E-mail Scott
Scott's Links
About the Author
Opinion Archives
Social Media:
Facebook
Twitter
Tumblr
Google Plus
YouTube
Flickr
PhotoBucket
Monthly Archives:

January 2010
February 2010
March 2010
April 2010
May 2010
June 2010
July 2010
August 2010
September 2010
October 2010
November 2010
December 2010
January 2011
February 2011
March 2011
April 2011
May 2011
June 2011
July 2011
August 2011
September 2011
October 2011
November 2011
December 2011
January 2012
February 2012
March 2012
April 2012
May 2012
June 2012
July 2012
August 2012
September 2012
October 2012
November 2012
December 2012
January 2013
February 2013
March 2013
April 2013
May 2013
June 2013
July 2013
August 2013
September 2013
October 2013
November 2013
December 2013
January 2014
February 2014
March 2014
April 2014
May 2014
June 2014
July 2014
August 2014
September 2014
October 2014
November 2014
December 2014
January 2015
February 2015
March 2015
April 2015
May 2015
June 2015
July 2015
August 2015
September 2015
October 2015
November 2015
December 2015
January 2016
February 2016
March 2016
April 2016
May 2016
June 2016
July 2016
August 2016
September 2016
October 2016
November 2016
December 2016
January 2017
February 2017
March 2017
April 2017
May 2017
June 2017

Powered by Blogger
Subscribe via RSS

Wednesday, December 30, 2015

Ant-Man is by far the weakest of the Marvel movies

Posted by Scott Tibbs at 4:00 AM (#)

The biggest problem with "Ant-Man" is that it is way too complicated for its own good and therefore makes very little sense. Neither the villains nor the heroes have good plans and there is far too much comedy to take anything seriously. And warning: There will be plenty of spoilers in this review. If you want to see this movie... Don't. But if you still want to see the movie, stop reading now.

Right off the bat, the scheme to get Scott Lang into the Ant-Man suit was far too complicated. In order for Hank Pym's scheme to work, absolutely everything has to go 100% perfectly. When your entire plan can be defeated by a question that begins with "Why don't you just..." your plan is several times more complex than needed.

First. Pym manipulates Lang into breaking into Pym's house to steal the Ant-Man suit. What if any of the multiple people needed to pass the rumor on to Lang decided not to spread the rumor? What if Lang fails to steal the suit? Do you find someone else? What if he sees the suit and does not take it? What if he never puts the suit on? What if he does not mess with the controls to activate the Pym Particles? What if Lang actually died in any of the multiple life-threatening situations he finds himself in after activating the suit?

How did Pym know that Lang's roommate would be coming in to turn on the shower at the very moment that Lang was trying on the suit, and activating the Pym Particles? What if, instead of breaking into the house and returning the suit, Lang had brought it to Stark Industries, SHIELD, the news media or the police? What if Lang refused to don the suit when the ants brought it into the jail, and decided to go back to prison instead?

So here we begin with the questions. Instead of having Lang break into your house, why don't you just invite him over and show him the suit? Instead of having Lang arrested, why don't you just make up a lie and say he was testing your security system? Instead of having the ants break Lang out of jail, why don't you just walk into the police station and say you do not want to press charges?

It is one thing to suspend disbelief for science fiction technology. But this plan is so full of holes that no rational person would behave this way. Furthermore, the way Lang is treated after he gets out of prison makes no sense. His ex-wife is nasty to him for no reason. Lang is not a thief. He went to jail for being a vigilante - he found out his employer was stealing from customers (many million dollars' worth) and hacked their system to give the money back to the victims. The police also treat him like a thief, even thought he is a vigilante. Yes, he needed to go to jail for what he did, but it is absurd to treat him like a common thief.

I would be remiss to note that Lang's buddies and their crew are uncomfortably close to being racist stereotypes, and I am being generous here.

Pym's former associate Darren Cross is trying to recreate the Pym Particles, but why did he not see the military application in the "malfunctioning" particle ray? The idea is to shrink organic matter, but it instead kills the subject and transforms him into a tiny blob of goo. (I think people would notice the fact that a member of the board of directors went to the bathroom and never came out.) The next time the Hulk is on a rampage and flattens half of New York City, they could shoot him with the "malfunctioning" particle ray and kill him. It would also be very useful to hand to soldiers the next time there is an alien invasion. You would not even need the Avengers to show up.

The movie tries to put over the Pym Particles as a huge deal, and is successful when the original Ant-Man easily dispatches an armed enemy battalion all by himself. Pym even mentions the Pym Particles are far more powerful and dangerous than even the Iron Man armor. But the final battle is far too silly and filled with slapstick. The movie jumps from intense action scene to a toy hitting the carpet over and over and over, and the drastic tonal shifts ruin the mood of the scene. Comedy can be worked into a superhero movie effectively, but if it is overdone it cheapens the experience. It was overdone here several times over.

I meant to go see this movie in the theater, but I never got around to it. After renting it, I am glad I missed it and did not waste the money to see it on the big screen. This could have been so much better, with a more straightforward plot and a whole lot less comedy. If Marvel wants its lesser-known characters to be viable properties, they have to treat them more effectively than they treated Ant-Man. There was enough good here that it does not deserve an F, but the stupid overshadows the good.

Final Grade: D


Below are the rules for commenting on ConservaTibbs.com.

  1. A reasonable level of civility is expected. While it is expected that controversial political and social issues may generate heated debate, there are common-sense limits of civility that will be enforced.

  2. This blog is a family-friendly site. Therefore no cursing, profanity, vulgarity, obscenity, etc. will be allowed. This is a zero-tolerance rule and will result in automatic deletion of the offending post.

  3. Anonymity has greatly coarsened discourse on the Internet, so pseudonyms are discouraged but not forbidden. That said, any direct criticism of a person by name may not be done anonymously. If you criticize someone, you must subject yourself to the same level of scrutiny or the comment will be deleted.

  4. You must put a name or pseudonym on your comments. All comments by "Anonymous" will be deleted.

  5. Please keep your comments relevant to the topic of the post.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Comments: