>>91335633I've heard that certain writers have vendettas against certain characters because of personal shit in their lives before or during encountering them, but I'd like to think for Hank and a few others it's less that they must be defined by a story or moment due to some sort of mandate and more that many writers who come across them realize without it they're just not that noteworthy.
Sure you could try to build Hank outside his inferiority complex, volatile behavior and the consequences of those things but you end up with something less impactful, unnoticeable or worse(?) an entirely different character.
Take Hank in the MCU, he's similar enough to 616 Hank Pym except a tragic death, paranoia and the Pym Particle side-effects are used to justify his mood problems more than his envy of others (he's still fairly spiteful towards those like Stark, but he isn't really envious of them. He threw away his business and position) but his story is more centered around others, like his dead wife, estranged daughter and the strained relation with the son-he-never-had, than himself. Which admittedly has some undertones to 616 Hank Pym's ties with Janet, alive or dead, Jocasta and Ultron but it's not those stories really so you have to ask yourself is that even Hank Pym?
Anyway, what I'm trying to say I guess is that most writers likely decide it's better to stick to the formula rather than flop an attempt to re-invent the wheel.
