Marvel's Ant-Man

[huttj509]

Just got back from it. Had a huge grin the entire time. Fun heist/superhero movie.

Since it came out *today* (in the US, dunno when overseas releases are), I'll remind people to remember the nice easy spoiler tags when commenting on details, let people opt in, instead of trying to opt out of reveals and information. I mean, there's a couple bits I was stunned weren't in the trailers I saw, as it seemed like easy hype-bait (cameo type stuff).


First, with the opening it took me a bit to recognize the people there...until Hayley Atwell opened her mouth. I'm embarrassed I didn't notice they were in a SHIELD office until after then.

Loved Falcon.

Guess who's back, back again. Hydra's back, making friends.

And it's about time, indeed.


As to the meat of the movie, felt like a solid heist/action flick. Loved the ants. And *that's* why you give them numbers, not names.

[Kittenwolf]

I saw it last night, and quite enjoyed it :)
It was definitely much better paced than Age of Ultron, it kept moving at a good pace (though I'll admit a couple of things did feel slightly rushed, but I think they were intended to due to who was speaking).

Marvel does seem to be doing quite well with the 'Make a superhero movie in a non-superhero genre' path, it makes a nice change of pace.

A few things that need spoilering (speaking of, probably a good idea to put spoiler tag in the title)...

Very annoyed that Wasp was written out in backstory, but oh well :(

Thoroughly enjoyed the Falcon cameo too, makes me quite look forward to the next movie that he's in.
On the topic of Falcon, his long-winded chinese whispers message to Scott at the end is "Yes", what was that in reference to? Did I miss a question from Scott during their meeting?

[huttj509]

I saw it last night, and quite enjoyed it :)
It was definitely much better paced than Age of Ultron, it kept moving at a good pace (though I'll admit a couple of things did feel slightly rushed, but I think they were intended to due to who was speaking).

Marvel does seem to be doing quite well with the 'Make a superhero movie in a non-superhero genre' path, it makes a nice change of pace.

A few things that need spoilering (speaking of, probably a good idea to put spoiler tag in the title)...

Very annoyed that Wasp was written out in backstory, but oh well :(

Thoroughly enjoyed the Falcon cameo too, makes me quite look forward to the next movie that he's in.
On the topic of Falcon, his long-winded chinese whispers message to Scott at the end is "Yes", what was that in reference to? Did I miss a question from Scott during their meeting?


I'm not sure on general spoiler policy for the forum. I avoided putting it in the title as I've seen people interpreting that as "no reason to use spoiler tags" (even when it can help formatting). I'll sleep on it.

Ok, as near as I can figure, Falcon was asking around about a guy who can shrink, with the implication that they might be interested in having those skills on the team, buddy asked his friend if friend could send word back up the chain that buddy might know a guy.

[friend] said he would.

I definitely had a "woo, wait, was Falcon looking to track the guy who robbed them? Yes isn't a good answer for that! But he's smiling, hang on." So yer not alone.

[t209]

So, being curious,
Does the movie include, or at least referenced, Hank Pym's hitting his wife and possibly regretting that decision?
So what's next? I know many of you would dislike him but...Eric O' Grady, anyone (well, he's pretty much Marvel equivalent of Harry P. Flashman)?

[Dragonus45]

So, being curious,
Does the movie include, or at least referenced, Hank Pym's hitting his wife and possibly regretting that decision?
So what's next? I know many of you would dislike him but...Eric O' Grady, anyone (well, he's pretty much Marvel equivalent of Harry P. Flashman)?


From what I understand the plan was to leave that entire box of rapid snakes buried deep in the ground where it belongs. I hope its true, the Domestic Abuse issue was always an overblown one that eats up way to much of peoples perceptions of the character.

[Helanna]

I just got back from seeing it, and I quite enjoyed it! It was lighthearted and fun, everyone in my theater was laughing throughout the movie, and it kind of makes for a nice break from the heaviness in the rest of the MCU right now. The shrinking made for interesting fight scenes and I really liked the character of Scott Lang, I'm looking forward to seeing him in ensemble casts in the future.


Probably my favorite line was "Okay, so I definitely think our first order of business should be calling the Avengers". Something about the way he delivered it, I dunno. (Runner-up would be "It is very, very important to me that Cap never finds out about this." I did love the Falcon cameo.) The training montage was good, as was the final fight scene.

[Kittenwolf]

From what I understand the plan was to leave that entire box of rapid snakes buried deep in the ground where it belongs. I hope its true, the Domestic Abuse issue was always an overblown one that eats up way to much of peoples perceptions of the character.

Did you honestly just say that negative reactions to domestic abuse are "Overblown" ?

[Kittenwolf]

Probably my favorite line was "Okay, so I definitely think our first order of business should be calling the Avengers". Something about the way he delivered it, I dunno. (Runner-up would be "It is very, very important to me that Cap never finds out about this." I did love the Falcon cameo.) The training montage was good, as was the final fight scene.



Definitely have to agree on the "Call the Avengers" line :D
He said it.. kinda like he was stating the most utterly, utterly obvious thing in the world to someone who had somehow missed it.
Which, lets face it, in-universe it kinda is.

[Dragonus45]

Did you honestly just say that negative reactions to domestic abuse are "Overblown" ?

No I said the incident itself is overblown.

[huttj509]

So, being curious,
Does the movie include, or at least referenced, Hank Pym's hitting his wife and possibly regretting that decision?


He has a temper. Hank Pym lashes out violently twice in the movie (relatable circumstances, but the lack of escalation along the way can lead to conclusions).

As to that incident itself:

In that story (issue 213, I think), there is a scene in which Hank is supposed to have accidentally struck Jan while throwing his hands up in despair and frustration—making a sort of “get away from me” gesture while not looking at her. Bob Hall, who had been taught by John Buscema to always go for the most extreme action, turned that into a right cross! There was no time to have it redrawn, which, to this day has caused the tragic story of Hank Pym to be known as the “wife-beater” story.

[Kittenwolf]

No I said the incident itself is overblown.


In that story (issue 213, I think), there is a scene in which Hank is supposed to have accidentally struck Jan while throwing his hands up in despair and frustration—making a sort of “get away from me” gesture while not looking at her. Bob Hall, who had been taught by John Buscema to always go for the most extreme action, turned that into a right cross! There was no time to have it redrawn, which, to this day has caused the tragic story of Hank Pym to be known as the “wife-beater” story.

This does depend on the version that you're referring to.
Ultimates Hank Pym was an out and out abusive wife beater. From memory his introduction panel had him beat Wasp until she fled to small size and hid under a cabinet, at which point he sprayed her with bug poison and sicced his ants on her.

I hadn't heard the reasoning behind the 616 wife beating incident though. The dangers of artist/writer disconnect I guess.

[Dragonus45]

This does depend on the version that you're referring to.
Ultimates Hank Pym was an out and out abusive wife beater. From memory his introduction panel had him beat Wasp until she fled to small size and hid under a cabinet, at which point he sprayed her with bug poison and sicced his ants on her.

I hadn't heard the reasoning behind the 616 wife beating incident though. The dangers of artist/writer disconnect I guess.

Well Ultimate Hank Pym has the same problem most of the Ultimates had, he was an ******* who only had a 10th of the depth that 616 version has. Although even by Ultimate standards he was pretty bad, but he was sort of what I meant when I said that the incident had taken over to much of peoples perceptions of Pym.

As for the 616 Pym thing even the writer artist disconnect would have been just a small incident, hank hits her once in the middle of a schizophrenic breakdown does not a wife beater make. Some other writers totally unrelated to the arc itself took off with the idea and had some characters make comments about it being a regular problem and the rest is history. Which is a shame because Pym is probably the best depiction of real mental disease and its effects on a person in superhero comics.

[Spamotron]

Yeah, Hank hit Jan all of once during a severe psychotic episode and was extremely guilty and repentant once he got his head back together. Similar incidents have happened with Peter Parker and Reed Richards to Mary Jane and Sue respectively. Peter's and Reed's instances have been utterly forgotten but Hank gets called a wife-beater. Probably because he didn't have very many memorable solo stories of his own for years before and after it.

Several good writers have then had Hank get proper therapy reconcile with Jan and move on with his life only for new writers to bring up the incident again like it happened yesterday. Perils of being a character in a shared universe where time is constantly being reset and character development undone.

[Kittenwolf]

Probably also largely caused by the bleed between various universe versions.

General pop culture osmosis doesn't really separate between 616, Utlimates, 610, 2099 and whatever else.
Hell, does anyone even remember what the 616 Nick Fury looks like?

[huttj509]

Probably also largely caused by the bleed between various universe versions.

General pop culture osmosis doesn't really separate between 616, Utlimates, 610, 2099 and whatever else.
Hell, does anyone even remember what the 616 Nick Fury looks like?

David Hasselhoff?

[Kitten Champion]

David Hasselhoff?

George Clooney!

[Ramza00]

Probably also largely caused by the bleed between various universe versions.

General pop culture osmosis doesn't really separate between 616, Utlimates, 610, 2099 and whatever else.
Hell, does anyone even remember what the 616 Nick Fury looks like?

A younger version of Paulie Walnuts from the sopranos with an eye patch.

[Razade]

The movie was awesome. Maybe my favorite after Guardians. The humor was on point, the after credit scenes were wonderful and the actors were seriously doing their best. Rudd oozed scrappy charisma and the supporting cast brought the humor.

[Hopeless]

David Hasselhoff?

I actually understand that reference!:smallsmile:

[t209]

He has a temper. Hank Pym lashes out violently twice in the movie (relatable circumstances, but the lack of escalation along the way can lead to conclusions).

As to that incident itself:

In that story (issue 213, I think), there is a scene in which Hank is supposed to have accidentally struck Jan while throwing his hands up in despair and frustration—making a sort of “get away from me” gesture while not looking at her. Bob Hall, who had been taught by John Buscema to always go for the most extreme action, turned that into a right cross! There was no time to have it redrawn, which, to this day has caused the tragic story of Hank Pym to be known as the “wife-beater” story.
So I was hoping that the film might continue the "Hank the Wife beater" clinche by referencing it and audience forgetting the context behind it.
edit: Not that I am one of those "Hank the wife-beater" believer and didn't know the context behind it, I feel that the movie might include Hank and Janet's argument (that may resulted in Hank beating her in temper and scarred him for life) before the latter's death in origin story and possibly regretting that moment...I don't know but that might feel a bit controversial and make that worse.

[Razade]

So I was hoping that the film might continue the "Hank the Wife beater" clinche by referencing it and audience forgetting the context behind it.
edit: Not that I am one of those "Hank the wife-beater" believer and didn't know the context behind it, I feel that the movie might include Hank and Janet's argument (that may resulted in Hank beating her in temper and scarred him for life) before the latter's death in origin story and possibly regretting that moment...I don't know but that might feel a bit controversial and make that worse.

Why are you so hung up on this if you didn't know the context behind the meme and why would you want a fun summer super hero movie to include a scene that the general comic book audiance universally reacted violently against? What purpose would it serve in the narrative of an action movie focused mostly to teenagers? Did you honestly think they were going to include it because you don't sound like you were expecting them to. Hank Pym wasn't the main character for the film and his relationship with is wife is only a point of growth for his daughter Hope. The MCU also has nothing to do with the comic book universe.

[t209]

Why are you so hung up on this if you didn't know the context behind the meme and why would you want a fun summer super hero movie to include a scene that the general comic book audiance universally reacted violently against? What purpose would it serve in the narrative of an action movie focused mostly to teenagers? Did you honestly think they were going to include it because you don't sound like you were expecting them to. Hank Pym wasn't the main character for the film and his relationship with is wife is only a point of growth for his daughter Hope. The MCU also has nothing to do with the comic book universe.
Well, when I said "Hank the Wifebeater", I thought the poster might assume that I was thinking that Antman beat his wife as a spousal abuse instead of one time and horrible event.
Second, I was asking if the movie adapted the scene with some twists to explain the context meme and possibly redeeming Hank in public eye but possibly failing at it.

[Dienekes]

Yeah, Hank hit Jan all of once during a severe psychotic episode and was extremely guilty and repentant once he got his head back together. Similar incidents have happened with Peter Parker and Reed Richards to Mary Jane and Sue respectively. Peter's and Reed's instances have been utterly forgotten but Hank gets called a wife-beater. Probably because he didn't have very many memorable solo stories of his own for years before and after it.

Several good writers have then had Hank get proper therapy reconcile with Jan and move on with his life only for new writers to bring up the incident again like it happened yesterday. Perils of being a character in a shared universe where time is constantly being reset and character development undone.

The problem with comic writers, especially with lower tiered characters like Ant Man, is that they tend not to collaborate well.

For instance, the writers have switched their stances on Pym's wife beating at least twice in my memory. Once, when they try to reconcile and Jan reveals that Pym had assaulted her on more than one occasion, and after Secret Invasion where it is very much presented as a one time offense that Pym admits to.

The whole scene I thought was confusing when I read it, though. Largely because Jan could have kicked his ass with one hand if she wanted to. Not that that makes hitting her ok, in any way. But that scene should have ended with either Pym on the ground or Jan running off in emotional duress, not beaten in one punch as it was presented.

[Chen]

Second, I was asking if the movie adapted the scene with some twists to explain the context meme and possibly redeeming Hank in public eye but possibly failing at it.

For people just seeing the movie, I highly doubt many will even remember Hank's name in the long term.

[Logic]

Hell, does anyone even remember what the 616 Nick Fury looks like?

If I recall correctly, he was originally modeled after Sean Connery in the Bond films, but with grey hair at the temples.

[Dragonus45]

The problem with comic writers, especially with lower tiered characters like Ant Man, is that they tend not to collaborate well.

For instance, the writers have switched their stances on Pym's wife beating at least twice in my memory. Once, when they try to reconcile and Jan reveals that Pym had assaulted her on more than one occasion, and after Secret Invasion where it is very much presented as a one time offense that Pym admits to.

The whole scene I thought was confusing when I read it, though. Largely because Jan could have kicked his ass with one hand if she wanted to. Not that that makes hitting her ok, in any way. But that scene should have ended with either Pym on the ground or Jan running off in emotional duress, not beaten in one punch as it was presented.

Well after secret invasion I think they went with the explanation that he hit her the one time when she tried to stop him from doing something stupid. But Skrull Pym was the one who did the actual Domestic Violence. I only vaguely remember it though. Which makes no sense from a timeline perspective but it's better than nothing.

[Helanna]

Definitely have to agree on the "Call the Avengers" line :D
He said it.. kinda like he was stating the most utterly, utterly obvious thing in the world to someone who had somehow missed it.
Which, lets face it, in-universe it kinda is.


It's always fun watching them come up with in-universe reasons that the Avengers can't just handle everything. :smalltongue: Actually that was another good line, "Nah, they're probably busy dropping countries out of the air" or something to that effect.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

I will agree with what has been said about the film, and will add that I think this is the most I have laughed with a Marvel film. Every heist film needs a heist team full of fun personalities, and this film delivered in spades. I kept thinking I would get sick of the friend, and yet I never did.

Time well spent - and yet the movie theatre was practically empty.

Grey Wolf

[t209]

www.cracked.com/blog/4-superhero-movies-that-can-save-genre/
Combination of this about Phantom (a "ghost" hero who's actually a title passed down from father to son) and seeing Hank Pym as 60's Antman.
I think Marvel can make both Peter Parker and Miles Morales by making the former as old Spiderman (maybe retired after having a daughter or wounded) and latter as the successor (maybe like Batman Beyond's Terry and Bruce Wayne).
Maybe resolved the lack of knowledge of him in the past as "forgotten" heroes and a meta-message on post-OMD (erased MJ and PP's marriage) treatment of him.

[Dienekes]

So, just got back from it. Now to force my opinions on people.

It was pretty good. I thought Cap2 was more interesting, and Guardians was funnier. But on the whole I thought it was good.

Things I liked:
Lang's ex-wife's new boyfriend, who I will refer to as Gyp, because I don't know the name of the actual character and the actor played the hell out of the role of Gyp Rosetti on Boardwalk Empire. Anyway, a lot of these post-divorce movies make the new guy either annoyingly perfect, or an ******* for no reason. Gyp was neither, a flawed human who was a stickler for the rules. Kind of a **** to the criminal deadbeat dad, for pretty obvious reasons, but when the chips are down he'll risk life and limb for his not daughter. The worst thing I can say about him is that he's kind of a bad cop, as everyone in this movie seems to get away from him.

The Jar-Jars. The Jar-Jar is a side character who is portrayed as in some way stupid or incompetent for the sake of incredibly forced humor. They mostly service no purpose to the plot other than some exposition, and if they do help it generally seems contrived. The guys in this movie weren't that bad. Sure the talkative one was pretty annoying, at times, but he was actually very helpful. Hell, I think he has a higher body count by the end of the movie than Scott did (if you count the people in the helicopter as Yellowjacket's kills and not Scott's anyway).

Scott Lang himself was pretty fun, and quirky enough without getting into stupid territory. Also, I agree that the "Call the Avengers" line was great and I thought Pym's reasons for not wanting to do that were legitimate ones. I really wouldn't trust Iron Man either, if I could only read the newspapers about the guy.

Pym, was also pretty well done. I do enjoy that they seem to have references to him not being completely of sound mind and a reason behind it. Going with how the suit can affect your brain in vague ways. Of course they never develop how he was effected, but his anger that comes up a few times can be seen as a clue.

What I didn't like:

Really only one major thing, the villain. He was pretty weak, as far as villains go. And a lot of what he does didn't make sense. Why would he ever need to call HYDRA? Ever? Just advertise to some wealthy corporations or governments. Can you imagine what the US would pay for what is essentially the perfect spy and a nigh undetectable soldier?

And a lot of his actions don't really hold up when just looked at through simple logic. Such as, the lamb thing. Now, I have no problem with dead lambs. I enjoy eating lambs, they taste good. Sure, I can see why it would be morally problematic to use young lambs for experimentation, but I have to ask, why? Look, you just need living tissue to experiment on right? A single lamb costs around $200 and that's without the cost to maintain it. A rat costs about $25, less if you buy them in bulk, again without maintaining costs. Why are you wasting so much of your companies money for no reason? That scene just bothered me. I've never liked stupid villains. As far as evil corporation villains go, this guy ranks closer to Hammer than Obadiah Stane.

And the minor thing. I'm pretty sure the gun was pointed at Pym's head when it's fired and he goes down like he's been fatally shot. Then we see him in an arm brace.

Edit: I guess another minor irksome thing. Janet's death. Well, her problem. They've successfully found a way to write her out of one movie and leave the door open for a later appearance. Anyway, her death in terms of the cover up. Really, Pym? You think it's better to tell your daughter that her mom died in a plane crash than say "Your mom died a hero, I'll tell you about it when your older." At least one of those things your kid can look to in pride. The other will just lead to a fear of planes. I guess you can say he was trying to not follow in their footsteps of becoming a hero, but I've never liked that cliche.

So, overall, I'd recommend it. It's not the most intelligent super hero movie out there, but it was never trying to be.

[Lizard Lord]

This does depend on the version that you're referring to.
Ultimates Hank Pym was an out and out abusive wife beater. From memory his introduction panel had him beat Wasp until she fled to small size and hid under a cabinet, at which point he sprayed her with bug poison and sicced his ants on her.

I hadn't heard the reasoning behind the 616 wife beating incident though. The dangers of artist/writer disconnect I guess.

Yet one more reason that, near as I can tell, Mile Morles is the only good thing to come out of the Ultimate Universe.

Edit: Actually now that I think of it, the Marvel Zombies were also first introduced as an Ultimate Universe story. So the MUU has two points going for it, but I pretty sure that's it. :smalltongue:

[Dienekes]

Yet one more reason that, near as I can tell, Mile Morles is the only good thing to come out of the Ultimate Universe.

The first Ultimates is actually a pretty decent story of a bunch of grim takes on their 616 counterparts. The problem is, they never get past that, and all the later stories pretty much sucked.

[Lizard Lord]

Hank Pym's backstory is the final line of clues that finally made realize that the MCU has had superheroes (as in plural and not just Cap) for a long time. It is just that recently Iron Man, and later the Avengers as a whole, that had publicized super heroes to the world, making them no longer a secret.


Which I would be surprised if Civil War didn't touch on that.

[Kitten Champion]

The first Ultimates is actually a pretty decent story of a bunch of grim takes on their 616 counterparts. The problem is, they never get past that, and all the later stories pretty much sucked.

Spider-Man was good for a couple of years... 'til about the midway-point. Then it started going out of its way to make Peter Parker miserable beyond all reason while doing crossovers with the rest of the universe which bogged the whole thing down considerably. Then they brought Miles in and he worked because he had much the same strength that Bendis brought into the project in the first place.

Millar and Marvel making the Avengers into a hack version of The Authority was never going to work out well in the long term - and most of the universe was less creative and more XTREME!!

.. but on the plus side, the Ultimate Universe did display - at least at first - that Marvel could make comics again that weren't blah wrapped in blah with a weak blah sauce. Which is what late 90's early 2000's Marvel desperately, desperately needed.

[SaintRidley]

I would like Ant-Man 2 to be narrated entirely by Luis. That is all.

[t209]

http://www.comicvine.com/forums/gen-discussion-1/report-the-writers-behind-vacation-in-talks-to-wri-1692948/
*Sigh*
Guess Marvel is going to ruin Spiderman since the premise sounds bad along with the writers. Don't start with James Gunn, I know the movie is great but kinda peeve that they made Ronan into Ultimate's servant of Thanos instead of "blue Judge Dredd with a hammer".
Guess it will be the white teenager one and possibly a horrible iteration.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Guess Marvel is going to ruin Spiderman since the premise sounds bad along with the writers.

That implies that Spriderman hasn't already been ruined, and I'd disagree with that. Sony, in its desperation to retain IP control, has been dragging the character through the mud. Given that MCU continues to make films that entertain me regardless of how silly the premise, I am at this point willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.

GW

[The Glyphstone]

Loved it.


What was going on with Sam, Steve, and Bucky there? Was he handcuffed to an engine block or something?

[Dusk Eclipse]

I got the impression his mechanical arm got stuck in that machine for some reason

Oh yeah people, in case are not aware, there are two post credits scenes so make sure you stay in the long run

[Dienekes]

Wait, stingers? Multiple?

Damn it. I only stayed for 1.

[Pex]

Did you honestly just say that negative reactions to domestic abuse are "Overblown" ?

Oh come on! You know perfectly well he meant that it was best not to inject the subject into the movie franchise at all as an unnecessary distraction. It caused a broo-ha-ha in the comics that's not needed nor desired for the movies. Don't turn this into a mountain out of an "ant"hill.

[Dusk Eclipse]

Wait, stingers? Multiple?

