Anchorman Co-Star Set To Play Marvel's Ant-Man

[Andy Chalk]

Anchorman Co-Star Set To Play Marvel's Ant-Man

Paul Rudd, the actor best known as Anchorman field reporter Brian Fantana, is set to star as Ant-Man, the superhero best known to pretty much nobody.

Batman. Iron Man. Spider-Man. Ant-Man. One of these things is not like the others. Seriously, who's going to stand in line for Ant-Man? A guy whose power is getting really, really small - and it's not even a power, it's just some goof juice he cooked up in the lab. And his ability to control ants? Wow, dude. You make Aquaman look positively god-like.

Anyway, this is apparently where Marvel is on the list of "Superguys Who Haven't Been In a Movie Yet," and to be fair they don't seem to be half-assing it. Both Rudd and Joseph Gordon Levitt were reportedly in the running for the part (Levitt may have bailed in favor of the recently-announced [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/130594-Sandman-Movie-Is-A-Go-Joseph-Gordon-Levitt-Is-Producer] Sandman project) and while Rudd isn't exactly known as the rugged superhero type, his comedic abilities and charisma might be just what the character needs to make him interesting in ways that don't involve backhanding his wife. Edgar Wright, who directed the "Cornetto trilogy" - Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz and The World's End - and Scott Pilgrim vs. The World, is signed to direct and also co-wrote the script.

But back to the original question: Why Ant-Man? He's a second-string Avenger at best and he's not even really a "he" at all: Logan is Wolverine, Peter Parker is Spider-Man, Tony Stark is Iron Man but Ant Man is just whoever happens to slap on the suit and swallow the pill at any given moment. I don't want to come off as too negative (am I being too negative?) but Ant-Man? Seriously?

Ant-Man: Be Careful Where You Step (which may not actually be the official subtitle) is currently in pre-production.

Souce: Variety [http://variety.com/2013/film/news/paul-rudd-marvel-ant-man-1200756440/]


Permalink

 

[Alcaste]

'Scuse me? Ant-Man is a fantastic character, easily my second favorite member of the Avengers (Behind black panther) and one of the founders to boot. Also, he can get really really big, so nyeh.

I'm excited. He looks like a Pym for sure, though I gotta admit I was more stoked when the rumour mill said that Simon Pegg was going to play the role. Oh well. This guy is DEFINITELY going to be in line.

 

[Agayek]

And his ability to control ants? Wow, dude. You make Aquaman look positively god-like.

Hey now, that can be way more useful than you think [http://parahumans.wordpress.com/category/stories-arcs-1-10/arc-1-gestation/1-01/].

I'm definitely interested in this movie. Judging by the people involved, it's going to be more light-hearted than most of the MCU fare, and I'm all sorts of curious about it.

 

[TiberiusEsuriens]

And his ability to control ants? Wow, dude. You make Aquaman look positively god-like.

Hey now, that can be way more useful than you think [http://parahumans.wordpress.com/category/stories-arcs-1-10/arc-1-gestation/1-01/].

I'm definitely interested in this movie. Judging by the people involved, it's going to be more light-hearted than most of the MCU fare, and I'm all sorts of curious about it.

Even more, controlling ants is not his real power. Ant-Man has the ability to change his size, weight, momentum, etc, at will, but because his name isn't "Change-your-size-at-will Man" no one ever really remembers it.

 

[man-man]

I think the answer to "Why Ant-Man?" is "To prove that they can". The way they're going about building a 'shared universe' in the films looks really quite well planned to me. There's a list of the films past and planned, organised into 'phases' on Wikipedia here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvel_Cinematic_Universe#Films

So Phase 1, they start with individual characters in individual films, then bring them all together in The Avengers. A gentle start to the idea of canon stretching over multiple films, and if it were to go over badly they could abort the mission and call Avengers a gimmick idea that didn't work out.

But it went well. Really well. So now the next hurdle for Phase 2... can they go back to individual movies? Will people still care when the stakes aren't turned up as high as they were in Avengers (with world-ending peril and half a dozen heroes). Answer: also yes, Iron Man 3 and Thor 2 have done well for themselves, and they've done well with keeping the individual flavour of each character's series.

