Marvel's Ant-Man Film
 

Edgar Wright Exits Marvel’s ‘Ant-Man’ as Director

In a surprise announcement, Edgar Wright has left Marvel Studios’ “Ant-Man” as its director, the company said Friday.

Marvel is zeroing in on a new filmmaker, but is not yet in negotiations with one yet, Variety can confirm. When announcing Wright’s departure, Marvel said “a new director will be announced shortly.”

Hollywood and Marvel’s fan community will be scratching its head for awhile over this one, considering Wright has been attached to “Ant-Man” since 2006 — before the first “Iron Man” film — as a screenwriter. He has regularly gone to San Diego Comic-Con to give updates on the project’s development, and even showed test footage in 2012 of his approach to bringing the size-shifting character to the bigscreen.

Marvel and Wright parted ways “due to differences in their vision of the film,” the company and director said in a statement.

The decision to move on is amicable, they added, and does not impact the release date of July 17, 2015. The film had originally been dated for Nov. 6, 2015.

Paul Rudd, Michael Douglas and Evangeline Lilly star in the film, with Corey Stoll, Michael Pena and Patrick Wilson.



In addition to helming, Wright also co-wrote the script with Joe Cornish (“Attack the Block”). Wright most recently directed the comedy “The World’s End,” and “Scott Pilgrim vs. the World,” “Hot Fuzz” and “Shaun of the Dead” before that.

Cornish could conceivably take over the project, given his close involvement with it over the years.

He had been considered for “Star Trek 3″ but opted for Universal’s spy thriller “Section 6,” set to star Jack O’Connell, instead. Film revolves around the formation of British intelligence agency MI6.

Marvel is developing “Ant-Man” as a potential new franchise as part of its third phase of films, the way it hopes to introduce the characters in “Guardians of the Galaxy” in August to hopefully appear in multiple movies.

In the comicbooks, Ant-Man is the alter-ego of biochemist Hank Pym, who uses subatomic particles to create a size-altering formula and when tests go awry, realizes he can also communicate with and control insects. The character eventually pairs up with the Avengers.

Its very strange, but Wright is a very oddball, peculiar filmmaker. Its likely he didn't "tow the company line".
Posted via Mobile Device

So no chance of a Simon Pegg character?

http://cdn3.whatculture.com/wp-conte...Pegg-Starr.jpg

http://media.bestlittlesites.com/ima...52816/Ant3.jpg

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/vMrswhnMZQo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

http://geektyrant.com/news/edgar-wri...ant-man-fiasco

<noscript>http://static.squarespace.com/static...ant-man-fiasco</noscript>http://static.squarespace.com/static...ant-man-fiasco




Director Edgar Wright and Marvel have found themselves in an awkward situation. After eight years of development, Wright left Marvel's Ant-Man production due to creative differences and script changes. Wright has been silent on the matter since it all went down, but over the weekend he tweeted a photo of legendary silent film star Buster Keaton holding a Cornetto ice cream bar. It came along with the description, "Selfie." The photo was quickly deleted, but there's no erasing something from the Internet.

The photo is said to represent Keaton’s comments from 1928. Keaton made 31 films independently, then signed on with MGM, which he said was the biggest mistake of his career. The director was never again able to create independent work. This is his exact quote:

"I made the worst mistake of my career. Against my better judgment I let Joe Schenck talk me into giving up my own studio to make pictures at booming Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer lot in Culver City."

It's not that hard to connect the dots. Wright is Keaton and Marvel in MGM in this situation. Unlike Keaton though, Wright will be able to get back into making the films he wants to make. He's not being forced by the studio to make movies he doesn't want to make.

I hate that we won't see Wright's vision of Ant-Man on the big screen. Hopefully Marvel knows what they're doing with the story they want to tell. The question is: is what they want to do with the story so important that it's worth losing an amazing director?

Wright must think Marvel is wrecking shit, which means they probably are.

Until Marvel actually screws up, I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt. When your worst film is a still pretty decent Iron Man 2... you're gonna get a lot of leeway in my book.

True, but I just can't get any kind of excited for even the potentiality of this movie.

