Editorial: Why Marvel must promote one of their One-shot directors and stay the course with Ant Man

Editorial:  Why Marvel must promote one of their One-shot directors and stay the course with Ant Man

Some people are suggesting that Marvel abandon their Ant Man production, which is eight-years in the making, and surely tens of millions sank into development and pre-production, and is meant to be aimed at the ambitious release date of July 17, 2015.

Editorial Opinion
By AwesomePromoz - Jun 06, 2014 04:06 PM EST
Filed Under: Marvel Comics
Source: MTV Movies
MTV asked 22 Jump Street directors Phil Lord and Chris Miller, who explained why they would never take the gig:  “It seems like a tough person’s shoes to step into, you know what I mean?” Miller said on the prospect. “It’s tough to have that as the specter hanging over, what would have been, and what could have been. It seems kind of tough.”

That said, abandoning the show now would be absolute insanity, and here is why:

An important question to consider is how devastating a loss Marvel have suffered with Wright's departure.  I say it's very devastating.  Wright is the mastermind and the heart and soul of the film.  It has lived in his mind for years, percolating and taking shape, until it finally poured out into a screenplay which has been gathering buzz around Hollywood since its first reveal.  But at a studio with a track record and a penchant for ensemble film-making such as Marvel, where handing off a film from one director to another is not unprecedented, Wright's loss may not be all-condemning.



Movies like this don't just pop out of a box.  Years of development and pre-visualization go into big budget action movies of this scale, and all of that work costs money for wages and materials.  Who has seen a DVD documentary for a film such as one of Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings epics or one of the Star Wars prequels.  One description of Jackson's process reads, "Pre-production is a key part in any film and for Lord of the Rings Pre Production started very early; Jackson began storyboarding the trilogy with Christian Rivers in August 1997.  This was 4 years before its release to the cinema showing how large of a production the first film would be and the enormous amounts of effort that were put into it."  What I'm saying here is that with countless hours and millions invested in pre-vis, you don't just pull the plug on the film; that would be a nightmare. You must assess your strengths and build on those.

The fact remains that the Star Wars prequels and LOTR films were still very much auteur-driven projects, and utterly dependent on their producer-directors to exist.  Marvel films are not like this, and that is the reason for the question mark over Wright's head throughout the life of the piece.  How was it going to work?  It can't, and now we understand that.  But where does Marvel go from here?

What is indelible and empirically true is that Marvel still has something very good going for it:  it has an excellent script by Edgar Wright.  Sure they are probably giving it the ol' Marvel once-over as we speak, trying to wedge in Avenger cameos and easter eggs that tie the shared universe together; isn't that what we love about Marvel Cinematic Universe stuff?  But the script, the script is their biggest strength.  It's the thing that Edgar Wright cannot take with him.

Let me now cite an example of a film that didn't even have the advantage of a script, but went on to greatness because of the strength of its star, Russell Crowe.  Describing the filming of Gladiator, Crowe says, "I read the script and it was substantially underdone. Even the character didn't exist on the pages. And that set about a long process, that's probably the first time that I've been in a situation where the script wasn't a complete done deal. We actually started shooting with about 32 pages and went through them in the first couple of weeks."  Gladiator took about 20 weeks to film, and most of that was without a script, and yet that film went on to win Best Picture at the Oscars.  Certainly Ridley Scott was a huge reason that film gelled, but at least the incoming Ant Man director has the advantage of an excellent script to massage and improvise upon.

So what do I advise?  Marvel need to stop wasting time searching for a comedic director to take over Wright's piece, and instead promote a company man to step up and approximate the film they were already making.  They have these directors on staff already.  One is Louis D'Esposito, a Marvel mainstay, who has directed Marvel's One-shots, Item 47, and Agent Carter, both of which have inspired fully picked-up TV series for ABC in Agents of SHIELD and Agent Carter.  Surely Louis could step up and direct this film, knowing that the numerous hours of pre-vis are there for the effect folks to follow; he has likely been involved first-hand in much of that work as is.

But I don't think D'esposito is even Marvel's best bet.  Marvel have an ace up their sleeve who is actually so similar to Edgar Wright, you'd almost think he could ghost direct the film as well as, if not better than the Cornetto-peddling brit.  The man I'm suggesting is Drew Pearce, a fellow brit, who has a highly regarded track record at Marvel including the Iron Man 3 and Runaways scripts, and the popular One-Shot All Hail The King.  Pearce is also lauded for uncredited script polishes on Pacific Rim and Godzilla.  

