Marvel's Ant-Man(The NEXT Avenger)

[Talavar]

Yes, but because of Marvel's tight grip, most of their movies have been formulaic and repetitive. Just look at Thor 2, and IM 3. Thank The One Above All that Cap 3 was freaking great.

I don't agree with this statement at all.  Marvel's tight grip has produced the best run of superhero movies yet made, with most of them head and shoulders above the competition.  Whether one likes them or not, I can't see how either Thor 2 or Iron Man 3 can be seen as formulaic or repetitive.  Neither is an origin story, which have been done to death admittedly, neither makes use of a villain already done (or even rather similar, such as another man in power armour for Iron Man), and both have major changes in the status quos for the characters involved.  That, and Cap 3 hasn't been made yet.

[trebean]

Yes, but because of Marvel's tight grip, most of their movies have been formulaic and repetitive. Just look at Thor 2, and IM 3. Thank The One Above All that Cap 3 was freaking great.

I don't agree with this statement at all.  Marvel's tight grip has produced the best run of superhero movies yet made, with most of them head and shoulders above the competition.  Whether one likes them or not, I can't see how either Thor 2 or Iron Man 3 can be seen as formulaic or repetitive.  Neither is an origin story, which have been done to death admittedly, neither makes use of a villain already done (or even rather similar, such as another man in power armour for Iron Man), and both have major changes in the status quos for the characters involved.  That, and Cap 3 hasn't been made yet.

Do'h, CAP 2! I MEANT CAP 2!.
Thor 2 and Iron Man 3 non formulaic? You have to look at the bigger picture here. Both are plagued with horrendously forced jokes and side characters, both have character "development" that never went anywhere (Yes, Tony's panic attack had as much relevance as Thor and Jane's I guess somewhat of a relationship?) The movies final act start to detoriate once given more thought (Like, why did Tony even blew up all his suits at the end? Did it stand for something? It must just have been a spurnof the moment seeing as how he builds ULTRON later on.)While I do agree that it's loads better than most ( Well, subjectively anyway, other than IM, Avengers, and Cap 2 most of what they release isn't that great) why do they always feel the need to add in unnecessary characters and moments (lest, for the cheapest of excuses COMEDY) it just kills the mood and stops everythingto a deadhalt. Boring Exposition? Here have a naked guy COMEDY!! Nonsensical Character arc that does nothing tp the plot or the character later on? Don't mind that just cherish this sickeningly sweet AAAAWWWW moment between Tony and this kid. Wait, you're gonna execute a brilliant clever plan that nobody ever saw coming (sarcasm) and finish this brilliance by hurling your hammer at the dust particle energy substance just to look EPIC!? Genius!!Wait Wait Wait, you're gonna tell me the world's smartest rich guy who literally has an army of robo suits with a simple command come to him instead stubbornly use a malfunctioning Prototype from what we've seen can withstand intense pressure yet fail to blast through a barn door? YOU'RE LIKE TAKING THE ELECTROMAGNETIC ACTIVITY IN MY NEURAL CORTEX AND PLACING IT ON THIS PAPER!








I do not hate these films, it's just that I don't think Marvel is thaaat good.

[Talavar]

Yes, but because of Marvel's tight grip, most of their movies have been formulaic and repetitive. Just look at Thor 2, and IM 3. Thank The One Above All that Cap 3 was freaking great.

I don't agree with this statement at all.  Marvel's tight grip has produced the best run of superhero movies yet made, with most of them head and shoulders above the competition.  Whether one likes them or not, I can't see how either Thor 2 or Iron Man 3 can be seen as formulaic or repetitive.  Neither is an origin story, which have been done to death admittedly, neither makes use of a villain already done (or even rather similar, such as another man in power armour for Iron Man), and both have major changes in the status quos for the characters involved.  That, and Cap 3 hasn't been made yet.

Do'h, CAP 2! I MEANT CAP 2!.
Thor 2 and Iron Man 3 non formulaic? You have to look at the bigger picture here. Both are plagued with horrendously forced jokes and side characters, both have character "development" that never went anywhere (Yes, Tony's panic attack had as much relevance as Thor and Jane's I guess somewhat of a relationship?) The movies final act start to detoriate once given more thought (Like, why did Tony even blew up all his suits at the end? Did it stand for something? It must just have been a spurnof the moment seeing as how he builds ULTRON later on.)While I do agree that it's loads better than most ( Well, subjectively anyway, other than IM, Avengers, and Cap 2 most of what they release isn't that great) why do they always feel the need to add in unnecessary characters and moments (lest, for the cheapest of excuses COMEDY) it just kills the mood and stops everythingto a deadhalt. Boring Exposition? Here have a naked guy COMEDY!! Nonsensical Character arc that does nothing tp the plot or the character later on? Don't mind that just cherish this sickeningly sweet AAAAWWWW moment between Tony and this kid. Wait, you're gonna execute a brilliant clever plan that nobody ever saw coming (sarcasm) and finish this brilliance by hurling your hammer at the dust particle energy substance just to look EPIC!? Genius!!Wait Wait Wait, you're gonna tell me the world's smartest rich guy who literally has an army of robo suits with a simple command come to him instead stubbornly use a malfunctioning Prototype from what we've seen can withstand intense pressure yet fail to blast through a barn door? YOU'RE LIKE TAKING THE ELECTROMAGNETIC ACTIVITY IN MY NEURAL CORTEX AND PLACING IT ON THIS PAPER!

