‘Ant-Man’ Sequel Set for 2018; 3 Untitled Marvel Films Announced

Courtesy of Marvel

Marvel has announced an “Ant Man” sequel and three untitled films as part of its plans for Phase 3 of the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

The second installment, “Ant-Man and the Wasp,” will hit theaters on July 6, 2018, the studio revealed on Thursday. The sequel marks the first Marvel movie named after a heroine (played by Evangeline Lilly).

Paul Rudd’s minuscule hero will be seen next in 2016’s “Captain America: Civil War.”

Meanwhile, the three untitled Marvel Studios films are slated for May 1, 2020, July 10, 2020, and Nov. 6, 2020.

“Ant-Man’s” second adventure will shift “Black Panther” and “Captain Marvel’s” release dates. “Black Panther” is moving up to Feb. 16, 2018, while “Captain Marvel” will now bow on March 8, 2019.

“Ant-Man,” directed by Peyton Reed, has hauled $178.5 million in the U.S. (the ninth highest-grosser domestically) and $409.8 million worldwide. The pic opens in China — its final international market — on Oct. 16.

Filed Under:

Want to read more articles like this one? SUBSCRIBE TO VARIETY TODAY.
Post A Comment 26

Leave a Reply


Comments are moderated. They may be edited for clarity and reprinting in whole or in part in Variety publications.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  1. terrynutkinz says:

    Erm…”The sequel marks the first Marvel movie named after a heroine”… so Captain Marvel will be a bloke then? Great to see that people get paid to do a half arsed job.

  2. Willgee says:

    It’s not even the right Ant-Man… and nut the right Wasp !! How could they just BYPASS Hank Pym and Janet Van Dyne as if they were never a part of Marvel History ?
    What a slap in the face of Silver Age Marvel Fans , such as myself, who read their adventures every month in Tales To Astonish !!!

    • therealeverton says:

      Well for one they were both in Ant-Man. Secondly I fully expect them to be even more involved in the next film. Third It’s not the same Universe as the comics, 616 comics, so they don’t have to follow everything that happened then and have mixed it up to great success so far.

      It’s a shame tat you. and some others, feel somehow slighted, but I just don’t see it that way; in fact it’s good to see some older people getting to play their part and more heroes being back in Peggey Carter’s days.

  3. Willgee says:

    Great news for Scott Lang fans.
    Bad news for Hank Pym & Janet Van Dyne fans .

    • therealeverton says:

      Bounds like a comment from someone wo never even saw the film. I;s good news for both.

      • therealeverton says:

        @Willgee It may have been as good, but the focus would have been different and the whole father daughter / Father figure – mentor thing would have been absent and that was the heart of the tale.

        Some people make themselves feel alienated for reasons I simply do not understand. It makes all the less sense because, unlike the legions of fans that have been created by these films, the smaller number of comic book fans are meant to know all about the various parallel universe and that each has its differences. The cartoons are different to the comics, and the other cartoons, which are different from the films and so on. The Marvel Cinematic Universe is NOT the 616 universe so there is no obligation to have Ant-Man & Wasp there. Black Widow and then Hawkeye are are a big part of the Ultimate Universe as is Captain America who is a founder member of the Ultimates, but not The 616 Avengers.

        Henry Pym was in the film, he had a great part to play and thanks to impressive tech we even got to see him more in his prime. We’ll see more of him, and I’m certain Janet in future films.

        After so long don’t know why people expect to see the comics replicated exactly on-screen. None of the MCU films do that, precisely because there are so many different versions of these characters to pull from, let alone the 616 & Ultimate realities. The Tony Stark of these films is not the classic Stark either, but that has been working out just fine.

        I’ve seen the three English language films based on I Am Legend and still haven’t seen the classic book on-screen. Maybe I will, maybe I won’t but each film has its own merits.

      • Willgee says:

        I saw the film . Twice, in fact . It was a good movie . I enjoyed it . But , it would have been just as good if MArvel had used the Original Ant-Man , Henry Pym , and his wife Janet . It was THEY that were the founding members of the Avengers …not Scott Lang . He was nowhere around . . Neither was Hawkeye and Black Widow . Marvel just bypassed Hank and Jan , and almost completely . REMOVED their part of the Marvel Legacy … While , at the same time , alienating all of Hank and Jan’s Silver Age fans , like myself , who read their adventures in Tales to Astonish every month .

