Ant-Man 2015 Review

Introduction (Warning Contains Spoilers)

With an extended version of Avengers: Endgame coming to cinemas this September, Marvel is attracting renewed attention.

Avengers: Doomsday is also scheduled to arrive in December. That gives us the perfect opportunity to revisit the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

We are continuing our journey through the MCU in chronological order. Our next stop is 2015’s Ant-Man.

The film arrived after several major Marvel successes. The MCU had already become one of Hollywood’s biggest franchises.

However, Marvel decided to take a considerable gamble. Instead of introducing another obvious powerhouse, it chose Ant-Man.

The character was much less known to the general public compared to Iron Man and Captain America.

This automatically brings up an important question. What prompted Marvel to give Ant-Man its own standalone movie?

The character had been existing in Marvel Comics for decades already. But still, he wasn’t nearly as recognizable as many other characters in the Marvel Universe.

That made the movie especially interesting to watch. Ant-Man features Paul Rudd in the lead role of Scott Lang.

Michael Douglas is the original Ant-Man, Hank Pym. Evangeline Lilly is Hope van Dyne. Corey Stoll is the villainous Darren Cross.

The movie also features Michael Peña, Tip Harris and David Dastmalchian. The plot revolves around Scott Lang released from prison.

This is the story of Scott Lang after he is freed from prison. Scott finds it hard to get back on his feet. He hopes to become a better father to his little girl.

But finding employment is hard. Eventually, Hank Pym hires Scott for a unique assignment. He gives Scott a highly technological suit.

The suit enables its user to become very tiny. Scott has to adapt to using his new powers. He also has to help stop Darren Cross from misusing the technology.

The basic idea is quite unique compared to previous MCU movies. In fact, the uniqueness can be seen as both good and bad.

The Ant-Man movie tries to balance superheroes and heist movie elements. Sometimes, the effort succeeds.

Other times, the movie seems to lack an identity. It also has pacing issues. Some parts move extremely slowly.

The visual effects are inconsistent. The villain is disappointing. Scott Lang’s transformation into a hero can also feel rushed.

Paul Rudd brings plenty of charm. However, it can be difficult to completely accept him as a convincing criminal.

The film therefore becomes an unusual entry in the MCU. It is entertaining in places. It also feels like one of Marvel’s weaker films.

Direction

Peyton Reed became the director of Ant-Man following a rather complicated process of development.

Initially, Edgar Wright was going to become the director of this movie. The director worked on this film for quite a long time.

But at some point, he abandoned the project. Peyton Reed became the new director of this film.

And that is important to consider when discussing the style of the movie. There are some differences between the idea and the finished product.

The director of Ant-Man decided to take a somewhat light-hearted approach. The film is meant to be funny.

It is also meant to be accessible. The director uses the aspects of heist movies. The film thus has its own unique rhythm compared to other MCU movies.

The whole idea of superheroes performing a miniature robbery is very amusing. The training scenes in the film are also quite fun.

Scott needs to learn how to manage his new powers. At first, he doesn’t seem to be a superhero naturally.

That helps to add some humor to the film. But sometimes, Ant-Man doesn’t use the potential of its premise.

For example, Ant-Man can become as small as an insect. This should generate many possibilities for creative filmmaking.

Sometimes this happens. The fight sequences with the small characters are inventive. It is also interesting how the everyday objects are used due to the scale of Scott.

However, the idea is not developed enough throughout the entire story. The movie frequently resorts to more standard superhero sequences.

This makes the plot idea not as unique as it could have been. The direction also fails in pacing.

The film takes a while to get to its main conflict. The training sequences also sometimes appear to drag on.

It is also inconsistent how much screen time the secondary characters receive. Some of the jokes are quite funny.

Michael Peña is the comedian of the film. He injects it with much of its humor. However, some of the gags are repetitive.

The film is not sure what tone it is supposed to maintain – if it should be a comedy or superhero action movie.

Reed deserves credit for keeping the film accessible. However, there is also a feeling that the movie could have been more ambitious.

The premise offered something genuinely different. The execution does not always take advantage of it.

Cinematography

Cinematographer Russell Carpenter works in the movie. The cinematic style contains a critical issue. The film should be able to transform common settings into huge spaces.

If Scott shrinks, then the common room becomes another world for him. This is one of the most creative visuals in the movie.

Even things which can be considered small can become a barrier for the protagonist. Scale changes are sometimes creative.

Wide shots are also used to emphasize the contrast between Scott and his environment. Thus, the visuals help to show the vulnerability of the protagonist when he shrinks.

The visuals are, thus, very much related to the central idea. However, the film doesn’t always have such a creative approach to visuals.

A variety of sequences are characteristic of MCU movies. Miniatures are visually more interesting than anything else.

They present a new point of view. The final fight sequence is also realized successfully by means of scaling.

