I still can't believe that Rocket Raccoon and Ant-Man got movies before Wonder Woman. As someone who had the Official Handbook of the Marvel Universe in his middle school binder, I think it's awesome, don't get me wrong, but it's still mind boggling.
As for female lead action movies (or comedies) people in Hollywood always seem shocked that they make money and are popular. Then a few years go by a new one comes out and makes money and they act all shocked again. They have this thought that men and boys don't want to see women being funny or kicking butt but women will see men. They still think of a women led action movie as cutting off half the potential audience.
As for female lead action movies (or comedies) people in Hollywood always seem shocked that they make money and are popular. Then a few years go by a new one comes out and makes money and they act all shocked again. They have this thought that men and boys don't want to see women being funny or kicking butt but women will see men. They still think of a women led action movie as cutting off half the potential audience.
Yes, but she's also far more well known. You'd have think that at some point in the past 70 years of the character's existence, someone over at WB would have said, "Hey, let's make a movie with this character; after all, we've made movies for Batman and Superman!"
As far as the female lead thing, look at the reviews for Fury Road. People LOVE that movie, and Mad Max is hardly in it; it's all Charlize Theron. People love Alien and Aliens- female lead. Also, there was a little film about a girl with superpowers that came out in 2013 that garnered some buzz.....
Yes, but she's also far more well known. You'd have think that at some point in the past 70 years of the character's existence, someone over at WB would have said, "Hey, let's make a movie with this character; after all, we've made movies for Batman and Superman!"
As far as the female lead thing, look at the reviews for Fury Road. People LOVE that movie, and Mad Max is hardly in it; it's all Charlize Theron. People love Alien and Aliens- female lead. Also, there was a little film about a girl with superpowers that came out in 2013 that garnered some buzz.....
True audiences don't care as long as it's a good movie. It's the perception in Hollywood. It is slowly changing. If you look at the advertising for Mad Max they hide the fact that Furiousa is the main character.
Caught a screening tonight. Solid film. Takes a bit to get going, but around the 45 minute mark, it's full steam ahead and a good deal of fun. Final 30 minutes are a blast.
Caught a screening tonight. Solid film. Takes a bit to get going, but around the 45 minute mark, it's full steam ahead and a good deal of fun. Final 30 minutes are a blast.
That is a little higher then Jurassic World (71%). Audiences are giving 91% so far. Right now the guess is 60 million for Ant Man this weekend. Critics Consensus: Led by a charming performance from Paul Rudd, Ant-Man offers Marvel thrills on an appropriately smaller scale -- albeit not as smoothly as its most successful predecessors.
Most of the negative reviews I have seen have dwelled on Edgar Wright and how that prevented the film from achieving greater heights, as opposed to judging the film on its own merits. Personally, that seems like a silly way to assess a movie, but to each their own.
To its own benefit and detriment, the film was made to coexist in the Avengers universe nearly seamlessly. Obviously, that means fitting him into the MCU feels natural because of this, but at the same time, it prevents itself from feeling like its own movie with its own voice.
To its own benefit and detriment, the film was made to coexist in the Avengers universe nearly seamlessly. Obviously, that means fitting him into the MCU feels natural because of this, but at the same time, it prevents itself from feeling like its own movie with its own voice.
I've read a few reviews saying just the opposite... that this is the most "independent" feeling MCU film outside of Guardians. I'll have to see for myself I suppose.
Most of the negative reviews I have seen have dwelled on Edgar Wright and how that prevented the film from achieving greater heights, as opposed to judging the film on its own merits. Personally, that seems like a silly way to assess a movie, but to each their own.
That's not entirely true. The film suffers quite a bit in a number of places: there's no chemistry between Lang and Hope Pym, the father/daughter dynamic is underdeveloped (to the point that the emotional payoff is lacking), the story follows Marvel's origin framework too closely, and its strict adherence to the MCU prevents it from feeling like its own film (which is a big reason I think so highly of GOTG).
The final hour is entertaining, especially the final 30 minutes, but my biggest issue with the film is that it feels like another cog in the MCU machine. Avengers had its own voice with Whedon. Winter Soldier is a drastically different tone and ambition than not only its predecessor, but the larger universe as well. GOTG, arguably the most important film in the MCU for establishing primary goals and villains, was clearly the product of James Gunn, and not Kevin Feige. Peyton Reed did a nice job on this film, but it feels like another piece of the puzzle.