  4. Jimi LaLumia says:

    the Ant man haters should wander off into the woods and die, it’s a hit, China will bring it to a half billion dollars worldwide, it is the 9th biggest movie of 2015 in America, so get over it, you lost, WE WON, drop dead! lol

  5. dre7861 says:

    The idea that Ant-Man wasn’t a hit and didn’t make money is a foolish one put forth by the media who are rooting for Marvel’s failure so that can proclaim the end of All Comic Book Movies – a dream they fantasize about as they go to sleep. The media has compared Ant-Man to the Incredible Hulk, which was considered to be a financial failure. The media often say that Ant-Man was the second lowest grossing film behind the Hulk. While that is true on face value it does not accurately portray the whole picture. It really is a difference of scale. The Hulk had a box office gross of $263 million while Ant-Man brought in $409.5 million (even before it is released in China which will cause that figure to increase). That’s a 55.6% increase in ticket sales for Ant-Man. But the real difference comes from looking at the two films budgets – The Hulk had a $150 million budget while Ant-Man had a $130 million. Ant-Man made 147% more in profits than the Hulk. The Hulk not only cost more to make but brought in less profits. Marvel knew from the start that Ant-Man was not going to leave the same financial footprint that the Avengers and The Guardians of the Galaxy would make and it wasn’t that far off their original projections. But the fact that Marvel has decided to promote the character being in Captain America: Civil War tells me that they full support the franchise. I think the only reason for the delay in announcing the sequel was that Marvel has a lot of irons in the fire, plus it made for good publicity.

    As far as the three unnamed movies for 2020 – I’ve heard no one speculate on it being a new Hulk movie, a Black Widow and a new franchise. That would keep with Marvel’s plan to release each year 2 established franchises and one new. It also makes sense for the rearrangement in scheduling.

    • therealeverton says:

      You’re right about”the media” waiting for Superhero films to die. It’s a joke when you consider they ae still about the lowest represented genre around and even in “big years” there’s still plenty of other films to choose from every week of the year.

      Also Marvel Studios’ Incredible Hulk was a successful failure. It reached its number one target, showing people there was a different Hulk to the one in Universal’s Ang Lee film and making the character a positive inclusion in The Avengers, not a character that would keep scores of people away from the film. Also to sow us Bruce was getting a measure of control over is transformations.

      It would have been great to see a financial reward at the box office, rather than “eventual” as well, but that was goal two. It’s like Batman Begins; the film lost money at the box office but dragged Batman back to respectability after Batman & Robin. (BB was obviously more of a success and a better film).As for Ant-Man it passed Incredible Hulk, it passed Captain America: TFA both “domestically” and internationally” and with $410m in the bank without its China release it has a shot of passing Thor’s $449m global take and tee international grosses of Iron Man. It could even pass $500m, I don’t think it will, but it certainly could.

    • Jedi77 says:

      Hmm… while I like what you say, you are wrong.

      “The Hulk had a box office gross of $263 million while Ant-Man brought in $409.5 million (even before it is released in China which will cause that figure to increase). That’s a 55.6% increase in ticket sales for Ant-Man.” – No, it isn’t..
      It’s a 55.6% increase in revenue. Ticket sales cannot be compared across eight years, due to the rise in ticketprices, new premium tickets, 3D surcharges etc. All in all, the increase in sold tickets are considerably lower than 55.6%.

  6. Al Swearengen says:

    This seems kinda unnecessary. It’s not like Ant-Man was a mega hit like Guardians was. I’d much rather see Captain Marvel than this.

    • dre7861 says:

      It’s being moved back four friggin’ months. Get a grip, dude. I would much rather see Marvel do Captain Marvel right than rush it through. Obviously they think that some more time will make a better movie and since Reed already had a story lined up, makes total sense to me. But feel free to rip your hair out and throw ashes on your head for a four month delay.

    • therealeverton says:

      Don’t see how it is unnecessary. The film has been a hit, went down well with audiences and Captain Marvel isn’t going anywhere but a few months later than before.

