Edgar Wright Has Left The (Marvel) Building

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Ahtman**

Source

The “Cornetto Trilogy” and “Scott Pilgrim” director and the Disney-owned Marvel Studios announced in a joint statement that he has left the big screen adaptation of “Ant-Man,” which stars Paul Rudd.

“Marvel and Edgar Wright jointly announced today that the studio and director have parted ways on ANT-MAN due to differences in their vision of the film,” a statement read. “The decision to move on is amicable and does not impact the release date on July 17, 2015. A new director will be announced shortly.”

The film — which also features Evangeline Lilly, Corey Stoll, Michael Douglas, and Michael Peña — is part of the next phase of Marvel films, which includes this summer's “Guardians of the Galaxy” and “Avengers: Age of Ultron.

Well that doesn't make me happy.

**Paradigm**

No that's a shame. Still, I'm fully expecting him to call up Pegg and Frost now and do a marvel spoof. They've done zombies, cops and aliens, supers are the next logical step.

**Cheesecat**

My thoughts =

**H.B.M.C.**

Real shame that the same thing didn't happen with Shane Black.

**timetowaste85**

Ugh, really? Despite how good SotD and HF were, Marvel fought him on his direction? Bad, bad Marvel (and that fething Mouse!)

**Overlord Thraka**

If they are having issues over the film. I wonder what direction it's going to take... I sense great fear in those who also realize this

**Palindrome**

Paradigm wrote:
They've done zombies, cops and aliens, supers are the next logical step.

The 'Corneto' trilogy is staying a trilogy, They apparently have no interest in making another similar film.

**Flashman**

My problem with Wright is that he was constantly spoofing and referencing other films and TV shows rather than doing his own thing.

**Paradigm**

Palindrome wrote:
Paradigm wrote:
They've done zombies, cops and aliens, supers are the next logical step.

The 'Corneto' trilogy is staying a trilogy, They apparently have no interest in making another similar film.

I'm aware, but I live in hope. Perhaps the Magnum trilogy?

**Compel**

Never did like 'The Worlds End' at all.

It wouldn't surprise me if they did find stylistic differences very quickly.

**Paradigm**

Compel wrote:
Never did like 'The Worlds End' at all.

It wouldn't surprise me if they did find stylistic differences very quickly.

No, it certainly wasn't up to the quality of the other two, largely because it abandoned most of the running references/jokes and I couldn't find a likeable character despite the great cast. Still, I think Wright is a good director and it's a shame he's gone on this one.

**Cheesecat**

Flashman wrote:
My problem with Wright is that he was constantly spoofing and referencing other films and TV shows rather than doing his own thing.

I take it you don't like parody then.

**Flashman**

Cheesecat wrote:
Flashman wrote:
My problem with Wright is that he was constantly spoofing and referencing other films and TV shows rather than doing his own thing.

I take it you don't like parody then.

It can be entertaining, but if parody is all you do, you're not really contributing anything of your own creation. Parody The Phantom Menace all you like, but at least George Lucas took the effort to come up with the idea in the first place.

I also concur with the above posts that The World's End wasn't very good.

**Ahtman**

I can't think of any work that doesn't have allusions or references to other works, so it seems a bit of a stretch to call out Wright for this. The Phantom Menace is an homage to old serial film as much as anything Wright has done.

**Flashman**

Ahtman wrote:
I can't think of any work that doesn't have allusions or references to other works, so it seems a bit of a stretch to call out Wright for this. The Phantom Menace is an homage to old serial film as much as anything Wright has done.

I'm talking about direct references/in jokes to other films/TV programmes e.g. the Point Break sequence in Hot Fuzz, the Ming the Merciless sound effect in Scott Pilgrim. Wright's films are peppered with this stuff and I find it a distraction to whatever story he's trying to tell.

As always, YMMV.

**Corpsesarefun**

Have you ever flicked between TV channels and found it happened to make a complete sentence? That's the sort of thing that Edgar Wright is going for; a collage consisting of pop culture scraps that comes together to be a piece of art in its own right.

As well as being a metaphor for his general style, Wright actually uses the channel flicking thing at the start of Shaun of the Dead with various news reports being interspersed by shlock day time television.

**Paradigm**

Corpsesarefun wrote:
Have you ever flicked between TV channels and found it happened to make a complete sentence? That's the sort of thing that Edgar Wright is going for; a collage consisting of pop culture scraps that comes together to be a piece of art in its own right.

