Paul Rudd is Ant-Man 1 1

[revat]

Once Ant-Man hits Video on On demand, it'll grow it's audience. A sequel,I would imagine, would have a bigger domestic B.O. just on that fact alone. I don't think thats in Marvel's plans though looking at it's future releases.

 

I agree, I think they've accomplished their goal. Make a bit of money, keep the marvel name out there, have a bit of fun, and introduce two new viable characters to the MCU before Civil War. As an added bonus, they get their shrinking hero out there before ATOM does any serious shrinking for DC. DOne and done.

[Gatsby77]

Why not? They haven't announced an Ant-Man 2 one way or the other.

 

They can easily plop it in among the already-announced flicks.

 

I'm also wondering, though, whether the Netflix Marvel might intersect with future films. I know network TV is separate from the shared movie universe, but I'm not sure that's true for Netflix, as I believe Charlie Cox & Vincent Donofrio have film clauses in their contracts.

 

I'd love to see Paul Rudd guest star on Daredevil and/or The Defenders, just as I'd love to see Cox and Donofrio on the big screen at some point.

[Unca Ben]

Once Ant-Man hits Video on On demand, it'll grow it's audience. A sequel,I would imagine, would have a bigger domestic B.O. just on that fact alone. I don't think thats in Marvel's plans though looking at it's future releases.

 

I agree, I think they've accomplished their goal. Make a bit of money, keep the marvel name out there, have a bit of fun, and introduce two new viable characters to the MCU before Civil War. As an added bonus, they get their shrinking hero out there before ATOM does any serious shrinking for DC. DOne and done.

 

IIRC, the filmmakers said introducing Pym technology and the Microverse in Ant-Man was laying the groundwork for some pivotal plot points in phase 3 of the Marvel Studios movies.

[TheLiamSturgess]

Why not? They haven't announced an Ant-Man 2 one way or the other.

 

They can easily plop it in among the already-announced flicks.

 

I'm also wondering, though, whether the Netflix Marvel might intersect with future films. I know network TV is separate from the shared movie universe, but I'm not sure that's true for Netflix, as I believe Charlie Cox & Vincent Donofrio have film clauses in their contracts.

 

I'd love to see Paul Rudd guest star on Daredevil and/or The Defenders, just as I'd love to see Cox and Donofrio on the big screen at some point.

 

I don't think that's entirely true about network TV - AoS and Agent Carter are both MCU-canon productions, equally as involved as DD. I wouldn't be surprised if there's at least a nod to the Secret Warriors by the time Infinity War comes around, as it would appear Marvel is ramping up to rope everyone in.

 

Netflix and their movie options have more or less confirmed that; AoS, I'm just speculating.

 

I would LOVE some lower-budget feature films on Netflix, though. I think Ant-Man is great for that, though he might eclipse the Netflix budget standard.

[kimik]

Here is what I find fascinating. Yes, these big budget movies make big money. But when you look at the investment versus the return in percentages, these movies are not necessarily the best ROI for studios. Not even close.

 

Paper Towns cost $12 million. It is already at $49 million worldwide or 4x budget in only it's second week and that is with a huge drop off. Pitch Perfect 2 cost $29 million. It made $282 million worldwide or close to 10x budget. Fifty Shades of Grey cost $40 million. It made $569 million or a whopping 14x budget and this was a movie that was derided.

 

I get it that the monetary return on the big budget movies is greater than these lower budget movies. But when you look at the risk involved, I wonder why a studio would be willing to lay out so much money? Disney has had its share of flops in the past (Lone Ranger and John Carter come to mind) and those have to hurt regardless of how well your other movies do. MGM went bankrupt due in no small part to expensive films. I know Lucas and Spielberg have both mentioned this current trend of ever bigger budgets is very risky and they are predicting an implosion.

 

I would hate to see these comic book movies be the catalyst for such an event.

 

Sorry, just realized this is not necessarily pertinent to the topic. Ant Man's budget of $120 million is huge compared to most movies, although modest when compared to other big budget movies (Avengers AOU cost $250 million.) It seems like with more practical effects and less special effects you could greatly reduce some of these movie budgets. Honestly, I'd love a superhero movie that gets you invested in the character emotionally. These current movies are all action but no heart. Is it impossible to deliver the action but also make the audience feel for the characters? I'm guessing a director is good at one or the other, but not both. And because of the nature of the source material, superhero movies are stuck with the action focused directors. GOTG delivered on both, but that movie is a standout in an otherwise paint by the numbers run of superhero movies.