I do not hate these films, it's just that I don't think Marvel is thaaat good.

Rather than go through this argument again (there is an entire thread about the MCU after all, where most of your above issues have been hashed out already), I'll simply say I disagree with this in its entirety, and hope that Marvel continues making movies that appeal to my taste rather than to yours.

[BentonGrey]

Yeah, far be it for me to defend Iron Man 3, which I felt was entertaining but pretty mediocre (and I agree with pretty much all of your criticisms thereof), but I'm definitely with Tal here about Thor 2.  In fact, to put the two films in the same league seems to me a rather grave disservice to the God of Thunder.

I wonder what role, if any, Marvel's meddling had in the unevenness of Iron Man 2.  On the whole though, I'd say the proof is in the pudding.  Obviously what Marvel is doing is working.  Yeah, there have been a few missteps, but the whole of the cinematic universe they've created is still darn impressive and basically unprecedented.

[catwhowalksbyhimself]

Which I think is part of the problem.  Comic book writers and novel writers sometimes, are used to writing in a shared universe where sometimes care needs to be taken to match things up with what is going on elsewhere.  Film writers are not.  They are used to doing their own thing, even when adapting stuff.  This shared Marvelverse is just a foreign idea to many.  It should be no surprise that some would find it even offensive.  They can't do whatever they want to do because it wouldn't fit into the rest of the established/planned universe.

But I feel that it's great for viewers at least and want more. 

My guess is simply that there were things in the script that contradicted the Marvelverse, plus they wanted to to put some things in that lead towards Avengers 3 and those things did not fit with what the writer wanted. For example, he might not like having magic, or aliens forced on him, both of which are possible, since they are a part of the Marvelverse.

[Podmark]

Honestly, what I find frustrating is that Wright could have had the movie that he wanted back in Phase 1, but it just never got off the ground.

I believe I've heard that Wright wasn't ready, and was busy with other projects.
I've never heard what exactly were his reasons for leaving but I'm sure it will be interesting. Anyway new director is Peyton Reed and the script is still based on Wright's version. I believe that the release is unchanged at this point.

I like Ant-Man (any of them) but I've never been that excited for this film. Part of that is that I keep expecting them to make more comedy than their previous films, and that doesn't sound too appealing. Additionally I just don't see the potential of Ant-Man as a leading film star. It seems to me a better choice would be to introduce Pym (or Lang) as a team member in Avengers - though numbers hurt that idea.

Actually I take the above back - I could totally see a comedic film based around the Eric O'Grady Ant-Man. That'd be awesome!

[BentonGrey]

Yeah, I haven't been terribly excited about this one since we got more information about it a while back.  I just don't care about Scott Lang at all, (I don't dislike him, I just don't care about him) so an Ant-Man movie that's not really about Hank Pym being Ant-Man just doesn't interest me much.  Too me, it's a shame that the script isn't changing, as this is a good opportunity to do something different.

[Podmark]

An additional point to my previous comment, Ant-Man has rarely been a solo character. Pym did have a solo run early in his existence but he's mostly known for his role on the Avengers. Lang I don't think has ever had a solo run, and O'Grady had one for a while before shifting to being a team character as well.

When deciding which characters to make a solo move about it would seem to me that Ant-Man would be lower on the list. Not that there isn't material to use, and I'm sure a great movie could be made about the character, but it's a slightly odd choice to me.

[BentonGrey]

An additional point to my previous comment, Ant-Man has rarely been a solo character. Pym did have a solo run early in his existence but he's mostly known for his role on the Avengers. Lang I don't think has ever had a solo run, and O'Grady had one for a while before shifting to being a team character as well.

When deciding which characters to make a solo move about it would seem to me that Ant-Man would be lower on the list. Not that there isn't material to use, and I'm sure a great movie could be made about the character, but it's a slightly odd choice to me.

I don't disagree, Pod, but I think he could work really well visually on the big screen.  If WB had any brains in their suits, they'd make an Atom movie to beat Marvel to the punch.  The Atom would certainly work better as a solo character and could get up to all kinds of neat stuff.  He even has a small rogue's gallery, unlike Ant-Man.

[trebean]

An additional point to my previous comment, Ant-Man has rarely been a solo character. Pym did have a solo run early in his existence but he's mostly known for his role on the Avengers. Lang I don't think has ever had a solo run, and O'Grady had one for a while before shifting to being a team character as well.

When deciding which characters to make a solo move about it would seem to me that Ant-Man would be lower on the list. Not that there isn't material to use, and I'm sure a great movie could be made about the character, but it's a slightly odd choice to me.

I don't disagree, Pod, but I think he could work really well visually on the big screen.  If WB had any brains in their suits, they'd make an Atom movie to beat Marvel to the punch.  The Atom would certainly work better as a solo character and could get up to all kinds of neat stuff.  He even has a small rogue's gallery, unlike Ant-Man.

