|
Post by formersamhmd on Jun 27, 2017 22:13:42 GMT
How many MCU movies are considered lower than Ant Man? Maybe TDW and TIH. That's about it though. Actually, I've met many people who prefer Ant-Man over even some of the heavy hitters like Guardians. Its been two years. get over it. They're probably still sore over how Ant-Man opened with a 66% rating on RT and ended with 80%, utterly slaying Fant4stic.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2017 22:17:10 GMT
Actually, I've met many people who prefer Ant-Man over even some of the heavy hitters like Guardians. Its been two years. get over it. They're probably still sore over how Ant-Man opened with a 66% rating on RT and ended with 80%, utterly slaying Fant4stic. I doubt Akbar cares that Ant-Man beat Fant4stic. The backlash Ant-man gets over one frikkin' director being unwilling to play ball is ridiculous, though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2017 22:17:18 GMT
Also your point about Marvel meddling with TDW sort of goes along with my original point that the studio meddles too much. Here's a quote from Thor 2's director... I’ve learned that you don’t make a $170 million movie with someone else’s money and not have to collaborate a lot. The Marvel experience was particularly wrenching because I was sort of given absolute freedom while we were shooting, and then in post it turned into a different movie. So, that is something I hope never to repeat and don’t wish upon anybody else. If they meddled too much, how come Shane Black, James Gunn, Scott Derrickson, and the Russo brothers have reported no such things and have pretty much been left to leave their mark on the series as long as it progresses the series? Marvel made a mistake with The Dark World, but does absolutely does not translate to every film the Studio produces being ridden with executive meddling. They were right to fire Wright after he dragged his feet for a whole damn decade instead of just making the Ant-Man movie. Shane Black DID complain. They told him not to use a female villain. Google it. If Wright were the only one to complain then I'd take Marvel's side. But Faverau, Whedon, and Alan Taylor complained as well. Maybe not every director had a bad experience but that doesn't negate the ones that did. Also maybe they just didn't mind the interference. They got paid didn't they? And they were mostly small time before, so why bite the hand that feeds you?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2017 22:19:25 GMT
Actually, I've met many people who prefer Ant-Man over even some of the heavy hitters like Guardians. Its been two years. get over it. They're probably still sore over how Ant-Man opened with a 66% rating on RT and ended with 80%, utterly slaying Fant4stic. Nope. I'm a fan of good superhero movies, many of which are MCU movies. I love Iron Man, Cap 1-3 and several others and I never even watched F4 So fuck off, idiot.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2017 22:30:12 GMT
If they meddled too much, how come Shane Black, James Gunn, Scott Derrickson, and the Russo brothers have reported no such things and have pretty much been left to leave their mark on the series as long as it progresses the series? Marvel made a mistake with The Dark World, but does absolutely does not translate to every film the Studio produces being ridden with executive meddling. They were right to fire Wright after he dragged his feet for a whole damn decade instead of just making the Ant-Man movie. Shane Black DID complain. They told him not to use a female villain. Google it. If Wright were the only one to complain then I'd take Marvel's side. But Faverau, Whedon, and Alan Taylor complained as well. Maybe not every director had a bad experience but that doesn't negate the ones that did. Also maybe they just didn't mind the interference. They got paid didn't they? And they were mostly small time before, so why bite the hand that feeds you? Except Black did use a female villain. Watch the film. Ironman 2 had the full weight of the MCU riding on it with Incredible Hulk under-performing and Wright being a dick and dragging his feet with Ant-Man. Ironman 2 HAD to be the film that tied everything up to that point together. Whedon directed The Avengers films, and that makes them pivotal to everything. They were never going to be only HIS films. The only one I'll give to you is Taylor.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2017 23:01:35 GMT
