Why Ultron is in ‘Avengers 2′ Instead of the ‘Ant-Man’ Movie

Published 1 year ago by , Updated August 20th, 2013 at 2:22 pm,

Hank Pym Ant Man Movie Ultron Origin Differences Why Ultron is in Avengers 2 Instead of the Ant Man Movie

It’s ironic that Marvel Studios has been long heralded as the comic book movie studio that fans deserve – primarily because of the perception amongst said “fans” that Marvel would always honor its own characters and canon in the way that other studios – like Fox and Sony – would not.

Now, with Marvel Phase Two, we are seeing some radical departures from traditional Marvel comic book canon (see: The Mandarin in Iron Man 3) – and that deviation will continue all the way through The Avengers: Age of Ultron, the culminating chapter of Phase Two and immediate predecessor to Edgar Wright’s Ant-Man movie, which will kick off Marvel Phase Three in fall of 2015. As many Marvel fanboys have noticed, that ordering - Avengers 2 before Ant-Man - has been more than a little problematic, where canon is concerned.

In the comics, Ultron – the Skynet-style artificial intelligence/robot that often terrorizes The Avengers – was created by scientist Hank Pym, the alter-ego of Ant-Man. It’s still unclear whether or not Hank Pym will be introduced in The Avengers: Age of Ultron, but we do know that Ultron will be getting a (no pun) retooled origin story, with speculation leaning toward Tony Stark’s A.I. system Jarvis going rogue and creating the villain (in some form or fashion).

Ant Man Movie Costume Why Ultron is in Avengers 2 Instead of the Ant Man Movie

This is, as stated, a bold deviation from Marvel canon – one that will inevitably leave some fans upset – which is why Ant-Man writer/director Edgar Wright discussed the reasoning for keeping Ultron’s origin out of Hank Pym’s movie, while speaking with Huffpo:

[Ultron] was never in my script. Because even just to sort of set up what Ant-Man does is enough for one movie. It’s why I think “Iron Man” is extremely successful because it keeps it really simple. You have one sort of — the villain comes from the hero’s technology. It’s simple. So I think why that film really works and why, sometimes, superhero films fail — or they have mixed results — because they have to set up a hero and a villain at the same time. And that’s really tough. And sometimes it’s unbalanced.

You know, when I was younger I used to love Tim Burton’s “Batman.” I was like 15 and even then I was aware, “This is really the Joker’s film.” It’s like, the Joker just takes over and Batman, you really don’t learn too much about him. Comics haveyears to explain this stuff and in a movie you have to focus on one thing. So it’s about kind of streamlining, I think. Some of the most successful origin films actually have a narrower focus. You cannot put 50 years of the Marvel universe into a movie. It’s impossible.

With that mind-state, Wright seems to feel extra fortunate that his subject is Ant-Man, a superhero that is far from mainstream in the minds of casual moviegoers:

I think there’s something in that it’s a lesser known character, there’s hopefully more license. For the one percent of people who are like, “Wait, Hank Pym would never do that!” there’s 99 percent going, “Who’s Hank Pym?” So, to me, the source material is great but it also frees you up to be like: I’m going to make a movie. The movie is not going to represent 50 years of Marvel comics because that’s impossible. But I’m going to make a 100 minute movie — or 110 minutes [laughs].

Ultron Movie Origin Story Why Ultron is in Avengers 2 Instead of the Ant Man Movie

Want to know what changes executives tried to make with Scott Pilgrim, or what Wright has done with his latest film, The World’s End? Then read the full interview.

Meanwhile, how do you feel about the changes being made to the Ultron and Hank Pym characters? Do you feel betrayed by Marvel, or are they just doing what they need to do to make successful and entertaining films? Let us know in the comments.

___________

The Avengers: Age of Ultron Will be in theaters on May 1, 2015; Ant-Man on November 6, 2015

Source: HuffPo

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:
TAGS: ant-man, the avengers 2

202 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. Why it still doesn’t make sense.

    • Because the story of how he became Ant-man is going to take most of the movie, not setting up a villain back story. I mean it’s right there.

  2. I’m still not convinced. I’m fine with Tony Stark inadvertently creating Ultron but Ant Man has to be in Avengers 2 in some way. Whether it be Hank Pym cameo or a minor appearance as At Man like Hawkeye in Thor. There is no way Marvel won’t take the opportunity to introduce a third tier character like Ant Man in potentially the biggest movie of all time. Especially when Ant Man has his own movie coming out later that year.

