Marvel's Ant-Man

[Eldan]

Just saw it. Terrible. Not even amusingly bad for the most part.

Wooden acting from the leads, annoying stereotypes from the non-leads. Scott, especially, could have been replaced by a piece of cardboard with a voice synthesizer stuck on it.
Worst dialogue I've heard in years. Jokes especially painful. Didn't hear anyone laugh in the audience even once. Every cliché sentence of the American Movie (tm) was there, and every single one was delivered badly. This was already bad in Age of Ultron, here there's nothing to distract from it as the camera lingers on them every time.
Plot that appeared to be a stitched-together Frankensteinian monstrosity of every other hero movie ever.
Pacing all over. If the dialogue is so bad, don't include so much of it, focus on the passable action scenes.

Two plus points: a few sad attempts at cool ant scenes and the quite nicely done quantum scenes. Which they had to ruin with "no, I can't die, my daughter is reverberating at me!".

Especially sad? First avenger with actually interesting powers. And they barely used them. I love ants. They managed to make them uncool. They had a bullet ant and the one guy stung by one? Barely reacted, then was knocked out.

A few more points.

First, why weaponize this? That's so stupid! Think of nanotech! Microsurgery! Art! Transportation, at least? Come on, you could think of transportation. Shrink a shipment of, say, ore, deliver it in a crate, unshrink.
Second, why is every marvel bad guy the same? Did the military-industrial complex kill Stan Lee's dog? How many "I'm your business partner, I do the same research as you, but I'm using it for evil" guys have we had so far? Two? Three? More? I don't even care anymore. There's probably a boarding school somewhere mass producing them from clones.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Two. Obadiah Stane in the first Iron Man movie, and Darren Cross here.

Not sure where you are, but there were plenty of laughs here.

Anyway, on to new business.

I like how they did multiple fake-outs on Yellowjacket getting one of his arms ripped off during the train fight. It's hard to see the actual one though, since it's right in the middle of the suit-imploding scene.

Also, note the Imperial laser sound effects. The arm-loss thing isn't the only Star Wars reference in the film.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Just saw it. Terrible. Not even amusingly bad for the most part.

OK. That doesn't sounds like the film I saw, but no accounting for taste. I have a question for you, though: why are you here? If the film is so terrible you hated it, and by your post it sounds like this is a fairly accurate description, why not move on with your life? Why force yourself to write up a 300 word essay on it?

This is something that has been bugging me for a while now. When I see what I consider a truly terrible film (in my case Watchmen... and even that one I laughed at [at, not with]), the last thing I want to do is wallow in them. I mourn the money I spent on them and the lost time, accept it is a sunk cost, and move on with my life to other things I will hopefully enjoy. I get that if you mostly liked the film but feel X or Y could have been done better, you may still want to join a discussion, but if there is no saving grace to the film, what the hell, man? Are you expecting someone will change your mind, or do you just want others to hate it as well? What, precisely, are you going to get from this thread other than keep bringing a bad film to mind?

With that out of the way:
Weaponize: we do not know how expensive the shrinking liquid is. It may make all other uses too expensive until military brings it down. Also, while superhero physics are indeed in effect, on paper transporting miniaturised cargo takes the same amount of energy as large cargo, so no real savings there. Finally, as established in the film, there is no stopping the technology from being weaponised except by removing it from circulation entirely. Even if you sell it to hospitals, someone is bound to use it to spy and sabotage.

Bad guys: Obadiah Stone and this guy are the only ones that fit that exact definition. But, yes, others follow a similar pattern, and I doubt anything I say will convince you otherwise, so again, see my previous "what are you trying to accomplish?" question.

Grey Wolf

[Giggling Ghast]

First, why weaponize this? That's so stupid! Think of nanotech! Microsurgery! Art! Transportation, at least? Come on, you could think of transportation. Shrink a shipment of, say, ore, deliver it in a crate, unshrink.

