Marvel Cinematic Universe - Timeline

Wait I thought antman just started production a few weeks ago?

I don't think it's started production yet, I believe it starts next year (don't forget Ant Man isn't scheduled to come out until late 2015, meaning they'll probably start pre-production/filming mid to late 2014.

Good because that costume looked like crap

Eh, it's tough to make out but don't forget this was only test footage with a very limited budget. I'm sure the real costume will look decent.
 
Two things one THE AVENGERS MADE OVER A Billion dollars THEIR BUDGET IS HUGE. Secondly yes they started production mid- late February
 
Two things one THE AVENGERS MADE OVER A Billion dollars THEIR BUDGET IS HUGE.

Well, the Avengers budget was huge, and Ant-Man's will probably be pretty large also, but you need to realize this test footage was merely a way to see if and how well the shrinking/growing effects could be pulled off. If they couldn't, Ant-Man wouldn't have been green-lighted at all, let alone given a big budget. Each movie is it's own investment with it's own budget, so even though it's all done by the same studio, they're different projects. The budget of Avengers has no bearing on Ant-Man, though it's profits probably do in terms of motivating them to make Ant-Man at all (again, it's been on the back-burner for 8 years at this point). So my point is that they had a limited budget, if I had to guess somewhere in the $50,000 to $150,000 range, most of which was focused towards pulling off the shrinking/growing effects, less on hiring artists to design a version of the costume and then costume designers to create it. That process alone usually accounts for quite a bit when these super hero movies go into production. Screen testing costumes to make sure they look, feel, and move "right" is also a usually expensive and time-consuming process.

So yeah, I was merely saying not to make much of the costume in this, as the actual Ant-Man costume and look will have likely had considerable more time and money put into it.

Secondly yes they started production mid- late February

Are you sure about that? I think if production had started it'd be all over news sites like what's been going on with Iron Man 3 and Thor 2 more recently. Also, Ant-Man still isn't scheduled to come out until late 2015, so I wouldn't expect actual production to start until late this year and into early 2014 at earliest. Granted, pre-production is going on now, and has been for years (the Ant-Man movie has been tossed around since 2005 or 2006, well before even Iron Man). Stuff like character and set designs, script being finalized, casting potential actors (another reason I know filming hasn't started--or significant production of any kind other than preliminary--is no actor has been cast as Ant-Man, that'll happen before actual production begins), etc.

Matter of fact, this article from mid Feb of this year (when you claim production started), says Edgar Wright (the writer/director) was still finalizing his work on The World's End, the movie he's doing before he starts on Ant-Man.

http://m.voices.yahoo.com/edgar-wright-discusses-ant-man-12006650.html

If I had to guess, work on that film will continue for at least a couple more months (editing, scoring, promoting) before it's release in October of this year. I'd expect Wright to finalize the Ant-Man script during the summer after he's wrapped work on The World's End, and start the casting process for Ant-Man (along with overseeing set production, special effects planning, etc) late this year and into early 2014, with filming starting in early 2014. This will allow a nice year and a half window to complete filming and finish the many special effects shots this film will likely utilize.

But yeah, there's no way actual production has started yet. Pre-production, absolutely, but this film is a perfect example of how drawn out the pre-production/script-writing phase can be.
 
Well, the Avengers budget was huge, and Ant-Man's will probably be pretty large also, but you need to realize this test footage was merely a way to see if and how well the shrinking/growing effects could be pulled off. If they couldn't, Ant-Man wouldn't have been green-lighted at all, let alone given a big budget. Each movie is it's own investment with it's own budget, so even though it's all done by the same studio, they're different projects. The budget of Avengers has no bearing on Ant-Man, though it's profits probably do in terms of motivating them to make Ant-Man at all (again, it's been on the back-burner for 8 years at this point). So my point is that they had a limited budget, if I had to guess somewhere in the $50,000 to $150,000 range, most of which was focused towards pulling off the shrinking/growing effects, less on hiring artists to design a version of the costume and then costume designers to create it. That process alone usually accounts for quite a bit when these super hero movies go into production. Screen testing costumes to make sure they look, feel, and move "right" is also a usually expensive and time-consuming process.

So yeah, I was merely saying not to make much of the costume in this, as the actual Ant-Man costume and look will have likely had considerable more time and money put into it.

Are you sure about that? I think if production had started it'd be all over news sites like what's been going on with Iron Man 3 and Thor 2 more recently. Also, Ant-Man still isn't scheduled to come out until late 2015, so I wouldn't expect actual production to start until late this year and into early 2014 at earliest. Granted, pre-production is going on now, and has been for years (the Ant-Man movie has been tossed around since 2005 or 2006, well before even Iron Man). Stuff like character and set designs, script being finalized, casting potential actors (another reason I know filming hasn't started--or significant production of any kind other than preliminary--is no actor has been cast as Ant-Man, that'll happen before actual production begins), etc.