    • i agree they should have Hank Pym work with Tony Stark to create Ultron

      • In EMH The Avengers have to teach Ultron about War/Violance to fight off Kangs army. Having Pym show up in Avengers AoU just to warn Stark about the dangers of teaching an AI about such things would be a good scene.

        • I agree with you. Or coming along as some sort of consultant after they realize Ultron has gone rogue…

  3. You know, people get upset that the movies change things about the comics. But look at the comics, there have been multiple versions of characters for a long time. Who’s to say the movies can’t spice it up to with its own, sort of, origin stories of said characters. As long as it’s a solid story and makes sense, I’m willing to watch whatever they come up with.

    • As modern mythology it’s the same thing as someone making a Hercules movie in which he is not the son of Zeus. Or setting Gilgamesh in Africa. Or maybe King Arthur can get Excalibur from a huge sky spirit instead of the Lady of the Lake. let’s make a movie called Snow White and the Seven Giants. I really like story of the Seven Dwarves but I think it’d be much more interesting if they were giants.

      • That’s like comparing a hill to a mountain lol.

      • + 100

      • Small view, big dreams of things….(hee-hee)

      • The King Arthur legends can change radically depending on the when and where of your source.

        Originally, Excalibur is a sword carried by various folk heroes (explaining some poems where it’s carried by Gawain). Geoffrey gives it to Arthur, but only notes that it was forged in Avalon. In some later traditions Arthur orders Excalibur thrown into the lake either to get rid of it (in which case a hand rises and returns it) or as he is dying (in which case she takes the sword and delivers him to Avalon).

        Around the 12th century the Lady emerges as the traitorous ex-student of Merlin who kidnaps a baby Lancelot and only gives Arthur Excalibur so that she could later order the execution of a knight as part of a blood feud. At the same time you have Boron writing about Excalibur being pulled from a stone as proof of the king’s heritage. Both stories are part of modern Arthurian legend.

        You could argue that it’s not about historical variations but popular image. Audiences wouldn’t accept an origin of Excalibur without the Lady of the Lake. Unless it’s him pulling it from stone, then that’s fine.

        And what does the obviously nerdy lit major think? Honestly, I don’t care if it’s handed off by a lady in a lake, taken from a stone, a family heirloom, a prize won in battle, or given to him by powers on high. Because it’s not about the details, it’s the meaning behind the act. Excalibur evolved from a mythological sword carried by dozens of unrelated heroes to a blade that was Arthur’s alone, but it’s always served the same purpose. When you see Arthur wield Excalibur you know that he’s the hero. That he has been ordained to this position. In fact, “a huge sky spirit” fits right in the more Christian flavored tellings. Angels handing over Excalibur as a sign of his divine kingship? It works so well that the only reason we don’t see it is probably the legends pagan origins.

        Now, I know there is far more demands on comics to keep to their canon but I personally feel the details behind Ultron’s conception are irrelevant. Anyone can build a AI that turns evil and tries to kill anyone, that’s a pretty standard sounding baddie. Ultron is more than that because of his personal connection to our heroes.

        The difference between Ultron and General Evil Robot is the difference between Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein’s monster and every movie monster that goes by Frankenstein. His relationship with Victor Frankenstein is key not because it’s Victor but because of what it says about psyche and power. If there was an alternate universe where Dr. Jekyll became obsessed with creating life instead of perfecting human nature maybe it would Jekyll’s monster. It would change details of the plot (I imagine it would be more of Jekyll attempting to conceal his creation from the law) but the overall meaning of the story could hold.

        With all that Pym gives to the story I totally understand why people are getting so frustrated. I’m one of those people who can Tony filling this role in the MCU. I… don’t even know why I felt the need to write this much on the subject. I’m just a huge lit geek.

        • Hey, this is going to seem pretty weirdly out of the blue, what with this coming 10 months later and everything. That being said, your analysis of Arthur bespeaks a lot of research that apparently I had been lacking. I’m currently writing a comic to be put up soon(ish) that is a comic book retelling of Arthurian legend, and I would actually love to bounce it off of you. Let me know if you’d be interested, I could really use your incisive knowledge.

    • ” Who’s to say the movies can’t spice it up” or paint themselves into a corner like ‘X3!’ I trusted Marvel wouldn’t do that, now I’m not so confident. I’ve lost a tremendous amount of interest in CB movies because of this…

  4. They’re (Marvel) trolling obviously, get used to it.

  5. Lets think of this logically. In the movie universe, Tony Stark is the tech genius. To have a character no one is familiar with to this point in said universe come out of nowhere and create arguably the most powerful and deadly artificial intelligence the world has ever seen just doesn’t fit the scope of what the films have already established. Now, for Stark to accidentally create Ultron, or even have JARVIS go haywire and become Ultron is a much better story to tell. Though, I do think having Pym as a tech in Stark industries somehow involved as a catalyst to the creation of Ultron would be a good move to make, even if it deviates from the original story.