Shane Black DID complain. They told him not to use a female villain. Google it. If Wright were the only one to complain then I'd take Marvel's side. But Faverau, Whedon, and Alan Taylor complained as well. Maybe not every director had a bad experience but that doesn't negate the ones that did. Also maybe they just didn't mind the interference. They got paid didn't they? And they were mostly small time before, so why bite the hand that feeds you? Except Black did use a female villain. Watch the film. Ironman 2 had the full weight of the MCU riding on it with Incredible Hulk under-performing and Wright being a dick and dragging his feet with Ant-Man. Ironman 2 HAD to be the film that tied everything up to that point together. Whedon directed The Avengers films, and that makes them pivotal to everything. They were never going to be only HIS films. The only one I'll give to you is Taylor. Well, Black's original plan was to have the girl be the main villain, not Killian. But according to him Marvel cared more about marketing and merchandising so a woman as the villain was out of the question. But whatever. We've had a fun and lively back and forth. Let's just move on.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2017 23:04:08 GMT
Except Black did use a female villain. Watch the film. Ironman 2 had the full weight of the MCU riding on it with Incredible Hulk under-performing and Wright being a dick and dragging his feet with Ant-Man. Ironman 2 HAD to be the film that tied everything up to that point together. Whedon directed The Avengers films, and that makes them pivotal to everything. They were never going to be only HIS films. The only one I'll give to you is Taylor. Well, Black's original plan was to have the girl be the main villain, not Killian. But according to him Marvel cared more about marketing and merchandising so a woman as the villain was out of the question. But whatever. We've had a fun and lively back and forth. Let's just move on. When you're a filmmaker in a cinematic universe, the film you're working on isn't yours'. Get used to it. Marvel has shown themselves to be willing to work with their filmmakers, and those who can't deal need to fold. You will never convince Marvel Studios is some evil overlord studio.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Jun 28, 2017 2:41:50 GMT
It was Ike Perlmutter who shot down the female villain idea, in fact it was his way of doing things that eventually got to Favreau and Whedon as well.
Feige making sure Ike was cut out of the movies eliminated that problem for future directors.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Jun 28, 2017 3:19:36 GMT
Well, Black's original plan was to have the girl be the main villain, not Killian. But according to him Marvel cared more about marketing and merchandising so a woman as the villain was out of the question. But whatever. We've had a fun and lively back and forth. Let's just move on. When you're a filmmaker in a cinematic universe, the film you're working on isn't yours'. Get used to it. Marvel has shown themselves to be willing to work with their filmmakers, and those who can't deal need to fold. You will never convince Marvel Studios is some evil overlord studio. But if it's true what Marvel did on Thor: The Dark World:
"The Marvel experience was particularly wrenching because I was sort of given absolute freedom while we were shooting, and then in post it turned into a different movie. So, that is something I hope never to repeat and don’t wish upon anybody else."
then MCU dictator Kevin Feige and the execs at MCU are really assholes.
Because the last thing that any filmmaker wants is for their film to just be butchered and change in post-production and then their name attached to a shitty film that they didn't make. It would be like signing a contract and then someone takes the contract and changes the terms of the contract but keeps your signature on the contract. You signed the original contract but not the amended contract.
The Director of Thor: The Dark World got his name attached to a shitty film but that wasn't the film he made. I can see why the Directors are pissed off at MCU for pulling such crap.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2017 3:46:41 GMT
When you're a filmmaker in a cinematic universe, the film you're working on isn't yours'. Get used to it. Marvel has shown themselves to be willing to work with their filmmakers, and those who can't deal need to fold. You will never convince Marvel Studios is some evil overlord studio. But if it's true what Marvel did on Thor: The Dark World:
"The Marvel experience was particularly wrenching because I was sort of given absolute freedom while we were shooting, and then in post it turned into a different movie. So, that is something I hope never to repeat and don’t wish upon anybody else."
then MCU dictator Kevin Feige and the execs at MCU are really assholes.
Because the last thing that any filmmaker wants is for their film to just be butchered and change in post-production and then their name attached to a shitty film that they didn't make. It would be like signing a contract and then someone takes the contract and changes the terms of the contract but keeps your signature on the contract. You signed the original contract but not the amended contract.
The Director of Thor: The Dark World got his name attached to a shitty film but that wasn't the film he made. I can see why the Directors are pissed off at MCU for pulling such crap.
