"Ant-Man"

For posts related to a specific film -- beware of spoilers o ye who dareth enter!
VorpalKitten
Posts: 44
767 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2014 8:20 am

"Ant-Man"

Post by VorpalKitten »

Did this movie do something atypical in the first twenty minutes or so? Maybe use a lot less background music than I'm used to? It was weird, it sounded interesting and they delivered a few jokes, but I couldn't enjoy it at all until I watched for a while and finally got engrossed in the movie.

Stewball
Posts: 3009
2188 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 4:18 pm

Re: "Ant-Man"

Post by Stewball »

And then there's the de-aging of Michael Douglas in the opening scene. I was certain it wasn't make up, but I didn't know how they did it. I was glad to find out I wasn't seeing things. I just dug this story up about it:

http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2015/07/ant-man-michael-douglas-young

Don't know if we can put that genie back in the bottle. Every aging A-lister is gonna want that treatment from beginning to end now. Probably wouldn't be too much trouble for photographers to use that technique on anybody for their portrait--a lot cheaper than plastic surgery I'm sure....body sculpting, the works.

Pickpocket
Posts: 1615
3024 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Sat May 27, 2006 2:20 pm

Re: "Ant-Man"

Post by Pickpocket »

I don't know why Marvel has to spend large chunks of their films setting up future installments. Attaching your name should be enough but yet it's always about these moments where it's like referencing Tony Stark or some shit like that. Even though they have the same story in every fucking movie they release, people are going to go see whatever they put out so why can't they just focus on making the best film possible? I don't get it. I'm sick of their shit. Also, Batman is a superior superhero to anything Marvel has. Fuck you, Marvel.

Velvet Crowe
Posts: 156
2601 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 3:26 pm

Re: "Ant-Man"

Post by Velvet Crowe »

Wasn't this movie suppose to have a completely different and less generic script than what was made? I heard Disney made them change it for some reason.

In terms of its relation to the comics, it's weird. For some reason, they use Scott Lang instead of Hank Pym{the traditional Ant-Man} and generally ignore most of the characters associated with Ant-Man to begin with in place of original characters. Though honestly, I feel like the reason for this is that Hank Pym was a pretty big asshole in the comics{Being that he physically abused his wife and built Ultron out of spite of the Avengers} which I guess is something Disney didn't want to touch on.

In my eyes, I feel like this made the character more interesting - the guy is a consistent fuck up when the world is populated by larger than life heroes who live by a much straighter code of ethics than he does.

As for the movie, I thought it was meh. It had some pretty cool scenes, like the Falcon vs Ant-Man fight, but then it does stupid shit like its ending and the characters in the movie were honestly pretty obnoxious for the most part.

Also, Batman is a superior superhero to anything Marvel has. Fuck you, Marvel.


Hey man, Machine Man, Doctor Doom and Deadpool{The Joe Kelly Deadpool, fuck the more recent crap made by Daniel Way} are pretty great.
Last edited by Velvet Crowe on Sun Nov 08, 2015 4:44 am, edited 3 times in total.

Pickpocket
Posts: 1615
3024 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Sat May 27, 2006 2:20 pm

Re: "Ant-Man"

Post by Pickpocket »

DrewTheDude wrote:Wasn't this movie suppose to have a completely different and less generic script than what was made? I heard Disney made them change it for some reason.


It had 4 different writers so you know it's going to be mediocre at best. Has any movie with 3+ writers ever been good?

DrewTheDude wrote: then it does stupid shit like its ending

This is what really bugged me about the movie. The big revelation was that Michael Douglas' wife got stuck in this alternate reality or some shit and couldn't get out of it because time doesn't exist or something. Of course Ant Man goes into this alternate reality and gets out of it in literally seconds. I was like wut. This brilliant scientist couldn't figure it out but some felon could in seconds? The best part was when Douglas was like how did you do this? and Ant Man says "I don't remember." It was such a terribly written easy bullshit hacky writer thing to do. But it's Marvel and terrible, formulaic writing is to be expected.

ShogunRua
Posts: 3449
0 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 3:18 am

Re: "Ant-Man"

Post by ShogunRua »

Pickpocket wrote:
DrewTheDude wrote:Wasn't this movie suppose to have a completely different and less generic script than what was made? I heard Disney made them change it for some reason.


It had 4 different writers so you know it's going to be mediocre at best. Has any movie with 3+ writers ever been good?


Depends on their roles and who they are. Once Upon a Time in The West is credited with 4 writers, of which at least 3 were important in the script's conception.

Pickpocket
Posts: 1615
3024 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Sat May 27, 2006 2:20 pm

Re: "Ant-Man"

Post by Pickpocket »

ShogunRua wrote:
Pickpocket wrote:
DrewTheDude wrote:Wasn't this movie suppose to have a completely different and less generic script than what was made? I heard Disney made them change it for some reason.


It had 4 different writers so you know it's going to be mediocre at best. Has any movie with 3+ writers ever been good?


Depends on their roles and who they are. Once Upon a Time in The West is credited with 4 writers, of which at least 3 were important in the script's conception.

per the imdb:

Writing Credits
Sergio Donati ... (screenplay by) &
Sergio Leone ... (screenplay by)

Dario Argento ... (from a story by) &
Bernardo Bertolucci ... (from a story by) &
Sergio Leone ... (from a story by)

I take that to mean 2 of them wrote it while the others just had an idea. This is from the wikipedia:
Leone commissioned Bernardo Bertolucci and Dario Argento—both of whom were film critics before becoming directors—to help him develop the film in late 1966. The men spent much of the following year watching and discussing numerous classic Westerns such as High Noon, The Iron Horse, The Comancheros, and The Searchers at Leone's house, and constructed a story made up almost entirely of "references" to American Westerns.

Not sure if that is a good example

Velvet Crowe
Posts: 156
2601 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 3:26 pm

Re: "Ant-Man"

Post by Velvet Crowe »

http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/ant-man ... -different

Here's what I was referring to earlier, but I don't think it was Disney's fault. The original script honestly doesn't sound that amazing to me either.

Pickpocket
Posts: 1615
3024 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Sat May 27, 2006 2:20 pm

Re: "Ant-Man"

Post by Pickpocket »

DrewTheDude wrote:http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/ant-man/36199/how-would-edgar-wright-s-ant-man-have-been-different

Here's what I was referring to earlier, but I don't think it was Disney's fault. The original script honestly doesn't sound that amazing to me either.

That makes sense. I love Edgar Wright and I was very surprised when the credits rolled and his name popped up. Seemed very unlike anything he's done in the past. When your lead actor, who has one writing credit prior, starts with rewrites in the middle of shooting, that's another sign it's going to be bad. I'm surprised this got so many good reviews. Can anyone defend why they liked it?

Stewball
Posts: 3009
2188 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 4:18 pm

Re: "Ant-Man"

Post by Stewball »

Pickpocket wrote:
DrewTheDude wrote:http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/ant-man/36199/how-would-edgar-wright-s-ant-man-have-been-different

Here's what I was referring to earlier, but I don't think it was Disney's fault. The original script honestly doesn't sound that amazing to me either.

That makes sense. I love Edgar Wright and I was very surprised when the credits rolled and his name popped up. Seemed very unlike anything he's done in the past. When your lead actor, who has one writing credit prior, starts with rewrites in the middle of shooting, that's another sign it's going to be bad. I'm surprised this got so many good reviews. Can anyone defend why they liked it?


I rated it average, but the humor and Paul Ruud's personality were the main positives. The plot wasn't great but I don't remember any jolting inconsistencies.

Post Reply