Marvel's Ant-Man

[Kitten Champion]

The only decision he negated was Hope wanting to be the Ant-Woman. Which happened because he didn't want to lose another member of his family to the superhero life, I mean... if he was against women being heroes at all he wouldn't have let his wife be the original wasp in the first place.

Yes, because otherwise he seems resigned to the fact that she'll do whatever she wants, not resistant. There's no heat or even bitterness with her voting him out of his company or having Scott arrested. More a sad acceptance that his relationship with her is just irreparable at this point but that they're the only allies towards this common and very important goal.

It was also specifically that - the wearing of the suit - which he couldn't accept, he didn't raise a single word of opposition against her continued subterfuge with Cross in Pym Industries or her being there in the final act during the heist itself when the danger was the most real with the film devoting increments of the second act to build this unnerving underlying tension surrounding Cross that obviously turned out to be fully justified.

[Dragonus45]

Mostly from the way he negates every decision Hope makes in the film up to that point.


There's no malice in it, any more than there's malice in saying that Tony Stark has a tendency towards recklessness or that Roy verbally lambasts friends and foes more than would be ideal. Everybody's got character flaws. Having those flaws doesn't make them bad people, and pointing out those flaws isn't an attack.


I...I like numbers. I find them soothing. So I actually want to thank you for providing me an excuse to go look some up. It was fun.

But where is the evidence that he does that for the reason you seem to be making up and not the one directly stated in the movie several times. Sorry let me rephrase, I mean that that gives his character a malicious intent not that your interpretation is itself malicious.

[Reddish Mage]

You're confusing a meta-critique with an internal justification of a fictional character within a body of work. What is this "everything else in the way the movie treats Hope" that concludes Hank Pym would have been fine with Hope wearing the suit were she male?

As others have remarked on, the effective institutional sexism of Misney isn't in question. But Hank is a fictional character comprising one data point. Can't really draw a line through that.

Wait Wait Wait!? Are you simply really talking about HANK PYM'S internal thoughts and justifications for his plans in regards to his daughter?

Those are quite, and they aren't sexist, explicitly at least. Does it implicitly betray a sexist internal set of values? Yes.

Hank regrets his loved one's heroic sacrifice that saved the world in an extremely intense matter: "not a day goes by that don't regret..." "letting her joint me."

That is not in keeping with comradie among male soldiers but is typical behavior among male superheroes and their relationship with their love interests.

This hero-complex, where the MALE superhero feels personally responsible for events that are beyond his control and he simply can't accept putting (typically female) loved ones in danger regardless of whether said loved ones are both capable in their own right and willingly accept the risk, is a typical MALE superhero trait. See Superman, Spider-Man, The Hulk...Hank's relationship with JANET, at least, fits a very archetypical superhero and very gendered pattern.

Hanks attitude isn't "it should have been me." His own story tells us he couldn't have made that sacrifice and that only Janet could have diffused the nuke. Only that in some way he feels responsible for it and regrets it. That attitude itself is unhealthy as the movie clearly demonstrates: because of that event he lied to his daughter about her mothers death, then he left Hope to deal with her mom's death on her own and then sent her away from him....

[Dragonus45]

Wait Wait Wait!? Are you simply really talking about HANK PYM'S internal thoughts and justifications for his plans in regards to his daughter?

Those are quite, and they aren't sexist, explicitly at least. Does it implicitly betray a sexist internal set of values? Yes.

Hank regrets his loved one's heroic sacrifice that saved the world in an extremely intense matter: "not a day goes by that don't regret..." "letting her joint me."

That is not in keeping with camaraderie among male soldiers but is typical behavior among male superheroes and their relationship with their love interests.

This hero-complex, where the MALE superhero feels personally responsible for events that are beyond his control and he simply can't accept putting (typically female) loved ones in danger regardless of whether said loved ones are both capable in their own right and willingly accept the risk, is a typical MALE superhero trait. See Superman, Spider-Man, The Hulk...Hank's relationship with JANET, at least, fits a very archetypical superhero and very gendered pattern.

