Ant Man - convince me it's not totally lame

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Fawbish

Sr Member
One of the founding members of the Avengers. Yes, definitely "scraping the barrel". Not. Yes, it's a tad risky and possibly unappealing to some. So what? You only want to see big budget films about heroes that are already known widely? You can do that. Dont watch Ant Man.
 

crabra comander

Sr Member
Oh damn, lot of hurt feelings here...

I can't say I care for Ant-Man, but it looks OK...However the cute train crash trailer, does that mean that any mini-sized item could kill these guys? I mean I'm assuming ANt-man will have the crush-proofness of, let's say, a COW KILLER ANT...which pretty much equals 100 PSI of crushing power.

I mean seriously, have you ever tried crushing a COW KILLER ANT? It's tough guys...
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Bigdaddy

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
God forbid we see a movie about a largely unknown hero that we haven't been clubbed over the head with for 10 yrs! ;) Personally I'm looking forward to this, and just to give you an idea of where I'm coming from: I forced myself to sit through The Avengers (once) I haven't seen IM3, ThorDW, AoU or GoTG and I have no plans to see them.
 

JD

Master Member
God forbid we see a movie about a largely unknown hero that we haven't been clubbed over the head with for 10 yrs! ;) Personally I'm looking forward to this, and just to give you an idea of where I'm coming from: I forced myself to sit through The Avengers (once) I haven't seen IM3, ThorDW, AoU or GoTG and I have no plans to see them.
BigDaddy, you owe yourself at least one viewing of Guardians of the Galaxy. While it's not the most original thing and it might be full of popcorn movie cliches, it is a fun ride. Thor Dark World is fun, too - if not a bit more predictable.
 

George

Master Member
Taste is subjective,so it's useless to argue about it.This person likes this,that person likes that...big deal.
Why don't we give eachother room to breathe,and put that wasted energy to good use by start crafting our fandom? :popcorn
 

coofunkcurly

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
God forbid we see a movie about a largely unknown hero that we haven't been clubbed over the head with for 10 yrs! ;) Personally I'm looking forward to this, and just to give you an idea of where I'm coming from: I forced myself to sit through The Avengers (once) I haven't seen IM3, ThorDW, AoU or GoTG and I have no plans to see them.
I'd rather sit through another Transformers movie than see GOTG again. ThorDW I fell asleep during. And IM3 is where I started to lose confidence in the Marvel movie machine. So much so that I have not seen AoU yet and will also skip Ant-Man.
 

Bigdaddy

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
I'd rather sit through another Transformers movie than see GOTG again. ThorDW I fell asleep during. And IM3 is where I started to lose confidence in the Marvel movie machine. So much so that I have not seen AoU yet and will also skip Ant-Man.
I'm going to give Ant Man a shot only because I like the character, and I don't want to toss out the baby with the bath water. I really enjoyed both Captain America films and I'm looking forward to Civil War. I might even rent AoU just to be up to speed for Civil War. For the record this is the only way I could be forced to watch any Transformers "film" again...
 

Attachments

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

third3ye

Sr Member
I must not be part of the public since I'm watching the movie, already got my tickets. All this talk about creating movies that 'the public wants' is just silly, Marvel's in the business of developing new franchises. They're not going to make the same mistake of being overly reliant on a single character (Spidey) for most of the last 3 decades. Look at their Phase 3 slate and that says it all, the company does not want to depend on the Avengers Big 4 especially when talent contracts are expiring after Infinity Wars.

I will admit that the marketing effort for Ant-Man has lacked focus, surprising for a Disney distributed film. The campaign started with unlikely hero, moved to father-daughter relationships, then to comedy, then to blatantly banking on the Avengers connection more recently. There's no denying this movie is gonna rely heavily on reviews to drive viewers, but GotG was able to pull it off and that was an even more obscure IP and with far less of an Avengers connection than Ant-Man.
 

streetjudge79

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
This is the only MCU film that I have absolutely no interest in seeing. I love the Marvel films but this character just seems completely underwhelming.
 

harrisonp

Sr Member
Oh damn, lot of hurt feelings here...

I can't say I care for Ant-Man, but it looks OK...However the cute train crash trailer, does that mean that any mini-sized item could kill these guys? I mean I'm assuming ANt-man will have the crush-proofness of, let's say, a COW KILLER ANT...which pretty much equals 100 PSI of crushing power.

I mean seriously, have you ever tried crushing a COW KILLER ANT? It's tough guys...
I would say by the way the train topples that it didn't have much of an effect on Yellowjacket, his cowering/shielding was probably just a reflex because the power of the suit isn't second nature to him yet. With the way we've seen Scott fight human enemies while small I would assume that some degree of enhanced durability comes along with the shrinking powers.
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

batguy

Sr Member
So you want creative people to make movies that only the public (meaning you) want to see? You don't want them to be... I don't know, creative, maybe? Like I mentioned in my post, Guardians was not on anyone's radar - yet, it's arguably one of the best Marvel movies. Had they not taken a risk and gone off the grid, we might never have had that movie... and here we go again with Ant-Man another blip on nobody's radar - and not taking the safe route with another Iron Man movie.

