Ant-Man (2015)

[anna0852]

I thought it was awesome!

 

But what I couldn't figure out was Cassie's attachment to her father. She can't be more than 6-7 years old and Scott's been in prison for the past 3 years. I didn't get the impression that Maggie was taking regular trips to San Quentin with her daughter in tow for visitation day. How exactly did Scott stay connected enough that Cassie was so close to him? At that age her memories would be fairly sketchy and I'd have expected her to be fairly stand-offish around Scott.

[JenMcSnark]

I loved it.  It was funny and charming and I thought it fit very well into the Marvel Universe.  I did find it annoying that Hope was obviously so much more qualified and not getting the change to suit up.  But it also felt understandable and real.  I definitely want to see it again. 

[InsertWordHere]

But what I couldn't figure out was Cassie's attachment to her father. She can't be more than 6-7 years old and Scott's been in prison for the past 3 years. I didn't get the impression that Maggie was taking regular trips to San Quentin with her daughter in tow for visitation day. How exactly did Scott stay connected enough that Cassie was so close to him? 

It bugged me a little that they showed a picture of Scott with Cassie at what looked to be her current age. When exactly could that picture have been taken?

[Bruinsfan]

Does Glamor Shots do Daddy & Daughter Tea Parties at prisons?

[CatMack]

At the end of the day everyone is entitled to their opinion and I'm not gonna argue with people because that gets tedious, but I do want to address a couple points.

 

Marvel has created a lot of awesome female characters, but they've consistently received a lot of criticism, from a lot of different corners, for how they use them (or don't use them).  This is the same studio that swore up and down they'd love to do a Black Widow movie that everyone keeps asking for but gosh darn it there's just no time - and then proceeded to completely rearrange their multi year schedule to insert yet another Spiderman movie that literally no one asked for.  They have clear priorities, and treating their female characters as worthy of being front and center isn't one of them.  They exist to support men, that's it.  So I'm not gonna give them any slack on giving Hope almost nothing to do in the final act of the movie, or on having her personality basically disappear once her dad told her what really happened to her mother.  And hey, I get that not everyone wants to analyse every piece of media they see, but those debates are gonna keep happening with or without you.  

 

As for Ant Man specifically, I didn't necessarily literally need it to be Hope's movie.  Have it be about Scott, sure.  He's our entry point into the story and the technology.  But having Hope actually suit up in the movie itself would have fixed a lot of problems.  First of all, no, it wasn't necessary as the story was written.  But this is a made up story, the writers are essentially god, they could have written the end of the movie in literally any way they wanted to accommodate Hope putting on the Wasp suite.  Having her suit up during the movie would have actually paid off her character arc in the movie itself, instead of paying it off as an afterthought in the credits.  Because no, I don't buy Hope reconciling with her dad as the final payoff of her character arc.  Part of it sure.  But it only works as a conclusion to her arc if you view her entire story as being about her daddy issues, and she was clearly so much more than that.  Actually letting her do something is paying off what the early part of the movie set up.  Having her find out what happened to her mother and then capitulate to the demands of the men around her for the rest of the movie was a lazy way to get points for having a cool female character without actually having to do anything with her.

 

Having Hope suit up for the finale battle also could have helped their villain a lot.  The actor was having a lot of fun, but Cross was about as generic a villain as you can get.  Hope actually had a relationship with him.  They could have played that up more, and having her part of fighting him in the end could have given the climactic battle more emotional stakes (cuz no, I don't find threatening a 6 year old they're clearly not actually going to hurt or threatening the life of the hero who's already confirmed for future movies to be emotionally effective at all).  If Scott was our window into the basic world of Ant Man, Hope could have been our window into Cross and actually making him more dimensional and interesting.  Instead we get two random dudes who literally know next to nothing about each other beating each other up because of plot.  Which is fine.  It's a perfectly serviceable comic book plot.  But it could have been better.

