Retro_Link

Ant-Man Movie

Recommended Posts

All right we get it @Daft popular amongst hipsters....

 

 

wait doesn't that then make them mainstream and no longer hipster material? explain this to me daft

 

mwahaha only messing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Their movies are toned down schlock. Honestly, I have no idea why Rez of all people likes their films, he actually reads the comics (which are fantastic).

 

What's toned down about them? Iron Man shows scenes of war, what I would call some quite hard hitting scenes of imprisonment and grotesque scenes such as Pepper reaching into his chest to change the paladadadium. Captain America was a period piece that had full on Nazis. Thor was fantastical showing full armies of armored fancies. Avengers showed brutish destruction in New York. What was toned down?

 

I do indeed read the comics. The Winter Soldier was amazingly adapted and very, very faithful to the comic. Iron Man is very faithful. It's a different medium so of course you can do more in a comic, but it's been a steady build up in the movies and we are reaping the rewards of what's been sewn in phase 1.

 

Iron Man 2 and 3 were also SO bad; two massively long AUDI adverts (and the third one which his 'post-traumatic stress'? Wut?). And I actually like The Avengers.

Also, Cap 2 was like a spy thriller...except without any remotely intelligent plotting, awful pacing and a really unconvincing 'twist'.

 

A really unconvincing twist that was directly adapted from the comic books you just praised. I disagree with IM2 and IM3 criticisms. IM2 had some insane action, the recasting of Rhodey was also great, Don Cheadle is an amazing actor as is RDJ and their dynamic and relationship is perfect. Also Sam Rockwell and Mickey Rourke as villains! These are acting juggernauts. IM3...directed by Shane Black! It was incredible. His post traumatic stress is surely...

 

They characters get developed only so far as they need to be.

 

I absolutely hate what Disney do. They are deathly uncreative. They do a characters a disservice.

 

and poor at developing their characters

 

...Good character development. Providing a character with an arc over a number of movies, which looks set to continue further too. Tony Stark alone has gone from cocky and abrasive to shamed and humbled, to hero with new found confidence and looks to continue that arc further in Age Of Ultron, whilst still all along maintaining those vital qualities that make Tony Stark who he is. That's great development. The same can be said for the other characters despite clocking in less appearances.

 

Also, Cap 2 was like a spy thriller...except without any remotely intelligent plotting, awful pacing and a really unconvincing 'twist'.

 

But what's worst of all, is that they are all so bland visually and - when they get past their origins - bland narratively

 

I don't think there was anything wrong with the pacing in Cap 2, and I certainly do think it was bland visually or narratively. The movie opens with nice peaceful, wide angle shots of a beautiful city, then moves into dark and rain-riddled espionage, the shot of the Quinjet racing through that rain is very memorable to me, then it moves on (with a lot of cool stuff in between) and culminates in a finale sequence that is gigantic in scope and is awe-inspiring with the fall of the helicarriers. From a story standpoint it gradually unweaves Winter Soldier's story whilst filling in back stories for lots of other characters, (Such as, as you mention the sublime Black Widow, and interesting characters like Arnim Zola and even Jasper Sitwell) and whilst doing all this still has time to throw bones out to the hardcore audience in the likes of name dropping Stephen Strange.

 

A few examples of the MARVEL Studios movies being anything other than "visually bland";

 

3008087-4446773524-thor0.jpg

 

Iron-Man-3-Air-Force-One.jpg

 

DarkWorld07.jpg

 

Captain-America-The-Winter-Soldier-helicarrier-crashes.jpg

 

 

I don't buy into 'GotG being a risk' rhetoric

 

I agree with this. Maybe if it wasn't a MARVEL movie it would be a risk. A high budget, big scope comedy-sci-fi flick. However you are dead wrong to not be thinking this movie will be something special. It will be unlike anything that's come before it - it's freaking James Gunn. The man's borderline-psychotic.

 

One of the great things about comics is that they allowed an individual to project their interpretation of a story with almost no bounds. Marvel, in their attempts to negate all risk and create this shared movieverse have these films on a production line.