But the credit that most favorably compares Pearce to Wright is his acclaimed superhero mini-series No Heroics.  Watch this trailer to see how Pearce incorporates parody, comedy, and superhero tropes into a fun and Marvel-esque tone:



Pearce is currently working on the next Mission: Impossible script, but surely the possibility exists of sharing that duty, or directing duties with D'esposito, and getting this film made.  Pearce and Wright are even familiar with each other, frequently tweeting to one another, and surely Wright would be merely a phone call away at any time to support his compatriot and former passion-project.  

I'm not the first writer to link Pearce to this job, but I really want to get this idea out there and end the speculation that the film is on the ropes.  All the groundwork is in place, it would be crazy to waste it.  Marvel has put their trust that the star of the movie is Ant Man: it's now time for Marvel to prove that they are in charge of their own show by trusting their staff and promoting from within.


This is a touchie subject in Comicbookmovie.com land so lets get this conversation going by sharing your opinions in the forum below. 

Also please click "Thumbs up" below and see if we can get a really wild discussion happening. 

Please Like and Tweet this article to help spread the message of Comicbookmovie.com around the web.

Excelsior!

STORM Battles The Marvel Universe's First Thunder God In First Look At This Summer's THUNDER WAR Event
Related:

STORM Battles The Marvel Universe's First Thunder God In First Look At This Summer's THUNDER WAR Event

MARVEL KNIGHTS: THE WORLD TO COME Covers Hint At More Big Twists In Marvel's White Black Panther Comic
Recommended For You:

MARVEL KNIGHTS: THE WORLD TO COME Covers Hint At More Big Twists In Marvel's White Black Panther Comic

DISCLAIMER: As a user generated site and platform, ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and "Safe Harbor" provisions.

This post was submitted by a user who has agreed to our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. ComicBookMovie.com will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please CONTACT US for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. CLICK HERE to learn more about our copyright and trademark policies.

Note that ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

AwesomePromoz
AwesomePromoz - 6/6/2014, 4:51 PM
I agree as regards the MCU. However, i want to see the film, even if it's a slightly bastardized version of Wright's vision. His Cornetto properties are way better than his IP-driven stuff anyway!
AwesomePromoz
AwesomePromoz - 6/6/2014, 5:32 PM
I'm suggesting hiring and in-house director with experience at Marvel Studios, not a [frick]ing idiot like Ratner!
Lhornbk
Lhornbk - 6/6/2014, 5:59 PM
I keep saying this: just scrap it.
RextheKing
RextheKing - 6/6/2014, 6:04 PM
@Soto the problem with Fox is that they don't have all the time in the world to get these films out like Marvel does. They wait too long then the rights go back to MS. Ant Man has been in development for 8 years and as said in the article the script belongs to Marvel so they don't have to start from scratch and spit the film out on the original release date.
AwesomePromoz
AwesomePromoz - 6/6/2014, 6:10 PM
@Soto - I also said "like Ratner" so you are the one guilty of poor comprehension. try again.
NovaCorpsFan
NovaCorpsFan - 6/6/2014, 6:21 PM
I agree with Lhornbk.
AwesomePromoz
AwesomePromoz - 6/6/2014, 7:10 PM
I named two verified in-house personnel that have directed One-shots for Marvel. Louis D'esposito is the co-president of Marvel Studios and has directed two shorts for them, both of which spawned ABC television series. Pearce has a permanent relationship with the studio, written or worked on several of Marvel's movies, and directed its most recent One-shot. Learn to read, then read the article, and do some of your own research. You're a cool guy, I liked your anti-Rothman editorial, so don't be a wiener here.
AwesomePromoz
AwesomePromoz - 6/6/2014, 7:14 PM
Drew Pearce has worked with Sir Ben Kingsley and Sam Rockwell: nobody eats him for lunch or otherwise.
AwesomePromoz
AwesomePromoz - 6/6/2014, 7:31 PM
I like what you're saying now but you're not convincing me it's the same situation. That's whyvi cited the pre-vis. The movie is already directed in that sense, they leave nothing to chance. Of course the live footage needs to be shot but that's why these directors are what they are. They are capable of detecting nuance and tension and momentum. The rest of the team at marvel have been preparing this movie painstakingly for years. It's not a little indie picture you shoot on the cheap then fix later in post. A decent director, and Pearce is that, can handle this assignment. What they mustn't do, and this where you and I agree, is wedge some other guy who is apt to mistake this for a project of his own. Ratner is a true hack, a director of VH1 fashion videos. Marvel has better filmmakers as interns.
MightyZeus
MightyZeus - 6/6/2014, 11:53 PM
As most people are saying i do not want to see a disaster of a film, i want to see a good entertaining film. I don't think Marvel Studio's has made a terrible film yet but do i think that Ant-Man could be? I mean i have a feeling Marvel Studio's could be worried that comic book fans would be angered by the fact that Hank Pym will be older and working in the 60's and that the film will be focused on Scott Lang. That's just my take on it even though it may sound silly but i remember when comic book fans where outraged when IM3 came out and about the whole Mandarin debacle.