Damn it. I only stayed for 1.

Yup, two, the second one is

A tie in into Civil War, we see the Cap and Falcon talking over a bound Bucky, they discuss something about Tony and some group whose name I can't remember offhand not agreeing.




Oh come on! You know perfectly well he meant that it was best not to inject the subject into the movie franchise at all as an unnecessary distraction. It caused a broo-ha-ha in the comics that's not needed nor desired for the movies. Don't turn this into a mountain out of an "ant"hill.

You are a terrible person and you should feel bad about it. :smalltongue:

[Rakaydos]

They mention how "this would have been easier to deal with a week ago", some kind of treaty called the Accords, and the guy who told Antman there might be an opening for him in the Avengers told Captian that "he might know a guy who can help."

I didnt notice bucky being stuck in a machine or anyhing, but he did look worse for wear.

[LaZodiac]

Loved it.


What was going on with Sam, Steve, and Bucky there? Was he handcuffed to an engine block or something?



My guess on this is that something's wrong with his arm, which is ****ing up his body, and they don't want Stark's help in part because the law kinda says he can't (what the Accords might be) and because...kinda on uneven footing with Stark after Ultron, even if you trust him. So Falcon's gonna man up and ask for help from the tiny man that kicked his ass.

So, I just got back from this movie. REALLY good in my opinion.

Surprised you're all talking about how Wasp got written out of the movie. She's in the movie. Hope Pym is The Wasp. Yes her Mother was also the Wasp and DID die, but WE ARE GETTING A WASP. That's PRETTY damn cool. She's going to be Ant-man's War Machine only much, much more threatening.

Anyway, something I really liked. The cop fiance of Scot's ex wife didn't die and turned out to not be an *******. In these movies the guy always gets back with his ex after the villain kills the new guy...and this time they didn't do that and it's really quite nice.

[SaintRidley]

[SPOILER]Surprised you're all talking about how Wasp got written out of the movie. She's in the movie. Hope Pym is The Wasp. Yes her Mother was also the Wasp and DID die, but WE ARE GETTING A WASP. That's PRETTY damn cool. She's going to be Ant-man's War Machine only much, much more threatening.

Anyway, something I really liked. The cop fiance of Scot's ex wife didn't die and turned out to not be an *******. In these movies the guy always gets back with his ex after the villain kills the new guy...and this time they didn't do that and it's really quite nice.
We got the promise of the Wasp, and about twenty seconds of Janet as Wasp in a flashback. Let's not oversell what we got on the Wasp front.

I don't think Janet's dead, though. She's quantum. And I could be wrong, but I think Scott lost one of his growy disc things in there. So it's possible she might get herself out, especially if some people I've seen are right in claiming they saw a figure that might be Janet during the Quantum scene.

[LaZodiac]

We got the promise of the Wasp, and about twenty seconds of Janet as Wasp in a flashback. Let's not oversell what we got on the Wasp front.

I don't think Janet's dead, though. She's quantum. And I could be wrong, but I think Scott lost one of his growy disc things in there. So it's possible she might get herself out, especially if some people I've seen are right in claiming they saw a figure that might be Janet during the Quantum scene.

Yeah I'm exagerating I'm just glad we got her at all.

For some reason all the imagery and the talking about it made me think we might get a Dr Strange cameo. QUANTUM REALM and stuff sounds rather...ahem, Strange.

[Dusk Eclipse]

That "Quantum Realm" might actually be the microverse, an actual universe in Marvel's comic universe, and as far as I remember it doesn't have to do directly with the good Doctor, though I suppose he should be able to get there, in all honestly my knowledge about him is quite lacking.

[Cheesegear]

So, the particles only bring atoms closer together. They don't change weight though (200 Pounds [~91kgs], according to Hope), and that's how he's able to maintain the force of his punches (a key component of Force is Mass). We see him fall down and crack ceramic tiles, he's able to fall through floors, and, as we see, he's able to flip dudes around.

His weight doesn't change...Yet Scott is able to run along a gun barrel, stand reasonably well on a child's train set without breaking it, and, obviously get carried around by ants...Even though his weight hasn't changed... Except we see that his weight can crack tiles!

I don't have a problem with science that may as well be magic, but, I do have a problem with inconsistency. Either he's heavy or he's not.

[Rakaydos]

So, the particles only bring atoms closer together. They don't change weight though (200 Pounds [~91kgs], according to Hope), and that's how he's able to maintain the force of his punches (a key component of Force is Mass). We see him fall down and crack ceramic tiles, he's able to fall through floors, and, as we see, he's able to flip dudes around.

His weight doesn't change...Yet Scott is able to run along a gun barrel, stand reasonably well on a child's train set without breaking it, and, obviously get carried around by ants...Even though his weight hasn't changed... Except we see that his weight can crack tiles!

I don't have a problem with science that may as well be magic, but, I do have a problem with inconsistency. Either he's heavy or he's not.

Why are you killing catgirls? Its a comic movie. Save your physics problems for The Martian, which is supposed to be hard science fiction aside from the initial disaster.

[LaZodiac]

So, the particles only bring atoms closer together. They don't change weight though (200 Pounds [~91kgs], according to Hope), and that's how he's able to maintain the force of his punches (a key component of Force is Mass). We see him fall down and crack ceramic tiles, he's able to fall through floors, and, as we see, he's able to flip dudes around.

His weight doesn't change...Yet Scott is able to run along a gun barrel, stand reasonably well on a child's train set without breaking it, and, obviously get carried around by ants...Even though his weight hasn't changed... Except we see that his weight can crack tiles!

I don't have a problem with science that may as well be magic, but, I do have a problem with inconsistency. Either he's heavy or he's not.

Ants are super strong. I've stomped on ants and they've survived, without damage.

Also those toy trains are, at least in my day, made out of steel. You're not breaking those unless you try.

As for the other stuff, I'd also like to point out that yes, he is as heavy as normal, but he's also SMALLER, so I imagine that disperses some of the issue with the whole gun running and stuff. Maybe his being fleet of foot due to all that training helps?

[Dienekes]

Ants are super strong. I've stomped on ants and they've survived, without damage.

Also those toy trains are, at least in my day, made out of steel. You're not breaking those unless you try.

As for the other stuff, I'd also like to point out that yes, he is as heavy as normal, but he's also SMALLER, so I imagine that disperses some of the issue with the whole gun running and stuff. Maybe his being fleet of foot due to all that training helps?

While, I didn't think about it watching the movie and it doesn't bother me. This doesn't make sense. The same mass should be more damaging when made smaller as it's weight is less distributed than if he was full sized. It should make the problems worse not better.

[t209]

While, I didn't think about it watching the movie and it doesn't bother me. This doesn't make sense. The same mass should be more damaging when made smaller as it's weight is less distributed than if he was full sized. It should make the problems worse not better.
I am feeling that you would be more upset if they had "Big House"* in MCU.
*Prison where the convicts were shrunk and put into a doll house.
edit: http://www.comicvine.com/videos/marvels-ultimate-spider-man-web-warriors-ant-man-c/2300-2973/
:smallfurious: Why Disney is bothering to make every non-movie series as MCU? I mean they may only bring Pym if the movie had one and tried to shove in the movies? It's pretty much XD's version of Spongebob, only with One More Day adaptation in first episode. Probably egomania since they had Squadron Supreme, Marvel's not-Justice League, in Avengers Assemble.
Even EMH managed to salvage Pym from the comic's "unknown guy who's only known for wife-beating by idiotic fans" to likable character. Though I kinda feel that his sudden pacifism as kinda of out of character, considering that he had no problems stomping and beating villains.

[Rogar Demonblud]

So, just got back from it. Now to force my opinions on people.

It was pretty good. I thought Cap2 was more interesting, and Guardians was funnier. But on the whole I thought it was good.

Things I liked:
Lang's ex-wife's new boyfriend, who I will refer to as Gyp, because I don't know the name of the actual character and the actor played the hell out of the role of Gyp Rosetti on Boardwalk Empire. Anyway, a lot of these post-divorce movies make the new guy either annoyingly perfect, or an ******* for no reason. Gyp was neither, a flawed human who was a stickler for the rules. Kind of a **** to the criminal deadbeat dad, for pretty obvious reasons, but when the chips are down he'll risk life and limb for his not daughter. The worst thing I can say about him is that he's kind of a bad cop, as everyone in this movie seems to get away from him.

The Jar-Jars. The Jar-Jar is a side character who is portrayed as in some way stupid or incompetent for the sake of incredibly forced humor. They mostly service no purpose to the plot other than some exposition, and if they do help it generally seems contrived. The guys in this movie weren't that bad. Sure the talkative one was pretty annoying, at times, but he was actually very helpful. Hell, I think he has a higher body count by the end of the movie than Scott did (if you count the people in the helicopter as Yellowjacket's kills and not Scott's anyway).

Scott Lang himself was pretty fun, and quirky enough without getting into stupid territory. Also, I agree that the "Call the Avengers" line was great and I thought Pym's reasons for not wanting to do that were legitimate ones. I really wouldn't trust Iron Man either, if I could only read the newspapers about the guy.

Pym, was also pretty well done. I do enjoy that they seem to have references to him not being completely of sound mind and a reason behind it. Going with how the suit can affect your brain in vague ways. Of course they never develop how he was effected, but his anger that comes up a few times can be seen as a clue.

What I didn't like:

Really only one major thing, the villain. He was pretty weak, as far as villains go. And a lot of what he does didn't make sense. Why would he ever need to call HYDRA? Ever? Just advertise to some wealthy corporations or governments. Can you imagine what the US would pay for what is essentially the perfect spy and a nigh undetectable soldier?

And a lot of his actions don't really hold up when just looked at through simple logic. Such as, the lamb thing. Now, I have no problem with dead lambs. I enjoy eating lambs, they taste good. Sure, I can see why it would be morally problematic to use young lambs for experimentation, but I have to ask, why? Look, you just need living tissue to experiment on right? A single lamb costs around $200 and that's without the cost to maintain it. A rat costs about $25, less if you buy them in bulk, again without maintaining costs. Why are you wasting so much of your companies money for no reason? That scene just bothered me. I've never liked stupid villains. As far as evil corporation villains go, this guy ranks closer to Hammer than Obadiah Stane.

And the minor thing. I'm pretty sure the gun was pointed at Pym's head when it's fired and he goes down like he's been fatally shot. Then we see him in an arm brace.

Edit: I guess another minor irksome thing. Janet's death. Well, her problem. They've successfully found a way to write her out of one movie and leave the door open for a later appearance. Anyway, her death in terms of the cover up. Really, Pym? You think it's better to tell your daughter that her mom died in a plane crash than say "Your mom died a hero, I'll tell you about it when your older." At least one of those things your kid can look to in pride. The other will just lead to a fear of planes. I guess you can say he was trying to not follow in their footsteps of becoming a hero, but I've never liked that cliche.

So, overall, I'd recommend it. It's not the most intelligent super hero movie out there, but it was never trying to be.

In re: the lambs. Apparently MCU's tax code is as generous with R&D costs as ours is.

Anyway, I read several reviews while waiting in line. First, I am now convinced that reviewers are seeing some other movie than the one I am. Second, one of the reviewers was certain that all of us fanboys would riot because the guns aren't shooting bullets that make someone fly across the room (I don't remember the name, but given the author's opinion of comic book movie geeks I suspect it was Lorraine Williams *lightning flashes, thunder rumbles, wolves howl in the distance*).

Finally, the reviewer on the USA Today site was certain that Evangeline Lilly's performance was going to get us all to shut up about a Black Widow movie in favor of a Hope Pym one. Which is base slander.

We'll demand BOTH.

[Cheesegear]

As for the other stuff, I'd also like to point out that yes, he is as heavy as normal, but he's also SMALLER, so I imagine that disperses

No. It doesn't. It means he is exerting his mass in a single, well-defined point. Hope even makes the comparison to a bullet fired from a gun. If he punches too hard, he will kill someone. The movie really did try to explain science. Atoms are closer together, but weight doesn't change. Force is maintained. Bullets from guns. This is explained in the movie, and I kind of wish that they didn't. Because then there are consistency problems. That's not even including the fact that since Ant-Man's size doesn't actually change (like they said), there can only be a finite limit to how small he can go.
Something, something quantum realm. But how do you get there? Once Hydrogen atoms start bumping into each other (size is not changed, only distance between atoms), growth alteration would stop, because the Hydrogen atoms are bumping into each other now, and can't get any closer. The human body has a lot of Hydrogen in it, plus everything else, which means Quantum Realm BS shouldn't happen, because it's not possible, unless actual size does change (but they said it didn't).

Basically, the movie tried have catgirls in the movie, but not kill them. And failed. The movie shouldn't have tried to explain anything. How does Stark's arc reactor work? Doesn't matter, 'cause nobody tried to explain it, it just works.

If Ant-Man is running up my arm, my arm suddenly has an extra 90kgs attached to it. All's Ant-Man has to do, is stand on someone's shoulder and wait for their knees to buckle. Jumping from someone's shoulder, like Ant-Man does, exerts additional downward muscle force, as well.

[The Glyphstone]

I didnt get the titanium thing either. Why would being made of titanium suddenly make you invincible against shrinking technology?

[The New Bruceski]

I didnt get the titanium thing either. Why would being made of titanium suddenly make you invincible against shrinking technology?

Because *mumble mumble mumble* so obviously you can't shrink through it.

I read that more as "the metal's too strong to use magic size-changing strength physics on and the seam between bits of metal is too tight because this is professionally-machined stuff and not a crack in linoleum." But that wasn't spelled out in the movie, just what my brain filled in for the gaps.

[The New Bruceski]

Luis was annoying at first, but he's a hard guy to stay mad at. The line at the end got confusing (and doesn't really make much difference either way you scan it) but I think it translates as
"Did Falcon talk to the journalist knowing that it would make its way to Ant-Man?" "Yes."

What I really appreciated was the sound contrast between the big and the small worlds. Everything's huge and loud and dramatic and then it jumps to the normal-sized view and the music cuts out and something just clatters on the floor lamely. Good use of sound/camerawork in the comedy element. Overall it was a movie that realized it was a silly concept, without going full-blown farce or having guys breaking character. I'm glad they cut out the "can we do something about the name" lines from the trailer, leave that sort of thing to Deadpool.

When I came out of the movie I enjoyed it but didn't really want to see it again or think it was one of the better Marvels. It's grown on me though, definitely a great movie.

[Razade]

I didnt get the titanium thing either. Why would being made of titanium suddenly make you invincible against shrinking technology?

It was just that they couldn't break through Titanium. Because it's Titanium.

[comicshorse]

I read that more as "the metal's too strong to use magic size-changing strength physics on and the seam between bits of metal is too tight because this is professionally-machined stuff and not a crack in linoleum." But that wasn't spelled out in the movie, just what my brain filled in for the gaps.

Yeah that was my take on it to

Also speaking as a huge Archnaphobe I'd like to thank the film makers for not putting in a scene where the shrunk hero is menaced by a ordinary spider

[Lacuna Caster]

Yeah, putting aside the glaring and horrendous physics difficulties, I still wasn't crazy about this movie. It's not bad, exactly. Just... almost offensively formulaic. Nothing happens that isn't 100% predictable hero's journey cheese, and there's very little in the way of fresh world-building or political spin to make up for it.

I'd want to see a version of this movie with Hope in a slinky leather ant-suit. Because she is better at it, and **** you Michael Douglas. Where it's mainly a spy-thriller focused on intel-gathering for the government. And where someone, at some point, remarks on the prodigious advances in medical science and materials engineering that could be made possible by shrinking-tech, instead of 'tiny uber-soldiers bad', because that's ****ing ridiculous for a wide range of reasons.

I BLAME YOU REED RICHARDS

[HMS Invincible]

Yeah, putting aside the glaring and horrendous physics difficulties, I still wasn't crazy about this movie. It's not bad, exactly. Just... almost offensively formulaic. Nothing happens that isn't 100% predictable hero's journey cheese, and there's very little in the way of fresh world-building or political spin to make up for it.

I'd want to see a version of this movie with Hope in a slinky leather ant-suit. Because she is better at it, and **** you Michael Douglas. Where it's mainly a spy-thriller focused on intel-gathering for the government. And where someone, at some point, remarks on the prodigious advances in medical science and materials engineering that could be made possible by shrinking-tech, instead of 'tiny uber-soldiers bad', because that's ****ing ridiculous for a wide range of reasons.

I BLAME YOU REED RICHARDS

I like how you complain how cliched the premise is, and then turn around and demand the female actor strut around in skanky tights for you. Real original.

[Lacuna Caster]

Well, people are still looking for a Black Widow movie. So apparently, yes.

[Reddish Mage]

Surprised you're all talking about how Wasp got written out of the movie. She's in the movie. Hope Pym is The Wasp. Yes her Mother was also the Wasp and DID die, but WE ARE GETTING A WASP. That's PRETTY damn cool. She's going to be Ant-man's War Machine only much, much more threatening.

Uh...you know a lot of the characters (not just Hope and Janet, but even Scott's daughter Cassie) actually have Marvel equivalents. So regarding your Wasp theory:

Hope Pym in the comics isn't another Wasp though. She's a villain named the Red Queen.


Yeah I'm exagerating I'm just glad we got her at all.

For some reason all the imagery and the talking about it made me think we might get a Dr Strange cameo. QUANTUM REALM and stuff sounds rather...ahem, Strange.

I think your instincts are spot on here. We know that...though they refuse to go into details...the "Quantum Realm" will be very important to Marvel Phase 3 which begins with the next movie...not to mention the theme of going to places out there..."beyond comprehension."

[LaZodiac]

Uh...you know a lot of the characters (not just Hope and Janet, but even Scott's daughter Cassie) actually have Marvel equivalents. So regarding your Wasp theory:

Hope Pym in the comics isn't another Wasp though. She's a villain named the Red Queen.



I think your instincts are spot on here. We know that...though they refuse to go into details...the "Quantum Realm" will be very important to Marvel Phase 3 which begins with the next movie...not to mention the theme of going to places out there..."beyond comprehension."

I don't think Hope'll become the Red Queen. Seems...basically wrong for her characterization.

Thanks. The FIRST thing I thought when I heard "quantum realm" as opposed to just quantum size or something more scientific was "well that's...Strange" and then I did a little rimshot in my head because I am the worst human being.

[Psyren]

Just saw it! Fun little romp even if it got a bit cornball at times.

@ Hank Pym:
I'm honestly glad they didn't explore that aspect of his character, it would have definitely cast a huge pall over the "curmudgeon with a heart of gold" character they had going for him. The mainstream audiences don't need it, the MCU doesn't need it, and if the purists complain, well, too bad.

@ Hope Pym:
It's honestly irrelevant whether Janet is the Wasp in the comics and Hope is someone else. MCU Wasp is going to be Hope. And this way we get an Ant-Man/Wasp dynamic without ever wondering "when the abuse issue will come up," because Scott Lang just isn't ever going to be that guy, end of.

@ Ants:
I heard an interview with some entomologists on NPR that the ants' behavior/properties was actually pretty realistic, so kudos to the movie-makers for that. Apparently the only place they really dropped the ball was having all the characters refer to the ants as males - the vast majority of ants outside the hive are female - but hey, patriarchy.

[Dusk Eclipse]

re ants: Not sure if it counts, but the in Latin American Spanish subtitles they actually refer to the ants as "chicas" (translation: girls).

[Psyren]

That's good. In the English version Scott says things to the ants like "good boy!" and names his flying ant Anthony, while Pym says things like "I'm controlling him" etc.

[t209]

re ants: Not sure if it counts, but the in Latin American Spanish subtitles they actually refer to the ants as "chicas" (translation: girls).
Maybe dubbers might be entologists too.
On the movie.
So now public will now remember Hank Pym as "just an old dude". But poor Janet will still be unknown.
Fortunately, that might cover the "he beats his wife" comment for now.

[Psyren]

I'm surprised that Baskin Robbins was so eager to be portrayed as not being an equal-opportunity employer of felons though.

Or maybe it was their way of assuring audiences that they don't hire criminals? But that their background check process is flawed enough that said criminals can be working there for a while before they find out?

[Dusk Eclipse]

Well Scott is...was a master thief, so it makes sense (at least to me) that he would be able to fool the background check, at least at first. As for why Baskin Robins agreed that characterization... there is no such thing as bad publicity?

[Dienekes]

I'm surprised that Baskin Robbins was so eager to be portrayed as not being an equal-opportunity employer of felons though.

Or maybe it was their way of assuring audiences that they don't hire criminals? But that their background check process is flawed enough that said criminals can be working there for a while before they find out?

Ehh, he lied on his resume. That's pretty much an automatic firing.

[Psyren]

Ehh, he lied on his resume. That's pretty much an automatic firing.

True but most background checks would know if you're a federal criminal, especially one who was literally in the news :smalltongue:

He was using the same name for crying out loud!

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Maybe dubbers might be entologists too.

"Hormiga" (ant in Spanish) is a feminine word, regardless of the sex of the individual ant, so in Spanish it flows more naturally to call them by female appellations. "Jirafa" (giraffe) is in the same boat: even though it tends to be obvious (or at least more obvious than with ants) which ones are the males, they tend to be referred to with female adjectives and pronouns. This video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46ehrFk-gLk&list=PL96C35uN7xGLDEnHuhD7CTZES3KXFnwm0&index=11) touches upon how this works, using the German and Spanish words for "key" to explain it (masculine in German, feminine in Spanish).

Edit: giving it an extra thought, dogs (even in English) tend to be assumed males until told otherwise ("There's a good boy!"). Since that's the characterization they were going for with the ants (most obvious with the large one at the end, but in general, they come across as adorable, excitable, eager to please lapdogs), the actors probably were put in that frame of mind, and used male pronouns without realising it.

Grey Wolf

[MCerberus]

I'm surprised that Baskin Robbins was so eager to be portrayed as not being an equal-opportunity employer of felons though.

Or maybe it was their way of assuring audiences that they don't hire criminals? But that their background check process is flawed enough that said criminals can be working there for a while before they find out?

The wanted the world to know
Baskin Robbin's always finds out

For me: fun movie that gets a lot of flak, and perhaps deserved for 1. coming out during a great year for popcorn movies and 2. not doing anything to advance the quality of genre movies. Although "Marvel Average" is pretty a pretty good standard to meet even if you don't exceed it.

My favorite jokes
Alright, so I was at this wine tasting...
Those two stories were hilarious, especially since it's such a wonderful sendup to the usual rundown given in heist movies. I also loved "the crew" of incompetent cultured thieves. On second thought, they were still really good at their jobs, just weird

Also that little girl was freaking HARD CORE

[Logic]

Uh...you know a lot of the characters (not just Hope and Janet, but even Scott's daughter Cassie) actually have Marvel equivalents. So regarding your Wasp theory:

Hope Pym in the comics isn't another Wasp though. She's a villain named the Red Queen.



