The Ant Man movie that has been on the table for years, and in the mind of Edgar Wright probably even longer than that, could be scrapped, an early victim of Disney’s new strategy of focusing jointly on blockbusters guaranteed to make money and low budget efforts also guaranteed to make money.

It was recently revealed that Disney has a new ethos when it comes to making movies. It will only be making two kinds of films: $150 million-plus blockbusters with plenty of merchandise possibilities; sub-$30 million projects full of young (and cheap) talent.

This new strategy means The Proposal 2 is unlikely as it costs somewhere in the middle. Which is short-sighted seeing as how the original was a surprise hit and made its money back many times over. And, according to Digital Spy, it could also mean the Ant Man movie could be scrapped.

Edgar Wright is currently hard at work on bringing Ant Man, a minor Marvel character, to the big screen after several years of the project going nowhere. But Ant Man couldn’t be made on a tiny budget so could instead be scrapped rather than gambled on with a big budget.

Ant Man is currently scheduled for a 2012 release but it remains to be seen whether the plug is pulled before any serious cash is spent.

Maybe Damon and Greengrass can bring back an ass-kicking, geriatric Jason Bourne in about forty years. 

Director Paul Greengrass and actor Matt Damon are out doing publicity for their new film “The Green Zone,” so naturally the topic of a fourth “Bourne” film came up. The publicists for “The Green Zone” must have been so thrilled to see reporters so easily diverted from the film they’re promoting to talk about a completely different movie.

Anyway, ComingSoon has Greengrass’s thoughts on why he isn’t doing a fourth “Bourne.” It’s not, he says, because he didn’t like the script as has been rumored. Rather, he just had a “been there, done that” feeling about the project. Greengrass said:

“…you just come to a point where you realize you’ve done it. You don’t have anything more to contribute to a franchise that needs to continue obviously, and in order to continue, a franchise needs to be rebooted and reenergized by new perspectives. I just felt that I’d done it, and there’s nothing unnatural about that. To make a film, it’s 19 months of your life seven days a week, 20 hours a day, you’ve got to have real… and there were just too many other things that I was interested in. I felt like I’d had a wonderful, wonderful time, I loved it and I want it to continue. In the end, contrary to reports, there was never an argument with the studio of any kind at all.”

Matt Damon has said that he wouldn’t do another Bourne film without Greengrass, but didn’t think that would be the end of the franchise:

“I think they have a good way to do a prequel with someone else, and basically make it about the Bourne Identity, the actual identity. Any studio is interested in making it an evergreen that can just go on and on and on, and it never will with our character because he’s resolved his issues now. He’s got his memory back three times now. I don’t think anybody wants to see me say ‘I don’t remember’ again, but I think what we could do is that you can do some movies with another actor, anyone, whether it’s Ryan Gosling or Russell Crowe or Denzel Washington, and he’s Jason Bourne, and at the end of his one or two or three movies, you see them getting ready to pass the identity onto me, so it just becomes like a 007, it becomes the name that they give this certain person who is uniquely positioned. So then if Paul and I come back and do a fourth one in ten years, we’ll pass it onto someone else and then the thing can kind of go on.”

Our clever Matt makes sure he doesn’t burn his bridges with this one. You can read the whole story from Damon and Greengrass here at ComingSoon.

Jason Isaacs seems like such a nice guy, yet he always plays baddies. Explain.

Don’t read if you don’t want to know.

Jason Isaacs might be out doing publicity for “The Green Zone,” but that doesn’t mean that “Harry Potter” won’t come up. ComingSoon asked Isaacs about the soon-to-end blockbuster film franchise. Isaacs said:

“They made the last book into two films, and it was a fantastic experience because everyone who is left alive is back… and even some of the dead people,” he said with a sly smile. “There is one long sequence where everyone who is left standing is there when the forces of good meet the forces of evil…”This franchise goes out in an epic way. I think the end of the films will be a fantastically cinematic and visual feast and it will more than satisfy the readers of the books, but what you won’t get is the book on screen. You will get something more and different.”

Well, that would be refreshing, because you know that nothing sucks more than when filmmakers try to just basically put a book up on the screen rather than adapt it for the new medium. Yes, I am specifically thinking of the first HP film.

I’m actually not an HP fan, so it’s hard for me to get into the heads of fans and how they feel about the film adaptations of the books. Do people think it was a good idea to split the last book into two films? I know a lot of fans (okay, the ones I know) didn’t like the last book. If you didn’t like it, do you have hopes that it will improve in the film version? That would be great to see. Though I guess the studio probably feels that the wiser thing to do is to cater to the large group of fans who just want to see every word of Rowling’s transcribed on screen than try to make an artistically satisfying film. That’s the way it usually goes, isn’t it?