Daivd Ayers. Suicide Squad. That is all. So shut up, you stupid piece of shit.
|
|
agentblue
Sophomore
@agentblue
Posts: 792
Likes: 248
|
Post by agentblue on Jun 28, 2017 5:01:37 GMT
Come man, give us the least diplomatic answer. It's been two years. TEXT: “The most diplomatic answer is I wanted to make a Marvel movie but I don’t think they really wanted to make an Edgar Wright movie. I was the writer-director on it and then they wanted to do a draft without me, and having written all my other movies, that’s a tough thing to move forward. Suddenly becoming a director for hire on it, you’re sort of less emotionally invested and you start to wonder why you’re there, really.” screenrant.com/edgar-wright-exit-marvel-ant-man/I so wish we could have seen his version of Antman, he was the main reason I wanted to watch it when it was being developed, from what I heard his script had no references to the MCU at all and he wanted it to be completely standalone. Oh well maybe some day he will direct a superhero movie.
|
|
moviemeisters
Sophomore
"Cinema is not a slice of life, but a piece of cake."
@moviemeisters
Posts: 190
Likes: 99
|
Post by moviemeisters on Jun 30, 2017 6:18:20 GMT
Well, who else would I speak for? You liked it and that's great. Personally, while not a difficult film to get through, I found it one of the more boring films in the MCU because of its use of the formula. I'm frankly confused as to where you're getting this "formulaic" stuff from. Its the only film in the series to be a heist film and Ant-Man himself is such a weird, off-beat character that his presence, powers, and skill-set alone do much to make the film unique in the lineup. Plus, its the only film in the series to be about an ex-convict or feature a character passing on their superhero identity to someone else. Forgive my criticism of a film you clearly love. I don't share the same affection for all of the MCU films that you seem to have. Here goes... The film felt too much like it was trying to tick the boxes of what's supposed to appear in a superhero movie without setting them up properly or tying them into the story very well: -The film establishes that Darren Cross is a bad guy when he kills a guy in the bathroom, but it is never (fully) established why the good guys see him as a villain and why they need to keep him specifically from learning the technology. Of course, later, Cross threatens Pym and it's established that he's working for Hydra, but it is long after the good guys' plan to destroy the facility and steal the Yellowjacket suit is underway. The good guys need a plan to stop the bad guy, because it's something that's just supposed to happen in this type of movie. -The presence of Hope in the story causes a few problems, as well. Pym establishes that he needs Lang to wear the Ant-Man suit for the heist, but Hope is in a much better position to steal the suit and she is much better at using the ant-controlling technology. Why doesn't he have her do the heist? The film reveals that Janet was "killed" and that Pym wants to keep Hope out of danger. The problem is that the plan relies on her being in a position of danger during the heist anyway. Why not just have her wear the suit and keep Lang out of the plot altogether? It just felt forced. By that same token, the character-centric element between her and Pym is resolved way too early in the story for it to matter and it also raises the question of why Pym never bothered to tell Hope about her mother's fate before when it would have solved a lot of the personal issues between them. It's brought up and resolved in a way that feels superfluous to the story. Lastly, the film reveals an unearned romance between Lang and Hope, which was not established or built-up to. Frankly, for the plot to work, they should have either excluded Hope from the story or made both characters wear suits with giving Lang a plot specific (or character-specific) reason to be there to do a task that Hope couldn't do. Once again, Hope's there to be the love interest because that's what happens in superhero movies. Nevermind that her presence causes problems in the plot and that her romance with our lead is forced. It's just that too much of the plot felt like things we've seen before without letting them flow organically with the story. As far as your specific reasons for it not being a formulaic story: I would argue it's NOT a heist film. Heist films have a degree of subterfuge, subtlety, and a slow build of suspense. None of this was present in the story. We knew the plan to steal the Yellowjacket suit would fail and, really, if your intention is to blow up a building, isn't stealing something from said building a moot point? Sure, the film features characters trying to steal things, but these potential heists always dissolve into typical superhero fights. I kind of agree with you in regards to the character's abilities being different from the other heroes, but the film doesn't feel different if nothing different is done from a character standpoint: Just another witty character fighting a bad guy in a battle that doesn't really require that much personal investment (Cross was really Pym's villain). Even the idea of the main protagonist being an ex-convict was held back: He was in prison for stealing from the rich and giving to the poor. No real risk, story-wise. Now, if he really was a bad guy who turns into an upstanding person by the end, THAT would have been an interesting story. As a person, Lang is the same guy at the end that he was at the beginning. Once again, just my two cents. You enjoyed the film and I respect that. I just feel that Wright could have given us something more unique and memorable.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2017 0:04:39 GMT
They know he's the bad guy because Hope Pym works closely with him and can see how unstable he's becoming. Besides that, mass producing the Yellow Jacket project is just begging for it to fall into the wrong hands. He had to be stopped even if he wasn't the bad guy.
