quote:

---

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).]

---

Good movies are good movies. Good directors are good directors. I had every expectation that Ant Man was going to be awesome with Edgar at the helm.

Just for a different perspective, the kind of hand wringing in this thread is common in maybe 10% of movie goers, I'd wager. Most people don't care who directs, who writes, etc.

I also agree that the studio will just find someone else talented and passionate enough to pull off good movies.

Good movies =! Successful movies


I got a list as long as my arm of movies that were good but didnt get traction at the box office. Unfortunately, these movies are judged by how many people see em.

One could argue the studio and marvel make up more on the back end with merchandise aimed at kids.

Rewatching the old x-films has reminded me that these films used to always have Avi Arad watching over them. Now it's Feige. The world keeps on turning.

quote:

---

Just for a different perspective, the kind of hand wringing in this thread is common in maybe 10% of movie goers, I'd wager. Most people don't care who directs, who writes, etc.

---

This
Most people don't know or cares who directs. Going off name recognition, I have no idea who Wright is. I'm sure if I googled him I'd probably recognize his name. Didn't he invent the airplane? Besides someone like Tarantino or Scorsese, most people couldn't care less about who directs the movie they're watching.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Just for a different perspective, the kind of hand wringing in this thread is common in maybe 10% of movie goers, I'd wager. Most people don't care who directs, who writes, etc.

---

This
Most people don't know or cares who directs. Going off name recognition, I have no idea who Wright is. I'm sure if I googled him I'd probably recognize his name. Didn't he invent the airplane? Besides someone like Tarantino or Scorsese, most people couldn't care less about who directs the movie they're watching.

---

I agree with you guys 100%. But no one is making the argument that people will stop showing up simply because Wright got fired, Whedon quit, or Feige is gone. No one is saying that these people's names are what bring fans to the theater. Rather, the argument is that the quality of the product could potentially drop in their absence, and THAT'S why people might eventually stop showing up. The bigger names are big for a reason. They produce content people like. Replace them with with lesser talents and the product will decline. A sh*ttier product = fewer butts in the seats.

Now, could Marvel bring in filmmakers of equal or superior talent in their absence, as many here have argued? Sure. But the chances are slim. These talents are rare. In particular, Kevin Feige. Feige is the sole reason the Marvel cinematic universe even exists. Without him, it wouldn't be the well-oiled machine it is now. When he's done, true, someone else could absolutely take over without skipping a beat. I'm just saying, chances are that won't happen. Those saying Feige is easily replaceable obviously have no idea how vital he truly is.

[This message has been edited by TCTTS (edited 5/27/2014 11:46a).]

These movies have been great, and those that take the time to know who writes, directs etc will notice when one gets fired.

However, the Marvel Movie Universe is starting to grow into what makes comic books borderline terrible. Think about the individual hero movies after the avengers. Big giant spaceships come to earth and Thor doesn't call the avengers for help? What were they doing watching TV? Hydra infiltrates shield and CA doesn't lob a call to Tony Stark for a hand?

Too many characters, story lines, cross overs, etc. Antman could have been epic, but the vast majority of movie go'ers would have not idea who he is and the movie probably would not have done well.

GOTG will be a good test as NO ONE knows who they are. The movies need to stick to the iconic IPs and not wonder down the same path as comic books in that they make up new characters, reboots, etc just because they need to feel important or get bored.

They can change actors etc as long as people are still watching iconic characters (CA, Ironman, Thor, Hulk, etc) it will do well and can be good.

And in Wright's case, there's just NO WAY Ant-Man is as good without out him. Again, hardly anyone's not going to show up just because Wright's name isn't attached. However, what people see in the trailers for this movie will surely be less-interesting and less-appealing in his absence.