Maybe MAYBE I'll give it a shot if Guardians turns out to be as good as it is looking it will be.

This. Those ****ers shit gold.

Somewhat agree....but I do wish they would allow more visionary directors like Wright into their system. I can't argue with their success. They have a system and it works for them.

The rumor is they rewrote his script with a couple of in house guys and he was pissed. He's worked on this film for years.

So I ask, why did Marvel hire him in the first place knowing full well how he operates?

They had Ang Lee. I don't think they're going to want to go down the 'visionary' road and let the directors run wild again anytime soon. On the other side of the equation, I think Iron Man 2 taught them about being too involved. Those two movies seem to have taught them valuable lessons and guided their approach moving forward.

Ang Lee and Hulk was way before Marvel Studios. Although, some of the same producers might have been involved back then? I'm not sure?

So you might be right, maybe that's why they don't let a strong director come in and have full control of his movie.
Posted via Mobile Device

FYP.

They hired him way back, before they made the first Iron Man and consequently before the whole Marvel thing was established.

Peyton Reed announced as the frontrunner for the job now.

Interesting.....Reed was originally going to make the first Fantastic Four film years ago.....



http://www.thewrap.com/yes-mans-peyt...rvels-ant-man/

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=119235

Peyton Reed directing. Adam McCay coming in to "contribute" to the script.

Whatever.

Full length trailer. This looks alot better than the first teaser


<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/pWdKf3MneyI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

This movie looks to be way beyond my initial expectations after the firing of Edgar and rewrites by Rudd and McKay.

I thought it would be an unmitigated disaster but it looks really good, IMO.

I am still a bit worried about it... I think we are looking at a solid, good but not great movie. Paul Rudd is so likeable though that he alone might change that calculus.

The cast is really excellent, from Michael Douglas to Evangeline Lily.

IMO, it all be about the story. If it works, it might be this summer's "Guardians of the Galaxy". If it flops, it'll be the Hulk.

Still on the fence. I think the cast will keep the numbers up, but I expect this will be the lowest theater showing for Marvel so far. I know I'll be waiting for reviews before going to see it (or waiting for Netflix). Most other Marvel products are an opening weekend event for me.

First Hulk terri-bad or 2nd Hulk solid?...

The first, which was just called "Hulk". I own the second movie and really like it. It's too bad that Norton didn't work out but they hit a home run with Ruffalo.

That said, both movies had similar box office returns but that was before Iron Man, which pretty much changed everything.

Ironically, considering our Mad Men discussion. Hamm and Rudd are both working on Wet Hot American Summer for Netflix as we speak.

Actually Nortons Hulk was about a month or two after the first Iron Man. It's considered part of the MCU and contains the Downey end scene

Right, but Iron Man's $102 million dollar opening weekend really set the tone for Marvel's future. I think that Norton's Hulk would have been more successful if not for the failed version earlier in the decade and had it not gone head to head with a Iron Man. Dumb move on Uni's part.

FWIW, Universal still owns the rights to the Hulk, there aren't any plans for a Hulk movie until the rights revert to Marvel.

The latest trailer is better than the earlier teasers, but something still looks and feels off about it. I sort of get the sense that they never figured out what the movie is, so everything about it feels off. It's not totally drama, it's not totally comedy, it just looks like a bland mix of random parts. Hopefully my read turns out to be wrong.

I think after The Avengers, Ruffalo IS The Hulk. End of story. No knock on Norton, but it's like a Brando Corleone thing.

To my mind, as good as De Niro is, he's a young gangster that led to the era of The Godfather, not a young Vito. Brando is Vito.

They probably don't feel like it's worth their time for another one.

Too many other characters to give films to

I've heard rumors abound about Planet Hulk but Marvel doesn't have the rights.

Sort of.. it's not like the crappy Sony deal but yeah Marvel doesn't have all the rights, from what i have heard it wouldn't be an issue if they really wanted to make a new Hulk movie but right now they don't.

Universal gets a cut of any solo Hulk films made. There is nothing roadblocking it other than sharing a piece of the pie. Marvel probably feels that there is no story worth telling at this moment, and the piece of the pie is too big.

