Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board

The Marvel Studios thread (2008-)

The Natural
 Share

Recommended Posts

Cliff Hanger

Cliff Hanger

Posted
Posted

And just like that, my interest evaporates. I was prepared to put up with a ninety year old Hank and an adaptation of "To Steal an Ant-Man" for one of my favorite writer/directors. Now I'm just pissed that they rearranged all their plans for the character to meet Wright's needs and somebody (don't know who) fucked it up this badly this late.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eivion

Eivion

Posted
Posted

I'm curious what differences caused the departure. I can't say I'm disappointed or excited. I was never fond of Wright's vision for the film, and even with whatever changes that led to split happening I can't see them scrapping his script.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheVileOne

TheVileOne

Posted
Posted

I'm curious what differences caused the departure. I can't say I'm disappointed or excited. I was never fond of Wright's vision for the film, and even with whatever changes that led to split happening I can't see them scrapping his script.

 

I have no idea if there is anything to it, but rumors on Reddit said he was behind schedule and going over budget and he wasn't "righting the ship as it were."  It's Reddit so take it with a grain of salt.

 

All that aside, I pretty much agree with the above.  My emotional attachment to this project was virtually nil.  Less so after it was announced that it would Scott Lang as the main hero and Hank Pym would be marginalized as an old man.  Obviously, I can't see that changing if they still plan on making the July 2015 release.  Hence why I don't think it was over creative differences.

 

Honestly, I've been puzzled that Wright stayed attached to this project so long.  He went off to do other movies and Ant-Man was always falling by the wayside.  I was never really keen on his take for the movie.  Feige and Marvel seemed in love with Wright or whatever and stuck with him for this long, so that's why I'm surprised this all fell apart at the 11th hour.

 

 

https://grantland.co...tman-dc-comics/

article by EW's Mark Harris about superhero movie bubble and the SHIELD TV show 

 

 

I don't know, it just feels like for more than 10 years I've been reading articles like this.  Snooty critics and columnists saying the bubble is about to burst and the genre is going to combust...but then it doesn't.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brian Fowler

Brian Fowler

Posted
Posted

I've seen all but one Marvel studios film in the theater so far (Incredible Hulk being the exception, and I chose wisely, given that is the only one I consider an out and out bad film), so I'll probably end up still seeing Ant-Man.

 

I also have 0.00000000% of emotional attachment to any version of Ant-Man, so the particular take on the material never mattered to me either way.

 

But losing Wright definitely drops this from "highly anticipated" to "yeah, I'll probably end up going to see it."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Matt D

Matt D

Posted
Posted

I've seen all but one Marvel studios film in the theater so far (Incredible Hulk being the exception, and I chose wisely, given that is the only one I consider an out and out bad film), so I'll probably end up still seeing Ant-Man.

 

I also have 0.00000000% of emotional attachment to any version of Ant-Man, so the particular take on the material never mattered to me either way.

 

But losing Wright definitely drops this from "highly anticipated" to "yeah, I'll probably end up going to see it."

 

I think you'd like Scott Lang if we got you to read the right comics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brian Fowler

Brian Fowler

Posted
Posted

That seems like an onscreen moment best saved for a serious "oh fuck, we're screwed" scene in Avengers 3.  Just when all seems lost, Ant-Man suddenly becomes Giant Man and crushes some bad guy foot soldiers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brian Fowler

Brian Fowler

Posted
Posted

 

I've seen all but one Marvel studios film in the theater so far (Incredible Hulk being the exception, and I chose wisely, given that is the only one I consider an out and out bad film), so I'll probably end up still seeing Ant-Man.

 

I also have 0.00000000% of emotional attachment to any version of Ant-Man, so the particular take on the material never mattered to me either way.

 

But losing Wright definitely drops this from "highly anticipated" to "yeah, I'll probably end up going to see it."

 

I think you'd like Scott Lang if we got you to read the right comics.

 

 

I mean, I liked him fine in Alias.  But I don't have any real emotional connection the vast, vast majority of the Marvel universe.  I'm just not a Marvel fan at heart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Antacular

Antacular

Posted
Posted

https://grantland.co...tman-dc-comics/

article by EW's Mark Harris about superhero movie bubble and the SHIELD TV show

I don't know, it just feels like for more than 10 years I've been reading articles like this. Snooty critics and columnists saying the bubble is about to burst and the genre is going to combust...but then it doesn't.

Comic book movies are becoming the film industry's dominant vehicle for action/scifi, and I don't see that changing in the foreseeable future. The general movie-going audience has a built in familarity with the characters, which makes it easier for them to become attached to said films. However, what I do see happening is that REALLY minor characters a la Ant-Man and Guardians of the Galaxy will not be able to pull Cap 2/Iron Man/Spidey/Bats numbers for very long, if they do at all. It's getting to the point where stand-alone films will have to focus on just the major, well known characters, and the Avengers-type films are where the Ant-Men of the world will make appearances.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheVileOne

TheVileOne

Posted
Posted

 

 

https://grantland.co...tman-dc-comics/

article by EW's Mark Harris about superhero movie bubble and the SHIELD TV show

I don't know, it just feels like for more than 10 years I've been reading articles like this. Snooty critics and columnists saying the bubble is about to burst and the genre is going to combust...but then it doesn't.

