The way you people think the movie business works is hysterical
DefNotReaves2025-11-18 19:47
I literally work in the film industry… professionally… as in it’s my career. Wanna tell me more about how “the movie business works” ?? I bet you work at fucking McDonald’s.
EDIT: even worse, you’re an *amateur director* 😂
AStewartR112025-11-18 20:54
You share your studio system link and I'll share mine.
If you work ATL at all, you understand that "I'm stepping away from the project because of creative differences" is what happens at the studio level when you have been fired and they want to allow you to save face. With the exception of Miller & Lord on *Solo*, this is what happens literally every time a name director is fired in prep.
Also, if I pay my mortgage by producing, directing, writing and working as a DP, how do you qualify amateur? What do you do? 2nd AC?
DefNotReaves2025-11-18 20:59
Bro you’re literally begging people online to fill a screening of a movie you made SEVEN YEARS AGO lmao it doesn’t get much sadder than that. I don’t need to see what you’ve made, I have a pretty good idea of your career lol
Marvel/Disney have absolutely zero qualms saying they’ve fired someone, dunno why you think it’d be different here. To assume no one ever actually walks away from something over creative differences just shows how weird and over inflated your own ego is.
DefNotReaves2025-11-18 21:09
Awwh you got shadowbanned. Now I’ll never know what your last comment said! Oh well lol hope your sad little movie you made 7 years ago doesn’t screen to an empty theater.
amosthorribleperson2025-11-18 21:55
Coming from someone who agreed with you initially, this is a really shitty exchange for a stupid internet disagreement. There was no reason for this to get personal, and you both need to grow up.
DefNotReaves2025-11-18 22:34
I truly do not care. His attitude shows what kind of person he is, and they’re a dime a dozen in the industry. I don’t put up with it anymore. You’re allowed to if you wish.
Lol delete your comment and run.
amosthorribleperson2025-11-18 22:51
...You are one of those dozen. How do you not see that? Nevermind, I don't need this lol
joesen_one2025-11-18 04:55
Loved his movies liek Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz and Baby Driver and would've been interesting to see what his Ant-Man would've been. Had fun with The Running Man as well.
VaishakhD2025-11-18 05:05
Crazy Antman went from him to the most cookie cutter director one could think of.
Apoctwist2025-11-21 04:16
They wanted someone who would do what they were told. Wright has his own ideas about what he wanted to do and by the time Ant Man came out Disney wanted to Disney-fi the MCU. They didn’t want something too edgy, the character couldn’t be too bad of a person, the direction needed to follow their house style. The same thing happened with that Han Solo movie. They didn’t want something edgy etching too different so they got the most boring director in the world to take over. Meanwhile the guys who were booted went on to make Into the Spiderverse.
Superawesomecoolman2025-11-18 05:36
I think it worked out for everyone. Ant-man is underrated and I don’t know if it would be the same thing if Edgar directed it.
deathmouse2025-11-18 07:42
I disagree. I like Ant-Man but it’s still a very mid run of the mill marvel movie. Edgar Wright was at his peak back then and I’m certain he would’ve given us something truly original and more noteworthy.
We’ll never know unfortunately…
biskutgoreng2025-11-18 10:27
We'll never get Simon Pegg as ant man
Able_Resident_12912025-11-18 12:35
Not with that negative attitude, no
uberdooober2025-11-18 17:56
I feel like every year me saying that I liked Antman way more than age of ultron alternates between a hot take and a cold take.
NotAStatistic22025-11-18 07:58
I disagree. The first movie was suitable, the second was middling, and the third was dogshit.
Scott Lang was just turned into a generic MCU quip machine. Ant-Man is probably better set up if he started out on better footing
Ghastion2025-11-18 10:28
Ant-Man was good for one watch, but on rewatches it does just feel like another episode of Marvel that never really warrants any further rewatches.
Edgar Wright makes infinitely rewatchable films because they're a unique experience you can only get from watching those films. Even if his films aren't perfect, they still pull you back over time. They stay on your mind. I really can't say that about Ant-Man at all.
Jupiters2025-11-18 17:39
confusing comment. Being underrated worked out for it?
Joshawott272025-11-18 11:10
I totally respect Edgar Wright’s reasons for stepping away. It makes total sense; Marvel Studios was a completely different beast when he first signed on compared to when *Ant-Man* was finally going to be made.
The first *Ant-Man* is one of my favourite MCU movies, and easily the best of the trilogy. I don’t know how much of that was down to Wright, Reed, or even Paul Rudd (I think I recall reading that Louis’ recaps were post-Wright). Nice to hear that there’s no longer bad blood between him and Marvel Studios now.
HereWeFuckingGooo2025-11-18 11:41
It's crazy to think the announcement of him being attached to do Ant-Man happened the same time as the announcement Favreau was going to do Iron Man, back in 2006.
LB3PTMAN2025-11-18 14:17
The first movie had a distinctly Wright like feel and that was lost with 2 and 3 to the movies loss. I would love to be in a universe where he got to make all 3 of them.
Plasticglass4562025-11-18 18:00
Yes, Luis' recaps were one of the additions, and while Michael Pena was cast, his role in the story / gang would have been different. This is all going by interviews around the time when it came out and then later Baby Driver so I may be misremembering stuff, but the Falcon stuff was Adam McKay's idea since he always liked that character. Hope has a larger role in the final film, and the Cure song was Peyton Reed's.