Hanks attitude isn't "it should have been me." His own story tells us he couldn't have made that sacrifice and that only Janet could have diffused the nuke. Only that in some way he feels responsible for it and regrets it. That attitude itself is unhealthy as the movie clearly demonstrates: because of that event he lied to his daughter about her mothers death, then he left Hope to deal with her mom's death on her own and then sent her away from him....

Most soldiers aren't in love with each other, married, and have a daughter together. You can't use that dynamic as a baseline to turn around and describe Pyms grief as sexist.

[Reddish Mage]

Most soldiers aren't in love with each other, married, and have a daughter together. You can't use that dynamic as a baseline to turn around and describe Pyms grief as sexist.

I would use the dynamic of a female superheroine with her lover that dies heroically...but none spring to mind.

Hence the problem, apparently, I can't prove Hank's behavior is sexist because I'd need a baseline to compare it too. But that baseline doesn't exist because, for some strange reason, there are far fewer female super heroines, and they don't seem to get into the same situations nor do they react the same way when they do occur. Funny how that is.

[Lacuna Caster]

Wait Wait Wait!? Are you simply really talking about HANK PYM'S internal thoughts and justifications for his plans in regards to his daughter?

Yes. We were really talking simply about Hank Pym's in-universe thoughts and justifications, insofar as we can reasonably infer those from actions and dialogue in the film.

If you're instead talking about Hank Pym as a manifestation of the director, producers, parent corporation or larger culture's value set, that's fine. But a message in collage doesn't require that every letter come from the same sentence, and we don't really know what Hank's life would spell out.

Hanks attitude isn't "it should have been me." His own story tells us he couldn't have made that sacrifice and that only Janet could have diffused the nuke...

Wasn't Hank's original suit also capable of the super-shrinking? Honestly, this seems like splitting hairs.

(Cripes, even by the standards of this film, that's some really strange physics- if you've shrunk to the scale of fitting between molecules in order to breach the hull, and can't grow back, how are you going to mess up the innards of the ICBM? At that scale you're pretty well limited to kicking a few electrons out of place.)

[Kitten Champion]

(Cripes, even by the standards of this film, that's some really strange physics- if you've shrunk to the scale of fitting between molecules in order to breach the hull, and can't grow back, how are you going to mess up the innards of the ICBM? At that scale you're pretty well limited to kicking a few electrons out of place.)

They showed that, they weren't fitting through the molecules of the metal but through a tighter gap than their suits would normally allow. Besides that, they didn't shrink instantaneously into nothingness but kept shrinking once they reached some predefined minimum the suit was capable of.

So Scott and Janet had X amount of time to affect things physically before reaching some critical point.

[Rogar Demonblud]

I would use the dynamic of a female superheroine with her lover that dies heroically...but none spring to mind.

Ironically, Hank and Janet again. The Avengers go dimensional exploring (which is generally an F4/Reed Richards' latest screw up thing, but I digress) and get into major trouble. Of the "One third of the team dead, dying or missing" variety. They get back to the portal, but need time to get it working. They get it because Hank holds off the opposition at the cost of his life. Janet basically has a psychotic break, disbands what's left of the Avengers, uses a critically injured Wanda to seal the portal device 'forever', and turns her children into the supervillains Red Queen and Big Guy.

Possibly the most interesting storyline to come out of the MC2.

[theNater]

The only decision he negated was Hope wanting to be the Ant-Woman.

There's also her decision to have Scott arrested, which he negates by breaking Scott out within hours. And as Kitten Champion notes, he doesn't get angry at her for doing it, he just undoes it without comment. How patronizing is that?

... if he was against women being heroes at all he wouldn't have let his wife be the original wasp in the first place.

That's not the way his sexism manifests. His sexism manifests as a belief that whether a woman can be a hero is a decision to be made by the man in her life. Heck, you've even phrased it that way yourself: "he wouldn't have let his wife" be a superhero, as if that's his decision instead of hers.

