Edgar Wright's 'Ant Man' is coming to theaters November 6, 2015
Surprise: 'Thor: The Darkest World' and 'Guardians of the Galaxy' will be in 3D
Marvel Studios' Ant Man is finally headed to the big screen.
After years of development, a sneak peek of test footage during last July's Comic-Con and general angst among comic fans as to whether Marvel Studios should bring the miniscule hero Ant Man to the big screen, Walt Disney Studios announced this morning that Edgar Wright's "Ant Man" is now officially dated for November 6, 2015.
Baring any unforeseen changes to Marvel's release schedule, "Ant Man" will become the 11th film the Disney division has produced. It will also become the studios second November release after "Thor: The Darkest Journey" takes the plunge on Nov. 8, 2013. Up until now, Marvel has only opened their films in the lucrative summer months. Pitching an established character such as the God of Thunder - an Avenger to boot - in November is one thing. Trying to launch a relatively unknown Marvel character during that time of year will be a unique challenge for the Marvel/Disney marketing team. The studio will no doubt try to lower expectations on this picture's box office potential, but they have two years to hope they can convince Channing Tatum or Brad PItt to play Dr. Hank Pym.
A number of different characters have taken the Ant Man name throughout Marvel's comic book history, but the most famous is Pym. One of the smartest men in the world next to Reed Richards and Tony Stark, Pym develops an application called "Pym particles" which allows for any object or being to be shrunk in size, but still carry the strength of their "original" size. Pym was a founding member of The Avengers that debuted in the Marvel comic book of the same name in September, 1963. Eventually, Pym used his particles to grow to giant size and went by the monikers Giant Man and Goliath. In recent years, he's stuck to his last costumed identity, Yellowjacket, a character which both grows to giant size and shrinks to the size of a, um, wasp or yellowjacket. When Pym took on new costumed identities, he ended up allowing fan favorite Scott Lang to wear the Ant Man costume. A third individual, morally ambiguous Eric O'Grady, used his access as a low level S.H.I.E.L.D. agent to steal an Ant-Man costume (with Pym particles) and use it for his own selfish reasons. It's still unclear which Ant Man Wright plans on using in his new movie.
Wright is currently in production on "The World's End" with longtime collaborators Simon Pegg and Nick Frost. He previously helmed the critically acclaimed "Shaun of the Dead," "Hott Fuzz" and "Scott Pilgrim vs. the World."
Additionally, Disney and Marvel announced what many had already assumed; "Iron Man 3" (May 5, 2013) and the previously mentioned "Thor: The Darkest World" (Nov. 8, 2013) will be in 3D. The studio decidedly did not include the upcoming "Captain America: The Winter Soldier" and "Guardians" in that category although you'd also have to assume they will be available in 3D.
No word yet on who will shrink to ant-size proportions for moviefans over the globe. Do you have any suggestions on who should play Ant-Man? Share your thoughts below.
News From Our Partners
-
The Telefile - The Most Heinous Person on Reality TV This Week
The Telefile - Modern Family: The Best Lines of the Night
The Telefile - Fall TV 2013: What's On When
-
'Frances Ha' Review
'Star Wars: Episode 7′ — The Real Reason J.J. Abrams Left 'Star Trek'
Sega Game Gear Classics Headed to Nintendo 3DS Virtual Console
-
Demi Lovato vs. Perrie Edwards – PopCrush Prom Queen of 2013, Round 3
Justin Bieber vs. Austin Mahone – PopCrush Prom King of 2013, Round 3
Demi Lovato Sings Selena Gomez's Praises [Video]
-
YESSSSSSS...
Who Won 'American Idol' 2013?
The Ultimate Office Blooper Reel
-
Critics Consensus: Star Trek Into Darkness is Certified Fresh
Red Carpet Roundup: Star Trek Into Darkness Edition
Video Interviews with Katie Aselton & Lake Bell of Black Rock
-
How Far Will 'Star Trek Into Darkness' Boldly Go At Box Office?
'Star Trek Into Darkness': The Secret Behind The Mystery Villain
'Pacific Rim' Trailer Surfaces: Watch Now!
-
Watch This: With Beavis And Butt-head Do America, Mike Judge skewered the idiocy of cinematic adventures
Hear This: Destroy This Place shows how press releases can get it right
Cannes Film Festival: Cannes 2013, Day Two: Iranian director Asghar Farhadi chases A Separation with another stunning drama
-
Christopher Nolan for James Bond Movie? Director Allegedly Courted to Direct
Edward Furlong, 'Terminator 2' Star, Arrested Again
Cannes 2013: $1M in Jewelry Stolen at Film Festival
Comments
Option 1
Comment instantly as a guest GuestOption 2
Option 3
Login or create a HitFix account Login SignupIntellectual Ninja
October 15, 2012 at 1:22PM EST Reply to CommentFunny, how in the (mostly) fabricated War on Women, a wife-beating superhero gets a film green-lit, and all of the people up-in-arms about the (mostly) fabricated WoW don't bat an eyelash.