Lang is expendible to Hank. Hope is not. There is no safe place during the Heist, but being in the Ant-Man costume is the most dangerous place to be during the job when things go wrong. As far as they knew, Cross had no idea Hope was in on it and wouldn't be in any danger. She was only in a known place of risk when Cross revealed that he knew more than he was letting on.
Every story feels like thing we've seen before. What an empty statement.
It IS a Heist film, and I can't agree with a single thing you just said. No, the film was a risk to make, because Ant-Man himself is such a bizarre character to sell to audiences. I don't care if the tropes in the film are familiar. The character himself is what makes it hard to sell. So yes, it was a risky film. You'll never convince me otherwise. Cross became Lang's villain the instant he threatened his daughter. Actually, we didn't know the plan to steal the Yellowjacket would fail.
Wright is a one-note hack, incapable of giving us anything unique and memorable. Stop overrating him.
|
|
moviemeisters
Sophomore
"Cinema is not a slice of life, but a piece of cake."
@moviemeisters
Posts: 190
Likes: 99
|
Post by moviemeisters on Jul 1, 2017 5:58:31 GMT
They know he's the bad guy because Hope Pym works closely with him and can see how unstable he's becoming. Besides that, mass producing the Yellow Jacket project is just begging for it to fall into the wrong hands. He had to be stopped even if he wasn't the bad guy. Lang is expendible to Hank. Hope is not. There is no safe place during the Heist, but being in the Ant-Man costume is the most dangerous place to be during the job when things go wrong. As far as they knew, Cross had no idea Hope was in on it and wouldn't be in any danger. She was only in a known place of risk when Cross revealed that he knew more than he was letting on. Every story feels like thing we've seen before. What an empty statement. It IS a Heist film, and I can't agree with a single thing you just said. No, the film was a risk to make, because Ant-Man himself is such a bizarre character to sell to audiences. I don't care if the tropes in the film are familiar. The character himself is what makes it hard to sell. So yes, it was a risky film. You'll never convince me otherwise. Cross became Lang's villain the instant he threatened his daughter. Actually, we didn't know the plan to steal the Yellowjacket would fail. Wright is a one-note hack, incapable of giving us anything unique and memorable. Stop overrating him. At this point, I guess we'll just agree to disagree. I like a number of films in the MCU quite a bit, but I didn't care for Ant-Man. Out of curiosity, though...Where do you rank it in the MCU?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2017 22:19:18 GMT
At this point, I guess we'll just agree to disagree. I like a number of films in the MCU quite a bit, but I didn't care for Ant-Man. Out of curiosity, though...Where do you rank it in the MCU? My rankings for the MCU films shift all the time. It depends on what I feel in the mood for. Let me say this: the reason I get defensive about this film is because I feel the backlash against it is a syndrome of modern thinking. A lot of people just can't seem to enjoy ANYTHING unless they consider it to be the highest form of art. Or they'll get so hung up on what could have been that they aren't really giving the actual product they got a fair shake.
