing more on her sensory abilities and their use to the team. She'd be, in many ways, a Wolverine of the team, healing fast and working independently and rebelliously.
- Hercules I would cast older as someone whose been on Earth active for a few thousand years. He'd be sort of this world weary elder. A contemporary of Odin, known more for his knowledge of the enemy than his abilities, though he'd be back to back with Thor a couple times anyway.
- Wonder Man... wait, that's not even hard. He's totally unique in powerset, he's an actual former villain. Adding him is easy. You actually have to simplify him to get him into the MCU.
- Beast. Basically the same thing with Tigra.
- Mockingbird... same role as Hawkeye in Avengers, sort of a minor plot-relevant this-is-my-trick supporting role.

 

[The Question]

It's not just about Scott Lang. It's about Marvel/Disney wanting everything to properly lineup with Phase 2 and 3, etc.

Marvel and Wright couldn't come to an accord on the creative direction they wanted to go. So obviously this matters. You can't be in denial about it.

I'm not, but you're changing the subject.

The question was, why is it better that Hank Pym be a young man and the hero of the story instead of an old man and sharing the story with Scott Lang? What does the film lining up with future phases have anything to do with that? And why does Scott Lang being a comparatively marginal character matter?

 

[JJ01]

Yes, doing a typical superhero movie would be less good than examining an experienced retired hero through another anti-hero's origin. The only reason I desire change is for quality reasons, as I've stated. They're not separate. Now, Marvel's re-writes are another story entirely, it seems very possible it'll go in a Thor 2/IM 2 direction, which would be bad, but unavoidable at this point, unless they pretty much scrap the project and return it to its original priority which is close to none.

It's all about the execution. Iron Man 1 was nothing special. Guy gets to see what his weaponry does to the world and decides to use his brain and tech to fight it back. Iron Man 3 broke the mold and it was really different. Is Iron Man 3 a good film? I don't know. I liked it. It's not that bad as some people make it look like, but despite being different and creative, it's not as good as Iron Man 1.

On Ultron (that's a jump, what is this based on?) I go by what the filmmakers state, same with Ant-Man. I don't have any assumptional beliefs beyond I don't assume that Feige and Whedon are liars. Iron Man 2 sounded good on paper, and look at what happened.

Yes, as you said the other time, ''they could be lying'' is probably not a good argument. But it doesn't mean they're telling everything. Like I said that time, you can't expect them to spill it all during an interview. I'm not saying Stark won't have a hand on Ultron. All I'm saying is it's not going to be that simple. With the reports of the AoU crew filming in locations such an old hospital and that scene in the 40s with Bettany, Evans and Atwell, I won't be surprised if Ultron's origins come from something the Avengers and those related to them did through all those years. I recall Scarlett Johanson giving a brief description about the film, with ''past catching up to these characters''. That would make it more interesting than Tony Stark deciding to create a new AI.

But you do ask an interesting question about adding Avengers. For me, I would not add an Avenger unless they had both a unique role and voice in the team. I would not do a film in the MCU unless it had a unique story to tell and an interesting lead character. I find myself creative stretching to add Black Panther or Ms. Marvel who have significant unique elements, but are very similar in terms of abilities to other characters. Marvel hasn't figured it either. I would be hard pressed to add She-Hulk, Tigra, Hercules, Wonder Man, Beast, Mockingbird, Swordsman or the like as Avengers. I mean, I could add them very easily, but they'd be redundant, by definition.

If I had to:
- She-Hulk would be Banner's cousin and later the team's lawyer, subverting the ideas that superheroes are supposed to punch things (though she would punch something at some point). She'd have her fourth wall flirty attitude for everyone.
- Tigra would be the team's hunter on the ground, focusing more on her sensory abilities and their use to the team. She'd be, in many ways, a Wolverine of the team, healing fast and working independently and rebelliously.
- Hercules I would cast older as someone whose been on Earth active for a few thousand years. He'd be sort of this world weary elder. A contemporary of Odin, known more for his knowledge of the enemy than his abilities, though he'd be back to back with Thor a couple times anyway.
- Wonder Man... wait, that's not even hard. He's totally unique in powerset, he's an actual former villain. Adding him is easy. You actually have to simplify him to get him into the MCU.
- Beast. Basically the same thing with Tigra.
- Mockingbird... same role as Hawkeye in Avengers, sort of a minor plot-relevant this-is-my-trick supporting role.

To be honest, I don't think this is going to be a big problem. We're not going to see the team filled with 20+ people. Rotating the roster makes the Avengers something really cool.

