Ant-Man and the Wasp

Dir: Peyton Reed

2018

****

Edger Wright and co-writer Joe Cornish famously walked from 2015’s Ant-Man over differences they had with Marvel. It was a sad moment for us fans of Wright and Joe from the Adam & Joe show because we knew just how brilliant and funny Ant-Man could be under their guidance. However, Peyton Reed and Paul Rud did save the day and made one of the MCU’s most fun, funny, ridiculous and charming films of the series. Marvel’s films have gone from strength to strength with each film bettering the last, that is, until now. Don’t get me wrong, I loved Ant-Man and the Wasp but it was as good as the first film, not better. The best aspects of the first Ant-Man were the bits left over from Wright and Cornish’s script and they are credited accordingly. Years later, we now know exactly what parts of the film were theirs, and in my opinion they were all the best bits. In 2018’s Ant-Man and the Wasp those best bits are copied and repeated but never bettered. There were a lot of things that bothered me about the film if I’m being honest. The fact that the whole story wouldn’t exist without amazing technology is a given, but the detail surrounding said technology is poor. For example, Michael Douglas’s Hank Pym and Evangeline Lilly’s Hope van Dyne (aka The Wasp) work in a huge building that they shrink down and move where ever they go. They run around all over town with the building but it is never damaged and once restored to its normal size it stays standing, even though it has no foundations. It’s maybe an unimportant fact in the scheme of things – and I’m all for a bit of magic – but the MCU films are now well known for their attention to detail. They also have a collection of cars they can shrink at will. Their little box of Hot Wheels cars is cool and many of them are in the funky colours that Hot Wheels come in, but doesn’t that mean they would have had to get regular cars made to look like toys? Why would they do that? Two scientists obsessed with trying to save their wife/mother from the depths of the quantum realm are hardly going to go to the effort of pimping their ride, just in case someone searches their belongings and wonders why they have a case of plain looking cars in a Hot Wheels box, rather than actual Hot Wheels cars. It’s not even like Hot Wheel paid for product placement. It shouldn’t bother me but it does, I have no problem with the nonsense logic behind the quantum realm and the ability of shrinking and growing but I think if you are going to explore the science fiction you have to try and explain it convincingly and follow up on the process. I think they got the big Ant-Man aspect right but less so the small Ant-Man, which is a shame, seeing as it is Ant-Man and not Giant-Man (at least not yet anyway). The plot is a little too shaky for comfort, given that these people are geniuses and can’t work out very simple ways that they could use their shrinking/growing technology better to their advantage. Again, detail is key and sometimes the most simple of ideas is the best – just look at the first film of it’s kind, the one that influenced the comic in the first place – 1957’s The Incredible Shrinking Man. This is one MCU film where the comic is still marginally better than the film adaptation, although it was nice to see a few characters pop up from the comics, such as Agent Woo (who is an agent of S.H.E.I.L.D in the comics), Ghost (who is a man and Iron-Man’s rival in the comics), Bill Foster (who was Black Goliath before becoming the second Giant-Man in the comics) and of course Janet van Dyne (who was the original Wasp in the comics). I may sound as if I didn’t like Ant-Man and the Wasp but I don’t want to give you the wrong idea, I did like it, very much in fact. It is just that it has been unfortunately shoe-horned in between some already iconic Marvel films. In a post-Infinity War world, Ant-Man and the Wasp is something of a palette cleanser before we get Captain Marvel and Infinity War part II. This being the case, Ant-Man and the Wasp felt it was disjointed from the main story as well as being an episode in a series. I can see that Marvel probably wanted something like that but I don’t think it has been beneficial to any of the characters. The post-credits scene that brings in the Infinity War story arch is the film’s most interesting scene, which it really shouldn’t have been. It feels like a ‘Meanwhile….’ type story, rather than the stand-alone film that Ant-Man, Wasp and everyone else deserved. Again, I sound like I didn’t enjoy it but I really did, it’s just that Marvel have now set the standards so high that any slight imperfection becomes all the more obvious. I did think Ghost was more suited as an Ant-Man villain though and I like how Ant-Man is bringing in all the new Marvel characters as well as old forgotten favorites. The first film was cleverly told through the events of a classic heist but Peyton Reed has said that for the follow up he was influenced by films such as After Hours, Midnight Run and What's Up, Doc?. I totally get that and think, especially towards the end of the film, and I loved the scrappy madness each character goes through. I think each character is perfectly cast too, my wish now would be that one day Ant-Man’s daughter Cassie (played by Abby Ryder Fortson) will also suit up as she does in the comics and becomes a young Avenger. So in conclusion, I liked the film overall but I liked and disliked how the film had to work within the other Avenger films. The details niggle a bit but overall, my only real true disappointment was with The Wasp's suit – which I thought could have been a lot nicer and had just a little more yellow. Other than that, it’s another hit for Marvel. It also features one of my favorite Stan Lee cameos of the entire MCU series so far.

Ultimate Avengers 2: Rise of the Panther

Dir: Will Meugniot, Steven E. Gordon, Dick Sebast, Curt Geda

2006

**

The initial Ultimate Avengers animated movie, released just a few month before its sequel, was a pleasant adventure film that offered something for existing fans and to those who were new to the Marvel characters. Ultimate Avengers 2: Rise of the Panther however, adds very little to franchise and is somewhat tiresome in comparison. The introduction of original Avengers member Black Panther is the one of the films only highlights, the other being the inclusion of Aliens disguised as Nazis, as seen briefly in the previous film. The standard of animation seems to have dropped somewhat since the last film, leading me to suspect that it was probably rushed, at least that's what it looks like. Mark Hamill was added to the voice cast in a minor role to entice more viewers but he is ultimately wasted on a rather pointless character. I'm sure that the first animated film was an influence on the live action films and I hope that its sequel is a reminder to Marvel of how not to make a movie.

Ultimate Avengers

Dir: Steven E. Gordon, Curt Geda, Bob Richardson

2006

***

Just before the Avengers film franchise really took off, Marvel made a couple of animated films based on the superheroes comic adventures. 2006's Ultimate Avengers isn't quite the same as the live action films would turn out but I can't help but think this influenced them and its DNA is in the blueprints of phase one of the Marvel cinematic universe. In Ultimate Avengers we see the team come together for the first time and take on invading Aliens who were in fact responsible for the Nazis. The team, led by Captain America under the watchful eye of Nick Fury (no pun intended, honestly) includes Iron Man, Thor, Black Widow, The Wasp and Ant Man - who in this instant has somehow reversed the powers of his suit to become Gi-ant man. They are assisted by S.H.E.I.L.D. doctor Bruce Banner who eventually helps them as his alter-ego, The Incredible Hulk. The animation has its high points and its low points but is generally of a high quality. The good guys beat the bad guys towards the end of the film as you'd expect but the real treat here is watching Hulk turn on his comrades. Avengers vs Hulk make this the surprisingly exciting watch that it is, especially when you realise it was made years before the live action films. Marvel animations are generally on par with DC's, they're nowhere near as good as the films or the comics but they are fun all the same.

Ant-Man
Dir: Peyton Reed
2015
****
Marvel films have gone from strength to strength under the leadership of their President Kevin Feige. Each of the better known Avengers (Hulk, Thor, Captain America, Iron Man etc) have graced the silver screen at least twice but in 2014 Marvel famously took a risk (was it really a risk?) and decided to make an adaptation of one of their lesser known group of heroes, the Guardians of the Galaxy. It was a huge hit and a well deserved success. It's got to the point now where I think Marvel could probably bring back Howard the Duck for a feature length version and people would lap it up (I certainly would). The thing with the Marvel movies is that a lot of the 'fans' don't really know anything about the comics or the Avengers. Indeed there was a lot of fuss in October 2014 when Marvel announced an alternative version of Thor whereby the Asgardian God of thunder was a woman. Non-comic readers were up in arms shouting 'Political correctness gone mad' not realising that all the Marvel characters (and DC characters for that matter) have gone through changes as alternative realities within the Marvel universe are explored. Not one of them complained when Thor was a zombie or a Dog (yes, Thor was once a Dog. I believe he was a Fish once too). So it is a big relief that people are accepting other characters, and so they should, especially as Ant-Man is part of the Avengers line up. 
 I was overjoyed when I heard that Edgar Wright was directing and co-writing with Joe Cornish and then heartbroken when he walked away from the project. Did Ant-Man retain the humour you'd expect from Wright and Cornish like Paul Rudd claimed and was Peyton Reed, director of The Break-up, Yes Man and Bring it On, really the best man to replace them? Well the answer is a resounding yes but, I suspect the ground work was pretty much done for him. Wright and Cornish get top writers billing in the credits and it's clear to see why, the humour throughout is typically absurd as it is effective. I suspect the reason for them leaving the project is that they probably lost many of their ideas by keeping within the strict Avengers story boundaries. Personally I love how Ant-Man fits (and will fit further) into the Marvel universe here, like I said, he is an integral part of the team after all. The casting is very successful, Paul Rudd is likable, funny and just works with the character. This is probably the most fun an Avengers film has been so far, it also doesn't shy away from the all important back story, quite the opposite, it indulges itself somewhat and saves the action for when the story warrants it. The action sequences are completely original, incorporate humour in a way I haven't seen very often and are well worth the wait. Ant-Man the film stays true to the original comic and captures the magic that those comics emulated. It's a 1950's B-Movie, it's a comedy, it's a superhero film and it's a heist movie. It's my favourite genres all rolled into one. It's such a strange idea, it is a credit to the talented writers for making it work and making it work as part of a much bigger story. This is how superhero films should be made and it makes it look so easy, so much so, that you wonder how so many superhero films have failed in the past with such simpler stories and characters. Somehow, the Avengers just got a hell of a lot more exciting.