ANT-MAN AND THE WASP: QUANTUMANIA - 2/17/2023

[John from Cincinnati]

Where was this energy from critics for Love & Thunder last year? This feels overdue. 

[The Man Known as Dan]

7 hours ago, Casey said:

I love the vast difference in opinion on Rotten Tomatoes when it comes to audiences (84%) vs critics (48%). I don’t care what some dude who reviews movies for the New Yorker thinks about a comic book movie.

Amusingly, I’m the opposite. Audience scores mean absolutely nothing to me. Audience gave Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom a 77% and that movie was shit soup.

People are going to like things they want to like to begin with unless it’s a special kind of bad.

[Craig H]

7 hours ago, John from Cincinnati said:

Where was this energy from critics for Love & Thunder last year? This feels overdue. 

I rewatched Love and Thunder recently and...it's not that bad. It's below Ragnarok in terms of quality, but it's still pretty good. I think my biggest complaint is that it feels very rushed, but at the same time, that whole scene with Zeus feels like it drags forever.

Movie needed more of Gorr terrorizing children. Perfect amount of screaming goats and other humor from Korg and Thor.

EDIT: I also wonder if Love and Thunder was something of a tipping point as far as expectations go from critics for these movies. And the flat-ish ending to Wakanda Forever, which I thought was still excellent despite that movie just kind of stopping.

Edited February 17, 2023 by Craig H

[Doc Townsend]

16 minutes ago, The Man Known as Dan said:

Amusingly, I’m the opposite. Audience scores mean absolutely nothing to me. Audience gave Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom a 77% and that movie was shit soup.

People are going to like things they want to like to begin with unless it’s a special kind of bad.

Same.  I couldn’t’ care less what the audience scores are.  Don’t trust them at all.

The backlash against professional critics - and professionals in general -   is kinda funny given that an awful lot of people want to tell me how many stars they give a  book or movie or post formal reviews.  In general, we’ve become a society of skeptics who think we know better than people who study these things for a living.

I had a coworker self-diagnose her medical issue then tell me then she wasn’t going to a doctor because “what would a doctor be able to tell me about my health?  .”  I had no idea the M in MBA stood for medicine.  I need to recheck my diploma. I may be qualified to hang out a shingle and didn’t know it.

[Craig H]

I typically only shy away from movie and tv reviewers and game reviews from very large websites, which is basically just IGN at this point. When it comes to movies and tv, I'm brought in more by what I hear about it from friends or relatives or a few others I trust. Reviews tend to get spoilery and are also borderline pretentious.

To put it another way, does anyone think John From Cincinnati is going to give a fuck that (looks for a movie on Rotten Tomatoes...) Magic Mike's Last Dance is 49% rotten? If he watches it and says it rocks and he doesn't know what reviewers were looking for, then I'm more inclined to trust him than a Tomato score.

[odessasteps]

My roommates in college took great pleasure in ignoring my reviews in the newspaper. 

[Craig H]

7 minutes ago, odessasteps said:

My roommates in college took great pleasure in ignoring my reviews in the newspaper. 

To be fair, I don't know anyone who read the Daily Student let alone reviews in it.

EDIT: Oh my god, this just brought back a memory. I used to email Scott Keith to say that I wrote for the Daily Student and wanted to review his book and he'd send me a free copy. I did this for all of his books. I never wrote for the newspaper.

Edited February 17, 2023 by Craig H

[Contentious C]

That's kinda funny, but, uh, you were still using that to ask for *Scott Keith books*.

[Craig H]

12 minutes ago, Contentious C said:

That's kinda funny, but, uh, you were still using that to ask for *Scott Keith books*.

2000 was a different time.

[Log]

I think critics are very useful if you know that particular critic's quirks.

Like, I know to take Meltzer's New Japan ratings with a grain of salt. I'll listen to what Steven Hyden writes about a heartland rock band, because I know that's his wheelhouse.

If I know a movie critic has hated every Marvel movie and thinks they're bad for cinema, I may take him/her hating Ant Man lightly. However, if a critic that has generally been into Marvel pans it, then it may mean a little more to me.

 

[odessasteps]

44 minutes ago, Craig H said:

To be fair, I don't know anyone who read the Daily Student let alone reviews in it.

EDIT: Oh my god, this just brought back a memory. I used to email Scott Keith to say that I wrote for the Daily Student and wanted to review his book and he'd send me a free copy. I did this for all of his books. I never wrote for the newspaper.

To be fair, when I was there, it was a paid circulation newspaper and we got paid, so it wasn't just the generic college newspaper. Not that we were probably any better writers at other Big 10 papers. I think Minnesota had a paid paper. I'd presume Northwestern did, given the snooty attitudes people at MgGill would give us. 

