Ant-Man The best way that Marvel can fix this

[JJ01]

There's no basis for that assumption, especially since Wright was around for the whole process of building up the MCU. If that's where the conflict was, I'd think he would have walked a loooong time ago.

And you didn't really answer my question. I know that's what people want. If they didn't want it I would have asked. But why is that so important?

For the same reason people lost interest in this movie upon seeing Wright's departure. Because you can probably have an Avengers movie without Cap, or one without Thor or Iron Man. After all, TWS's gross proved you don't need Iron Man or Thor to have a good and sucessful movie. But I guess certain people want to see certain characters in the big screen.

 

[Shikamaru]

With all due respect, Question, you act way too surprised when it comes to fan reactions like these. Not just with Pym, but with many other similar topics on here. I'm not saying you can't be fine with it (more power to you), but I find it very hard to believe you can't at least understand others' reasoning on this.

I mean, some just think Hank is essential to the team, much like how they would think an 80 year old Bruce Wayne next to a young JL wouldn't be a good idea. You don't have to agree with what they're saying, but their perspective is clear as day.

 

[The Question]

For the same reason people lost interest in this movie upon seeing Wright's departure. Because you can probably have an Avengers movie without Cap, or one without Thor or Iron Man. After all, TWS's gross proved you don't need Iron Man or Thor to have a good and sucessful movie. But I guess certain people want to see certain characters in the big screen.

That reason doesn't have anything to do with why people have lost interest now that Wright is gone.

And you still didn't answer the question. All you've said is that people want it because they want it.

With all due respect, Question, you act way too surprised when it comes to fan reactions like these. Not just with Pym, but with many other similar topics on here. I'm not saying you can't be fine with it (more power to you), but I find it very hard to believe you can't at least understand others' reasoning on this.

I mean, some just think Hank is essential to the team, much like how they would think an 80 year old Bruce Wayne next to a young JL wouldn't be a good idea. You don't have to agree with what they're saying, but their perspective is clear as day.

I really don't understand it. I understand that it is a thing, I'm certainly not surprised that it's what often happens, and I understand that it is clearly the perspective that they have. But the logic behind it, why they feel that way, eludes me. I get that it matters to them, but I don't understand why it matters to them. This aversion to change in adaptation seems completely irrational to me.

 

[JJ01]

While I understand your point to some degree, I'm not sure I follow the final point. To me, having Hank Pym as a contemporary to Stark and Banner raises that exact concern. As a person, he's somewhat redundant. As an ability or superhero, Lang fills in just as well. To me, having an older Hank Pym opens up a world of possibilities. It allows for more period pieces with a young Hank Pym. He can appear in one-shots, flashback episodes of TV shows, or even prequel movies. By placing him in the 1960s, he's an equal or better of Howard Stark (certainly, those two are very different as Pym is more a tinkerer than Howard, but not more of one than Tony) as opposed to one of three with Tony and Bruce.

That being said, there is one missed opportunity I fear that rises because of an old Pym. To me, I think the desire would be to have Wasp in Avengers. That means, Janet would likely be a contemporary (or romantic interest) of Lang. I do think the Hank-Janet dynamic is one that can be interesting to portray on screen and it would be a shame to lose out on that.

I agree. I was really excited to see and know all about that period when he was active. If they stick to old Pym, I want them to keep Douglas. But the main appeal for me, was seeing Hank's character interacting and suiting up with the rest of the Avengers. It's not just about powers or abilities. They're important. But the character and its personality are important too. We can take Pym, Lang and O'Grady. They've been Ant-Men at some point in the comics. However, that doesn't mean they're all the same. Stark, Banner, Pym, Reed, Cho, McCoy, T'Challa to name a few examples, are all smart. But they're different characters with different personalities. I loved the avengers interacting in the first movie. Whedon did a great job handling so many and different characters. So I guess I could say I was looking for that with Pym and the rest of the avengers.

 

[JJ01]

That reason doesn't have anything to do with why people have lost interest now that Wright is gone.

And you still didn't answer the question. All you've said is that people want it because they want it.



I really don't understand it. I understand that it is a thing, I'm certainly not surprised that it's what often happens, and I understand that it is clearly the perspective that they have. But the logic behind it, why they feel that way, eludes me. I get that it matters to them, but I don't understand why it matters to them. This aversion to change in adaptation seems completely irrational to me.

As I said before, it's just that. Because people want it. You can probably do the same with other characters. But people would want to see them.

 

[The Question]

As I said before, it's just that. Because people want it. You can probably do the same with other characters. But people would want to see them.

That's not an answer. I mean, have you given any thought to why you want it?

 

[Ant-manic]

So the current rewritten script is allegedly an abomination.