Scott and Cross fight in the environment where ordinary objects become giants. This whole sequence takes place in a children’s room, where there is a set of a toy train track.

Playfulness is brought to the culmination of the film. However, at the same time, this is a distinguishing feature of this movie compared to others of the same genre.

However, cinematography cannot solve visual problems of this movie. Some digital environments look fake.

Certain action sequences also lack the physical impact found in other MCU films. The result is competent rather than exceptional.

The film works best when it embraces its unusual scale. It is less interesting when it returns to familiar superhero imagery.

Visual Effects

Visual effects constitute one of the least consistent aspects of Ant-Man. There are times when they are executed quite successfully.

However, there are other times when they become rather dated..The shrinking tech is obviously the most important part of it.

It becomes pretty believable when Scott transforms into Ant-Man. The movie is also successful in conveying scale in a number of miniature scenes.

Practical environment helps a lot. One can recognize familiar items. Their tremendous size makes Scott’s predicament quite comprehensible.

However, CGI is not always done well. Some of the digital environments seem rather artificial.

Some character effects lack the realism seen in later MCU productions. This is particularly noticeable when the film relies heavily on computer-generated imagery.

This is especially evident in cases when the picture makes heavy use of CGI. The problem is not in the fact that the film utilizes CGI.

It is clear that a movie about a shrinking superhero should be supported by lots of visual effects. The problem is in the fact that the level of these effects varies.

Sometimes, it is possible to notice that the effects are integrated seamlessly with live action. At other times, it is clear that the effects are CGI.

Such effects are especially visible when the film is compared to other films of Marvel. There’s even an opportunity that gets wasted here.

The idea could have prompted some innovative filmmaking on the practical level. Instead, the movie occasionally resorts to heavy use of digital effects.

The miniature action sequences are the most successful application of the technology. They provide the viewers with a real sense of perspective.

The finale also makes good use of scale. Still, the overall visual effects aren’t always impressive. From my point of view, it’s one of the film’s weak technical sides.

The CGI isn’t awful. It just doesn’t always look as well-made as one expects from Marvel.

Themes and Storyline

The primary theme is redemption. Scott Lang appears in the movie as an ex-convict. He was imprisoned because of a burglary.

He wants to fix his relationship with his daughter. His past makes him an atypical hero because of his background.

This is an intriguing concept. Unfortunately, the movie fails to develop it properly. Scott is obviously a good guy who made some errors.

Nonetheless, the transformation of Scott from a convict to a superhero is quite fast. It is one of the most obvious flaws in the movie. It is tough to take Paul Rudd as a credible villain.

Paul Rudd is a likable actor. It is great that he plays the role of Scott.

However, it also makes his criminal past feel less convincing. The film tells us about his actions. It does not always instill in us a sense of its severity.

His wish to be a better father seems more realistic. The relation allows him to get a strong motivation.

The same goes for the story of Hank Pym. The man has got regretful moments. Many people have already died due to his activities.

He does not want his technology to go into wrong hands. The relation with Hope is not an easy one either.

The girl tries to prove herself. He keeps trying to protect her all the time. It leads to conflicts between them.

Evangeline Lilly provides Hope with a lot of determination. However, the character might deserve more development.

The story also looks at scientific responsibility. Pym understands that his invention can be deadly. Darren Cross wants to use it for commercial purposes.

Thus, he is a source of major conflict. However, Cross does not make for an interesting character. His goals are quite simple.

He wants power, money, and recognition. Corey Stoll does a good job playing this character. The writing just does not offer enough to him.

The heist formula proves to be one of the most successful ideas of the story. Scott and his gang have to sneak into a guarded place.

Every team member has his own role. This makes for a new kind of superhero story. Unfortunately, it takes a lot of time before the story gets to this point.

This hurts the overall pace. There are scenes that make the plot come to a stop. The runtime of the movie is approximately one hour and fifty-seven minutes.

This is not very long. However, it feels like this movie is longer than it actually is. It has a simple plotline.

The material about the characters sometimes makes it slow. On the whole, the themes are there. The realization leaves something to be desired.

Performances

Paul Rudd is good in his role of Scott Lang. He brings humor to the role naturally. His chemistry with his daughter works perfectly fine.

However, there is a major issue with the background of the character. According to the movie, Scott was supposed to be a master criminal.

However, Paul Rudd makes him seem like an ordinary guy. This is definitely not a bad performance.

It just does not make his character a convincing criminal. Therefore, the character’s transformation into Ant-Man becomes funny rather than serious.

It is thanks to Michael Douglas that those scenes seem convincing. Evangeline Lilly does a great job with the determination of Hope.

She successfully proves the fact that she is a capable person..Still, the movie has kept her out of the action way too much..She deserved a bigger part.

