Marvel Studios’ Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania

peteeeed

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlNFpri-Y40

trailer

AMKC

Is the trailer any good? Not watching it.

When's it due out?

MisterAnarchy

It looks a bit nuts to say the least.

FunLover18

Looks great, can't wait! Out in February

pixelburp

Well. It sure looks like a Marvel movie. With the recent reveals about FX churn, I couldn't help look at all those flat CGI vistas and think welp, a lot of people pulled a lot of sleepless nights to make that.

Though the real movie magic at work here is how Paul Rudd is 53, yet has barely changed bar a line or two here & there.

retalivity

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119790128#Comment_119790128

The man looks nearly the exact same as he did in Clueless, 27 years ago!

gmisk

From the trailer it looks like Michelle Pfeiffer might have a decent sized role which is good

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119790182#Comment_119790182

The answer is obviously "wealthy Hollywood grooming", but it's still impressive how well his face has kept its shape and younger appearance. though I'd say he's dying his hair at the least; can't hit 53 and not be going grey in a fair few places.

The White Wolf

It's always the same answer for the likes of Cruise, Clooney, Rudd etc....paid to maintain a certain level of looks and few bad habits.

This is the side of the MCU that I'm mostly interested in and all we've got recently is a disappointing Eternals and a perfectly....fine Loki? Sacking Gunn for that brief period really screwed them.

Foxtrol

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119805162#Comment_119805162

What impact do you think sacking Gunn had?

The White Wolf

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119815791#Comment_119815791

GOTG 3 would have been released years ago and from what I've read, had a pivotal role to play in the cosmic side of the MCU.

Foxtrol

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119820064#Comment_119820064

Which cosmic movies have been delayed because of it? Thor was already released, Captain Marvel couldn't be released without Ms Marvel and Secret Invasion looks like it isn't being held up by as it is looking to be released in advance of GotG 3.

Feel COVID is a much bigger impact to plans for movies than the Gunn situation. I doubt anything else cosmic would have been released by now even if the Gunn situation hadn't occurred.

The White Wolf

It's not about what cosmic films were planned next but where GOTG 3 was/is leaving the overall story in the MCU.

It's becoming a clear problem for Marvel, the delays with Blade being another example.

Foxtrol

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119829341#Comment_119829341

Still don't really get where you're coming from. It has been clear for a while what direction the overall story in the MCU was going and that has been basically confirmed with the plans for Avengers Secret Wars and Kang Dynasty.

I don't see GotG 3 being a huge gamechanger to the direction they've set, outside of the impact for the characters themselves, and that wouldn't have changed whether it was shot a bit sooner. Most of Phase 4 have been pretty self-contained stories getting things rolling from different angles towards the overall story, and the different streams that will lead into it, but not taking huge leaps.

Also don't see Blade being an indicator of a clear problem. Marvel have always had directors drop out of movies, there is just two or three times the output from the MCU these days and then a pandemic to deal with.

The White Wolf

You say it's clear where the direction has been going for awhile while also saying Phase 4 has been mostly self contained stories, so there's a bit of a contradiction there. These 2 Avenger films were only announced recently as well so I'm not sure how the direction could be clear, because there has been none.

My point is that I miss how tighter things used to be in the MCU, as opposed to having a million different threads going at once that can unravel quickly with extended delays. You can read up yourself about how important GOTG 3 was meant to be for Phase 4 as it's all there to find on Google.

pixelburp

I think it's a mistake to ascribe too much forward planning to the MCU: I'm sure there's some, to a degree, but I doubt there's some immovable Bible that Feige is following and it's more ad-hoc than he'd & Marvel might ever let on. Which is why I also got the impression Guardians 3 would move the MCU in a different direction to the one taken - 'cos of the Gunn "controversy" (which now seems so bizarre in retrospect). That's not meant as a negative either, because whereas rigidity is a weakness, so too is whiplash crisis management of the style DC have been fond of - and are trying to solve by way of Mr. Gunn.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119833022#Comment_119833022

"fatigue" is an overused word at this stage that seems to trigger argument ... but, I dunno "overwhelming" feels a better fit, in the Disney+ era, of where my headspace exists. I find it hard to keep track of every show, and every branching set of characters invariably linking back and into other stories. Wandavision alone is getting two spin-offs with Agatha(??) getting one of them for some reason.