|
|
|
Post by Atom(ica) Discord on Jul 1, 2017 22:54:40 GMT
At this point, I guess we'll just agree to disagree. I like a number of films in the MCU quite a bit, but I didn't care for Ant-Man. Out of curiosity, though...Where do you rank it in the MCU? My rankings for the MCU films shift all the time. It depends on what I feel in the mood for.Let me say this: the reason I get defensive about this film is because I feel the backlash against it is a syndrome of modern thinking. A lot of people just can't seem to enjoy ANYTHING unless they consider it to be the highest form of art. Or they'll get so hung up on what could have been that they aren't really giving the actual product they got a fair shake. #TRUTHBOMB SaveSave
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2017 22:56:45 GMT
My rankings for the MCU films shift all the time. It depends on what I feel in the mood for.Let me say this: the reason I get defensive about this film is because I feel the backlash against it is a syndrome of modern thinking. A lot of people just can't seem to enjoy ANYTHING unless they consider it to be the highest form of art. Or they'll get so hung up on what could have been that they aren't really giving the actual product they got a fair shake. #TRUTHBOMB SaveSaveAnd then of course there's the old argument of what exactly IS art.
|
|
moviemeisters
Sophomore
"Cinema is not a slice of life, but a piece of cake."
@moviemeisters
Posts: 190
Likes: 99
|
Post by moviemeisters on Jul 2, 2017 3:07:07 GMT
At this point, I guess we'll just agree to disagree. I like a number of films in the MCU quite a bit, but I didn't care for Ant-Man. Out of curiosity, though...Where do you rank it in the MCU? My rankings for the MCU films shift all the time. It depends on what I feel in the mood for. Let me say this: the reason I get defensive about this film is because I feel the backlash against it is a syndrome of modern thinking. A lot of people just can't seem to enjoy ANYTHING unless they consider it to be the highest form of art. Or they'll get so hung up on what could have been that they aren't really giving the actual product they got a fair shake.I understand completely. It's never a good attitude to go into a movie hoping it'll be bad just so one could criticize it. Even after the Edgar Wright issues, I was still willing to give the movie a fair shot. I really liked the trailers, actually. I just didn't connect to the characters or the plot. I feel there were better ways to do the film, which the MCU has actually done with other films. Personal opinion, of course. You enjoyed it, so more power to you.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2017 3:14:14 GMT
My rankings for the MCU films shift all the time. It depends on what I feel in the mood for. Let me say this: the reason I get defensive about this film is because I feel the backlash against it is a syndrome of modern thinking. A lot of people just can't seem to enjoy ANYTHING unless they consider it to be the highest form of art. Or they'll get so hung up on what could have been that they aren't really giving the actual product they got a fair shake.I understand completely. It's never a good attitude to go into a movie hoping it'll be bad just so one could criticize it. Even after the Edgar Wright issues, I was still willing to give the movie a fair shot. I really liked the trailers, actually. I just didn't connect to the characters or the plot. I feel there were better ways to do the film, which the MCU has actually done with other films. Personal opinion, of course. You enjoyed it, so more power to you. Fair enough. Sorry for lashing out at ya, by the way. About a decade of putting up with crap from Nolanites and Snyderites have trained me to believe criticisms are attacks. I forget sometimes that they're not.
|
|
moviemeisters
Sophomore
"Cinema is not a slice of life, but a piece of cake."
@moviemeisters
Posts: 190
Likes: 99
|
Post by moviemeisters on Jul 2, 2017 3:21:19 GMT
I understand completely. It's never a good attitude to go into a movie hoping it'll be bad just so one could criticize it. Even after the Edgar Wright issues, I was still willing to give the movie a fair shot. I really liked the trailers, actually. I just didn't connect to the characters or the plot. I feel there were better ways to do the film, which the MCU has actually done with other films. Personal opinion, of course. You enjoyed it, so more power to you. Fair enough. Sorry for lashing out at ya, by the way. About a decade of putting up with crap from Nolanites and Snyderites have trained me to believe criticisms are attacks. I forget sometimes that they're not. No problem, pal. I, kind of, went through the same thing when the Man of Steel fans started criticizing Iron Man 3.
|
|