Darren was driven by the need to surpass his mentor, Hank Pym. As Hank had figured out how to shrink a whole person, he needed to do the same.

"Selling arms to terrorists" isn't the most sane business plan, but the movie did state he wasn't the most stable guy even before unprotected exposure to Pym Particles.

[Docuzzell]

I heard from my friend that this movie is running well and break records of all other movies released this year.

[Eldan]

OK. That doesn't sounds like the film I saw, but no accounting for taste. I have a question for you, though: why are you here? If the film is so terrible you hated it, and by your post it sounds like this is a fairly accurate description, why not move on with your life? Why force yourself to write up a 300 word essay on it?

Oh, that wasn't an essay. That wasn't even a rant. If I write a rant, it's several pages. That was a short statement of opinion.

I like discussing things, even if I dislike them. I'm currently in the process of reading through the thread to see other people's opinions.

[Eldan]

Two. Obadiah Stane in the first Iron Man movie, and Darren Cross here.

Surely more than that? Stane and this one were, yes, the only CEOs of the main character's company that weaponized their projects. But there were more weapon-developing company leaders. Whatshisface in Iron Man 2, Fire-spitting nerd guy in Iron Man 3, at least one Hulk villain...

[Rogar Demonblud]

I heard from my friend that this movie is running well and break records of all other movies released this year.

He's wrong. This isn't going to come close to Furious 7 or Age of Ultron, although it is doing nicely compared to a lot of others. I'm kind of interested in how Pixels is going to do, but I'm not going to see it, since the word is Adam Sandler didn't even phone in his performance this time. What's the next step down? Texting in your performance?

[Lizard Lord]

OK. That doesn't sounds like the film I saw, but no accounting for taste. I have a question for you, though: why are you here? If the film is so terrible you hated it, and by your post it sounds like this is a fairly accurate description, why not move on with your life? Why force yourself to write up a 300 word essay on it?

You may as well ask every amateur critic this same thing about anything they disliked. Have you really never talked about a movie you disliked before? Not even once?

(Mind you I liked this movie a lot, but like you said there is no accounting for taste. And everyone is entitled to express their opinion whether that is positive or negative.)

[cobaltstarfire]

I'm kind of interested in how Pixels is going to do, but I'm not going to see it, since the word is Adam Sandler didn't even phone in his performance this time. What's the next step down? Texting in your performance?

There are lots of reasons to not see Pixels. I think the one that jumps out to me the most is that the only female character is apparently a literal trophy that the aliens beamed down for one of the hero's to have.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Surely more than that? Stane and this one were, yes, the only CEOs of the main character's company that weaponized their projects. But there were more weapon-developing company leaders. Whatshisface in Iron Man 2, Fire-spitting nerd guy in Iron Man 3, at least one Hulk villain...

Iron Man 2, would that be Justin Hammer (rival) or Ivan Vanko (revenge crazed nut job)?

Iron Man 3, I believe you're referring to Aldridge Killian (rival, intends to do a take over of Stark Industries in the mid-term future)

As for Hulk, you'd have to specify which movie. Not that it really matters; both David Banner and Samuel Stern were stealing Bruce's work for their own purposes, not working with him.

Really, the Marvel Universe makes me want to know more about the Edison vs Tesla rivalry.

[Lizard Lord]

Surely more than that? Stane and this one were, yes, the only CEOs of the main character's company that weaponized their projects. But there were more weapon-developing company leaders. Whatshisface in Iron Man 2, Fire-spitting nerd guy in Iron Man 3, at least one Hulk villain...

You mentioned a very specific type of character and asked how many there were in the MCU. The answer is two. This is a new question and while Cross and all of Iron Man's villains meet this criteria, none of the MCU Hulk villains do (nor any other MCU villain so far for that matter).
General Ross was a soldier doing his job and had the extra incentive of knowing that his daughter was close to what he considered a monster. The MCU Abomination was a soldier that really hated to lose and wanted to do whatever it took to be on equal footing with this new enemy. Samuel Sterns (who hasn't even been on screen long enough to be named the Leader, let alone get a more villainous motivation) was just motivated by scientific fascination/curiosity. He created Abomination just to see what would happen and had no illusions of controlling him. Unless you are talking about Bruce's dad in the last Pre-MCU movie. (I don't even remember his motivations or if he was a company leader or not. I kind of like to just forget that movie all together.)