    Sure, it screws with canon, but, for the movies, this is the much better way to go with the story. Especially now that Iron Man 3 seems to have laid the groundwork nicely for a JARVIS gone haywire..

    • Like there aren’t unsung geniuses out there? How unbelievable would it be for him to create this tech in his university lab as some guy that’s been overlooked for the genius he is. Hank Pym is much smarter than Stark in the comics. He’s right there behind Reed Richards. You could easily introduce Pym as just Pym and not yet Ant-man and the story would be fine. These unnecessary changes are gonna piss off a lot of fans who are going to be the primary moviegoers of these “fringe” characters. I put that in quotes because Wright makes it sound like Ant-man is lesser known when in fact he was a founding member of the Avengers. Maybe Wright should pick up a comic and learn something about his own character.

      • Wider audiences aren’t familiar with Pym. Even an Avengers fan, if they’re younger, could have read the comics and only have a passing association with Pym.

        To follow up on Scorpio’s logic, I don’t think it’s a matter of only having room for one “genius”. It’s a matter of streamlining the plot and using what they already have. Part of Ultron’s appeal is that he isn’t just some random robot gone bad that the team has to face, it’s intimately connected to them because of who and how it’s created. Emotionally, it makes more sense to use a character that we’re already attached to rather than using up a chunk of the film to introduce a new character, create the personality type necessary for the Ultron story to work, plus build up audience empathy and his relationship with the other characters. Either the movie is mostly Ant-man or it fails, and general audiences are left feeling like it’s Avengers Verses Random Robot and who is this Pym guy why should we care?

        MCU Tony has been shown to have the capability to build a pretty sophisticated AI and of course he can do a robot worth fighting. The audience knows him and likes him: if Tony’s tech goes evil, we feel for him. You can spend more time on his team mates reactions and building Ultron’s personality. In my mind, that makes for the better Avenger’s movie. I would much rather have a bad guy built on the psychological value of “this is one of us” then having to go through the long build up for what I honestly think wouldn’t have the emotional pay off.

    • I’d only counter by saying that maybe by creating Ultron is how Hank Pym ends up on S.H.E.I.L.D.’s radar. Aldrich Killian is a character main stream audiences didn’t know about and he turned out to be the major baddie in IM3. Same with Vanko in IM2. Just because they haven’t been introduced yet, doesn’t mean they can’t have important roles. That’s not to say that’s how it should happen though. They only have a couple hours to tell a full story and have a lot of characters to give fair screen time to. We saw what happened with Hawkeye in the first one, so I don’t think it’s a terrible idea to not include Pym, just saying it could be pretty easily incorporated into the story.

    • Pym is no different than Banner all of a sudden being a genius, or reed Richards, or even (in the comics) Peter Parker knows a bit about chemistry. They all start at space #1, even Stark.

    • “What the buggar are you doing, Dave?” (HAL)

  6. I am really tired of hearing directors basically say, “Oh yeah I love the source material, huge fan and all, but I really my version of this character is gonna be something great.” It reminds me of the Pink Floyd song “Have a Cigar” in which some big music producer is trying to schmooze the band members by saying “Well, I’ve always had a deep respect, and I mean that most sincerely. The band is just fantastic, that is really what I think. Oh by the way, which one’s Pink?” As any fan of Pink Floyd knows nobody in the band is named Pink Floyd. These directors just seem to latch on to something that is popular or could make them money or they have some random idea of their own and think it’s ok to switch up origins and alter character dynamics for their own selfish artistic vision. Just to be clear, I don’t mind changes that don’t alter what it means for that character to be that character. I don’t mind that Nick Fury in the movies isn’t the Nick Fury from the comics that led the Howling Commandos in WWII. That just wouldn’t make sense for him to be 100 years old and still leading shield but I think we can all agree that the Mandarin in IM3 was almost an insult to the character any comic fan is familiar with and was unnecessarily changed just to fit the director’s vision. It’s selfish. You wanna do your own thing with a character, then fine; but give the fans the characters we know and love first and then do your own thing. We want to see those characters brought to life the way we know them, not the way a director who isn’t a long time fan envisions them. I’m not the biggest Ant-man fan but it’s really the principle of it that gets me. We’re seeing this more and more and I hope this trend doesn’t bleed into the DCU.

    • what makes you think every change is gonna be like what happened to the Mandarin?

      • Not every change hopefully. Like I said, it’s really more the principle of the thing. Do justice to the characters as they are first then tell your own story. Ultron and Hank Pym are so closely intertwined in many stories it’s gonna weird for that to be the case in the movies. And what does Pym have other than Ultron? The portal to the Negative Zone? It just comes back to, why change it? There isn’t a real reason like there is in my Nick Fury example or changing jane Foster’s profession from EMT to astrophysicist or the CIA and Hank McCoy being the ones who created Cerebro in X-MEN: First Class. Those are fine because they don’t change the overall dynamics of characters and they’re understandable. If it doesn’t need to be changed then don’t change it. Write a new story. Sure. Avengers was a new story and I loved it. There is, however, no reason for Pym to not be the one who creates Ultron.

    • You are right! Like Bane. Put the red mask on first, make him physically bigger (taller) than Batman, Stronger, and then go in and put the tubes in front of his mouth with a pain suppressing effect rather than a venom strength enhancing one. Or make him take steriods to be strong, in addtion to, the pain vapors that he inhales in the mask. Steriods are realistic and people use them all the time to get stronger. Than Bane becomes more realistic like Nolan wanted, but he still makes him look the part first!

    • It’s not right to say that directors don’t care about the source material or that they’re not fans just because you and I don’t agree with certain changes. Is it a bit selfish? I don’t know but they have no obligations to stick to canon just to please a minority of people who go to see these films.

    • You said it. I bought the first issues of many of the marvel comics when they first came out (X-Men, Avengers, FF, IM, Cap A., Spiderman, Daredevil, etc.) and would really like to see them brought to the screen as the originators of these characters first meant them to be, not some strangers that someone tinkered with and played super-fantasy-football with. I think fanboy/girl loyalty deserves the reward of the characters as they originally were.

    • I’m still not convinced that Killian wasn’t just another pawn of Mandarin, hiring someone to fake being his boss, and that the real Mandarin hasn’t been revealed yet. They just laid too much groundwork for him in the first 2 movies for his portrayal in IM3 to be that simple.

    • like EW said, you have the 1% who go “no, that’s not right! in the comics, s/he does/did…”then you have the other 99% who say “mandarin who? what? the oranges??”

      • “Mandarin oranges”…well, it is true the big change in the character was pretty fruity!

  7. Why is everyone assuming that Jarvis will become Ultron? Couldn’t it be some sort of Stark technology mixed with the Extremis program? Wasn’t Aldrich Killian the founder of A.I.M.? So, isn’t it a possibility that A.I.M. influenced technology and Hydra’s chief scientist Arnim Zola combine to create Ultron? Having Jarvis go rogue seems a little too Iron Man focused for team-up movie…but that is my own opinion.

    • And I’m fine with the movie adaptations taking their own liberties with the story. If I wanted canon, I’d go back and read my favorite comic book story lines.

      • +1 (I had this thought several comments ago, lol)

    • The Extremis virus is bio-weaponry though. Unless they plan on changing Ultron EVEN MORE, I don’t think anything “bio” will have much to do with him…

      • You’re right, the Avenger, but I was thinking more on the lines that A.I.M. and Hydra could combine their efforts. Arnim Zola’s understanding of cosmic technology combined with the technology learned from the Iron Patriot theft and attack on Stark mansion…information on Stark’s tech gained thanks to A.I.M.’s Mandarin and the Extremis virus. I’m hoping Whedon uses the other Marvel movies to make us forget about A.I.M and then bring them back in with Ultron in the Avengers 2: Secret of the Ooze.

        Hail Hydra.

        • Hahahaha Okay, I see where you’re coming from.
          I’m still in favour of Hank Pym creating Ultron… like it should be! ;) But since that’s not happening, your idea is definitely one of the more original ones I’ve seen (imo, it’s far better than a convenient “JARVIS gone haywire” stunt)

          • We always have Avengers EMH with Hank Pym creating Ultron. And who knows, maybe they’re Mandarining us and Pym will create Ultron.

            • As long as there’s no “twist” where we find out Pym is actually an Australian rock star and Ultron is actually a suit piloted by the rock star’s pet capuchin.

              • **Whedon tosses out script**

                LOL :D

          • I think you can still have Hank Pym be responsible for the creation of Ultron with either Pym or Ultron’s origins being directly part of Avengers 2. After all, while Loki was the “villain” in Avengers, the real villain is Thanos, and nobody, aside from perhaps Loki, has the first clue about his involvement. What they say they are going to do, and what they actually do, are not necessarily the same. Take for example the claim that Khan wasn’t going to part of Star Trek 2.

  8. I don’t really mind what they do with the characters. As long as it’s not too far off from who the characters are and has a good story, I’m sold.

  9. “You have one sort of — the villain comes from the hero’s technology”
    Is it just me, or did Edgar Wright maybe kinda sorta confirm Tony Stark being the creator of Ultron by saying that?
    …Probably not, but still.

    Can’t say I agree with Wright when he says a movie has to focus on “one thing” and being narrowed down. It’s more than possible for a film to have a well-fleshed out protagonist and antagonist… you just need to write the script properly.

    A good movie – comic book or not – should be able to tell an interesting story with interesting characters (PLURAL) and still be able to convey an overall message, and weave in different themes and ideas….. So no, not just “one thing”. The focus should/can be on the “hero”, but that doesn’t mean that the other characters need to fall by the wayside. ‘Skyfall’ had a fantastic villain, but at the same time it still felt like it was Bond’s journey: his story. He had a great arc in the film, and the plot itself was very well thought out imo.

    I understand what he’s saying about not being able to include 50 years of CB stories, but that doesn’t mean you should ignore it all and do whatever. A lot of the recent CBMs have done a great job of taking inspiration, and incorporating ideas/plot points/visual moments/themes from the decades of stories already out there.
    TDK trilogy, Avengers and Iron Man are only some of the examples.

    • When he said “the villain comes from the hero’s technology,” I think he was just referring to the first Iron Man.

      • Vanko’s tech was adapted from the ARC reactor technology his father and Howard Stark worked on…in IM2.

    • I’m pretty sure Whedon already confirmed Stark being Ultron’s creator in one interview or another.

  10. He does have a point, and it seems like the best way to handle it. Making an Ant-Man movie interesting is enough of a task.

    • And I still think that Hank Pym will cameo in Avengers 2

      • I hope so.

      • I hope so too. In fact, I hope for more than a cameo. A couple of scenes would be nice.

        • For once I hope (though I doubt) that Marvel is keeping a big secret from us, and will surprise us when suddenly Pym appears big and bold on the screen like Goliath, reaches out into the theater, and grabs a big handful of our popcorn!

  11. Um guys, how have none of you noticed that Edgar Wright pretty much confirms that Hank Pym will be THE ant man in the film?
    That’s huge, before that we were dealing with the possibility of Hank being an old scientist and Scott Lang being the main.

    Thank god.
    Care less about the Ultron thing now, just give us a likable Hank character.

    • Scott Lang can still be in it.

      • yes of course – but I think this wording rules out the possibility
        of scott lang being ant man and pym simply being the creator of the tech

        • They can base it off of To Steal An Ant-Man in which Lang steals Pym’s tech, so I wouldn’t get too happy yet.

    • I noticed that too. I was thinking he said Ant-Man was going to be Scott Lang earlier, but I was always hoping for Hank Pym, and I’m glad that appears to be the case now.

      • Likewise, absolutely stoked and hope it proves to be true!

    • It occured to me too, but I don’t want to get my hopes too high. But there have been evidences pointing in that direction that have been popping up on the Net from time to time, and maybe it’s a stretch on my part, but it seems to be logical, at least to me.

      I don’t really care if Lang is in the movie, but I would want Pym to be the main protagonist. And preferably, moving on to become an Avenger ;-)

      • Same, Edgar Wright tweeted me saying “Did I say that?”
        When I mentioned the Hank Pym confirmation to him, seems
        there’s still a chance Hank Pym ain’t our main guy.

      • YYYEEESSS!!!!!!

        • (Goldilocks slobbers in excitement all over his computer keyboard!)

  12. I just hope Ultron’s A.I. comes from outer space. Courtesy of Thanos.

    • That’s an interesting idea, I mean I still prefer the comic original idea for sure, but your idea intrigues me. It would help connect it to the inevitable Thanos showdown.

  13. Kofi has been on a Marvel bashing spree of late. From articles to podcasts, dude just can’t seem to say anything positive about them, theres really no need to sarcastically put down “marvel fanboys” like that.

    • +1

    • I honestly never saw any “Marvel fanboy bashing” from Kofi at all.

      The only people bashing are those in the comments section who rightfully have to school the “Marvel fanboys” away from their illogical opinions (like Mandarin being “ruined” in IM3 or whatever crap they spew next).

      Majority opinion of the Tim Burton Batman movie is that it was great. No one on here complains that they changed the origin slightly to make Joker the killer of the Waynes to fit the story rather than going with the killer from canon, Joe Chill.

      That’s because Joker was the villain and they had to tie him to Batman somehow to make their showdown at the end seem more than just a random encounter because one’s a criminal and the other a vigilante.

      That’s what IM3 did. Took a person from Stark’s past and made him the real villain of the piece in a brilliant way,

      This is what they seem to be doing with Ultron too.

      If a change in a movie is that disappointing then just don’t watch it and read the comic books again instead. Besides, think of the non-comic book readers who enjoy these movies and get interested in comic books, where they’ll read the actual origins.

      Nobody complains that Robin Hood movies don’t end with him having his wrists slit by his friends to speed up his death while he suffers a debilitating disease so why complain about comic book movies slightly deviating?

      I swear, since the internet became popular and everyone could get access, the amount of whiners and complainers who moan about the slightest non-issue has increased thousand-fold.

      • @ Dazz

        Burton’s Joker and MCU Mandarin? Really? No one complained about Burton’s Joker because it didn’t suck. The Mandarin twist just added more silly to an already too silly movie.

        “Hi. I’m billionaire Tony Stark. I have kid side-kicks and shameless ‘Dora the Explorer’ references in my movies. Say hi to the Mandarin, and make note of the Budweiser he is sipping on.”

    • I’ve been on a Marvel bashing spree for YEARS:

      http://screenrant.com/iron-man-2-story-problems-kofi-60445/
      http://screenrant.com/the-avengers-movie-discussion-kofi-47707/
      http://screenrant.com/thor-movie-discussion-avengers-kofi-115624/

      Please give me my due :-)

      Irony: I grew up reading 2x the Marvel than I did DC Comics. But still… here we find ourselves.

      • :D

      • Whats the point though? you’re giving them all this crap even though they’re the one studio that has been consistently putting their best foot forward when producing cbm’s. You write articles on how Aquaman or Wonder Woman can be the next big DC movie even though we know damn well those movies are still getting no traction over at WB. Marvel is doing the opposite and delving deep into their roster giving us freakin Guardians of the Galaxy. And yet all you do is look at the negative and act like they can’t do anything right. I dont get it..lol

        • Marvel’s cinematic universe is doing very well and I enjoy them but they do have their flaws.

          • Of course they have flaws..like every other studio in the world, but we don’t just continuously bash them for mistakes while never acknowledging the good they do.

            • Never acknowledging the good they do?
              You do realize Kofi gave ‘The Avengers’ a 4.5/5 in his review back in 2012, right?
              Honestly, it seems you’re seeing only what you want to see. Kofi, however, is being professional and unbiased as far as I can tell.

              • +1

              • +11

                • awwww, thanks guys!

                  It is true. We (as a site) are just critical of all this stuff because we love it so much and want the best for it and cut ourselves in the shower behind the knee when it turns out badly.

                  All despots are secretly broken-hearted idealists. :-)

                  • …cheese and rice….

  14. i think its better to take and wait see attitude until the next marvel film
    comes out, someone here made a statement that they don’t like tony stark
    being the origin of every single problem this team faces and i concur with
    that statement. marvel and dc have done a great job so far not going to
    horrendously far like sony and fox have but sometimes i fear marvel may
    start copying their formulas when there is no need to.

    • I might be missing your point, but Tony Stark didn’t have much to do with Loki and I assume he won’t have much to do with Thanos.

      • Whose tower did Loki use to activate the Tesseract? Who brought the nuclear warhead through the porthole to destroy the army of Thanos? Who ate shawarma?

        • Loki using Tony’s tower didn’t really have anything to do with Tony or Iron Man. It was just the opportune place to put the machine. I agree with Deezy that it was more Thor’s falt than anyone.
          That’s true about destroying Thanos’ army; I didn’t think of that, though I’m not entirely sure that would faze Thanos much.
          And he sure did eat that shawarma! :-)

          • Loki used Stark Tower because it was a self sustaining power structure. That opening scene in which Iron Man connected an arc reactor device underwater and then they powered the tower up…that was the reason for it. Like a hoverboard going over water, the portal needed power.

            • LOL.

              “BATTER UP!”

              • as much as i love the BTTF, 2, and that scene in particular, has got to be some of the worst sound editing ever.

            • I still wouldn’t say that Tony’s falt though. That’s like saying it is Ford’s falt if someone excapes from a robbery in a Ford truck. It is the person using the trucks fault, and in turn it was Loki’s fault (and perhaps indirectly Thor’s fault.)

              • I never said it was Tony’s fault. I was only saying the story was very Stark heavy. Loki used Stark tech…and the Tesseract that Tony’s dad recovered from the bottom of the ocean

                • I think that was an honest attempt at involving all the Avenger’s. It’s Tony’s tower that Loki (brother of Thor) uses to power the cube knocked into the sea by one Captain America. They even had it give off gamma radiation so they could tie in Bruce.