I think it would be cool if Ant-Man or Hank Pym where to be introduced in Age of Ultron. I've read time travel could be involved with the film due to the fact that there have been scenes between Captain America and Peggy Carter(even though it could be a flashback), have Hank Pym be shown and get the audience interested in his character in order for the audience wanting to see more.
AwesomePromoz
AwesomePromoz - 6/7/2014, 3:45 AM
@Soto - I still find what you're saying compelling, but I don't think you can prove any of it.

Surely a revision is a far cry from a square one rewrite. There's no way they could do that. All the action set pieces would be planned out for months by now, you suppose they are just going to keep them and slip them into a completely rehashed plot? Someone above questioned whether Marvel was sticking with Michael Douglas, well there's an interview on this site with him and he doesn't say anything about being fired.

I'm not sure if we fully understand the X-Men 3 situation -- how much was in place? People have been raving about X-Men Days of Future Past because it ret-conned X3 and Wolverine Origins out of the series, but if Ratner just shot the storyboards then that saddles Matthew Vaughn with the blame for being a shit movie, not Ratner. So how do we then praise Vaughn for First Class, when it was his process that [frick]ed up X3? I hated First Class as much as I hated X3, but I'm in the minority there.

Your understanding of the filmmaking process seems a little flawed. I'm a director myself, so I respect the craft we are talking about. Saying Pearce and D-esposito are unqualified is not correct, I already cited the number of projects they have completed which go beyond just the One-shots, so quit myopically referring to the One-shots as their only credits and go to IMDb and check it out yourself. They are qualified, and if not available then that's too bad. This is an Editorial.

Back to your flawed perception of the filmmaking process. I never said the director presses record and that's that - that's a ridiculous ad homimen argument you've tried to stick me with but I reject it, sorry I'm not that dumb.

To be precise, it's the cameraman who presses record, the first AD who shouts "action" and the director gives instructions to the cast and the first AD. That's how it works, so don't be silly by simplifying the process by claiming I believe he should just press record.

No I'm saying this director can wok with the script he's given, shoot the practical photography, take it into editing (which has already started btw, I'd guess up to 50% of the film is already there in the fork of animatics) and see what needs to be re-shot or taken into pickups. The gigantic action scenes are often shot by the Second Unit director or Effects Coordinator anyway so the director can focus on the character work. It's not an auteur piece, that's what I've been saying all along. Anyway, respectfully agree to disagree; please keep leaving your comments here, this is fun!
AwesomePromoz
AwesomePromoz - 6/7/2014, 3:55 AM
@dethpillow a quick correction here: Drew Goddard (writer/director of Cabin in the Woods) is the guy that left Daredevil. He would be awesome but I wouldn't recommend him for the Ant Man assignment because he is an auteur director like Joss Whedon who takes total control of a project. He would be the same as Wright in that regard.

Drew Pearce and Louis D'esposito have experience in film and Tv as well, so they would understand the process of stepping into an established production and getting the main practical work done while the effects and other sequences are created independently. Another TV director who came onto a production for Marvel was Alan Taylor, who replaced Patti Jenkins, and its my perception that despite its flawed story, Thor 2 was the best directed installment of the MCU to this point. All the action sequences in that made sense and told the story, not just blurry "kick this and punch that" closeups and handheld stuff.
CaptainAmerica31
CaptainAmerica31 - 6/7/2014, 8:01 AM
Test footage:( my most ANTciptated film for 2016 is now my least:( I was so excited
CaptainAmerica31
CaptainAmerica31 - 6/7/2014, 9:23 AM
@Dellamort but Peyton Reed has no special effects background...
View Recorder