Now that you've mentioned it. Who is Antman fighting in this movie?

[Tomato]

Antman has a few villains of his own, or that originated with him... Ultron is perhaps the most well known, but Whirlwind started as an Ant-man villain as well, as did Egghead. Admittedly they're kind of... bottom of the barrel, but if they can make Batroc the Leaper into a credible threat, I'd be interested in seeing what they can do with Whirlwind.

[BentonGrey]

Yeah, Egg-Fu, wasn't it?  Anyway, he and Whirlwind are the ones that came to mind for me.  If they had gone about this with  better planning, they could have introduced Ultron in an Ant-Man movie and then brought him back for Avengers...though that might not work too well, considering how well the Ant-Man movie did.

Whirlwind could certainly be worth seeing on film, but he's really only got the charisma to be a secondary villain, methinks.

[spydermann93]

Yeah, Egg-Fu, wasn't it?

Egg-Fu is a Wonder Woman villain

[trebean]

Yeah, Egg-Fu, wasn't it?  Anyway, he and Whirlwind are the ones that came to mind for me.  If they had gone about this with  better planning, they could have introduced Ultron in an Ant-Man movie and then brought him back for Avengers...though that might not work too well, considering how well the Ant-Man movie did.

Whirlwind could certainly be worth seeing on film, but he's really only got the charisma to be a secondary villain, methinks.

Wot?

[BentonGrey]

Tre, I was saying that it would be cool to introduce Ultron in an Ant-Man movie, but it could backfire if the film didn't perform well, since folks would then be unfamiliar with the villain when The Avengers rolled around.

[detourne_me]

Wouldn't introducing AIM work well in an Ant-Man movie? They could even have some goofy beekeeper outfits too. (If only as an homage to the comics, in movie they could be used to combat an insect infestation)

[Starman]

Now that you've mentioned it. Who is Antman fighting in this movie?

Cross Technological Enterprises (Darren Cross, maybe some kind of interpretation of Crossfire?) and a version of Yellowjacket are rumoured to be the bad guys.

[catwhowalksbyhimself]

Wouldn't introducing AIM work well in an Ant-Man movie? They could even have some goofy beekeeper outfits too. (If only as an homage to the comics, in movie they could be used to combat an insect infestation)

AIM was already (poorly) introduced in Iron Man 3.

[crimsonquill]

AIM was already (poorly) introduced in Iron Man 3.

I'm sure AIM could be revamped in some fashion since it was just a brain-trust or HIVE mind of scientists being led by Aldrich Killian. I would assume that Killian's group of Extremis soldiers and his plans with the false Mandarian made him part of a radical faction of AIM. Much like Hydra, I would have assumed the remaining founders went on to form other scientific research companies with different experiments to develop.. maybe one of those projects (Project: MODOK?) could show up in Agents Of SHIELD or Iron Man 4?

- CQ

[catwhowalksbyhimself]

Certainly it could and I do hope to see that at some point.

[Tomato]

http://screenrant.com/ant-man-comic-con-poster/

[BentonGrey]

Hmm...I don't quite know what to think about that poster.  I wonder if it will grab the public properly.

[spydermann93]

Hmm...I don't quite know what to think about that poster.  I wonder if it will grab the public properly.

I think that Marvel Studio's track record, alone, will pull in more than enough fans.

[BentonGrey]

Well, they certainly have built up plenty of good will, haven't they.

[Podmark]

Marvel has announced the villain for the Ant-Man film: Darren Cross (cousin of Crossfire and villain of Scott Lang's origin) who will take up the identity of Yellowjacket. He will be played by Corey Stoll.

Also Evangeline Lilly will be playing Hank Pym's daughter Hope Van Dyne (a villain named Red Queen in MC2).

Both these were heavily rumored.

http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=54394

[lugaru]

Yeah, if Guardians of the Galaxy has shown me anything, it is that the public actually sees Marvel as a brand and get excited for characters they have never heard of. This could create something interesting, if one of marvels less popular (not Ant-Man specifically) character has a really good film, they could end up having to way up their profile in the comics. See Blade as an example.

[Shogunn2517]

Filming begins!  And the thread wasn't even on the 3rd page.

http://marvel.com/news/movies/2014/8/18/23096/production_begins_on_marvels_ant-man

[XStream]

So, for some reason I thought Paul Rudd was John Krasinski (The Office). And I became super excited! I guess the real Paul Rudd will do.

[JeyNyce]

I wonder how this movie is going to tied in with the Avengers and all the other shows in the MCU?  I'm thinking that somebody from Agents might make an appearance in the movie.

[catwhowalksbyhimself]

Yeah, if Guardians of the Galaxy has shown me anything, it is that the public actually sees Marvel as a brand and get excited for characters they have never heard of. This could create something interesting, if one of marvels less popular (not Ant-Man specifically) character has a really good film, they could end up having to way up their profile in the comics. See Blade as an example.

As a real life example my boss mentioned the Guardians movie to me and said he had no idea who the characters were or what it was about, but since it was a Marvel film, it had to be good and he was planning to see it.