Coming up for the end of Phase 2 we have a second Avengers movie, because that's always fun, and they're adding some more characters to the lineup to see if that works (whether people will accept additions and changes to allow characters to rotate in and out of the spotlight) and sooner than that, a Guardians of the Galaxy movie to test the waters for an entirely different group.

Phase 3 then, I would anticipate is where we're going to see them really expand out into the full size of the Marvel Universe, including the weirder, wackier, less serious characters. Like Ant-Man. They have a *lot* of material to work with if they can establish movie-success with characters that are less of a household name. I would expect to possibly also see Guardians/Avengers crossing over or mixing and matching, or an ensemble movie with some of the original Avengers missing, or team-up movies that are smaller in scope than the *full* team pulling together. Again all to slowly prove that they can do the Shared Universe thing in films (and other media - Agents of SHIELD is already working on extending their reach into TV) and still keep people following.

It's a hell of a strategy and I hope it pays off for them. They deserve the success, having gone about it with a good amount more finesse than DC with their shambling attempt to put together a Justice League movie.

 

[man-man]

Hey now, that can be way more useful than you think [http://parahumans.wordpress.com/category/stories-arcs-1-10/arc-1-gestation/1-01/].

Good to see I'm not the only one who thought of that. I'm headed rapidly into the final chapters right now and holy god damn is it a good story.

 

[Guffe]

I'm not familiar with superheros...
Is one of the "antpowers" that he can like fall from superhights and not hurt himself one of the parts? how about lifting shit several times his own bodysize and weight?
Because if that's the case, he's basically a superhuman with superstrength and endurability + the size control thing...

 

[Zeraki]

I'm not familiar with superheros...
Is one of the "antpowers" that he can like fall from superhights and not hurt himself one of the parts? how about lifting shit several times his own bodysize and weight?
Because if that's the case, he's basically a superhuman with superstrength and endurability + the size control thing...

As far as I know, he can only make himself bigger or smaller, as well as control ants through some kind of technologically advanced helmet. His real superpower however, is his mind... and beating his wife. (Sorry, couldn't resist)

 

[ComicsAreWeird]

Sorry, Andy Chalk...but your views on Antman are seriously uninformed. Here's why:

1. The first Antman - Hank Pym - is one of the founding Avengers. His historical importance in the team is undeniable.

2. His powers are visually interesting and cinematic. They have been used in amazingly creative ways in the comics. The concept reel that Edgar Wright revealed a while ago displays this perfectly.

3. Check out Irredeemable Antman to see how entertaining and hilarious the character can be.

4. He sets up some uf the biggest shake-ups on the Avengers status quo. He created Ultron which in turn helped create Vision, two major characters in the Avengers lore. On another note, his aggressive behavior towards his wife (Wasp) set him as a flawed, complex character that shed light on major real-life social issues.

Long story short...there is a lot of potential with the franchise. There is a lot of trust from Marvel in the character. With Edgar Wright and Paul Rudd there is now a lot of TALENT associated with this franchise. I have no doubt that Marvel will score another home-run with this flick.

 

[Agayek]

Good to see I'm not the only one who thought of that. I'm headed rapidly into the final chapters right now and holy god damn is it a good story.

Seriously. I'm not sure I like the switch from Skitter to Weaver and the subsequent inflation of scope (mostly cuz I just don't find the Entities all that interesting), but the story is fucking amazing either way.

Also, Khepri for God-Emperor 2016. ALL GLORY TO THE HYPNO-GIRL

 

[Clankenbeard]

4. He sets up some uf the biggest shake-ups on the Avengers status quo. He created Ultron which in turn helped create Vision, two major characters in the Avengers lore. On another note, his aggressive behavior towards his wife (Wasp) set him as a flawed, complex character that shed light on major real-life social issues.

^^This!

Yes, I remember the first time I even heard the name Antman. It was a Saturday Night Live sketch where Garret Morris was playing him at a superhero party. When asked what he could do, he said "I can shrink down to the size of an ant while still retaining my normal human strength." At this point the other heroes snarked, "Whoa. Better watch out for this guy!"