Comic book movies are becoming the film industry's dominant vehicle for action/scifi, and I don't see that changing in the foreseeable future. The general movie-going audience has a built in familarity with the characters, which makes it easier for them to become attached to said films. However, what I do see happening is that REALLY minor characters a la Ant-Man and Guardians of the Galaxy will not be able to pull Cap 2/Iron Man/Spidey/Bats numbers for very long, if they do at all. It's getting to the point where stand-alone films will have to focus on just the major, well known characters, and the Avengers-type films are where the Ant-Men of the world will make appearances.

 

 

Yeah but look at Thor.  7 years ago, I wasn't sure I could believe Thor could carry his own franchise, and he did, even before Avengers came out.

 

And then look at Blade.  Before X-Men, Spider-Man came along, Blade was one of the cooler "comic book" movies out there.  I think with some of the lower tier characters you can get away with more because the expectations aren't as high.

 

It just seems to me whenever the genre is going through doldrums or a decline like say Fantastic Four or X-Men 3 or Spider-Man 3, something else comes along that blows it back up like Iron Man.  Then things were a little slow for a couple years, then we get Avengers.  And now we have Captain America 2 which was legit awesome.

 

I think Mark Harris is simply one of those writers that deep down can't stand that these comic book movies are popular and wants to prematurely predict the "demise" of the genre.  So if and when it does happen, he can point to this and be like, "See!  I told you!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brian Fowler

Brian Fowler

Posted
Posted

They also allow for studios to skip that messy "creating ideas" step of making movies, and they love that.

 

I don't think it's inconceivable that the bubble could burst, but I don't think anyone can claim it's about to until Age of Ultron opens.  Because if it does close to what The Avengers did, and with Batman vs. Superman: Stupid Sub-title coming the next year, it's hard to write off the genre.

 

If those two under perform, then he can gleefully point to this article and it's evidence of how right he was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Antacular

Antacular

Posted
Posted

I'd go so far to say that Thor was SOMEWHAT known, and that his bump was initally due to Iron Man's success. Thor's been riding Tony's coattails since. I don't think that's going to be possible with Guardians, and certainly not Ant-Man.

To be fair, Blade wasn't marketed as a "comic book movie," but as a badass vampire hunter who just so happened to originate from comics. It's like calling Constantine a "comic book movie."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheVileOne

TheVileOne

Posted
Posted

Fuck Constantine.  That movie sucked.  

 

They also allow for studios to skip that messy "creating ideas" step of making movies, and they love that.

 

I don't think it's inconceivable that the bubble could burst, but I don't think anyone can claim it's about to until Age of Ultron opens.  Because if it does close to what The Avengers did, and with Batman vs. Superman: Stupid Sub-title coming the next year, it's hard to write off the genre.

 

If those two under perform, then he can gleefully point to this article and it's evidence of how right he was.

 

I don't think that will mean anything.  Iron Man 2 being a disappointment didn't kill the genre.  Even the Amazing Spider-Man movies have been under-performers really.  And I never thought we'd see that happen.  While some franchises fall by the wayside, others excel.

 

X-Men was sort of in decline for a few years, now it seems like it's riding a new wave of popularity with Days of Future Past.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Antacular

Antacular

Posted
Posted

I don't think X-Men, Spidey, or Bats will ever be bombs, they will put asses in seats regardless of quality. The test is how well movies like Guardians, Ant-Man, etc do. But yeah, the simple fact that comic book movies already have embedded plots, thus saving studios precious time, is also a HUGE reason for their success.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brian Fowler

Brian Fowler

Posted
Posted

We actually have begun to see a meritocracy sort of develop.

 

Marvel made a string of good to really good movies, and as a result, they are now making more money.  Sony made a bad Spider-Man movie, did an unnecessary reboot, then made another fairly bad Spider-Man movie, and now they have their lowest grossing Spidey ever.

 

Fox made a terrible third X-Men movie, and an even worse spin-off, and got their next two films to be their lowest grossers by a lot.  But those were both well received, and expectations are that this new one is going to make a lot of money again (indeed, projections have it over 100 million for the 4 day weekend, which would be more than 2/3's of the way to what First Class and The Wolverine grossed total.)

 

The movies are succeeding less on their own quality than the quality of whatever led into it, but that's a form or meritocracy.

 

Which means if there were justice in the world, Cap 3 will make three times as much as BvS:DoS.  :)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EVA

EVA

Posted
Posted

Yeah, my enthusiasm for ANT-MAN now is probably in the negative. Edgar Wright is one of my favorite working directors, and I have zero fucks to give about any version of the character. I was solely interested to see what Wright could do with Marvel's toy chest.

But while I'm extremely disappointed by the news, I can't say I'm totally surprised that it didn't work out between Wright and Marvel (even though the film made it as far into production as it has). He's a totally different animal from the type of guys Marvel seems to prefer to work with. I feel kinda haughty using this word, but the dude is a legit auteur with a distinct voice and vision and he's accustomed to having things done his way. Marvel tends to prefer to work with TV directors and guys with backgrounds as screenwriters in the studio system (i.e., guys who NEED these gigs and are accustomed to delivering whatever product someone tells them to in a timely and efficient manner). Not that surprising that things fell apart once they got to the business of actually making the movie, as opposed to just making the googly eyes at each other and talking about how cool it would be.

Too bad, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...