But where is the evidence that he does that for the reason you seem to be making up and not the one directly stated in the movie several times. Sorry let me rephrase, I mean that that gives his character a malicious intent not that your interpretation is itself malicious.

Sexism is usually not malicious, and Hank's in particular isn't. He seems to hold a belief that as the man, it is his duty to protect the women in his life, and if anything happens to them it is his fault. He thinks he's being benevolent, and doesn't realize how demeaning it is.

Given the environment in which he grew up, it would be strange if his thinking had never been influenced by this belief. Remember, he's apparently a New Yorker and his parents would have been around Peggy Carter's age. Imagine what lessons any of the guys from Agent Carter would teach their sons; that's what Hank has to work with.

Wasn't Hank's original suit also capable of the super-shrinking? Honestly, this seems like splitting hairs.

His suit was damaged in a way that made it impossible for him to do it.

[Xondoure]

Okay, I'll redact that. Any reaction he had to her death, including no reaction, would have been sexist because he's male and she's female. Carry on, nothing to see here, I'm an idiot, etc. etc.

I know this is a few pages late, but I feel like this is still relevant enough to comment on. Yeah pretty much I 100% agree with this because the killing off of a female character as character development for a male character is a pretty awful trope that appears far more than it should (and is rarely reversed.) The only pay off in this case is that we may yet get Janet kicking butt on screen because comic book deaths aren't meant to be permanent.

[Milo v3]

There's also her decision to have Scott arrested, which he negates by breaking Scott out within hours. And as Kitten Champion notes, he doesn't get angry at her for doing it, he just undoes it without comment. How patronizing is that?

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

That's not the way his sexism manifests. His sexism manifests as a belief that whether a woman can be a hero is a decision to be made by the man in her life. Heck, you've even phrased it that way yourself: "he wouldn't have let his wife" be a superhero, as if that's his decision instead of hers.

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

[Reddish Mage]

Remember, he's apparently a New Yorker and his parents would have been around Peggy Carter's age. Imagine what lessons any of the guys from Agent Carter would teach their sons; that's what Hank has to work with.

That's really an excellent way to bring up that Hank would be widely exposed to, and even raised on, this sort of thinking using purely in-universe logic.

[Zmeoaice]

Oh my god can we discuss any Marvel film without people bickering about sexism.

Anyhow I thought this film was okay, but not much more. Darren Cross was a complete and utter moron the whole film for not applying the particles for a zillion other uses besides combat and for selling it to a barely regrouped terrorist organization when the USA would be able to pay him a ton more cash. And Hank was a tool for not telling his daughter how her mother died even though she's like 40 years old and can handle the truth. Also his ant mind controller thing could have been very useful and he kept it all to himself.

Spoiler

Show

The giant Ant in the end should have suffocated.

[Tyrant]

So to recap, Hank is sexist because:

1) He won't let Hope wear the suit

2) He apparently allowed Janet to wear the suit

3) He got Scott out of jail after Hope put him in jail

4) He blames himself for his wife's death

5) Being a male and making decisions

I'm pretty sure it all boils down to number 5, but I want to comment on the others.

1) Well, it is his suit and his technology. It kind of is his choice who wears it. It's not just up for grabs. Hope has no realistic claim to it.

2) He created the technology and the suits. It was his choice who got to wear them and who didn't. Yes, he let her. Any other scenario is her stealing something from her husband or taking the choice from him as to what he does with his things.

3) It was his house. If he wants to let someone break in he is allowed to do that. Hope overrode him, he was just putting the plan back on track.

4) He designed the suits. Something went wrong with his meaning only his wife could make that choice. Of course he feels guilty that something he made malfunctioned and as a result his wife was seemingly killed.

5) I'm still pretty sure this is what is upsetting people.