I think your instincts are spot on here. We know that...though they refuse to go into details...the "Quantum Realm" will be very important to Marvel Phase 3 which begins with the next movie...not to mention the theme of going to places out there..."beyond comprehension."
The Red Queen (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Queen_%28comics%29) you speak of is an alternate universe version of Hope Pym. The original, 616 version of the Red Queen (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madelyne_Pryor#Red_Queen) is Madelyne Pryor, the slightly modified clone of Jean Grey.

EDIT: Apparently, Madelyne Pryor isn't even in the top 3 Red Queens (http://marvel.wikia.com/Red_Queen), but then again, neither is Hope Pym. On the other hand, it is the only thing she is known for as a Super-character. I think we'll see Cassie Lang as Stature before we see Hope Pym as Red Queen.

[Kitten Champion]

I strongly suspect the movie's writers just got the Hope Pym name from the Marvel wiki after creating a general outline for the character. I can't imagine they happened to be reading the largely forgettable MC2 books from the late 90's and had some kind of eureka moment or something.

[LaZodiac]

The wanted the world to know
Baskin Robbin's always finds out

For me: fun movie that gets a lot of flak, and perhaps deserved for 1. coming out during a great year for popcorn movies and 2. not doing anything to advance the quality of genre movies. Although "Marvel Average" is pretty a pretty good standard to meet even if you don't exceed it.

My favorite jokes
Alright, so I was at this wine tasting...
Those two stories were hilarious, especially since it's such a wonderful sendup to the usual rundown given in heist movies. I also loved "the crew" of incompetent cultured thieves. On second thought, they were still really good at their jobs, just weird

Also that little girl was freaking HARD CORE

Yeah it's actually kinda interesting. Those guys are clearly bafoons...but Carlos WAS at a WINE TASTING and an ART SHOW. And...he's actually kind of a badass, taking out at least four guards with his fists, all armed to the teeth. He also saved the life of the guy that he had stolen the outfit for, and that was really good of him. These guys may have the appearance of idiots, but they're actually good at this.

Yeah his daughter is great. She saw a man die in front of her in an exceedingly gruesome way and also she now has a monstrous giant ant as a pet and she's just totally chill about it.

[Psyren]

I strongly suspect the movie's writers just got the Hope Pym name from the Marvel wiki after creating a general outline for the character. I can't imagine they happened to be reading the largely forgettable MC2 books from the late 90's and had some kind of eureka moment or something.

Or they simply said "We want a Pym presence, and we need a Wasp, but using Hank + Janet is just going to raise all sorts of ugly questions in the MSM that overshadow the light-hearted tone of the movies. Bingo, Hope!"

[cobaltstarfire]

I've never felt so excited about a stinger as the one suggesting Hope would get a suit and be the Wasp. I don't know anything about the comics, but I'd really love to see a Solo movie about her. Something about her seems more interesting to me than Black Widow

I liked Ant Man...I felt it was a tiny bit slow to wind up, and there wasn't really much groundbreaking about it, but it was a fun movie. And I'm fine with that.

My guy (physicist) had some complaints about the physics being really inconsistent from one scene to the next, but he still rather enjoyed the movie in spite of that.

[Binks]

Went to see it as part of a friend's bday celebrations. I had low expectations regarding it, honestly was expecting it to be Marvel's first big flop, a Green Lantern style awful superhero comedy thing. I was extremely surprised by how good the movie was. Helps that it does not take itself too seriously, but manages to avoid going too far into silliness too. It's very good, definitely a good entry in the MCU, and I do recommend anyone on the fence give it a shot. In terms of idea, it's a heist comedy with a superhero, Oceans 11 but with super-science. In terms of feel, it's a lot like Guardians of the Galaxy. very fun.

My thoughts on a few of the topics throughout this thread.

Anyway, something I really liked. The cop fiance of Scot's ex wife didn't die and turned out to not be an *******. In these movies the guy always gets back with his ex after the villain kills the new guy...and this time they didn't do that and it's really quite nice.
Yeah, the movie seemed to subvert a lot of expectations. Hero gets the 'call' and immediately runs to return the suit because it's all freaking him out. Hero pulls off a picture perfect return of the suit...and is immediately arrested by the cops. Hero fights a Mauve shirt from another franchise...and is losing until he pulls off a cheap trick instead of Worfing him to prove how strong the new hero is.

I was pleasantly surprised by how many times they brought up a standard superhero movie theme then proceeded to go somewhere else with it.

And I could be wrong, but I think Scott lost one of his growy disc things in there. So it's possible she might get herself out, especially if some people I've seen are right in claiming they saw a figure that might be Janet during the Quantum scene.
I can't speak for the 'seeing Janet quantum' thing, as I didn't see anything but have heard it (and have poor eyesight, so wouldn't be surprising that I missed it), but he doesn't lose the disk in there. He drops it, it drifts away for a bit, then he manages to get his hands on it. He tosses aside his (presumably unable to return from the quantum realm based on the fact it wasn't working) regulator and replaces it with the only enlarging disk he pulled out. Sorry.

I get the feeling they're mostly just leaving their options open regarding Janet/Quantum stuff. As someone who has done this sort of thing before while GM-ing it feels a lot like a 'here's a backstory element that's interesting, no idea if we'll do anything with it but we'll leave it open to interpretation, just in case'. They made a big deal of the 'beyond time' thing and the fact that no one found (or could find) the body is always a means of leaving a death open, but I don't imagine they had any plans for Janet when the movie released.

I didnt get the titanium thing either. Why would being made of titanium suddenly make you invincible against shrinking technology?
They were using titanium as shorthand for 'too sealed to get through any of the cracks'. That's all, just simpler to say, simpler for the audience to remember, and plays to the stock shortcut of 'Titanium is absolutely the best metal' that most movies/tv shows seem to embrace. You can mentally replace 'Titanium' with 'completely sealed' and it doesn't really change anything.

Ehh, he lied on his resume. That's pretty much an automatic firing.
That was the impression I got as well. The guy seemed totally ok with the fact he was a convict, and a non-violent crime is typically not enough to get you fired, but he obviously had lied during the application process (there are typically documents you have to sign saying if you've ever been convicted of a crime and he obviously lied on those) and that's enough to get you fired regardless.

That part of the story did make me quite sad though. The fact that this guy, brilliant, hard working, masters degree, incredible skill, committed a single crime (ignore the fact that it was also a good motive), did his time, got out, and immediately set about to get back on the straight and narrow...and nobody would let him. And the worst part of all was that that came before any of the real super science stuff. That entire part of the story could have been set in the real world and it wouldn't have raised an eyebrow. Sad.

[comicshorse]

I think it says something about my knowledge of physics that the only bit of the movie that raised an objection in my mind was the fact that suit Carlos takes from the unconscious guard fits him perfectly despite them being very different in height and weight :smallsmile:

[Kitten Champion]

Or they simply said "We want a Pym presence, and we need a Wasp, but using Hank + Janet is just going to raise all sorts of ugly questions in the MSM that overshadow the light-hearted tone of the movies. Bingo, Hope!"


I don't see how that's an "or" situation.

Though Marvel/Disney easily could have made a Hank Pym movie. Hank's in their insipid Avenger's Assemble! cartoon, the character isn't verboten or anything. It was Edgar Wright who wanted to do a superhero story about a mentor/mentee relationship and so we got the premise for this - at least according its writer/director.

[Ranxerox]

Yeah it's actually kinda interesting. Those guys are clearly bafoons...but Carlos WAS at a WINE TASTING and an ART SHOW. And...he's actually kind of a badass, taking out at least four guards with his fists, all armed to the teeth. He also saved the life of the guy that he had stolen the outfit for, and that was really good of him. These guys may have the appearance of idiots, but they're actually good at this.



Also every time we see Carlos* at his apartment he is making everyone Belgium waffles. Clearly, the guy is totally awesome. :cool:

* - Luis actually per IMDB

[Logic]

I strongly suspect the movie's writers just got the Hope Pym name from the Marvel wiki after creating a general outline for the character. I can't imagine they happened to be reading the largely forgettable MC2 books from the late 90's and had some kind of eureka moment or something.

It's funny, every Alternate Universe that Marvel gave an entire line of books to seems to have started with a Spider-character. And those seemed to be the best books of the bunch.

2099? Spider-Man 2099
MC2? Spider-Girl
Ultimate? Spider-Man

More on topic: I think your explanation for Hope Pym (Van Dyne) makes the most sense. The writes created a character and gave her an established name, partially ignoring the super-powered past of that character.

[Psyren]

I don't see how that's an "or" situation.

I meant that everyone is selling the moviemakers a bit short by assuming they just don't know who Hope Pym is in the comics. It's equally possible that they do know and said "irrelevant for our version of the character."



Though Marvel/Disney easily could have made a Hank Pym movie. Hank's in their insipid Avenger's Assemble! cartoon, the character isn't verboten or anything. It was Edgar Wright who wanted to do a superhero story about a mentor/mentee relationship and so we got the premise for this - at least according its writer/director.

I haven't watched that show and don't know what role he plays. But as this movie necessarily needed to do a deeper dive into Hank's family life and his relationship with his wife and daughter, that ugly backstory was definitely a concern here.

In fact I feel the movie teased it a bit; showing Hank's short temper very early on, and also establishing that his daughter hated his guts very early on as well could have easily been leading up to that revelation - only to have it thoroughly subverted and the two reconciled.

[Kitten Champion]

I meant that everyone is selling the moviemakers a bit short by assuming they just don't know who Hope Pym is in the comics. It's equally possible that they do know and said "irrelevant for our version of the character."

Honestly, Marvel comic writers don't know who half of these characters are, they use the wiki too because they don't have time to read through who-knows-how-many issues to get the salient information for a single word box. Especially as this is an obscure alternate universe one from over a decade ago who likely didn't see more than 5-issues at best. It's not like the MC2-universe has been this big creative force affecting the MCU in subtle or overt ways.

I'm just playing the odds here.




I haven't watched that show and don't know what role he plays. But as this movie necessarily needed to do a deeper dive into Hank's family life and his relationship with his wife and daughter, that ugly backstory was definitely a concern here.

... fair point, Avengers Assemble! is notable for treating its cast - effectively grown-ass professional adults in their mid-20's to 30's - like 8 year olds in a tree fort. However, I contend that Marvel doesn't give a damn or they'd have no Hank Pym or Ant-Man movie in the first place. You only have so many licensed characters to work with, between ignoring comic continuity - which is irrelevant as this is AU anyways - or abandoning a comic character that they can turn into a profitable movie franchise with potential merchandising tie-in, they'll ignore the comic continuity.

Same reason Millar's Civil War isn't going to be faithfully adapted come May of next year, Disney/Marvel ultimately want the version of stories and characters which work the best for their whole corporate media empire thingy, and such a version of Hank Pym certainly exists.

[MCerberus]

Also every time we see Carlos at his apartment he is making everyone Belgium waffles. Clearly, the guy is totally awesome. :cool:

Wait. I have an idea.
We can save the broadcast Marvelverse.

Carlos, Agent of Shield

[LaZodiac]

Wait. I have an idea.
We can save the broadcast Marvelverse.

Carlos, Agent of Shield

But Agents of Shield is actually really good!

It would be funny if Carlos got a cameo though. He feels like the type of guy that might show up to hint at things that are happening.

[Psyren]

Carlos was definitely the breakout star here.

I doubt AoS could afford T.I. though, but it wouldn't be the first time a down-on-his-luck rapper joined a crime serial :smallbiggrin:

[SaintRidley]

Hey, so everybody referring to "Carlos" - the character's name is Luis. Just putting that out there.


Honestly, Marvel comic writers don't know who half of these characters are, they use the wiki too because they don't have time to read through who-knows-how-many issues to get the salient information for a single word box. Especially as this is an obscure alternate universe one from over a decade ago who likely didn't see more than 5-issues at best. It's not like the MC2-universe has been this big creative force affecting the MCU in subtle or overt ways.

I'm just playing the odds here.


Except Jason Aaron. He actually read every issue of everything Thor was in prior to starting God of Thunder. And that work paid off.

[LaZodiac]

That's my bad, sorry Saint Ridley. Derp.

Anyway it's been confirmed that the lady shadow we saw during that Quantum Space moment with Scot was Hank's wife. Confirmation here. (http://www.vulture.com/2015/07/spoiler-ant-mans-twists-and-cameos-explained.html)

[Psyren]

Except Jason Aaron. He actually read every issue of everything Thor was in prior to starting God of Thunder. And that work paid off.

I'm assuming these folks did their homework unless someone can find a statement to the contrary. Even if you get the intern to dig through some back issues, these things literally take months if not years to make.

[t209]

... fair point, Avengers Assemble! is notable for treating its cast - effectively grown-ass professional adults in their mid-20's to 30's - like 8 year olds in a tree fort. However, I contend that Marvel doesn't give a damn or they'd have no Hank Pym or Ant-Man movie in the first place. You only have so many licensed characters to work with, between ignoring comic continuity - which is irrelevant as this is AU anyways - or abandoning a comic character that they can turn into a profitable movie franchise with potential merchandising tie-in, they'll ignore the comic continuity.

Same reason Millar's Civil War isn't going to be faithfully adapted come May of next year, Disney/Marvel ultimately want the version of stories and characters which work the best for their whole corporate media empire thingy, and such a version of Hank Pym certainly exists.
Yeah; Disney-Marvel is pretty much trying to make Animated Series into kiddy MCU these days ("Hey, this movie is famous now, we're gonna add the movies' character only if that movie is famous.") Not to mention they're getting a new season, along with Ultimate Spiderman cartoon (Marvel's Spongebob). Considering Disney's track record with Recess and Gargoyle (former decided not to move timeslot and latter ruined), that wouldn't be out of place for them to NOT make serious cartoon.
Now time will tell when they will ruin Kamala Khan in upcoming season.
At least, as much as they cancelled YJ and GL for TTG, DC had the bright idea to make their AU standalone from other universe to some degree. Then again Warner Brothers never tack on family friendly image as Disney and had some serious cartoons under their belt. I think my friend had a good point in his argument on peeve at Marvel..

Second, I don't know but Mark Millar's Civil War is pretty much hated event. Depends if Tony built Space Gitmo.

[Rogar Demonblud]

I suspect part of the reason Scott got fired is because his (concealed) conviction was for theft. As a guideline for running a business, about a third of your shoplifting/theft issues will be employees with sticky fingers.

That doesn't include embezzlement either, which is always an inside job by its very nature.

[Lacuna Caster]

I like how you complain how cliched the premise is...
Anyway, it's possible I came across as a little too angsty there. Like I said, not a bad movie.

I guess I'm just a little peeved at how Age of Ultron turned out- another not-a-bad-movie that I'm convinced could have been legitimately great if MarvelCorp had got off Whedon's back a little. They're in a position now where they have a working formula and they're terrified to deviate from it.

Same forces at work.

[Reddish Mage]

Anyway, it's possible I came across as a little too angsty there. Like I said, not a bad movie.

I guess I'm just a little peeved at how Age of Ultron turned out- another not-a-bad-movie that I'm convinced could have been legitimately great if MarvelCorp had got off Whedon's back a little. They're in a position now where they have a working formula and they're terrified to deviate from it.

Same forces at work.

I don't think so. Ant Man is a "formula" that was created with Guardians of the Galaxy and it's only the second attempt at working cross-genre.

I agree about Marvel getting off Whedon but cies la vie, it wasn't marketing so much as the other creative staff that have been working on other awesome movies like Winter Soldier and will be taking over anyway...

[Thrudd]

Hey, so everybody referring to "Carlos" - the character's name is Luis. Just putting that out there.



Except Jason Aaron. He actually read every issue of everything Thor was in prior to starting God of Thunder. And that work paid off.

In spades, God of Thunder was fantastic all around, including the art.

In the movie, as soon as Hank described what happened to Janet, I whispered to my wife "they're going to the microverse!"
If they do an Ant Man 2, that has to be the focus of it. Also, they need to explore going giant size, which is the next logical step after the events at the end. I actually think it would have been cool if Scott made that discovery in the final act and went Giant for a minute.
Regarding the "science", the only thing I can think is that it doesnt really work exactly how Pym described it, maybe his explanation is a way to try to explain the unexplainable for pleibs, or maybe it is a blatant lie to throw people like Stark off the scent (of course Cross figured it out anyway). Most likely its just stupid movie science that we arent supposed to think about.

[SaintRidley]

I don't think so. Ant Man is a "formula" that was created with Guardians of the Galaxy and it's only the second attempt at working cross-genre.

Thor was basically a superhero Shakespearean comedy.
Captain America: The First Avenger was an old school war movie that transitioned into superheroing. Not exactly blended, but bi-genred.
Winter Soldier was a superhero spy thriller thing.

I mean, that's three right off the top of my head before Guardians.

[Logic]

I don't think so. Ant Man is a "formula" that was created with Guardians of the Galaxy and it's only the second attempt at working cross-genre.
I completely disagree with you. Guardians of the Galaxy is not a Heist Movie, whereas Ant-Man is.

Thor was basically a superhero Shakespearean comedy.
Captain America: The First Avenger was an old school war movie that transitioned into superheroing. Not exactly blended, but bi-genred.
Winter Soldier was a superhero spy thriller thing.

I mean, that's three right off the top of my head before Guardians.
And to add to SaintRidley's points:

Iron Man, Incredible Hulk and Thor 2 are definitely mostly typical Superhero movies, with Thor 2 being the least "formulaic Superhero movie" of these three, excepting only the trope that Thor must team up with his enemy to fight a bigger threat.
Iron Man 2 is almost a "Buddy Cop" movie with the Superhero motif liberally applied.
Thor being Shakespearean Comedy is a bit of a stretch, but I can see the comparisons.

[Kitten Champion]

Incredible Hulk was more The Fugitive than Superman. I mean he does technically fight a super-villain at the very end and all, but for the most part it's just Edward Norton trying to find a cure while the military hounds his every step.

Avengers' Hulk is a heroic character, Incredible Hulk Hulk is sort of a concept.

[LaZodiac]

Thor was basically a superhero Shakespearean comedy.
Captain America: The First Avenger was an old school war movie that transitioned into superheroing. Not exactly blended, but bi-genred.
Winter Soldier was a superhero spy thriller thing.

I mean, that's three right off the top of my head before Guardians.

Winter Soldier was such a good spy thriller that I'm somewhat interested in checking out good spy thriller movies to see if they're comparable.

[Reddish Mage]

I completely disagree with you. Guardians of the Galaxy is not a Heist Movie, whereas Ant-Man is..

You think the Heist part is the important part...and not the comedy? Yes the job is a heist...until it's an epic slugfest...except before it was a sort of training montage...but the actors are comedians playing superheroes from the comics and MCU

[The Glyphstone]

You think the Heist part is the important part...and not the comedy? Yes the job is a heist...until it's an epic slugfest...except before it was a sort of training montage...but the actors are comedians playing superheroes from the comics and MCU

Except that is exactly how you structure a heist film. You have the characters planning, then training/practicing/preparing for the heist, then the actual heist goes down and all the action happens when it inevitably goes wrong. It is also funny, but its core genre is 'heist film'. GotG is a space opera/adventure that is also funny.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

You think the Heist part is the important part...and not the comedy? Yes the job is a heist...until it's an epic slugfest...except before it was a sort of training montage...but the actors are comedians playing superheroes from the comics and MCU

Heist movies tend to have training montages (usually to show how the plan should go, so you know when the plan goes off the rails), so that is not in any way a differentiation. The "slug fest" is the only part that ties Ant Man to the superhero genre (Heist movies tend to have their own share of wonky physics - see the Mythbuster episode on Safebox busting). Besides, I'd argue that "comedy" is not a genre description, but a tone description. You can have comedy-romance/heist/adventure/etc. Or you can have a Drama-same. You can even try to blend both and have a romantic/heist/adventure/etc. dramedy, but it takes a lot of skill to pull it off (for example, according to this review (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJei7-9yFDs), Trainwreck, tried to and failed). But in all those cases, the genre is separate from the tone. Finally, the characters are not superheroes. There is one that might become one, but for the purposes of this film, the ant suit is no different from the EMP or Qin Shaobo's acrobatics in Ocean's 11.

Grey Wolf

[Cristo Meyers]

There is one that might become one, but for the purposes of this film, the ant suit is no different from the EMP or Qin Shaobo's acrobatics in Ocean's 11.

Grey Wolf

Or Eliot Spencer in every episode of Leverage.

[Logic]

You think the Heist part is the important part...and not the comedy? Yes the job is a heist...until it's an epic slugfest...except before it was a sort of training montage...but the actors are comedians playing superheroes from the comics and MCU


Except that is exactly how you structure a heist film. You have the characters planning, then training/practicing/preparing for the heist, then the actual heist goes down and all the action happens when it inevitably goes wrong. It is also funny, but its core genre is 'heist film'. GotG is a space opera/adventure that is also funny.

The Glyphstone beat me to it. GotG is a Space Opera that has quite a bit of humor. Ant-Man is a Heist Movie with quite a bit of humor. They also star "Superheroes" (depending on your definition of the GotG characters.) The comedy in both is a selling point of the films, but I would not call it the primary or secondary genre of either.

[Lacuna Caster]

The Glyphstone beat me to it. GotG is a Space Opera that has quite a bit of humor. Ant-Man is a Heist Movie with quite a bit of humor. They also star "Superheroes" (depending on your definition of the GotG characters.) The comedy in both is a selling point of the films, but I would not call it the primary or secondary genre of either.
I still think it'd be a better movie if they just had Hope in the ant-suit.

"...And that's how your mother was scheduled only to appear in our sequel."
"Oh, Dad, that's so awful. But... I realise now that you were only trying to protect me."
"Thank you darling. And I realise now that you are a grown woman capable of handling harsh truths and tough decisions."
"...Really?"
"No, I still prefer to entrust this rootless stranger with negligible experience with the future of the company and probably our lives. Now put on your makeup and look nice for Cross."

The heist angle isn't really all that important, because it goes straight to hell after ten minutes and from there on it's all laser beams, tanks and explosions. If you mung together Gordon Gekko and Millennial McGuyver, it's otherwise structurally identical to Iron Man.

*grumble grumble grumble*

[Dienekes]

I still think it'd be a better movie if they just had Hope in the ant-suit.

"...And that's how your mother was scheduled only to appear in our sequel."
"Oh, Dad, that's so awful. But... I realise now that you were only trying to protect me."
"Thank you darling. And I realise now that you are a grown woman capable of handling harsh truths and tough decisions."
"...Really?"
"No, I still prefer to entrust this rootless stranger with negligible experience with the future of the company and probably our lives. Now put on your makeup and look nice for Cross."

