@asgaard: Good analysis.
So I saw it yesterday and here's a link to my user review
It's earnest and darn it had a lot of potential in showing a different way of doing things in the MCU for action an spectacle. But overall thought the film told me about character more then it showed, Lilly, Pena, and Douglas really did a lot with a little. Seeing how Hope was constantly pushed into a supporting role was very annoying.
Yet I still want more. There is something there that I like and maybe if Reed and Co. had more time to work on the script things would be better. Or maybe Marvel's infamous post-production would round the square peg to fit into its round hole
Out of five, I give it a two.
The main plot was solid enough, and it does make sense- but it is super predictable. At no point was I all like 'Oh, I had no idea that Janet Pym messed with a regulator, THAT'S how she died!'
Also, none of the characters really made me care. The scene where Hank and Hope are talking about what happened to Janet felt just like I was in Scott's shoes- an awkward experience about an emotional bond that I honestly don't give a crap about.
The characters that I genuinely did care about are- in order-
- Scott Lang
- The... the guy that he lives with? IDK his name.
- Antony, the ant
- Hank Pym
Hope did little to really entice me. In fact, she's kind of a d!ck.
The romance between Scott and Hope was sloppy. I believe there were two full conversations between the two, and then the rest of the movie was her doubting his ability to be Ant-Man, and then BAM! Super predictable get together at the very end.
The villain's motives were very simplistic. Sure, greed is acceptable, but it just seems like with all the villains in the MCU with such different stories they could have given something better.
I never really figured out why Darren Cross figured out that Scott had infiltrated the building, and knew their entire plan? It seemed a tad ridiculous, just to get a more sinister looking villain.
Action is beautiful. Whenever he shrinks, he leaves behind a sort of after-image that gives a very nice comic feel, and combat is very fluid with the Ant-Man suit.
I feel like the scene where Scott goes to the Avengers facility on accident could be done better. His fight with Falcon seems ridiculously stretched out, especially with the BS goggles that Falcon wears that allows him to see someone the size of an ant? If he does, does this mean that it automatically zooms in on actual ants that size, or what? I honestly don't get it, and don't think such a stretched fight was necessary. A one punch knockout or something while Falcon was standing watch would've been fine.
And the ending was awful. When Scott messes with his regulator, he solves his own problem in, like, ten seconds. And how did he use the big-disc as a replacement regulator? Why the hell does that make sense? What was Scott's logic there? "Ah, well this thing that makes things big is relatively the same size as the regulator spot... Must be able to make me normal size!
Humor was good. Action was good. Everything else was a tad so-so, or just bad.
Ant-Man Isn't the Mcu greatest movie but certainly is not the worse far from that, i like it a lot, wasn't disappointing and if the plot spend more time with Darren Cross motivations, An-Man could have been one of the Mcu best movies yet...
He was meant to be a homage to Hank Pym's mad man period, when he created multiple personas, was insecure and mad, to a point of striking his wife to finish a mad plot.
Just got back from seeing it, such an awesome and fun movie. It seriously captures the best part of what makes the MCU movies great. The movie focuses on it's story and while it does remind you that it's a part of a much larger universe and even has a nice part in the film where it becomes very apparent, the movie still stands on it's own.
Overall, the film is a great conclusion to Phase 2 of the MCU and sets things up nicely fro Phase 3.
Ant-Man is more or less the Iron Man of phase 2; you go in expecting nothing, see two or so cheesy scenes, a ton of CRAZY action (or in general from trippy pym-particle scenes) and a good deal of wise-cracking. It isn't anything miraculous, yet walk away pleased with the overall result with a big smile on your face for what is to come.
64% with 25 reviews basically guarantees this movie's going to wind up with a rotten score. And it should, .
And why change a formula that makes Disney billions of dollars? People keep talking about 'super-hero fatigue,' but so far it's been 16 years of repeated super-hero films (with more or less the same formula across the board) without any slow-down.
It should be 'rotten'? it's a literally a movie you walk in expecting nothing from and turns out to actually pretty good.
