‘Ant-Man’ Cast Loses Patrick Wilson

Published 2 months ago by

Ant Man Problems Ant Man Cast Loses Patrick Wilson
With the 2014 Comic-Con in full swing, major reveals for damn near every geek property under the sun will arrive throughout the weekend. Marvel Studios’ panel, which arrives this Saturday, is sure to be a centerpiece of the convention, expanding on the surprise addition to the studio’s 2018 releases.

Marvel’s long game is one of the most fascinating and intriguing aspects of their Cinematic Universe strategy – and with the upcoming Guardians of the Galaxy already receiving positive reviews, the stage is clearly set for some of Marvel’s more out-there properties, such as Ant-ManHowever, the upcoming intriguing-on-paper chronicle of Hank Pym (Michael Douglas) and Scott Lang (Paul Rudd) has been beset by its share of troubling publicity.

The project first lost original director Edgar Wright, who was then replaced by Peyton Reed, with perceived ongoing script difficulties and the open disdain of star Michael Douglas not helping the situation. Now, in the midst of the year’s biggest pop-culture exposition, Deadline reports that The Conjuring star Patrick Wilson has left Ant-Man.

Patrick Wilson Leaves Ant Man Ant Man Cast Loses Patrick Wilson

Two other Ant-Man actors have left the production alongside Wilson: Kevin Weisman (Awake) and Matt Gerald (G.I. Joe: Retaliation) have also departed, reportedly over the fact that their characters have been cut out of more recent versions of the script. As for Wilson, “a scheduling conflict” is said to have led to his departure, due to the delay in the film’s production.

Despite a strong early look at the movie’s promotional material and co-star Corey Stoll (The Strain) keeping a positive spin on the current state of the screenplay, Wilson’s presence will be difficult to replicate. We didn’t know who he was playing, but given his charismatic persona and willingness to tread into dark territory (WatchmenInsidious), the odds on his portraying an Ant-Man villain were pretty good.

With Marvel’s big panel just around the corner (and the rumor that Joaquin Phoenix is in talk to play Doctor Strange taking center stage on the interwebs for the moment), expect Wilson’s departure to be either downplayed or completely brushed aside this weekend. Still, how will this affect Ant-Man‘s already-delayed production schedule? Will it still make the Summer 2015 release date? We may know more after this weekend.

Ant-Man is still scheduled to open in U.S. theaters on July 17, 2015.

Source: Deadline

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:
TAGS: ant-man

85 Comments

Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.


If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.

  1. This movie is becoming less and less interesting… and that’s saying something, considering this is ANT-MAN we’re talking about, a movie I was never that interested in to begin with. It’s like this movie keeps on losing the aspects of it I was actually looking forward to.

    • Agreed. Troubled production equals a bad movie. (Not to say it won’t make money. I mean look at ‘World War Z’, terrible troubles, terrible movie, boat loads of cash….)

      • Troubled production does not mean bad movie.

        Titanic, Back to the Future, Jaws, Tootsie, Gone with the Wind, Apocalypse Now; all had tumultuous productions and they are great movies.

        • Wizard of Oz…
          Buddy Ebsen(Jed Clampett), originally cast as the Tin Man, almost died during production from inhaling the toxic chemicals in face paint.
          There were also several director changes among other issues, yet went on to become one of the greatest films of all time…

          • dont forget THE GODFATHER..

        • And every single one of those movies had MUCH better directors.This movie is in trouble.

          • Uh…yeah, but all of those directors pretty much hit it big with the movies mentioned above. Each of those directors had maybe 2-3 films under their belt. Their big breakout movies were the tumultuous ones.

            Spielberg was relatively unknown doing LOTS of tv episodes, tv movies, and movie shorts before his first major hit movie…JAWS which had lots of issues.

            Coppola did a lot of small time stuff but his big breakout movie was… GODFATHER…

            Zemeckis was a relatively unkown director when he did Romancing the Stone which had quite a few problems. His next film? BACK TO THE FUTURE: which had production issues including lead actor Michael J Fox being hired AFTER filming began. Sidenote: Zemeckis was fired from directing Cocoon which ended up popular by up and coming Ron Howard.

            Tootsie had 2 different directors before Sydney Pollock took over. The script had many re-writes. Pollock and lead actor Dustin Hoffman had issues because apparently Hoffman was fairly controlling.

            Gone with the Wind went through 3 DIFFERENT directors during filming! FACT: Victor Fleming, director of Wizard of Oz, was the 2nd director to step in but left over exhaustion.

            • So let me get this straight,you are saying that Peyton Reed,the guy who directed gems like Yes Man,The Break-Up,and Bring It On is going to turn into the next Spielberg or Coppola with an Ant-Man movie,a movie which is generating the least amount of positive interest of all of the Marvel movies?

              • Lol, I wasn’t going to respond to the idiocy of the defense, but thank you for pointing out the painfully obvious Longshanks! Comparing Reed to great artist of cinema is utterly ludicrous.