The heist angle isn't really all that important, because it goes straight to hell after ten minutes and from there on it's all laser beams, tanks and explosions. If you mung together Gordon Gekko and Millennial McGuyver, it's otherwise structurally identical to Iron Man.

*grumble grumble grumble*

Ehh, I found Scott and friends in general more interesting than Hope's daddy issues. But what do I know, I thought both Thor movies were boring romantic dreck.

[SaintRidley]

Thor being Shakespearean Comedy is a bit of a stretch, but I can see the comparisons.

Yeah, I was putting it down quick. More properly it seems like one of Shakespeare's histories got mixed with one of his comedies and a dash of one of the comedic romances, minus the cross dressing.

[The Glyphstone]

I still think it'd be a better movie if they just had Hope in the ant-suit.

"...And that's how your mother was scheduled only to appear in our sequel."
"Oh, Dad, that's so awful. But... I realise now that you were only trying to protect me."
"Thank you darling. And I realise now that you are a grown woman capable of handling harsh truths and tough decisions."
"...Really?"
"No, I still prefer to entrust this rootless stranger with negligible experience with the future of the company and probably our lives. Now put on your makeup and look nice for Cross."

The heist angle isn't really all that important, because it goes straight to hell after ten minutes and from there on it's all laser beams, tanks and explosions. If you mung together Gordon Gekko and Millennial McGuyver, it's otherwise structurally identical to Iron Man.

*grumble grumble grumble*

I guess you totally missed the exchange between Hope and Scott in the car, then? Where she basically says everything you are complaining about, and Scott bluntly points out that he gets the suit because in Hank's eyes, he is expendable and Hank would rather see the mission fail and the world be thrown into chaos than to risk Hope dying? And heists always go to hell after ten minutes, that is also an important part of the genre. They don't usually involve shrunken tanks, admittedly.

[SaintRidley]

Opening domestic gross was a bit over $58 million. Better than Incredible Hulk's $55 million as a raw number, and fortunately it had a smaller budget. I feel like a lot of people have been taking a wait-and-see approach. The Prophet thinks the "Ant-Man will flop" attitude might be causing a self-fulfilling prophecy.

[Lacuna Caster]

I guess you totally missed the exchange between Hope and Scott in the car, then? Where she basically says everything you are complaining about, and Scott bluntly points out that he gets the suit because in Hank's eyes, he is expendable and Hank would rather see the mission fail and the world be thrown into chaos than to risk Hope dying?
Nope, I saw it. The movie attempting to explain itself doesn't make the explanation either logically or thematically cogent. Hope is still being babied to no terribly clear purpose.

"Now Hope, your remember your part in this: In order to keep you safe, I will need you close to Cross, inside the building to which I intend to affix massive hypobaric explosives."
"Are those... safe?"
"100% guaranteed. Real doozies. They will literally leave nothing standing."

(I guess heists in heist movies tend to run into trouble, but don't they usually solve the problem with additional heistery?)

[Lacuna Caster]

Now that I think about it, wouldn't shrinking the ICBM with those little sticky-pads have been a fairly straightforward solution to solving the nuclear crisis? Even if there's an area/volume-limitation, you'd at least tear open the hull. (I now have this mental image of a tiny mushroom cloud in Hank's palm.)

For the matter, Hope could just throw the enlarger-pads onto herself, grow to 500 feet tall, and crush the Pym building under her heel. And we could all sing this song (www.youtube.com/watch?v=XT13ijUfSts).

To be fair though, I wouldn't mind so much if Scott and the Wacky Latino Brigade were brought aboard as advisors or logistic support. Terry and Bruce style.

[LaZodiac]

Nope, I saw it. The movie attempting to explain itself doesn't make the explanation either logically or thematically cogent. Hope is still being babied to no terribly clear purpose.

"Now Hope, your remember your part in this: In order to keep you safe, I will need you close to Cross, inside the building to which I intend to affix massive hypobaric explosives."
"Are those... safe?"
"100% guaranteed. Real doozies. They will literally leave nothing standing."

(I guess heists in heist movies tend to run into trouble, but don't they usually solve the problem with additional heistery?)

Yeah but this is also a super hero, so when the going get tough the tough get tiny and start rocket punching people across rooms.

The way I see Hope is that she's one big "okay so we can't actually have her in the suit because she'd be too good for this plot, we should let her shine in a later movie where she's actually doing something challenging".

Because Hope IS right, if she was given the suit she'd just easily finish this mission without any problem. And then we wouldn't have a movie. So lets save her obvious badassery for later when it's needed, movie making wise. The in universe reason still works because Hank genuinely thinks Cross won't hurt her.

[The New Bruceski]

(I guess heists in heist movies tend to run into trouble, but don't they usually solve the problem with additional heistery?)

The modern Italian Job solves the problem with a car commercial. Ocean's 12 does it with a cheap magic trick. Reservoir Dogs does it by killing everybody. The glitch is the chance for the Crew to use whatever skills they have that weren't already being used, whether it's hardcore driving ability or a superpowered fistfight. Sometimes, particularly if the mastermind's main trait is being especially thinky, those skills may be more heisting or "it's all part of the plan" (Ocean's 11 and Inside Man for example) but not necessarily.

[Rodin]

Opening domestic gross was a bit over $58 million. Better than Incredible Hulk's $55 million as a raw number, and fortunately it had a smaller budget. I feel like a lot of people have been taking a wait-and-see approach. The Prophet thinks the "Ant-Man will flop" attitude might be causing a self-fulfilling prophecy.

A big part of it will be the combined lack of name recognition and disdain for his power set. Shrinking yourself and controlling ants aren't exactly sexy powers, and I wasn't planning on going to see the movie until I watched the trailer.

Even so, I was super skeptical going in. The last two MCU movies I'd seen (Iron Man 3 and Avengers 2) had both disappointed me due to pretty poor plotting and a strong "been there, already seen this" feeling. And I really, really enjoyed Ant Man. It had a different feel from the rest of the movies I've seen from the MCU, they did a pretty good job with the actions sequences and the comedy was hilarious.

Also, literally the only thing I knew about Hank Pym was the "hitting his wife" thing and I felt like they dealt with that quite well at the beginning of the movie - it was mentioned, dealt with, and then they didn't let it get in the way of the rest of the movie while still not forgetting about it. While I'm sure it won't please everyone, as a casual fan I thought they did a good job with it.

Edit:

Oh, my one major complaint was the super blatant sponsorship/advertisement stuff. Come on, guys, you can make the advertising more subtle than that.

[LaZodiac]

A big part of it will be the combined lack of name recognition and disdain for his power set. Shrinking yourself and controlling ants aren't exactly sexy powers, and I wasn't planning on going to see the movie until I watched the trailer.

Even so, I was super skeptical going in. The last two MCU movies I'd seen (Iron Man 3 and Avengers 2) had both disappointed me due to pretty poor plotting and a strong "been there, already seen this" feeling. And I really, really enjoyed Ant Man. It had a different feel from the rest of the movies I've seen from the MCU, they did a pretty good job with the actions sequences and the comedy was hilarious.

Also, literally the only thing I knew about Hank Pym was the "hitting his wife" thing and I felt like they dealt with that quite well at the beginning of the movie - it was mentioned, dealt with, and then they didn't let it get in the way of the rest of the movie while still not forgetting about it. While I'm sure it won't please everyone, as a casual fan I thought they did a good job with it.

Edit:

Oh, my one major complaint was the super blatant sponsorship/advertisement stuff. Come on, guys, you can make the advertising more subtle than that.

The only bit of advertisement I can think of is...Thomas the Tank Engine and whatever company it is that makes that garbage Siri phone. Which should show how good the advertising is. And for what it's worse those scenes where also really awesome.

[Dusk Eclipse]

You are missing Basking Robbins... and they always find out.

[LaZodiac]

You are missing Basking Robbins... and they always find out.

That doesn't really seem like advertisement to me because it's like..."our heroes last resort before stealing **** again is working at this ****ty ice cream parlor, and the management is corrupt and hate working there but have to fire him anyway because he's a criminal, but he lets him steal one of the "fruit smoothy things" and the hero is thrown throwing it out after taking one sip of it."

What I'm saying is that this is meant to be positive buzz for Baskin Robbins, they've got a weird idea of what positive is.

[Dusk Eclipse]

I was only going for the obvious joke, besides, as I said earlier, "There is no such thing as bad publicity". And maybe I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure Scott finished the Mango fruit blast before tossing it in the garbage, I clearly remember hearing the "I'm slurping an empty beverage through a straw" sound while he was walking. I could be wrong of course.

[cobaltstarfire]

I was only going for the obvious joke, besides, as I said earlier, "There is no such thing as bad publicity". And maybe I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure Scott finished the Mango fruit blast before tossing it in the garbage, I clearly remember hearing the "I'm slurping an empty beverage through a straw" sound while he was walking. I could be wrong of course.

I read that scene about the same, "I've been walking for a while and just finished this drink, now to properly dispose of it in the trash."


I didn't see it as bad publicity either personally, it played out about how one would expect that scene to play out, regardless, and I don't see that as much of a reflection on the real life company, other than maybe the "[we] always find out" part.

[theNater]

Regarding the "science", the only thing I can think is that it doesnt really work exactly how Pym described it...
My guess is that Pym doesn't actually understand it, either.

As for how it actually works, we know Pym particles interact with the brain of the person who's been shrunk. What if that interaction goes two ways, and the mass-altering effects are tied to the expectations of the user? Scott can get knocked out of the tub by a couple of gallons of water because it looks like it outweighs him, he can ride an ant because it looks big as a horse, and he punches like a man because he's been told he can. If Hank actually believes he hasn't altered his mass, then all his tests will reveal that his mass is unchanged.

[Ranxerox]

Question for those of you with better powers of observation than me. After the fight in the room where the Yellow Jacket suit was stored, a white guy in a suit darted in and took from one of the unconscious guys what appeared to be a vial of Cross's version of Pym particle. This confused me because I thought that Cross had the yellow vial of shrinking particles, but maybe after making a point that he planned on selling Hydra the suits but keeping control particles he handed off the vial to one of his body guards. I wasn't paying attention to the vial at the time so I didn't really pay that much attention to where Cross put it.

Anyway, the guy who grabbed the vial of particles, who was he and what happened to him after that?

[LaZodiac]

Question for those of you with better powers of observation than me. After the fight in the room where the Yellow Jacket suit was stored, a white guy in a suit darted in and took from one of the unconscious guys what appeared to be a vial of Cross's version of Pym particle. This confused me because I thought that Cross had the yellow vial of shrinking particles, but maybe after making a point that he planned on selling Hydra the suits but keeping control particles he handed off the vial to one of his body guards. I wasn't paying attention to the vial at the time so I didn't really pay that much attention to where Cross put it.

Anyway, the guy who grabbed the vial of particles, who was he and what happened to him after that?

I believe he was...whats his face, the head of Hydra involved here. He stole the Cross Formula, and got onto the helicopter with Cross. Cross then went psychopath and basically killed everyone on it trying to kill Ant-man also oh my god I originaly spelt that as Aunt-man holy ****.

[The Glyphstone]

I thought that vial was handed to one of the Hydra guys, as part of the deal - he was giving them the fuel, but when it ran out they'd have to come to him for more. And then Cross grabbed the fuel back from the unconscious guy because he needed it to power up the Yellowjacket suit, and said vial was the only fuel he had on hand.

[theNater]

I believe he was...whats his face, the head of Hydra involved here. He stole the Cross Formula, and got onto the helicopter with Cross. Cross then went psychopath and basically killed everyone on it trying to kill Ant-man also oh my god I originaly spelt that as Aunt-man holy ****.
My read was that he (best guess from a moment at IMDB is that it was Mitchell Carson, played by Martin Donovan) got it, and that he didn't get on the chopper, instead getting away from the building by his own means. So HYDRA now has one vial of Cross particles, but no suit and no recipe for making more, as fodder for future storylines.
It certainly wasn't very clear what happened there. I'll try to keep a careful eye on it next time I watch the film.

[huttj509]

I believe he was...whats his face, the head of Hydra involved here. He stole the Cross Formula, and got onto the helicopter with Cross. Cross then went psychopath and basically killed everyone on it trying to kill Ant-man also oh my god I originaly spelt that as Aunt-man holy ****.

Because The Man From U.N.C.L.E. is completely different. :-P

[comicshorse]

My read was that he (best guess from a moment at IMDB is that it was Mitchell Carson, played by Martin Donovan) got it, and that he didn't get on the chopper, instead getting away from the building by his own means. So HYDRA now has one vial of Cross particles, but no suit and no recipe for making more, as fodder for future storylines.
It certainly wasn't very clear what happened there. I'll try to keep a careful eye on it next time I watch the film.

That's what I thought too. The S.H.I.E.L.D guy Pym bashes into the desk a t the start of the film who know seems to be working free lance and arranged the introduction between Cross and Hydra. What he does with the particles is obviously a hook for any sequel as he might have a better idea than just selling it to Hydra

[Binks]

Nope, I saw it. The movie attempting to explain itself doesn't make the explanation either logically or thematically cogent. Hope is still being babied to no terribly clear purpose.
More along the lines of, we have 3 people. Hank, who Cross hates but will bring in there (but keep a close eye on. He can be a distraction and try to talk Cross out of it, but that's about it). Hope, who Cross likes and can get close to him to thwart whatever backup plan is in place, and Scott, who has no relation to Cross and is only good in the suit.

If we put Hope in the suit we're down a member of an already very small heist team. The initial reason was clearly to keep her safe but later on it just becomes practicality. When you have a 3 people team (later expanded, but the others are in the same boat as Scott as far as clearance), you don't waste any advantages like Hope being trusted.

Now that I think about it, wouldn't shrinking the ICBM with those little sticky-pads have been a fairly straightforward solution to solving the nuclear crisis? Even if there's an area/volume-limitation, you'd at least tear open the hull. (I now have this mental image of a tiny mushroom cloud in Hank's palm.)

For the matter, Hope could just throw the enlarger-pads onto herself, grow to 500 feet tall, and crush the Pym building under her heel. And we could all sing this song (www.youtube.com/watch?v=XT13ijUfSts).
Shrink shurikens were invented sometime after that incident. From what the movie says we can assume they're pretty new and based on the Ant Man suit's lack of any real weapons being an issue during Hank's stint in it.

As for crushing the Pym building that has a few issue.
1. The Pym particles do bad things to unprotected brains, so obviously not going to want to just throw some on Hope willy-nilly.
2. Though there is a lack of consistency we are told the particles don't change mass, so she'd be 500 tall but still have the same mass, which the building would easily hold up against.

My read was that he (best guess from a moment at IMDB is that it was Mitchell Carson, played by Martin Donovan) got it, and that he didn't get on the chopper, instead getting away from the building by his own means. So HYDRA now has one vial of Cross particles, but no suit and no recipe for making more, as fodder for future storylines.
It certainly wasn't very clear what happened there. I'll try to keep a careful eye on it next time I watch the film.
The vial is handed by Cross to a Hydra guy ('I'll manufacture the fuel' Yeah...real bright to tell the guys you're giving a super weapon platform that you're going to rip them off by keeping the fuel for it to yourself.) That hydra guy is killed and the senator guy grabs the vial during the escape then exits the building (not on the helicopter).

So a vial of the yellowjacket pym particles made it out of the building and into the hands of Hydra. Sequel hook.

[LordRahl6]

My read was that he (best guess from a moment at IMDB is that it was Mitchell Carson, played by Martin Donovan) got it, and that he didn't get on the chopper, instead getting away from the building by his own means. So HYDRA now has one vial of Cross particles, but no suit and no recipe for making more, as fodder for future storylines.
It certainly wasn't very clear what happened there. I'll try to keep a careful eye on it next time I watch the film.

Bigger question is whether HYDRA is still operating as a single organization, or if it has factionalized like SHIELD did after Captain America: The Winter Soldier. Because if is a single entity we KNOW who the buyer was and the consequences could be grave for the Director of SHIELD. On the other hand there could be two other factions of HYDRA out there with different leadership.


Grant Ward (Known leader, but unlikely to have the Serum due to Executive Meddling on Whedon's part)
Mitchell Carson (possible, but when I went to the movie he seemed more middle man(angement to me)
Baron Zemo (The Big Bad for Captain American: Civil War also the reason sopilered this section)

[Lacuna Caster]

More along the lines of, we have 3 people. Hank, who Cross hates but will bring in there (but keep a close eye on. He can be a distraction and try to talk Cross out of it, but that's about it). Hope, who Cross likes and can get close to him to thwart whatever backup plan is in place, and Scott, who has no relation to Cross and is only good in the suit.

If we put Hope in the suit we're down a member of an already very small heist team. The initial reason was clearly to keep her safe but later on it just becomes practicality. When you have a 3 people team (later expanded, but the others are in the same boat as Scott as far as clearance), you don't waste any advantages like Hope being trusted.
I've been trying to think of an adequate response to this for nearly an hour. I'm going to settle for this.

Point 1: 'I need you on the inside to distract Cross' is Hank's initial excuse, not one he admits to later.
Point 2: As it turns out, Cross is not even a bit distracted by Hope being on the inside. (Which also puts her in danger.)
Point 3: Even if this idea had worked, it ignores alternative potential outcomes. (e.g, the advantages of Cross being distracted are probably outweighed by the advantages of Hope stealing Yellowjacket days, weeks or months earlier, without any need for elaborate training, and before Cross can get suspicious.)

So... I kinda feel this line of argument is completely bogus. (Saying 'Oh, but we wouldn't have a movie otherwise' is also kind of bogus: No, you wouldn't have this movie, but you might, e.g, have a movie where Hope is given the damn suit, gets the damn jacket, and proceeds to kick ass and cure cancer for the remaining 90 minutes running time. I'm down with that.)


Shrink shurikens were invented sometime after that incident.
That post was mostly intended for humour, but again, I don't recall the movie saying that.

[Rakaydos]

Now that I think about it, wouldn't shrinking the ICBM with those little sticky-pads have been a fairly straightforward solution to solving the nuclear crisis?

Right, because reducing the distance between atoms of a -Nuclear Warhead- wont end badly. At all.

Definitely not a... critcal... mistake, right?

[Lacuna Caster]

Right, because reducing the distance between atoms of a -Nuclear Warhead- wont end badly. At all.

Definitely not a... critcal... mistake, right?
In the same sense that conservation of energy doesn't concentrate all the heat of a normal-sized human body into roughly one-millionth the volume every time the suit shrinks, not-vaporising the occupant instantly. Yes.

[cobaltstarfire]

The easy answer really is that they hadn't been invented yet at the time. Either using them was a good idea and they didn't exist to be used, or using them was a bad idea and that's why they weren't used.

[Lacuna Caster]

The easy answer really is that they hadn't been invented yet at the time. Either using them was a good idea and they didn't exist to be used, or using them was a bad idea and that's why they weren't used.
Oh, this is me just bitching about the Highly Selective Usefulness Of Giant Eagles In Tolkien. I honestly don't mind about the technical incongruities or plot-amnesia so much.

It's just that the whole production stinks of this kind of nonsense (http://www.themarysue.com/invisible-women/). Stinks of it.

[Reddish Mage]

So....forgetting for a second the highly inconsistent and physically impossible way they treat shrinking and enlarging, lets list out some of the plot inconsistencies surrounding the main heist:




Considering they were going to blow up the building containing all the research anyway, they didn't actually need to get inside and get the yellowjacket suit...it would be a useless suit without all that research, and...until very late in the movie...Darren Cross didn't have the ability to shrink a live subject yet.
They didn't have to actually sneak into the building to blow it up, they could have used a missile or tunneled beneath the building
They didn't need to act at the last minute. Hank Pym was supposedly watching Scott Lang since "the Vista job." Presumably considering using him as an Ant Man...and explicitly he was discussing the job with Hope months ago, why'd he wait until the very last second to act?
That's aside from all the stupid sexist and overprotective father bull**** Hank unilaterally withdrew from at the very end of the movie anyway preventing him from allowing Hope to just don the Ant Man suit and carry out the operation herself...with the added benefit it could be done months before Darren went full paranoid-psycho and beef things up to the anth degree
Incidentally, does the idea of all the data being stored on a single set of servers inside a single physical location in this day and age strike anyone else as stinking to high heaven?
Is 15 minutes really enough of a warning to get EVERYONE out of a building that size?
Assuming everyone gets out...doesn't that leave all the scientists and Darren himself in a position where he would be capable of just repeating all that research...but with the benefit of fresh memory and hindsight?



Also on a completely unrelated note Both Hank and Hope mentioned that Darren's already fragile brain chemistry was upset by using Pym particles without a helmet at somepoint. When exactly would this have occurred? Seriously, one of the most important formative scenes in the entire movie appears to be somewhere on the cutting room floor.

[Rogar Demonblud]

I think that last point might have been a psyche out ploy more than anything else, although he was standing around the lab during the testing without a MOPP suit.

[theNater]

So....forgetting for a second the highly inconsistent and physically impossible way they treat shrinking and enlarging, lets list out some of the plot inconsistencies surrounding the main heist:
I can answer most of these.


Assuming everyone gets out...doesn't that leave all the scientists and Darren himself in a position where he would be capable of just repeating all that research...but with the benefit of fresh memory and hindsight?
The production of the particles should be extremely sensitive processes; temperature variations of 1/10th or 1/100th of a degree matter, for example. Unless the staff were memorizing their notes on a regular basis, this is a setback of years, if not decades. Keep in mind that there's no way to completely destroy information, so whatever our heroes do is only a delaying tactic. The hope is to delay Ant-Man type shrinking until routine security/defensive measures can handle it; probably not more than a couple of decades, given Falcon's capabilities.


Considering they were going to blow up the building containing all the research anyway, they didn't actually need to get inside and get the yellowjacket suit...it would be a useless suit without all that research, and...until very late in the movie...Darren Cross didn't have the ability to shrink a live subject yet.
Being kept in miniaturized form meant that the suit might make it out of the explosion in one piece, and its design would contain hints about the particles. They want to confirm destruction of the suit because someone who found it would be that much closer(months, probably, but maybe years) to the technology.


They didn't have to actually sneak into the building to blow it up, they could have used a missile or tunneled beneath the building
Once there to confirm destruction of the suit, there's no reason not to bring explosives with them.


They didn't need to act at the last minute. Hank Pym was supposedly watching Scott Lang since "the Vista job." Presumably considering using him as an Ant Man...and explicitly he was discussing the job with Hope months ago, why'd he wait until the very last second to act?
Cross made a breakthrough they weren't expecting. In the space of 24 hours, they went from having months to having days.