 

Captain America: Winter Soldier was one of the times Marvel got it right - that movie proved that it works to give your female "support" character so much importance she's practically a co-lead rather than a supporting player.  Hell, Pepper gets to kill the villain in Iron Man 3.  Women can have weight and importance given to their character arcs, can participate in the payoff of the plot, without it diminishing the male lead.  Like I said before, I liked Ant Man!  I didn't think I would, and before I saw the movie I resented that Scott Lang was gonna show up in other movies.  I like his character just fine and I have no problem with seeing him again.  It's an enjoyable movie with a mostly enjoyable cast of characters.

 

That's been the majority opinion of every review I've read so far, both professional and otherwise.  It's fine.  It's good.  It's entertaining.  It's not one of Marvel's best but it works well enough.  

 

But I think it could have been better.  I think their insistence on keeping Hope sidelined after pointing out over and over again how she was better suited for pretty much everything was a detriment to the story.  Scott is an entertaining character but there's nothing particularly special about him, and it became distractingly obvious that they had to hold Hope back so that he could shine in the end.  I realize it was an origins story of sorts, but there's nothing really that complicated about Scott or Ant Man, no reason he couldn't have shared the spotlight.  Having a lead character who's the lead character not because they're special but just because they're there, that works if that character is the only one around who can fulfill the roll.  It doesn't work when someone better suited is around and they're not the hero because mumble mumble contrivance patronizing male over-protectiveness mumble mumble.  Scott's the hero because the writers decided he was the hero, not because it actually makes sense.  And that's never paid off.  

 

That's what I have a problem with.

Edited July 20, 2015 by CatMack

[Zuleikha]

But it only works as a conclusion to her arc if you view her entire story as being about her daddy issues, and she was clearly so much more than that.  Actually letting her do something is paying off what the early part of the movie set up.

 

Yes! That is the point I've been making. 

 

I also think its important to distinguish between criticisms of the character and criticisms of the writers. Some critics have criticized Hope's character for being dour and spoiling the fun. That's a criticism of the character. But to say that it's a problem that Hope didn't get to suit up and engage in heroics is a criticism of the writing. 

[Sakura12]

It's funny seeing reviewers calling Ant-Man a flop. 58 million for a character the average audience has never heard of looks good to me. It shows that the Marvel branding has earned a great deal of audience trust. 

 

Not every movie is going to be a mega hit, but I think I will have to see next week's numbers to determine if it's a flop or not. I think critics jump into fast. That's like saying a pilot of a tv show is a huge hit because it got 20 million viewers, then by the 3rd week it has only 5 million. That would be a flop IMO. You have to wait for everything to settle first before you put a mark on it. 

Edited July 20, 2015 by Sakura12

[CatMack]

People called Agent Carter a bomb too even though it pretty consistently won its timeslot and the TV execs were consistent with saying they were happy with the numbers.  People were shocked, SHOCKED, when it was renewed even though anyone paying attention shouldn't have been.

 

I think people just want to see Marvel fail, it's become such a juggernaut, any sign that the bubble is bursting and people are all over it ready to declare something a failure.  I may have my issues with the movie but it's clearly performing perfectly acceptably, even if it's not Marvel's biggest runaway hit ever (which no one ever expected it to be).

[benteen]

I'd say to all of those critics that Marvel got nearly $60 million out of ANT-MAN!  Ant-Man was a B-level hero even when he was part of the original Avengers.  Scott Lang's profile has been raised over the past few years (including as the main character of the excellent Future Foundation comic) but he's at best a B-list charater who is obscure to the general public.  It's a testament to the Marvel brand that they can take a periennel B-lister and make him a major box office hit.

[Traveller519]

Yup, I think it was the complete success of Guardians of the Galaxy last summer that's leading people to say this is a flop. "Look, not everything they touch turns into a runaway cash cow. The movie is going to make it's budget back, and overall increases the story telling narrative of the universe. Marvel needs these buttresses. They keep the universe front and center and give them variety with the big projects.

 

I don't think they even needed Hope to put on the suit to at least give her character some support. Having her take down some security guards to buy them some time, where Luis failed to do so (a BW call back from Iron Man 2) would have added some dimension. They almost did that when she got the drop on Cross in the chamber but that really sputtered out pretty quickly when Pym went down.

