• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Ant-Man & the Wasp: Grade, Review, Discuss Please Code Spoilers

How would you grade AM&TW

  • A+

    Votes: 4 6.6%

  • A

    Votes: 16 26.2%

  • A-

    Votes: 15 24.6%

  • B+

    Votes: 16 26.2%

  • B

    Votes: 6 9.8%

  • B-

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • C+

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • C

    Votes: 1 1.6%

  • C-

    Votes: 2 3.3%

  • D

    Votes: 1 1.6%

  • F

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    61
  • Poll closed .
Just saw this tonight and really enjoyed it with my kids and family. Wasn't my favorite MCU film but I gave it a B+.

The thing I kept thinking about with the Lab was the way it was carried around all the time when it was shrunk. I kept wondering if everything inside was bolted down or held to surfaces like tables with magnets.

I also think there was a missed opportunity at the end to put Bill Foster in the Ant Man suit to protect Scott's secret identity.
 
TREK_GOD_1 said:
But an extremist, defensive posture is what you get when one person declares himself the MCU's protector. Throughout time, it has been observed that when one defends something constantly and to wild extremes (including constantly attacking others for their opinion), its just revealing how weak the subject is, or the position attempting to shield it. If its truly good, it would not need 'round the clock defense.
Click to expand...
Anwar said:
No, it just means after 10 years of every single MCU movie being ripped into because they dared to embrace their comic bookiness instead of selling out the way most others have, some fans just have had enough and aren't afraid repay the negativity.
Click to expand...
Guys, guys. There's no need to fight. You're both equally annoying and defensive one-note hyperbolic caricatures of DC and Marvel fandom. :techman:
 
Locutus of Bored said:
Guys, guys. There's no need to fight. You're both equally annoying and defensive one-note hyperbolic caricatures of DC and Marvel fandom. :techman:
Click to expand...

[waves hands in wizard-like manner]For that, may you find yourself tied to a chair watching the Corman Fantastic Four movie--forever.[/waves hands in wizard-like manner]

:nyah:
 
Last edited:
Locutus of Bored said:
Better that one than the 2015 Fantastic Four film.
Click to expand...
There was no such film! There was a film that was a clumsy mash-up between an interesting body-horror / superhero concept movie with characters that in no way resembled the Fantastic Four and a generic action superhero film with what might be confused with Fantastic Four characters if you were high, drunk and mentally retarded at the same time.
 
Gavin70 said:
There was no such film! There was a film that was a clumsy mash-up between an interesting body-horror / superhero concept movie with characters that in no way resembled the Fantastic Four and a generic action superhero film with what might be confused with Fantastic Four characters if you were high, drunk and mentally retarded at the same time.
Click to expand...

Tell us how you really feel! ;)
I wonder what you would think of the Corman version...
 
theenglish said:
The thing I kept thinking about with the Lab was the way it was carried around all the time when it was shrunk. I kept wondering if everything inside was bolted down or held to surfaces like tables with magnets.
Click to expand...
My thought, without any on-screen evidence to back it up, was that Hank created a stasis inside the building to hold everything in place.
 
Also, does Scott carry around a bunch of miniaturized ant saddles? Every random ant he rides has one, and a bunch of them get taken out while wearing it. So I'm just gonna assume that yes, Scott carries spare saddles around with him at all time. :)
 
Anwar said:
Maya Hansen was originally supposed to be the villain of Iron Man 3.
Click to expand...

Huh. While I don't agree with Marvel's reasoning, I think I prefer the version of Maya Hansen that we got. She was more interesting as a good person who got morally compromised rather than a flat out villain. Kinda like Bill Foster in this one.

Gavin70 said:
Screw whether Ben Affleck wants to stick around or not. If getting Keaton back into the role is ever on the table, it needs to be done with no further discussion.
Click to expand...

I'm on the fence about that. I really liked Affleck in Batman v. Superman but I kinda felt like he was phoning it in in Justice League. The kicker for me is that I feel like Affleck is the first live-action Batman to have the right chin for it.

On the other hand, we're not too many years away from Keaton being old enough to plausibly play Bruce Wayne in a live-action Batman Beyond movie.

Kytee said:
I think the young actress who plays the daughter is really outstanding. I find many child actors can take me right out of the movie because it feels like they are just reading their lines , rather then acting the part. In this case she really nailed the role.
Click to expand...

Agreed. She's a great actress and has great chemistry with Paul Rudd.

I'm also impressed with Paul Rudd, who brings a lot more charisma to the movie than what it actually deserves. He doesn't completely carry the movies on his back the way that Robert Downey Jr. does but he's a big part of what prevents the Ant-Man movies from completely descending into forgettable Incredible Hulk or Thor: The Dark World territory.

Minor quibble: When Ghost first showed up, it seemed like everyone all of a sudden started calling her "Ghost" as if that's her name even though she never identified herself that way and we never got a scene with everyone else deciding to call her that.

Neat line from the trailer that I didn't hear in the movie: "I'll go high, you go low." "I have wings. Why would I go low?" (When the movie omits a cool part from the trailer, I think we should start calling that a "Rogue One moment.")

Did anyone else think that Hank Pym was a dead man when Ghost confronted him in the van? I sure did. I think it helped that I think all of the footage of him from the trailers came from before that point in the movie. So my over-analytical side didn't dismiss the danger he was in because he had more scenes to go.
 
I kinda liked the new Fantastic Four movie. While I would never say it was a good movie, it was at least interesting and had some moments. Sure the execution wasn't great and it was dour, probably as far away from what you imagine the Fantastic Four to be. Yet it still had a kindle of something.
 
Tom Hendricks said:
I kinda liked the new Fantastic Four movie. While I would never say it was a good movie, it was at least interesting and had some moments. Sure the execution wasn't great and it was dour, probably as far away from what you imagine the Fantastic Four to be. Yet it still had a kindle of something.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't say that I disliked the movie. It's main issue is that it was two halves of two different movies crammed together. Josh Trank's had an interesting concept for a superhero movie, but clearly wasn't interested in Fantastic Four. Fox used the FF brand in order to market the product to comic book fans and in order to meet the deadline to hold on to the rights. That would have been OK as a sort of "What If...?" approach, but then Fox panicked with the negative publicity from fans (based on public comments from cast about ignoring the comics) and Trank's meltdown and refilmed a significant portion of the movie to make it a more traditional superhero movie. Which might also have been OK, but the cramming together of the two parts just didn't work. I have to admit that I'd be interested in seeing what Trank's complete movie would have been like (unlikely since parts weren't filmed in the end). It wouldn't have been much like Fantastic Four from the comics (which is what I really would have liked) but as a different take on superheros generally it clearly had the potential to be extremely interesting. Whether it would have been successful or not, would depend on whether fans were prepared to accept it as an FF in name only story and evaluate it on what it really was. But honestly I don't think it could have been any less successful than it ended up being and Fox might have saved a ton of money on the reshoots.
 
Of course, the only reason they made the film to begin with wasn't because some Director had a great idea for an FF film...it was purely to retain the FF film rights.

Looking back on it, turned out to be futile.
 
I don't know how you would get the budget for it, but I think Fantastic Four would work better as a pulpy fun TV show than as a movie.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top