That's aside from all the stupid sexist and overprotective father bull**** Hank unilaterally withdrew from at the very end of the movie anyway preventing him from allowing Hope to just don the Ant Man suit and carry out the operation herself...with the added benefit it could be done months before Darren went full paranoid-psycho and beef things up to the anth degree
I'm not seeing a plot inconsistency here. People are sometimes stupid and sexist. And you'll note that he didn't fully withdraw it after learning that rescuing Janet might yet be possible.


Incidentally, does the idea of all the data being stored on a single set of servers inside a single physical location in this day and age strike anyone else as stinking to high heaven?
There's a tradeoff, because everything that makes it easier to reproduce in case of catastrophic failure also makes it easier for a competitor to copy for their own use. Only keeping one copy is reasonable, barely.


Is 15 minutes really enough of a warning to get EVERYONE out of a building that size?
In real life, probably not. But the Avengers evacuated that chunk of Sokovia in minutes or hours. Apparently evacuations are easier in the MCU than in real life.

[Rogar Demonblud]

I imagine any research lab probably has a (well) rehearsed evacuation plan. Also, it was at night, so they were probably down to minimal staff.

[Dragonus45]

I'm will waiting for someone to explain how Pym was being sexist in wanting to keep his daughter out of the suit. His reasons seemed to have a lot more to do with him worrying for her safety and preferring to use a disposable mook than thinking she was lesser for being a woman. Also I figure that for corporate trade secrets like that it would be reasonable to keep everything on on site copies.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Also I figure that for corporate trade secrets like that it would be reasonable to keep everything on on site copies.

This. The only way to keep secrets is to put the servers in a room you have the only key to. Putting anything sensitive in "the cloud" or in someone else's servers is ridiculously dangerous. I worked in a bank in England where the databases were stored in "the bunker". I thought they were being melodramatic until I was informed that no, in fact they did purchase a WW2 bunker to put their servers in. Access to that place was extremely controlled, as you can imagine.

As to having an off-site backup facility (for fires and other localised disasters): feel free to imagine that, after they blew up the HQ building to smithereens, they went to the back-up facility and did the same. Back up facilities (with data stored in tape) are secure, but not ant-man secure. It would have dragged on the film for no reason and little enjoyment.

Grey Wolf

[Lacuna Caster]

I'm will waiting for someone to explain how Pym was being sexist in wanting to keep his daughter out of the suit. His reasons seemed to have a lot more to do with him worrying for her safety and preferring to use a disposable mook than thinking she was lesser for being a woman. Also I figure that for corporate trade secrets like that it would be reasonable to keep everything on on site copies.
I don't know if Pym was being sexist per se, but I suspect Disney & Marvel execs were... less than enthusiastic about Hope or Wasp being given a more prominent story role. (I have somewhat different (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?428336-Marvel-s-Ant-Man/page5&p=19564269#post19564269) complaints with Pym's motivations.)

Given the film's tortuous development history and the parent company's integral strategy of not selling toys to girls, that is.

[Psyren]

I can answer most of these.


The production of the particles should be extremely sensitive processes; temperature variations of 1/10th or 1/100th of a degree matter, for example. Unless the staff were memorizing their notes on a regular basis, this is a setback of years, if not decades. Keep in mind that there's no way to completely destroy information, so whatever our heroes do is only a delaying tactic. The hope is to delay Ant-Man type shrinking until routine security/defensive measures can handle it; probably not more than a couple of decades, given Falcon's capabilities.


Being kept in miniaturized form meant that the suit might make it out of the explosion in one piece, and its design would contain hints about the particles. They want to confirm destruction of the suit because someone who found it would be that much closer(months, probably, but maybe years) to the technology.


Once there to confirm destruction of the suit, there's no reason not to bring explosives with them.


Cross made a breakthrough they weren't expecting. In the space of 24 hours, they went from having months to having days.


I'm not seeing a plot inconsistency here. People are sometimes stupid and sexist. And you'll note that he didn't fully withdraw it after learning that rescuing Janet might yet be possible.


There's a tradeoff, because everything that makes it easier to reproduce in case of catastrophic failure also makes it easier for a competitor to copy for their own use. Only keeping one copy is reasonable, barely.


In real life, probably not. But the Avengers evacuated that chunk of Sokovia in minutes or hours. Apparently evacuations are easier in the MCU than in real life.



Agreed with all of these. I will point out that destroying the servers with no failover or replica is a bit dumb for such a high-tech company, but hey, Hollywood. No matter how worried they are about industrial espionage, having their life's blood in only one place is nonsensical. I mean, an earthquake could have taken it all out.

[Binks]

Point 1: 'I need you on the inside to distract Cross' is Hank's initial excuse, not one he admits to later.
Point 2: As it turns out, Cross is not even a bit distracted by Hope being on the inside. (Which also puts her in danger.)
Point 3: Even if this idea had worked, it ignores alternative potential outcomes. (e.g, the advantages of Cross being distracted are probably outweighed by the advantages of Hope stealing Yellowjacket days, weeks or months earlier, without any need for elaborate training, and before Cross can get suspicious.)
1. Doesn't make it any less true later. Excuses can be valid reasoning, just poor motive after all. *shrug*
2. A fact none of the heroes thought was true (right up until they're in that room the assumption they all have is that Cross doesn't suspect Hope).
3. I'm assuming they were keeping the Yellowjacket and related date under ever tighter wraps (in that little chamber it went away to when they caught Ant Man at the end) until the unveiling. It's not unreasonable to assume that the security was too tight except for this one shot when they were unveiling it.

Not to mention that Hope would still have required a lot of training. She can talk to the Ants, and can fight, but she has no experience in the suit. Hope being in the suit means she needs to be trained up for at least a week or so (jump through keyhole, doesn't matter how good you are, you need to practice timing, and talking to the ants at their size has got to be quite different than doing so at large size), and the first time Hank was willing to give her the suit Scott's already close to being ready to go.

In other words, at the point in time when Hank and Hope finally discuss Hope's mother and why she can't wear the suit, you have, as options for the heist:
1. Expendable guy who can use the suit (~50%, but working on it), is learning to communicate with the ants, and is a master thief (don't discount the fact that Scott was picked for the job because he did something just like this in the past. That's what got him thrown in prison. Hope has probably never stolen anything in her life, Scott burgled another high tech firm with supposedly impenetrable security without the suit.
2. Valuable daughter who Hank might be willing to give the suit to, can talk to the ants, but has no training with the suit (0%), is not a thief, and has an alternative means of entry to the facility that would allow her to help out in ways Scott can't (planting the signal decoy. Who else could have done that?).

I don't know about you, but I'm picking the first guy to wear the suit, maybe regretting not speaking about this sooner, and moving forwards.

That post was mostly intended for humour, but again, I don't recall the movie saying that.
When Hank first introduces the disks he says something along the lines of 'I invented these for you to have a weapon...' or similar. I don't remember the exact line but the line gave the impression Hank had invented the disks as a weapon for whoever would end up wearing the suit after him.

That, plus the fact none of the propaganda stuff shown of Hank's Ant Man days has anything disk related, gave me the impression the disks were new. It would make sense after all, he spent so much time working on how to shrink or grow other things to get Janet back, the disks would be a logical growth of that research.

[Lacuna Caster]

1. Doesn't make it any less true later. Excuses can be valid reasoning, just poor motive after all. *shrug*
2. A fact none of the heroes thought was true (right up until they're in that room the assumption they all have is that Cross doesn't suspect Hope).
3. I'm assuming they were keeping the Yellowjacket and related date under ever tighter wraps (in that little chamber it went away to when they caught Ant Man at the end) until the unveiling. It's not unreasonable to assume that the security was too tight except for this one shot when they were unveiling it.
If excuses can be valid reasoning, why can't hindsight? And if you're going to assume X and Y about Cross' security plans, why don't I get to assume Hope would have a massive head-start in terms of training? Something Hope very certainly thought was true.

Frankly though, I consider all this a distraction from the core point. Why are you so committed to generously rationalising an evidently poorly-borne-out and thematically-erratic in-movie decision, when it's likely that out-of-movie factors just didn't want Hope or Wasp doing anything much important? Never mind defending Pym, how do you defend Marvel?

[Dragonus45]

If excuses can be valid reasoning, why can't hindsight? And if you're going to assume X and Y about Cross' security plans, why don't I get to assume Hope would have a massive head-start in terms of training? Something Hope very certainly thought was true.

Frankly though, I consider all this a distraction from the core point. Why are you so committed to generously rationalizing an evidently poorly-borne-out and thematically-erratic in-movie decision, when it's likely that out-of-movie factors just didn't want Hope or Wasp doing anything much important? Never mind defending Pym, how do you defend Marvel?

I defend Marvel by pointing out the movie they made was good on its own merits. They need no more justification than that, but if you must have more the dual themes of fatherhood and familial redemption don't work if Hope is the one in the suit. Also how on earth is it thematically erratic? Also the assumption that they would only have a limited window to strike is one that makes sense under genre of "heist film" so its reasonable to assume that it was under tighter security before hand.

[cobaltstarfire]

We all know that marketing for these things has a problem, there's nothing to argue about on that front. I don't know about anyone else, but I don't think that's a reason to try to force the content of the movie to all be inherently bad/problematic/whatever.

The solution was already in that article you posted, ask for/demand good merchandize for girls, and then make sure to buy that merchandise. That last part is the important part. It doesn't matter if merch exists if not enough of it gets moved. (merchandise not moving is the reason YJL got cancelled as an example)


I do have lots of hope for a Wasp movie, the set up for it really made it look like it'd be a solo movie to me, or maybe I'm just being overly optimistic and seeing what I want. I rather enjoyed Hope as a character, whereas Widow doesn't really interest me at all.

[Lacuna Caster]

I defend Marvel by pointing out the movie they made was good on its own merits. They need no more justification than that, but if you must have more the dual themes of fatherhood and familial redemption don't work if Hope is the one in the suit.
I'm sure they wouldn't. I'm suggesting you'd have an entirely different movie with a different set of events and different themes, quite possibly closer to the director's intent.

(And yes, I do (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?428336-Marvel-s-Ant-Man/page4&p=19563525#post19563525) think it's thematically erratic. And given that Cross explicitly sets up triple security on the day, that's not a reasonable assumption.)

I'm not trying to argue that everything about the movie is bad. I'm just saying that this one aspect- the awkward sidelining of female characters- is bad, and I wish folks would face it and move on. I don't like spurious denials.

[Dragonus45]

I'm sure they wouldn't. I'm suggesting you'd have an entirely different movie with a different set of events and different themes, quite possibly closer to the director's intent.

(And yes, I do (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?428336-Marvel-s-Ant-Man/page4&p=19563525#post19563525) think it's thematically erratic. And given that Cross explicitly sets up triple security on the day, that's not a reasonable assumption.)

I'm not trying to argue that everything about the movie is bad. I'm just saying that this one aspect- the awkward sidelining of female characters- is bad, and I wish folks would face it and move on. I don't like spurious denials.

Well your entirely different movie is not the one we are talking about. This one did have those themes, and what with Scotts daughter growing up to be stature I find the parallels were quite enjoyable. As for your link you still seem to be overlooking the issue Scott himself bring up about disposability. Scott Lang is a cool buy, but when things go wrong Pym would rather let him die than risk sending Hope in. I do understand Pym's fears for her safety even if she is old enough that they hold her back more than protect her, they are reasonable if misguided. Also while Hope is probably a better action hero but Scott is the better thief and that's what they need at the moment. What awkward sidelining? Hope was still an important character, she still contributed, and her arc was given just as much importance as her fathers was. Just because Marvel is slow rolling out its heroes to make the Super Movie Bubble last longer and she is a bit delayed does not mean she is getting sidelined because she is a woman. You want to talk about spurious denials? Lets talk about spurious accusations.



We all know that marketing for these things has a problem, there's nothing to argue about on that front. I don't know about anyone else, but I don't think that's a reason to try to force the content of the movie to all be inherently bad/problematic/whatever.

The solution was already in that article you posted, ask for/demand good merchandize for girls, and then make sure to buy that merchandise. That last part is the important part. It doesn't matter if merch exists if not enough of it gets moved. (merchandise not moving is the reason YJL got cancelled as an example)


Eh I have never noticed a problem with the marketing so I think there is something to argue on that front. As for the merch thing we have already beaten this one to death on the forums but generally women themselves tend towards not buying merch with women on them as much as people seem to think they would. It simply doesn't move.

[Kitten Champion]

I saw the running gag of Hope being implicitly better at superheroics as a sly meta-critique on the genre, with the eventual pay-off in the epilogue. Admittedly it's a joke which would've worked better in Marvel's phase one, but the implication - that Hope was literally born to do this and yet is held back to being a supporting figure due to the sheer stubbornness of a rich old white dude - were pretty clear.

[LaZodiac]

I saw the running gag of Hope being implicitly better at superheroics as a sly meta-critique on the genre, with the eventual pay-off in the epilogue. Admittedly it's a joke which would've worked better in Marvel's phase one, but the implication - that Hope was literally born to do this and yet is held back to being a supporting figure due to the sheer stubbornness of a rich old white dude - were pretty clear.

He's not just a rich old dude, he's her father. And what he's doing has well intention, even if she doesn't feel as such. I don't think it's sexist, at all. If it was actually sexist it would of done something completely stupid like have her go against her Dad and be proved wrong. What we have in Ant-Man is a reasonable and GOOD motivation for Pym to not let his daughter do this, that when all is said and done he realizes he was wrong and asks to help work on the Wasp suit with her. Pym's entire plot is learning to stop coddling his daughter. It may in fact be anti sexist in that regard.

Also we're getting a kickin' rad Miss Marvel movie. Yes, we should of been getting a female lead super hero movie SOONER, but "eventually" is better then "never" in my books.

[theNater]

I'm will waiting for someone to explain how Pym was being sexist in wanting to keep his daughter out of the suit. His reasons seemed to have a lot more to do with him worrying for her safety and preferring to use a disposable mook than thinking she was lesser for being a woman.
When Hank refuses to let Hope wear the suit, he's saying she's not capable of deciding for herself what risks she takes. Note that he's perfectly willing to let Scott decide for himself whether or not to wear the suit. Coupled with blaming himself for Janet's loss, a strong argument can be made that he's stuck in the old "it is a man's duty to protect his wife and daughters" mindset, which is rooted in the idea that women can't protect themselves.

Note that I don't particularly blame Hank for this; it's most likely a result of his upbringing. Heck, I'm decades younger than he is, and that's a lesson I was inundated with growing up. The fact that he's making progress-that he's a better person at the end of the film than at the beginning-is the important part (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0490.html). Everyone has flaws, after all.


As for the merch thing we have already beaten this one to death on the forums but generally women themselves tend towards not buying merch with women on them as much as people seem to think they would. It simply doesn't move.
Just due to timing, I'm going to share my merch story now. I've been visiting my nephews a bit this month, and they are fans of a show called Paw Patrol(puppy superheroes, basically). I watched a few episodes with them, and at the suiting-up phase, regular as clockwork, one of my nephews says "I wanna be the pink one!" Guess which one is the only girl on a team of six puppies. For bonus points, guess which one does not appear on his Paw Patrol hat.

[Binks]

If excuses can be valid reasoning, why can't hindsight? And if you're going to assume X and Y about Cross' security plans, why don't I get to assume Hope would have a massive head-start in terms of training? Something Hope very certainly thought was true.
How would she have gotten a head start? Hank obviously has never let her wear the suit, so she'd be starting from square 1 with the suit-related power (not so much with the other stuff, but as I said, Scott's already got progress in every area, and she has uses other than being in the suit, unlike him).

Frankly though, I consider all this a distraction from the core point. Why are you so committed to generously rationalising an evidently poorly-borne-out and thematically-erratic in-movie decision, when it's likely that out-of-movie factors just didn't want Hope or Wasp doing anything much important? Never mind defending Pym, how do you defend Marvel?
I defend Marvel with the simple fact that this is an Ant Man movie. It's not a Wasp movie. If you want to argue that it should have been a Wasp movie that's fine, but it was planned from day 1 as an Ant Man movie, the character of Ant Man is far better known (even if some bad publicity) than Wasp, and it was always going to be an Ant Man movie.

It's like criticizing Cap 2 for not being a Black Widow movie. That's kind of not the point.

If you want good female superhero movies (and heaven knows I do as well) then say that, don't go tearing down a good movie because it's not precisely what you wanted.

Does the lack of a Wasp in this movie make sense from a Watsonian perspective (within the context of its established universe)?
Yes. There are good in-story reasons for there not being a Wasp during the course of this movie.

If you don't like the Doylist (out of story) reasons for the lack of a Wasp that's fine, but there's no reason to extend that to criticisms of the story itself.

Realistically at the end of the day I'm not really arguing with you. I would have enjoyed seeing more of Hope or Janet as the Wasp. Hopefully (pun intended?) we'll get to see Wasp kicking around in later movies being awesome alongside Scott (the stinger pretty clearly demonstrates that, and that she's probably getting a better suit than his :smalltongue:). I'm just pointing out that they justified pretty well the lack of a real Wasp presence within the context of the story.

[Kitten Champion]

He's not just a rich old dude, he's her father. And what he's doing has well intention, even if she doesn't feel as such. I don't think it's sexist, at all. If it was actually sexist it would of done something completely stupid like have her go against her Dad and be proved wrong. What we have in Ant-Man is a reasonable and GOOD motivation for Pym to not let his daughter do this, that when all is said and done he realizes he was wrong and asks to help work on the Wasp suit with her. Pym's entire plot is learning to stop coddling his daughter. It may in fact be anti sexist in that regard.

Also we're getting a kickin' rad Miss Marvel movie. Yes, we should of been getting a female lead super hero movie SOONER, but "eventually" is better then "never" in my books.

Oh, no, I'm not referring to the internal justification for Hank Pym's actions within the plot. The central theme of the movie is clearly redemption, Pym's overwhelming motivation was to avoid what he sees as yet another catastrophic consequence to his own choices. Be it creating the Pym particles in the first place, weaponizing them, losing his wife, abandoning his daughter emotionally, or mentoring Darren Cross only to abandon him when he started resembling his own worst traits. He sought out some way to stop this final insult - the potential carnage his technology could unleash upon the world - using the method which, while clearly not the most practical as the movie shows us, was one he could justify to himself at the end of the day.

However, external to the plot and its themes there's this winking-at-the-camera aspect to her character's portrayal as this omni-competent serious heroic character that's not given the cool suit and superpowers despite all objective reasoning pinning her as more than capable of fulfilling that role. I can't help think, given the way the movie framed her, that it was conscious commentary on the genre's lack of diversity as this imposition from above while anyone can see why that's pretty BS.

[cobaltstarfire]

Eh I have never noticed a problem with the marketing so I think there is something to argue on that front. As for the merch thing we have already beaten this one to death on the forums but generally women themselves tend towards not buying merch with women on them as much as people seem to think they would. It simply doesn't move.

Yeah that's probably why my main point was that if you want it you have to buy it.

[Tyndmyr]

I don't know if Pym was being sexist per se, but I suspect Disney & Marvel execs were... less than enthusiastic about Hope or Wasp being given a more prominent story role. (I have somewhat different (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?428336-Marvel-s-Ant-Man/page5&p=19564269#post19564269) complaints with Pym's motivations.)

Given the film's tortuous development history and the parent company's integral strategy of not selling toys to girls, that is.

What....Disney? Disney doesn't sell toys to girls?

If there's one company willing to make movies for girls, and make tie-in toys for them, it's probably Disney.

[The Glyphstone]

What....Disney? Disney doesn't sell toys to girls?

If there's one company willing to make movies for girls, and make tie-in toys for them, it's probably Disney.

It's true, but missing a key variable - non-Princess toys. Disney's Princess line is their 500-pound gorilla of merch and movies aimed at girls. In Disney Exec logic, there is no need to market non-Princess material to girls, because that is their 'girl-focus' product line.

[Psyren]

Oh, no, I'm not referring to the internal justification for Hank Pym's actions within the plot. The central theme of the movie is clearly redemption, Pym's overwhelming motivation was to avoid what he sees as yet another catastrophic consequence to his own choices. Be it creating the Pym particles in the first place, weaponizing them, losing his wife, abandoning his daughter emotionally, or mentoring Darren Cross only to abandon him when he started resembling his own worst traits. He sought out some way to stop this final insult - the potential carnage his technology could unleash upon the world - using the method which, while clearly not the most practical as the movie shows us, was one he could justify to himself at the end of the day.

However, external to the plot and its themes there's this winking-at-the-camera aspect to her character's portrayal as this omni-competent serious heroic character that's not given the cool suit and superpowers despite all objective reasoning pinning her as more than capable of fulfilling that role. I can't help think, given the way the movie framed her, that it was conscious commentary on the genre's lack of diversity as this imposition from above while anyone can see why that's pretty BS.

Yep - they're basically guilty of the school of thought that "if we hang a lampshade on it, everyone will think we're doing it ironically and give us a pass." MovieBob commented on this directly in his review.

I guess we'll all just have to hold out hope for Captain Marvel...

[The Glyphstone]

Yep - they're basically guilty of the school of thought that "if we hang a lampshade on it, everyone will think we're doing it ironically and give us a pass." MovieBob commented on this directly in his review.

I guess we'll all just have to hold out hope for Captain Marvel...

It might also be a bite-the-hand scenario, commentary by the director on Executive Meddling rather than an attempt at irony.

[Kitten Champion]

It might also be a bite-the-hand scenario, commentary by the director on Executive Meddling rather than an attempt at irony.

Possibly. As I said it would have worked well I think if this was a phase one movie and we would have seen Hope in the Avengers. Still, I'm not as anxious about Marvel's diversity issues at the moment, so I found the meta-critique just kind of interesting.

I'm curious to see what Lilly will look like in the Wasp armour as I rather enjoyed the Wasp visual effect from the flashback - Tinkerbell meets Iron Man amuses me - and I kind of... well, the Hope character spends most of the movie somewhere between annoyed and anxious (understandably, it would be glib of them for her to be too lighthearted especially opposite Scott) with a few good moments of drama punctuated with a nice scene with Douglas before the third act, but only at the end where she's in a more comfortable situation do we see a relaxed and happy Hope and I want see more of her where she isn't surrounded by tension and daddy issues.

[Psyren]

To be fair, none of the three is ever really relaxed, they all feel the sword of Damocles dangling overhead throughout the film for different reasons. Scott is just better at hiding his stress behind snarky gallows humor, while Hank buries his fears under his stock senex archetype. So that aspect isn't unique to Hope. (Though I'll also note that she's the one in the most danger of the trio, so it's understandable that her stress shows a bit more prominently.)

Speaking of which, I do have to give Evangeline kudos for the range of emotion we got from Hope in this film. It would have been all too easy to make her yet another Badass Hollywood Ice Queen, yet her fear around Cross and her anger at her father (and their tearful reconciliation) were all very humanizing moments for her that I wasn't expecting based on slugging Paul Rudd in the trailer.