Matter of fact, this article from mid Feb of this year (when you claim production started), says Edgar Wright (the writer/director) was still finalizing his work on The World's End, the movie he's doing before he starts on Ant-Man.

http://m.voices.yahoo.com/edgar-wright-discusses-ant-man-12006650.html

If I had to guess, work on that film will continue for at least a couple more months (editing, scoring, promoting) before it's release in October of this year. I'd expect Wright to finalize the Ant-Man script during the summer after he's wrapped work on The World's End, and start the casting process for Ant-Man (along with overseeing set production, special effects planning, etc) late this year and into early 2014, with filming starting in early 2014. This will allow a nice year and a half window to complete filming and finish the many special effects shots this film will likely utilize.

But yeah, there's no way actual production has started yet. Pre-production, absolutely, but this film is a perfect example of how drawn out the pre-production/script-writing phase can be.

Ok I see what you're saying but at the same point no movie even small budget kids films only has a budget of $150,000. My friend got curious the other day and looked up how big the croods budget was (sure it's animated so it will take up a little more money) $150 million not thousand. Then they freaked out about how there's hungry people everywhere and there spending that much on a movie. But the point is I think. Everything you said may be right Except for the budget
 
Throughout the years, there have been plenty of phenomenal or at least financially successful movies with small budgets. Clerks and Night of the Living Dead are two great examples, with a combined total budget of less than $150,000. Paranormal Activity spawned a billion dollar franchise on a budget of $15,000. You make a good enough movie, either by writing (Clerks), effects (NotLD), or shock value (PA), the budget isn't as important.
 
Ok I see what you're saying but at the same point no movie even small budget kids films only has a budget of $150,000. My friend got curious the other day and looked up how big the croods budget was (sure it's animated so it will take up a little more money) $150 million not thousand. Then they freaked out about how there's hungry people everywhere and there spending that much on a movie. But the point is I think. Everything you said may be right Except for the budget

DIB was talking about the budget for the Ant-Man test reel. The actual movie will have a much larger budget.
 
Throughout the years, there have been plenty of phenomenal or at least financially successful movies with small budgets. Clerks and Night of the Living Dead are two great examples, with a combined total budget of less than $150,000. Paranormal Activity spawned a billion dollar franchise on a budget of $15,000. You make a good enough movie, either by writing (Clerks), effects (NotLD), or shock value (PA), the budget isn't as important.

Touché but paranormal activity IMO wasn't very good at all. In not into horror movies so I using like it though so don't go by me. OFF TOPIC anyway yes even with a small budget I know marvel can make antman a great movie
 
Not to mention, Edgar Wright has made a successful career of directing movies with fairly modest budgets.

A good portfolio consists of films with a wide range of budgets. Marvel would be smart to expand out beyond the blockbusters.

Besides, smaller budget films are where you cultivate the talent for future blockbusters. Look at Guillermo Del Toro or Robert Rodriguez.
 
Last edited:
Ok I guess but antman is on my must watch list ASAP

Me too. Edgar Wright and Joe Cornish are phenomenal, and the test footage looks great. And supporting a movie likes this improves the odds that we'll see more quirky, idiosyncratic films produced from the Marvel catalog.
 
Last edited:
Me too. Edgar Wright and Joe Cornish are phenomenal, and the test footage looks great. And supporting a movie likes this improves the odds that we'll see more quirky, idiosyncratic films produced from the Marvel catalog.

I agree wright said that he may be changing up the way it's presented idk what that means by it interests me even more
 
Ok I see what you're saying but at the same point no movie even small budget kids films only has a budget of $150,000. My friend got curious the other day and looked up how big the croods budget was (sure it's animated so it will take up a little more money) $150 million not thousand. Then they freaked out about how there's hungry people everywhere and there spending that much on a movie. But the point is I think. Everything you said may be right Except for the budget

I think you're misunderstanding me. I said the Ant-Man test footage had a relatively small budget, probably in the $50,000-150,000 range, most of it being spent on the shrinking/growing special effects, the rest on the costume, set, props, actors (assuming they were paid instead of doing as a "favor" to the director), etc. Again, I was referring to the test footage, not the actual Ant-Man film, whose budget will probably be in the $80-120 million range.

Throughout the years, there have been plenty of phenomenal or at least financially successful movies with small budgets. Clerks and Night of the Living Dead are two great examples, with a combined total budget of less than $150,000. Paranormal Activity spawned a billion dollar franchise on a budget of $15,000. You make a good enough movie, either by writing (Clerks), effects (NotLD), or shock value (PA), the budget isn't as important.

Exactly. If I recall correctly Clerks budget was around $20,000 that Smith paid for with various credit cards and selling his comic collection.

DIB was talking about the budget for the Ant-Man test reel. The actual movie will have a much larger budget.

Exactly.

Touché but paranormal activity IMO wasn't very good at all. In not into horror movies so I using like it though so don't go by me. OFF TOPIC anyway yes even with a small budget I know marvel can make antman a great movie

???

But... Ant-Man will have a relatively large budget. Like I said, when I mentioned the $150,000, I was talking about the test reel footage of a minute or two they did to test the special effects that was shown last summer at Comic Con and in the past few days showed up online (temporarily). Like I said, the actual Ant-Man film will have a budget probably approaching $100 million. Maybe a bit less, but tens of millions for sure.

I agree wright said that he may be changing up the way it's presented idk what that means by it interests me even more

I think he mainly is referring to the tone. Instead of the adventurous, humorous/serious approach most of the films have taken, he's intending to make it more quirky and rely more on humor than the other MCU films, which had a good amount of humor of their own, but less and without the different lens of weirdness Ant-Man will likely have. It's also supposed to have the obvious superhero elements as well as spy/thriller tones from what I've read. Either way, Wright is a fantastic writer and decent director, so I'm fully expecting to enjoy Ant-Man...the wait will be tough though, 2 and a half years to go.
 
That premieres sometime this fall right?

Yup, right now an actual release date hasn't been announced, other than Fall, 2013. It's still not confirmed if ABC picked it up as a series yet (though I'd be very surprised if they don't given the popularity of the MCU movies and this being a direct, weekly TV show tie-in to them).

It was recently announced an actor from Whedon's "Angel" series, J. August Richards, would join the cast, and given the pilot episode wrapped filming several weeks before that announcement, I'd say that's a good indicator ABC has picked it up as a full series but not announced it yet. I'm sure we'll get such an announcement in the next month or two, most definitely by summer.

I also wonder just what the scale/budget for this show will be. Will it be a full 20-24 episode season, or a smaller, maybe 10-16 episode season? Will be interesting to learn the details. I know most of us are looking forward to it. I'd make a guess and say the premiere will probably occur around October or November, right around the time Thor - The Dark World hits theaters and Iron Man 3 comes out on DVD.


Also, assuming it gets a full season, I'm hoping Marvel includes the 3 Marvel One-Shot short films as bonus features on the DVD/Bluray collections, since two of those directly involve Coulson, and one directly relates to SHIELD and their "recruitment" process. ;)

Maybe even make a new One-Shot for the DVD release, perhaps as a bridge between Season 1 and Season 2. I know, I'm getting way ahead of myself.
 
Last edited:
Yup, right now an actual release date hasn't been announced, other than Fall, 2013. It's still not confirmed if ABC picked it up as a series yet (though I'd be very surprised if they don't given the popularity of the MCU movies and this being a direct, weekly TV show tie-in to them).

It was recently announced an actor from Whedon's "Angel" series, J. August Richards, would join the cast, and given the pilot episode wrapped filming several weeks before that announcement, I'd say that's a good indicator ABC has picked it up as a full series but not announced it yet. I'm sure we'll get such an announcement in the next month or two, most definitely by summer.

I also wonder just what the scale/budget for this show will be. Will it be a full 20-24 episode season, or a smaller, maybe 10-16 episode season? Will be interesting to learn the details. I know most of us are looking forward to it. I'd make a guess and say the premiere will probably occur around October or November, right around the time Thor - The Dark World hits theaters and Iron Man 3 comes out on DVD.

Also, assuming it gets a full season, I'm hoping Marvel includes the 3 Marvel One-Shot short films as bonus features on the DVD/Bluray collections, since two of those directly involve Coulson, and one directly relates to SHIELD and their "recruitment" process. ;)

Maybe even make a new One-Shot for the DVD release, perhaps as a bridge between Season 1 and Season 2. I know, I'm getting way ahead of myself.

No not really. You can never get too ahead of yourself with marvel. But I agree that they should put the one-shots on the season DVD. I believe that it may premiere more September-ish than November though although that does fit in with the timeline. This and the new avengers show should come out at about the same time I think, I know it won't but it would make sense.
 
No not really. You can never get too ahead of yourself with marvel. But I agree that they should put the one-shots on the season DVD. I believe that it may premiere more September-ish than November though although that does fit in with the timeline. This and the new avengers show should come out at about the same time I think, I know it won't but it would make sense.

I'd be willing to bet we'll see the pilot premiere around Oct or Nov, like I said to coincide with Thor 2's release in theaters and Iron Man 3's DVD release. Marvel is all about cross-promoting, and airing commercials during the first few episodes of the SHIELD show for Thor 2 and IM3 (DVD) would surely accomplish that. I'd actually be shocked if the timing didn't work out that way since it'd be such a golden opportunity to capitalize on the excitement of the new show and movie (as well as likely boost DVD/Bluray sales for IM3).
 

Latest posts

Back
Top