Fans also didn't like the idea of Pym being old and Wasp being his daughter in Wright's version.

Let's assume that Marvel can rewrite the whole thing, give fans Pym who has more sequel potential instead of Scott Lang who really doesn't and then give us the storyline where Pym goes crazy and hatches a plot to destroy a good part of the world in order to save it.

I don't agree with your premise. Scott Lang has every bit the story potential as Pym; moreso because he also has a legacy in Cassie. there's not a story that you can tell w/ movie Pym that you can't tell w/ movie Scott.

 

[Human Torch]

That reason doesn't have anything to do with why people have lost interest now that Wright is gone.

And you still didn't answer the question. All you've said is that people want it because they want it.



I really don't understand it. I understand that it is a thing, I'm certainly not surprised that it's what often happens, and I understand that it is clearly the perspective that they have. But the logic behind it, why they feel that way, eludes me. I get that it matters to them, but I don't understand why it matters to them. This aversion to change in adaptation seems completely irrational to me.

I guess what you're failing to grasp is that some want Pym given a faithful adaption the same as Cap,Thor and so on.

The first time you start a film by a "legacy" character,it's usually the best (in most cases,first) version of the character.Pym is better than Lang.That doesn't mean that they'll never use Lang,but Pym deserves priority.Ant man's first live action.big screen treatment should star Hank.

Lets put it another way.Black Panther's big screen debut.Do you want it as an 80 y/o with no possible future ties to the Avengers?But he's pretty much a fringe,"only the fanboys care about him" character like Ant Man,no?

 

[Ant-manic]

With all due respect, Question, you act way too surprised when it comes to fan reactions like these. Not just with Pym, but with many other similar topics on here. I'm not saying you can't be fine with it (more power to you), but I find it very hard to believe you can't at least understand others' reasoning on this.

I mean, some just think Hank is essential to the team, much like how they would think an 80 year old Bruce Wayne next to a young JL wouldn't be a good idea. You don't have to agree with what they're saying, but their perspective is clear as day.

I'm not surprised. it's the same ugliness folks were spewing before there was any casting news for this movie. I remember how everyone assumed Rudd would be Pym; as if it couldn't be any other way. it's why I don't feel sympathy for anyone hurt over Pym being older. my viewpoint, as a Scott Lang fan, was never even considered. Scott has been Ant-Man since before I was born. he has a legitimate claim to the title. and I'm glad that they chose Scott. I'm not sure why people keep bringing up the Avengers. Hank wasn't Ant-Man very long when he joined the Avengers. I'm perfectly ok w/ Scott not joining the Avengers. he's interesting enough to go it alone.

 

[JJ01]

That's not an answer. I mean, have you given any thought to why you want it?

Because it's an opinion. Sorry if it doesn't qualify as answer to you. It's not like I believe my opinion or yours are some sort of fact or anything. That'd be silly. That's why I was open to Wright's vision too.

 

[Ant-manic]

I guess what you're failing to grasp is that some want Pym given a faithful adaption the same as Cap,Thor and so on.

The first time you start a film by a "legacy" character,it's usually the best (in most cases,first) version of the character.Pym is better than Lang.

not according to the Watcher, Reed Richards, or Tony Stark.

but Pym deserves priority.Ant man's first live action.

and what has he done to deserve that? has he proven himself a solo hero? has he accomplished something as Ant-Man that Scott didn't? he certainly hasn't put the sweat equity into the costumed identity. proportionally, all he deserves is having his origin tale shown. when you compare their respective careers as Ant-Man, that's what makes sense.

 

[The Question]

I guess what you're failing to grasp is that some want Pym given a faithful adaption the same as Cap,Thor and so on.

I grasp that. But that's not a reason. That is the thing that people want, and I'm asking why they want that.

The first time you start a film by a "legacy" character,it's usually the best (in most cases,first) version of the character.Pym is better than Lang.That doesn't mean that they'll never use Lang,but Pym deserves priority.Ant man's first live action.big screen treatment should star Hank.

You're making two huge assumptions here that I think are pretty heavily debatable. First that Hank Pym is inherently better than Scott Lang, and second that there's a natural order that these characters have to be introduced in. I see no evidence of either being the case.

Lets put it another way.Black Panther's big screen debut.Do you want it as an 80 y/o with no possible future ties to the Avengers?But he's pretty much a fringe,"only the fanboys care about him" character like Ant Man,no?

I think that kind of depends on wether or not that's the most interesting way to adapt the character that stays true to what the character is about. It depends on what story context that will be happening in and how it would play out. It depends on who would be taking up the mantle instead of him and what their relationship would be.

And, to be honest, future ties to The Avengers isn't all that important to me. I mean, it'd be nice if Ant-Man or Black Panther join the team for Avengers three, but the team's already pretty crowded, so I won't really care if they don't.