      So we get both films. Also it’s been made caller several times that, along with Dr. Strange’s quantum physics stuff, the Pym tech is key to Phase three.

      If the level of hit that this film is were the measure you hint at then Captain America (most likely Thor, X-Men and Batman Begins would / should all have ended at 1 film.

      The mistake is judging everything by the same standard. That isn’t how it works at all. Each film is different, especially hen it is the first instalment AND when it is a hard sell. That’s why Thor & Captain America were successes even though they didn’t match up to Iron Man’s global grosses.

  7. Thetoxicavenger says:

    Please make it stop.

    • therealeverton says:

      Why? Just because you’re selfish enough to wish other people lose out on their entertainment? Whatever films you enjoy is up to you and I have no desire for any legal entertainment you enjoy, that I don’t to go away. Do the rest of the world a courtesy and afford them the same respect.

      • therealeverton says:

        @CP says:- yes that is annoying.

        @ the others Well if you’re going to see superhero films where people are wearing tights, I think there’s some kind of time warp in your cinema that leads to sometime over 20 years ago.

        As for this idea that Superhero films are taking over ANYTHING is laughable. Try doing your own “research” instead of just swallowing trendy nonsense. There THREE superhero films this year. Even on a year when there are !A lot” there’s still fewer of them tan Horror films, Young Adult adaptations, Oscar Bait films etc. If there was an average of 1 super hero film per month, you’d still have 20 other films EVERY MONTH to choose from; you yes, it is a selfish attitude. You already have more choice with the 200+ other films than these mythological people you seem to think exist who only like super heroes.

        All the same *sigh* yes, in that same way that all films are pretty much the same – start middle – finish, obstacles to overcome etc. It has always been in the telling and so far the good ones (Nolan Trilogy, Singer and/or Vaughan X-Men, Marvel Studios, Raimi Spider-Man have outweighed the bad. In fact if you look at the past few years the hit / good view ratio for these films is pretty much better than any other group. One of the reasons is because they are very different. Comedy Heist, political thriller, science fiction, science fantasy, disaster movie etc.

      • CP says:

        By the way, my longer reply was meant for toxicavenger and celluloidfan…for some reason I couldn’t directly reply to their comments. You, on the other hand, nailed it therealeverton!

      • CP says:

        Gee whiz, I guess if you don’t like comic book movies, you can always stop watching them. If you want to see other movies, then go for it. There were how many hundreds of non-superhero movies released this year? I mean, just in my city today alone, I can choose from almost 20 movies from almost every genre, and I don’t live in that big of a place. Hogging up the screens? Get a grip…not to mention, if you guys are fans of other types of movies (hey, I am too!) it’s often the tentpole pictures that actually make money that allow studios to produce “prestige” flicks that don’t always make financial sense. So I guess if you want to see more non-superhero movies, then it’s in your best interest to keep rooting for them to succeed.

      • Thetoxicavenger says:

        Not selfish Just wish they weren’t all the same movie over and over again. seeing men in tights fighting each other in a psychologically childish world doesn’t really do it for me anymore. At least nolans super hero movies had deeper layers. Sure I’m not the only one and that this super hero trend will fade after civil war and Doctor strange are out.

      • CelluloidFan35mm says:

        If you and many others are entertained by them and genuinely enjoy them, more power to you all.
        I, however, am tired of them. It’s complete overload at this point and the comic book fatigue has set in for me after The Avengers and I do not wish to see anymore. (I have yet to see The Winter Soldier and avoiding BvS like the plague.
        Myself and some others would like to see some variety on the screen while you can have your comic book movies at the same time. We just don’t want it be the only thing hogging up the screens.

  8. PG says:

    Isn’t Captain Marvel “named after a heroine”..? Or do they mean first *released*..

    • therealeverton says:

      Yes, it’s their first, big screen, Female titled film. Jessica Jones is their first female titled/led project, but that’s on Netflix and Captain Marvel is now out the year after Ant-Man & The Wasp.

  9. Ben says:

    Guess that means Black Panther and Captain Marvel are both being pushed back again then.. Still, glad they’re making a sequel to Ant-Man!

More Film News from Variety