[Kuetsar]

1 hour ago, Craig H said:

I rewatched Love and Thunder recently and...it's not that bad. It's below Ragnarok in terms of quality, but it's still pretty good. I think my biggest complaint is that it feels very rushed, but at the same time, that whole scene with Zeus feels like it drags forever.

Movie needed more of Gorr terrorizing children. Perfect amount of screaming goats and other humor from Korg and Thor.

EDIT: I also wonder if Love and Thunder was something of a tipping point as far as expectations go from critics for these movies. And the flat-ish ending to Wakanda Forever, which I thought was still excellent despite that movie just kind of stopping.

For me, L& T is the worst thor, and its not even close. But I'm also someone who unironically likes Dark World, so. . . . 

[odessasteps]

Have they ever said what the script would have been like for BP2 with Bozeman? Same plot beats and ending with the fight in the sand with Namor? 

[Zimbra]

3 minutes ago, odessasteps said:

Have they ever said what the script would have been like for BP2 with Bozeman? Same plot beats and ending with the fight in the sand with Namor? 

Coogler talked about it a little:

Quote

 

Coogler: It was, “What are we going to do about the Blip?” [In Marvel’s “Avengers: Infinity War,” T’Challa is one of billions of people who suddenly vanish, only to be brought back by the Avengers five years later.] That was the challenge. It was absolutely nothing like what we made. It was going to be a father-son story from the perspective of a father, because the first movie had been a father-son story from the perspective of the sons.

In the script, T’Challa was a dad who’d had this forced five-year absence from his son’s life. The first scene was an animated sequence. You hear Nakia [T’Challa’s love interest, played by Lupita Nyong’o] talking to Toussaint [the couple’s child, introduced in “Wakanda Forever” in a post-credits sequence]. She says, “Tell me what you know about your father.” You realize that he doesn’t know his dad was the Black Panther. He’s never met him, and Nakia is remarried to a Haitian dude. Then, we cut to reality and it’s the night that everybody comes back from the Blip. You see T’Challa meet the kid for the first time.

Then it cuts ahead three years and he’s essentially co-parenting. We had some crazy scenes in there for Chad, man. Our code name for the movie was “Summer Break,” and the movie was about a summer that the kid spends with his dad. For his eighth birthday, they do a ritual where they go out into the bush and have to live off the land. But something happens and T’Challa has to go save the world with his son on his hip. That was the movie.

 

 

[John from Cincinnati]

2 hours ago, Craig H said:

To put it another way, does anyone think John From Cincinnati is going to give a fuck that (looks for a movie on Rotten Tomatoes...) Magic Mike's Last Dance is 49% rotten? If he watches it and says it rocks and he doesn't know what reviewers were looking for, then I'm more inclined to trust him than a Tomato score.

Critics I trust on Magic Mike matters have been talking about it positively, so divided critical consensus only makes it more exciting!

It depends on the property and the way different voices are engaging with things. For the most part, I buy into every major criticism I've seen about this movie in terms of recent MCU stuff. It's up to everyone to use their own discernment about when to listen and when to not. Definitely count me among those more willing to listen to some critics than care what the audience score is. And even among friend and family recommendations, I know whose opinions I find more worthwhile than others. Take in what you want, know what information you'll likely find decision useful, go from there.

[Craig H]

4 hours ago, Kuetsar said:

For me, L& T is the worst thor, and its not even close. But I'm also someone who unironically likes Dark World, so. . . . 

Eh, Dark World isn't that bad either. It's like the Mendoza line for MCU movies.

[J.T.]

Somewhere between the gushingly high fanboy audience scores that wouldn't be objective if lives were on the line, and the critics who don't want to be left behind when others are bashing the film du jour, is the ground truth. 

Most of the reviews seem to come down on this movie for not following the formula of the previous Ant-Man films and I kinda hate that logic.   Thor: Ragnarok is celebrated because Taika went back to the drawing board and came up with something dramatically different after Thor: The Dark World failed to impress.

So what if Ant-Man did something off program and it went awry?  At least they tried.   We wouldn't have the current greatness in the John Wick films if someone hadn't had the brilliant idea to expand the horizon of the franchise and do some world building.

I tend to ignore the critics that don't share my eccentricities so if the ghost of Roger Ebert and Joe Bob Briggs say this thing is okay, then I'll probably enjoy it.  I am sure my kid and I will be perfectly fine when we leave the movies tomorrow afternoon.

Edited February 21, 2023 by J.T.

[Craig H]

Here's something else worth mentioning since I've seen it more than once mentioned that the CGI isn't up to snuff, but...WTF has happened with CGI in MCU movies? It used to be top notch and some of the best around, with some exceptions like the Black Panther train fight. The CGI in Eternals was not good and the post credits had maybe some of the worst CGI I've seen. The end of Shang-Chi was just weird looking. Then you have She-Hulk. I wonder if they have so many irons in the fire that their graphics department is just being spread too thin.

