This site will work and look better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

Whedonesque - a community weblog about Joss Whedon
"Strangely fitting in a grotesque fashion."
11945 members | you are not logged in | 30 October 2014




Tweet







May 24 2014

Joss Whedon shows solidarity with Edgar Wright. Joss tweeted a pic of him holding up a Cornetto. Yesterday it was announced that Edgar had parted from the Ant-Man movie.

Someone explain this to me? Please and thank you.
I only watch the Whedon Marvel stuff, not the rest of it, but I would've expected good things of an Ed Wright Ant-Man. Weird decision.
The Edger Wright news is very disappointing.Wright has been developing Ant Man since 2006 before even Iron Man came out.It was part of the slate of the first Marvel Studio movies to get announced with Iron Man and the Hulk film.

It makes you wonder what creative differences came up now for them to part ways right before filming was to start when Kevin Feige and Wright had been working on this for the past 7-8 years.
Lioness, I'm thinking it's like this. "The Three Flavors Cornetto" trilogy refers to Edgar Wright's 3 movies, "Shaun of the Dead," "Hot Fuzz," and "The World's End." In Joss' photo, he's holding up an ice cream cone made by an ice cream co. called Cornetto - hence, a show of solidarity. (According to Wikipedia, the trilogy is also referred to as "The Blood and Ice Cream trilogy" or just "The Cornetto trilogy." And they go on to explain the joke. Search for "Cornetto" if you want to learn more.)
@Buffyfantic: Especially after Marvel already delayed this film to allow Wright to finish other projects (like "The World's End") first.

I think Drew McWeeny's article on HitFix sounds about right. After all the concessions made by both Wright and Marvel, it is pointless to speculate who the "bad guy" is, without more information from the sources. (Which is unlikely to happen, considering the civil silence that followed Petty Jenkins leaving Thor 2.).
Unfortunate for sure - I would have liked to have seen Edgar's vision let loose in a big budget Marvel romp. Of course the Interwebs are in an uproar, as if this has never happened before, most coming down in the "artist got screwed by The Man" camp. Sigh.

Actually the only part that intrigues me is to what extent - if any - this impacts Joss' relationship with Marvel. Is his "solidarity" pic a sign of deeper rifts between Marvel and the creative wing, or is more akin to "sorry it didn't work out" and then on to the working day. Given that Joss' voice has been so evident throughout the MCU I'm crossing my fingers that he sees this through to completion of Avengers 3 / Thanos Showdown before the weight of the machine collapses
The truth - since I don't buy this at all - will eventually have to surface. Or an elaboration at least.
Latino Review has a article that just went up this morning with what they have heard about why this happened..

http://www.latino-review.com/news/exclusive-the-inside-story-on-the-divorce-between-marvel-edgar-wright-over-ant-man
Jocelyn, Thank you. That explains it.
If Joss is publicly showing solidarity with Wright against Marvel... that's not a good sign that things are OK in MCUville.

I have a feeling the story with these movies is going to be "Phase 2 and Fizzle." I certainly have no intention of seeing the Ant-Man movie at this point.

Suits make art worse. Always and without exception.
Suits have been funding art for the last several hundred years. Without them, the public wouldn't have been able to see a large number of acclaimed works of art. Nor would artists have been able to carry out their visions.
We dont know what happened. Assuming that Marvel was at fault is as pointless as assuming it was all Wrights fault. Relationships are complicated. Sometimes things happen. Its not always about the "evil suits not allwing the creative artist to be himself". This is weird, and we know nothing about it.

As for Josses tweet... He knows probably more about what happened than us. He is also part of the creative team behind all of the movies and has worked with Wright at some point and level. Assuming anything at this point, moreso the worst, is just giving in into irrational fear.

But its also worth to consider, just as a posibility, that, like in marriage, sometimes things just dont work out, without a clear villain nor hero needed. Not all divorces are about cheating and hate.
Suits have been funding art for the last several hundred years. Without them, the public wouldn't have been able to see a large number of acclaimed works of art. Nor would artists have been able to carry out their visions.

That's fine, on those occasions when they actually allow the artists to carry out their visions.

Creation is the job of creators.
This is very frustrating. I must have someone to blame. I'm particularly outraged that some of the cast, or Paul Rudd, at least, was keen on the role because of Wright's involvement. It must be very disappointing. I'd prefer that the project be scrapped than for it to be forced out by unenthusiastic people.
We dont really know who the new director is. There is always hope for the new movie. Its a dificult situation, but it worked well enough for Spartacus or Superman II (i know some people dont like Lesters version, but it wasnt a disaster and critically was better received than the first one). Yeah, Kubrick is Kubrick and this ends well one of every twenty times, but there is always hope for the movie itself.

I love Wright, even when i found Scot Pilgrim deeply flawed, and wuld have loved to see his version, but im not gonna condemn the movie without a fair trial.