[Rodin]

When Hank refuses to let Hope wear the suit, he's saying she's not capable of deciding for herself what risks she takes. Note that he's perfectly willing to let Scott decide for himself whether or not to wear the suit. Coupled with blaming himself for Janet's loss, a strong argument can be made that he's stuck in the old "it is a man's duty to protect his wife and daughters" mindset, which is rooted in the idea that women can't protect themselves.

Note that I don't particularly blame Hank for this; it's most likely a result of his upbringing. Heck, I'm decades younger than he is, and that's a lesson I was inundated with growing up. The fact that he's making progress-that he's a better person at the end of the film than at the beginning-is the important part (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0490.html). Everyone has flaws, after all.


I didn't get that at all. He was happy to fight side-by-side with his wife and let her take all the same risks he did. He obviously felt that Janet was perfectly capable of protecting herself.

The problem he has in the present is that Hope is literally the only family he has left - the only thing he has left to live for. This causes him to make an irrational choice and not give the suit to the person best suited for it. Gender doesn't matter here - if Hope had been a boy the plot point would have been exactly the same.

Hank's torn between "protect the world" and "protect my family", and protecting his family wins.

[Reddish Mage]

I think it's quite clear from Hank's own story that he is keeping Hope because he draws a parallel to "letting" Janet on the missions and lost her.

Also whether or not in Hank's mind gender plays a role, and it's obvious it does. The fact is a overbearing protective father keeping his son away from danger isn't a trope the way it is for a daughter.

Also, I don't see the writing of Hope (and even Janet) as winking at this patriarchy but a straightforward example of it. Janet's loss is a tragedy that is regreted and not a sacrifice to be celebrated the way a man in a similar position would more likely be remembered. Hope is disempowered by men throughout the movie, and when Hope gains empowerment, she does so the traditional way a woman gains empowerment in literature...from a man's sponsorship.

If this movie wanted to take a crack at breaking down genre conventions they would have had to break formula. Imagine if Hope was proven right, and ended up having to become the Ant Person because Scott proved inadequate or simply not enough in the end...or, consistent with the tone of the script, Hope simply broke role at the climax and pulled out her own surprise, cause she's a genius scientist badass damn-it, and she needs no-one's approval to save the day and prove that the half-trained idiot the film follows instead isn't up to the task.

[Rodin]

If this movie wanted to take a crack at breaking down genre conventions they would have had to break formula. Imagine if Hope was proven right, and ended up having to become the Ant Person because Scott proved inadequate or simply not enough in the end...or, consistent with the tone of the script, Hope simply broke role at the climax and pulled out her own surprise, cause she's a genius scientist badass damn-it, and she needs no-one's approval to save the day and prove that the half-trained idiot the film follows instead isn't up to the task.

Now this would be awesome.

Plus, it's actually something that could have gotten past the suits. A lot of the problem I'm sure was the aforementioned marketing difficulties (Ant-Man Who? Shrinking power???), and getting him to have difficulty and then have her show up as the Wasp would tick both boxes nicely. Market it exactly as before, have her showing up be a surprise, then have them both be necessary in the climax. Yeah, some of the more idiotic groups would complain but it'd work just great.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Man, the things that occur to you when you get up in the middle of the night to check on the storm.

The film is at least in part a study on the themes of relationships. Primarily the (failed) mentor-mentee of Pym and Cross, the (growing) mentor-mentee of Pym and Lang, and the redemptive father-daughter arc between the Pyms.* But the other one is the growing friendship (with seeds of future romance) between Scott and Hope. He can explain to her how fathers worry about their daughters, because he both is one/has one, and is more willing to talk about it than the older generation. And she can provide him with a perspective on how painful it is for a child to lose a parent (one of her first human moments is when she apologizes for nearly inflicting that on Cassie). In a way, they balance each other.

Oh, and I'm fairly certain Scott's tinkering with the regulator is what will eventually lead to Giant-Man action.



*Anyone else notice that she knew all along that he was lying to her about her mom and the plane crash? One of the tidbits I learned reading Bob Forward's 3 Minute Max is that lying to kids is a bad idea, and this shows why.

[theNater]

I didn't get that at all. He was happy to fight side-by-side with his wife and let her take all the same risks he did. He obviously felt that Janet was perfectly capable of protecting herself.
He was willing to let her fight alongside him, and he blamed himself, not her, when she died. He felt that he could protect her, not that she could protect herself.


Gender doesn't matter here - if Hope had been a boy the plot point would have been exactly the same.
There is no evidence to support that, and his interactions with Cross-"the son he never had"-suggests otherwise. When Cross wants to research shrinking tech, Hank tries to talk him out of it, instead of flat forbidding him. When Hank finally does decide to forcibly stop Cross, it's for the good of the world, not for Cross' own good. Cross is allowed to make his own decisions, and even when Hank's disagreement with those decisions turns to violence, it is never suggested that they weren't his to make.

[Tyrant]

He was willing to let her fight alongside him, and he blamed himself, not her, when she died. He felt that he could protect her, not that she could protect herself.
He created the technology. As such, for her to do anything with it would require his permission. The creator of such a technology could quite easily blame themselves when something goes wrong with it or a shortcoming in it creating a situation where she had to do something drastic. He made it, it got her killed. That isn't sexist for him to blame himself.

There is no evidence to support that, and his interactions with Cross-"the son he never had"-suggests otherwise. When Cross wants to research shrinking tech, Hank tries to talk him out of it, instead of flat forbidding him. When Hank finally does decide to forcibly stop Cross, it's for the good of the world, not for Cross' own good. Cross is allowed to make his own decisions, and even when Hank's disagreement with those decisions turns to violence, it is never suggested that they weren't his to make.
How is Pym supposed to forbid him? He was voted out. He had no control. Who was instrumental in making that happen again? Oh right, poor powerless Hope. Well, I guess the decision centered around a man so it still doesn't count, right?

[Binks]

How is Pym supposed to forbid him? He was voted out. He had no control. Who was instrumental in making that happen again? Oh right, poor powerless Hope. Well, I guess the decision centered around a man so it still doesn't count, right?
This. And pay attention to why he was voted out, because he forbid Cross from researching the Pym particles.

Hank forbid both Hope (his daughter) and Cross ('the son he never had') from doing anything related to the Pym particles because he blamed the technology for the death of his wife and thought it was unsafe. How is that sexist?

[LaZodiac]

There is no evidence to support that, and his interactions with Cross-"the son he never had"-suggests otherwise. When Cross wants to research shrinking tech, Hank tries to talk him out of it, instead of flat forbidding him. When Hank finally does decide to forcibly stop Cross, it's for the good of the world, not for Cross' own good. Cross is allowed to make his own decisions, and even when Hank's disagreement with those decisions turns to violence, it is never suggested that they weren't his to make.

Those are Cross' words. Cross thinks he was "the son Pym never had". Pym says the reason he took Cross in as an apprentice was because he saw himself in him. He cut him out of his life because he saw too much of himself in him.

Something I'd like to point out for everyone who's going on about Pym being sexist. First, I do disagree that if the genders where reverse, and Hope was a dude, he'd still act the same way. He's being an over protective father. That's it. Additionally, if SCOT LANG was a woman, he'd be treating HER the same too. He has no reason to treat Scot any different in regards to gender because at the end of the day Scot's a tool. An expendable piece to beat Cross. But of course if the gender's were flipped you'd be upset about "Scottina being a tool" too, so...you know.

At any rate the movie is really good.

[Dragonus45]

This. And pay attention to why he was voted out, because he forbid Cross from researching the Pym particles.

Hank forbid both Hope (his daughter) and Cross ('the son he never had') from doing anything related to the Pym particles because he blamed the technology for the death of his wife and thought it was unsafe. How is that sexist?

Because one of them is a woman and the gynocentrism is real.


Those are Cross' words. Cross thinks he was "the son Pym never had". Pym says the reason he took Cross in as an apprentice was because he saw himself in him. He cut him out of his life because he saw too much of himself in him.

Something I'd like to point out for everyone who's going on about Pym being sexist. First, I do disagree that if the genders where reverse, and Hope was a dude, he'd still act the same way. He's being an over protective father. That's it. Additionally, if SCOT LANG was a woman, he'd be treating HER the same too. He has no reason to treat Scot any different in regards to gender because at the end of the day Scot's a tool. An expendable piece to beat Cross. But of course if the gender's were flipped you'd be upset about "Scottina being a tool" too, so...you know.

At any rate the movie is really good.

I would say he would have a reason to treat Scottina different if only because I could imagine him having trouble treating a woman in the same disposable manner that he would treat a man.

[theNater]

This. And pay attention to why he was voted out, because he forbid Cross from researching the Pym particles.
I need to double-check this. Fortunately, I was planning on seeing it again anyway.


Something I'd like to point out for everyone who's going on about Pym being sexist. First, I do disagree that if the genders where reverse, and Hope was a dude, he'd still act the same way. He's being an over protective father. That's it.
Is there a typo here? Because if you think he wouldn't be as overprotective of a son, that's him being sexist.


At any rate the movie is really good.
Absolutely!

[Reddish Mage]

I'm pretty sure Scottina would never be chosen because of the current movie climate where we are still waiting on Ms. Marvel and Black Widow is cut from Avenger Tees. Not to mention, I think audiences would react quite differently to the way Hank cavalierly treats Scottina with complete disregard for her safety or her autonomy throughout the movie...

Also, Scottina would have had a much different reaction from her friends and employer about the Vista job, we would have considered child support demands from her daughter's father to be obviously outrageous considering Scottina's circumstances and basically the movie would become radically different by the gender flip.

[LaZodiac]

Is there a typo here? Because if you think he wouldn't be as overprotective of a son, that's him being sexist.


Absolutely!

Yeah that's a typo. I meant that I think Pym WOULD be exactly as protective over a son as he would a daughter.

[theNater]

Yes, we can come up with excuses for each individual thing Hank does that seems like it might be sexist. And then ignore that there are several of them. And also ignore that growing up in the time and place he did, it would be unusual for him not to have picked up some sexist attitudes.

But why would we want to? Him having sexist attitudes doesn't make him a bad character, or make the character a bad person, or make the film a bad film. Indeed, I'd say it makes the character and the film a bit better, by making him more human and relatable. Why is it so awful to admit that yeah, maybe this guy is a little bit sexist?

[Psyren]

Yet his "survivor guilt" doesn't stop him from putting someone else in that exact same dangerous situation; and while he may not know Scott as closely as he knows Hope, he's been watching Scott long enough to know that he has a family, a great deal of intelligence/raw talent, and many years of life ahead of him. It's not like he's a terminal cancer patient or something.

So I call shenanigans on that rationale, clearly whatever guilt Hank feels is not much of an impediment to him putting someone in that suit. Your argument is like saying a survivor from Band of Brothers would be ready to head down to a high school the next day and start recruiting more young people for the army. They wouldn't, because that is real trauma.

[Bulldog Psion]

Okay, I'll redact that. Any reaction he had to her death, including no reaction, would have been sexist because he's male and she's female. Carry on, nothing to see here, I'm an idiot, etc. etc.

[LaZodiac]

Okay, I'll redact that. Any reaction he had to her death, including no reaction, would have been sexist because he's male and she's female. Carry on, nothing to see here, I'm an idiot, etc. etc.

For what it's worth I agree, and you are right.

[Bulldog Psion]

For what it's worth I agree, and you are right.

:smallsmile:

[theNater]

Any reaction he had to her death, including no reaction, would have been sexist because he's male and she's female.
Funny, I don't recall a big fuss in the Agents of SHIELD thread about Calvin Zabo being sexist due to his reaction to the death of his wife, even though he's male and she's female.

Somehow I suspect we wouldn't be having this conversation if Hank had gone full supervillain and tried to blow up the country from which the missile was launched.

[Psyren]

Okay, I'll redact that. Any reaction he had to her death, including no reaction, would have been sexist because he's male and she's female. Carry on, nothing to see here, I'm an idiot, etc. etc.

I'm not trying to shut you down, and I'm not saying there isn't at least a degree of trepidation there because of what happened to Janet. But to believe gender roles played no part in his decision is, to me, equally naive. Even his explanation for why he lied to her for years, "trying to protect her" - protect her from what exactly, and why did he feel she needed to be protected from the truth to begin with?

[Kitten Champion]

Funny, I don't recall a big fuss in the Agents of SHIELD thread about Calvin Zabo being sexist due to his reaction to the death of his wife, even though he's male and she's female.

Somehow I suspect we wouldn't be having this conversation if Hank had gone full supervillain and tried to blow up the country from which the missile was launched.

I think Cal was more obviously sympathetic because of how clearly his experiences broke him. He was treating Skye like a little girl - at least some of the time - and every time he did it was just incredibly sad. Hank was otherwise level-headed and calm, he retracted from his feelings rather than embracing them to the point of madness as Cal did. Which is why when they surfaced they were all the more disconcerting.

Honestly, who Hank Pym reminds me of is Walter Bishop from Fringe. Generally well-meaning but with a darker inner nature they wrangle to control, looking back on a life of great accomplishments but drowned under a sea of regret, who go to extremes to protect their child - the last thing they have in the world - while seeking redemption for their mistakes.

[Dienekes]

Yet his "survivor guilt" doesn't stop him from putting someone else in that exact same dangerous situation; and while he may not know Scott as closely as he knows Hope, he's been watching Scott long enough to know that he has a family, a great deal of intelligence/raw talent, and many years of life ahead of him. It's not like he's a terminal cancer patient or something.

So I call shenanigans on that rationale, clearly whatever guilt Hank feels is not much of an impediment to him putting someone in that suit. Your argument is like saying a survivor from Band of Brothers would be ready to head down to a high school the next day and start recruiting more young people for the army. They wouldn't, because that is real trauma.

This seems a very strange reasoning for me. Mostly, because of my uncle. My uncle more or less forbid his children from ever being a part of the military, but when I was thinking of signing up sat me down and had a discussion of the pros and cons of joining.

In short, no I don't think it's odd for someone to be more protective of their own children than other people.

Also, as an aside, I'm pretty sure Captain Speirs was an advocate for the military for a long time after being in Easy Company. Though, I don't think he was ever a recruiter per se.

[Psyren]

This seems a very strange reasoning for me. Mostly, because of my uncle. My uncle more or less forbid his children from ever being a part of the military, but when I was thinking of signing up sat me down and had a discussion of the pros and cons of joining.

That's something you already decided to do on your own, and not being your father, he couldn't exactly forbid you. But it doesn't sound, from the snippet you shared, like he approached you and coaxed you into uniform either. I don't see a strong parallel here.

In short, you were already "thinking of signing up," to use your own words above. Scott Lang was not - he tried on the suit purely out of curiosity and ended up flushed down the drain in his "trial by water." It then took two more attempts before he Accepted The Call.

Compare to Hope, who was actively trying to sign up the entire time, and even keeping up with her training (physical and mental) so she'd be ready to don the suit when Hank changed his mind.

[Rogar Demonblud]

I wonder if her very assertiveness was part of the problem. It's pretty evident there's a lot of Janet in Hope (although she definitely has her father's temper), and Hank may have been worrying that she'd charge in with the same drive to complete the mission before any other consideration.

Also, her training wasn't that good; she has a problem with limiting her control. The task was 'put two sugar cubes in the tea'. She had the ants dump in about half a box, and summoned so large a swarm that the lights and windows were being covered over.

Contrary to the Military Maxims, there is such a thing as overkill. And overkill is pretty much her default state for the first two acts.

[Dienekes]

That's something you already decided to do on your own, and not being your father, he couldn't exactly forbid you. But it doesn't sound, from the snippet you shared, like he approached you and coaxed you into uniform either. I don't see a strong parallel here.

In short, you were already "thinking of signing up," to use your own words above. Scott Lang was not - he tried on the suit purely out of curiosity and ended up flushed down the drain in his "trial by water." It then took two more attempts before he Accepted The Call.

Compare to Hope, who was actively trying to sign up the entire time, and even keeping up with her training (physical and mental) so she'd be ready to don the suit when Hank changed his mind.

That's mostly true. But I am putting in one detail, my uncle was not against me joining the military. He actually made a good reason for me to, but he was expressly against my cousin doing so. Because people worry about their kids more than some guy they've read about on the news, or in my case, some guy they see once a year at Christmas.

I can totally see someone knowing that a dirty job was necessary and needed to be done, and not wanting their own child to do it.

[comicshorse]

Also, her training wasn't that good; she has a problem with limiting her control. The task was 'put two sugar cubes in the tea'. She had the ants dump in about half a box, and summoned so large a swarm that the lights and windows were being covered over.

Contrary to the Military Maxims, there is such a thing as overkill. And overkill is pretty much her default state for the first two acts.

I read that as not being she didn't have control and more she was showing her father ( and Scott) how much she could do

[Dragonus45]

I read that as not being she didn't have control and more she was showing her father ( and Scott) how much she could do

Needlessly showing off could be considered lacking control. Also if you rewatch the scene and the tone it was setting she clearly was overdoing in and had not noticed the bugs flooding the lights.

[Reddish Mage]

All this talk defending Hank's protectiveness of Hope as gender-neutral based on the simple possibility that Hank could have done the same for a son, ignores everything else in the way the movie treats Hope, as well as the how the Marvel Movies has treated women as a whole, and the decades of differences in how woman have been treated in superhero comics and comic based media.

Hope being sidelined isn't an isolated example, it's been the rule since the start that women have been relegated to support roles.

Marvel movies are not gender blind and Ant Man is no exception.

[Kitten Champion]

All this talk defending Hank's protectiveness of Hope as gender-neutral based on the simple possibility that Hank could have done the same for a son, ignores everything else in the way the movie treats Hope, as well as the how the Marvel Movies has treated women as a whole, and the decades of differences in how woman have been treated in superhero comics and comic based media.

Hope being sidelined isn't an isolated example, it's been the rule since the start that women have been relegated to support roles.

Marvel movies are not gender blind and Ant Man is no exception.

You're confusing a meta-critique with an internal justification of a fictional character within a body of work. What is this "everything else in the way the movie treats Hope" that concludes Hank Pym would have been fine with Hope wearing the suit were she male?

[Dragonus45]

All this talk defending Hank's protectiveness of Hope as gender-neutral based on the simple possibility that Hank could have done the same for a son, ignores everything else in the way the movie treats Hope, as well as the how the Marvel Movies has treated women as a whole, and the decades of differences in how woman have been treated in superhero comics and comic based media.

Hope being sidelined isn't an isolated example, it's been the rule since the start that women have been relegated to support roles.

Marvel movies are not gender blind and Ant Man is no exception.

You say that like any of those things are relevant, or are even true.

[Legato Endless]

It was a fun airy movie. The heist itself wasn't terribly impressive logistically, but the film wasn't really about that, and the character humor went pretty far. Especially Luis, the cultured thief. Loved the ant raft scene, the writers clearly did their research. Really hoping we get more gags like that in future outings. We could have been netted with generic swarm effects, but instead we got some pretty grounded insect usage. As was Scott's complete lack of occupational options as a painfully realistic insertion of stinging social commentary.

The inconsistency of the shrinking powers affects on mass niggled a bit, but that's mostly nitpicking. Along that same line, while I was already set for another throwaway Marvel villain, which we got in spades, I do wish we'd at have gotten a bit of character development. Hank's plea for Cross that he can stop because the particles are affecting him falls completely flat because we never see evidence of this. Evil Exec's big establishing moment is murdering a coworker in the bathroom, and he retains that baseline of stability for the rest of the film. Hank ambiguously having anger issues or being under the influence of Pam particles works fine because this is a past event, but Cross never really transitions in any way beyond being slightly more cavalier about what he's doing. You could have eliminated the entire mind altering properties of the particles and nothing would have changed in the film.

Still, the film was more about family and redemption and stealing things, so very minor overall. Really hoping we only have to wait for Civil War to finally get Wasp on screen proper.


*Anyone else notice that she knew all along that he was lying to her about her mom and the plane crash? One of the tidbits I learned reading Bob Forward's 3 Minute Max is that lying to kids is a bad idea, and this shows why.

True. The one thing lying to your kids is good for is as a stock dramatic device for easy parental tension.

[Tvtyrant]

I thought it was great. Easily the most humerus of the Marvel line, and I didn't feel any of the motivations as being unrealistic. I especially liked that Darrin had a better explanation than most villains in marvel. He is a brilliant but petty man who constantly feels snubbed, and then when he should be at the top of the world his work is destroyed. Being too self absorbed to think about why he failed so completely, he breaks down into a scene chewing monster.

[theNater]

I think Cal was more obviously sympathetic because of how clearly his experiences broke him.
Frankly, I think Cal's biggest advantage was one of sheer screentime. He got multiple scenes with multiple female characters, including his wife and daughter, while Hank only interacts with Hope on anything like that level. So the film doesn't provide anything that contradicts a reading of Hank being sexist, because there simply isn't time. (Which is a side effect of this being Scott's story, rather than Hank's).

[Lacuna Caster]

I think I'm pretty behind on the conversation here, but I honestly had no idea there was a mid-credits scene with... uhh. Do I have to spoiler this? ...I suppose I do.
Hope being shown the Wasp-suit. (Also, the stuff with cap'n'bucky, but whatever.)

I guess it's good that Pym very very belatedly comes around on this? Still feeling kinda cheated, though I guess I've been out of the loop.

[Kitten Champion]

So the film doesn't provide anything that contradicts a reading of Hank being sexist, because there simply isn't time. (Which is a side effect of this being Scott's story, rather than Hank's).

Except it did, we were shown him working hand-in-hand with his wife as super-operatives for SHIELD and he willingly designed a Wasp suit for Hope by the end. It was clearly the trauma of his wife's fate which motivated his resolve to stop Hope from from taking up her mother's mantle and not her sexual organs, both because that's pretty much what he said and his reversal for the epilogue would makes no sense otherwise. It's not like he had some epiphany which called into question some unexplored sexist position into question, the turning point in their relationship was admitting what happened to Janet to Hope despite his long-standing fear that knowledge of her mother's fate would result in Hope ruining her life in the same fruitless quest to save her from her eternal quantum prison as he had done.

[Lacuna Caster]

Except it did, we were shown him working hand-in-hand with his wife as super-operatives for SHIELD and he willingly designed a Wasp suit for Hope by the end.
Oh. Apparently I don't.

Yeah, I don't think there's particularly clear evidence for Hank being sexist, exactly. Just... not being particularly fair to Hope or far-sighted about how the plan might go.