For a project like this, one that could easily go either way, Wright's particular vision and touch - not his name - is what would have likely pushed those on the fence to buy a ticket. His script could have had those two or three lines featured in the trailer, or those two or three more stylized sequences, that swayed those who previously would have had no desire to this characters on screen. There's a certain noticeable "thing" that Wright would have brought to this movie that no other yes-man replacement will. Instead, you can bet that a watered-down, more homogeneous end-result will no doubt keep people away who would have otherwise bought a ticket. And again, that has nothing to do Wright's name, but his direction.

[This message has been edited by TCTTS (edited 5/27/2014 11:49a).]

quote:

---

And in Wright's case, there's just NO WAY Ant-Man is as good without out him. Again, hardly anyone's not going to show up just because Wright's name isn't attached. However, what people see in the trailers for this movie will surely be less-interesting and less-appealing in his absence.

For a project like this, one that could easily go either way, Wright's particular vision and touch - not his name - is what would have likely pushed those on the fence to buy a ticket. His script could have had those two or three lines featured in the trailer, or those two or three more stylized sequences, that swayed those who previously would have had no desire to this characters on screen. There's a certain noticeable "thing" that Wright would have brought to this movie that no other yes-man replacement will. Instead, you can bet that a watered-down, more homogeneous end-result will no doubt keep people away who would have otherwise bought a ticket. And again, that has nothing to do Wright's name, but his direction.

---

lol

quote:

---

Think about the individual hero movies after the avengers. Big giant spaceships come to earth and Thor doesn't call the avengers for help? What were they doing watching TV? Hydra infiltrates shield and CA doesn't lob a call to Tony Stark for a hand?

---

[nerd] This has been rehashed here multiple times, but this shouldn't be surprising to anyone. At this point, the Avengers are not best buddies hanging out on the weekends. In fact, they really don't even like each other in the 1st movie. Thor is pretty much an immortal who has been worshiped as a god on Earth for most of his existence. Why in the world do you think it would occur to him to reach out to Earthlings for help in dealing with an Asgardian issue.

Same goes for Cap and Tony. Cap doesn't trust Tony as far as he can throw him. Faced with 100% deception from everyone around him (using helicarriers designed by Tony), why would he reach out to him? [/nerd]

TCCTS, I hear you, but playing devil's advocate, Wright is known for overly-stylized/campy movies. The super hero movies that have done well recently have tried to stay as close to "real world" as possible given the content. There is a real risk that an overly-stylized/campy Ant-man could be taken as Marvel's Batman & Robin. Despite good intention otherwise.

quote:

---

These movies have been great, and those that take the time to know who writes, directs etc will notice when one gets fired.

However, the Marvel Movie Universe is starting to grow into what makes comic books borderline terrible. Think about the individual hero movies after the avengers. Big giant spaceships come to earth and Thor doesn't call the avengers for help? What were they doing watching TV? Hydra infiltrates shield and CA doesn't lob a call to Tony Stark for a hand?

Too many characters, story lines, cross overs, etc. Antman could have been epic, but the vast majority of movie go'ers would have not idea who he is and the movie probably would not have done well.

GOTG will be a good test as NO ONE knows who they are. The movies need to stick to the iconic IPs and not wonder down the same path as comic books in that they make up new characters, reboots, etc just because they need to feel important or get bored.

They can change actors etc as long as people are still watching iconic characters (CA, Ironman, Thor, Hulk, etc) it will do well and can be good.

---

I think you just totally contradicted yourself. The crossover confusion would only be a problem if they kept going back to the crossover, but they are not. They are keeping them separate in their individual movies.

quote:

---

When you start adding the Black Widow, Hawkeye and then Ant Man...they won't have the appeal or built in audience.

---

Hawkeye, and especially Black Widow, have been estrablished in previous movies. BW has a pretty big part in Winter Soldier.

Besides, Scarlett Johannsen.

When Marvel decided to to an Iron Man movie, many people were questioning why they would do Iron Man. Yea, he is part of the Avengers, but he was a character most non comic book readers knew very little, if anything about. There was even more questioning when Robert Downey Jr. was cast as Iron Man and Jon Favreau was cast to direct. You can say Marvel is playing it safe, but they have a vision, they know what they are doing, and so far, they have hit it big with their movies. When you have someone that wants to tinker with the universe and do things the non Disney way, then you start having issues that Sony is having with X-Men / Spider-Man with inconsistencies in quality and continuation errors.