And that seems to be what most people think of him. But the dude is a genius. His discovery/harnessing of Pym Particles is what allows him to change the size of objects. Look past his unfortunate name and give this movie a chance. I bet it'll be better than Steel!

 

[Mr. Q]

Well, since Andy couldn't be bothered to do actual reporting on Ant-Man or his backstory, allow me to fill in the blanks.

Ant-Man aka Hank Pym (his full name being Henry Johnathan "Hank" Pym) was one of the founding members of the Avengers and a long-time staple in Marvel Comics. He made his appearance in the anthology comic Tales to Astonish #27 in the story entitled The Man in the Ant Hill. The people behind Hank Pym's creation was Stan "The Man" Lee, who plotted the story, his brother Larry Lieber, who wrote the script, and legendary artist Jack "The King" Kirby. It wasn't until Tales to Astonish #35 when Dr. Pym officially donned the role of Ant-Man. This was mostly because issue #27 sold well and, with the rise of superheroes during the silver age, Stan Lee decided to make him a costumed crime fighter. Hank Pym would also take on other superhero roles over the years, including Giant-Man, Goliath, Yellowjacket (one of the more controversial identities), and the Wasp. The latter identity was to honor Janet Van Dyne who died during Secret Invasion (Don't worry, she got better). Alongside Tony Stark and Bruce Banner, Hank is also one of the greatest minds in the Marvel Universe. While the character has appeared in various TV shows and animated features, this will be the first time Hank Pym aka Ant Man will grace the silver screen.

As for Marvel Studios choice on Paul Rudd, I'm actually game for it. From what I can guess based on the choice of director and lead actor, this could be played as an action/comedy like Iron Man. It's uncertain if this will be going with the early script reports where Paul Rudd is playing Scott Lang, the second person to take on the role of Ant Man, and someone else will be playing Dr. Pym. Personally, I hope that is not the case and the film will focus more on Hank Pym, his origin as Ant Man, and his romantic beginnings with Janet Van Dyne (maybe have her don the outfit of Wasp). Edgar Wright has done romantic comedies with action elements such as Shaun of the Dead and Scott Pilgrim vs the World, so it is certainly going to be interesting to see his take on this character once production begins.

 

[Flatfrog]

The question isn't whether the movie will appeal to people like most of the responders in this thread so far, who have heard of the character and know his potential. It's whether they'll be able to persuade average cinema-goers to give it a try. In that respect, Andy's not wrong, this one could be a tough sell - and even with Edgar Wright on board, it could be a great movie and still flop (cf Scott Pilgrim). There's no doubt Marvel is pushing the boat out on this one.

 

[Mr. Q]

Ah, look, it's Andy Chalk again.

What do you have for us this time, Andy?

Seriously, who's going to stand in line for Ant-Man? A guy who's power is getting really, really small - and it's not even a power, it's just some goof juice he cooked up in the lab. And his ability to control ants? Wow, dude. You make Aquaman look positively god-like.

But back to the original question: Why Ant-Man? He's a second-string Avenger at best and he's not even really a "he" at all: Logan is Wolverine, Peter Parker is Spider-Man, Tony Stark is Iron Man but Ant Man is just whoever happens to slap on the suit and swallow the pill at any given moment. I don't want to come off as too negative (am I being too negative?) but Ant-Man? Seriously?

....

Wow, there are so many things wrong with this that I don't even know where to begin.

Firstly, Hank Pym is not a minor character in the Marvel Universe. He's not. Not by any stretch of the imagination. He's a super-genius whose inventions play a central role in several major storylines and crossover events. He was also a founding member of the Avengers back in the day, just to point this out. He's not a "second-string" Avenger.

Second, it's technically accurate to state that there are multiple Ant-Man characters (as there have been multiple people to assume his mantle), but you then follow it up with an equally bone-headed assertion about other superheroes. Peter Parker is Spider-Man, except when he's not. Tony Stark is Iron Man, again, except when he's not. Not to mention he's in the same situation as Pym, whereby the suit provides a good portion of his powers up until the Extremis days or so. And the same is true of numerous other superheroes. It is stupid to declare this about Pym specifically when so many other heroes swap costumes in the comics.