 

I understand a bit of Marvel's problem. To build their universe they needed their biggest tent pole heroes, especially with Spider-man and the X-men (their property that contains the best known strong female characters) gone. Those characters are the longest standing ones, who came out of a period where white men were the primary basis for the Super Heroes. I do think Marvel deserves credit for it's network TV shows though in building the diversity. Obviously Agent Carter was female-centric and dealt with the issues of sexism through the historical lense. Agents of SHIELD has promoted its strong female characters and a diverse cast, especially through the second season. And by and large those are mostly original characters (or furthering the fringe characters).

 

I'm straying to far of course now. But I liked the movie. It was fun. I liked having a small stakes comic book movie for a change.

[caracas1914]

I admit I'm a little ambivalent to the comic relief role of Michael Pena. Yes, he's a wine connosieur and abstract art afficionado, but in the context of MARVEL's having no Latino actors prominently in "hero" mode.....

[VCRTracking]

Him going back to save the guard is probably my favorite moments.

[JBC344]

I admit I'm a little ambivalent to the comic relief role of Michael Pena. Yes, he's a wine connosieur and abstract art afficionado, but in the context of MARVEL's having no Latino actors prominently in "hero" mode.....

See, this actually gets me more excited for his character.  I think Marvel is pretty good about spreading the love with a lot of the second or third tier characters.  With a lot of people talking about how much they like Michael's Luis.  I can definitely imagine him showing up in other movies.  Who knows where they will take the character.  He could end up another Maria Hill, who isn't a super hero but whose role seems to expand with every movie they put her in. 

[raven]

 

hen someone better suited is around and they're not the hero because mumble mumble contrivance patronizing male over-protectiveness mumble mumble.  Scott's the hero because the writers decided he was the hero, not because it actually makes sense.  And that's never paid off.

As someone who really enjoyed this movie, I've got to agree with this.  I also liked Scott and thought Paul Rudd was funny, goofy and charming, but in the back of my mind was "and why NOT Hope again"?  To me it was sort of a glaring question in this one.  She's obviously intelligent and believably tough (Evangeline Lilly still has great arms), is dying to put the suit on, can work with the ants, knows the business, etc etc.  Sooooo..why NOT Hope again? Maybe if they had a Wasp movie for her next in the pipeline, but apparently not.  It just stuck out to me.  Never read the comics so I don't know that story except for what everyone's posted here.

 

That aside, I liked this more than Ultron, almost as much as GOTG.  Scott's Scooby Gang leaned a little too steroptypical sometimes, but I thought Michael Peña's monlogues with the cutaways were a lot of fun; I agree with Vulture that he stole his scenes. Like VCRTracking, one of my fave moments was him saving the guard; I think the guests were evacuated before the building collapsed into the subverse.   OK, the gang were all fun even if I did wince a couple of times.

 

I was kind of creeped out by CGI Michael Douglas.  Yeek!  I kept waiting for his face to fall off.

 

Liked seeing Falcon; liked Scott's "I'm Ant Man" and his 'I'm sorries!' when they were fighting.  It was nice that pending step-dad put Cassie first; she was cute too, any kid who likes a horror looking toy is OK by me.

 

Another scene I liked was Scott with his free BR drink after being fired.  Of course he took his on the house whatever it was, why not??

 

I was waiting for a disclaimer that no ants were harmed in the making of this film.

Edited July 23, 2015 by raven

[Bruinsfan]

I'm left wondering why they needed to short out the backups and steal the Yellowjacket suit if Pym's plan was to blow up the whole facility and shrink all the debris into the Microverse. Hope could have easily set those charges/reduction bombs with longer timers during the work day and then faked some type of nighttime emergency to get the security staff out of the building, no Ant Man training montages required.

[nobodyyoucare]

The backups may be programmed to send out their data. The suit is important research so Pym couldn't have it destroyed. Plus if someone got inside it during the shrinking they could use it to escape. 

[VCRTracking]

How Exactly Did Ant-Man Make Michael Douglas Look So Young?