Yeah. !@#$ those guys. And by fans, we mean the world-wide movie-goer, right? Because, unsurprisingly, the over-whelming vast-majority of these viewers don't follow comics and couldn't care less about the Marvel logo and will MOST CERTAINLY watch Batman V Superman with glee.
So what's up with the pointless resentment?
It felt very much like a Phase One film.
I agree, it origin story (albeit, it's two origin stories in one) and runs a lot like Iron Man without so many of that film's short-comings.
Fun, but ultimately forgettable.
Most of the phase one films don't fit that description. They're not Quantum Solace.
Not NEARLY as funny as some say though.
Agree, it get's it's laughs - especially with a full room, but it hits the mark most of the time.
Reminiscent of Honey I Shrunk the Kids; Ants aren't quite intelligent / complex enough to care about - but they do come out the protagonists here.
@isaac_clarke: Not resentment on my part, just fact. The MCU can put out pretty much anything and the fans will go see it, this is just me speaking from my experience. A ton of my friends are MCU fanboys and will hype up the films to no end. If Ant-Man was made by Fox or Sony, I think people wouldn't give it nearly as much of a chance.
And to me, the Phase one films fit that description well. Thor, Captain America, Iron Man 2 and Incredible Hulk...who still really talks about those films? Only Iron Man and Avengers are worth remembering.
@isaac_clarke: Not resentment on my part, . The MCU can put out pretty much anything and the fans will go see it, this is just me speaking from my experience. A ton of my friends are MCU fanboys and will hype up the films to no end..
You're using a very small sampling size (your group of friends) and attributing their characteristics the whole audience of every MCU film. These viewers are 'super hero movie' fans, with no loyalty to the Marvel brand (they watch WB, Fox and Sony films) - if that wasn't the case, if even a fraction of them went out to buy Marvel merchandise, Marvel would be killing it on comic profits. Many 'fans' won't ever go past a wiki-page about these characters.
Fox started this trend / transformation of cinema with X-Men, Ant-Man won't make as much as Spider-Man and Marvel Studios had nothing to their name people gave Iron Man a shot.
And to me, the Phase one films . Thor, Captain America, Iron Man 2 and Incredible Hulk...who still really talks about those films? Only Iron Man and Avengers are worth remembering.
Maybe TIH and IM2? They're filler. The rest not so much. Even the mediocre WWII drama that was the First Avenger is highly memorable. And I'm not sure what's up with the dislike of Thor, which was either the 2nd or 3rd best film in phase one (best villian by far, a fantastic cast and very true to the comics - literally Hopkin's Odin!)
Before GotG, there wasn't anything quite like Thor in the MCU. It was a mix between 'Coming to America' & a medieval family drama, with awesome cast and a compelling villain.
I loved Ant-Man, but then again, I figured I would. My family aren't superhero fans and they saw the movie and loved it. It was their favorite marvel movie. I have friends who aren't into superhero movies, they saw it, and really liked it.
Cinemascore gives it an A rating. That means that people who saw it liked it a lot. Hopefully, word of mouth will help get even more people to go see it.
Immensely entertaining, thoroughly enjoyed it. Stoll played his character rather odd . . . couldn't quite balance quirky and sadistic. Evangeline Lily's entire arc's impassive and common with most Marvel movies - a lot of beats and development are nothing more than fodder and a dull way to impact or progress the story. This has really made the infamous 'Marvel Formula' blatant at this point.
I see Ant-Man and its really nice but missing those iron man techno side effects and locations and many more .... may be as marvel lover i have lots of expectation with you but it will be great to see Ant man as next member of avengers. http://goo.gl/UJebtQ
Just saw it today, rather enjoyed it. I liked it more than Age of Ultron, got more interested and invested. I enjoy Scott Lang and felt they nailed the character. Glad to see Marvel is trying other characters. Characters like these will open the door for them to take more chances. As for why him and not others, it's probably because of how things are in the MCU, that he fits in well. The character will be easy to use in other things.
Please Log In to post.
This edit will also create new pages on Comic Vine for:Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.
Comment and Save
Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Comic Vine users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.