[ edited by Darkness on 2014-05-24 17:28 ]
I appreciate your optimism, and I too, of course, hope for the best. However, I can't imagine a reputable director taking over at this stage. especially so if they really intend to keep their currently scheduled release date. X-Men 3 had a similar issue and it turned out to be perhaps the most despised movie of the lot (I actually kind of liked it, but mainly because of extremely low expectations, and because of the perfect casting of Kelsey Grammar as Beast. Days of Future Past is fantastic by the way). I guess we'll just have to wait and see on this one.
I'm extremely surprised to learn that they parted ways.

How frustrating, Wright could've been one of the -if not the - only directors to do something really personal with the character.
Maybe it was too personal. If this is the reason, it's all the more disappointing.
I don't know if I should start a new thread for this or not but Latino Review is now reporting Drew Goddard has departed Marvel Studios Daredevil Netflix series

http://www.latino-review.com/news/exclusive-drew-goddard-has-left-marvels-daredevil

They don't give the reason for his departure and unlike with Wright,it's not confirmed but if true,there might be news on Tuesday.

[ edited by Buffyfantic on 2014-05-24 18:34 ]
Sounds like the train is about to leave the station.
I am reading into this that Joss Whedon appreciates the work of Wright and he is sad that Wright will not make the Ant-Man movie.

Wright's distinctive style, best shown in the Cornetto trilogy, might not have worked with the suits at Disney. I suppose he might have been more free to follow his vision if the movie was produced before the Disney take-over, at least I choose to believe so.

Ant-Man stills has a chance of working. I suppose all hands will be on deck and it wouldn't surprise me if Joss Whedon lent a hand repurposing the script. I hope they will not go with a completely different one, because from what little I have gathered, Edgar Wright had created a spectacular movie, gathering two different Ant-Mans and the Wasp in a heist-movie with a twist.

Burning the story, starting a new and finding a new director would mean delaying the movie. Which they may do.

This could turn into an X-men 3 level disaster, but hopefully MCU will take a sad situation and turn into a success story with this property. I firmly believe that Edgar Wright wishes that the Ant-Man movie succeed even though he has felt that he needed to give it up.

I hope this isn't the end of the Ant-Man movie project, even though I was really skeptical at first.
Anyone know how reliable Latino Review is? There is always so much gossip out there .....
"Wright's distinctive style, best shown in the Cornetto trilogy, might not have worked with the suits at Disney."

That explains the creative freedom given to a former Troma creator.
Anyone know how reliable Latino Review is? There is always so much gossip out there .....

Very hit and miss. Over the years they've sometimes posted genuinely huge scoops... and other times they've said the Skrulls were going to be in Avengers. Hard to say.
I give them a bye on the Skrull story, since the comic Chitauri were originally introduced as the Ultimate Universe Skrull.
ImmaDeker - Point taken, but I think James Gunn and Edgar Wright are worlds apart in their artistic visions.

Personally I prefer James Gunn's vision as a movie-maker. Just my opinion. I have no idea why Gunn was a fit for Marvel/Disney and why Wright was not.
I'm very disappointed with the Ant-Man losing Wright. I'm a big MCU-ite at the moment, but with this decision, Marvel would really have to come up with something spectacular to convince me that I want to see this movie.
I love Edgar Wright & can't wait to see what he does next. Ant Man? I'll wait for the reviews.
This may sound horrible, but is Ant-Man even a good idea without Wright? I mean, is this an IP people are clamoring to see?

I know my girlfriend is way more interested in the Wasp. This is the kind of property that outside of comic fans is going to need a hook. Wright was his own hook.

I'm just genuinely curious what's going on over there.
I think almost any idea can be turned into a great and successful movie, including Ant Man. Whether it is or not is almost always a question of execution. I'm sad about Wright but this disagreement could be about more than just whether the movie is good or not. Disney needs a movie that is more than just good. They need it to work with the rest of their multibillion dollar universe, narratively, tonallly, and so on. Indeed, it's probably more important to maintain the integrity of that universe, from Disney's perspective, than it is to have a movie that's hugely successful or well reviewed. If so, I can't fault them for having those priorities, any more than I could fault Wright for not necessarily sharing them.

[ edited by Squishy on 2014-05-25 20:38 ]

[ edited by Squishy on 2014-05-25 20:39 ]
Sure you CAN make an Ant-Man. My point was, is it the best use of your money without that hook? Since they're not using Ant-Man for either the Ultron arc or the founding the Avengers arc, aren't there more marketable characters they can dust of to give a feature film? People know Hawkeye and the Black Widow. Falcon or War Machine could be the first super heros of color for Marvel getting their own film.

That's more my point. Do we need an Ant Man mythos when the reason we were getting one is gone and Marvel already isn't using Hank Pym in any way that ties him historically to the main plot. I have to believe the reason we haven't seen him even as a side character up until this point was because Marvel was developing him with Wright.

[ edited by azzers on 2014-05-25 23:39 ]
"Falcon or War Machine could be the first super heros of color for Marvel getting their own film."

Neither of those names are Blade.

EDIT: Also those choices are terrible because War Machine and Falcon are supporting characters tied to their protagonists/are generic offshoots of their protagonist. Black Widow and Hawkeye would be the better choice for a spin off film, even though both are aggressively boring.

[ edited by ImmaDeker on 2014-05-26 01:17 ]
Blade wasn't a well know character before his movies. A recent interview with someone at Marvel held Blade up as an example of a good property that did well as a movie, even though it wasn't known to the general public.

I think Falcon and Black Widow could both make good movies. I think Ant-Man could also make for a good movie. So established characters don't negate the value of introducing new character, nor vice-versa.

The only one I think wouldn't work is War Machine. You'd have a tough time convincing the public that it isn't just Iron-Man without Tony Stark.
I think if any characters are "aggressively boring," it's Thor or Captain America not Black Widow or Hawkeye. In fact, as far as I'm concerned it was Black Widow that was the true star of CAtWS. And yet I don't know if she or Hawkeye could carry their own movies. It's interesting to note that neither have really been able to sustain a long running comic series, unlike Thor and Cap. (The new Fracton Hawkeye, if it's still going on, May ultimately prove me wrong though.) It's hard to say what makes the kind of character that can sustain their own movie or series. It's not "interestingness" as Thor and Cap prove. And it's not name recognition, as Blade proves (and I hope GotG will prove). I think maybe it's in large part the strength of the core themes behind the characters more than the characters themselves, and a lot turns as well on the supporting characters and villains. But the biggest factor, I still have to think, is not which characters you choose, but the execution.

I think Ant-man could be fabulous, but Wright's departure is a very very bad sign, as it suggests there is no strong shared vision for the film. I bet Paul Rudd and Michael Douglas are pretty bummed right now.
Hell, even now I forget Blade was a Marvel character. Doesn't mean I'm not wrong, but that's kind of my point because I'm far from the 1000th person to forget that. Blade wasn't marketed as a Marvel movie.

Re: Hawkeye and Black Widow - the main issue I think they have is they're both human characters first. You can write compelling plots but since Marvel tends to turn the world on superhuman characters, their arcs are hard to sustain. They're not going to tick the radars of any world stopping villians.

I still think you would get a better movie out of fleshing those two out than you would a guy like Pym. At the end of the day, choosing to do one film negates doing another film at the same time for Marvel. I could be proven wrong but I'm just not seeing the appeal without Wright. He was my appeal for that film.

[ edited by azzers on 2014-05-26 03:39 ]
I'm inclined to agree. I'd be really sad not to see Ant-man and Wasp sometime soon. But I'd rather they wait until they can make a compelling movie than do something lame. I loved Millar's version of them in the Ultimates, but I get the sense that was not anywhere near the direction Wright was going.
Joss should have walked off the Avengers in solidarity and assembled a Serenity sequel.
To be fair, his form of solidarity is tastier.
Ha. Yes indeed.
Emperor Joseph II: My dear young man, don't take it too hard. Your work is ingenious. It's quality work. And there are simply too many notes, that's all. Just cut a few and it will be perfect.

Mozart: Which few did you have in mind, Majesty?

-- "Amadeus"

The "suits" have been at it, since before there were suits.
Ain't ever gonna change.
Great artisans sometimes manage to make art in spite of the dumb.
Would have been happy to see a Wright Ant-man movie but I've also been pretty pleased (enthusiastically so) with the movies Kevin Feige has shepherded through so far. I'll not jump to conclusions or picnic over this.
Emperor Joseph II: My dear young man, don't take it too hard. Your work is ingenious. It's quality work. And there are simply too many notes, that's all. Just cut a few and it will be perfect.

Mozart: Which few did you have in mind, Majesty?


Not that that, or anything like it, ever actually happened. Joseph II admired Mozart's work enormously and provided him with crucial--and steady--financial support.
Suits are always the dreaded suits until someone wants money to make something...

Then they become patrons/partners/investors. :)
for those interested — closely related to Joss' solidarity picture, io9's story on Edgar Wright's brief, quickly retracted "statement" on the matter.
Wow, the person who wrote up that analysis is really reading some tea leaves.

Yeah, it's a meaningful picture. However, I don't think we can say what the meaning is or what the meaning of its retraction is. It could be that Wright took it down because people were reading too much into it.

Until Wright actually says how he feels about what happened, I wish people wouldn't be so quick to put words in his mouth. Even then, there will be the other side of the story. We may never know exactly what happened.
By the way, I think it's worth noting what James Gunn had to say about the situation on Facebook.

"Sometimes you have friends in a relationship. You love each of them dearly as individuals and think they're amazing people. When they talk to you about their troubles, you do everything you can to support them, to keep them together, because if you love them both so much doesn't it make sense they should love each other? But little by little you realize, at heart, they aren't meant to be together - not because there's anything wrong with either of them, but they just don't have personalities that mesh in a comfortable way. They don't make each other happy. Although it's sad to see them split, when they do, you're surprisingly relieved, and excited to see where their lives take them next.
It's easy to try to make one party "right" and another party "wrong" when a breakup happens, but it often isn't that simple. Or perhaps it's even more simple than that - not everyone belongs in a relationship together. It doesn't mean they're not wonderful people.

And that's true of both Edgar Wright and Marvel. One of them isn't a person, but I think you get what I mean."

You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.



joss speaks back home back home back home back home back home