                *side note* All of those movies named, WERE ALLOWED TO KEEP THE DIRECTOR WHO HAD BROUGHT SOUL TO THE PROJECT! Had the studio replaced Spielberg with someone like Rodger Corman on Jaws, the legacy of that film would be viewed VERY differently.

                • “All of those movies named, WERE ALLOWED TO KEEP THE DIRECTOR WHO HAD BROUGHT SOUL TO THE PROJECT!”

                  Wrong. Try doing some research. Wizard of Oz, Tootsie, Cocoon, and Gone with the Wind all went through multiple directors.

                  Nice try though…

                  • Research? I wouldn’t watch ‘Wizard of Oz, Tootsie, Cocoon, or Gone with the Wind’ if you paid me. Why on Earth would I research them?

                    I was referring to the movies mentioned above that are actually worth watching.

                    • Lol! Alright man. But let’s just be clear that you did say all those movies named were allowed to keep their director.

                      Cocoon, Wizard of Oz, Tootsie, and Gone with the Wind were all named and all of them kept their director.

                      Also, they were nominated for Academy Awards and won awards. All those movies are generally considered classics and worth watching by most cinephiles.

              • Longshanks…

                Now you are just playing dumb. In no way am I saying that Peyton Reed is the next Spielberg or Zemeckis. Could he end up good? Sure why not? He has the massive resources of MCU/Disney backing him.

                The point was that there are many directors who started off unknown and with little to their resume. Guys like Spielberg, Coppola, and Zemeckis started out this way and faced many problems during production yet went on to direct a great movie.

                It’s not like when Spielberg did Jaws the world said, “Oh my God, you are Steven Spielberg! You are amazing!” No, he did a great movie to earn respect. Peyton Reed is faced with a very similar situation as those directors/movies I’ve expressed and they put out a great product. Why is it unimaginable for Peyton Reed to put out Ant-Man as a great product? Maybe he is a one hit wonder. Maybe he makes this movie great and does nothing else good.

                It’s one thing to not believe in this movie. It’s another to say that this movie can’t succeed. It is ignorant since other movies with worse problems in worse situations and with an unknown director have succeeded.

                • “In no way am I saying that Peyton Reed is the next Spielberg or Zemeckis.”

                  Read your own posts again,because it sounds like that’s exactly what you are saying.If it wasn’t what you were saying,then you should have used different examples of troubled productions like say The Crow,or Twilight Zone The Movie,where actors actually died,and the movies actually succeeded.Or like someone mentioned before about Dougray Scott getting replaced by Jackman in X-Men films,or any other casting replacements.

                  No,you specifically choose all movies with Oscar winning or nominated directors,so it seems like you are trying to compare Reed with those directors you mentioned.

                  Oh,and news flash,Ant-Man WILL NOT be anywhere near as good as the movies you mentioned either,but that’s just my opinion.

                  • Oh my gosh how are you not getting this? You need to learn to not just glean someone’s work if you are going to use their words against them.

                    I literally said the following things:

                    “(Peyton Reed) Maybe he is a one hit wonder. Maybe he makes this movie great and does nothing else good”

                    “…there are many directors who started off unknown and with little to their resume”

                    “Guys like Spielberg,..faced many problems during production yet went on to direct a great movie.”

                    “Peyton Reed is faced with a very similar situation”

                    “In no way am I saying that Peyton Reed is the next Spielberg or Zemeckis.”

                    MEANING: You are judging Peyton Reed based on his resume which, I agree, is pretty terrible (except Yes,Man). He is being given a chance to show what he’s got. The EXAMPLE directors I’ve listed were given a chance (with a lacking resume) and they made “their mark” with a great movie. They also had troubled production. Those guys went on to continued success. I’m not saying that Reed will go on to continue making great movies. Yet he can still make ‘A’ good movie, especially with MCU and Disney supporting him.

                  • By the way, I find it ironic that you have issues with the directors I chose as examples (Zemeckis, Spielberg, Coppola) and said I should have used Twilight Zone: The Movie as a better example.

                    Guess who directed Twilight Zone The Movie? 4 Famed directors who had some great films. Guess who those 4 directors were?

                    1. Joe Dante (Gremlins 1 and 2, Explorers, Innerspace, The Burbs)

                    2. George Miller (Mad Max movies, Witches of Eastwick, Lorenzo’s Oil)

                    3. John Landis (Animal House, Three Amigos, Coming to America, Trading Places, Blues Brothers)

                    4. STEVEN SPIELBERG!!!!!

                    Thanks for helping to assist me in proving my point…LOL

                    • ::Sets balls on Clay’s shoulder::

  2. People need to stop freaking out about this movie just because it’s having problems. It hasn’t even hit filming yet. At least the kinks and bugs (ants?) are being worked out before filming starts.