 

Ant Man held up pretty well against Mission Impossible this weekend. Next up is Fantastic Four.

Merchandising is were these super hero movies make their money as well.

Ant-Man is a brand now which can be sold on anything, while Paper Towns only has going for is it`s box office.

Ant-Man will probably sell additional millions in merchandise over the years, while Paper Towns is a one trick pony.

 

How much do films like this make from product placement/advertising in the movie as well?

[rjrjr]

Here is what I find fascinating. Yes, these big budget movies make big money. But when you look at the investment versus the return in percentages, these movies are not necessarily the best ROI for studios. Not even close.

 

Paper Towns cost $12 million. It is already at $49 million worldwide or 4x budget in only it's second week and that is with a huge drop off. Pitch Perfect 2 cost $29 million. It made $282 million worldwide or close to 10x budget. Fifty Shades of Grey cost $40 million. It made $569 million or a whopping 14x budget and this was a movie that was derided.

 

I get it that the monetary return on the big budget movies is greater than these lower budget movies. But when you look at the risk involved, I wonder why a studio would be willing to lay out so much money? Disney has had its share of flops in the past (Lone Ranger and John Carter come to mind) and those have to hurt regardless of how well your other movies do. MGM went bankrupt due in no small part to expensive films. I know Lucas and Spielberg have both mentioned this current trend of ever bigger budgets is very risky and they are predicting an implosion.

 

I would hate to see these comic book movies be the catalyst for such an event.

 

Sorry, just realized this is not necessarily pertinent to the topic. Ant Man's budget of $120 million is huge compared to most movies, although modest when compared to other big budget movies (Avengers AOU cost $250 million.) It seems like with more practical effects and less special effects you could greatly reduce some of these movie budgets. Honestly, I'd love a superhero movie that gets you invested in the character emotionally. These current movies are all action but no heart. Is it impossible to deliver the action but also make the audience feel for the characters? I'm guessing a director is good at one or the other, but not both. And because of the nature of the source material, superhero movies are stuck with the action focused directors. GOTG delivered on both, but that movie is a standout in an otherwise paint by the numbers run of superhero movies.

 

Ant Man held up pretty well against Mission Impossible this weekend. Next up is Fantastic Four.

Merchandising is were these super hero movies make their money as well.

Ant-Man is a brand now which can be sold on anything, while Paper Towns only has going for is it`s box office.

Ant-Man will probably sell additional millions in merchandise over the years, while Paper Towns is a one trick pony.

 

How much do films like this make from product placement/advertising in the movie as well?

 

I'll bet they make pretty good money for the product placement. Does anyone know how much? I would be interested in seeing those numbers.

 

How much do movies like this cost in advertising. I saw zero commercials for Paper Towns. Before Ant Man and Jurassic Park came out, it seemed like every commercial break had an ad for those movies. And I saw those ad across a wide number of channels. How much does the movie producer spend on advertising these blockbusters? More than those rinky dink movies that make 10x or more their cost. And those are numbers that are not part of the production budget. We use to see those numbers on Box Office Mojo, but lately I haven't seen them.

Edited August 4, 2015 by rjrjr

[gadzukes]

 

 

 

How much do films like this make from product placement/advertising in the movie as well?

 

I wonder if the creators of Thomas the Train had to pay for him to be used in the movie or if Marvel had to pay them. That was a lot of Publicity for Thomas.

[Prince Namor]

 

 

 

How much do films like this make from product placement/advertising in the movie as well?

 

I wonder if the creators of Thomas the Train had to pay for him to be used in the movie or if Marvel had to pay them. That was a lot of Publicity for Thomas.

 

They paid Marvel.

 

Marvel could've made up their own toy train line for the movie.

[Ant-Man]

[50 CENT LONG BOX]

I finally saw this movie. I liked it!

 

Had a good old Marvel feel to the characters. That's the key to this one. Not massive fights, world ending armies, or super God-like aliens. Just a guy with good intentions you are pulling for.

[Artboy99]

I finally saw this movie. I liked it!