[theNater]

Except it did, we were shown him working hand-in-hand with his wife as super-operatives for SHIELD and he willingly designed a Wasp suit for Hope by the end. It was clearly the trauma of his wife's fate which motivated his resolve to stop Hope from from taking up her mother's mantle and not her sexual organs, both because that's pretty much what he said and his reversal for the epilogue would makes no sense otherwise. It's not like he had some epiphany which called into question some unexplored sexist position into question, the turning point in their relationship was admitting what happened to Janet to Hope despite his long-standing fear that knowledge of her mother's fate would result in Hope ruining her life in the same fruitless quest to save her from her eternal quantum prison as he had done.
That scene is the turning point, and think about what Hope says there. "She made her decision". There's the epiphany for him, that women get to make decisions. We don't see whether Hank thought Janet fighting alongside him was her decision or his. We don't see him blaming Hope for voting him out, leaving the possibility that he believes she was manipulated by Cross. We do see him consistently overriding the decisions Hope makes.

Is it possible that he's blaming himself purely because of survivor's guilt, and that his infantilization of Hope is purely parent/child, rather than specifically father/daughter? Sure! But there's at least as much evidence that it's based on his fundamental (and fundamentally wrong-headed) belief that men are responsible for the safety of the women in their lives, and that by the end of the movie he's realized the wrongness of this belief.

[Reddish Mage]

Oh. Apparently I don't.

Yeah, I don't think there's particularly clear evidence for Hank being sexist, exactly. Just... not being particularly fair to Hope or far-sighted about how the plan might go.

I think defending Hank on the one point based on the "lack of clear evidence" is just using a court standard of finding guilt rather than an easy to apply statistically-based standard of Ant-Man, Marvel movies, Hollywood in general and comics too following a pattern Its easy to show the movie is part of a pattern of a limiting female involvement in superheroics and of a gendered understanding of women that often relegates them to support roles, you can defend Hank's reasoning, the fact the movie fails the Bechtel test, the decision to refer to the ants as guys and by male names and pronouns (btw almost all ants are female)...but there are so many patterns that occur so often in so many forms of media and that Marvel and Disney are certainly following a very very long-running trend.

[Lacuna Caster]

I think defending Hank on the one point based on the "lack of clear evidence" is just using a court standard of finding guilt rather than an easy to apply statistically-based standard of Ant-Man, Marvel movies, Hollywood in general and comics too following a pattern Its easy to show the movie is part of a pattern of a limiting female involvement in superheroics and of a gendered understanding of women that often relegates them to support roles, you can defend Hank's reasoning, the fact the movie fails the Bechtel test, the decision to refer to the ants as guys and by male names and pronouns (btw almost all ants are female)...but there are so many patterns that occur so often in so many forms of media and that Marvel and Disney are certainly following a very very long-running trend.
As others (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?428336-Marvel-s-Ant-Man/page5&p=19572482#post19572482) have remarked on, the effective institutional sexism of Misney isn't in question. But Hank is a fictional character comprising one data point. Can't really draw a line through that.

[Rodin]

Just to clarify my own position:

I felt that Ant-Man did a reasonable job of justifying why Hank kept her out of it. I didn't feel cheated when I watched the movie. It was clear that Hank was making an irrational choice based on personal feelings, which is a long way from the "woman screams, man comes to save her" dynamic that is so common.

That said, the institutional sexism of Hollywood is still frustrating and while progress is being made they could be doing a lot better. Having Hope become the Wasp in the third act would have been superior to what we actually got, which was influenced by Hollywood culture and trying to sell a hard-to-sell movie to the suits.

In other words, Ant-Man did well with what it had to work with.

[Lizard Lord]

By the way, does anyone know how well Ant-Man is doing in the box office? I went on the Friday of its release date with my brothers and there was barely anyone there besides us.

I liked this movie and would like to see it get sequels, but that may not happen if the box office numbers don't justify it.

[cobaltstarfire]

The movie theater was packed last weekend when we went to see it, but I live in a college town which probably has really biased turn out.

What little my weak googlefu can find says that it was number 1 the week it released, that it did a little weaker than other Marvel titles, but it's not doing terribly considering.

[Dragonus45]

That scene is the turning point, and think about what Hope says there. "She made her decision". There's the epiphany for him, that women get to make decisions. We don't see whether Hank thought Janet fighting alongside him was her decision or his. We don't see him blaming Hope for voting him out, leaving the possibility that he believes she was manipulated by Cross. We do see him consistently overriding the decisions Hope makes.

Is it possible that he's blaming himself purely because of survivor's guilt, and that his infantilization of Hope is purely parent/child, rather than specifically father/daughter? Sure! But there's at least as much evidence that it's based on his fundamental (and fundamentally wrong-headed) belief that men are responsible for the safety of the women in their lives, and that by the end of the movie he's realized the wrongness of this belief.

Did you just say that his epiphany was learning that women get to make decisions? Where on earth is that interpretation of the character coming from. That he doesn't blame her for voting him out? How do we know that? Even if he didn't how would that be proof that he believes she was just a pawn of Cross.

[theNater]

I felt that Ant-Man did a reasonable job of justifying why Hank kept her out of it. I didn't feel cheated when I watched the movie. It was clear that Hank was making an irrational choice based on personal feelings, which is a long way from the "woman screams, man comes to save her" dynamic that is so common.
I'm wondering if there's been a miscommunication at some point. See, my position is that it is at least plausible that at the start of the film Hank irrationally believes that "woman screams, man comes to save her" is how the male/female dynamic should work, and the film recognizes that this belief is irrational.


By the way, does anyone know how well Ant-Man is doing in the box office?
So, I hit up Box Office Mojo for some numbers, and they look a bit iffy.

Ant-Man opened in the US to the tune of $57 million. That puts it between Incredible Hulk($55) and the Captain America/Thor tie($65 each). Given that Incredible Hulk is the only MCU movie that didn't get a sequel of its own, that's a bit scary. But there's still hope! Incredible Hulk's long-term take was awful relative to opening weekend compared to the other Marvel openers(2.4x in the US for $134, 4.7x worldwide for $263). If Ant-Man's long-term take is as good relative to opening weekend as Iron Man's(3.2x domestic, 5.9x worldwide), it'll total $182 in the US and $336 worldwide, which is within spitting distance of Cap's($176 US, $370 worldwide) and well past Hulk's.

If we want a sequel(and I do), best thing to do is see it again(and I will) and tell other people to see it(and I am).

In conclusion: If there is anyone reading this post who is even vaguely interested in Ant-Man and hasn't seen it yet, please go see it in the theaters. I liked it a lot, and want to encourage Marvel to make more.

[Rogar Demonblud]

By the way, does anyone know how well Ant-Man is doing in the box office? I went on the Friday of its release date with my brothers and there was barely anyone there besides us.

I liked this movie and would like to see it get sequels, but that may not happen if the box office numbers don't justify it.

It made about $145 million (before the current weekend), so it's doing pretty good considering it hasn't opened in most markets yet. It also drew more families (28%) and more women (32%) than any previous Marvel film did opening weekend, showing the studio may finally be outgrowing the 'under 35/male' box that most superhero movies are comfortable with.

They're also thinking about not only a sequel, but also a prequel, possibly with Michelle Pfeiffer or Catherine Zeta-Jones as Janet. (I'd prefer the former).

[Dragonus45]

I'm wondering if there's been a miscommunication at some point. See, my position is that it is at least plausible that at the start of the film Hank irrationally believes that "woman screams, man comes to save her" is how the male/female dynamic should work, and the film recognizes that this belief is irrational.


A lot of things could be plausible what I want to know is where your evidence is for that, malicious, interpretation of his character.

[Lizard Lord]

So, I hit up Box Office Mojo for some numbers, and they look a bit iffy.

Ant-Man opened in the US to the tune of $57 million. That puts it between Incredible Hulk($55) and the Captain America/Thor tie($65 each). Given that Incredible Hulk is the only MCU movie that didn't get a sequel of its own, that's a bit scary. But there's still hope! Incredible Hulk's long-term take was awful relative to opening weekend compared to the other Marvel openers(2.4x in the US for $134, 4.7x worldwide for $263). If Ant-Man's long-term take is as good relative to opening weekend as Iron Man's(3.2x domestic, 5.9x worldwide), it'll total $182 in the US and $336 worldwide, which is within spitting distance of Cap's($176 US, $370 worldwide) and well past Hulk's.

If we want a sequel(and I do), best thing to do is see it again(and I will) and tell other people to see it(and I am).

In conclusion: If there is anyone reading this post who is even vaguely interested in Ant-Man and hasn't seen it yet, please go see it in the theaters. I liked it a lot, and want to encourage Marvel to make more.

Well..now I feel bad that you actually looked it up. I could have looked it up, I was just lazy and wondered if someone knew off hand (though obviously wouldn't know an exact number, but still). :smallredface:

[Rogar Demonblud]

It should be pointed out that The Incredible Hulk was a cooperative work with Universal (who owns the solo Hulk rights since the days of the TV series), so a sequel is going to have a lot more hoops to go through. Honestly, I wonder if it wouldn't be in Marvel's best interests to try to buy at least the movie rights back.

[theNater]

Did you just say that his epiphany was learning that women get to make decisions? Where on earth is that interpretation of the character coming from.
Mostly from the way he negates every decision Hope makes in the film up to that point.


A lot of things could be plausible what I want to know is where your evidence is for that, malicious, interpretation of his character.
There's no malice in it, any more than there's malice in saying that Tony Stark has a tendency towards recklessness or that Roy verbally lambasts friends and foes (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0490.html) more than would be ideal. Everybody's got character flaws. Having those flaws doesn't make them bad people, and pointing out those flaws isn't an attack.


Well..now I feel bad that you actually looked it up. I could have looked it up, I was just lazy and wondered if someone knew off hand (though obviously wouldn't know an exact number, but still). :smallredface:
I...I like numbers. I find them soothing. So I actually want to thank you for providing me an excuse to go look some up. It was fun.

[Milo v3]

Mostly from the way he negates every decision Hope makes in the film up to that point.
The only decision he negated was Hope wanting to be the Ant-Woman. Which happened because he didn't want to lose another member of his family to the superhero life, I mean... if he was against women being heroes at all he wouldn't have let his wife be the original wasp in the first place.

[Kitten Champion]

The only decision he negated was Hope wanting to be the Ant-Woman. Which happened because he didn't want to lose another member of his family to the superhero life, I mean... if he was against women being heroes at all he wouldn't have let his wife be the original wasp in the first place.

Yes, because otherwise he seems resigned to the fact that she'll do whatever she wants, not resistant. There's no heat or even bitterness with her voting him out of his company or having Scott arrested. More a sad acceptance that his relationship with her is just irreparable at this point but that they're the only allies towards this common and very important goal.

It was also specifically that - the wearing of the suit - which he couldn't accept, he didn't raise a single word of opposition against her continued subterfuge with Cross in Pym Industries or her being there in the final act during the heist itself when the danger was the most real with the film devoting increments of the second act to build this unnerving underlying tension surrounding Cross that obviously turned out to be fully justified.

[Dragonus45]

Mostly from the way he negates every decision Hope makes in the film up to that point.


There's no malice in it, any more than there's malice in saying that Tony Stark has a tendency towards recklessness or that Roy verbally lambasts friends and foes (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0490.html) more than would be ideal. Everybody's got character flaws. Having those flaws doesn't make them bad people, and pointing out those flaws isn't an attack.


I...I like numbers. I find them soothing. So I actually want to thank you for providing me an excuse to go look some up. It was fun.

But where is the evidence that he does that for the reason you seem to be making up and not the one directly stated in the movie several times. Sorry let me rephrase, I mean that that gives his character a malicious intent not that your interpretation is itself malicious.

[Reddish Mage]

You're confusing a meta-critique with an internal justification of a fictional character within a body of work. What is this "everything else in the way the movie treats Hope" that concludes Hank Pym would have been fine with Hope wearing the suit were she male?


As others (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?428336-Marvel-s-Ant-Man/page5&p=19572482#post19572482) have remarked on, the effective institutional sexism of Misney isn't in question. But Hank is a fictional character comprising one data point. Can't really draw a line through that.

Wait Wait Wait!? Are you simply really talking about HANK PYM'S internal thoughts and justifications for his plans in regards to his daughter?

Those are quite, and they aren't sexist, explicitly at least. Does it implicitly betray a sexist internal set of values? Yes.

Hank regrets his loved one's heroic sacrifice that saved the world in an extremely intense matter: "not a day goes by that don't regret..." "letting her joint me."

That is not in keeping with comradie among male soldiers but is typical behavior among male superheroes and their relationship with their love interests.

This hero-complex, where the MALE superhero feels personally responsible for events that are beyond his control and he simply can't accept putting (typically female) loved ones in danger regardless of whether said loved ones are both capable in their own right and willingly accept the risk, is a typical MALE superhero trait. See Superman, Spider-Man, The Hulk...Hank's relationship with JANET, at least, fits a very archetypical superhero and very gendered pattern.

Hanks attitude isn't "it should have been me." His own story tells us he couldn't have made that sacrifice and that only Janet could have diffused the nuke. Only that in some way he feels responsible for it and regrets it. That attitude itself is unhealthy as the movie clearly demonstrates: because of that event he lied to his daughter about her mothers death, then he left Hope to deal with her mom's death on her own and then sent her away from him....

[Dragonus45]

Wait Wait Wait!? Are you simply really talking about HANK PYM'S internal thoughts and justifications for his plans in regards to his daughter?

Those are quite, and they aren't sexist, explicitly at least. Does it implicitly betray a sexist internal set of values? Yes.

Hank regrets his loved one's heroic sacrifice that saved the world in an extremely intense matter: "not a day goes by that don't regret..." "letting her joint me."

That is not in keeping with camaraderie among male soldiers but is typical behavior among male superheroes and their relationship with their love interests.

This hero-complex, where the MALE superhero feels personally responsible for events that are beyond his control and he simply can't accept putting (typically female) loved ones in danger regardless of whether said loved ones are both capable in their own right and willingly accept the risk, is a typical MALE superhero trait. See Superman, Spider-Man, The Hulk...Hank's relationship with JANET, at least, fits a very archetypical superhero and very gendered pattern.

Hanks attitude isn't "it should have been me." His own story tells us he couldn't have made that sacrifice and that only Janet could have diffused the nuke. Only that in some way he feels responsible for it and regrets it. That attitude itself is unhealthy as the movie clearly demonstrates: because of that event he lied to his daughter about her mothers death, then he left Hope to deal with her mom's death on her own and then sent her away from him....


Most soldiers aren't in love with each other, married, and have a daughter together. You can't use that dynamic as a baseline to turn around and describe Pyms grief as sexist.

[Reddish Mage]

Most soldiers aren't in love with each other, married, and have a daughter together. You can't use that dynamic as a baseline to turn around and describe Pyms grief as sexist.

I would use the dynamic of a female superheroine with her lover that dies heroically...but none spring to mind.

Hence the problem, apparently, I can't prove Hank's behavior is sexist because I'd need a baseline to compare it too. But that baseline doesn't exist because, for some strange reason, there are far fewer female super heroines, and they don't seem to get into the same situations nor do they react the same way when they do occur. Funny how that is.

[Lacuna Caster]

Wait Wait Wait!? Are you simply really talking about HANK PYM'S internal thoughts and justifications for his plans in regards to his daughter?
Yes. We were really talking simply about Hank Pym's in-universe thoughts and justifications, insofar as we can reasonably infer those from actions and dialogue in the film.

If you're instead talking about Hank Pym as a manifestation of the director, producers, parent corporation or larger culture's value set, that's fine. But a message in collage doesn't require that every letter come from the same sentence, and we don't really know what Hank's life would spell out.


Hanks attitude isn't "it should have been me." His own story tells us he couldn't have made that sacrifice and that only Janet could have diffused the nuke...
Wasn't Hank's original suit also capable of the super-shrinking? Honestly, this seems like splitting hairs.

(Cripes, even by the standards of this film, that's some really strange physics- if you've shrunk to the scale of fitting between molecules in order to breach the hull, and can't grow back, how are you going to mess up the innards of the ICBM? At that scale you're pretty well limited to kicking a few electrons out of place.)

[Kitten Champion]

(Cripes, even by the standards of this film, that's some really strange physics- if you've shrunk to the scale of fitting between molecules in order to breach the hull, and can't grow back, how are you going to mess up the innards of the ICBM? At that scale you're pretty well limited to kicking a few electrons out of place.)

They showed that, they weren't fitting through the molecules of the metal but through a tighter gap than their suits would normally allow. Besides that, they didn't shrink instantaneously into nothingness but kept shrinking once they reached some predefined minimum the suit was capable of.

So Scott and Janet had X amount of time to affect things physically before reaching some critical point.

[Rogar Demonblud]

I would use the dynamic of a female superheroine with her lover that dies heroically...but none spring to mind.

Ironically, Hank and Janet again. The Avengers go dimensional exploring (which is generally an F4/Reed Richards' latest screw up thing, but I digress) and get into major trouble. Of the "One third of the team dead, dying or missing" variety. They get back to the portal, but need time to get it working. They get it because Hank holds off the opposition at the cost of his life. Janet basically has a psychotic break, disbands what's left of the Avengers, uses a critically injured Wanda to seal the portal device 'forever', and turns her children into the supervillains Red Queen and Big Guy.

Possibly the most interesting storyline to come out of the MC2.

[theNater]

The only decision he negated was Hope wanting to be the Ant-Woman.
There's also her decision to have Scott arrested, which he negates by breaking Scott out within hours. And as Kitten Champion notes, he doesn't get angry at her for doing it, he just undoes it without comment. How patronizing is that?


... if he was against women being heroes at all he wouldn't have let his wife be the original wasp in the first place.
That's not the way his sexism manifests. His sexism manifests as a belief that whether a woman can be a hero is a decision to be made by the man in her life. Heck, you've even phrased it that way yourself: "he wouldn't have let his wife" be a superhero, as if that's his decision instead of hers.


But where is the evidence that he does that for the reason you seem to be making up and not the one directly stated in the movie several times. Sorry let me rephrase, I mean that that gives his character a malicious intent not that your interpretation is itself malicious.
Sexism is usually not malicious, and Hank's in particular isn't. He seems to hold a belief that as the man, it is his duty to protect the women in his life, and if anything happens to them it is his fault. He thinks he's being benevolent, and doesn't realize how demeaning it is.

Given the environment in which he grew up, it would be strange if his thinking had never been influenced by this belief. Remember, he's apparently a New Yorker and his parents would have been around Peggy Carter's age. Imagine what lessons any of the guys from Agent Carter would teach their sons; that's what Hank has to work with.


Wasn't Hank's original suit also capable of the super-shrinking? Honestly, this seems like splitting hairs.
His suit was damaged in a way that made it impossible for him to do it.

[Xondoure]

Okay, I'll redact that. Any reaction he had to her death, including no reaction, would have been sexist because he's male and she's female. Carry on, nothing to see here, I'm an idiot, etc. etc.

I know this is a few pages late, but I feel like this is still relevant enough to comment on. Yeah pretty much I 100% agree with this because the killing off of a female character as character development for a male character is a pretty awful trope that appears far more than it should (and is rarely reversed.) The only pay off in this case is that we may yet get Janet kicking butt on screen because comic book deaths aren't meant to be permanent.

[Milo v3]

There's also her decision to have Scott arrested, which he negates by breaking Scott out within hours. And as Kitten Champion notes, he doesn't get angry at her for doing it, he just undoes it without comment. How patronizing is that?
Except... that was her negating his decision... How is it wrong to negate someone negating you???


That's not the way his sexism manifests. His sexism manifests as a belief that whether a woman can be a hero is a decision to be made by the man in her life. Heck, you've even phrased it that way yourself: "he wouldn't have let his wife" be a superhero, as if that's his decision instead of hers.
I phrased it that way because you were suggesting he was sexist.....

[Reddish Mage]

Remember, he's apparently a New Yorker and his parents would have been around Peggy Carter's age. Imagine what lessons any of the guys from Agent Carter would teach their sons; that's what Hank has to work with.

That's really an excellent way to bring up that Hank would be widely exposed to, and even raised on, this sort of thinking using purely in-universe logic.

[Zmeoaice]

Oh my god can we discuss any Marvel film without people bickering about sexism.

Anyhow I thought this film was okay, but not much more. Darren Cross was a complete and utter moron the whole film for not applying the particles for a zillion other uses besides combat and for selling it to a barely regrouped terrorist organization when the USA would be able to pay him a ton more cash. And Hank was a tool for not telling his daughter how her mother died even though she's like 40 years old and can handle the truth. Also his ant mind controller thing could have been very useful and he kept it all to himself.


The giant Ant in the end should have suffocated.

[Tyrant]

So to recap, Hank is sexist because:

1) He won't let Hope wear the suit

2) He apparently allowed Janet to wear the suit

3) He got Scott out of jail after Hope put him in jail

4) He blames himself for his wife's death

5) Being a male and making decisions

I'm pretty sure it all boils down to number 5, but I want to comment on the others.

1) Well, it is his suit and his technology. It kind of is his choice who wears it. It's not just up for grabs. Hope has no realistic claim to it.

2) He created the technology and the suits. It was his choice who got to wear them and who didn't. Yes, he let her. Any other scenario is her stealing something from her husband or taking the choice from him as to what he does with his things.

3) It was his house. If he wants to let someone break in he is allowed to do that. Hope overrode him, he was just putting the plan back on track.

4) He designed the suits. Something went wrong with his meaning only his wife could make that choice. Of course he feels guilty that something he made malfunctioned and as a result his wife was seemingly killed.

5) I'm still pretty sure this is what is upsetting people.

[Solamnicknight]

I went to see the movie with some friends and we enjoyed it. And as for that sexism thing
https://backtothethames.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/inigomontoya.jpg Bottom line is Hank didn't want Hope in the suit because he didn't want his daughter to die. It's a parental thing not a gender thing. Remember what Scott said? He was EXPENDABLE! Since he was a criminal, if the heist had failed, which by the way it nearly did. Scott would die or get trapped in the space between worlds instead of Hope, which by the way he NEARLY DID! Hank's just doing what most parents do, try to protect their child, even if said child is an adult can take care of themselves. Usually in the eyes of a parent their child is their child.

[~Corvus~]

It was fun~ Not as glorious or unexpected as Guardians of the Galaxy, but still good.

My favorite / funny moments:
Back it up... yeah just baaack, just baaaack in on up.

Louis (Michael Peña character) talked about being able to knock out Peanut in jail, and then spends a decent part of the Heist continuing to knock people out. He wasn't kidding! Somehow, it remained comical.

"Captain, I know a guy." At this point, it's gotten silly. ALSO IS THAT THE GAUNTLET OF POWER???

[DiscipleofBob]

I went to go see this opening weekend, but it was at a drive-in and we ended up getting rained out. Finally got to see the full thing this time.