Because it's an opinion. Sorry if it doesn't qualify as answer to you. It's not like I believe my opinion or yours are some sort of fact or anything. That'd be silly. That's why I was open to Wright's vision too.

It being an opinion doesn't mean that there isn't a reason for it or a logic behind it. Opinions don't just pop out of the aether, there are reasons we hold the opinions we hold. And usually, there's more to our opinions than "I want _____." Usually, "I want _____" is followed by "because of _____."

 

[babykhris]

Ant-Maniac what does Ant-Man need to get the casual and fanboys to rally behind it now that Wright is gone. A cooler villian (ie: M.O.D.O.K.)??

 

[Human Torch]

not according to the Watcher, Reed Richards, or Tony Stark.



and what has he done to deserve that? has he proven himself a solo hero? has he accomplished something as Ant-Man that Scott didn't? he certainly hasn't put the sweat equity into the costumed identity. proportionally, all he deserves is having his origin tale shown. when you compare their respective careers as Ant-Man, that's what makes sense.

Frankly,that's why I hate "legacy" characters.Dc causes no end of this kind of "My Flash is better than your Flash!" argument.

But as I said before,there's no reason they can't do Lang for Ant Man 3 or whenever the Pym actor's contract is up.Instead,they're undercutting Pym for Lang and putting him and Wasp off by the way side.

 

[The Question]

Frankly,that's why I hate "legacy" characters.Dc causes no end of this kind of "My Flash is better than your Flash!" argument.

But as I said before,there's no reason they can't do Lang for Ant Man 3 or whenever the Pym actor's contract is up.Instead,they're undercutting Pym for Lang and putting him and Wasp off by the way side.

What is none of them are better than any other? They can all be equally good.

And I still don't see how being a veteran superhero who predates everyone else in the MCU besides Cap and gets to be a big player in an interesting and unique superhero film constitutes being undercut.

 

[JJ01]

I grasp that. But that's not a reason. That is the thing that people want, and I'm asking why they want that.

Because they like the character. Simple as that. He's not a wifebeater as some people make it look like.

And yeah, Scott Lang probably did more as Ant-Man than him, and that's why the movie should be about him. But by that logic, Scott Lang should be just a cameo, considering he only has like 445 or so appearances in comic books, whereas Pym has way more than that. You could say it's because they were created in different time periods. But Deadpool was created way later than Scott Lang and has way more appareances than him.

 

[The Question]

Because they like the character. Simple as that. He's not a wifebeater as some people make it look like.

Okay, but I like the character too, and I have no problem with him not being in The Avengers and him being played as having been active since the 1960s. Liking the character doesn't explain why people think that casting him older, having him predate The Avengers, and having the film focus on him passing the torch to Scott Lang is somehow doing a disservice to the character.

 

[an_ewok]

Okay, but I like the character too, and I have no problem with him not being in The Avengers and him being played as having been active since the 1960s. Liking the character doesn't explain why people think that casting him older, having him predate The Avengers, and having the film focus on him passing the torch to Scott Lang is somehow doing a disservice to the character.

Agreed. Taking away being creator of Ultron is an actual disservice to Pym, since it's just about the only thing interesting about him. Even with that, Wasp is a better character, but without it? Might as well just make a Wasp movie.

 

[JJ01]

Okay, but I like the character too, and I have no problem with him not being in The Avengers and him being played as having been active since the 1960s. Liking the character doesn't explain why people think that casting him older, having him predate The Avengers, and having the film focus on him passing the torch to Scott Lang is somehow doing a disservice to the character.

See, now that's the problem. People (myself included) assume old Pym would be irrelevant due the excuses I previously posted. Now, it all comes down to your opinion. Do you really like him being irrelevant with no more appearances just so Lang gets to shine? Or would you like seeing your favorite character, well, being relevant and showing up in more movies with the Avengers, kicking ass and suiting up? But unless they use Wright's exactly script, we will never know. Unless they leak it. t:

 

[Human Torch]

What is none of them are better than any other? They can all be equally good.

And I still don't see how being a veteran superhero who predates everyone else in the MCU besides Cap and gets to be a big player in an interesting and unique superhero film constitutes being undercut.

The film is going to be unique no matter what.Unless there is 20 or 30 costumed Marvel hero SH films where the protagonist shrinks that has been released beyond my notice.There was no need (and I believe I'm saying this for the 104th time) to reduce Pym to an old man,who may or may not have been married to Janet and Ant Man in the 60's,to adapt To Steal An Ant Man.All this film would accomplish is taking Pym's only claim's to fame (The creation of Ultron & Marriage to Wasp) and chucking them into the woodchipper.

