I'll be happy if it all leads up to Ant-Man (Scott Lang) and Wasp (whoever she is) becoming Avengers.
Last edited:
Ant-Man: Info, Pics, Rumors, Casting and Details till release
- Thread starter Captain Craig
- Start date
I actually like that it keeps the door open for a 60s-70s "Ant-Man and the Wasp" period piece (ala the 40s set "Agent Carter") featuring the adventures a younger (and recast) Hank Pym and Janet Van Dyne.
I actually like that it keeps the door open for a 60s-70s "Ant-Man and the Wasp" period piece (ala the 40s set "Agent Carter") featuring the adventures a younger (and recast) Hank Pym and Janet Van Dyne.
Yeah, if that's what they do, that's fine with me.
I sort of wonder if the Hank Pym, wife-beater, stories (esp. the Ultimates) didn't poison that particular character for the studio.
yeah, i realize Pym's still in the movie but having him as a supporting character is less risky for your multimillion dollar movie than the potential bad publicity when Fox, MSNBC or someone else decides to gin up a phony controversy about how Marvel's latest movie is the story of a wife-beating superhero.
Remember, this is the same mass media that seems to believe each and every story where a main comic book character dies is permanent, doesn't know the difference between Ultimate Spiderman and 616 Spiderman and still occasionally leads off stories with sound effects from the old Batman TV show.
Given all that, I can see Disney executives being very, very, hesitant to take the chance on a Hank Pym Ant-man.
^ Probably.
I think it's likely that the reason Pym's daughter has that name is that her mother is Janet, and there's likely a divorce involved. A similar incident may be part of this Pym's distant backstory.
I recognized that as a possibility too, right away. But since we've gotten confirmation on the other characters, it would be nice to have that for Janet too.
She might not be a physical presence in the film, just a piece of backstory.
I do think Pym's role will be quite prominent (closer to co-star than supporting character, even if the story's not told from his perspective), however, I agree - his demons are in the past. That being said, Kevin Feige seemed to suggest that Pym's more questionable moments (the Janet slapping incident) won't be part of his movie character. I tend to agree with what Lucas and Spielberg said when making Raiders of the Lost Ark. It's much easier to forgive a character for things we're told they did in the past than things we see when on screen. It's enough that his life has changed since that time and he's working to make up for it.
No matter what, Hank Pym's struggles with mental illness (bipolar disorder, iirc) is something that should be addressed at some point. It's something that humanizes the character. More importantly, it distinguishes his "disability" from that of Matt Murdock's, which, half the time, is portrayed as really an advantage. For Hank Pym, it's just something he has to live with in addition to all the challenges of being a superhero.
Great take on it, Alidar Jarok.
Well, like I said, many of the more extreme aspects are not going to part of the character at all, according to Feige. I'm hoping that some aspects of Pym's manic-depressive behavior is referenced (the extreme genius moments that led to the discovery of Pym particles, but also the depressive moments that possibly drove away his family). In other words, I don't want things too Pollyanna. Like you, I agree that placing this into a non-lead is helpful (although Stark in Iron Man 2 shows it's possible to keep it with the lead). I think having it take place in the past is another way to do it. Given this, they shouldn't completely shy away from exploring this aspect of the character.
Yeah, I think we're more in agreement than disagreement here. My only point was, basically, that given Hank's rep as the wife-beater of the Marvel U I don't think Disney was going to risk the bad PR of using him as the main character even if that aspect isn't in the movie.
Hank was a wife-beater in the comics? So what? Jimmy Olsen was a giant turtle boy in the comics, but that's ignored by the movies and TV.
I'm not so much concerned about continuity for the sake of continuity as I am about there being a rare opportunity here in comic book adaptation to show superheroes coping with personal demons that many people in the real world have to deal with. More people IRL have to cope with domestic abuse than have to cope with the fallout of having been turned into a giant turtle.
Such storylines might be better material for a superhero TV series. Ant-Man doesn't need this kind of baggage in a big summer movie.
I agree. And Gwen Stacy should never have been killed off in either the comic books or this year's The Amazing Spider-Man 2. Now that franchise is sinking before our eyes.
Yeah, I think it would make the character more interesting to not be afraid to embrace it. I'm saying this as someone who fully realizes that it's unfair to Ant-Man. It started as a simple panel where the direction was for Pym to just slap her. But the comicbook mantra of the time is don't do an action unless it's a big action, so that slap was drawn as knocking her completely off her feet.
Hank Pym wasn't the only one to slap a girlfriend in the comics. Matt Murdock has done it on occasion too (I want to say Heather Glenn, but I can't recall for certain). He somehow managed to avoid this label. So, if Hank Pym were a real person, I would say it was unfair to him. But he's not, he's a story character and, like it or not, other writers have chosen to explore this moment. I think that's a positive opportunity for more character development in the true Marvel fashion.