As someone said elsewhere, the MCU is becoming like comics themselves and increasingly unfriendly to anyone outside of the congregation willing to slavishly keep track. Never thought I'd find myself looking to Wikipedia, just so I can keep track of comigs and goings. There's too much and as you say WhiteWOlf, I kinda miss those more self-contained days.

Brief_Lives

Gunn is very hit and more miss for me...

GotG-1 was very good..

GotG-2 and The Suicide Squad, I thought were rubbish...

Foxtrol

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119833022#Comment_119833022

I dont see a contradiction at all. Movies can be self-contained while also pointing in the direction they were going, even if we aren't aware of it at the time - for example introducing us to each of the infinity stones etc. It was that way for most of Phase 1 and 2 as well. Phase 3 is where you could see things ramping up towards Thanos and even then the likes of a very self contained story in Ant Man 2 ended up being the key for End Game.

There had been plenty of direction in Phase 4 - once the multiverse was brought in and then revisited showing conflict between multiverses then Secret Wars was the likely direction they were going. Then an intro to Kang in Loki and then him being a player in the movie this thread is about pointed to him a key 'big bad' going forward.

A million different threads does have risks but it also allows more opportunities to pivot as needed when things go right. I wont be reading any potential rumours/spoilers for GotG until after I see the movie, can come back and debate at that stage whether it made a huge difference to the direction the MCU has taken.

Foxtrol

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119833301#Comment_119833301

I'd never say it was anywhere close to a Bible but the MCU have clear landmarks that they work towards (e.g., Phase 1 ending with creating the Avengers, Infinity War not happening until the end of Phase 3, when many expected it to be the end of Phase 2), they give writers/directors specific things that need to achieved in a given movie for the larger MCU story, and then ensure each build off the previous so the movies weave together. It isn't anything too amazing but if you compare it to DC or the ST in Star Wars it is night and day how they approach it and avoid the holes the others have fallen into.

'Overwhelming' is a personal feeling, which I get, but it is very much on you than the MCU. You're just dealing with what many folk did during the early phases of the MCU. Plenty of people dipped in and out of certain movies back then and the MCU did just fine. MCU do a great job of giving the audience enough information for them to enjoy a movie without having seen minute of every movie/show beforehand - they basically always have a character who needs to be caught up to speed on the key items. If those who dip in want to go back and watch the previous items after or read up on wikipedia to get the full picture then they can.

It isn't new phenomenon, the movies were never completely self-contained and you're just experiencing what many others did before - those people would have similarly seen the movies as 'unfriendly' and you as being in a 'congregation willing to slavishly keep track'. You've just now found yourself on the other side of a situation where no one is 'wrong', it is just personal taste.

JP Liz V1

New Poster

Mr Crispy

And a new trailer to go with it. Edit - as Varik says below, it's hugely spoiler-heavy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WfTEZJnv_8

Varik

No one watch that if you don't want spoilers it practically the whole plot and key point condensed into 2 minutes.

I can't remember a trailer that showed that much before.

Mr Crispy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120088437#Comment_120088437

Cheers - I'll edit my post to warn others.

pixelburp

Jaysus. I know trailers these days can be susceptible to simply summarising the whole plot - but that's pretty egregious on the MCU's part. Trying to think of older trailers and if they've been as brazen in the past.

To the trailer itself, could help spot

Spoiler Warning

MODOK!

kerplun k

Decent enough trailer. Could be one for IMAX. My Avatar WOTW experience was go good, its made me more eager to watch more films this way.

On a side note. I think if something is in the trailer, people should freely be able to discuss without using spoiler tags. The distributers have intentionally put the information out there for people to discuss.

Penn

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120089194#Comment_120089194

Yeah I'd have to agree. The trailer appears to give a lot away, but at the same time they could be giving those things or making people to lean towards those things, and end up giving us something we don't expect. I also don't think anything was really shown in that trailer that wasn't really implied from the first trailer, aside from the reveal of (what's in pixelburp's spoiler above).