Corey Stoll succeeds in making a good impression as Darren Cross. Cross is an intense character. Nevertheless, he is not a memorable villain.

The screenplay makes him predictable.

The movie’s most hilarious character is played by Michael Peña. Luis is energetic and lively. He tells his stories in a funny way on purpose.

While some people will like that feature, others might think that he repeats himself too often.

Supportive comedy actors include David Dastmalchian and T.I. They fit the structure of the heist movie.

Anthony Mackie also makes an appearance as Sam Wilson, providing a link to The Avengers.

Despite that, the performances are not able to save the screenplay from its flaws. The best performances belong to Douglas and Rudd. The supporting cast provides entertainment.

The villain remains the weakest dramatic element.

What Worked and What Did Not

Several aspects have made Ant-Man successful. The first one is its unique premise.

The MCU had already shown the audience gods, super soldiers, and superheroes in their armour suits.

Ant-Man provided something smaller. The heist approach also helps differentiate the film from others.

It is quite simple. Firstly, Scott has to learn how to operate his suit. Then, he should help steal dangerous technology.

As a result, it seems as though the film is a crime superhero film. Humour is another strong element of the movie.

Paul Rudd knows how to deliver humour well. So does Michael Peña. Michael Douglas adds dramatic elements into the film.

The relationships between Scott and his daughter add meaning to the film. Miniature action scenes are enjoyable.

They utilize the character’s unique powers well. It is also worth mentioning that the film ties in effectively into the larger MCU universe.

However, there are several flaws as well. The quality of CGI is uneven. Some special effects are great.

Others are surprisingly fake. The pacing is another drawback. The movie is slow on several occasions. The beginning scenes require a lot of time to introduce the characters.

The heist itself is also delayed. Another disappointing aspect is the villain. Darren Cross is not complex enough compared to some of the other MCU villains.

His motivation is simple. So is his final showdown. There is also a problem with Scott’s criminal past.

Paul Rudd is a likable actor. This makes it hard to believe him as a real criminal. More time could have been devoted to his background.

This would have made the character’s reformation more believable. Hope deserves more action. She is a capable character.

But she is often left in the shadows despite her future importance. Finally, the movie poses an interesting question for Marvel’s decision-makers.

Why did they choose Ant-Man for the standalone movie? The answer is clear.

The largest heroes of Marvel were already made by that time.

Therefore, it could afford to try something new. Ant-Man had connections to Marvel’s history. However, the character was not quite famous among people.

Thus, this project turned out to be a real gamble. In some respects, the gamble was successful. The film looks unique enough.

Still, it does not provide enough reasons for itself as the top MCU movies do. The movie seems to be more of a small story.

It cannot be considered as a negative point though. Not each movie from Marvel should be large. The movie looks somehow incomplete.

However, it has everything that could make it interesting. It has a cool idea. It has an interesting protagonist. It has an experienced cast.

It simply does not bring all those elements together consistently.

Overall Verdict

Ant-Man is an oddity amongst the early Marvel Cinematic Universe movies. Its smaller scale is a refreshing change of pace from big budget superhero movies.

It’s also quite unique in its use of the heist movie structure. Paul Rudd makes for a likable Scott Lang character.

Michael Douglas offers up a solid performance in his role as Hank Pym. The miniature battles tend to be fairly entertaining.

The comedy also fits well in many scenes. But Ant-Man would certainly rank as a poor MCU movie.

The movie has certain pacing issues. Some scenes move slowly. The plot is also quite predictable. The main villain is not very charismatic.

Darren Cross does not have the depth of Marvel’s best villains. Visual effects are not consistent as well.

Certain scenes are very good visually. However, other scenes do not look so good. Another flaw of the movie is Scott’s criminal past.

Paul Rudd seems to be so nice that it is hard to believe he used to be a criminal. Therefore, his redemption loses its significance somewhat.

Another wasted opportunity is Hope van Dyne. The girl clearly has all it takes to become a superhero. However, she is not given enough to do it.

It is still great that Marvel decided to make an Ant-Man movie. They were willing to risk and choose such a relatively unknown character.

This risk paid off as it resulted in a very entertaining movie. However, it is not among Marvel’s best productions.

There are plenty of great ideas in the movie. Unfortunately, they are not implemented consistently enough.

Ant-Man is the most successful when it stays small scale. Miniature scenes are funny. The heist parts are fun.

Characters bring some comedy to it. However, when the movie tries to fit in the superhero narrative, it gets boring.

So it’s hard to say that Ant-Man is a bad movie. There is enough fun in it to be worth watching. But it is just as hard to name it the best movie from Marvel movies.

It feels like an extra part and not an important one. And maybe that’s why Marvel picked Ant-Man. They could try something new without risking their main characters.

Thus, Ant-Man is an interesting movie, but not very influential. It’s fun enough to watch once. But it does not have the same influence as other Marvel movies.