[ChelseaNH]

I'm surprised that Howard Stark was still alive in 1989.  If he died shortly thereafter, that would make Tony almost 30.  Given his immaturity, I was expecting Tony's father died when he was still young.

 

I still don't understand how Hank leaving Hope in the dark about how Janet really died was supposed to protect her.  if you don't want her using the suit because it's dangerous then let her know why it's dangerous.

 

I think that showing the original AntMan and Wasp working together sets it up to show the new AntMan and Wasp working together, and I wish they had taken that final step.  Although AntMan and Wasp being able to overtake a ballistic missile?  Almost as laughable as ants not freezing at flight altitude.  I can be hand-wavy about Pym particles, but not practical things.

 

Still, it was a fun time and there was Anthony Mackie, so I'm good.

[nobodyyoucare]

 

Given his immaturity, I was expecting Tony's father died when he was still young.

He did. Iron Man movie states Tony was on his own during his childhood due to the death of his parents. . 

[ChelseaNH]

If Tony is about 50 now, he was born in 1965, which makes him 24 in 1989, which is when the opening scene with Howard was set.  So somebody somewhere is wrong about something.

 

Unless Howard was a Life Model Decoy, and then I am done with these people.  DONE! I say.

[Glory]

If Tony is about 50 now, he was born in 1965, which makes him 24 in 1989, which is when the opening scene with Howard was set.  So somebody somewhere is wrong about something.

 

Unless Howard was a Life Model Decoy, and then I am done with these people.  DONE! I say.

I definitely think all the Iron Man movies have played fast and loose with Tony's age. Let's see. If they de-age him about 10 years (not unheard of in Hollywood and RDJ is a good looking 50) that would make him 14 in the opening scene. More realistic? 

 

However - when was the original video with Howard Stark set (the video where we first see Howard Stark on screen)? That might ruin it. 

[ChelseaNH]

If Tony is around 40, that would put the Stark Expo from IM2 around 1980 instead of 1970.

[Guest]

I enjoyed it.  It wasn't the best movie ever (in my opinion), but I like Paul Rudd and the movie was fast moving. I had serious doubts going in, but apparently when Marvel releases something, my husband and I will go see it no matter what it is.

 

I agree that the Hope/Scott kiss came too quickly, but at the same time, I felt it was somewhat predictable.

 

I really liked the fight with Falcon.

[Rick Kitchen]

 

I still don't understand how Hank leaving Hope in the dark about how Janet really died was supposed to protect her.  if you don't want her using the suit because it's dangerous then let her know why it's dangerous.

 

He probably blames himself for Janet's death.

[Raja]

And he was a covert agent so how could he tell a teenager or younger? By the time he did well after SHIELD'S secrets were made public in The Winter Soldier it was too late for the relationship.

[nilyank]

I'm surprised that Howard Stark was still alive in 1989. If he died shortly thereafter, that would make Tony almost 30. Given his immaturity, I was expecting Tony's father died when he was still young.

In the first Iron Man film, they showed all those magazine and newspaper articles about Tony (using RDJ's real life younger pics) and the stated that he took over Stark Industries when he was 21. If Howard died shortly after in 1989, that would make Tony around 46-47 years old.

[SeanC]

The newspaper obituary of Howard in The Winter Soldier states that he died in 1991. That's the sort of minor detail that it's not prudent to assign too much importance to, but given that the Winter Soldier killed him it's quite possible the writers/producers came up with a firm sequence of events around it (particularly if it's a plot point in the next film).

[nobodyyoucare]

 

and the stated that he took over Stark Industries when he was 21

Taking over could have occured years after the death of Stark. A new CEO would have to be approved which can take a year or two. Plus if Stark were younger they may not have wanted him to be CEO younger then 21. 

[anna0852]

In the first Iron Man film, they showed all those magazine and newspaper articles about Tony (using RDJ's real life younger pics) and the stated that he took over Stark Industries when he was 21. If Howard died shortly after in 1989, that would make Tony around 46-47 years old.