 

Had a good old Marvel feel to the characters. That's the key to this one. Not massive fights, world ending armies, or super God-like aliens. Just a guy with good intentions you are pulling for.

 

(thumbs u

[Captain_Pike]

Saw the movie yesterday...I really enjoyed it.

I especially liked Michael Pena's two telephone sequences.

Funny stuff.

 

[Bosco685]

 

 

[kdoginohio]

Saw it. Enjoyed it. Couple of gripes, but what else is new? I think being truer to the Scott Lang story from Marvel Premiere would have been better. Also, they couldn't get someone else on Avenger's perimeter duty? Sheesh! The fate of the original Wasp leaves so many possibilities in the future. The FF, Micronauts, even Dr. Strange. Maybe Netflix could run with this as a show. All in all, it was nice to see Hank Pym after all the shafting from Marvel in past movies.

[Hawkman]

just saw it today. very fun movie, no major gripes, tho it would be nice if there was any kind of extended cut on the dvd release.

[paperheart]

Ant-man probably benefiting from FF debacle. Hanging on nicely this weekend. $165mm seems doable now.

[Hawkman]

this article from D.O.G. does a really good job of breaking down which elements may have started as Wrights and which started as Reeds...

 

"Which parts of Ant-Man are Peyton Reed's, and which are down to Edgar Wright? We've been taking a look...

 

This article contains major spoilers for Ant-Man.

 

When Edgar Wright departed Marvel Studios’ Ant-Man project after years of work, there was no shortage of internet outrage on the matter. When Peyton Reed of Yes Man and Bring It On stepped in to direct the film, he signed up for a hell of a lot of scrutiny.

 

The finished film has garnered plenty of positive reviews, though, and its opening weekend at the box office has proven the film to be a hit (although a smaller one by Marvel standards). One question remains, though – how would Edgar Wright’s version have been different to Peyton Reed’s completed film?

 

Here’s our breakdown of what elements came from which director’s tenure at the helm, from what we've managed to gleam.

 

 

 

 

CONCEPT:

 

Just how massive were the post-Edgar Wright Ant-Man rewrites? Did they rejig the entire story? Well, it would seem that the central ‘spine’ of the movie came from Wright’s initial -script drafts with Joe Cornish.

 

According to a detailed article from the fine folk at io9, here’s some insight about Reed’s thoughts on the original draft:

 

"Reed described Edgar Wright and Joe Cornish’s original Ant-Man -script as the 'spine' of the final movie. 'It’s a heist movie, and it is sort of the passing the torch from Hank to Scott', he said. 'It’s this kind of bent mentor/pupil story'. But tonally, he says, the movie changed once the directors changed and Rudd and Adam McKay started reworking the -script."

 

Conclusion: it’s unclear exactly what these ‘tonal’ changes were, but the decision to focus the film on Hank passing the Ant-Man torch to Scott via a heist movie structure came from Wright and Cornish.

 

 

 

 

 

CASTING:

 

Peyton Reed came on board with Ant-Man without much time before production properly began. It shouldn’t come as a huge surprise, then, that the big casting decisions were already made. Indeed, you may remember that Rudd and Douglas were already cast when Reed joined up.

 

Another quote from the io9 article here: "Wright has had another, immense contribution to the final movie: He cast the main characters. 'I mean we’ve cast additional actors since then', Reed said, 'but the core group are just beautifully cast. Like, to me, to me Hank Pym is one of the most compelling characters in the Marvel comics world and to have Michael Douglas play that guy where there’s just clearly a huge, grey area in this guy and... sometimes, with that character, you wonder if he’s sane. That’s perfect casting to me'".

 

Conclusion: The big names were Wright, some more recent additions were Reed.

 

 

 

 

DESIGN:

 

The visual world of Ant-Man treads a lot of entirely original ground for a Marvel movie. In our own interview with Peyton Reed, he confirmed that his own visual flourishes and ideas definitely helped shape the design of certain elements.

 

“When I came on, Shepherd Frankel became the production designer,” Reed told us. ”So, Shepherd and I worked really closely and designed. He designed all the Pym Tech stuff, all that stuff.”

 

“Russell Carpenter, the cinematographer, I brought on to the movie. Russell was someone I’d wanted to work with for a long time,” he added. “He was really into… like, I said ‘the shrinking stuff has to look as photorealistic as possible’… and we talked about macrophotography and all that stuff.”