Finally, there's a very simple reason "why": Because Hank Pym is responsible for the creation of an extremely potent artificial intelligence. You may have heard of it. It's called "Ultron". Yes, as in "Age of Ultron", the running title for Avengers 2. The main villain of Avengers 2 will almost certainly be either introduced or at least hinted at in some capacity in the Ant-Man movie....something which virtually anyone who spent 10 minutes in front of Google could have reasoned out easily. But I guess it's better to worry about being "funny" than being correct.

So in the spirit of that logic....

Spoiler: Guess we can CHALK this article up to a 'did not do the research' label, eh?

I mean seriously, I've never read a comic in my life, and even I knew enough about the subject at hand to realize that "haha, he controls ants, he must suck" was a stupid way to set up this article. If you're going to report on something like this on a website which practically collects all manner of nerds like fine china, do the research.

Thank you. I'm glad to know that I'm not the only one who thinks Andy needs to get his act together.

I also offered a comment on Hank's creation and multiple roles he's taken over the years but didn't include Ultron since Marvel Studios is planning to make Tony Stark the creator of the villain in Avengers: Age of Ultron.

 

[Something Amyss]

Ant-Man: Be Careful Where You Step (which may not actually be the official subtitle) is currently in pre-production.

It totally should be the official title.

I think the answer to "Why Ant-Man?" is "To prove that they can".

I suspect it's less that and more just continuity. I don't like Ant-Man, but he's been a big part of the Avengers for a good chunk of their time as a team. He's behind Ultron, who is going to be part of the second Avengers movie, and that's probably enough to justify it to them.

And, I mean, keep in mind that Iron Man was a B-lister, too.

If they really want to prove they can, it's time for Squirrel Girl.

 

[Grabehn]

'Scuse me? Ant-Man is a fantastic character, easily my second favorite member of the Avengers

That happens a lot with most characters that aren't that mainstream, same thing that happened with Aquaman and "talking to fish" with the Super Friends show. Even though I've learnt a bit more about the character through the internet, and how a lot of people LOVE him and he's super cool and lost a hand and all that, for most people he's the fish-talking wimp.

I think Ant-man has the advantage here, since I don't know him as ridiculized character, but instead I didn't even know he existed until the movie stuff came to be.

 

[MorganL4]

I think the answer to "Why Ant-Man?" is "To prove that they can". The way they're going about building a 'shared universe' in the films looks really quite well planned to me. There's a list of the films past and planned, organized into 'phases' on Wikipedia here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvel_Cinematic_Universe#Films

So effectively the answer to "WHY Antman?" is because they want Ultron to be the big bad for Avengers 2..... I guarantee it. And having Ultron as a bad guy in your films without having the guy who MADE him (Dr. Henry Pym) would be kind of like having Braniac be in a Justice League film that mysteriously lacked Superman.

 

[faefrost]

The lack of imagination among the comic inteligencia always amazes me. 'OMG why would they want to make a movie about so a D list character that nobody knows?!?" Ummm, because amazingly enough the character is one that you can easily make a really spectacular adventure movie around. That whole "get small" thing? Does anyone remember "Honey I Shrunk the Kids"? Now picture that with Super Heroes. It allows for a wonderful mix of 50's-60's B scifi with a dose of Mission Impossible.

This is the same lack of vision that leads to everyone going "who?" over Guardian's of the Galaxy. "Why are they making Guardians of the Galaxy movie?" Because GoG is basically the Dirty Dozen or the Magnificent 7 meet Star Wars. It may be a somewhat obscure comic property, but it is one that seems to be tailor made for a movie. It's the sort of thing that Hollywood does well. Whereas some more common superheroes may actually be harder to convert to the big screen. look at the decades of Spiderman and Captain America suq before technology let them do it right. Hollywood still has no idea how to handle a Justice League movie.