|
I had a though about how the enlarging side of the technology doesn't really get a mention, could Scott use the suit to turn himself into a giant? Seems like the tech could also be used to end the world's resource scarcity, but then the arc reactor should have done that ages ago anyway so that's just a non-serious nitpick. Overall though I found the movie pretty good, can't really think of a fault or any specific thing I'd change. I actually like corresponding scene in the actual movie more than the test footage linked above which looks "off", like it's getting too close to slapstick.
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 19:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 03:06 |
|
|
Avalerion posted:I had a though about how the enlarging side of the technology doesn't really get a mention, could Scott use the suit to turn himself into a giant? Heavy Metal fucked around with this message at 19:38 on Jul 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 19:35
|
|
|
Heavy Metal posted:Yep. He goes by the name Giant-man at one point. Guaranteed they'll figure this out and go for it in Infinity War part 2. I wouldn't be surprised if, instead of Scott becoming Giant-Man, they introduce Goliath.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 19:45
|
|
|
Avalerion posted:I had a though about how the enlarging side of the technology doesn't really get a mention, could Scott use the suit to turn himself into a giant? Seems like the tech could also be used to end the world's resource scarcity, but then the arc reactor should have done that ages ago anyway so that's just a non-serious nitpick. I totally thought that was what was going to happen at the end when he escapes the Quantum Zone by replacing the shrinky core of his belt with a growy one, especially after they repeated over and over that he would lose all sense of time and space being there. Also considering that Yellowjacket was able to grow back to normal human size after Ant-Man used the shrinking shuriken on him when he was full-sized that must mean that his suit has the ability to grow above and beyond its normal size but it doesn't really matter because that entire fight owned.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 19:54
|
|
|
Sleeveless posted:Also considering that Yellowjacket was able to grow back to normal human size after Ant-Man used the shrinking shuriken on him when he was full-sized that must mean that his suit has the ability to grow above and beyond its normal size but it doesn't really matter because that entire fight owned. Don't think that's how it works. Both the suits and the discs did the same thing: adjust the amount of space between atoms. Being shrunk by a disc leaves you in the same position as being shrunk by a suit, so the suit can reverse either. The fact that nobody made themselves a giant was presumably a function of the same regulators that, unless tampered with, stopped people from shrinking below ant-sized.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 19:59
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:Don't think that's how it works. Both the suits and the discs did the same thing: adjust the amount of space between atoms. Being shrunk by a disc leaves you in the same position as being shrunk by a suit, so the suit can reverse either. The fact that nobody made themselves a giant was presumably a function of the same regulators that, unless tampered with, stopped people from shrinking below ant-sized. Other things (the ant, train and garden gnome) were made giant sized though so the tech for it is there.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
Avalerion posted:Other things (the ant, train and garden gnome) were made giant sized though so the tech for it is there. Except they were just scaled up to relative size to humans. I mean, yes from their own perspectives they're now giant. But the Thomas the Tank Engine was enlarged to roughly scale-sized. (Also, after they went to the trouble to show that the ant had been adopted by Cassie, am I the only one wondering what they would've done with Thomas?
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 20:21
|
|
|
Avalerion posted:Other things (the ant, train and garden gnome) were made giant sized though so the tech for it is there. Right, they were all made giant size by the discs, which don't have a regulator. I'm agreeing that the tech supports making things unnaturally big, just saying that there's no reason to think the yellowjacket suit was made to do so based on what we saw.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 20:44
|
|
|
Gotcha, you are talking about the suits specifically while I was thinking of the tech in them in general. Lots of potential to tap there either way if Marvel wants to go that direction in any of the sequels, Hank's comparison to Iron Man's stuff was pretty spot on I think.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:Don't think that's how it works. Both the suits and the discs did the same thing: adjust the amount of space between atoms. Being shrunk by a disc leaves you in the same position as being shrunk by a suit, so the suit can reverse either. The fact that nobody made themselves a giant was presumably a function of the same regulators that, unless tampered with, stopped people from shrinking below ant-sized. That makes a lot more sense.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 20:52
|
|
|
It was way better than I was expecting. Also I felt very stupid because I had no idea he could control ants too, I thought the name was just because he was small. In my defence, none of the trailers I saw even had any ants in them. That whole last fight was excellent. And the fight in the briefcase. Also they left the Stan Lee cameo so late I totally forgot to watch for it so when it happened I was very surprised. That's still the best running gag in Marvel films. They should have him pop up in Batman vs Superman I think. Or just any DC film one day.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 20:59
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:Also after all the talk about "fridging", that particular character does the most badass thing in the whole film, that is, sacrificing herself without hesitation and the male character she inspires is deeply flawed and fragile. There's really no reason why Jan was written to be the one who so conveniently makes the heroic sacrifice instead of Hank -- Hank is depicted with a lot of issues in the source and in this adaptation but "coward" was never one of them -- and there's no reason this relegates Hope to the sidelines other than the fact that they constructed the plot this way. And the reason they constructed the plot this way was because, in this film, male characters are the default and female characters are the ornaments to that default.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