I think that sounds about right then. You also have to factor in that Tony spend most of his upbringing in boarding school. Even if Howard was alive until Tony turned 20-21, he wasn't a hands-on and present parent.  

[ChelseaNH]

He probably blames himself for Janet's death.

 

No doubt.  So when Hope asked why he never told her the truth about her mother's death, he could have said, "I couldn't bear to talk about it."  But instead, he said it was to protect her, which doesn't make a lot of sense.

[KatWay]

I think they were pretty clear that Howard died before Tony took over Stark Industries at age 21. There was a picture of Obediah taking over before that (then getting "usurped" by Tony, laying the groundstone for his motivation). So the timeline overall doesn't add up. Quite a mistake/retcon for people as detail oriented as the Marvel folks!

Edited July 23, 2015 by KatWay

[benteen]

I got the impression he wanted to protect Hope from the details...that Janet was essentially trapped in a neverending hell if she was still alive at all.

[nobodyyoucare]

I got the impression he wanted to protect Hope from the details...that Janet was essentially trapped in a neverending hell if she was still alive at all.

Yep so he doesn't lose her since he was thinking she may use the suit to try to rescue Janet if she found it. He more then anyone else knew the dangers and didnt want Hope to lose both parents or lose the last link to his wife. 

[stealinghome]

I think they were pretty clear that Howard died before Tony took over Stark Industries at age 21. There was a picture of Obediah taking over before that (then getting "usurped" by Tony, laying the groundstone for his motivation). So the timeline overall doesn't add up. Quite a mistake/retcon for people as detail oriented as the Marvel folks!

I figure at some point the movies are just going to have to adopt the same sliding timescale the comics have. If they're serious about doing movies out to 2028, they're going to have to, I think

[VCRTracking]

Part 2 of the interview with director Peyton Reed at AICN:

 

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/72474

 

I feel bad that a lot of Edgar Wright, especially the parts people really love that Peyton and the writers that came after Wright came up with.

[dusang]

I really enjoyed it. Although I also discovered my fear of creepy, crawly, multi-legged, swarmy things is much more deeply rooted than I previously realized.

[benteen]

I saw it again today and I enjoyed it as much, if not more, than the first time.

[Unusual Suspect]

I liked it. Cool effects, cool characters. But after Avengers: AoU and Guardians of the Galaxy, it's still the weakest of the trio. I didn't get as emotionally invested. Still, a good movie.

[thuganomics85]

Finally got around to seeing it.  Probably one of my least favorite Marvel films, but that's not really a bad thing, since I enjoyed most of the films.  I liked that it had a lighter tone to it, the focus on the characters, and I even enjoyed that it was a bit of a smaller story.  The entire world wasn't in peril (yet), and it was just about them getting a weapon out of a egomaniac's hands.  And the final showdown took place in a child's bedroom, instead of an entire freaking city.

 

That said, even though I enjoyed the Scott character and Paul Rudd was perfectly cast, my biggest issue was that I was more interested in Hope and her story, so at times I felt like I actually wanted to see a different movie: one with her as the lead.  And I felt like she seemed to just disappear at the final act, which was frustrating.  I did like the film pointed out several times that she probably should have been on the mission instead.  And I think Scott was more or less right that the only reason she wasn't was because Hank was overprotective of her, while he considered Scott "expendable."  Make sense, and it actually gave Hank a darker edge to him, because he does come off at times like a guy who is on the right side, but isn't really that good of a guy at times.

 

And the, of course, there was Darren Cross.  Once again, Marvel gets another more then capable actor with Corey Stoll, and pretty much waste him as a typical villain. I can't think of anything outside the suite, that separates Darren from numerous bad guys in comic films and general action films.  He's either an egomaniac or a violent crazy guy.  Does Marvel even care about this department?  Because they keep dropping the ball.  I honestly think if they somehow got Daniel Day-Lewis to play a villain, they'd find some way to make him and the character boring.