But yea, so far Loki and Armin Zola are the only really good MCU villains. I would give Ultron third place and Cross fourth just by the merit of having no better competition. Which is a shame, because I had high hopes for Red Skull (A.K.A. Super Hitler) and Mandarin. If Thanos disappoints I will be pissed.

[Rogar Demonblud]

There are lots of reasons to not see Pixels. I think the one that jumps out to me the most is that the only female character is apparently a literal trophy that the aliens beamed down for one of the heros to have.

Damn. The aliens really went all out imitating the video games.

[Eldan]

Actually, I quite liked Killian, I thought he was one of the better ones. Not for his character, mind you, but because they have so few villains with actual powers and his power had the added advantage of beind flashier than most hero powers in the MCU.

I'm still a bit annoyed about Malekith. I can't shake the feeling that he could have been interesting if they had given him screentime.

[Kitten Champion]

I rather liked Ultron as a villain, he had charisma as a twisted version of Tony Stark and posed a sufficient threat to the team and the world that he wasn't... cheap, I guess. It was entertaining to see him on screen and that's what matters.

[Eldan]

Ultron was good for a while. But then he gave up on what was previously his main power (cloud distribution) and turned into YAMA (Yet Another Mook Army), just so they could punch him to death, which was very disappointing.

[theNater]

Except... that was her negating his decision... How is it wrong to negate someone negating you???

What decision of his was she negating? Whether Scott would be Ant-Man was quite clearly Scott's decision.

I phrased it that way because you were suggesting he was sexist.....

There is more than one way to be sexist. Hank doesn't hold the belief that women should never be superheroes; he has different (but still sexist) beliefs.

5) Being a male and making decisions

Making decisions for a woman who is perfectly capable of making her own. Nobody's calling Scott sexist for deciding to call in his team to support the heist, or the stepdad sexist for covering for Scott.

For some of you I think your enjoyment of things might improve if you were let go of the idea that the movie needs to have a main character without dangly bits, or with them this is the century of the fruitbat, in order to meet the ever elusive goal of "representation".

It is unlikely my enjoyment of this film could improve, given how much I already enjoyed it. I mean, I'm planning to go see it again in the theater, which is rare for me(it used to be unheard of, but then the MCU happened).

Well, I don't know about anybody else, but I rather liked it!

(Which of course probably means everyone else hated it or something.)

Sentiment in this thread seems pretty positive overall, and it's 79% on Rotten Tomatoes.

I know I liked it.

[Ranxerox]

Sentiment in this thread seems pretty positive overall, and it's 79% on Rotten Tomatoes.

I know I liked it.

And the 79% is with the critics. Audiences are giving it a 91%, which would rank it with Marvel's best films.

[Legato Endless]

Surely more than that? Stane and this one were, yes, the only CEOs of the main character's company that weaponized their projects. But there were more weapon-developing company leaders. Whatshisface in Iron Man 2, Fire-spitting nerd guy in Iron Man 3, at least one Hulk villain...

Yeah, if you expand the concept to 'the Evils of the Military Industrial Complex', then you've got about two thirds of the MCU. More than Terrorists, Nazis and evil Royals combined in terms of Antagonists. Basically once you climb high enough in the hierarchy of any organization in the MCU, your options are vigilante, Fascist, or Terrorist Sponsor.

There are lots of reasons to not see Pixels. I think the one that jumps out to me the most is that the only female character is apparently a literal trophy that the aliens beamed down for one of the hero's to have.

O_o

[Eldan]

Moviebob's review of Pixels is enlightening. It's ten minutes of purest vitriol.