 

Peyton Reed was present when the core designs for Pym Tech and the visual world were being developed, then. However, It would be remiss not to mention that Edgar Wright’s test footage from 2012 featured an Ant-Man suit and a visual style to the miniaturisation that was definitely reflected in the finished product.

 

Conclusion: A bit of both - Edgar’s early footage clearly had an influence, but it sounds like Peyton Reed was involved in the core discussions of Pym Tech design and creating the visual style of the shrunken-perspective environments.

 

 

 

SCORE:

 

Ant-Man has a memorable score that blends jazzy, heist-y motifs with a more classic superhero sound. And, as he mentioned when he spoke to him, Peyton Reed was directly involved at that stage of production.

 

"Then, you know, Christophe Beck did the score for the movie - who I’d worked with on Bring It On, my first movie", Reed explained. "And I wanted a theme. I wanted a recognisable superhero theme. To me, it felt like a long time since I was a kid and Richard Donner’s Superman: The Movie had that, such an identifiable John Williams theme."

 

"And Chris, I felt like, just knocked it out of the park. And it’s a jazzy thing, and it has a very heist-y feel to it as well," he elaborated.

 

Conclusion: Peyton Reed all the way on this one. Christophe Beck wasn’t involved until Reed came on board.

 

 

 

 

CHARACTER DEPTH:

 

Hope van Dyne, as played by Evangeline Lilly, has a sizeable part to play in the finished film. She teaches Scott to punch, helps with all the missions and pops up during the credits, too.

 

Apparently, some of this came from Adam McKay and Paul Rudd’s post-Wright-departure rewrites. Here's what io9 uncovered.

 

"Lilly explained that she approached Rudd while he and McKay were working on their draft and asked 'hey, why don’t you beef up my character?' The result is that Hope gets a larger arc in Reed’s movie, along with some 'physical stuff' that wasn’t in the Wright and Cornish draft."

 

Corey Stoll’s Yellowjacket is a less fully-fleshed-out character. Regardless, Stoll told io9 that his character was ‘pushed’ and ‘deepened’ by the post-Wright drafts.

 

Conclusion: Wright first introduced the characters, but it sounds like McKay and Rudd’s Reed-era re-writes certainly promoted at least one character..

 

 

 

 

The QUANTUM REALM:

 

The Quantum Realm (known as the Microverse in the comics) is the scary Interstellar-ending-alike trippy tiny world where Paul Rudd’s Scott gets stuck in the film’s third act. When he ‘goes subatomic’ in a bid to defeat Yellowjacket he ends up in The Quantum Realm, perpetually shrinking until he uses his noggin to find a way out. Peyton Reed told Uproxx how this idea came to be in the film:

 

"Well, I came on about the same time that Adam McKay and Rudd were doing rewrites. And I’ve known McKay for some time and we talked on the phone and we were both really jazzed about the idea of, in the third act, in a movie in which we will have seen shrinking a bunch, let’s take it even further in the third act and introduce what, in the comics, was the Microverse, in what we call The Quantum Realm."

 

Reed went on to mention that "creating this moment of self-sacrifice where he has to go into the quantum realm to save his daughter, that was something that was never in those drafts that Adam and I brought to it".

 

"It owes a little bit to 2001," Reed explained, "and then there’s a The Twilight Zone episode that Richard Matheson wrote called Little Girl Lost, where a little girl sort of falls into the wall. Something opens up and she’s in this whole other dimension. And it freaked me out as a kid, and I love the idea, so we did an inverse version of that where the dad is now in there and the daughter is back in reality."

 

Conclusion: Mark this one in the Peyton Reed column. The Quantum Realm – and the stunning visual sequence it enables – only came about thanks to Reed and Adam McKay’s discussions.

 

 

 

 

FALCON FISTICUFFS:

 

In Ant-Man, Paul Rudd’s Scott goes on a mission to steal a vital piece of tech from an old Stark warehouse. But it turns out that it’s an Avengers Facility now and Anthony Mackie’s Falcon is on guard duty today.

 

Then follows some in-flight fighting with some miniaturisation thrown in, too. It’s a fun sequence, but one that jars a little due to its blatant nods and winks to fans of the wider Marvel cinematic universe. Most people would probably guess that this one wasn’t Edgar Wright’s idea, and they’d be right.