My real concern is Feige's apparent displeasure with Wright leaving. I trust his vision based on what Marvel has done so far under him and compromising THAT vision is the troubling part.

I do think Wright would have made an awesome Ant Man movie and hate that he won't have a hand in creating part of the MCU for now. I'm not saying they won't be able to bring in a quality replacement, but this could be the beginning of a troubling trend of meddling by Disney.

Time will tell, I guess.

I like how anyone chosen to direct now is a "yes man replacement." So were all the directors of movies prior to Wright yes men? I dont remember hearing about any creative differences prior to this, so did they just get lucky and agree on everything in the previous movies or were they all just yes men kowtowing to their Marvel overlords?

[This message has been edited by Red Five (edited 5/27/2014 12:54p).]

quote:

---

And in Wright's case, there's just NO WAY Ant-Man is as good without out him.

---

No one will ever know b/c we won't get 2 ant man movies to compare against one another. It's like you're saying that if ant man is good, no matter how good, you will always say it could have been better. Stop letting stuff like who directs create bias before the movie ever releases.

quote:

---

However, the Marvel Movie Universe is starting to grow into what makes comic books borderline terrible. Think about the individual hero movies after the avengers. Big giant spaceships come to earth and Thor doesn't call the avengers for help? What were they doing watching TV? Hydra infiltrates shield and CA doesn't lob a call to Tony Stark for a hand?

---

What? Dude... your typical moviegoer/DVD watcher (so 99.9% of the consumers of these movies) gives ZERO ****s about consistency within a comic-book universe. They're totally okay with considering the world the Avengers inhabit to be separate from the ones the heroes inhabit in the stand-alone films... in fact they don't even give it a second thought.

Perspective from James Gunn (director of GotG):

quote:

---

Sometimes you have friends in a relationship. You love each of them dearly as individuals and think they’re amazing people. When they talk to you about their troubles, you do everything you can to support them, to keep them together, because if you love them both so much doesn’t it make sense they should love each other? But little by little you realize, at heart, they aren’t meant to be together – not because there’s anything wrong with either of them, but they just don’t have personalities that mesh in a comfortable way. They don’t make each other happy. Although it’s sad to see them split, when they do, you’re surprisingly relieved, and excited to see where their lives take them next.

It’s easy to try to make one party “right” and another party “wrong” when a breakup happens, but it often isn’t that simple. Or perhaps it’s even more simple than that – not everyone belongs in a relationship together. It doesn’t mean they’re not wonderful people.

And that’s true of both Edgar Wright and Marvel. One of them isn’t a person, but I think you get what I mean.

---

http://www.blastr.com/2014-5-27/rumor-day-why-edgar-wright-quit-marvels-ant-man

Yeah, the "why aren't the avengers helping Cap?" questions might pop up during the movie, but not enough to distract from the movie. They become bigger after the movie is over, and then it doesn't really matter.

And with Steven S DeKnight (Spartacus) taking over as show-runner for Daredevil, I'm much less worried.

http://marvel.com/news/tv/2014/5/24/22578/steven_s_deknight_joins_marvels_daredevil

Because it would be stupid to have 10 Avengers movies.

quote:

---

I think you just totally contradicted yourself. The crossover confusion would only be a problem if they kept going back to the crossover, but they are not. They are keeping them separate in their individual movies.

---

They are doing a great job overall. Over time is what I am talking about. I have tried very hard to read comics because I love the characters, but I do not want this excellent movie world to fall into the same trap. To agree with the OP's point when you bring a new director/writer they will start to change things just to be different.