Why am I the only person, it seems, who is upset that a WIFE-BEATING superhero is coming to our screens?
mmcb105 Methinks they probably won't go with that particular take on the character for the movie.
October 15, 2012 at 1:47PM ESTIntellectual Ninja It doesn't matter. I know they're going to sanitize the character, as they did with Tony Stark, but alcoholism is NOT the same as violence against women.
October 15, 2012 at 2:02PM ESTIt just isn't. Maybe I feel so strongly because when I was young, my mother, my brother, and I were terrorized by her second husband in this way, but you shouldn't have to have been a victim of abuse to not like this film being made.
Again... in comics, Hank Pym is a second-rate Reed Richards. It fuels his anger and self-pitying nature. This is his defining character-trait.
It is also the fuel for his abuse against his wife.
I'm sorry... but this is WRONG.
mmcb105 You obviously feel very strongly about this, so please try not to be offended by the position I’m taking. As far as I know, in the comics this behavior was never glorified. In fact, when Pym was abusive it was portrayed as terrible (at least in the bits I have read).
October 15, 2012 at 2:24PM ESTHaving a comic-book character perpetrate vile actions is different than glorifying that action. I think you’d be hard pressed to find someone who read those storylines and then proceeded to abuse their wives and/or children because Hank Pym said it was okay.
Honestly though, if they omit that aspect of the character, then this isn’t really even an issue. Many comic book characters have done and said things during their history that would be considered horrific now. Captain America was blatantly jingoistic patriotic propaganda, racism and sexism was (and in some cases still is) prevalent in comics, etc. (http://www.cracked.com/article_19731_the-7-biggest-dick-moves-in-history-superheroes_p2.html)
Does this mean we should never again make a Superman or Green Lantern comic? No, it simply means that we excise the intolerant aspects of their characters or write them as deep character flaws that other characters severely disagree with. Challenging the archetypical definitions of a hero are nothing new to comics (see Watchmen, The Dark Knight Returns, etc).
Again, I’m in no way trying to minimize how terrible abuse is, because it is quite horrible and indefensible, but there is nothing about making an Ant-Man movie that would promote that kind of behavior either.
Shawn There was only an incident like thiss once..in the ultimate Marvel Universe. I highly doubt that this one small trait is something the CMU will commit too. To say a superhero should'nt be greenlit just because they did one thing, one time in one story is silly. I am very sorry that that happened to you and your family, but superheroes have done some pretty cruel things throughout their history, so should we just ignore it because it will make one person upset? No.
October 15, 2012 at 2:33PM ESTThe comic never once glorified the act of violence against women...so I don't know where that even came from.
Intellectual Ninja
October 15, 2012 at 2:47PM EST Reply to CommentShawn, where or where did I write anything about "glorifying"?
YOUR words, not mine.
You are also mistaken for believing this is a "one-time" thing or just apart of the Ultimate Universe.
I am saying it is wrong to create a film about a superhero who is a wife-beater. It may have been retconned-out here lately, but it was a LARGE PART of who he was for YEARS.
Do some research and see.
And then argue with me some more about how it's okay to create a film featuring a hero who is best known to comic-book readers as a wife-beater.
Because THAT IS how he is best-known.
CaptainCanada There's nothing wrong with adapting the Pym character to film. He has two decades of history prior to that particular Jim Shooter story, which was a single incident, and sporadically referenced afterward. If they don't want to bring up that story, that's it. Every character has bad stories out there, and in this case Pym wasn't even meant to be a hero, so it's not like it was a problematic story in and of itself. It was a problematic direction for his character.
October 15, 2012 at 2:59PM EST
October 15, 2012 at 3:00PM ESTBottom line is that Ant Man is a fictional character who, like most other comics, changes writer and direction regularly. The ant man used by marvel studios cartoon division has always been a fair indicator of where the big screen would land.
Male superheroes fight female heroes all the time and you have no issue with that? Your response will be to tell me that it isnt the same thing, but Janet had fought plenty of men as the wasp and had been fine with her husband's dickish behavior prior. It's comic, even the most sobering attempts at real issues arent worth this much energy when there are real women being abused everyday. Perhaps you should find a better place to direct this passion, let it do some actual good.
Intellectual Ninja Cory, the fact that you equate spousal abuse to the common "superhero fighting" between heroes and villains of different gender show a complete lack of understanding of the heinousness of spousal, or familial abuse.
October 15, 2012 at 3:08PM ESTIt couches your response in ignorance.
Dan IntellectualNinja, you need to chill the fuck out boss. Shawn replied to you in a measured and reasonable way. You're acting like a fucking tool, personal issues or no.
October 15, 2012 at 3:25PM ESTmmcb105 Mostly agreed with Cory here, this isn't how the character is best known. It happened exactly two times (once in regular continuity and then in the Ultimates continuity), and hadn't happened before or since. Its not an ingrained part of the character.
