|
Does anyone suppose Marvel will be trying hard to get Catherine Zeta-Jones to play Janet Van Dyne in the MCU? It's the sort of thing I could see them trying.
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 21:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 16:25 |
|
|
Reintroducing Janet Van Dyne to the MCU would be a public relations loving nightmare with absolutely zero good solutions. Keep her dead or atomized or whatever her current status is.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 22:48
|
|
|
"Rather than deal with the potential complications of extricating these two characters from an uncomfortable storyline that has come to define them in the comics (which we rarely stick to anyway,) let's just fridge the woman." You're right, that's much better.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 22:58
|
|
|
I think having Janet in flashbacks as Hank sees the legacy of ant man and the wasp being fulfilled by Scott and his daughter might work but i dunno how they would work actually bringing her back from like 20 years in the microverse or the quantum realm of whatever term they used in the movie
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 23:12
|
|
|
As usual, you are overestimating how much 99.999% of the MCU's audience knows anything about comic books.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 23:14
|
|
|
Chaos Hippy posted:"Rather than deal with the potential complications of extricating these two characters from an uncomfortable storyline that has come to define them in the comics (which we rarely stick to anyway,) let's just fridge the woman." Honestly? Yeah. Address the issue, Hank suddenly becomes the wife-beating superhero all loving over again. Pretend it never happened, get accused of erasure, whether valid or not. And no, nobody reads the loving comics but you are mother loving fooling yourself if there wouldn't be a bunch of insufferable thinkpieces about how Disney/Marvel's eliminating the very real problem of spousal abuse as a social issue from their superhero movies if they bring back Janet and don't bring up The Incident. It's a problem with absolutely zero solution. You already saw it sorta with Tony's nonexistent alcoholism in the MCU, imagine that issue times a billion and that's what happens if they bring up Janet Van Dyne. NieR Occomata fucked around with this message at 23:24 on Jul 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 23:19
|
|
|
Chaos Hippy posted:"Rather than deal with the potential complications of extricating these two characters from an uncomfortable storyline that has come to define them in the comics (which we rarely stick to anyway,) let's just fridge the woman." I don't think it counts as fridging someone when they heroically sacrifice themselves to save lives.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 23:20
|
|
|
If anything, they already did Janet disservice by implying she was too dumb to try something as simple as sticking the expandodisc in the regulator.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 23:23
|
|
|
I was kind of hoping that Ant-Man and Wasp would be a movie about them going to the Microverse to rescue Janet. Nobody cares about the comic poo poo and if people want to write dumb think pieces about it then let them and we can all just ignore them as we should. I think not bringing in Janet would be a mistake because it's a leftover plot point that needs to be addressed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 23:27
|
|
|
I just don't think it's a coincidence that the current Ant-Man is Scott Lang, the only legacy superhero in the MCU. They've already more-or-less punted Pym out of any real influence with the Avengers or other superheroes, even in an advisory capacity beyond a mentorship of Scott, and killed off Janet because of how tainted of characters they are, and pairing up Scott and Hope makes it so they basically get the Ant-Man/Wasp dynamic without the uncomfortable reality that is Hank and Janet. The creative direction of the first movie has already been a sort of tacit admission of defeat and a sweeping of the first Ant-Man and first Wasp off the board.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 23:33
|
|
|
You're approaching this with dumb comic fan logic where you think that something that happened in the comic matters to the movies. It doesn't and it never will. The reason Lang was picked was because it was set up as a con man heist film from the inception and that Lang was the character that fit that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 23:34
|
|
|
They kinda have to. If nothing else just to find Janet's body and give Hank peace. The amount of people that get flustered about Marvel deciding not to adapt Hank hitting Janet will be insignificant. Marvel absolutely does not have to have Hank hitting Janet in their cinematic canon. It would be stupid if they did. They leave out stuff from the comics all the time. Not only that, the story that included that moment has already concluded and Hank wasn't a part of it at all. They don't have to bring that up any more than they have to do an adaptation of Avengers #200 when they have a Captain Marvel movie.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 23:35
|
|
|
X-O posted:You're approaching this with dumb comic fan logic where you think that something that happened in the comic matters to the movies. It doesn't and it never will. The reason Lang was picked was because it was set up as a con man heist film from the inception and that Lang was the character that fit that. I don't think that, but you are fooling yourself if you don't think there will be a bunch of really overwrought, missing-the-point or the fact that the MCU isn't the 616 ill-informed and disingenuous "socially conscious" articles about how Hank hit Janet in the comics that aren't canon to a movie series with a totally different backstory and Marvel is Bad for not including it. It would absolutely, 100% happen. It would be A Thing, even moreso than #GiveCapABoyfriend, a hashtag that literally ignored characters' stated onscreen sexuality to blow up into a whole event.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 23:41
|
|
|
How about as a compromise where they bring Janet back, and Scott Lang hits his ex-wife.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 23:43