[Solamnicknight]

I went to see the movie with some friends and we enjoyed it. And as for that sexism thing
Bottom line is Hank didn't want Hope in the suit because he didn't want his daughter to die. It's a parental thing not a gender thing. Remember what Scott said? He was EXPENDABLE! Since he was a criminal, if the heist had failed, which by the way it nearly did. Scott would die or get trapped in the space between worlds instead of Hope, which by the way he NEARLY DID! Hank's just doing what most parents do, try to protect their child, even if said child is an adult can take care of themselves. Usually in the eyes of a parent their child is their child.

[~Corvus~]

It was fun~ Not as glorious or unexpected as Guardians of the Galaxy, but still good.

My favorite / funny moments:

Spoiler

Show

Back it up... yeah just baaack, just baaaack in on up.

Louis (Michael Peña character) talked about being able to knock out Peanut in jail, and then spends a decent part of the Heist continuing to knock people out. He wasn't kidding! Somehow, it remained comical.

"Captain, I know a guy." At this point, it's gotten silly. ALSO IS THAT THE GAUNTLET OF POWER???

[DiscipleofBob]

I went to go see this opening weekend, but it was at a drive-in and we ended up getting rained out. Finally got to see the full thing this time.

Spoiler: Best Line of the Movie

Show

"That's not a keychain."

[Solamnicknight]

It was fun~ Not as glorious or unexpected as Guardians of the Galaxy, but still good.

My favorite / funny moments:

Spoiler

Show

Back it up... yeah just baaack, just baaaack in on up.

Louis (Michael Peña character) talked about being able to knock out Peanut in jail, and then spends a decent part of the Heist continuing to knock people out. He wasn't kidding! Somehow, it remained comical.

"Captain, I know a guy." At this point, it's gotten silly. ALSO IS THAT THE GAUNTLET OF POWER???

Spoiler: Ant man's crew

Show

That back up the van moment was solid comedy gold. Also the moment when the police find the two guys in the van. What about the fight between Yellowjacket and Ant-Man? That had some really funny moments. Like when Yellowjacket gets swatted into a bug zapper, or Thomas the Tank Engine.

[BRC]

I went to see the movie with some friends and we enjoyed it. And as for that sexism thing
Bottom line is Hank didn't want Hope in the suit because he didn't want his daughter to die. It's a parental thing not a gender thing. Remember what Scott said? He was EXPENDABLE! Since he was a criminal, if the heist had failed, which by the way it nearly did. Scott would die or get trapped in the space between worlds instead of Hope, which by the way he NEARLY DID! Hank's just doing what most parents do, try to protect their child, even if said child is an adult can take care of themselves. Usually in the eyes of a parent their child is their child.

Eh, here's the thing.

Spoiler

Show

Hank Pym had a reason for wanting to keep Hope out of the suit, even though it was very clear that she was the more qualified candidate.
However, from storytelling terms it was a bad reason. Not in that it did not make sense for his character, but in that it does not make sense in terms of the heroic narrative.

The reason basically came down to Hank Pym trying to protect his daughter, ignoring the fact that 1) she was making the choice, fully aware of the risks, and 2) that she was more qualified to do the job.
Hank was willing to risk both the mission failing AND Scott Lang's life (Which he's also willing to ruin via elaborate mind games) in order to protect his daughter.

From a storytelling perspective, Hank's unwillingness to let Hope use the suit is an obstacle.
Now, in a standard heroic narrative, there would be a few options here.

Option 1: If the heroic narrative is focused on Scott Lang, he must demonstrate why he is the right man to wear the suit. This is kind of what they did, but it didn't really stick. He demonstrated that he COULD do the job, and Hope basically just accepted that her father wouldn't budge on the subject. Although in this case the obstacle they're overcoming is Hope's disapproval, rather than Hank's stubbornness. We never got a good, solid reason why Scott was a better choice than Hope, except that Hank would let Scott use the suit.
Option 2: If the heroic narrative is focused on Hope, she overcomes the obstacle by convincing her father to let her use the Suit.
Option 3: Heroic Narrative still focused on Hope, rather than convincing Hank to let her use the suit, she just takes it and does the job herself.
Option 4: To give Hank Pym his heroic moment, he overcomes his flaw (Grief over his wife's death preventing him from supporting his daughter), agrees to let Hope use the suit, and supports her. The difference between this and #2 is whether the focus is on Hope convincing Hank, or Hank dealing with his issues on his own.