 

"Adam came up with the idea that in every heist movie, there’s a trial by fire and they’ve got everything in line for the heist, but we need this one thing," Reed told Uproxx.

 

"Adam pitched that idea of sending Scott on a mission for which he’s not quite prepared and he comes up against another Marvel character. That blew my mind, and particularity with that specific character ," he added.

 

Speaking of his own opinions on the scene, Reed said: "that, to me, worked in a really organic way. It wasn’t like 'oh, let’s put him up against this other guy'. It served a plot point; a purpose in our story."

 

Conclusion: Adam McKay and Peyton Reed came up with this idea, resulting in a scene that has split opinion down the middle, it would seem.

 

 

 

 

MICHAEL PEñA’s tips:

 

Here’s one that surprised this writer. Remember those two scenes where Michael Peña’s Luis told hilariously elongated stories before getting to a fairly simple point? They garner some of the biggest laughs in the film.

 

Well, here’s what Peyton Reed told Uproxx about them. "The other things that we really brought to it, when we started working with Michael Peña, if Scott’s going to make this decision to turn back to a life of crime and comes in and says ‘tell me about that tip,’ I love the idea of we created these ‘tip montages'".

 

"That was something that never existed in the original drafts", Reed confirmed, "and I wanted to bring to it. And the production writers at the time, Andrew Barrer and Gabriel Ferrari, had been working with Paul, so they wrote those tip montages, which we then reprise at the end to tee up how the movie ends."

 

Thus, some of the most off-the-wall humour in the film came from Andrew Barrer and Gabriel Ferrari’s drafts, under the stewardship of Peyton Reed and Paul Rudd. While these knowing cutaway gags initially seem like pure Edgar Wright, they actually came into the -script a long time after his departure. We can assume, then, that Wright’s Stan Lee cameo (if he had one in mind) would have come at a different point, too.

 

Conclusion: Peyton Reed all the way, with the actual lines written by Andrew Barrer and Gabriel Ferrari.

 

 

 

 

MID-CREDITS STING:

 

As you know, Ant-Man has two credits stings. The mid-credits scene sees Evangeline Lilly’s Hope van Dyne finally get offered a chance to suit up. After a whole film’s worth of being held back by her worrywart father, she’s set to fulfil her destiny and become Wasp.

 

If you were looking to guess which bits were studio mandates, this scene may seem like a late-in-the-day Marvel Studios shoehorn jobbie. However, it was actually in the -script from the start.

 

"It was really always planned to be at the end of this movie," Peyton Reed told us. "Her arc is every bit as important as Scott’s arc in this movie, and this movie is about the formation of her as a hero, as much as it is to Scott. And that was important, to have in the movie."

 

Conclusion: Edgar Wright’s tenure by the sounds of it. The idea certainly predates Reed’s involvement.

 

 

 

 

POST-CREDITS STING:

 

Ant-Man’s post-credits scene features Anthony Mackie’s Falcon and Chris Evans’ Captain America debating what to do with a newly-found Bucky. Seeing as Falcon says "I know a guy" (a direct call-back to a Michael Douglas line from earlier in the film), you might initially think this scene was written exclusively for Ant-Man.

 

It’s actually not. The scene is from the Russo brothers’ Captain America: Civil War, due out next year. Reed told us how the scene came to be at the end of the Ant-Man credits. "These dailies came down, and Kevin said ‘come look at this stuff, look at this exchange – it’s interesting,’ and it feels like closure to what’s happening between those characters in our movie. And I love the idea, because I love that it ends with Mackie saying ‘I know a guy’ and then BOOM ‘Ant-Man will return,’ James Bond style, you know?"

 

So, the second sting wasn’t added until late in the day, and the idea for it came down directly from studio boss Kevin Feige.

 

Conclusion: Reed’s tenure, Feige’s initial idea, Russo brothers’ scene. Simple.

 

 

 

[Bosco685]

[gadzukes]

With everyone focusing on the FF movie debacle, has anyone been checking to see that Antman is actually doing really well?

 

I was thinking Antman would end up domestically in the mid $150mils but now it's looking like it'll make the mid $160mils. That's a big differrence.

[kimik]

It seems to be petering out, but if it can hit $400M worldwide it should be considered a very nice win for Marvel studios.