I actually think the "cut" they get is distribution. I'm not sure, I'd have to ask my Marvel guy on that. (I just like saying that I have a "Marvel guy"! I actually may be headed back to Atlanta in a week or so to help him set up for Cap America 3 like I did with Ant Man... and no I am not Dane style cool, I just wrote some custom software that they'll be using for databasing digital shot data.. so the closest I get to the actual film is a trailer full of computers.. very un-sexy)

That's awesome! Enjoy your time with Marvel. Composers are "behind the scenes" too and I am no where the MCU. The closest I get is tweeting back and forth with Brian Tyler. :D

Enjoy!

Well I'm only "with Marvel" on Cap 3 and Ant Man but even then I am just helping out a company called DigiLab and they don't have any exclusive deal they just get picked up on a per movie basis. The only movie I did anything really cool on was The Interview. Sony had really specific specs they wanted the files in and no one could figure it out so I wrote some cool software that Sony loved... I will say this about the IT people at Sony... they were by far the most professional I have dealt with... which is ironic since they got hacked and all.

I have to laugh at that last line, if you don't mind.

LMAO

I have a friend that works for Sony IT. He was saying that basically it was user error that got them hacked. He said all the higher ups are basically just completely computer reeruned and their passwords were like "123"

This is probably true for a lot of larger companies

In my experience, people higher up the chain ultimately prefer convenience over security

But if this is true, Sony should have had some sort of Password complexity enforcement

Article on the Universal Hulk thing:

http://collider.com/new-hulk-solo-mo...ns-the-rights/

You're sexy to me..... :p

I think Marvel is being smart about this.

Instead of making a new Hulk flick and trying to convince the crowd it can work they're waiting for the audience desire for one to build. Wait until the masses create the demand for one...

Well, Marvel's on a roll, so I'm certainly not going to second guess them about how to try succeeding with a two time loser. I'm a lot more likely to trust them than WB/DC, right now.

That may be but it sucks for all of their employees, which in addition to admin staff includes past and present producers, composers, writers, actors, gaffers - essentially anyone and everyone that ever received a W2 or 1099 from Sony.

I have friends that now to have pay a monthly service fee to internet "watchdog" companies that look for ID theft.

It really sucks for all them.

Personally, I think Marvel is better off including the Hulk as a co-star in its films, whether it's the Avengers or Guardians or the Inhumans, etc.

I think they'll re-cast before they do another stand alone.

Did you notice Danny Elfman has a score credit on Age of Ultron?

I wonder what he contributed?

The part where Thomas the Train derails....



Yeah, I LOL'd

Agreed. If they do a Planet Hulk/WWH they can ship him off during/after Infinity Gauntlet when his 4 picture contract will likely be up.

No Hulk for a few movies, build demand, then tell the story.

I want a Hulk movie more than anyone but you have to do it right. 4-6 years of wait time from today might be the perfect window...

Mark Ruffalo Says There Have Been ‘Talks’ of a ‘Planet Hulk’ Movie

Ruffalo spoke to IGN (along with Scarlett Johansson, who was there for the ride), and asked about the further adventures of Hulk. The actor admits there has been “some talk” of Planet Hulk, the first pseudo-confirmation of any kind. Now, before we present the quote, we should note that it may offer up some major spoilers for Avengers 2.

SPOILERS AHEAD

Mark Ruffalo: “I think there’s a lot of places to go with [Hulk].”
Scarlett Johansson: “Like where?”
IGN: “Space?”
Ruffalo: “Well he’s going to space. Yeah, I mean there’s some talk of maybe Planet Hulk.”
IGN: “Would you like to see that?”
Ruffalo: “I’d be completely interested in entertaining that.”

Before you start adding Planet Hulk to your Marvel release date calendar, Ruffalo said that he personally wasn't involved in any active talks to star in the project and that, as we know, it's not part of Marvel's announced slate of films. But, would that even matter? One of the many rumors was that Hulk would somehow find his way into another one of Marvel's already announced films, not unlike how Iron Man is in Captain America: Civil War. Specifically that Guardians of the Galaxy 2 would essentially be a Planet Hulk movie.

James Gunn has unequivocally said that rumor is “100% bulls---” when asked in the past, and that “there was never plan for the Hulk to team up with the Guardians of the Galaxy – I wouldn't want the Hulk to team up with the Guardians of the Galaxy!” So, you can scratch that theory.

Now, back to whether or not Ruffalo just gave away the Avengers 2 ending. Having seen Avengers 2 we can say...maybe?

The Hulk is definitely not with the team at the end of the film, and has ventured off somewhere by himself. But, he is not “shot off into space” nor is it ever really confirmed that he’s headed to space. He just knows he needs to protect the word from himself. It’s left ambiguous as to where that place is. It could be outer space, or it could be a remote island somewhere.

There’s probably enough for the Planet Hulk truthers to think that it's definitely happening and there’s probably enough for the Planet Hulk deniers to think that it's definitely not happening. Ruffalo’s comments are interesting because he's either speculating, or has some legitimate inside knowledge as to Hulk's final destination. (One thing is clear: if Hulk does wind up in space, his intellect has certainly grown, because he's piloting his own ship (literally and figuratively). If the big, green monster can find his way into outer space, he's clearly grown beyond HULK SMASH.)

If we had to guess, the only reason Hulk is gone is to explain his disappearance between Age of Ultron and when he eventually returns in Infinity War. So, yes Hulk is probably off in space somewhere, but the Planet Hulk storyline is also just as likely taking place off-screen in a universe we will never see. (Also, if Marvel is really being clever, in the comic books, Hulk wasn't around for the Civil War storyline, because he was in space, Planet Hulk-ing out.)



Read More: Mark Ruffalo Says There Have Been ‘Talks’ of a ‘Planet Hulk’ Movie | http://screencrush.com/planet-hulk-m...ckback=tsmclip

Marvel can do what they want. The demand was there for Spiderman and they reworked their schedule.

The demand (besides just me) for a Planet Hulk has to be there first...

Planet Hulk doesn't excite me. I just don't like Hulk that much. He's fine in small doses. But watching all powerful beings beat the shit out of each other is a little bit boring.

I really like Ruffalo as Hulk because he possess such an "Every Man" quality that's different than a guy like Tom Hanks, who's kind of goofy.

That said, I agree. I like seeing him as a complimentary character because he can really add to a scene. I thought the end of Iron Man 3 was brilliant.

You'd have to read it. I won't bore you with much other than to say when the Hulk lands on that planet he's not all powerful. A normal sword can cut him...

Is he a kook about fracking there?

while I am a fan of his work, I was disappointed when I first found out Ruffalo was gonna be the Hulk. something about him, to me, just didn't seem right for the part.
I was wrong. he's frigging great. he is Bruce Banner.

I haven't read the comic but I've seen the animated movie DC put out recently. Didn't like it.

Yup. Hulk is best in small doses, which is why he works in Avengers so well. The Norton movie wasn't bad, but there's something about Hulk that can't hold an audience's attention for a whole movie.

Just so I'm sure I have my facts straight, in the 70s and 80s on Network TV, Kung Fu, The Incredible Hulk and Highway to Heaven were the exact same show, right?

Basically a bunch of Network Execs doing coke and saying 'Billy Jack should be a SERIES!!'

Which were all just a re-working of "The Fugitive" format.

I think it's different today than it was back then.

There's a difference in the medium, and that seems to make a big difference. In a TV series, you can develop the weekly "stranger" plots, after you've spent a chunk of the first season setting everything up.

In cinema movies, people get really pissed when Hangover 2 is basically Hangover 1.

Planet Hulk is pretty boss, but leads up to an astounding World War Hulk.

The cinematic Avengers will likely have to eventually deal with the fact that the Hulk cannot be controlled and is too destructive to be relied upon. Joss Whedon made a brilliant move in delineating the "impulsively angry" Hulk who is uncontrollable (fought Thor on the helicarrier) and the "knowingly angry" Hulk whose actions can be guided by Bruce Banner's morality (fought the Chitari in the Avengers climax).

It looks like Avengers 2 will at least address this issue. There will likely be no room for it in Avengers 3.