[Giggling Ghast]

There are lots of reasons to not see Pixels. I think the one that jumps out to me the most is that the only female character is apparently a literal trophy that the aliens beamed down for one of the hero's to have.

Technically, it's one of two female characters, and she's initially an antagonist. When the aliens are defeated, Q*Bert (who is on the heroes' side for no adequately-explained reason) turns into a copy of said female character as a trophy for Josh Gad, who adored the character as a child.

I haven't seen the film. This is just what I picked up from reviews.

[Kitten Champion]

The biggest shame about Pixels is it so easily could have been a great movie, something between Captain N: The Game Master and Scott Pilgrim versus the World could be pretty cool if you had an imagination, effort, and talent behind it.

[Eldan]

THere's always Futurama's Anthology of Interest (II, I think?). Bonus point being it's only seven minutes. Wakka-wakka-wakka.

[comicshorse]

Darren was driven by the need to surpass his mentor, Hank Pym. As Hank had figured out how to shrink a whole person, he needed to do the same.

"Selling arms to terrorists" isn't the most sane business plan, but the movie did state he wasn't the most stable guy even before unprotected exposure to Pym Particles.

My take was that Darren knew that selling to Hydra wasn't going to make the most profit but he couldn't resist another way to get back at Pym. By making his worst nightmare happen by giving his work to a ruthless terrorist orginization

[Tyrant]

Making decisions for a woman who is perfectly capable of making her own. Nobody's calling Scott sexist for deciding to call in his team to support the heist, or the stepdad sexist for covering for Scott.

Hank isn't telling Hope she can't be a super hero or execute her own plan. He's telling her that she can't use his stuff to do it. She has absolutely no claim to his stuff. He owns it. Ownership includes the ability to tell other people "no, you can't use that". When her decisions start involving him and his stuff, they cease to be only her decisions.

[Bulldog Psion]

Moviebob's review of Pixels is enlightening. It's ten minutes of purest vitriol.

Wow, that's hilarious.

[theNater]

THere's always Futurama's Anthology of Interest (II, I think?). Bonus point being it's only seven minutes. Wakka-wakka-wakka.

Second segment of two, according to Wikipedia.

"Invaders! Possibly from space!"

Good times.

Hank isn't telling Hope she can't be a super hero or execute her own plan. He's telling her that she can't use his stuff to do it. She has absolutely no claim to his stuff. He owns it. Ownership includes the ability to tell other people "no, you can't use that". When her decisions start involving him and his stuff, they cease to be only her decisions.

And if his rationale was that it was his and he didn't want her touching his stuff, then that wouldn't be sexist(unless he was worried about cooties or something). But the reason behind his decision was that it was too risky, and she's entirely old enough to decide what risks to take.

[cobaltstarfire]

It could just as well be a mix of Ageism, Sexism, and protective parent.

edit:

As far as Pixels, I haven't seen it nor do I plan on it. So my mistake on how the "trophy" was got, either way the "trophy" turned into a human woman to become a literal trophy woman, ick. I've seen too many other people rather angry over various things in it to want to waste a single cent on it.

[Reddish Mage]

First, why weaponize this? That's so stupid! Think of nanotech! Microsurgery! Art! Transportation, at least? Come on, you could think of transportation. Shrink a shipment of, say, ore, deliver it in a crate, unshrink.

Darren right in the beginning shows a video as he states had already been revolutionizing the world with his shrinking tech (cue video of a shipment shrinking), and then presents the yellow-jacket. What he doesn't add (but we learn immediately thereafter) is that he managed to create the shrinking suit, but can't actually shrink a living subject yet....

And given the many applications, the prospect of quick payoffs from the militarization of the technology is both extremely obvious and quite in keeping with the personality of Darren Cross they are trying to establish.

[Binks]

What decision of his was she negating? Whether Scott would be Ant-Man was quite clearly Scott's decision.

The decision to allow Scott to break into his home (twice) to steal and return the suit without being arrested.