The basic core of the film is all Wright. People forget it actually really came close to shooting. Wright approved the costume, Wright cast Paul Rudd (and Michael Douglas, and Evangeline Lilly, although Patrick Wilson was his Cross), and if you look up "Edgar Wright Ant-Man SDCC 2012," you can see that the visual flourishes and fighting styles and stuff like jumping across the top of a gun were all Wright. I can't say for certain, but stuff like the bathtub scene I'm guessing is incredibly similar to what Wright had in mind.
One neat thing that Kevin Feige said was that in every draft of the script from the earliest Wright days to the final film, the final fight took place on a kid's train set, although early on, they weren't sure if it could legally be Thomas the Tank Engine!
When Wright first left, the biggest differences were rumored to be centered around Scott, who was more of a dick and full-time criminal in his version. Marvel wanted him to be the more loveable, a Robin Hood guy who only stole from a really bad guy that one time, rather than someone whose job is thieving. David Dastmalchian mentioned in a Kevin Smith interview that Wright cast him when he was part of like an 8-10 team that worked for Luis who worked for Scott, then had to reaudition for Reed as part of a newer, smaller crew.
While Wright hasn't gone into specifics, he has said in other interviews that part of why he left the movie is because he was more-or-less fired as a writer but kept as a director. He and Joe Cornish had done several drafts, and Marvel brought in Andrew Barrer and Gabriel Ferrari (who aren't credited on the first film but are on the second) to do a draft, which would be to be the first dramatically soften Scott. Wright said he agreed to at least read it, and then when he read it, left the project.
Different_Engineer562025-11-18 14:02
TiL Feige doesn’t rhyme with “page”
Jupiters2025-11-18 17:40
yes it does. Both are pronounced "Fie-guee" and "Pie-guee"
Spiritual-Map-762025-11-18 20:51
mcu is not the place for truly creative ppl imo.........or even really making different kind of movies the comic books are far more ambitious and often interesting then alot of the movies and most of the shows..
thefantasticfourplay2025-11-19 02:42
It’s interesting how Ragnorak came out after this. Wonder if Taika managed to just pull it off within the framework or if losing an auteur type like Edgar actually made Kevin think and be like, maybe we should let them do their own thing. And then after Love and Thunder decided that, okay maybe not.
RooMan72232025-11-19 22:05
Edgar wright to Peyton Reed was one of the biggest downgrades in cinema
Commentaires
EDIT: even worse, you’re an *amateur director* 😂
If you work ATL at all, you understand that "I'm stepping away from the project because of creative differences" is what happens at the studio level when you have been fired and they want to allow you to save face. With the exception of Miller & Lord on *Solo*, this is what happens literally every time a name director is fired in prep.
Also, if I pay my mortgage by producing, directing, writing and working as a DP, how do you qualify amateur? What do you do? 2nd AC?
Marvel/Disney have absolutely zero qualms saying they’ve fired someone, dunno why you think it’d be different here. To assume no one ever actually walks away from something over creative differences just shows how weird and over inflated your own ego is.
Lol delete your comment and run.
We’ll never know unfortunately…
Scott Lang was just turned into a generic MCU quip machine. Ant-Man is probably better set up if he started out on better footing
Edgar Wright makes infinitely rewatchable films because they're a unique experience you can only get from watching those films. Even if his films aren't perfect, they still pull you back over time. They stay on your mind. I really can't say that about Ant-Man at all.
The first *Ant-Man* is one of my favourite MCU movies, and easily the best of the trilogy. I don’t know how much of that was down to Wright, Reed, or even Paul Rudd (I think I recall reading that Louis’ recaps were post-Wright). Nice to hear that there’s no longer bad blood between him and Marvel Studios now.
The basic core of the film is all Wright. People forget it actually really came close to shooting. Wright approved the costume, Wright cast Paul Rudd (and Michael Douglas, and Evangeline Lilly, although Patrick Wilson was his Cross), and if you look up "Edgar Wright Ant-Man SDCC 2012," you can see that the visual flourishes and fighting styles and stuff like jumping across the top of a gun were all Wright. I can't say for certain, but stuff like the bathtub scene I'm guessing is incredibly similar to what Wright had in mind.
One neat thing that Kevin Feige said was that in every draft of the script from the earliest Wright days to the final film, the final fight took place on a kid's train set, although early on, they weren't sure if it could legally be Thomas the Tank Engine!
When Wright first left, the biggest differences were rumored to be centered around Scott, who was more of a dick and full-time criminal in his version. Marvel wanted him to be the more loveable, a Robin Hood guy who only stole from a really bad guy that one time, rather than someone whose job is thieving. David Dastmalchian mentioned in a Kevin Smith interview that Wright cast him when he was part of like an 8-10 team that worked for Luis who worked for Scott, then had to reaudition for Reed as part of a newer, smaller crew.
While Wright hasn't gone into specifics, he has said in other interviews that part of why he left the movie is because he was more-or-less fired as a writer but kept as a director. He and Joe Cornish had done several drafts, and Marvel brought in Andrew Barrer and Gabriel Ferrari (who aren't credited on the first film but are on the second) to do a draft, which would be to be the first dramatically soften Scott. Wright said he agreed to at least read it, and then when he read it, left the project.