        • No one ate the swarthy mama, er, swarming rammer, I mean pshaw my armor, uh that is…whatever that slop was. Look again at the after-credits scene. They all looked like laconic cows chewing their cuds and not enjoying it. In fact, I was waiting for someone to yell, “OK, group, let’s all blow chunks in unison!”, and see them spew on the screen. Now that they pobably would have enjoyed, more than that toe-cheese-tofu stuff or whatever they were supposed to be eating. Now try a Whopper or Bonus Jack burger–now that you’ll like, bubbalah!

          • Huh?…never mind…

            • I concur :)

    • I might be missing your point, but Tony Stark didn’t have much to do with Loki and I assume he won’t have much to do with Thanos, as far as creating them goes.

    • How is Tony Stark the origin of every problem? He had nothing to do with Loki attacking earth. That was Thors fault more than anything. ANd people forget that Cap actually had the most screentime in the Avengers. It just seems like RDJ’s larger than life personality makes it seem like he’s being lorded over everyone else when this is not the case. We’ve just seen him more because his movies have been first off the slate.

    • Just about everything in the MCU, up to this point, can be blamed on one of three people, including and mostly limited to: Odin, Tony Stark, and to a lesser extent that old guy who made the Super Soldier serum.

      No criticisms there, just an ironic observation.

  15. Does anyone who is offering up the possibility of “Jarvis going haywire” actually
    think that’s a cool idea?
    I can think of nothing worse of having that voice on a villain. yuck.

    my hope is that the new ultron has been created by the world council as a sort of
    “safeguard” against all of the avengers combined, so has the powers of (to some extent)
    and the power to match thor, hulk etc. using stolen stark tech

    remember in im3, stark had the hulkbuster armour and the god killer armour,
    so in the mcu he’s obviously been researching the abilities and his own safeguards
    against the other avengers (even if it’s only for feelings of insignificance in power compared)
    i think in ca2 we’ll learn that stark tech has been stolen for the purpose of ultron

    ultron will go rogue from the world council (or somebody working for the baddies
    will activate whatever allows him too – perhaps whoever scarlett and quicksilver are working for)

    and this will open the window for stark to resuit out of guilt

    • I think it’s a cool idea.

      • A different voice then at least? Right?
        A whimpy english butler voice calling itself Ultron sounds like
        a horrible idea to me

        • Jarvis played by Alfred (Batman crossover?).

    • I like it. Except, the World Council hires A.I.M. and Arnim Zola to create Ultron. Then, Hydra activates Ultron.

      Hail Hydra.

      • OK this response is hysterical. +1 just because I’m lmao.

    • That’s similar to what I’ve been thinking. My hope is that S.H.I.E.L.D. higher ups collaborate with the U.N. (or something along those lines) to create a a defense they can fully control, rather than the loose cannons that are the Avengers. I was thinking this defense AI is Ultron and becomes “unshackled” (like EDI in ME2) but then instead of helping turns on them which requires the Avengers to be assembled once again.

      • Reagan Star-Wars Initiative is available….

    • i wonder if shield will have a hand in it, and it be more stuff based on The Destroyer, because of us being “hopelessly, hilariously” outgunned, and maybe hyrdra, or aim, or someone uploads a virus to it, and yada yada yada…there’s your story.

      speaking of the destroyer, is that a new one in thor2?

  16. i dont think kofi does it intentionally and is just merely stating the obvious. i think like myself he likes the marvel brand but wants to see
    the canon respected for the most part. personally i think the next avengers
    movie is about ultron because marvel has mastered making lots of robots
    as we saw in all iron man movies and of course RDJ salary is going to affect
    the special and visual effects of next avengers movie resulting in more robots. but we shall wait and see.

    • If he likes the brand, he’s sure not showing it. I just listened to the Elysium podcast where he said something along the lines of being sick and tired of Marvel and that their full of s***. I don’t know, it was just very off-putting tbh. I’m not saying the MCU is above criticism but he pretty muc puts them down every chance he gets.

    • I doubt his salary will affect special or visual FX!!

  17. They better not mess around with thanos’s story.

  18. Meh. Ultron is pretty boring regardless of who is responsible for inventing it. I like it when things stay close to the source material but I feel that the Ultron story-line not being in ANT-MAN is a good thing.

