Hank Pym might not be Ant Man in the film

Before Hank Pym fans jump to a sudden conclusion and swear to boycott this and all other Marvel films for all time, this is just speculation in an IGN article. Here, Edgar Wright confirms that Pym will appear in the film. BUT, Wright has also talked about his version of Ant Man as "a film about a 'badass secret agent' in the past. Thus, there is a small possibility that it might not be Hank Pym who actually dons the helmet and costume of Ant Man. This description isn't best suited to how we know Hank Pym to be. Instead, Ant Man might be Scott Lang, a reformed criminal who inherits Ant Man's trademark helmet and gear. Pym could just be the creator of the Pym Particles and the gear

So what do you think of this possibility? Is it a good way to make an Ant Man film? Or might it betray the core concept of Hank Pym's legacy in favour of something else?

@v_scarlotte_rose will be pissed when she hears this. Btw I don't understand why they're doing this to Pym, he's one of the most important Avengers and Marvel is trying to downgrade him by giving away one of his biggest creations to Tony Stark and keeping him out of his own movie(if its not a false rumor).

@rustyroy: As I specify in the OP, it's merely speculation based on Wright's description of Ant Man as a badass secret agent. Pym has never been any kind of secret agent in his history. He's been a scientist above all else, not involved in any espionage. Hence Lang might be the character who wears the Ant Man suit and Pym takes on a mentor role instead.

Hnn. On one hand we already have scientists in the form of Banner and Stark. On the other hand, we already have secret agents in Hawkeye and Widow.

On a third hand, I just realized I don't particularly care about Ant-Man. That being said, it could work.

Shawn of the dead is really gonna make a catwoman duplicate movie

@lvenger: Then I hope its a false speculation.

@veshark: I know right? Both categories are filled already yet being a scientist is integral to Pym's character but Wright has described the film as a kind of secret agent movie. It just doesn't seem to fit.

@russellmania77: We can't tell that for certain yet. Certainly when not enough information has been released about the film to compare it to the monstrosity that was Catwoman.

@rustyroy: I'm sure it will be. But it's still a possibility all the same.

I really think that Marvel should give more credit to Hank Pym than they are.He is one of the original Avengers and one of the most entertaining and interesting ones and a great genius.I don't mind Scott Lang but he should appear in a future movie about Ant-Man or in another Avengers movie.We should have Hank Pym.

Good point, and you would have thought with the absence of Reed Richards within the Marvel Studios universe (Well, at the moment anyway) they would have taken this opportunity to introduce a character to fill that void.

This was the rumour going around years ago when the script was first in talks. Then fears were quelled when Marvel said that it would be Hank, though that was probably just lying. It's Marvel, after all.

@fadetoblackbolt: Ah I see. I thought this sounded familiar.

The Marvel Cinematic Universe needs to have a genius and I was glad that it would be Hank but I guess so far I have been wrong.

@tdk_1997 said:

Marvel hates Hank because most of the guys with the most power in the comics hate him. Bendis and Brevoort both hate Hank, and put the screws to him any time they can.

With Banner and Stark, Pym would be redundant.

@imagineman16 said:

Pym is smarter than both Banner and Stark.

He's the third smartest man isn't he? Only Doom and Reed outclass him in intellect. But Banner's the fourth smartest so he's not too far behind.

@lvenger said:

Yeah, he's definitely third. Marvel like to say Tony is higher because they suck, but on feats Hank is waaaaaaaaaaaaaay above.

Tony's answer to every question is build another armour.

And because of those two idiots everybody else hates him because they haven't read a single good book with him.They think that he is that guy that is a genius but is too much of a douchebag and always says that he is the smartest man in the world like he did recently in Avengers A.I #1.

Yeah Hank has way more versatile feats than Tony does. Stark has rather repetitive feats after a while. Either they're good prep time ones or some armour ones.

@tdk_1997 said:

Yep, that's exactly it. Not to mention that they call him a wife-beater (when 90% of Marvel's big name heroes have beaten up at woman at some stage) because he's the only one who takes responsibility .

He's the only one that takes responsibility because Marvel don't like him and they want everyone else to hate him.

I already am a bit. I know it's all speculation, and we don't know for sure what's going on, but after the news about Ultron, I don't know what other changes to expect.

If it turns out to be Scott Lang in the main role, I hope that Hank will be there in another identity(probably Yellowjacket). Wasp should be there too.

I'm aware that Pym is, in terms of the 616 universe, smarter than Banner and Stark. The thing is... that doesn't really matter here. A movie's structure has to be different, and in the context of a movie, balancing 3 geniuses is a recipe for failure, especially when the smartest of them (Pym) is someone who general audiences aren't going to care about or like as much as Stark or Banner. Like it or not, Tony Stark is the epicenter of the Cinematic universe; we've seen his character built and crafted over 4 different movies (keep in mind this isn't a discussion about the quality of those movies, that's irrelevant here), and having Stark be the creator of Ultron is, for better or for worse, a more sensible culmination of it all. In the Cinematic universe, Tony is king; and just as God oh-so-dramatically created Satan, Tony will be the unwitting architect of their enemy.

We don't need Hank Pym in the grand scheme of the Cinematic universe. The genius quota has been filled, and for his intelligence to have any meaning in an Avengers setting, Banner and Stark would be downplayed, which would piss off the thousands of people who, lets face it, were only going to see Iron Man and Hulk again. Comic book movies aren't made for comic book fans anymore. That sucks, but if we accept it, then we can at least move past our prejudices and enjoy them for what they are. With the way in which Tony has been crafted in the Cinematic universe, having him be the man behind Ultron is, in all honesty, a better story.

Excellent post, I couldn't agree with you more.

@imagineman16: Very nice post, but I disagree. Stark and Banner really didn't do anything of particularly large note in terms of intelligence in Avengers. Theyjust kind of said that they were clever and then their powers came in and did the work for them.

By virtue of that, you just establish that Hank's a genius in his own film, then have him as the Giant/Ant-Man in Avengers. How awesome would it have been to have a 60ft Giant-Man clash against a gigantic Ultron? Marvel's very own kind of Kaiju moment, right there. Not to mention the shrinking thing allows for a lot of options too.

If having three geniuses is redundant, then so is having three "tanks" in Hulk, Thor and Iron Man. Add two humans and a super-soldier and the whole team is made up of redundancies. It would have been very easy to bring Hank in, but Whedon and co were just too lazy to do it. And they stole Hank's biggest villain because Iron Man's suck. A weak effort by all involved.

Nice post man. I do prefer Banner and Stark as characters so I totally understand and kind of agree with the focus on them but it's a tad disrespectful to the source material and Hank Pym fans (small as they may be for an underrated character). Still it's too early to predict how Whedon will play it out so I've reserved my judgement for it.