Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Saw it, liked it, hope it gets a sequel. But it's performing as well as Incredible Hulk did back in 2008, and that film didn't see a sequel. I wouldn't be surprised if Lang's Ant-Man only pops up in Avengers films and other characters' movies.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 187
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Sorry just saw this...   The simplest answer is a director does a lot more than tell the actors what to do. On a movie of this scope the director is working for a year or more before they even start s

It's "Ant-Man". Two words, one hyphen, and the 'M' is capitalized. COME ON YOU GUYS.

I'm ALWAYS on board for more Hawkeye. The less ultimate and more 616 they make him the better.

Just talked to a friend who saw this an wasn't impressed. She's a Marvel fan and like Paul Rudd-thought the action stuff looked good but she felt

too much of it felt contrived and really disoliked "any emotional part-it felt forced."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw it, liked it, hope it gets a sequel. But it's performing as well as Incredible Hulk did back in 2008, and that film didn't see a sequel. I wouldn't be surprised if Lang's Ant-Man only pops up in Avengers films and other characters' movies.

This is what I'm guessing too, and I'm okay with that. Not everyone needs a solo movie, or sequels. I know a lot of people have wanted a Black Widow film, but it'd be pretty low on my list, for example.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw it, liked it, hope it gets a sequel. But it's performing as well as Incredible Hulk did back in 2008, and that film didn't see a sequel. I wouldn't be surprised if Lang's Ant-Man only pops up in Avengers films and other characters' movies.

From the split with Ed Norton to the plans with the other Avenger & Avenger-related movies to the inherent difficulties of making movies around the main character, there are many reasons why we have not seen another Hulk movie. It wasn't a "blockbuster", but it was certainly profitable. And though Ant-Man may not make Age of Ultron dollars, with a budget that was less than half as big, it doesn't really need to to be considered a success. Despite the fact that it hasn't even been released everywhere, yet, it has already returned most of its $130M budget. Also, while considering that this film slightly out-performed Hulk out of the gate, let's not forget that Thor's opening weekend only made another $8M more than Ant-Man, so you could just as well make that comparison.

 

Consider all of the additional money (remaining ticket sales, DVD/Blu Ray sales, merchandise sales, etc.) that you can add to the current total when all is said and done and it should certainly warrant another film. Given all of the problems that plagued the making of this film, it's also reasonable to speculate that the next film may very well be a stronger (and more profitable) effort. I'll be surprised (and sad) if we don't see a sequel - though, in reality (if not name), I expect it'll be an Ant-Man and Wasp film. That sounds good to me, as well. :cool:

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Microverse?! Can I get a heck yes to a Micronauts movie

 

I read where they specifically could not use the term "Microverse" because of rights issues with the Micronauts. That's why they used the term "quantum realm". And there's been some talk that Doctor Strange's magic utilizes this "realm".

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Saw it, liked it, hope it gets a sequel. But it's performing as well as Incredible Hulk did back in 2008, and that film didn't see a sequel. I wouldn't be surprised if Lang's Ant-Man only pops up in Avengers films and other characters' movies.

This is what I'm guessing too, and I'm okay with that. Not everyone needs a solo movie, or sequels. I know a lot of people have wanted a Black Widow film, but it'd be pretty low on my list, for example.

 

Who on earth really thinks a Black Widow film would be worth the effort?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just talked to a friend who saw this an wasn't impressed. She's a Marvel fan and like Paul Rudd-thought the action stuff looked good but she felt

too much of it felt contrived and really disoliked "any emotional part-it felt forced."

I'm getting that from a lot of friends; the general opinion is that the film is just there, but does not mean much, and that Ant Man as a character is just not that interesting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Who on earth really thinks a Black Widow film would be worth the effort?

Plenty of folks, me included. Personally, I wouldn't go strictly with a Widow solo film, exactly. More of a Widow/Hawkeye film with Fury in a significant supporting role. They could easily make an interesting & entertaining film with these characters, one that could set itself apart from the other films in the process. A film based around these alleged super-spies actually being super-spies would have oodles of potential.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Driver, or anyone that knows, there was talk about the audacity Disney had relieving Wright from the chair and then we'd find out how much Wright was left in the film (and how much they actually liked him) by the credits. Wright was featured several times; script, story, producer (exec, I think). Sometimes with 'and' other times with '&'. So I was wondering what kind of juicy juice was revealed in how the credits were done?

Sorry just saw this...

 

The simplest answer is a director does a lot more than tell the actors what to do. On a movie of this scope the director is working for a year or more before they even start shooting, planning FX sequences, casting, approving designs, planning, prepping-- it's a huge job. In Wright's case, he was also writing so he had to make every change needed as production shored up.

 

When he left, they didn't start over. They were too close to go time, so a lot of his creative and directorial decisions are still there in the movie. That's worth an EP credit at the minimum. Given that he wrote the initial drafts, he also was entitled to story and screen play credit.

 

For the record, the writing credits were:

 

Story by: Edgar Wright & Joe Cornish

Screenplay by: Edgar Wright & Joe Cornish and Adam McKay & Paul Rudd

 

When there are a chain of writers, often times the original writers are given story by credit if most of the plot is still theirs-- meaning changes are more about details instead of structure.

 

"Written by" usually appears when one writer or team is responsible solely for everything. "Screenplay by" means there is source material or multiple writers involved. So Ed & Joe were the first writing team, and are listed first (ampersand means writing team) and the word AND means successive writers, so Adam & Paul did a pass at it.

 

Again, since there is a story by credit, this mean that Adam & Paul's draft did not significantly change the plot and structure. This also jives pretty much with what Adam McKay has said his involvement was-- they offered it to him to direct, but instead, he and Paul (they've worked together many times) did their pass to funny it up (I assume given their other collaborations) and install whatever changes the new director had, and whatever changes Marvel wanted from where Edgar left it.

 

That said, as an Edgar Wright fan, his finger prints are all over it. You can't deny that Luis telling his stories, with his voice over on actors acting out his words in high speed, is full on Wright.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Saw it, liked it, hope it gets a sequel. But it's performing as well as Incredible Hulk did back in 2008, and that film didn't see a sequel. I wouldn't be surprised if Lang's Ant-Man only pops up in Avengers films and other characters' movies.

I just finally got around to seeing it and this pretty sums up my thoughts. It is too bad more people didn't go see it, but these characters popping up in other movies, whether in major or minor roles, might ultimately be for the best anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...

Finally saw it last night while wrapping presents. I really wish that Wright had been in charge for all of it. I think it would've been far more interesting. It was good, but not spectacular, and I think that was mainly because they played it safe with a lot of the visual style, while Wright's visual and editing style would've really worked way better with the flow of the film.

Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...