I think trying to go down a path past the iconic heroes to someone like Antman could be disastorous no matter how good the movie is. As I said GOTG will be a good test because everyone that is not a comic "nerd" has no idea who they are. When movies come up I tell people I am stoked about this film, and I get the "who are they" question from everyone.

quote:

---

Because it would be stupid to have 10 Avengers movies.

---

The Avengers comics have run for 50+ years. Whats your point?

quote:

---

What? Dude... your typical moviegoer/DVD watcher (so 99.9% of the consumers of these movies) gives ZERO ****s about consistency within a comic-book universe. They're totally okay with considering the world the Avengers inhabit to be separate from the ones the heroes inhabit in the stand-alone films... in fact they don't even give it a second thought.

---

I thought that the typical movie go'er was stupid and their opinons where moot?

I have the same concerns as TTCTS, but not for who is acting, directing, or writing. I have the concern because they are making movies about less iconic and more niche comic books that may not have a good showing regardless of how good it is. When the ticket sales do turn out they will start to force the issue and it could go downhill.

[This message has been edited by BcoBq2004 (edited 5/27/2014 1:46p).]

From a non-comic book person, Ant Man sounds like a bad parody of a comic book movie. It will have to have massive word of mouth buzz for me to consider watching in theater.

The problem with ant man is not that he is less known, not that he is a secondary character or that his powers aren't cool enough...it's that his name is stupid. Iron man sounds tough, super man is pretty straight forward, spider man and batman are cool and mysterious. Ant man? Lame.

However, if the movie is cool it doesn't matter. Just think of the "worst" movie in this new marvel group from Disney. It only has to be that good. It'll more than likely be light years better than X3 or spider man 3 or batman and robin.

Ant Man is a dumb name and sounds incredibly lame, which is why most are so bummed about Wright leaving. You put Ant Man in the hands of Joe Q. Studio and it seems like Marvel is jumping the shark and reaching... But put it in the hands of the guy who made The Cornetto Trilogy and Scott Pilgrim... suddenly it seems like the perfect fit, and the only guy who could actually make it work. It goes from being lame, to sounding like a ton of fun...

But again, Marvel has come through time after time so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. But I can't pretend I'm not really, really disappointed by Wright's departure. His movies are so damn fun.

As another said, I think GOTG is going to show whether the lesser known characters can survive as movies.

If GOTG does poorly, Ant Man is going to bomb no matter who directs it.

quote:

---

The Avengers comics have run for 50+ years. Whats your point?

---

So you rather have Avengers 2 instead of Iron Man3? Avengers 3 instead of Thor 2? Avengers 4 instead of Captain America 2? Avengers 5 instead of Ant Man. That doesn't sound stupid to you? If you're going to get hung up on why don't all superheroes just unite, then you might as well just stop watching them.

I've read several articles now about Wright's departure and I don't see any Disney heavy handedness inferred anywhere. Sounds like the conflict was with Feige and the folks that have the control at Marvel to make all of this universe fit together. While Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz were great fun, At World's End was very poor in my opinion and I don't see how that type of film making would fit in the Marvel world. Have a feeling that's where the wheels came off, his brand of comedy and storytelling just didn't ultimately fit in the overall story Marvel wants to tell.

As for the Daredevil news, sounds like a non-story to me. Guy has a scheduling conflict with Sinister Six and he's still going to be helping with the series and the first 2 episodes are his writing.

I'm hopeful that it is a good movie but I'll admit that just at a surface level "ant man" sounds really corny.

quote:

---

I'm hopeful that it is a good movie but I'll admit that just at a surface level "ant man" sounds really corny.

---

Get your point, but Superman may be the worst name for a character, ever. Followed closely by Wonder Woman.

Considering superman originates in the 30's, I'll give them a pass.

Comparing the Superman name to Ant Man as similar is just silly. Superman has been around for years and his powers are known.

Nobody will know what Ant Man can do and his name won't help.

you should watch avengers: earth's mightiest heroes

That won't do much to instill a desire to see more ant man, imo. Maybe wasp or whatever his wife's name is.

pym particles