|
|
|
But none of that matters, nobody should pay it attention and arguing that they should write their movies to avoid a few dummies online whining about comics is stupid.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 23:44
|
|
|
Yeah having hank hit janet in the movie would look so incredibly bad they would never do that lol
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 23:49
|
|
|
Toxxupation posted:Honestly? Yeah. Address the issue, Hank suddenly becomes the wife-beating superhero all loving over again. Pretend it never happened, get accused of erasure, whether valid or not. So zero times a million. Still zero. site posted:If anything, they already did Janet disservice by implying she was too dumb to try something as simple as sticking the expandodisc in the regulator. I think Hank created those for Scott?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 00:02
|
|
|
Wasn't Hank hitting Janet supposed to be an accident during his madness induced rantings? It always felt like Hank's reputation as an abusive husband stemmed more from people taking it out of context rather than because he actually is one (in 616 at least).
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 00:02
|
|
|
Roth posted:Wasn't Hank hitting Janet supposed to be an accident during his madness induced rantings? It always felt like Hank's reputation as an abusive husband stemmed more from people taking it out of context rather than because he actually is one (in 616 at least). Unless you count the Ultimate version, which took Wife-Beating to 11.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 00:09
|
|
|
You accidentally pressed the B key at the end there.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 00:13
|
|
|
Marvel has referenced it a few times and I feel like if they want us to forget about it they wouldn't have alternative universes where he sprays her with RAID and sends ants to terrorize her.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 00:17
|
|
|
On the other hand I'm not sure what about the way the Ultimate Universe played out would make you think there was a lot of line-wide long term planning going on there and I'm saying that as someone who liked the UU better than most I think
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 00:19
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:How about as a compromise where they bring Janet back, and Scott Lang hits his ex-wife. Scott should hit Hank Pym. Let's address the abuse of the elderly in society.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 00:21
|
|
|
Grem posted:Marvel has referenced it a few times and I feel like if they want us to forget about it they wouldn't have alternative universes where he sprays her with RAID and sends ants to terrorize her. Well Mark Millar is going to do what he does.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 00:21
|
|
|
If you need a reason to keep the abuse out of the movies that is tonally consistent with the comics, think about how including it would affect the film version of Janet. In the comics, Jan has long since grown past being defined by the incident. More Wasp-savvy readers might correct me, but I would argue that even in the years immediately following that issue, "abuse victim" was not one of Jan's defining characteristics. Given that Hank and Jan's hero days, and the entirety of their relationship, are long in the past, the hypothetical assault would need to be deliberately brought up and explained. Given that this explanation would necessarily be tied into Jan's first appearance on screen (barring her brief masked appearance in Ant Man,) it would be almost impossible to avoid turning that abuse into a defining trait of the character. It's understandable to argue that leaving it out lets Hank off the hook, but given that Hank isn't a real person, and that movie Hank is not the same person as comic Hank (and also not real,) I would argue that it's less relevant than the injustice it would do to what may be the first female superhero (chronologically) of the MCU by immediately redefining her as a victim. That being said, I'm not an expert, and your mileage may vary.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 00:21
|
|
|
Toxxupation posted:Honestly? Yeah. Address the issue, Hank suddenly becomes the wife-beating superhero all loving over again. Pretend it never happened, get accused of erasure, whether valid or not. gently caress you
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 00:26
|
|
SonicRulez posted:Not only that, the story that included that moment has already concluded and Hank wasn't a part of it at all. We had an MCU story where Hank Pym fucks up fighting a wizard lady, then goes insane before his hearing and builds a mech to attack the Avengers? Roth posted:Wasn't Hank hitting Janet supposed to be an accident during his madness induced rantings? It always felt like Hank's reputation as an abusive husband stemmed more from people taking it out of context rather than because he actually is one (in 616 at least). He gave her a black eye and then she divorced him. You can't really spin that as "not really wife beating". Lurdiak fucked around with this message at 00:33 on Jul 11, 2016 |
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 00:31
|
|
|
Grem posted:Marvel has referenced it a few times and I feel like if they want us to forget about it they wouldn't have alternative universes where he sprays her with RAID and sends ants to terrorize her.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 00:32
|
|
|
CAPTAIN CAPSLOCK posted:Scott should hit Hank Pym. Let's address the abuse of the elderly in society. Doesn't really work with a version of Hank who's more than happy to knock a dude on his rear end.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 00:33
|
|
|
X-O posted:I was kind of hoping that Ant-Man and Wasp would be a movie about them going to the Microverse to rescue Janet. Nobody cares about the comic poo poo and if people want to write dumb think pieces about it then let them and we can all just ignore them as we should. I think not bringing in Janet would be a mistake because it's a leftover plot point that needs to be addressed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 00:42
|
|
|
People complain about what Iron Man 3 did to Mandarin, but its treatment of AIM was way poorer.
