News broke yesterday that Edgar Wright is off Ant-Man, just weeks before filming was set to begin. There were numerous initial guesses as to why, but ultimately it came down to a difference of opinion on the script. Disney overreached and wanted something a little more tame, with a different take on the morality at the core of the story. The rewrite they commissioned apparently sucked, they wouldn't budge, and so Wright let the project yesterday morning... after developing it for 8 YEARS.

And now, today, even more bad news... Drew Goddard has left Daredevil; the gritty, street-level Marvel/Netflix series set to debut in 2015. For what we can only assume are similar reasons. And much like Wright with Ant-Man, Goddard was the only real reason I was really looking forward to that project.

Marvel has always been stingy and controlling. They're notoriously cheap. But add Disney to the mix, and this whole marriage may have not been the best idea (as many predicted way back when). When it comes to Star Wars, its messages/themes/subject matter aren't really at odds with Disney's overall brand. Plus, Star Wars is probably more of a separate, defined entity. I know many flipped out at the initial deal, but Lucasfilm and Disney always felt like a match made in heaven to me. From a thematic/marketing standpoint, the two companies have always felt like sister brands in a way, just ones that never crossed over until now.

And it's not like Marvel is super-edgy or anything, but it's apparent now that a movie with a thief as the central character (Rudd as Ant-Man), and a gritty, street-level Daredevil series, may not be the best fit with the Disney brand. At least the iterations that Wright and Goddard wanted to tell. Disney has released plenty of slightly "edgier" fare over the years, but it's usually through its Touchstone label, or another subsidiary. Here, with these Marvel properties, the Disney brand/logo is the first thing you see.

What's really interesting is Joss Whedon's tweet this morning (in the article linked below), showing clear solidarity with Wright. Combine that with the fact Kevin Feige's contract is up in 2018 - the year Avengers 3 is scheduled to hit - and I could definitely see the Marvel movie universe as we know it coming to an end after that movie. Disney will of course keep it going by any means necessary, but without Feige (and potentially without Whedon for Avengers 3), there's no way this franchise continues with the success it's had these past few years.

Yet, while the Disney meddling is a spot-on exemple of the worst tendencies of the movie industry, I've never really wanted to continue watching this series past Avengers 3. An Avengers 4 with Cheadle as War Machine, Sebastian Shaw as the new Iron Man, Dr. Strange, Quicksilver, Scarlet Witch, etc. has just never appealed to me. To me, this franchise IS Iron Man/Evans' Captain America/Thor/Hulk/Nick Fury, etc. I could not care less about "the new class" or wherever they go post-Avengers 3. I'm sure the new characters will be interesting in their own right, but I'm already somewhat close to feeling burnt out on this whole endeavour as is. I can't imagine looking forward to MORE of this stuff, focused on the D-team, handled with slightly less care, come the end of the decade. So, yes, this news sucks, but there's a part of me that's almost relieved this franchise may now have some kind of an expiration date in sight.

Anyway, this is a good rundown by Devin Faraci at Badass Digest, expanding on everything I've covered, with a better-informed opinion on this whole deal. Is he overreacting, or is the writing truly on the wall?

Is This The End Of The Marvel Movie Age?

[This message has been edited by TCTTS (edited 5/24/2014 2:39p).]

I really wanted this Daredevil series to work but it won't if it's not dark and violent.

Also, Goddard is leaving Daredevil because he is going to direct Sinister Six, so it may not be because of creative differences. Stephen DeKnight is taking over the show but Goddard is being reported to stay on as a consultant. Sounds more like a time management issue to me.

^ Just now seeing that new report, re; Goddard. Still, after The Amazing Spider-Man 2's performance, the chances of Sinister Six actually making it to the screen have decreased significantly. So, to leave his dream project (which Goddard has said Daredevil was), to jump full-time to a movie that could very well never see the light of day, may also be saying something about the state of affairs at Marvel. Then again, it could simply just be a time-management issue like you said.

Either way, the Whedon/Feige contract issues still remain, and Disney's meddling is no-doubt having an adverse effect. Will be interesting to see how it all plays out...

Daredevil is a shtty character as is Ant Man. And Rudd is a helluva miscast for anything super, much less hero-ey

Daredevil is an awesome character.

This worries me the most (from T's frst link):

quote:

---

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.

---

If Fiege is getting over ruled then there is little hope. However, I find this hard to believe, because I've always read that Disney (Iger) has always admitted to the success of Marvel being them staying away from the creative aspects of it and putting faith in the Marvel producers. Maybe I'm naive, but I can't imagine an executive in charge go "ohh, all that success I've had by putting trust in someone else and his/their vision succeeding? Yeah, let's screw with that!"

