Anyone seen ANTMAN? (plus bonus discussion of female comic book movies)

[accfanfrom1970]

Jason? Anyone? Looking to be entertained this weekend...Rotten Tomatoes has me kind of on the edge, yea or nay?

[JasonEvans]

Jason? Anyone? Looking to be entertained this weekend...Rotten Tomatoes has me kind of on the edge, yea or nay?

Sorry, I have been busy but, yes, I did see it on Monday this past week.

I say yea. It is not quite in a class with the best Marvel movies (Cap 2, Avengers, Guardians, and Iron Man) but is as good as the Thor films and better than Iron Man 2 or either of the Hulk films.

It differs from other Marvel movies in that it is more of a comedy caper than an action film. I laughed out loud more than I was thrilled with some stunt or special effect sequence. The story is pretty good, though it lags a bit at times. Things get a tad ridiculous late in the film and there are some "why did they do that?" kind of moments that don't make a lot of sense when you really think about them. Some of the characters don't act at all realistically. You need to turn off your brain and just accept the premise a little bit or you can easily nit-pick it to death.

Paul Rudd and Michael Douglas are both very good. Rudd got buff for this, the same way Chris Prat did for Guardians, but he does a great job of conveying the uncertainty of a guy thrust into a hero role almost against his will. Of course, he is also really funny and his supporting cast are also amusing, especially Michael Pena. Michael Douglas is the heart of the story and the script does a great job of explaining a lot of his motivations. The villain, Darren Cross played by Corey Stoll, is pretty mediocre. Other than Loki and Ultron, Marvel has not had particuarly compelling villains in its movies. Lastly, Evangeline Lilly is just ok in this film, though it isn't all her fault. She is wearing a really distracting wig the whole time. I think they borrowed the wig that Cate Blachett wore in Indiana Jones 4 and it just looks awful.



I had fun watching the movie and it does a good job setting up what Ant Man can be for the Marvel universe going forward. They do a really nice job of fitting it into the existing Marvel universe and Ant Man does interact with important other Marvel characters and organizations. There are none of the lingering questions like "Where is Iron Man?" that sorta dogged Captain America:Winter Soldier.

Be sure to stick around for a mid-credit bonus scene that is pretty dull (and makes no sense when you think about the character's motivations earlier in the movie) and a post-credit scene that is really cool and points toward some big things coming down the road.

-Jason "on a 1-10 scale, I'd give it about a 7... it was worth seeing, but isn't great" Evans

[Wander]

I liked it too. But Kate-from-Lost was right: she was far superior at martial arts and talking to ants than the main character, so why not put her in the suit? That whole conversation was uncomfortably meta: by my count, Marvel is going to release twenty films before a female takes the main role instead of a lame, generic supporting character that are mostly all the same. In a world where even the big high-grossing popular stuff has Katniss, Daenerys, Elsa, and Rey, comic book movies are really looking far behind the times as a genre.

[davekay1971]

I liked it too. But Kate-from-Lost was right: she was far superior at martial arts and talking to ants than the main character, so why not put her in the suit? That whole conversation was uncomfortably meta: by my count, Marvel is going to release twenty films before a female takes the main role instead of a lame, generic supporting character that are mostly all the same. In a world where even the big high-grossing popular stuff has Katniss, Daenerys, Elsa, and Rey, comic book movies are really looking far behind the times as a genre.

This is an interesting point and very true. I think the studio logic is that these movies are incredibly expensive, and female-lead action movies have historically been anything but sure things at the box office. Which, of, course, makes the same kind of statement about our society as do the box office prospects of Asian led action movies, Latino led action movies, etc. In fact, the only non-white-male action lead that has developed a track record of success that studios will support is African-American male led action movies, with Will Smith and Denzel Washington (and, to a lesser extent, Wesley Snipes about a decade ago) delivering enough consistent success to open up the venue for other actors to follow.

Hollywood studios are (very much) lagging indicators of society, particularly when it comes to big budget movies. The simple answer as to when we will start to see more big budget movies led with characters who anything other than heterosexual white (or African-American...with the right actor) males happen is when some studio exec has the confidence to green-light a $150 million prduction budget (plust another $100-$150 million on promotion) on a movie with such a lead.

