irstupid said:
It baffles me how critics seem to always give them such good ratings. You would think they would bash them for being so shallow. Hell the most recent Ant Man was a Iron Man 1 clone with tacked on super offensive stereotypes. |
The hell? How is Ant-Man, Iron Man 1. Tony had no mentor. Nor is Scott a prick towards people. He just wanted to not be a criminal. Prove to his former family he doesn't suck ass. Stark is a complete 360 of Lang. The only simliarlies is the men like to be funny, and the bad guys stole the tech. Tons of hero movies/shows do this. Spider-Man, Hulk, Justice League, Batman, Iron Man, Wonder Woman. Striker alone rips off powers. And makes copies of copies. To deal with "failed (Logan)" attempts.
Lawlight said:
The Avengers came without some key characters like Ant Man, who had a movie in production before Iron Man. Do you really think Marvel had one plan and stuck to it? Spider-Man got added to Civil War in the last 2 weeks of shooting. That's not rushing? |
That gets a pass. Sony is the anvil that gets in the way. If Spider-Man was owned by Marvel 100%. He would of been in Civil War from the start.
Now Ant-Man, if you follow the movie stories. Hank quit prior to the Ant-Man film. So a Ant-Man wouldn't be in Avengers 1. He was looking for someone during Avengers 2. And was trying to block his tech from being persued for almost 20 years. Yeah, this breaks the Avengers comic book starting characters. But the movies did give a internal explination. Janet was dead 20 years before Avengers 1. So she couldn't be in it, for that reason too. Ant-Man's production was never smooth. So obiously the movie had script and other issues. Movies don't stay in limbo for years, for no reason.