 

[Ant-manic]

It's not just about Scott Lang. It's about Marvel/Disney wanting everything to properly lineup with Phase 2 and 3, etc.

Marvel and Wright couldn't come to an accord on the creative direction they wanted to go. So obviously this matters. You can't be in denial about it.

the point being that none of us know what "creative direction" marvel will choose. all we know is that they were cool with Wright's plans for most of the 8 years we've been waiting. it's not just about Scott Lang. it's not just about Hank Pym. it's not just about the Avengers. it's about Wright feeling as if he no longer has control over his dream project.

 

[Ant-manic]

Not to nitpick, but we aren't talking about Arthurian lore here.

Comics are modern myth yet. And the comics to movies have already changed greatly.

And again, I'm not going to yell and scream about Lang over Pym, but simply I prefer Pym over Lang. And we have to acknowledge that yes, Lang has been a marginal character over the years at best.

As a scott lang fan, i don't have to acknowledge that; at all. i think that he has really come into his own in the past couple of years; now that they've bothered to give him exposure. he was the lead of the most recent FF series. and it didn't do any worse sales-wise than the Hank Pym-led Avengers A.I; he also stole Johnny Storm's girlfriend and roughed Dr. Doom up. lang is certainly not an icon. but neither is Pym. they are both underdogs within the Marvel Universe. Pym just has less of an excuse for being that low on the ladder.

 

[Ant-manic]

The Question, obviously a lot of this matters. Eight years later, no movie. Release date, but no director.

So clearly some of this matters. What does it matter? It matters because creatively it sounds like Edgar Wright, Marvel, and Disney couldn't get on the same page with what they wanted. Edgar Wright wanted to make the movie out of his favorite comic. He wanted to do his own thing not connected to the MCU. What he wanted was the Scott Lang origin story. And well, Scott Lang has never been that big of a character in the Marvel Universe.

actually, he was including both origin stories. he just wasn't wasting much time on Pym's iconic skirmishes with the Porcupine, bald near-sighted fat man, a guy in platform shoes, a talking beetle that she-hulk killed w/ a rolled up newspaper, a crossdresser, a horns-wearing communist, a magician's bunny, a figure skater with a turnip-shaped helmet, a guy in bright yellow w/ elf slippers, an old man with an old man ray, and a candidate for dia-beetus w/ a hypnotic voice. i'm so angry that we'll never see the live-action version of "Somewhere Waits a Wobbow!!"

 

[Mike Murdock]

I think people seem to be believing that Pym would be ignored in the movie as it currently stands. That's not my understanding at all. If anything, his origin and much of his life would be told. I think it's possible to do a good tribute to Pym even with Lang being the main character. The only thing that would be missing (that's a realistic possibility otherwise) is Hank Pym being an Avenger in a future movie. But I do think they have to go one movie at a time and, even in that regard, they're already missing him as a founder of the Avengers.

 

[Ant-manic]

I think people seem to be believing that Pym would be ignored in the movie as it currently stands. That's not my understanding at all. If anything, his origin and much of his life would be told. I think it's possible to do a good tribute to Pym even with Lang being the main character. The only thing that would be missing (that's a realistic possibility otherwise) is Hank Pym being an Avenger in a future movie. But I do think they have to go one movie at a time and, even in that regard, they're already missing him as a founder of the Avengers.

my hope would be that they don't waste Douglas and have him appear in the Avengers sequels. his interactions with the others are potentially priceless. they should at least have him in a face-off with Stark. i can imagine them either hating each other or wanting to ditch the others/ hang out. maybe Pym could talk about knowing Tony's father (or mother).

 

[Mysteryman]

Its hard to believe Pym would be ignored with someone like Michael Douglas playing him.

 

[Ant-manic]

if Marvel is going to intrude and take primary control of this film, i hope they do insert some linking elements into the picture. Pym could easily be attached to SHIELD or whatever preceeded it. the villain could have ties to Hydra or A.I.M. Lang could eventually wind up at Stark Industries (or wind up in prison after stealing from them).

 

[The Question]

if Marvel is going to intrude and take primary control of this film, i hope they do insert some linking elements into the picture. Pym could easily be attached to SHIELD or whatever preceeded it. the villain could have ties to Hydra or A.I.M. Lang could eventually wind up at Stark Industries (or wind up in prison after stealing from them).

There's no indication that those things aren't already in the script.

 

[Ant-manic]

There's no indication that those things aren't already in the script.

sure. but what would your hunch be; knowing what you know about Wright's vision for the Ant-Man movie?