    So lets take a look at why some of your are acting like it’s the Ant-ocalypse:
    1. Wright left. So what? His movies are great, granted. But that doesn’t mean another person can’t shine. So, not a deal breaker unless you are a booty hurt die hard Wright follower.
    2. The script is being re-worked. Happens a lot. Even during filming.
    3. An actor had to drop because of scheduling conflicts. Oh NO! (sarcasm). Not the first time in film history.
    4. 2 other actors were cut because of script changes. Again, not a big deal since we don’t know the original script or the new one. Who says its not for the better?

    Either way, there are quite a few great movies that had production woes but were great. Titanic, Back to the Future, Apocalypse Now, Tootsie, Jaws, Gone with the Wind…

    Those of you who keep bashing it and/or hoping it fails on every Ant-Man thread. It is your prerogative. It is obvious that you are anti-Marvel. However, if you truly care for the character or the MCU then try not to be so negative. IMO, MCU has only had 2 movies that have not met expectation and yet are still decent movies. Thor 2 and IM2.

    I don’t think Paul Rudd and Michael Douglas would have signed on to something they didn’t have faith in. So give the movie a break. Wait until you see set photos and previews.

    • The very first thing you said is what worries me, the fact that they haven’t even started filming yet (and they’re facing all of these production troubles), and the movie releases in less than a year.

      • But that is the overall point…

        The troubles they are having are not that big of a deal.

        The only real issue over this film was the director left. But it was before filming. Could have been worse. Would have sucked if Wright left after filming started. Marvel has done a good job tying all stories together and making sure stories are good. Obviously the story/script re-writes were a big enough deal for Feige to step in and have a say.

        And the 3 actors being gone isn’t a big deal. It’s not like Rudd or Douglas left.

        • “It’s not like Rudd or Douglas left.”

          …yet.

  3. Wow this is turning out to be a Marvel Studios behind-the-scenes myth right about now… the movie that refused to get made.

    If Edgar Wright releases a Roach-Man movie with his ideas with the unwilling cast… I’m certain there will be a significant number of people who will turn it into a cult classic. Kickstarter anyone?

  4. ‘We didn’t know who he was playing, but given his charismatic persona and willingness to tread into dark territory (Watchmen, Insidious), the odds on his portraying an Ant-Man villain were pretty good.”

    But now you do? Sure seems that way since “didn’t” is an expression denoting a past condition.

    • This writer is usually off the mark. You should’ve seen his article on the AoS hologram man. Pretty pointless.

  5. *sigh* I just want to hear some good news about this movie again. Ant-man is one of my favorite superheroes and it seemed to be a dream cast with a dream director. Now they’re losing one of the more intriguing actors and they replaced Edgar Wright with the boring choice of Peyton Reed. Give me some good news, Marvel!

  6. @ Anthony Vieira

    Now the question is who could possibly replace Patrick Wilson? Maybe Jason Statham lol
    So glad Corey Stoll is still on board cuz he is brilliant

    • who could they get to replace Patrick Wilson ???? ………. uh anyone … he’s a frigging actor not a nuclear scientist or something

      people do realize there are tons of actors in the world and anyone of them can step up and play virtually any role – consider actors like lego parts – if you lose one you can easily go get another one – that’s the entire job of Casting directors – they’re in charge of getting lego pieces for the director

      and I’m sure there are 100 or more equally talented “name actors” who would love to join the Marvel family
      and no offense Patrick Wilson fans – but I wouldn’t he’s exactly say he was A list talent – heck I would say Michael Pena is a bigger name than he is.

      and remember this: IT’S A MOVIE – no one is forcing you to go see it next year – if you don’t like things about it – don’t go see it
      there problem solved for you

  7. I said this earlier and will say it again. Peyton Reed doesn’t have a good resume and is an unknown, but who cares. He has a studio with a good track record of good films and with lots of resources backing him. There are many good directors who started off as relative unknowns with small resumes but hit it big with a movie that went through production woes.

    Spielberg was relatively unknown doing LOTS of tv episodes, tv movies, and movie shorts before his first major hit movie…JAWS which had lots of issues.

    Coppola did a lot of small time stuff but his big breakout movie was… GODFATHER which had production issues…

    Zemeckis was a relatively unkown director when he did Romancing the Stone which had problems such as post production issues and arguments between Zemeckis and Turner. His next film? BACK TO THE FUTURE: which had production issues including lead actor Michael J Fox being hired AFTER filming began. SIDENOTE Zemeckis was fired from directing Cocoon which ended up popular by up and coming Ron Howard.

    Tootsie had 2 different directors before Sydney Pollock took over. The script had many re-writes. Pollock and lead actor Dustin Hoffman had issues because apparently Hoffman was fairly controlling. Tootsie went on to be very popular.

    Gone with the Wind went through 3 DIFFERENT directors during filming! Not to mention the other issues that went on behind scenes. FACT: Victor Fleming, director of Wizard of Oz, was the 2nd director to step in but left over exhaustion.

  8. Michael Douglas being ‘disappointed’ Edgar left is hardly ‘disdain’.
    Disdain is equal to ‘contempt’ which is not what Douglas stated in speaking about the situation.