...and that's nonsense about a "no-risk" plan. There's no such thing as no risk (take a look at the movies you mentioned), Ant-Man is a risky idea for Marvel, he's (basically) an unknown character and... well, it's ANT-Man. Not Iron Man, not Thor, not a name hero. Most folks are laughing about this one (but, in the end if the buzz is good... they'll see it).

Making movies that the public wants to see is much more of no-risk plan. Ant-Man has been talked about since 2003 and in development since 2006... so this is well outside that "no-risk 5-year plan."

You can look at my initial response to the Ant-Man trailer... it looked rote, like something Marvel might do in their sleep - you know: no-risk. But, as I see more of it, I am becoming more and more curious about this movie. I'm still bummed that Edgar Wright isn't on board... but I just have a feeling that this is going to be a fun flick and I am looking forward to spending my money to see it.

I still think it's childish to wish failure on other people's hard work because they're not making a movie tailored to your (or, cough, "the public's") specific tastes. The reasons why Green Lantern and The Lone Ranger failed are numerous - heck, GL could have been DC's Iron Man had it been done right. (...and Iron Man was simply luck and hard work - it's not unreasonable to see that Tony Stark/Iron Man is akin to Hal Jordan/Green Lantern in their respective comic universes).

If someone could cater to the "public's taste" on a regular basis they'd be raking in the bucks. As it is, even the big boys that do it on a regular basis (hi, Apple) also fail on a regular basis and even they don't simply stop being creative or stop trying to push the envelope. Yes, every company has a plan and none of those plan's are risk free.

Making Ant-Man is a risky move in the same way that making 10 Spider-Man shows in 10 years would be risky. It's risky in the commercial/marketing sense. It's risking over-saturation of a known "safe" product, the comic book movie. It's not Spider-Man or Iron Man but it's a comic book movie from the Marvel brand that ties into their larger picture. It's not risky. Tomorrowland was risky.

As for wishing failure on hard work - No big budget movie exists without creative people doing a lot of hard work. That doesn't mean every big budget movie should succeed. I don't want to be subjected to an endless string of Twilight movies. Do you? There is a finite amount of stuff the industry is going to make. If there is no pressure against the wrong stuff then they won't make enough of the right stuff. Look at how many comic-book movies have been made in the last decade and how many more are in the works. Look at how much money has been sunk into all that. Imagine if ALL THAT was devoted to variations on the teenager/vampire chick flick theme. The over-saturation of projects like this has gotten ridiculous.

The reason why I might refer to Ant-Man in particular as "the wrong stuff" before I've even seen the movie is self-evident. This thread exists and nobody is wondering why. They ARE scraping the bottom of the barrel for comic hero franchises. It might be a good movie. But that's almost irrelevant to my feelings about the genre right now.

I don't want Ant-Man to fail for its own sake. I want the resources set aside for Ant-Man#2 &3 to get diverted to something else.
 
Last edited:

Riceball

Sr Member
I really wouldn't call making an Ant-Man movie scraping the barrel, granted that he's not that well known to the general public but neither were the Guardians of the Galaxy, I never actually ever heard of GotG until I saw an episode of one of the animated Avengers shows that had them in one episode. If Marvel was really scraping the barrel they have plenty more older and more obscure characters than Ant-Man, a character who's a founding member of the Avengers in the comics and in the animated Avengers series that was on before Avengers Assemble. If Marvel were truly scraping the barrel then they might have trotted out characters like ROM the Space Knight, Moon Knight, Stingray, Torpedo, Captain Ultra, and list goes on.
 

Vivek

Master Member
Community Staff
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Not to worry, there is no Ant-Man 2 nor 3 for the next 5 years. Plenty of resources to go around.
 

Mados

Well-Known Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
The only thing I'm not liking about Ant Man is he wasn't involved in the creation of Ultron. I am really looking forward to this. There is a lot more there than just a guy who shrinks and commands ants. I don't think they scrape the barrel with their movies, that's what Agents of Shield is for.
 

harrisonp

Sr Member
The only thing I'm not liking about Ant Man is he wasn't involved in the creation of Ultron. I am really looking forward to this. There is a lot more there than just a guy who shrinks and commands ants. I don't think they scrape the barrel with their movies, that's what Agents of Shield is for.
Yeah that got to me too, all it would take was ONE mention that the "defense program" they were working on had been pioneered by Howard Stark and Hank Pym in the 60s but it had been mothballed waiting for technology to catch up to their vision. I felt that would have given a nice bit of connective tissue and appeased the fans of the original origin.
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Top