"That's not a keychain."

[Solamnicknight]

It was fun~ Not as glorious or unexpected as Guardians of the Galaxy, but still good.

My favorite / funny moments:
Back it up... yeah just baaack, just baaaack in on up.

Louis (Michael Peña character) talked about being able to knock out Peanut in jail, and then spends a decent part of the Heist continuing to knock people out. He wasn't kidding! Somehow, it remained comical.

"Captain, I know a guy." At this point, it's gotten silly. ALSO IS THAT THE GAUNTLET OF POWER???
That back up the van moment was solid comedy gold. Also the moment when the police find the two guys in the van. What about the fight between Yellowjacket and Ant-Man? That had some really funny moments. Like when Yellowjacket gets swatted into a bug zapper, or Thomas the Tank Engine.

[BRC]

I went to see the movie with some friends and we enjoyed it. And as for that sexism thing
https://backtothethames.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/inigomontoya.jpg Bottom line is Hank didn't want Hope in the suit because he didn't want his daughter to die. It's a parental thing not a gender thing. Remember what Scott said? He was EXPENDABLE! Since he was a criminal, if the heist had failed, which by the way it nearly did. Scott would die or get trapped in the space between worlds instead of Hope, which by the way he NEARLY DID! Hank's just doing what most parents do, try to protect their child, even if said child is an adult can take care of themselves. Usually in the eyes of a parent their child is their child.

Eh, here's the thing.


Hank Pym had a reason for wanting to keep Hope out of the suit, even though it was very clear that she was the more qualified candidate.
However, from storytelling terms it was a bad reason. Not in that it did not make sense for his character, but in that it does not make sense in terms of the heroic narrative.

The reason basically came down to Hank Pym trying to protect his daughter, ignoring the fact that 1) she was making the choice, fully aware of the risks, and 2) that she was more qualified to do the job.
Hank was willing to risk both the mission failing AND Scott Lang's life (Which he's also willing to ruin via elaborate mind games) in order to protect his daughter.

From a storytelling perspective, Hank's unwillingness to let Hope use the suit is an obstacle.
Now, in a standard heroic narrative, there would be a few options here.

Option 1: If the heroic narrative is focused on Scott Lang, he must demonstrate why he is the right man to wear the suit. This is kind of what they did, but it didn't really stick. He demonstrated that he COULD do the job, and Hope basically just accepted that her father wouldn't budge on the subject. Although in this case the obstacle they're overcoming is Hope's disapproval, rather than Hank's stubbornness. We never got a good, solid reason why Scott was a better choice than Hope, except that Hank would let Scott use the suit.
Option 2: If the heroic narrative is focused on Hope, she overcomes the obstacle by convincing her father to let her use the Suit.
Option 3: Heroic Narrative still focused on Hope, rather than convincing Hank to let her use the suit, she just takes it and does the job herself.
Option 4: To give Hank Pym his heroic moment, he overcomes his flaw (Grief over his wife's death preventing him from supporting his daughter), agrees to let Hope use the suit, and supports her. The difference between this and #2 is whether the focus is on Hope convincing Hank, or Hank dealing with his issues on his own.

But, none of these really happened. Instead, we are presented with a scenario (Hope is more qualified, but Hank refuses to let her use the suit, and instead insists on sending the thief with a week of training, assuming said thief does not die the first time he accidentally uses the suit), and we just roll with it, because this is Scott Lang's story, not Hope's. Hank gets over his issues offscreen, after the action has passed.

I wouldn't necessarily call it sexist, but it is kind of troubling. They could easily have avoided the issue simply by not making Hope quite so qualified. Nobody was expecting this to be the Hope Van Dyne movie, but it seems like they quite deliberately created a female character who could have filled the protagonist role, just so she could stand there being qualified while the standard issue hollywood white male protagonist got to be a hero.

[Dienekes]

Eh, here's the thing.


Hank Pym had a reason for wanting to keep Hope out of the suit, even though it was very clear that she was the more qualified candidate.
However, from storytelling terms it was a bad reason. Not in that it did not make sense for his character, but in that it does not make sense in terms of the heroic narrative.

The reason basically came down to Hank Pym trying to protect his daughter, ignoring the fact that 1) she was making the choice, fully aware of the risks, and 2) that she was more qualified to do the job.
Hank was willing to risk both the mission failing AND Scott Lang's life (Which he's also willing to ruin via elaborate mind games) in order to protect his daughter.

From a storytelling perspective, Hank's unwillingness to let Hope use the suit is an obstacle.
Now, in a standard heroic narrative, there would be a few options here.

Option 1: If the heroic narrative is focused on Scott Lang, he must demonstrate why he is the right man to wear the suit. This is kind of what they did, but it didn't really stick. He demonstrated that he COULD do the job, and Hope basically just accepted that her father wouldn't budge on the subject. Although in this case the obstacle they're overcoming is Hope's disapproval, rather than Hank's stubbornness. We never got a good, solid reason why Scott was a better choice than Hope, except that Hank would let Scott use the suit.
Option 2: If the heroic narrative is focused on Hope, she overcomes the obstacle by convincing her father to let her use the Suit.
Option 3: Heroic Narrative still focused on Hope, rather than convincing Hank to let her use the suit, she just takes it and does the job herself.
Option 4: To give Hank Pym his heroic moment, he overcomes his flaw (Grief over his wife's death preventing him from supporting his daughter), agrees to let Hope use the suit, and supports her. The difference between this and #2 is whether the focus is on Hope convincing Hank, or Hank dealing with his issues on his own.

But, none of these really happened. Instead, we are presented with a scenario (Hope is more qualified, but Hank refuses to let her use the suit, and instead insists on sending the thief with a week of training, assuming said thief does not die the first time he accidentally uses the suit), and we just roll with it, because this is Scott Lang's story, not Hope's. Hank gets over his issues offscreen, after the action has passed.

I wouldn't necessarily call it sexist, but it is kind of troubling. They could easily have avoided the issue simply by not making Hope quite so qualified. Nobody was expecting this to be the Hope Van Dyne movie, but it seems like they quite deliberately created a female character who could have filled the protagonist role, just so she could stand there being qualified while the standard issue hollywood white male protagonist got to be a hero.


They actually do have option 1. Though it is very small, and should have been done better. That his skills with breaking and entering were actually what brought about the success on the mission. It was him who suggested the use of the water vents to get in, and he listed out each of the operations they would need for the job, and then provided people to fill the three necessary roles.

The difference is, usually, when someone shows how they're capable in that regard we get a moment where everyone steps back and goes "I guess you were the right choice after all, Generic Hero." And the Generic Hero has a little smug smirk, and the show goes on.

In this it was: "Oh God, not those three idiots" and they moved on to the operation.

[Ranxerox]

Eh, here's the thing.


I wouldn't necessarily call it sexist, but it is kind of troubling. They could easily have avoided the issue simply by not making Hope quite so qualified. Nobody was expecting this to be the Hope Van Dyne movie, but it seems like they quite deliberately created a female character who could have filled the protagonist role, just so she could stand there being qualified while the standard issue hollywood white male protagonist got to be a hero.


Perhaps not good heroic narrative, but realistic as all get out. Marvel took a half step here which has left a lot of people unhappy; though from a marketing standpoint may very well have been the right move. It had the honesty to do something few action movies do and admit that having something dangling between your legs doesn't make you the best qualified to be the hero. Unfortunately, it didn't go the rest of the way with it and make the protagonist female or even force the male hero to share top billing.

[Giggling Ghast]

Considering it was Scott who figured out how to get in the building and brought on his crew, I don't know that Hope was MORE qualified.

Yes, she had experience commanding ants and was the better fighter, but she wasn't a thief. You want something stolen, you hire a thief.

Sorry, CAT BURGLAR. :p

(By the way, I liked the movie. The fight on the train set was hilarious.)

[Dragonus45]

Considering it was Scott who figured out how to get in the building and brought on his crew, I don't know that Hope was MORE qualified.

Yes, she had experience commanding ants and was the better fighter, but she wasn't a thief. You want something stolen, you hire a thief.

Sorry, CAT BURGLAR. :p

(By the way, I liked the movie. The fight on the train set was hilarious.)

The way I look at it Hope is a better action hero, and if this was a straight up punch out the bad guy action movie she's your girl. Neither of them is really more qualified than the other, they just are good at separate things.

[Reddish Mage]

So to recap, Hank is sexist because:

1) He won't let Hope wear the suit

2) He apparently allowed Janet to wear the suit

3) He got Scott out of jail after Hope put him in jail

4) He blames himself for his wife's death

5) Being a male and making decisions

I'm pretty sure it all boils down to number 5, but I want to comment on the others.

1) Well, it is his suit and his technology. It kind of is his choice who wears it. It's not just up for grabs. Hope has no realistic claim to it.

2) He created the technology and the suits. It was his choice who got to wear them and who didn't. Yes, he let her. Any other scenario is her stealing something from her husband or taking the choice from him as to what he does with his things.

3) It was his house. If he wants to let someone break in he is allowed to do that. Hope overrode him, he was just putting the plan back on track.

4) He designed the suits. Something went wrong with his meaning only his wife could make that choice. Of course he feels guilty that something he made malfunctioned and as a result his wife was seemingly killed.

5) I'm still pretty sure this is what is upsetting people.

Why would I or other (mostly male identified) critics be upset at the prospect of a male making a decision? A male making decisions for a adult and perfectly capable woman on the basis of wanting to protect her...that's a red flag.

The justifications for Hank's actions are flawed in that they are unprovable...we can argue back and forth about story interpretations and Hank isn't around to tell us whose right.

All this internal story justification for Hank's actions ignore the fact that this is a story. Hank doesn't exist, Marvel writers, directors, editors and producers do. The people that wrote the series wrote it so that Scott, not Hope, would get to be the Ant-Man. They created (of more likely failed to create) the justifications Hank would have or wouldn't. They did it because they wanted to tell one story and not another.

That, in itself, doesn't suggest gender bias. However, making certain choices repeatedly suggests it's a trend. Trends can be identified and studied scientifically and all the studies point to a general dearth of female participation in these sorts of movies, especially in the lead role.

[Tyrant]

Why would I or other (mostly male identified) critics be upset at the prospect of a male making a decision? A male making decisions for a adult and perfectly capable woman on the basis of wanting to protect her...that's a red flag.
What part of "everything belongs to and was created by Hank, therefore it is his and only his decision what happens to it" isn't getting through? You're basically saying that a dad is sexist if he says "no, you can't borrow my car" to his daughter.

The justifications for Hank's actions are flawed in that they are unprovable...we can argue back and forth about story interpretations and Hank isn't around to tell us whose right.

All this internal story justification for Hank's actions ignore the fact that this is a story. Hank doesn't exist, Marvel writers, directors, editors and producers do. The people that wrote the series wrote it so that Scott, not Hope, would get to be the Ant-Man. They created (of more likely failed to create) the justifications Hank would have or wouldn't. They did it because they wanted to tell one story and not another.

That, in itself, doesn't suggest gender bias. However, making certain choices repeatedly suggests it's a trend. Trends can be identified and studied scientifically and all the studies point to a general dearth of female participation in these sorts of movies, especially in the lead role.
So because some people are bringing their own baggage about the movie industry with them Hank Pym is a sexist?

[Airea]

I just saw it as a father being over protective. It can be frustrating as hell, but I've been there. As stupid as it is they do mean well.

You just hold it over their heads later. :D

[Legato Endless]

The justifications for Hank's actions are flawed in that they are unprovable...we can argue back and forth about story interpretations and Hank isn't around to tell us whose right.

If a justification or interpretation can not cite evidence, than it's probably not a solid theory. Or we simply admit we are entering into a discussion where what we think biased from a lack of information.


. All this internal story justification for Hank's actions ignore the fact that this is a story. Hank doesn't exist, Marvel writers, directors, editors and producers do.

No, that presumes textual analysis is rooted in the external circumstances an author created a work in. That can be problematic for a number of reasons, it's the reason Death of the Author exists as a type of interpretation.


That, in itself, doesn't suggest gender bias. However, making certain choices repeatedly suggests it's a trend. Trends can be identified and studied scientifically and all the studies point to a general dearth of female participation in these sorts of movies, especially in the lead role.

Correlation does not prove causation. Just because a trend exists doesn't mean every data point gets neatly shuffled into it. Context is a thing. By this logic, case studies are bizarre and unnecessary.

[Solamnicknight]

I still think it was Hank being a Papa wolf. Really, we are dealing with a man who built tech that killed his beloved wife. Do you really think he wants his daughter to get inside that thing? Also I don't know why everybody is so blasted worked up since Hank changed his mind in the first stinger. We'll see Hope as Wasp, and the original Wasp died heroically taking out a fricken nuke for crying out loud! Seriously the whole sexism accusation thing in these threads is getting real old real fast, boy who cried wolf style. First it was the Hulk/Widow thing in AOU and now this. Never mind that Marvel so far has introduced a lot of female heroes. Here's a list: Black Widow, Lady Sif, Maria Hill, Agent Carter, Melinda May, Skye/Daisy Johnson/Quake, Bobbi Morse/Mockingbird, and Scarlet Witch. We also have Jessica Jones and Elektra showing up on Netflix, and a Captain Marvel movie coming up. So you were saying?:smallfurious:

[cobaltstarfire]

I think it's just too little too late for quite a few people.

And I think it's understandable, I don't tend to feel frustrated, but I do always feel a huge amount of excitement at the idea of a show/game/movie that features a good strong central female character. Every single time, and I am pretty certain that is in part because of lack of representation.

I personally feel that the female characters in Ant Man were a good step, they weren't the central characters no, but I think all three of them were pretty strong. We had a good sensible mother, an awesome daughter, and Hope who is obviously awesome even if she wasn't allowed to shine.

I think at this point though, I'll be really disappointed if Hope doesn't get her own movie, that's what I really really want now. Wasp looks way cooler than ant man.

[Ranxerox]

I think at this point though, I'll be really disappointed if Hope doesn't get her own movie, that's what I really really want now. Wasp looks way cooler than ant man.

She always was in the comics, so that is not surprising.

[GAAD]

So.

One thing I liked about this movie?

The predictability of the villain.

No sudden betrayal, no out-of-nowhere heel turn, no gigantic game-changing plot twist. Heck, we know who the bad guy is, and so do the heroes, from basically the start of the movie! Sometimes it is nice to have a basic kick-in-the-door and kill BBEG style story.

[Dragonus45]

For some of you I think your enjoyment of things might improve if you were let go of the idea that the movie needs to have a main character without dangly bits, or with them this is the century of the fruitbat, in order to meet the ever elusive goal of "representation".

[Reddish Mage]

If a justification or interpretation can not cite evidence, than it's probably not a solid theory. Or we simply admit we are entering into a discussion where what we think biased from a lack of information.



No, that presumes textual analysis is rooted in the external circumstances an author created a work in. That can be problematic for a number of reasons, it's the reason Death of the Author exists as a type of interpretation.



Correlation does not prove causation. Just because a trend exists doesn't mean every data point gets neatly shuffled into it. Context is a thing. By this logic, case studies are bizarre and unnecessary.

Wow...that's actually responsive. Kudos.

So in the first, a discussion about Hank Pym's internal justification is a discussion lacking adequete evidence where we are bringing in our outside biases. Just that.

My understanding of "Death of the Author" is that authorial intent is no longer the sole and final arbiter of a work's meaning,..or even has any import as any more than "self-commentary." The author's environment, his culture, his hidden psychology, those are important to most contemporary hermeneutics. Other than New Criticism, which seeks to look at a literary work as self-contained, and that dinosaur is old hat.

Yes, correlation doesn't prove causation, and science is limited as to what it can say about a particular data point, but I'm primarily concerned with getting the basic point across that the gendering of characters actually exists...gender influences what role they appear in and how they behave.

Also what you say about case studies is true.

[Legato Endless]

Wow...that's actually responsive. Kudos.

Why thank you.



My understanding of "Death of the Author" is that authorial intent is no longer the sole and final arbiter of a work's meaning,..or even has any import as any more than "self-commentary." The author's environment, his culture, his hidden psychology, those are important to most contemporary hermeneutics. Other than New Criticism, which seeks to look at a literary work as self-contained, and that dinosaur is old hat.


New Criticism and Death of the Author do agree on the notion of the 'Intentional Fallacy', which is to say that even the biography may be ignored for analysis. Other than, the two differ somewhat substantially, as New Criticism still concerns itself with authoritative interpretation and self referential aesthetics and blah.


Yes, correlation doesn't prove causation, and science is limited as to what it can say about a particular data point, but I'm primarily concerned with getting the basic point across that the gendering of characters actually exists...gender influences what role they appear in and how they behave.

To which I would absolutely agree. It's an extraordinary pervasive pernicious influence that will take long years to disentangle, if ever. But simply assuming something is influenced (in a certain way) in various scenarios can lead to errant assumptions, which, while not what I think you were actually getting at as the conclusion, was what the argument was starting to look like.

From the opposite perspective, I'm always troubled when I rant to people concerning various disturbing cultural trends and conventions, to which an all too common response is a triumphant citing of that lone shining exception, ("What are you talking about Legato, there was a trans woman in that Sherlock show, so they obviously are having their stories told. It's fine.") because people think all too easily in absolute values. Because it's convenient if errant.

Apropos of nothing, that romantic hook up at the end of the film seemed totally unnecessary and tersely obligatory, and dear Lord the CGI de-aging of Michael Douglas in the opening was absolutely stellar. I did a double take the first time I saw it. I've never seen it done so convincingly before.

[Reddish Mage]

To which I would absolutely agree. It's an extraordinary pervasive pernicious influence that will take long years to disentangle, if ever. But simply assuming something is influenced (in a certain way) in various scenarios can lead to errant assumptions, which, while not what I think you were actually getting at as the conclusion, was what the argument was starting to look like.

From the opposite perspective, I'm always troubled when I rant to people concerning various disturbing cultural trends and conventions, to which an all too common response is a triumphant citing of that lone shining exception, ("What are you talking about Legato, there was a trans woman in that Sherlock show, so they obviously are having their stories told. It's fine.") because people think all too easily in absolute values. Because it's convenient if errant.

I was giving a salient reading of Henry Pym as seeing himself as in a privaledged position to make decisions for his wife and daughter. He clearly did see himself in such a position as no one disagrees he wasn't taking blame for his wife's sacrifice or putting his foot down in keeping Hope out of the Ant Man suit. If you think there isn't a gender aspect to his decision, and after analyzing his fictional biography and relationship to Cross as opposed to Hope, still see it that way, I can only note based on historical trends, it's more likely than not. That's it, none of that is question begging, but I'm at an end of the points I can raise.

I still say, if this is a lone exception, it's pretty lonely, but a discussion of MCU's gender treatment is a separate story.


Apropos of nothing, that romantic hook up at the end of the film seemed totally unnecessary and tersely obligatory, and dear Lord the CGI de-aging of Michael Douglas in the opening was absolutely stellar. I did a double take the first time I saw it. I've never seen it done so convincingly before.

Think that's impressive, check out Terminator: Genisys and watch as Middle-aged Arnold, Young Arnold and Old Arnold mix it up.

[Airea]

I loved the movie, and I got the protective father thing (lived it myself to a degree). But Janet just being written out still bugs the **** out of me.

I don't demand she be a main character, but more then a 20 second flashback was called for.

[DiscipleofBob]

I loved the movie, and I got the protective father thing (lived it myself to a degree). But Janet just being written out still bugs the **** out of me.

I don't demand she be a main character, but more then a 20 second flashback was called for.

I got it! :smalltongue:

[Solamnicknight]

I loved the movie, and I got the protective father thing (lived it myself to a degree). But Janet just being written out still bugs the **** out of me.

I don't demand she be a main character, but more then a 20 second flashback was called for.
There's rumors that if they do another Ant Man movie it might be a prequel or time travel film set when Hank was Ant-Man and Janet was still alive. I hope they go with that idea.

[Kitten Champion]

Apropos of nothing, that romantic hook up at the end of the film seemed totally unnecessary and tersely obligatory


I agree, if it had to be done it was something that could have been pushed back to a later film, it felt very "classic hero's reward" and unnecessary when I was already satisfied seeing Scott renew his relationship with his daughter that was his driving motivation throughout the film.

Honestly, Iron Man, Amazing Spider-Man, and Lois & Clark: The Adventures of Superman are the only superhero genre live-action adaptations where romantic relationships worked for me on any level.

Seriously - looking at Marvel - Thor and Jane foster are pretty banal and the movies never effectively sold me on their romance, Captain America and Peggy Carter are much better but that quickly ends in tragedy, Guardians of the Galaxy didn't have one largely to its benefit, The Incredible Hulk's relationship with Betty Ross didn't survive its movie and was pretty tepid all told and Avengers Hulk's relationship with Black Widow never really got passed Banner's issues, Agent's of SHIELD is a bunch of single people and two divorced couples, and lastly Daredevil has the possibility for a competently composed romantic subplot but hasn't had one yet.

From the pre-Marvel Studios era, we had Mary Jane Watson from Raimi's Spider-Man of which I'm really not a fan, the Fantastic Four which were hollow movies generally which carries over into the Reed/Sue relationship, I don't think Blade or Elektra had a love interest in their own movies, I don't care if Ghost Rider did, and Jennifer Garner's role in Daredevil was astonishingly bad.

Then there are the X-Men movies, nothing really stands out from their attempts, except Origins with its fridging.

Looking at DC - CW superhero relationships are uniformly awful and should be burnt down for the insurance money. The only tolerable one - from Smallville, Arrow, Flash, whatever - is Diggle's marriage, which again, isn't exactly great but at least it has more to it than their usual approach of putting attractive people on screen and claiming they're in a relationship without worrying about little things like effective chemistry or logic.

As to the movies, Dark Knight Batman's love interest is killed to further his character arc and every other one disappears by the end of the movie, Man of Steel Supe's is making out with Lois Lane in the middle of ground zero for reasons that still perplex me to this day, Catwoman is bad and it should feel bad, Green Lantern's relationship might have worked with a better script, Jonah Hex was worse than Catwoman at least with regards to how women were treated, and Watchmen is Watchmen.

I guess the Donner films aren't bad in depicting their central romantic relationship, though I wouldn't call them particularly well done examples either... just better than most of the competition as there are admittedly some charming scenes within them just between fairly two-dimensional characters. Lois and Clark picked up on that and took it somewhere with a slightly more of a grounded relationship despite comic hijinks.

I suppose that leaves Superman Returns which I don't really have an opinion on it because it's confusingly rooted in continuity I don't quite get.

[Aotrs Commander]

*just got back from cinema*

Well, I don't know about anybody else, but I rather liked it!

(Which of course probably means everyone else hated it or something.)

Falcon was a nice surprise.