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119790182#Comment_119790182

I was chatting to a popular Dublin tourist destination manager and tried to get some quality Hollywood gossip out of him but all I got was Paul Rudd and pink are the nicest , most respectful decent people you can meet , in fact if you meet Paul Rudd there’s a chance he might get in touch next time he’s here for the craic 😂😂

FortuneChip

Superficially first...

Michelle Pfeiffer looks great!

Not overly keen on Evangeline Lilly's hairdo. Looks weird. I know she shaved her head a few years ago, that was a better look than what she's sporting here...

On the trailer, it seems like a massive departure from the previous two movies. We're into real end-world/multi-verse stuff, and I don't think it really suits the character based on movies to-date.

"You're an interesting man, Scott Lang" - He's not really, not by Avenger standards, at the risk of Captain America'ing this... "big man in a suit that makes you small or big. Take that away and what are you?"

The only thing that would be putting him on Kang's radar is if he'd found some macguffin, which I assume is the case.

I'm sure it'll be grand, and Paul Rudd's natural ability will carry things along nicely, but definitely think he's been shoe-horned into Marvel's bigger threats.

TherapyBoy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120090644#Comment_120090644

Could be “interesting” in the sense that without Scott Lang’s contribution to Endgame we’d still be missing half the population of the universe.

martingriff

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120090644#Comment_120090644

Well if you take away x from a number of avengers where would they be. Iron mans suit, Captain Americas shield, Falcons suit, Hawkeye arrows, Thors hammer

~Rebel~

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120089221#Comment_120089221

Almost never the case unfortunately... I've just come to expect that the teaser and first trailer are ok to watch, while the second trailer will absolutely definitely give things away that they shouldn't. If there's a movie I have any pre-existing interest in watching, I find I have to avoid the second trailer like the plague.

FortuneChip

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120091608#Comment_120091608

Then there's an even more interesting rat doing the rounds in some car impound. What I meant wasn't that it wasn't some innate abilty, yes he contributed, but some of it was circumstance or pure fluke.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120091698#Comment_120091698

Well, Thor's a god. Iron Man made his suit, and it was his technological advancements that led the universe to knowing that "earth was ready for a higher form of war". Cap is a living legend that's led the Avengers.

The other two are soldiers...

It's not a dig at Ant Man, but his stories have always been a bit more personal, and his influence in the collective movies until now have always been more of a support role. Maybe it's just his few minutes in the quantom zone that intrigues Kang, or, more likely, he's picked up a macguffin.

I'm just saying I feel he's been very quickly thrown into the A-Team because of the changing line-up.

Penn

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120092287#Comment_120092287

Ant-Man films have always been awkwardly placed. The first came out just after Age of Ultron and was technically the last film of Phase 2, and the second came out after Infinity War (but was set just before it).

While the previous films were very self-contained for the most part, the Quantum Realm became central to defeating Thanos, and is what's leading Kang into the MCU. Plus Hank Pym and Janet Van Dyne are key Marvel characters who haven't really gotten a chance to shine as the films skipped over them to go with Scott. With the Quantum Realm always being central to the Ant-Man films, it does make sense that Ant-Man's role and this movie have become far more central to the overall MCU rather than being another infill movie.

EoinMcLovin

https://youtu.be/DF5q3BIgv7g

____

TheIrishGrover

I know nothing about the comics (ANY of them) so I cannot comment on the importance of seeing this Quantum Realm in the movies. From what I read, it seems to be quite integral with the next MCU Phase and I'm sure it will all be explained.

But this trailer did nothing for me. Once again: No knowledge of the comics so don't hate the ignorant :) but I enjoyed the first Ant-Man movie. Was great to watch a fun heist movie without having to know what happened in the previous 5 MCU movies or wonder how this was going to impact the NEXT 5 MCU movies. Sure, we all know how the post-credit sequence in Ant-Man 2 impacted "Endgame" now but then? Non-readers didn't.

Plus, Michael Pena. Yay.

Second one was not quite as good. But had its moments.

Plus, Walton Goggins and Randal Park. Yay.

But this looks..... Yeah, it's quite a departure from the first ones. And, with everyone in their suits and everything CGI behind .... Dare I say it's giving off a bit of a "Spy Kids" vibe?

Plus, yeah, those trailers?