Now we are starting to see women in action leads. But only in certain genres. It started with horror, where the girl became the popular choice as the one-who-lives after Siguorney Weaver blew the Alien out of her escape shuttle. Now we see female action leads in sci-fi/fantasy genre (Hunger Games, GOT). Comics are probably next. Marvel has the revenue stream to bet on Captain Marvel. Wonder Woman, who will be reintroduced in Batman v Superman will get her own vehicle (and, of course, she is an A-list comic book character). But if Captain Marvel and Wonder Woman aren't supported at the box office the way Thor, Captain America, etc have been, where the movies at least bank well enough to warrant a sequel, we'll see studios go right back to male-led comic book action cinema very quickly.

[JasonEvans]

Now we are starting to see women in action leads. But only in certain genres. It started with horror, where the girl became the popular choice as the one-who-lives after Siguorney Weaver blew the Alien out of her escape shuttle. Now we see female action leads in sci-fi/fantasy genre (Hunger Games, GOT). Comics are probably next. Marvel has the revenue stream to bet on Captain Marvel. Wonder Woman, who will be reintroduced in Batman v Superman will get her own vehicle (and, of course, she is an A-list comic book character). But if Captain Marvel and Wonder Woman aren't supported at the box office the way Thor, Captain America, etc have been, where the movies at least bank well enough to warrant a sequel, we'll see studios go right back to male-led comic book action cinema very quickly.

To some extent, you are right. But it is still sorta surprising it is taking as long as it is to get women as leads in action movies. Your example of Sigourney Weaver in Alien was -- wait for it -- 37 years ago!! One would think that her follow-up, Aliens, in 1986 (a huuuuge hit and the film that cemented James Cameron as one of the great directors) would have really advanced the female-led action flick world. But, it didn't. There are female-led films, but rarely with a really big budget and marketing dollars behind them. Don't forget that the first Hunger Games was an off-season, late-March release and was made on a budget of about $75 million, not exactly big money by Hollywood standards. The money pumped into that franchise since then was a result of it being a sequel, not because of some new belief in a woman leading an action film.

And I think a lot of the problem is a Hollywood belief about moviegoers desire to see strong women that is completely wrong.

The reflex reaction to this discussion is to say that there simply have not been a lot of successful action films with women at the front. And that reaction would be wrong. The Alien series and Hunger Games are well-known, but what about the Resident Evil films starring Mila Jovovich, one of the most successful sci-fi horror franchises around? The Divergent film series with Shailene Woodley up front is going pretty well. The Underworld films starring Kate Beckinsale have made a lot of money. Kill Bill 1 & 2 with Uma were big hits commercially and critically. I think that all the Charlie's Angels films made well over $100 mil each. Scarlet Johnannsen in Lucy led a sci-fi action flick and it was a big hit.

But, Hollywood execs and apologists say, "Look at Electra, look at Catwoman... they both failed miserably." Yup, that is true, but they were both horrible films with dreadful scripts/direction. There is a mountain of evidence that a female-led action film with a quality story/direction will do great at the boxoffice... same as a film with a male lead. any bias about what a woman can accomplish physically in a role is long gone. In the new Mission Impossible film, Rebecca Ferguson kicks butt over and over again. She is absolutely equal to the male spies she is fighting.

It is long past time for Hollywood to make a female superhero film... but the problem may not be Hollywood's fault. The comics themselves are pretty thin on popular female superheroes.

Arguably, the best known female comic book characters are part of a team like Storm, Rogue, and other X-Men (are they X-Women?) or Sue Richards the Invisible Woman of Fantastic Four. There have also been female superheroes as part of the Justice League or Avengers, but not many who stood on their own without a group of guys around them. Other than Wonder Woman, there are precious few female comics that have achieved more than relatively moderate success.

By the way, I think a lot of the problem stems from Sue Richards. If you read early Fantastic Four comics, she is clearly the weakest of the group, often in need of help more than helping everyone else out.


Some of those early comic book panels are horribly offensive when viewed today.



Fantastic Four was a huge, huge comic success. One of the biggest comics of the 60s - 80s. I have to wonder if the early depiction of Invisible Girl (she would not be known as Invisible Woman until much later) played some kind of role in establishing female comic book heroes as being less than their male counterparts.

-Jason "Well, I have prattled on enough... bottom line, that Women Woman movie is really, really overdue" Evans

P.S. - At some point in here I probably should have noted that the Wonder Woman TV show of the was super successful in the 1970s, but I cant think of where it fits so I stick it here, as an afterthought.