But, none of these really happened. Instead, we are presented with a scenario (Hope is more qualified, but Hank refuses to let her use the suit, and instead insists on sending the thief with a week of training, assuming said thief does not die the first time he accidentally uses the suit), and we just roll with it, because this is Scott Lang's story, not Hope's. Hank gets over his issues offscreen, after the action has passed.

I wouldn't necessarily call it sexist, but it is kind of troubling. They could easily have avoided the issue simply by not making Hope quite so qualified. Nobody was expecting this to be the Hope Van Dyne movie, but it seems like they quite deliberately created a female character who could have filled the protagonist role, just so she could stand there being qualified while the standard issue hollywood white male protagonist got to be a hero.

[Dienekes]

Eh, here's the thing.

Spoiler

Show

Hank Pym had a reason for wanting to keep Hope out of the suit, even though it was very clear that she was the more qualified candidate.
However, from storytelling terms it was a bad reason. Not in that it did not make sense for his character, but in that it does not make sense in terms of the heroic narrative.

The reason basically came down to Hank Pym trying to protect his daughter, ignoring the fact that 1) she was making the choice, fully aware of the risks, and 2) that she was more qualified to do the job.
Hank was willing to risk both the mission failing AND Scott Lang's life (Which he's also willing to ruin via elaborate mind games) in order to protect his daughter.

From a storytelling perspective, Hank's unwillingness to let Hope use the suit is an obstacle.
Now, in a standard heroic narrative, there would be a few options here.

Option 1: If the heroic narrative is focused on Scott Lang, he must demonstrate why he is the right man to wear the suit. This is kind of what they did, but it didn't really stick. He demonstrated that he COULD do the job, and Hope basically just accepted that her father wouldn't budge on the subject. Although in this case the obstacle they're overcoming is Hope's disapproval, rather than Hank's stubbornness. We never got a good, solid reason why Scott was a better choice than Hope, except that Hank would let Scott use the suit.
Option 2: If the heroic narrative is focused on Hope, she overcomes the obstacle by convincing her father to let her use the Suit.
Option 3: Heroic Narrative still focused on Hope, rather than convincing Hank to let her use the suit, she just takes it and does the job herself.
Option 4: To give Hank Pym his heroic moment, he overcomes his flaw (Grief over his wife's death preventing him from supporting his daughter), agrees to let Hope use the suit, and supports her. The difference between this and #2 is whether the focus is on Hope convincing Hank, or Hank dealing with his issues on his own.

But, none of these really happened. Instead, we are presented with a scenario (Hope is more qualified, but Hank refuses to let her use the suit, and instead insists on sending the thief with a week of training, assuming said thief does not die the first time he accidentally uses the suit), and we just roll with it, because this is Scott Lang's story, not Hope's. Hank gets over his issues offscreen, after the action has passed.

I wouldn't necessarily call it sexist, but it is kind of troubling. They could easily have avoided the issue simply by not making Hope quite so qualified. Nobody was expecting this to be the Hope Van Dyne movie, but it seems like they quite deliberately created a female character who could have filled the protagonist role, just so she could stand there being qualified while the standard issue hollywood white male protagonist got to be a hero.

Spoiler

Show

They actually do have option 1. Though it is very small, and should have been done better. That his skills with breaking and entering were actually what brought about the success on the mission. It was him who suggested the use of the water vents to get in, and he listed out each of the operations they would need for the job, and then provided people to fill the three necessary roles.