Spoiler Warning

Surely that "We both just have to lose" is the final equivalent of "Yeah? And I am Ironman" in Endgame

peteeeed

first reviews coming in

https://www.shortlist.com/news/ant-man-and-the-wasp-quantumania-reactions-are-in-this-is-what-the-critics-are-saying-403553

Brief_Lives

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120210607#Comment_120210607

thats a great spoiler free link, thanks..

looks like Kang and Michelle Pfieffer are worth watching...

also, highlights that excepth for the tv shows, phase 4 movies were ryubbish..

peteeeed

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120210630#Comment_120210630

hope its not a mess like dr strange 2 but it sounds like it might be

Foxtrol

It might be because my expectations had been lowered having seen the poor reviews but that was fun. Felt like a true movie representation a more 'out there' comic book. They hit the run time right, didn't feel any of it dragged at any point and they were able to give time to certain key scenes.

Saw it in a giant IMAX and the backdrops throughout the quantum realm were pretty stunning, though I'd be pretty confident CGI overall wont hold up as well on smaller or lower quality screens and people will be able to pick out specific scenes where there are issues. Scaling the characters growth is something it struggles with without having the anchors of real items. Also,

Spoiler Warning

to me MODOK looked off initially but I dont know how they would avoid it with that character, especially with the backstory they give him. They landed the character better than I ever thought they could in MCU, somewhere between being dangerous and what we saw in the recent cartoon while it making sense.

Tonally it lined up well with the previous Ant-Man movies for the most part, though obviously set in much wilder surroundings so everything was bumped up a few notches. Unlike Thor 3, the comedy though not perfect had far more hits than misses. Hadn't realized a writer from Rick and Morty was involved in this but it can definitely be felt. Though it suited this movie seeing there is more involvement from them in the future Avengers movies makes me hope they leave most of this humour in the Quantum Realm.

Jonathan Majors steals every scene he is in and confirms that the MCU is in safe hands with their big bad. I'm sure there will be plenty of spoiler discussions later about how he is used in this movie and how it impacts future stories but I think I see why and where they're going with it and it makes sense. I do wish they hadn't announced the names of the upcoming Avengers movies until after this as it took away some uncertainty but after this movie no one can argue that the MCU doesnt have a firm direction.

FYI: There is both a mid and post credit scene. Both are well worth staying for, the middle one being key and the second one being more of a scene from a future release.

The White Wolf

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120253693#Comment_120253693

I found it fun as well, certainly on par with the 2nd film in the trilogy which I was surprised to hear got an 87% RT rating. Just goes to show how messed up that site is when one scores that and the other is scoring below 50 now.

I can only assume Disney are no longer sending the shills crates or nice passes.

notahappycamper

An absolute abomination of a “movie”.

The White Wolf

Weirdly I thought Evangeline Lilly was an MVP in the film even though some reviews said she was barely in it. She was really good. Douglas was good as well when he had something to do. I preferred the Van Dyme stuff to Scott and his daughter.

Foxtrol

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120253767#Comment_120253767

Your point regarding the difference in treatment in the 2nd and 3rd installments is spot on. I don't see a way you can objectively watch both and come to such widely different results.

I'd heard before seeing it that there were negative reviews but hadn't actually read any. Taking a scan through rotten tomatoes they're really all over the place, with many contradicting each other - some it was overly edited others it was too long, some praising visuals others slating them, some saying it can easily be skipped others saying it is so important to the overarching MCU storyline that it hurt the movie. No clear themes of issues like there was with Thor 3 or Eternals.

Suspect the knives have been sharpened for a long while for many critics and they were choosing or were told to hold off. I'm actually surprised their movies received good reviews for as long as they did, can absolutely understand them not being the cup of tea for a lot of critics.

The White Wolf

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120254236#Comment_120254236

But the weird thing is that it isn't the reputable ones with the knives out. The Guardian gave it 3 stars and seemed to enjoy it mostly. Irish Times gave it 3 stars as well.

It's the **** sites that are slating it , and who previously ate up everything MCU, and most of them are on RT.

pixelburp

Letterboxd reviews are all over the map, but trending positive and 30 odd movies in I can get why if even the positive thoughts are a bit shoulder -shruggy. Actual professional sites and aggregators feel like too much of a crapshoot these days.

