Ant-Man: The Movie is official!

[Deckard]

I like Wright but he's hit or miss.

His directing does pretty much make Hot Fuzz way funner though imo. Shaun of the Dead, nothing really stands out from the directing that I can think of, it's more writing.

 

[Dr.Mirakle32]

**** Edgar Wright. If he was truly committed to this project, we would have seen it after THE INCREDIBLE HULK and before IRON MAN 2. In the seven years he's been dragging his feet with ANT-MAN, we got SCOTT PILGRIM and that "masterpiece" THE WORLD'S END. If he really had a clear vision and wanted to do it, it would have been made by now.

 

[Deckard]

I don't think the hold up was Wright? It had to be Marvel, no? Ant Man factors into Phase 3 does it not? Why would it have come out 7 years ago?

 

[PsychoCenobite]

**** Edgar Wright. If he was truly committed to this project, we would have seen it after THE INCREDIBLE HULK and before IRON MAN 2. In the seven years he's been dragging his feet with ANT-MAN, we got SCOTT PILGRIM and that "masterpiece" THE WORLD'S END. If he really had a clear vision and wanted to do it, it would have been made by now.

No one will know for sure, apart from those directly involved, but I just saw this posted on another forum:

https://www.latino-review.com/news/...orce-between-marvel-edgar-wright-over-ant-man

Yesterday, the shocking news dropped that Edgar Wright left Marvel's Ant-Man over creative differences. What exactly were those creative differences?

Well, after talking to sources all afternoon Friday and burning the midnight oil, I got the scoop.

For starters, let's debunk some lies that are currently making the rounds on reddit and other forums.

A) Edgar Wright got fired.

Nope. Not true at all. Get to that in a second.

B) Here is another massive lie I read...

"The word from people on the crew is Wright got booted for being REALLY behind schedule and being ineffective at righting the ship and getting it back on track. Production has been bleeding money for a month and Marvel got fed up with him and they lost their confidence in his ability to manage a production of this size."

********. Not true. AT ALL.

The prep on this film has been forever and it was impossible to be behind schedule because the entire production was out on hiatus by Marvel for duration of the script's rewrite. Families left homes to work on the movie in Atlanta and were now suddenly in limbo.

So about the rewrite...

About 3 months ago, Marvel had notes. The meat of the notes were about the core morality of the piece, must include franchise characters. etc., These notes came from the big four at Marvel. Joe Cornish and Edgar Wright did two drafts to try and answer the notes without compromising their vision.

6 weeks ago Marvel took the script off them and gave the writing assignment to two very low credit writers. One of the writers were from Marvel's in house writing team. Edgar stayed cool, agreed to stay on the project, and read the draft.

The script came in this week and was completely undone. Poorer, homogenized, and not Edgar's vision. Edgar met with Marvel on Friday to formally exit and the announcement went out directly after.

Edgar & Joe were upset by the sudden, out of nowhere lack of faith in them as filmmakers. Fiege had always batted for them but this felt like it came from the higher ups.

Where does this leave the cast? Well, it is believed they don't have the option to walk like Edgar did.

That is pretty much the gist of it. I give props to Edgar for having integrity.

PsychoCenobite

 

[Uncanny Web-Slinger]

So basically Marvel turned it into a possibly soulless corrupted universe-building franchise flick rather than a good film.

 

[Dr.Mirakle32]

I don't think the hold up was Wright? It had to be Marvel, no? Ant Man factors into Phase 3 does it not? Why would it have come out 7 years ago?

I remember Wright was announced as director around the same time as Favreau for IRON MAN. This was 2007-ish.

 

[Josette]

So basically Marvel turned it into a possibly soulless corrupted universe-building franchise flick rather than a good film.

A good film and a universe building franchise flick aren't mutually exclusive - otherwise we wouldn't get films like The Winter Soldier, The Avengers, Iron Man, and the first Thor. They were universe building (especially TWS) and they were all great films to me, with TWS being in my top 5 favorite comic book movies of all time. The directors were also able to place their personal style on them (KB did the Shakespearean tragedy with Thor, the character interactions in Avengers had Whedon all over them, and the Russos were fans of Ed Brubaker's comic run on Cap and it shows).