Maybe for a comic book. But seeing a live action character is a completely different beast. Daredevil is all Anne Frank by day, ninja warrior by night. Very few people relate to the handicapable to begin with.

Plus his villains are lame.

[This message has been edited by billoncapitolhill (edited 5/24/2014 3:51p).]

He's a little more complicated than that. The Frank Miller stories really destroy the Matt Murdoch character. And Kingpin is a great villain and Bullseye can be great if shown for the true psychopath that he is. Daredevil could work is based on realism like Nolan's Batman.

I feel like people are having a knee jerk reaction to something that happens quite often in movie studios. The Edgar Wright situation is disappointing, but until Marvel turns out something that is actually terrible, I'm going to trust they know what they are doing.

Kinda agree. I think everything now beyond this year is just icing for marvel. Even if the whole deal ends with avengers 3 in 2018, that would give the universe an entire decade of domination. I doubt marvel thought it would last any longer than that to begin with. They'll pump out av2, im4, ca3, thor3, and av3 before it ends, and nothing that ant man does or does not do will matter for the above. Plus this is Hollywood we are talking about, by 2025 they'll probably be a new iron man reboot. Marvel needed the resources of Disney to help pump all these films in before the window closed on them. Comic book films might be a bubble, and all good things come to and end eventually, but an ant man isn't going to be the beginning of the end for marvel.

I totally agree with both of you, but no one is saying this specific instance is going to have a significant impact, in and of itself. It's what this situation alludes to. Namely, that Disney's overreaching could eventually cause the two people most responsible for creatively guiding this universe to basically pack it up. Whedon, before Avengers 3, and Feige, just after. A Whedon-less Avengers, and Feige-less Marvel would result in VERY different franchise, as this entire endeavor would be nowhere without the vision of either person. Feige, in particular.

[This message has been edited by TCTTS (edited 5/24/2014 5:36p).]

no

we can only pray

Does anyone know if the actors from guardians signed a multi movie deal or just for this one movie?

It's kinda weird to think that we will talk about the Marvel era like people talk about John Wayne Westerns.

I've gotten into comic books in my older age. I never was into them except for the random gi joe. I really am not a fan of Marvel...I much prefer DC. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed both hulk movies (yes, both), iron man 1 and the second Cpt murica. But I won't miss anything else.

quote:

---

Maybe for a comic book. But seeing a live action character is a completely different beast. Daredevil is all Anne Frank by day, ninja warrior by night. Very few people relate to the handicapable to begin with.

Plus his villains are lame.

[This message has been edited by billoncapitolhill (edited 5/24/2014 3:51p).]

---

You mean Hellen Keller?

Probably even a worse comparison

Marvel might drop off for a while after Feige & Whedon leave, but I doubt it will die anytime soon. Compare Marvel's success to X-men, you had a rock solid start (xmen, x2) then a very disappointing lull (x3, origins wolverine) and it looked like that might be GG, but then first class revitalizes things, Wolverine was good (IMO) and from what I'm hearing, Days of Future Past solidly puts the franchise back on the map (haven't seen it yet, though).

Marvel can go off the tracks for a few years and recover when it's learned its lesson. It's hard to truly kill a company loaded with characters loved by so many.

EDIT - Hellen Keller

At least she was blind. I was sitting here trying to figure out how Daredevil was like a teenage Jewish girl hiding from the Nazis.

They really just need to hold it together until after Avengers 3. After that, implode if you want to. It does stink about Daredevil - a Netflix series would be the perfect place to delve into a darker character and storyline than they had in the feature films.

[This message has been edited by jeffk (edited 5/24/2014 7:12p).]

quote:

---

You mean Hellen Keller?

---

No Anne Frank. The girl that was deaf, dumb, and blind.

quote:

---

At least she was blind. I was sitting here trying to figure out how Daredevil was like a teenage Jewish girl hiding from the Nazis.

---

Ah so Daredevil is like Hellen Keller hiding who he is from the bad guys.

Clerks 2

quote:

---

quote:

---

You mean Hellen Keller?

---

No Anne Frank. The girl that was deaf, dumb, and blind.

---

She sure played a mean pinball.

quote:

---

Clerks 2

---

You always gotta be right doncha? You nazi dewshbag.

For the record, there will be no Iron Man 4, RDJ will appear in Avengers 3 and be done.

quote:

---

For the record, there will be no Iron Man 4, RDJ will appear in Avengers 3 and be done.

---

Marvel has said that the IM series does not end with RDJ's departure.

To the larger issue, let me rebut a little.