Fair number mention more ropey FX, which is a shame if true (subjectivity notwithstanding), cos I'd have hoped after Love and Thunder more polish was added. Will be interesting to see how this does box office wise, not least cos of the Disney+ effect.

Foxtrol

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120254376#Comment_120254376

On first view in IMAX there was nothing as bad as the very low points of Thor. I'm sure there'll be plenty of questionable stills but overall it looked great - though a good chunk of Thor was good, even great parts, but it is now the poster boy for bad FX.

Can understandably see MODOK being one element that could be cited. It was jarring with the mask off but they sort of boxed themselves in with the narrative choice and the fun element to me was worth it.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120254784#Comment_120254784

Dunno where you saw Love and Thunder cos at home on Disney+ with a decent TV it was unbelievably bad for a top tier studio. The Black and White world was arresting but the rest pretty shocking in places; things like Hemdal's son's teleconference more akin to a SyFy channel show than a big studio flick.

The MCU FX was always solid, rarely spectacular but at least felt suitably Hollywood Tier. I wonder what changed. Obviously the sweatshop stories got the headlines recently but I've wondered if Marvel changed contractors, schedules became compressed, or what changed. It's a big ask that big Hollywood Blockbusters look the part.

Penn

A bit of a mixed bag imo. Kang was undoubtedly the star of the show. There were no bad performances in the rest of the cast either. Even Corey Stoll ended up with some of the best lines and was a bit of fun. If anything, Michael Douglas was almost the weak link in the cast. He just felt a bit bored and wasn't really given a lot to work with.

The biggest issue was that it lost what made the Ant-Man movies so great. The comedy was dialled so far back and didn't really land. The supporting cast was gone. And they lost the inventiveness of using the shrink/grow powers in the real world.

I think it's around as good as the other Ant-Man films. A fun watch, a lot to like, but never really great in any way.

PTH2009

Average enough i found with an ever bloated universe been bloated even more

Spoiler Warning

but did enjoy the post credit scenes even if I was confused enough for the 1st one but that 2nd one was very nice. How would Thanos fit into this and the Eternal lads must know a bit about this too

The story was meh and with no superheros been killed meaning the bloated universe is still just that and forever expanding with yet another 'strong female warrior' in the frey

Modok was pretty odd and forget about the comedic characters from the past movies which were never mentioned

Foxtrol

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120254964#Comment_120254964

Like most MCU, and blockbusters in general, I saw it in a giant IMAX.

I never said L&T was perfect, your assessment actually seems pretty close to what I posted - some highs and serious low lows (your examples are what comes to mind on opposite ends of the spectrum). My original point was just that the way some people talk about the CGI in it you'd swear every scene was at that SyFy level.

I'm obviously not a harsh rater on CGI, outside of those obvious scenes I mentioned in my OP I think the majority of it was good - which is how I rate CGI if it doesn't stand out so much as to pull me out of the movie - they are super hero blockbusters so the skeptical part of my brain is already switched off. I don't think I'd ever enjoy a movie if I picked up some of the stuff I see in complaints in threads regarding CGI (not that there is anything wrong with having that eye or focus).

Haven't seen L&T on the small screen yet so all of that could change on my next viewing - I thought MoM was fine in that theatre and saw way more issues when I rewatched on TV. Definitely more of a drop off in CGI in phase 4, which I'd guess is more down to COVID impacting FX team capacity and late changes in plans when movies have issues. Hopefully it'll improve now with things slowing down a bit.

Also, me having not viewed L&T again at this stage probably says it all about how I felt about the movie overall.

Foxtrol

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120255174#Comment_120255174

I'd be surprised if:

Spoiler Warning

we see much of the quantum realm folk again outside of maybe some big Endgame final battle scene of getting all the warriors together. If Ant-man and Wasp had stayed down there I'd agree it would have been a different story. No real long term bloat of note coming out of it, they just reaffirm Kang as the big bad and brought Cassie one step closer to being one of the young avenger team.

Not sure if you've seen Loki yet but they imply that though Thanos might be stronger in a one on one fight, the Kangs technology and knowledge would wipe the floor with him. Thanos' goal was to gather infinity stones while Kang's people treat them like paper weights.