The First Avenger was rushed due to getting Cap to the Avengers, but I thought it was a solid movie and Johnston gave it its own adventure style. One of the biggest regrets I have with MCU is not being able to get a Captain America Howling Commandos film, though, no doubt about it.

Iron Man 3 has Shane Black stamped all over it (and I actually think it was to that movie's detriment - it's easily my least favorite MCU film). Guardians of the Galaxy looks like it's got James Gunn's personal style - we'll see how it turns out.

A good balance is probably the best case scenario - individual and unique as possible while still being part of a "whole". That's what's setting the MCU apart from other comic book fare out there, and I can believe they would be controlling of it to a point, otherwise the continuity could become a train wreck fast.

But I just can't boil it down to it simply being Marvel choosing world building over good films when they just gave me Winter Soldier. It's entirely possible to have both.

I'm not a huge fan of Wright (though I love Hot Fuzz) and I've never been interested in Ant Man as an individual character, so my anticipation for the movie is the same either way. Who knows if/when we'll ever hear the true story/full details.

 

[Khev]

A good film and a universe building franchise flick aren't mutually exclusive - otherwise we wouldn't get films like The Winter Soldier, The Avengers, Iron Man, and the first Thor. They were universe building (especially TWS) and they were all great films to me, with TWS being in my top 5 favorite comic book movies of all time. The directors were also able to place their personal style on them (KB did the Shakespearean tragedy with Thor, the character interactions in Avengers had Whedon all over them, and the Russos were fans of Ed Brubaker's comic run on Cap and it shows).

The Russo Bros got to bring in much more of their personal preferences than just a love for Brubaker's run. They were very vocal about getting to bring in elements from many of their favorite films. They cite First Blood (another movie with a badass soldier kicking ass against shady federal agents and then fleeing barricades on a motorcycle) and Die Hard (of which the famous elevator fight seems to be a direct homage) as well as The French Connection and Brian DePalma's Blow Out.

Feige obviously wanted many tributes to 3 Days of the Condor which the Russos obliged but they were obviously free to run wild with their own preferences as well.

 

[Josette]

Yeah, the spy/thriller inspiration was strong in the film, and I remember reading about all of those influences.

That's why I just can't go with the whole "Marvel doesn't let the directors bring their visions to the movie" thing. We have evidence that contradicts that.

 

[moose]

So was this going to be another scott pilgrim or shawn of the dead movie just using Antman if so that would be bizzare for a Marvel movie I am not a fan of that tone and if they are truly thinking of this being interconnected to the other movies it will not fit in.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk

 

[Khev]

Yeah, the spy/thriller inspiration was strong in the film, and I remember reading about all of those influences.

That's why I just can't go with the whole "Marvel doesn't let the directors bring their visions to the movie" thing. We have evidence that contradicts that.

Yep, agreed 100%. If Feige was guilty of "over the shoulder directing" then TFA should look very much like TWS, especially with the same screenwriters for both. But it doesn't. Johnston got to make the Lucasfilm WWII adventure movie he wanted and the Russos got to make their own movie. Even Cap's capabilities and style are quite different from director to director. Johnston stated that he loved Cap's shield but didn't want it to appear like some "magical" thing that would always return to him. So he only had Cap throw it as an improvisational measure. The Russo bros on the other hand clearly embraced the superhuman technique of Cap's shield throwing from the comics. I'm sure Feige and Marvel preferred one take over the other (probably the latter) but obviously let each director have their say as to how Cap was presented on screen.

If Wright was butting heads with them then he very well might have been going full Goyer, and Marvel never lets anyone go full Goyer.

 

[Irvy]

A character as silly/out there as ant man would have been great in E Wright's hands, I'm out until convinced otherwise.

 

[Khev]

He's no sillier than a talking Raccoon which appears to be doing just fine in the hands of someone other than Wright.