October 15, 2012 at 4:12PM ESTAlso, if you didn't think the comic was a glorification of spousal abuse, then what exactly is your problem with it? Should we never talk about these things ever?
I'll repeat my above comments. Showing something heinous is not in and of itself a bad thing. I think your past has probably colored your opinion on this a little too much, and you're jumping to conclusions that don't really exist.
October 15, 2012 at 4:32PM ESTShawn Intellectual Ninja...like Dan said, I was trying to be measured and reasonable, but now, you can sincerely go fuck yourself.
October 15, 2012 at 9:34PM ESTThe wife-beating thing happened in the Marvel Ultimate Universe and the time in the Earth 616 universe was proven later to be an accident..that's right an accident. So maybe you should do a little more research "intellectual" ninja.
In the case of your argument, should a Wonder Woman movie never be made because she killed one time? Broke the comic book ethics? Hell, in the same story Superman and Batman covered up her murder, SHE murdered, superheroes murdered. So should we shun production of anymore Superman and Batman movies while we are at it?
Should we completely disregard, destroy and discredit the Watchmen film because it had a rape? I can't imagine how survivors cringe everytime they see the horrid act onscreen. So should we take merit away from the movie and the story because it featured superheroes raping superheroes?
Like I said, the trait is soo small in the history of Pym and in this case, kinda dark that I bet they won't even feature it in the cinematic Marvel Universe, but if your so against the character, just do yourself and all of us a favor and JUST DON'T WATCH IT!
and again, go fuck yourself.
Intellectual Ninja Oh, Shawn, profanity is the tool of the unintelligent and ignorant, ESPECIALLY in a forum such as this.
October 15, 2012 at 9:46PM ESTAnd again... if you cannot wrap your pea-sized brain around the difference between two superheroes fighting (regardless of gender) and SPOUSAL ABUSE...
... then I seriously hope you never, ever procreate.
Because your future children are better off as sperm making it's way into a sock than in further adding to the stupidity of the world.
CaptainCanada It's nonsense to suggest that one Jim Shooter story written decades after the character was created means that he is somehow forever tainted or cannot be adapted to film. You simply just don't bring that into the character's film history, adaptations always being selective. Pym has already been featured in multiple animated series, for instance, to no ill effect. The version of Pym people see in the movies will be the defining one for 99% of the population.
October 15, 2012 at 10:03PM ESTmmcb105 Intellectual Ninja - classic "straw-man" argument. You obviously don't have a leg to stand on in your argument about the Hank Pym character being "best-known" for being a wife beater, so you attack unimportant things like profanity.
October 15, 2012 at 10:50PM ESTHow come you haven't responded to any of my posts?
October 16, 2012 at 3:16AM ESTShawn Because you can't seem to understand where myself or the other folks in this forum are coming from, I don't think I am the one with the pea-sized brain. And just because someone uses profanity, doesn't automatically make them ignorant, you have no clue what I have been through as a person, so please don't get all Dr. Phil on me.
October 16, 2012 at 9:03AM ESTMMCB105, he hasn't responded because, like you said, he has no leg to stand on.
I feel Hank Pym is more known for making serums, Ultron, and having a helping hand in cloning a God, but hey, I am an ignorant profanity user, so what the hell do I know?
I'm done with trying to understand this guy, he apprently to caught up in his ways to understand how much sense his argument makes so whatever.
If your going to go your whole life being ignorant creating arguments out of thin air, you probably shouldn't procreate either.
Shawn Oh, and I never once talked about superheroes fighting...I talked about superheroes MURDERING AND RAPING. Big difference. Another good reason to add to the list of why you sir, should never have children, they'll grow up not being able to read.
October 16, 2012 at 9:05AM ESTMojo CoCo
October 15, 2012 at 2:48PM EST Reply to CommentI prefer the deadpool pronunciation Pimp Articles.
Not sure I care about thor being in 3d, I saw the first in 2d bc I didnt want the darkening to ruin Asgard's visuals
October 15, 2012 at 4:34PM ESTMario
October 15, 2012 at 4:24PM EST Reply to CommentWhat's the name of Thor's movie again? "Thor: The Darkest of the World Journeys"? I thought it was only "The Dark World".
October 15, 2012 at 4:33PM ESTChuckCobra
October 15, 2012 at 7:24PM EST Reply to CommentYou are aware that it is a comic book and not real right? If they were casting an actor who beat his wife then yeah I would be upset that they were condoning this behavior. But one single writer had a FICTIONAL character hit his wife. It was a story. Something that can be written out of the movie. The character isn't at fault here. He isn't REAL and he literally had no control of his actions. It's the writers who wrote it MANY years ago. And the new writers will most def not be putting that into the movie. The superhero wasn't a wife beater in his original incarnation. So don't blame him.
Shawn Thank you
October 15, 2012 at 9:36PM EST