- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Antman was atrocious (spoilers)
Posted on 7/18/15 at 2:18 pm to RonBurgundy
Posted on 7/18/15 at 2:18 pm to RonBurgundy
quote:
both films have terrible scenes in them and DFOP conflict can be solved with one statement by the time traveling Wolverine...."Hey Prof.X, if we fail, seek out Kitty Pryde when she is born and we will keep trying until we get it right."
That wouldn't guarantee a solution. Kitty wouldn't be born for quite some time, and they'd already have Mystique's DNA. Plus they'd have to convince Wolverine all over again to do this. Sure it could work, but it would save a lot of trouble just to get it right the first time.
0
Posted on 7/18/15 at 2:21 pm to SG_Geaux
I'm fine with that. Different opinions are good. Just wanted to state my viewpoint
Posted on 7/18/15 at 2:22 pm to RonBurgundy
quote:
Like most reviews I've read on this movie, it's starts by complaining that Wright didn't direct this film and then insults Peyton Reed by inferring that he is a Yes Man to Marvel.
The vast majority of Ant-Man reviews are favorable. Are you seeking out the negative ones?
Posted on 7/18/15 at 2:27 pm to RonBurgundy
quote:
If anyone preferred Ant-Man to First Class or DoFP, they shouldn't be allowed to operate a vehicle or to be around children without supervision.
quote:
both films have terrible scenes in them and DFOP conflict can be solved with one statement by the time traveling Wolverine...."Hey Prof.X, if we fail, seek out Kitty Pryde when she is born and we will keep trying until we get it right."
And the major fault in Ant-Man's plot is actually in the script: "Why don't we just call the Avengers?"
All of these movies have alternate resolutions to the set plot. All of these solo Avengers films where they don't call in their superhero friends to help out, or call Odin to send in his army of Gods, etc.
Days of Future Past has alternate resolutions available, just as every other superhero movie does.
Posted on 7/18/15 at 2:39 pm to RonBurgundy
quote:
Like most reviews I've read on this movie, it's starts by complaining that Wright didn't direct this film and then insults Peyton Reed by inferring that he is a Yes Man to Marvel.
First off, when did Edgar Wright become the second coming? He's yet to make a really good movie that was not a Simon Pegg vehicle (I know Scott Pilgrim has its adherents, but it dumbed down the book and added very little to the source material). I've never seen such moaning and beating of the breast over a middle tier director not getting to do a film.
Secondly, man would've a Peyton Reed FF film been amazing. If Down with Love is any indication, he can really pull of 60s rom com, which is wat I think his FF film would've been. The Fantastic Four have deserved much better.
As for Ant-Man, I thought it was a slight, enjoyable heist film. It didn't take itself too seriously, the stakes were appropriately low (despite posters complaints in this thread, Marvel needed a movie that wasn't quite at the level of saving the world from apocalypse), and Paul Rudd just oozes charm. It felt like Marvel taking a bit of a breather. This wasn't all out spectacle, it was a more character driven film. And ultimately, it was about a robbery.
I enjoyed it.
Posted on 7/18/15 at 2:49 pm to Baloo
quote:
First off, when did Edgar Wright become the second coming?
Nobody is saying that he is, but he is a unique film maker who would've given us a Marvel film like no other. Instead we got another episode in a Marvel TV series.
He's also the person who had the foresight to go to Marvel when they were still moving the office furniture into the new Marvel Studios, before Iron Man was in the planning stage, and pitch to Marvel that they should be doing films about their third-tier characters.
Posted on 7/18/15 at 3:16 pm to Fewer Kilometers
quote:
First off, when did Edgar Wright become the second coming? He's yet to make a really good movie that was not a Simon Pegg vehicle (I know Scott Pilgrim has its adherents, but it dumbed down the book and added very little to the source material). I've never seen such moaning and beating of the breast over a middle tier director not getting to do a film.
Secondly, man would've a Peyton Reed FF film been amazing. If Down with Love is any indication, he can really pull of 60s rom com, which is wat I think his FF film would've been. The Fantastic Four have deserved much better.
As for Ant-Man, I thought it was a slight, enjoyable heist film. It didn't take itself too seriously, the stakes were appropriately low (despite posters complaints in this thread, Marvel needed a movie that wasn't quite at the level of saving the world from apocalypse), and Paul Rudd just oozes charm. It felt like Marvel taking a bit of a breather. This wasn't all out spectacle, it was a more character driven film. And ultimately, it was about a robbery.
I enjoyed it.
quote:
Nobody is saying that he is, but he is a unique film maker who would've given us a Marvel film like no other. Instead we got another episode in a Marvel TV series.
If you're not on board with the theme "it's all connected" then Marvel Studios films really aren't for you.
They are far superior to Fox Marvel that jumps from film to film with little to no continuity.
quote:
He's also the person who had the foresight to go to Marvel when they were still moving the office furniture into the new Marvel Studios, before Iron Man was in the planning stage, and pitch to Marvel that they should be doing films about their third-tier characters
Wright has deserves the appropriate credit for this film.
To answer your earlier question, no I don't seek out bad reviews, but the ones that are bad usually are complaining that Edgar Wright didn't ultimately direct this.
Posted on 7/18/15 at 3:26 pm to RonBurgundy
quote:
If you're not on board with the theme "it's all connected" then Marvel Studios films really aren't for you.
They are far superior to Fox Marvel that jumps from film to film with little to no continuity.
I can agree that Marvel is more concerned with continuity while Fox's X-Men division is more concerned with creativity.
Posted on 7/18/15 at 3:32 pm to Fewer Kilometers
quote:
while Fox's X-Men division is more concerned with creativity.
Fox has been making the same X Men movie for the last 15 years. They've pumped out more superhero film trash than any other studio. If you like XMen films, to each his own...but don't plant a flag saying Marvel Studios is less creative than Fox and their one note franchise.
I'm not going to derail this thread any further, so if you want to continue this Fox Marvel vs. Marvel Studios, F4 is in a few weeks.
Posted on 7/18/15 at 3:57 pm to athenslife101
I thought Ant-Man was pretty solid...4/5 for me.
Posted on 7/18/15 at 5:03 pm to RonBurgundy
quote:
I'm not going to derail this thread any further, so if you want to continue this Fox Marvel vs. Marvel Studios, F4 is in a few weeks.
Posted on 7/18/15 at 5:05 pm to asurob1
quote:
F4 is in a few weeks.
Posted on 7/18/15 at 5:07 pm to JinFL
quote:
Michael Pena
Most of his lines delivered. Especially the two scenes when he did the voice overs.
Posted on 7/18/15 at 5:10 pm to Fewer Kilometers
quote:
And the major fault in Ant-Man's plot is actually in the script: "Why don't we just call the Avengers?"
They explain why. They don't want Stark to get the serum. Then in the second after credits scene you see Falcon tell Captain America that "he knows a guy" Meaning "Hank Pym, who will likely be the Tony Start of the Captain America side in Civil War.
Posted on 7/18/15 at 5:24 pm to Fewer Kilometers
quote:
Nobody is saying that he is, but he is a unique film maker who would've given us a Marvel film like no other. Instead we got another episode in a Marvel TV series.
... which Wright wrote 80% of. Face it, we got the Edgar Wright movie, just directed by someone else. I know people like to bitch about studio interference, but studio interference isn't always bad.
Besides, this movie WAS different. Really, what are the similarities between this and, say, Guardians of the Galaxy or Thor? There was no big bad, there were no Infinity Stones (or any other McGuffin), there really wasn't an origin story. It was a fun heist movie with lots of quirks to it. The scene in the briefcase was all Edgar Wright, right down to the Cure playing.
I just don't get the "oh NO, Edgar Wright didn't direct this film!" hysteria. He's a guy. He's made ONE full-length movie that was not a Simon Pegg movie, and it was a mediocre adaptation of an inventive book. I actually have more faith in Reed, who did Down with Love, but also has far more experience with offbeat indy comedy: he directed TV shows for Weird Al, Mr. Show, and the UCB. He also did short films for Superchunk. He's got far more indy weirdo cred.
Posted on 7/18/15 at 6:16 pm to Baloo
quote:
... which Wright wrote 80% of. Face it, we got the Edgar Wright movie, just directed by someone else.
Not really. You can see the bones of Wright's movie and what he wanted to do with it, but in no way does the finished product look like one of his films.
quote:
Besides, this movie WAS different. Really, what are the similarities between this and, say, Guardians of the Galaxy or Thor?
There are two types of Marvel film. The Infinity Stone films and the corporate espionage films. Rarely do they stray from those formats. Ant-Man falls in with Iron Man I, II, and III and Incredible Hulk with the tech/government angle. But what would've made it different is Wright's style of direction and editing.
quote:
He's got far more indy weirdo cred.
Have you seen Spaced?
Posted on 7/18/15 at 6:19 pm to Baloo
quote:
First off, when did Edgar Wright become the second coming? He's yet to make a really good movie that was not a Simon Pegg vehicle (I know Scott Pilgrim has its adherents, but it dumbed down the book and added very little to the source material). I've never seen such moaning and beating of the breast over a middle tier director not getting to do a film.
Well, he has yet to make a non-genius movie. Scott Pilgrim is sill the most quotable comedy of decade, and visually what he does with it is incredible. It's truly the fist time an actual comic has been visually brought to the big screen. Plus he's highly competent in action. Edgar Wright is a great director, and the worst thing he's out his name to is Paul. I just think it's bullshite you discount a person's work simply because he's largely worked with another great coworker
Posted on 7/19/15 at 9:42 pm to athenslife101
Man, i gotta disagree with just about everything you said. I enjoyed it. I dont see it winning any awards or anything, but enjoyable nonetheless. I think your a lil bit too critical of these superhero movies. Evangeline lilly becoming the wasp was tight at the end btw. She 
Posted on 7/19/15 at 10:00 pm to tiger_nurse
Yeah the OP just wanted to be an Internet bad arse/lets hate what's popular. This movie was damn good for what it was. It wasn't GOTG, but it was better than iron man 3 or man of steel
Posted on 7/19/15 at 10:02 pm to tigerclaws15
I would also say that most of movie watchers would disagree with the OP as well. 79% critic score and 92% user score
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News