 

[moose]

A character as silly/out there as ant man would have been great in E Wright's hands, I'm out until convinced otherwise.

Since when has Antman been ever been silly . Don't remember ever seeing him portrayed in that fashion be it in the comic or the cartoon. The fact he has a crucial role in building the villian Ultron. He has a controversial relationship with the wasp slapping her when he was suffering from a mental breakdown.

I now if they want to turn him into a joke of a character that's another matter

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk

 

[Irvy]

Whatevs they will get some nobody who will "conform".

 

[amvmm]

Another departure...Now Daredevil

https://uk.ign.com/articles/2014/05/24/report-drew-goddard-leaves-marvel-netflixs-daredevil-series

 

[pturtle]

Was almost sure that was going to happen with him signing on to write and direct S6 for Sony. Still a major blow to a Marvel though. I'm hoping they get someone of his caliber to come in and take over.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Rotfish]

I wouldn't be upset if they ditched this movie and introduced him in the Avengers 2 or another film.

As others have said, Ant-Man is a harder sell than the other Avengers heroes. It might actually be a better idea [financially] to introduce him in the second movie. I was honestly surprised he was getting a solo flick.

 

[BuddyGus]

I have faith in the character. I hope that the faith I have in Marvel holds out as much. I was happy to have wright attached to the film as I feel that a cheekily take on Ant-Man would have been best. But, I think that at least a have a dozen other directors could do it just as well.

 

[jye4ever]

https://badassdigest.com/2014/05/24/is-this-the-end-of-the-marvel-movie-age/


It was a good run.


Yesterday Edgar Wright left Ant-Man when Marvel took him and Joe Cornish off the script and handed it to Eric Pearson, who had written the Marvel One Shots. Latino Review has the story here, and it's an ugly one of Marvel backing off their filmmaker at the last moment. The new script is apparently a disaster, and rumor has it that the problem is coming from higher up than Kevin Feige - Disney execs are sticking their fingers into the Marvel pie, I'm hearing.


This morning Latino Review got a new Marvel scoop - Drew Goddard is leaving the Netflix Daredevil show, they say. No reason is given yet.


On Twitter Joss Whedon, the big creative name behind Marvel these days, posted this:



a clear display of solidarity with Edgar Wright, who wasn't fired from Ant-Man but forced off the project when given a ****** script just weeks before shooting. Whedon, by the way, has hinted that The Avengers: Age of Ultron is the finale of his time with Marvel.


This follows on the heels of Marvel taking Thor: The Dark World away from Alan Taylor in post and having another director come on and shoot additional material. Marvel's always been autocratic - this is the house that Feige built, and he's been leading it with an iron fist - but things have been getting uglier over there for some time, especially now that Disney is getting involved. Why would the studio **** with the division that's making money and having a huge cultural impact right when they're at their best? Because of dumb egos. Hollywood is dumb, run by dumb, venal people, and the executives who aren't creative resent the people who are, and want to get their stink on the movies. And you have to understand that Disney doesn't care about the movies - they want the Marvel IP so they can sell diapers and shirts and bedsheets. The movies are just commercials for the IP.


It's only going to get worse. Disney's notes on Ant-Man made the movie homogenized and flat. They're not going to stop there. How long will Marvel resist before they just give up? Kevin Feige's contract is up in 2018 - I would be surprised if he re-ups. I'm betting on the press tour for Avengers 3 being his big victory lap as he says it's time for someone else to lead Marvel into the next phase.


As for what's up with Ant-Man... does Marvel even want to make this movie? Everything I've heard about this new script indicates they really aren't behind the concept. And what's the point of making Ant-Man without Edgar Wright anyway? Could they simply scrap the whole project? What if they killed Ant-Man, abandoned that release date and announced Captain/Ms. Marvel for November 2015? They have the script. I think they have the role cast. They know that there's a lot of impact to be had with the first female-led superhero movie of this particular cycle.


LIke I said, it was a good run. There will be more good Marvel movies, but you can see the expiration date now.