If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact [email protected]

Marvel Studios’ Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,434 ✭✭✭✭AMKC

    Is the trailer any good? Not watching it.

    When's it due out?

    Live long and Prosper

    Peace and long life.

  • Registered Users Posts: 13,804 ✭✭✭✭MisterAnarchy

    It looks a bit nuts to say the least.

  • Registered Users Posts: 6,793 ✭✭✭FunLover18

    Looks great, can't wait! Out in February

  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 32,478 CMod ✭✭✭✭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.

  • Registered Users Posts: 13,427 ✭✭✭✭retalivity

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

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 30,931 ✭✭✭✭gmisk

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

  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 32,478 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp

    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.

  • Registered Users Posts: 4,995 ✭✭✭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.

  • Registered Users Posts: 10,361 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol

  • Registered Users Posts: 4,995 ✭✭✭The White Wolf

    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.

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 10,361 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol

    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.

  • Registered Users Posts: 4,995 ✭✭✭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.

  • Registered Users Posts: 10,361 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol

    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.

  • Registered Users Posts: 4,995 ✭✭✭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.

  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 32,478 CMod ✭✭✭✭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.

    "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.

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,445 ✭✭✭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...

  • Registered Users Posts: 10,361 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol

    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.

  • Registered Users Posts: 10,361 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol

    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.

  • Registered Users Posts: 80,850 ✭✭✭✭JP Liz V1

    New Poster

  • Registered Users Posts: 7,118 ✭✭✭Mr Crispy

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

    Post edited by Mr Crispy on

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 12,271 ✭✭✭✭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.

  • Registered Users Posts: 7,118 ✭✭✭Mr Crispy

  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 32,478 CMod ✭✭✭✭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


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,302 ✭✭✭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.

  • Registered Users Posts: 32,269 ✭✭✭✭Penn

    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).

  • 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 😂😂

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,707 ✭✭✭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.

  • Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 4,180 Mod ✭✭✭✭TherapyBoy

    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.

  • Registered Users Posts: 10,367 ✭✭✭✭martingriff

    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

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 28,499 ✭✭✭✭~Rebel~

    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.