The difference is, usually, when someone shows how they're capable in that regard we get a moment where everyone steps back and goes "I guess you were the right choice after all, Generic Hero." And the Generic Hero has a little smug smirk, and the show goes on.

In this it was: "Oh God, not those three idiots" and they moved on to the operation.

[Ranxerox]

Eh, here's the thing.

Spoiler

Show

I wouldn't necessarily call it sexist, but it is kind of troubling. They could easily have avoided the issue simply by not making Hope quite so qualified. Nobody was expecting this to be the Hope Van Dyne movie, but it seems like they quite deliberately created a female character who could have filled the protagonist role, just so she could stand there being qualified while the standard issue hollywood white male protagonist got to be a hero.

Perhaps not good heroic narrative, but realistic as all get out. Marvel took a half step here which has left a lot of people unhappy; though from a marketing standpoint may very well have been the right move. It had the honesty to do something few action movies do and admit that having something dangling between your legs doesn't make you the best qualified to be the hero. Unfortunately, it didn't go the rest of the way with it and make the protagonist female or even force the male hero to share top billing.

[Giggling Ghast]

Considering it was Scott who figured out how to get in the building and brought on his crew, I don't know that Hope was MORE qualified.

Yes, she had experience commanding ants and was the better fighter, but she wasn't a thief. You want something stolen, you hire a thief.

Sorry, CAT BURGLAR. :p

(By the way, I liked the movie. The fight on the train set was hilarious.)

[Dragonus45]

Considering it was Scott who figured out how to get in the building and brought on his crew, I don't know that Hope was MORE qualified.

Yes, she had experience commanding ants and was the better fighter, but she wasn't a thief. You want something stolen, you hire a thief.

Sorry, CAT BURGLAR. :p

(By the way, I liked the movie. The fight on the train set was hilarious.)

The way I look at it Hope is a better action hero, and if this was a straight up punch out the bad guy action movie she's your girl. Neither of them is really more qualified than the other, they just are good at separate things.

[Reddish Mage]

So to recap, Hank is sexist because:

1) He won't let Hope wear the suit

2) He apparently allowed Janet to wear the suit

3) He got Scott out of jail after Hope put him in jail

4) He blames himself for his wife's death

5) Being a male and making decisions

I'm pretty sure it all boils down to number 5, but I want to comment on the others.

1) Well, it is his suit and his technology. It kind of is his choice who wears it. It's not just up for grabs. Hope has no realistic claim to it.

2) He created the technology and the suits. It was his choice who got to wear them and who didn't. Yes, he let her. Any other scenario is her stealing something from her husband or taking the choice from him as to what he does with his things.

3) It was his house. If he wants to let someone break in he is allowed to do that. Hope overrode him, he was just putting the plan back on track.

4) He designed the suits. Something went wrong with his meaning only his wife could make that choice. Of course he feels guilty that something he made malfunctioned and as a result his wife was seemingly killed.

5) I'm still pretty sure this is what is upsetting people.

Why would I or other (mostly male identified) critics be upset at the prospect of a male making a decision? A male making decisions for a adult and perfectly capable woman on the basis of wanting to protect her...that's a red flag.

The justifications for Hank's actions are flawed in that they are unprovable...we can argue back and forth about story interpretations and Hank isn't around to tell us whose right.

All this internal story justification for Hank's actions ignore the fact that this is a story. Hank doesn't exist, Marvel writers, directors, editors and producers do. The people that wrote the series wrote it so that Scott, not Hope, would get to be the Ant-Man. They created (of more likely failed to create) the justifications Hank would have or wouldn't. They did it because they wanted to tell one story and not another.

That, in itself, doesn't suggest gender bias. However, making certain choices repeatedly suggests it's a trend. Trends can be identified and studied scientifically and all the studies point to a general dearth of female participation in these sorts of movies, especially in the lead role.

[Tyrant]

Why would I or other (mostly male identified) critics be upset at the prospect of a male making a decision? A male making decisions for a adult and perfectly capable woman on the basis of wanting to protect her...that's a red flag.