[keith_h]

1 hour ago, Craig H said:

Here's something else worth mentioning since I've seen it more than once mentioned that the CGI isn't up to snuff, but...WTF has happened with CGI in MCU movies? It used to be top notch and some of the best around, with some exceptions like the Black Panther train fight. The CGI in Eternals was not good and the post credits had maybe some of the worst CGI I've seen. The end of Shang-Chi was just weird looking. Then you have She-Hulk. I wonder if they have so many irons in the fire that their graphics department is just being spread too thin.

Crazy fast deadlines, underpaid and overworked CGI artists seems to be the story. If anything something like Avatar 2 proved if you have the time and the money you can still get amazing CGI. Marvel just doesn’t care at this point. Or doesn’t care enough when their bottom line won’t really be impacted by spending another $20 million on CGI or taking another 6 months to ensure everything is top notch.

[John from Cincinnati]

This seems to not be a small part of the reception this installment's getting. If the bulk of the movie takes place in an entirely CGI world, it shouldn't look shaky or seem rushed. 

Probably not a bad thing they're kicking The Marvels back four months. 

[JLowe]

Just got back from seeing it. I enjoyed it a lot, and I think it’s a good launch point for Phase 5. I thought the CGI was fine to excellent, I only remember one short scene where it looked very obvious green-screen. Some scenes had a very Star Wars feel and for just a hot second I thought they might slip in an Easter Egg teasing that the galaxy far, far away is part of the Quantumverse.

[Contentious C]

I suppose this is as good at time as any to head back to a theater and get a gauge on whether or not I'm actually feeling better, so I just picked up a ticket for Monday; if I can make it through a 2-hour movie without any awfulness, I'm probably on the way to recovery.  Last few days and weeks have been substantially improved. 

[J.T.]

Critics are morons.   This movie was perfectly fine.   Certainly not in the top tier of MCU films, but not as quantifiably blah as Morbius or the Venom movies either.  Quantummania is basically a Bill Mantlo / Micronauts story with Kang playing the role of Baron Karza.

If it is guilty of anything, it is for being a bit too comic book geeky for an unsullied audience that only watches the movies and has never cracked open a comic book.  If you are not familiar with Kang as a character, the significance of the mid and end credit scenes will mean absolutely nothing to you.

Jonathan Majors was amazing.  His ability to go from dignified villain smugness to "I have had enough of this bullshit from you rabble" violent at the drop of a hat is king sized.  He is perfect for the role of Kang.  Brilliant, charismatic, and unashamedly ruthless.   Not too lofty in his evil to kick a puppy himself just to prove a point.

I thought the deus ex machina ending was a bit contrived and silly, but it was nice to see the studio push back against the "controlling ants is a dumb superpower" people.

The family content was also acceptable and didn't feel all that forced.   Hope being all LALALALALALA NOT LISTENING while Hank and Janet put their sexual histories on blast was hilarious.  Who hasn't that ever happened too and who didn't feel extremely awkward at that moment, especially if you're an adult hearing those parental revelations?  EWWWW!

I did not particularly care for the retcon of MODOK and his demotion to henchman, but

Spoiler

If Janet and Scott could both survive going sub atomic, then I guess Darren Cross could too.   How decent of Kang to adapt and improve the Yellowjacket suit's weapon systems for use in MODOK's floating chair.  I did enjoy Scott going all US Army and properly inserting the For in MODOK's acronym name.  Yes, it should be MODOFK.

 

Edited February 21, 2023 by J.T.

[Casey]

This is my least favorite Ant-Man movie, but by no means is it worse than stuff like the Dark World. I don't mind that it focused on the Ant Family instead of the loveable side characters we've seen in the last two movies. The way this movie gets going almost immediately, someone like Luis or Maggie & Jim would only have a cameo in the very beginning like Woo. TI was never coming back, so his character is basically MIA unless they re-cast it (which I doubt).

Hank Pym talking about socialism in a Marvel movie wasn't on my bingo card, though. Still don't understand the re-casting of Cassie, nothing in this movie suggested it wasn't anything that Emma Fuhrmann couldn't do. Is Kathryn Newton a big upcoming star that I don't know about or something?

Spoiler

I didn't see the mid or post credits scene because.... uhhhh, reasons... but my question is this: who is the actual Kang that's the overarching villain? I thought it was this version - the Conqueror - but he's "dead" so maybe not. Scott isn't convinced of that, so maybe he comes back. From what I've read, different versions of Kang like Immortus and Rama-Tut are in one of the stingers. And I believe at least Victor Timely and Rama-Tut are in Loki S2, so...

It's going to be Immortus, isn't it? There's the pre-existing connection to the Fantastic Four and I'm still not convinced an incursion between 616 and another universe won't bring at least the F4 to our timeline.

 

[Matt D]

I liked it a lot more than I was expecting to (which probably isn't a big surprise to a lot of you). And not just Kang. More comments later.