It's probably still far better than it has any right to be, considering its production history.
I've read a few reviews saying just the opposite... that this is the most "independent" feeling MCU film outside of Guardians. I'll have to see for myself I suppose.
Just got back from seeing it and it was awesome! I think he will fit in perfect with the avengers. Paul Rudd does a great job and his personality should fit right in with the others. Also, the shrinking ability should make for some unique fight sequences when they all team up. I was a bit worried about the movie having a hokey feel to it but they did a great job.
Just saw it and enjoyed it. I thought it was fun. I'm a sucker for a heist movie. I agree that relationships between the main characters were odd but the Pym/Hope dynamic was under almost 30 years of strain and Lang and Hope only knew each other a couple weeks.
Make sure you stay all the way to the end they have mid and post credit tags.
It was fun. Some delightful moments in a solid, though predictable, script. A few big laughs. A serviceable villan. An origin story. Nifty special effects. It felt like Sam Raime's first Spider-Man to me. My favorite moment was the "messed up dog".
As many have pointed out, Ant-Man suffers from a very slow first act...but, it ends up being a fun movie.
I like how they tackled Ant-Man's history with SHIELD. Although I found that first scene a bit strange. Maybe because it played immediately after the theater's courtesy spiel, without studio logos...or I was distracted by the really cool visual and make-up effects.
I don't read the comics, but I found Hank's struggle with his scientific/technological advances and their application (SHIELD initiatives) compelling. It almost seems like he was fighting his inner mad scientist...which the villain embraces. I wish more had been done with that. But setting up Pym as having always been there from the beginning was nice. Hank doesn't seem to trust SHIELD, or The Avengers...
Which side does this new Ant-Man take in the coming war? And will the old Ant-Man follow, pick Stark, or will he be too distracted by a renewed mission to find his wife to care about Cap v Stark?
I really enjoyed the fight scenes. Lots of fun. Maybe it's the novelty of Ant Man's power, but I think the fights were better than a lot of what we see in other MCU/DC films.
Most of the jokes were really good. Some fell flat. The acting was solid, which was helpful in some of the silliest components of the story. Not as good as Guardians, which I feel did a better job connecting to audience emotionally...but still worth watching at theaters. I'd say it is better than JW in terms of summer flicks.
The early Saturday morning showing was packed. I was surprised by the how many younger kids were there...a lot of dads taking their sons. I think this movie will have no issue making money.
As many have pointed out, Ant-Man suffers from a very slow first act...but, it ends up being a fun movie.
I like how they tackled Ant-Man's history with SHIELD. Although I found that first scene a bit strange. Maybe because it played immediately after the theater's courtesy spiel, without studio logos...or I was distracted by the really cool visual and make-up effects.
I don't read the comics, but I found Hank's struggle with his scientific/technological advances and their application (SHIELD initiatives) compelling. It almost seems like he was fighting his inner mad scientist...which the villain embraces. I wish more had been done with that. But setting up Pym as having always been there from the beginning was nice. Hank doesn't seem to trust SHIELD, or The Avengers...
Which side does this new Ant-Man take in the coming war? And will the old Ant-Man follow, pick Stark, or will he be too distracted by a renewed mission to find his wife to care about Cap v Stark?
I really enjoyed the fight scenes. Lots of fun. Maybe it's the novelty of Ant Man's power, but I think the fights were better than a lot of what we see in other MCU/DC films.
Most of the jokes were really good. Some fell flat. The acting was solid, which was helpful in some of the silliest components of the story. Not as good as Guardians, which I feel did a better job connecting to audience emotionally...but still worth watching at theaters. I'd say it is better than JW in terms of summer flicks.
The early Saturday morning showing was packed. I was surprised by the how many younger kids were there...a lot of dads taking their sons. I think this movie will have no issue making money.
I would imagine they would both want to keep their identities secret. Hank doesn't want anything to do with the government and dislikes Stark. I would guess he would align with Cap but he may stay away from all of it out of disgust of SHEILD in general.