As well as being a metaphor for his general style, Wright actually uses the channel flicking thing at the start of Shaun of the Dead with various news reports being interspersed by shlock day time television.

These are two of the reasons I love Wright's style so much. The frequent references are hilarious for the most part, and the montage/flicking/collage scenes are really well done and pretty unique.he may do a Lt of parody, but that doesn't stop him from being a great director.

**Corpsesarefun**

Now that I think about it, Wright's heavy use of jump cuts also fits with the channel flicking motif.

**Compel**

I don't know much about 'Ant-Man' as a concept. But could it be that Marvel decided, "hey, Edgar, have a go at a mostly 'straight' film, but with some humour in it (because, Marvel), but don't go OTT."

Then they decide, "you know what, this didn't work... Sorry mate, you don't fit, good luck for the future though."

**Ahtman**

Flashman wrote:
Ahtman wrote:
I can't think of any work that doesn't have allusions or references to other works, so it seems a bit of a stretch to call out Wright for this. The Phantom Menace is an homage to old serial film as much as anything Wright has done.

I'm talking about direct references/in jokes to other films/TV programmes e.g. the Point Break sequence in Hot Fuzz, the Ming the Merciless sound effect in Scott Pilgrim. Wright's films are peppered with this stuff and I find it a distraction to whatever story he's trying to tell.

It seems your problem is less about things being referenced in one way or another, which almost everything does, but in how specifically Wright goes about it and that it isn't to your particular taste. This, of course, is perfectly reasonable.

**gorgon**

Marvel's exceedingly tight grip on its properties has positives and negatives. Losing a talented director at the last minute over creative differences is clearly a negative. While the split may be somewhat amicable, it's hard to believe Wright would have walked away easily. He's already sunk time into the project, which was going to be his source of income and employment for the next year.

You almost have to wonder how important the directors even are to Marvel if they consider them so plug-and-play that they can have this happen and still keep a July 2015 release date.

Interesting that Whedon didn't stay completely neutral, although his commentary could hardly be described as biting.

http://io9.com/edgar-wrights-ant-man-departure-could-mean-nothing-or-e-1581351233

**Corpsesarefun**

These are Edgar Wright and Joss Whedon's respective tweets after the news broke, somehow I don't get the impression that either of them were glad about the change.

Spoiler:

**Medium of Death**

I still don't know why they're making an Ant Man film. Regardless of the director.

**gorgon**

Medium of Death wrote:
I still don't know why they're making an Ant Man film. Regardless of the director.

Clearly they have confidence in their formula that they can make money from an Ant-Man film...even with a last-minute director change and some lower-level writers reworking the script.

I don't think the concept of oversaturation is remotely on their radar, if that's what you're really asking.

**Frazzled**

I'll be honest. I really want to see the Guardians of the Galaxy now. But thats not being played as a comic book movie. I DId't see winter tailor or whatever it was. I don't even want to see X Men because of the over doing of comic book movies. So far the new Batman/Superman movie looks forgettable as well. I'm just kind of done with comic book movies.

Clearly someone does like them however.

**Ahtman**

gorgon wrote:
I don't think the concept of oversaturation is remotely on their radar, if that's what you're really asking.

That is certainly a problem, but I think Ant-man may be a bit to niche for the public. The only reason I had any interest in the project was Edgar Wright pushing it for it and getting it, which made it at least have the possibility of being an interesting movie. I imagine they are banking on people wanting to see every episode in a "phase" to get butts in the seats.

**Medium of Death**

I'm just surprised we haven't had a new Hulk film with the new guy. I quite liked him in The Avengers.

**Paradigm**

Medium of Death wrote:
I'm just surprised we haven't had a new Hulk film with the new guy. I quite liked him in The Avengers.

Yeah, this is a little strange. They finally get a good actor that really gets the character (the one in the first one was good, but Ruffalo is better) and then don't do a sequel, despite setting up The Leader in the first film. Did The Incredible Hulk not make as much money?

**Frazzled**

Incredible Hulk wasn't the first one.

Hulk was, as well as being a much better movie.

**Paradigm**

Frazzled wrote:
Incredible Hulk wasn't the first one.

Hulk was, as well as being a much better movie.

That wasn't part of the Avengers-verse, though, was it? I though TIH was a reboot rather than a sequel?