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.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.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'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...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 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.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...
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.
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.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.