I loved Hot Fuzz, hated Scott Pilgrim, so I know Wright is talented but I don't always agree with his choices in film making. What I'm about to say has nothing to do with Edgar Wright's talent.
Edgar Wright has been attached to Ant-Man since 2006. There are some sources that say that Wright left because Marvel wanted changes to the script that were very drastic and brought the film more in line with the rest of the Marvel Cinematic Universe.
Wright's original vision, from what we've heard in interviews here and there, was to make a comedic, quirky film "in a corner of the Marvel cinematic universe," implying that it wasn't meant to cross over into much of the rest of the greater story.
We've also heard rumors that Hank Pym's character was a super hero back in the 60s, when the character was created, and that he's retired, and Paul Rudd's version of Scott Lang will be stealing the suit from a retired, former super hero Hank Pym.
I don't know what Marvel may have wanted to change, but I wouldn't be surprised if they wanted it tied more closely to the Marvel Cinematic Universe. You can call it studio meddling if you want, but I'm going to posit something. If Wright had gotten this movie made and out in what we now know as "Phase One," he would have been one of the people shaping what the Marvel Cinematic Universe looked like instead of trying to find a corner of the franchise where his vision would still work.
All I'm saying is that its a little sad that Wright posts that there are no bad guys, and people immediately look for bad guys. Wright had other projects he wanted to get done before Ant-Man, that pushed production back, and the climate changed. That doesn't sound like an evil conspiracy or even the quashing of creativity to me. I could be wrong.