What part of "everything belongs to and was created by Hank, therefore it is his and only his decision what happens to it" isn't getting through? You're basically saying that a dad is sexist if he says "no, you can't borrow my car" to his daughter.

The justifications for Hank's actions are flawed in that they are unprovable...we can argue back and forth about story interpretations and Hank isn't around to tell us whose right.

All this internal story justification for Hank's actions ignore the fact that this is a story. Hank doesn't exist, Marvel writers, directors, editors and producers do. The people that wrote the series wrote it so that Scott, not Hope, would get to be the Ant-Man. They created (of more likely failed to create) the justifications Hank would have or wouldn't. They did it because they wanted to tell one story and not another.

That, in itself, doesn't suggest gender bias. However, making certain choices repeatedly suggests it's a trend. Trends can be identified and studied scientifically and all the studies point to a general dearth of female participation in these sorts of movies, especially in the lead role.

So because some people are bringing their own baggage about the movie industry with them Hank Pym is a sexist?

[Airea]

I just saw it as a father being over protective. It can be frustrating as hell, but I've been there. As stupid as it is they do mean well.

You just hold it over their heads later. :D

[Legato Endless]

The justifications for Hank's actions are flawed in that they are unprovable...we can argue back and forth about story interpretations and Hank isn't around to tell us whose right.

If a justification or interpretation can not cite evidence, than it's probably not a solid theory. Or we simply admit we are entering into a discussion where what we think biased from a lack of information.

. All this internal story justification for Hank's actions ignore the fact that this is a story. Hank doesn't exist, Marvel writers, directors, editors and producers do.

No, that presumes textual analysis is rooted in the external circumstances an author created a work in. That can be problematic for a number of reasons, it's the reason Death of the Author exists as a type of interpretation.

That, in itself, doesn't suggest gender bias. However, making certain choices repeatedly suggests it's a trend. Trends can be identified and studied scientifically and all the studies point to a general dearth of female participation in these sorts of movies, especially in the lead role.

Correlation does not prove causation. Just because a trend exists doesn't mean every data point gets neatly shuffled into it. Context is a thing. By this logic, case studies are bizarre and unnecessary.

[Solamnicknight]

I still think it was Hank being a Papa wolf. Really, we are dealing with a man who built tech that killed his beloved wife. Do you really think he wants his daughter to get inside that thing? Also I don't know why everybody is so blasted worked up since Hank changed his mind in the first stinger. We'll see Hope as Wasp, and the original Wasp died heroically taking out a fricken nuke for crying out loud! Seriously the whole sexism accusation thing in these threads is getting real old real fast, boy who cried wolf style. First it was the Hulk/Widow thing in AOU and now this. Never mind that Marvel so far has introduced a lot of female heroes. Here's a list: Black Widow, Lady Sif, Maria Hill, Agent Carter, Melinda May, Skye/Daisy Johnson/Quake, Bobbi Morse/Mockingbird, and Scarlet Witch. We also have Jessica Jones and Elektra showing up on Netflix, and a Captain Marvel movie coming up. So you were saying?

[cobaltstarfire]

I think it's just too little too late for quite a few people.

And I think it's understandable, I don't tend to feel frustrated, but I do always feel a huge amount of excitement at the idea of a show/game/movie that features a good strong central female character. Every single time, and I am pretty certain that is in part because of lack of representation.

I personally feel that the female characters in Ant Man were a good step, they weren't the central characters no, but I think all three of them were pretty strong. We had a good sensible mother, an awesome daughter, and Hope who is obviously awesome even if she wasn't allowed to shine.

I think at this point though, I'll be really disappointed if Hope doesn't get her own movie, that's what I really really want now. Wasp looks way cooler than ant man.

[Ranxerox]

I think at this point though, I'll be really disappointed if Hope doesn't get her own movie, that's what I really really want now. Wasp looks way cooler than ant man.

She always was in the comics, so that is not surprising.