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 00:43
|
|
|
Easy enough to fix. AIM has always been a fractious organisation, with splinter groups almost beyond count.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 00:57
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:We had an MCU story where Hank Pym fucks up fighting a wizard lady, then goes insane before his hearing and builds a mech to attack the Avengers? Did I confuse Ultron with the story where Hank hit Janet?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 00:58
|
|
SonicRulez posted:Did I confuse Ultron with the story where Hank hit Janet? Yes.
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:He gave her a black eye and then she divorced him. You can't really spin that as "not really wife beating". I went ahead and looked it up just to be sure, which led me to this blog post by Jim Hooter who wrote Avengers 213 where it happened. "In that story (issue 213, I think), there is a scene in which Hank is supposed to have accidentally struck Jan while throwing his hands up in despair and frustration—making a sort of “get away from me” gesture while not looking at her. Bob Hall, who had been taught by John Buscema to always go for the most extreme action, turned that into a right cross! There was no time to have it redrawn, which, to this day has caused the tragic story of Hank Pym to be known as the “wife-beater” story." http://jimshooter.com/2011/03/hank-pym-was-not-wife-beater.html/ I'm not trying to make the claim that he didn't hurt her, but that it was an accident on his part. I'm not exactly an expert on what qualifies as wife beating, so go ahead and correct me if accidents are a part of that (being completely genuine about that). Of course, I don't really blame Janet for divorcing him at that point anyway, regardless of the fact that it was an accident or not since he was hardly husband of the year material before then either. I really hope I'm not coming across as trying to defend domestic abuse here, which is why I'd welcome being corrected on that if that's the case.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 01:09
|
|
|
The art might have been an accident, but once it was done it was taken as intentional going forward.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 01:11
|
|
|
I wasn't aware of the aftermath, as I figured it was still written as having been an accident. So I guess that's that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 01:16
|
|
|
fart
Chickenwalker fucked around with this message at 05:16 on Sep 23, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 01:57
|
|
|
achillesforever6 posted:My dumb idea was that it would be a corporate espinoge film where Lang and Hope/Hank try to stop evil organizations from tampering with technologies that could destroy/ruin the world; mainly because I want to see AIM return with MODOK. I like this idea. MODOK seems like just the right level of villainy for solo Ant-Man movie. Maybe toss in how Scott sees AIM as an opportunity to find "legit" work, given his fugitive status. AIM seems like the kind of company to not shine too bright a light on someone's past.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 02:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 16:25 |
|
|
Toxxupation posted:I don't think that, but you are fooling yourself if you don't think there will be a bunch of really overwrought, missing-the-point or the fact that the MCU isn't the 616 ill-informed and disingenuous "socially conscious" articles about how Hank hit Janet in the comics that aren't canon to a movie series with a totally different backstory and Marvel is Bad for not including it. It would absolutely, 100% happen. It would be A Thing, even moreso than #GiveCapABoyfriend, a hashtag that literally ignored characters' stated onscreen sexuality to blow up into a whole event. And I don't think it would (or should) stop them putting Janet in a film.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 02:20
|
|