BrianWilly posted:And so, of the two, the "badass" character is relegated to a ten second CGI cameo and the "flawed and fragile" character gets to be a star billing player through the whole film. Not entirely related, but I laughed when they showed Hank looking longingly at the photo of him and his wife, and her hat is pulled down so you can't see the actress they haven't cast yet to play her.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 22:17
|
|
|
I also noticed Howard Stark looked pretty good for 72. They could have at least put some old man make-up on Slattery since he's only 51.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 22:24
|
|
|
duz posted:Not entirely related, but I laughed when they showed Hank looking longingly at the photo of him and his wife, and her hat is pulled down so you can't see the actress they haven't cast yet to play her. I think that's pretty much the entire reason for the "fridging", because thanks to the time-space fuckery of being trapped in the quantum realm they can bring her back whenever they want to and have her be young or old so they don't want to commit to an actress. Hence the only time we see her in action is a pair of eyes in a CGI costume.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 22:32
|
|
|
duz posted:Not entirely related, but I laughed when they showed Hank looking longingly at the photo of him and his wife, and her hat is pulled down so you can't see the actress they haven't cast yet to play her. That was a real Batman and Robin Poison Ivy at the airport situation. Perfect example of something Wright would've called attention to in the editing, like Cate Blanchett in Hot Fuzz.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 22:35
|
|
|
duz posted:Not entirely related, but I laughed when they showed Hank looking longingly at the photo of him and his wife, and her hat is pulled down so you can't see the actress they haven't cast yet to play her. Buddy of mine thought it was Catherine Zeta-Jones (i.e. real-life wife of Michael Douglas)
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 23:02
|
|
|
Well that was not very good. It was ugly and horribly directed, you can tell what set pieces were written by Wright and they just failed horribly. Also, all the heart in this film was horribly contrived. It was just bleh all over.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 23:44
|
|
|
Loved it, easily on par with Guardians in terms of humor. I'm also wondering what's the deal with people not understanding Paul Rudd's humor? I think some people may not have seen him in much before so they didn't know what to expect, because most of his humorous bits here were exactly his style.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 00:00
|
|
|
McDragon posted:Also they left the Stan Lee cameo so late I totally forgot to watch for it so when it happened I was very surprised. That's still the best running gag in Marvel films. They should have him pop up in Batman vs Superman I think. Or just any DC film one day. Deadpool better recognize him on sight, if only because we got a "gently caress LIEFELD!!" in the SDCC footage.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 00:39
|
|
|
Saw it last night, liked it. Paul Rudd rules. Marvel rules. Wasn't the best Marvel movie, but it was very entertaining.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 00:41
|
|
|
http://thenerdsofcolor.org/2015/07/17/i-saw-ant-man-you-should-too/
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 00:45
|
|
|
This movie was a great mix of action and comedy. I would watch it again in the theater for the special effects but I think the comedic effects (which had me rolling) wouldn't be as great the second time around. The jokes often had a surprise element to them which, while particularly funny for a first viewing, wouldn't have the same impact if you knew they were coming.BrianWilly posted:and there's no reason this relegates Hope to the sidelines other than the fact that they constructed the plot this way. And the reason they constructed the plot this way was because blah blah blah Here's the reason: The movie was called "ANT-MAN", not "WASP". Although the mid-credit teasers established that possibility for a future film. nelson fucked around with this message at 01:02 on Jul 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 00:49
|
|
|
Be an Ant-Man, don't be a Can't-Man.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 00:49
|
|
|
If my calculations are correct, when this baby hits .88 picometres... you're gonna see some serious poo poo. I thought this movie was great. I love the concept of a superhero heist movie and thought it was executed well.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 01:11
|
|
|
That really was some top-notch CGI wizardry on Michael Douglas at the start there. That tech has come a hell of a long way since Tron Legacy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 02:26
|
|
|
I usually avoid superhero movies because even Marvel ones take themselves too seriously despite having the most ridiculous concepts, but Ant-Man was really fun to watch so the stupid cheesiness of the plot and villain was forgiveable. I spent most of the movie being annoyed that Hope was clearly the better candidate and I wanted to see HER go on an adventure, but the speech about her not being the expendable one plus her getting her own suit in the end left me pretty happy! It could have done with less *NOD NOD WINK WINK* to other Marvel movies because they were wasted on me since I didn't any of the references, but overall this is a cool-looking movie and enjoyable. Top laffs when he gets arrested for returning what he stole
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 02:38
|
|
|
It would be nice if marvel could produce a villain that isn't "white guy in suit who wants to make money / get power because of reasons" Every time they've had a chance for a interesting villain it's been squandered. I get the feeling somewhere there's a Disney memo saying that the villan can't have to much focus because it will harm toy sales. Aside from that I rather enjoyed this film, a lot more than Avengers 2
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 04:43
|
|
|
Mr.Citrus posted:I get the feeling somewhere there's a Disney memo saying that the villan can't have to much focus because it will harm toy sales. Which is weird because there's usually a whole bunch of people far more interested in the villains that the heroes. I grew up loving Disney villains and wishing there were more toys of them!
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 04:53
|
|
|
turtlecrunch posted:This movie was cute and funny hth. There's one really bizarre exchange that makes me wonder if the creators have some intimate knowledge on the difference between mice and lambs or if they assume small = stupid or something anyway that was weird.  I bet that some poor marketing guy at Aardman is suddenly really regretting making this after what happened to the cute little lambs in Ant-Man.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 05:02
|
|
|
Mr.Citrus posted:It would be nice if marvel could produce a villain that isn't "white guy in suit who wants to make money / get power because of reasons" Hey they've had plenty of Villains that don't fit that description. Like: -Blue guy who really wants to commit genocide because he's a space racist. -Dark-Elf guy who wants to destroy the universe. -Sarcastic robo-baby who wants to destroy earth because he has daddy issues. -Red Nazi Skeletor who wants to use lasers to out-Nazi Hitler.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 05:08
|
|
|
It was alright. More coherent than Avengers 2 at least. Seeing Bad Bald Businessman kill a dude by using his shrink ray to make him fall and splat onto the floor was a bit shocking to me though. It's probably just my personal extreme fear of dying from falling, but that freaked me out more than any violence or gore in Fury Road, which didn't phase me.
Motto fucked around with this message at 05:20 on Jul 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 05:17
|
|
|
Motto posted:It was alright. More coherent than Avengers 2 at least. Seeing Bad Bald Businessman kill a dude by using his shrink ray to make him fall and splat onto the floor was a bit shocking to me though. It's probably just my personal extreme fear of dying from falling, but that freaked me out more than any violence or gore in Fury Road, which didn't phase me. I assumed it just condensed people into a small amount of goo rather than them squishing from falling? It looked like tasty jam.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 05:25
|
|
|
dog days are over posted:I assumed it just condensed people into a small amount of goo rather than them squishing from falling? It looked like tasty jam. It's the same shrinking tech he's trying to create. The Lamb turned into the goo as well from the tests.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 05:28
|
|
|
dog days are over posted:I assumed it just condensed people into a small amount of goo rather than them squishing from falling? It looked like tasty jam. The idea that faulty shrinking tech crushes you into paste instantly isn't much better.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 05:32
|
|
|
Mr.Citrus posted:I get the feeling somewhere there's a Disney memo saying that the villan can't have to much focus because it will harm toy sales. Barbossa, Hades, Scar, Jafar, Yzma etc. are all much more interesting and fun than any MCU villain, including Loki.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 06:03
|
|
|
If anything the villains have gotten better post-Disney because in Iron Man, Hulk, and Iron Man 2 the villains were all just evil versions of the hero while after the acquisition we at least got Loki and Trevor Slattery in addition to the evil versions of the heroes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 06:08
|
|
|
Any idea how different Edgar Wright's ant man was supposed to be? Not really familiar with his style so curious why some people think his take would have been better.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 07:45
|
|
|
Really liked this movie. Probably my favorite Marvel film. Just the fact that almost none of the effects shot felt like extraneous bullshit kind of makes that easy. There was like twenty seconds of Ant-Man going on a roller-coaster ride after setting up the sabotage stuff that I felt was kinda pointless but that was it. Well, excepting the entirety of the Falcon scene, but that was fun enough. Favorite scene was by far the city model shootout. It actually felt dangerous, and the scale made it seem actually arduous. Really liked the villain. Especially how, excepting the fact that he was a crazy murder psycho, didn't really do anything wrong. Pym was the dickweed, and his daughter just straight betrayed him for not much more than 'morals' and poo poo. The Hydra cameo was loving lovely. 'It's cool, they've changed. We're gonna be rich'. Also being about something was cool. Still not sure what Guardians was about. It's crazy that they made a movie about mind controlling ants and did it so earnestly that I forgot it was loving stupid.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 07:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 03:06 |
|
|
I think the Falcon scene was needed for the pacing. It's the first time we see Scott actually be Ant-Man and fight someone equal, and actually show off what he's capable off but ground him at the same.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 07:58
|
|