It's not about wanting creative people's work to fail.
I want those creative people to successful. But I want them to be employed doing projects that the public wants to see, instead of whatever fits a corporation's no-risk 5-year plan.
Maybe Ant-Man is a great movie. But if it is, then those same creative juices could have been directed at some other concept.
So you want creative people to make movies that only the public (meaning
you) want to see? You don't want them to be... I don't know, creative, maybe? Like I mentioned in my post, Guardians was not on anyone's radar - yet, it's arguably one of the best Marvel movies. Had they not taken a risk and gone off the grid, we might never have had that movie... and here we go again with Ant-Man another blip on nobody's radar - and not taking the safe route with another Iron Man movie.
...and that's nonsense about a "no-risk" plan. There's no such thing as no risk (take a look at the movies you mentioned), Ant-Man is a risky idea for Marvel, he's (basically) an unknown character and... well, it's ANT-Man. Not Iron Man, not Thor, not a name hero. Most folks are laughing about this one (but, in the end if the buzz is good... they'll see it).
Making movies
that the public wants to see is much more of no-risk plan. Ant-Man has been talked about since 2003 and in development since 2006... so this is well outside that "no-risk 5-year plan."
You can look at my initial response to the Ant-Man trailer... it looked rote, like something Marvel might do in their sleep - you know: no-risk. But, as I see more of it, I am becoming more and more curious about this movie. I'm still bummed that Edgar Wright isn't on board... but I just have a feeling that this is going to be a fun flick and I am looking forward to spending my money to see it.
I still think it's childish to wish failure on other people's hard work because they're not making a movie tailored to your (or, cough, "the public's") specific tastes. The reasons why Green Lantern and The Lone Ranger failed are numerous - heck, GL could have been DC's Iron Man had it been done right. (...and Iron Man was simply luck and hard work - it's not unreasonable to see that Tony Stark/Iron Man is akin to Hal Jordan/Green Lantern in their respective comic universes).
If someone could cater to the "public's taste" on a regular basis they'd be raking in the bucks. As it is, even the big boys that do it on a regular basis (hi, Apple) also fail on a regular basis and even they don't simply stop being creative or stop trying to push the envelope. Yes, every company has a plan and none of those plan's are risk free.