  19. In Avengers 1 we had an Asgardian threat, now we need an Earthly threat. So how about running with the scene after Iron Man 1 where Tony talks to Ross about his green guy problem. AIM, Hydra, World Council, Hammer, or Red Skull gets this tech and creates Ultron. The Earth villans need to shine now.

  20. WILL ARNETT FOR HANK PYM!!!… That is all.

    • WILL ARNETT FOR EVERYTHING!!!

      • I endorse this statement.

  21. Once it starts…..

  22. If this was Fox, there would be so much hate lmao. In Whedon we trust? In Marvel/Disney we trust? That’s cute.

    • Actually, I support Sony and Fox’s vision too. It’s when they make terrible movies that I actually get angry. Spider-Man 3 sets me off like no other film. Iron Man 2 gets me all riled up. And I’ve never watched Ghostrider 2 or Electra. So, it isn’t the studio. It’s the movie.

      • I suggest you do NOT watch Ghost Rider 2. If you get angry over Spider-Man 3 there’s no telling what Ghost Rider would do aha. Take the healthy route man.

        • Not planning on ever watching it :)

  23. Ultron is a very big part of Hank Pym and should not be taken away from his story.
    As for Ultron being created inadvertently by Tony Stark, I see how it could work etc, but it yet again puts Tony/RDJ front and center of the screen. It seems he always gets the bigger parts. Not that I have a problem with him, just give the others a chance.

  24. I wonder which version of Hank Pym they will use. Earth’s Mightiest Hero’s Hank Pym was a Pacifist with powers who wanted to talk things out before using his powers. I didn’t really like that version. Ultimate Avengers Hank Pym was quick to fight the bad guys but he was a wife beater and a major A**hole I hope they take the good qualities of both.

    I hope they let him shrink and grow tall then he would be worth watching. As long as its not Jason Lang. Unless they use 1 for shrinking (antman)and 1 for growing (Goliath). But that might get confusing.

    • How about they use 616U Pym? He’s a great guy (slighty troubled at times, but a great guy ;-)), and A:EMH Pym is very much inspired by him. He has been in existence for over 50 years, after all. Founding member and all, you know? ;-)

      Ultimate Pym would be redoundant, they will already have Stark as the wisecrack, and Quicksilver as the annoying sarcastic jerk. No need for more. That character is an insult to the “real” Pym, and The Ultimates is majoritarily responsible for Pym’s unjustified bad reputation. Better not get anywhere close to that alternate Pym. Cause that is NOT Hank Pym…

    • Use the early version from the comics when he was Giant-Man. Just a good guy hero, a good scientist, not a wife-beater or a pacifist.

  25. Well, at least the costume me be from Marvel Comics ;)

  26. Ant-man is really not that cool. I don’t ever recall reading and issue of The Avengers and thinking “that was a good read but it needed more Ant-man”. All the Ant-man fanboys need to realize that he’s, at best, a third tier character.

    Marvel studios realizes that they are focusing on making this genius level scientist character as compelling or a more compelling than the two genius level scientists characters that are already part of the Avengers (Tony Stark & Bruce Banner).

  27. Wonder if they’ll have Shield try to utilize the Chitauri technology and remnants from the Avengers and their whole Chitauri network thing and try to set up some sort of A.I. using Jarvis as a blueprint that goes haywire.

    Or maybe:

    When their enemies were at the gates the Romans would suspend democracy and appoint one man to protect the city. It wasn’t considered an honor, it was a public service.

    Tony, the last man that they appointed to protect the republic was named Caesar…and he never gave up his power.

    Okay, fine. You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain. Whoever Iron Man may be to the world, I don’t wanna do this for the rest of my life. How could I? Iron Man is looking for someone to take up his mantle.

    Someone like Ultron?

    Maybe. If it’s up to it.

    What if Ultron is the Iron Man’s legacy? Hm?

  28. um….I dont see why he would be in just an Iron Man movie or in Ant Man because Ultron was created by both Tony and Hank.

    • In the original comics, Ultron was created only by Pym. Stark had nothing to do with it. I’m talking 616 universe, of course.

  29. They can always have the villain spontaneously show up in the beginning of the movie and as the movie unfolds, we find out its origins. They can later on find out Ultron has killed Hank Pym in order to act on its own or something like that.

    This way they can use the other Ant-Man in the Ant-Man movie like they wanted.

    • Wow… how do you believe fans would react to that, knowing that they’re pissed that Pym will not be creating Ultron? Killing Pym off would already be the ultimate insult, but then to have someone else become Ant-Man in the MCU… I can’t even put it into words how outraged I would be…!

      • Kill off Pym before he even gets started, and I will be pissed like a giant-man-sized kidney!