 

Well it's a unique situation. No one has ever attempted a shared universe before (in live action...to this level). Ultimately, they adapt important and renowned stories, cast great talent both behind and in front of the camera and the characters are very faithful to their comic book iterations. It's hard to condense so much history into a handful of films. Remember this entire franchise is relatively new and has been relatively slowly paced/spread out. We've only had two Cap films, two Thor films etc, whereas MOS was the seventh Superman movie. The DC movies (that I assume are one of your main comparisons) have already gone through a number of iterations.

 

For a lot of people, these characters are new to them, and for us to be getting the calibre of product that we are getting, with this unique, specifically defined and executed interconnectivity...it's a wonderful thing, and it adapts the sense of MARVEL's shared universe really...really fucking well.

 

Also, fuck you for making me type all that! :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We've only had two Cap films, two Thor films etc, whereas MOS was the seventh Superman movie.
Woah there, almost sounds like you're forgetting some staples of cinema here such as

 

Captain America (1979)

Captain%2BAmerica%2B1979%2B-%2Bstill.jpg

 

The Incredible Hulk Returns (with Thor!)

hulk+thor.jpg

 

Nick Fury: Agent of S.H.I.E.L.D.

10541690-l.jpg

Edited by Shorty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The search for Ant-Man's new director has finally ended.

 

Marvel officially announced today that Peyton Reed -- best known for Jim Carrey's Yes Man and cheerleader comedy Bring It On -- will be replacing Edgar Wright as director. Marvel also revealed that Adam McKay (Anchorman, Talladega Nights), who was recently rumored to be in the running to direct, is rewriting the film, though Marvel's exact terminology is "contributing to the film's script."

 

The studio provided the following synopsis for the superhero flick:

 

"Armed with the astonishing ability to shrink in scale but increase in strength, con-man Scott Lang (Paul Rudd) must embrace his inner-hero and help his mentor, Dr. Hank Pym (Michael Douglas), protect the secret behind his spectacular Ant-Man suit from a new generation of towering threats. Against seemingly insurmountable obstacles, Pym and Lang must plan and pull off a heist that will save the world."

 

Now that the film has its director, Ant-Man looks to be on track to hit its July 17, 2015 release date.

 

Reed, who got his start directing episodes of the Back to the Future animated series, nearly directed another Marvel Comics adaptation, Fantastic Four, over a decade ago, though that job eventually went to Tim Story.

I'm worried for this one. A year until release, still being rewritten, a 'grab any director we now' scenario... Was really looking forward to it before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They've announced Evangeline Lilly's character in the movie. She is playing 'Hope' Van Dyne, Pym's estranged daughter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bland as fuck. I'm so shocked (but seriously, I'm a little surprised that the trailer is this bland). Also, Paul Rudd shirtless...gross.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't excited before the trailer...I'm still not excited. Poor trailer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was a bit of a boring trailer, but then it wasn't the spoiler teaser trailer people were complaining about for Age of Ultron so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah that was a very generic "this is a superhero origin movie" trailer. We know that's what it is, give us some details about why Ant-Man is rad (I'm assuming they want us to think that) because a meta joke about how silly the name is doesn't sell it. It's a silly concept but that doesn't mean it can't work, but this trailer really doesn't prove that it can work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was worried for this movie as soon as Edgar Wright left... I'm still worried for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That looks awesome! I'm so excited Dude from House of Cards is in it too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm so fucking hyped for this movie.

 

Ever since I learned about the existence of Ant-Man I thought it was fucking awesome.

Being able to communicate with ants and work together fascinates me to no end.

 

The ants looked real cool in the trailer, so I hope they'll get some character as well and have the audience connect with these cute li'l fellas :3

I hope they get a good amount of screen time, it is ANT MAN after all not just MAN.

 

And with Marvel promoting this movie to ants as well, I'll do a double-take once I sit down.

Don't want to be squashing our li'l friends now.

 

CDGb9c4UIAAxUTF.jpg

CJu1PTHl.jpg

Edited by Fused King

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites