So seeing Edgar Wright depart under rumors that this is precisely what happened (re: Ant-Man being rewritten to better fit with the tone and meta-story of the post-Avengers 2 Marvel Universe) manifests as something like film geeks' worst fear and the Old Guard's sour grapes dream come true. It's "evidence" that Feige and Marvel/Disney are running something less like the happy-go-lucky fanservice factory they played at being and more like the assembly-line corporate hackwork some always thought of them as running.
... saying "Ant-Man needs to be THIS so that he fits in with the next crossover" is almost certain to lead to a less interesting final result than "Just make Ant-Man and we'll work out what he'll do in Avengers when we see if people like him or not." That first way is how Warner Bros and DC are currently trying to nudge Justice League into place - it's not going great so far. They're doing a movie whose subtitle is Dawn of Justice.
See as a fan, I disagree on this being a "fear" and honestly its my "expectation" and even desire
that, in a continuity-bound presentation of a story I care about, some direction of that continuity be maintained.
In comics we have seen that some of the most bizarre and awful storylines exist and were created with NO regard to the universal whole.
Where DC is concerned, what Bob has described is not so clearly descriptive of what they've done in this. Man of Steel was never written with the intent of building toward a Justice League story, in the same way the 3 recent Batman films were never made toward that end. Forcing Man of Steel into that after the fact was a product of corporate marketing interference (which we ALL understand was reactionary to the success of the Avengers
,) NOT creative oversight
such as that Marvel has shown in this and most every instance. That is the inherent difference. The intent of "cashing in on a franchise model" vs "creative direction for the sake of story cohesion and believability."
IF Edgar Wright is grinding his heels on a specific vision of the film that would sacrifice the continuity built into place, then I'm ok that he has left the project. That, to me, shows a lack of creativity to work with the group as a whole to build something greater than just his vision. I'm not entirely convinced it's that extreme, but we don't know the line beyond which Wright was unwilling to be flexible, so we can't say one way or the other.
I was never going to see Ant Man because of Edgar Wright anyway. I was going to see Ant Man because I want to see his role in this universe and how his story impacts the greater story. And I want to see how much is drawn from the comics and made authentic and believable. (But I'll be honest, Wright's sizzle reel of Ant Man in combat was an exciting tease, so credit due on that!)
I still have not paid any attention to who wrote/directed Winter Solder
and I loved it. (Not to say directors don't ever influence my interest, because I'm a huge fan of Gunn and think he's prefect for what he's been brought in to do on GotG
. I just don't adhere to the idea that he's the "only" one who could do it any more than I think Wright is the "only" one suited for Ant Man.)
If Feige (and by proxy Whedon where he advises) didn't already have tremendous credibility in the oversight of that continuity as it stands, that would be one thing. But he does (they do.) So I'll trust the decision.
Maybe what Wright would have done would've been great and appealed to specific fans of his, so I understand the disappointment that we'll never know now.
But I can't look at this as unreasonable or even bad in the grander scale of these things.
(Remember, Marvel is the company willing and excited to take chances on things like Ant Man, Rocket Raccoon, etc... while representatives of DC are busy making fun of fans for knowing who Martian Manhunter is.)