 

I was surprised that I liked Scott's buddies and didn't find them annoying.  Michael Pena was a highlight: more then made up for his wooden and awkward performance in Gracepoint this spring.  Also surprised I kind of enjoyed Paxton and thought he was good to Scott's daughter in his own way.  Weird seeing Wood Harris in a throwaway role as his partner.  Speaking of which, between this and Jurassic World, why is Judy Greer's talent being squandered in thankless roles like these?

 

All the shrinking effects were great, but I think the gold star really goes to that uncanny de-aging they did to Michael Douglas in the beginning.

 

It was fun seeing 80s Peggy Carter, even if she looked way younger then 70.  Howard was a bit more mixed: I like John Slattery, but I think I just consider Dominic Cooper to be "the" Howard Stark now, and I almost wished they forgot about Slattery's brief stint in Iron Man 2, and just had an aged up Dominic instead.  He just brings the charm and arrogance that makes me see him as Howard, while I just think of Slattery's version as Roger Sterling with a stache.

[beetnemesis]

Very good movie. Full great CGI and special FX the most special of them all is how they made Michael Douglass look so young in the beginning of the movie.

[Bruinsfan]

I'm really pulling for that to win them the Best Visual Effects Oscar. The only other CGI effect that made me gasp out loud this year was the mososaurus jumping up to eat the shark in Jurassic World, and I think the Ant Man feat represented the greater artistry of the two.

[Raja]

It's funny seeing reviewers calling Ant-Man a flop. 58 million for a character the average audience has never heard of looks good to me. It shows that the Marvel branding has earned a great deal of audience trust. 

 

Not every movie is going to be a mega hit, but I think I will have to see next week's numbers to determine if it's a flop or not. I think critics jump into fast. That's like saying a pilot of a tv show is a huge hit because it got 20 million viewers, then by the 3rd week it has only 5 million. That would be a flop IMO. You have to wait for everything to settle first before you put a mark on it. 

Looks like the Ant-Man just passed up Captain America The First Avenger in American box office take. $177 to $176 millions. And the movie hasn't opened in China yet.

http://comicbook.com/2015/09/21/ant-man-surpasses-captain-america-the-first-avengers-domestic-bo/

 

I wonder why the hold on China, are they going to release concurrently with home video as an anti piracy test?

[methodwriter85]

I don't know what it was, but I found Cassie extremely annoying. Ugh, I hope they recast if Ant-Man gets another movie.

 

Judy Greer is having one hell of a "Hey, It's That Guy" career. By far the most successful of the Jawbreaker cast.

 

I appreciate that the show avoided making Paxton into a bad guy, or try to suggest some lingering feeling between Scott and his ex-wife. That would have been eye-rollingly bad.

[Bruinsfan]

I don't know, Paxton was an ass about trying to keep Scott from Cassie's birthday party, was pushing to exclude a clearly loving and involved but broke father from his daughter's life over child support payments that were demonstrably not needed to make ends meet, and put himself in charge of a Javert-esque manhunt for Scott despite it being a textbook conflict of interest. He came around in the end after being rendered helpless by a supervillain who busted up his home and wanted to murder his girlfriend's daughter, but I didn't get the feeling he was all that good a guy in general.

[SeanC]

Maggie, while a bit more sympathetic to Scott, didn't want him around either (and it's her call).  Paxton was reflecting his partner's wishes in that.

[Bruinsfan]

It's kind of a chicken-and-egg thing for me, I'm not at all sure denying visitation rights was originating with Maggie rather than Paxton.

[SeanC]

Maggie seemed perfectly able to stand up for herself, so absent some indication otherwise, I assume it was her idea.  Scott getting sent to jail would have turned her entire life upside down, so I hardly think it's unreasonable.

[VCRTracking]

‘Ant-Man’ Sequel ‘Ant-Man and the Wasp’ Announced for 2018

[HoodlumSheep]

People onthe internet are so salty about Captain Marvel being pushed back. Lol. I'm totally fine with it. Ant-man and the Wasp? Sounds like we could get a fun dynamic duo movie.

[Bruinsfan]

This. The cast and concept are proven, and it returns the Wasp to prominence where she should have been from Phase One.