 

[The Question]

The film is going to be unique no matter what.Unless there is 20 or 30 costumed Marvel hero SH films that has been released beyond my notice.There was no need (and I believe I'm saying this for the 104th time) to reduce Pym to an old man,who may or may not have been married to Janet and Ant Man in the 60's,to adapt To Steal An Ant Man.All this film would accomplish is taking Pym's only claim's to fame (The creation of Ultron & Marriage to Wasp) and chucking them into the woodchipper.

How does making him older constitute "reducing" him? How is starting his career in the 1960s "reducing" him? How does that make him less?

The number of marvel super hero movies isn't entirely relevant. The uniqueness I refer to has nothing to do with how many movies there are about people with costumes. The fact is there's a super hero movie formula. Making Pym older, making him an established hero who's been around since the 1960s, bringing in Scott Lang as the POV character and focusing on the legacy aspect, all of that breaks away from the formula. Making Pym the main character, making it a story about a scientist who gets powers and then fights a bad guy, that moves us closer to that formula. And I am ****ing bored with that formula, I want something fresh.

The need to do it is the need to do something that hasn't been done already. I'd say that there's much more of a need to make those changes and to adapt "To Steal an Ant Man" than there is a need to keep things the same. There's no need to not do that stuff.

And you say that his only claims to fame are making Ultron and marrying Janet. If the only worthwhile aspects of the character are how he related to other characters, then why does it matter that the film would focus on Scott Lang?

Why is "the same" good, and why is "different" bad?

See, now that's the problem. People (myself included) assume old Pym would be irrelevant due the excuses I previously posted. Now, it all comes down to your opinion. Do you really like him being irrelevant with no more appearances just so Lang gets to shine? Or would you like seeing your favorite character, well, being relevant and showing up in more movies with the Avengers, kicking ass and suiting up? But unless they use Wright's exactly script, we will never know. Unless they leak it. t:

Why do you assume he would be irrelevant? I'm not sure which excuses you're referring to. And I see no reason to think that we'd never see him in a movie again. But even if we didn't, if it was in a great role in a great movie, why is that a bad thing?

My question is: Why is suiting up and kicking ass with The Avengers better than having him be a respected elder statesman an a key player on an inventive take on a super hero move? Why does that have more value?

 

[JJ01]

Why do you assume he would be irrelevant? I'm not sure which excuses you're referring to. And I see no reason to think that we'd never see him in a movie again. But even if we didn't, if it was in a great role in a great movie, why is that a bad thing?

My question is: Why is suiting up and kicking ass with The Avengers better than having him be a respected elder statesman an a key player on an inventive take on a super hero move? Why does that have more value?

For the same reasons people are already questioning Rhodey's and Falcon's inclusion to the Avengers.

Why would you need Pym when you have Tony and Bruce as the brains?
Why would you need Pym in costume when Lang and Janet can shrink down and become giants?

It's not like Douglas is young and can keep doing this for several years. I don't think kids will want to play with an old Hank Pym figure. You can't ''play'' with their personality. I'd rather watch a bunch of superheroes fighting and talking, rather than just talking.

 

[The Question]

For the same reasons people are already questioning Rhodey's and Falcon's inclusion to the Avengers.

Why would you need Pym when you have Tony and Bruce as the brains?
Why would you need Pym in costume when Lang and Janet can shrink down and become giants?

It's not like Douglas is young and can keep doing this for several years. I don't think kids will want to play with an old Hank Pym figure. You can't ''play'' with their personality. I'd rather watch a bunch of superheroes fighting and talking, rather than just talking.

I don't understand how this is an answer to the question I asked.

 

[JJ01]

I don't understand how this is an answer to the question I asked.

Dude, you're asking about the excuses. Those are the excuses. You still don't get it? It's not about being a good or bad thing. It's about what people want. You ask what would have more value. I just told you. These are all opinions. Would the general audience go and watch a movie about the Avengers just talking and not in costume?

At this point I'm not sure if I'm being trolled or something. But good job. If you really don't get it, then we're done here.

 

[The Question]

Dude, you're asking about the excuses. Those are the excuses. You still don't get it? It's not about being a good or bad thing. It's about what people want. You ask what would have more value. I just told you. These are all opinions. Would the general audience go and watch a movie about the Avengers just talking and not in costume?

At this point I'm not sure if I'm being trolled or something. But good job. If you really don't get it, then we're done here.

I never asked what had more value. I know what in your opinion has more value. I asked why it has value to you. I also never asked about the excuses. I asked for the reason why the thing you value has value to you. Why do you value Hank Pym suiting up with The Avengers and kicking ass more than Hank Pym being introduced as an older character in a film with Scot Lang as the POV character?