That's literally a teaser for a teaser.
That's literally a teaser for a teaser.
Would you consider it a teaser trailer trailer, or a teaser trailer teaser?
I have a bad feeling about this. I think it's going to be a Daredevil/Electra/Amazing Spider-Man/Fantastic 4/Hulk rather than an Iron Man/Avengers/Captain America 2.
They're going with the more recent Scott Lang storyline, rather than the older Hank Pym one that I know from my old comic reading days. "Spider-man" is Sony Pictures. "Ant Man" is Marvel Studios, who have learnt from their "The Incredible Hulk" debacle. Hopefully it will be as good as their other Phase 3 movies to date.
Not that I really care who's distributing it or paying the wages (it's the director, script, and cast that matters), there's a whole long list of movies I didn't particularly care for with Marvel listed as production company. Elektra was Marvel Enterprises/Studios, as was Daredevil. And both Ang Lee's Hulk and The Incredible Hulk, and Iron Man 3, Captain America 1, Thor 1, and Fantastic 4 1-2, The Wolverine, and X-Men 3; and Marvel is listed actually as one of the producers of the new Amazing Spider-man films along with Sony. They only have about a 50% hit rate. My guess is that Ant Man will be one of the bad 50%.
The director, script, and cast are far more important than who happens to be distributing it. Plus the p Besides, Marvel was responsible for two Hulk films, Captain America 1, Iron Man 3,
Never apologize for liking B-Movies.Of those last four I actually liked two (CA1, IM3). Then again I was a reader of the WWII based Captain America comics and "Sgt. Fury and his Howling Commandos", so I was somewhat predisposed to liking Cap1. I don't think that the hulk was at all well represented until "The Avengers." Unfortunately I would say that super hero movies, as a whole, seem to have a rather terrible track record.
I'll freely admit that I even liked "The Shadow", to my shame.