First, there is a lot of "nobody can do it like..." In this thread. We have seen these sort of last minute replacements before from Marvel. Cheedle replaced Howard in the Iron Man franchise. Favreau left directing Marvel films over creative differences (including Avengers, but that was still pretty preliminary). Hell, Hugh Jackman was a last minute recast for Wolverine (not a Marvel film, but still). Thor 2 changed directors over some politics. Etc. Yet despite all of that, Marvel just turned out maybe its best movie yet.

There is a lot of talent in Hollywood, and Marvel seems to bank on that.

Iron Man 2 was hurt by studio interference just like we are seeing from Ant Man, by inserting the while Black Widow storyline into Favreau's movie. Since then, Marvel seems to have backed off a bit, so it's not like they never learn.

Regarding Feige, he's great, but if he gets cut loose, it's not like there is nobody else to take that up. In fact, the logical successor is Brian M Bendis, who would be an upgrade over Feige, imo. He's the new guard champion, responsible for the best writing of the last decade plus at Marvel.

Sucks that Wright is out. Doesn't mean the end of everything.

I don't get this picture that Whedon tweeted. Someone wanna help me out?

Agreed, AliasMan02. That's a good perspective to have.

I guess, personally, I just don't want them to recast Iron Man, at least not right after Downey Jr. is done. I like endings. And even though I know it'll never happen, it'd be nice to have an actual, hard conclusion to this franchise at the end of Avengers 3 (potentially with Stark's death, if not others as well).

But if they keep the same continuity post-Avengers 3, are they actually going to re-cast Stark as another 50-year-old iteration (the age Downey Jr. will be Avengers 2 is released)? That seems somewhat counter-productive. But if they go younger, it won't fit with the current continuity. Either way, I just don't want to see this same world continue with a bunch of recasts and D-teamers. I'd honestly rather they go for a hard ending in 2018, and then start all over again a decade later or so. But again, I know that'll never happen. These things have to be in constant motion, constantly producing $$$. I'm just having a hard time picturing how they'll actually do it.

[This message has been edited by TCTTS (edited 5/25/2014 12:42p).]

Here you go, mid90...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Flavours_Cornetto_trilogy

Showing his support of Wright who directed the "Cornetto" trilogy

[This message has been edited by Markoramius (edited 5/25/2014 12:43p).]

thanks TCTTS

Did anybody really think Ant Man would have the success of the other Marvel series?

I'm not a huge comic book guy or extremely well versed in Marvel, but I and most people could have told you who IM, CA, Thor and the Hulk are. From what I do know of Ant Man, I just don't see him having the level of appeal as other movies especially with Rudd playing the role.

When you start adding the Black Widow, Hawkeye and then Ant Man...they won't have the appeal or built in audience. I think even GOTG will struggle because of this.

There are plenty of misses in the past to show that it can be difficult with these kinds of movies. Daredevil the movie, and the Green Lantern both bombed with "big name actors" attached.

Anybody who is on the Arrow threads know I'm a huge fan of that...and I would rather see them introduce additional characters that way than to keep trying to force out movies....but I know the big money isn't there doing it this way..

Edit..and yes I know I went back and forth between Marvel and DC...but that was just to make the point...They may be different owners, but they are both trying to follow a similar path.

[This message has been edited by agmatt06 (edited 5/25/2014 2:55p).]

quote:

---

Agreed, AliasMan02. That's a good perspective to have.

I guess, personally, I just don't want them to recast Iron Man, at least not right after Downey Jr. is done. I like endings. And even though I know it'll never happen, it'd be nice to have an actual, hard conclusion to this franchise at the end of Avengers 3 (potentially with Stark's death, if not others as well).

---

If I'm right about BMB eventually taking a creative lead, then it's a good thing that you like endings. This is the man who killed Spider-Man, the central character of the Ultimate universe (that he essentially created), and has kept him dead. Feige is from the "just resurrect him" generation. Bendis, not so much, to his credit.

Marvel may recast Stark, but I doubt it.

quote:

---

But if they keep the same continuity post-Avengers 3, are they actually going to re-cast Stark as another 50-year-old iteration (the age Downey Jr. will be Avengers 2 is released)? That seems somewhat counter-productive. But if they go younger, it won't fit with the current continuity. Either way, I just don't want to see this same world continue with a bunch of recasts and D-teamers. I'd honestly rather they go for a hard ending in 2018, and then start all over again a decade later or so. But again, I know that'll never happen. These things have to be in constant motion, constantly producing $$$. I'm just having a hard time picturing how they'll actually do it.

[This message has been edited by TCTTS (edited 5/25/2014 12:42p).]

---

Marvel has lots of options. Guardians opens up a whole new can of worms. They have proven that they are willing to invest in more minor properties, and I think Guardians will show they can do it well.