Philaflava.com ::

Guess its about time this got a thread. Trailer doesn't show much but I'm optimistic.

Honestly what sold me the most for some reason was Paul Rudd going '...huh..' and the 'change the name' line.

I'm really not sure about him as an action hero and was thinking they would try to make him more gruff than he really is and it would come off forced, but those little moments were was so on point as far as his general mannerisms it kinda convinced me.

Well it doesn't take a whole lot to get a marvel movie fan on board for this off the teaser trailer.

I see this doing huge at the box office off the star power alone. i'm getting serious iron man 1 vibes here for some reason.

I still wish Edgar Wright was doing this, he's exactly the right guy for striking a balance between comedy and action in a way that makes both a viable element in the movie. Either him or Shane Black. The guy they got instead has a good comedy resume but not a shred of making things go boom.

I'm sure it'll be cool, but it's just hard to imagine a superhero movie about a guy who becomes microscopic as his power/ability. Unless he's fighting ebola can't imagine many villians his size.

alpha wrote:I'm sure it'll be cool, but it's just hard to imagine a superhero movie about a guy who becomes microscopic as his power/ability. Unless he's fighting ebola can't imagine many villians his size.

He can grow 100 times his size and shrink 100 times his size, so he'll be fighting ebola and maybe a megazord if we're lucky.

Who is the bald guy who is obviously the villain?

I cheated, nevermind.

http://m.imdb.com/title/tt0478970/fullc ... m_tt_cl_sc" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

TI is in this movie.

shit, I thought it worked only one way. thanks.

For some reason the fact that Paul Rudd is doing this makes me a little optimistic. I like when comedic actors are cast in non-comedic roles. I hope he's not just playing Paul-Rudd-in-damn-near-every-movie-he's-in and is more just adding a little of himself to spice up the role.

Marvel will never flop again. They have greased the wheels so even their biggest cinematic risks will do "Guardians of the Galaxy' numbers now.

Space them out enough, make them slightly unique enough, and make them hit enough satisfaction points (action, effects, plot, comedy, drama, maybe a lil romance, tension, spectacle, innovation) and BOOOOM

yet another $80-100 million dollar opening weekend, and yet another franchise in the can

this looks okay. they are going for some "new" angles in this: tag team superhero action on some mentor/student struggle shit, and this time, they're trying to save childrens, instead of the typical cliche: saving the soul of some tortured adult

I'll watch it opening weekend of course, but it doesn't got much wow factor yet. I love the pacifist Avenger angle in the comics and I wonder if they will add it in the movie. But as of now, Ant-man needs an AWESOME villain/crisis to me

drizzle wrote:Honestly what sold me the most for some reason was Paul Rudd going '...huh..' and the 'change the name' line.

I'm really not sure about him as an action hero and was thinking they would try to make him more gruff than he really is and it would come off forced, but those little moments were was so on point as far as his general mannerisms it kinda convinced me.

Pretty much my thoughts exactly.

New trailer up! I dig it...

kinda fucking with it

the shot of the toy train falling over was strong

Still gonna be a hard sell w/the general audience but this trailer is a vast improvement over the first. They probably needed more time on the effects.

I am into it. It might be a hard sell in some ways, but it might be able to ride good will from Age of Ultron and Marvel's fairly solid track record.

curious what kind of contingency plan MCU has for individual failures? if every movie is built at least in some part off some preceding one, and the preceding one flops...

maybe they're confident enough in the main ones (avengers, cap) to the point where lesser asides like ant man and the tv shows don't matter as much? ie the main ones have the most important pieces for preserving continuity, so if ant man fails you're not missing as much overall?

basically, could a flop create a swiss cheese effect in continuity where certain fans can't follow shit in movie Y without seeing movie X? this was already kinda starting to happen to me when I watched the avengers and had no idea where the fuck the tesseract came from to begin with, because I haven't seen Cap1 and Thor1 at that point. not a big deal in that situation but going forward the multiplicative effect will make it worse.

Don't see it failing. Paul Rudd being in it is a major selling point and its off-beat vibe. The film also kills two birds with one stone, as it not only caters to Marvel neck beards, but also fans of mostly overrated comedies from the last ten years.

If this movie follows the most recent comic book runs of Ant-Man, including the new one written by Nick Spencer, then it will have a fair amount of humor.

Love Rudd but can't really lead plus none of the Apatow boys have been decent superheroes.

I think this is out, or soon to be out. What's the consensus? Worth watching or no? Although I think the amount of activity in this thread is answer enough.

There's this thing called Google. Try it.

@chamerz
for what it's worth I'm gonna see it once in theatres just to see it

re continuity
if they are smart they won't do anything major here. they just really really need to establish some characters for where they're going. in my opinion they're rushing it. but we'll see.

Spartan wrote:Don't see it failing. Paul Rudd being in it is a major selling point and its off-beat vibe. The film also kills two birds with one stone, as it not only caters to Marvel neck beards, but also fans of mostly overrated comedies from the last ten years.

hahaha quality commentary

Twitch is fairly tepid on it

http://twitchfilm.com/2015/07/fantasia- ... t-man.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It's super disappointing that people will inevitably be on the whole 'what if' thing with Edgar Wright.

I get mentioning it, but referring to it multiple times in a review just seems like a no win situation for the film as it stands.

Pretty good flick, looked great on IMAX (I also forget all IMAX screens are not created equal, there's a few in my area that I go to. One is further away, but every time I go I'm reminded how much better it is than the others. They won me over for good this time).

Not on the level of Guardians though as I've seen some say. The story is a little stale, Rudd is good but doesn't really run with the role. Michael Douglas is expectedly great. Really don't care for that dude who plays Yellowjacket. Special effects and fight scenes are pretty great, but there's not enough of them. I thought Mike Pena would steal the movie, but most of his lines fell flat.

this movie was fucking awesome

the whole "why don't you just call the avengers?" thing is brilliant

the lip-syncing plot-advancement scenes are even more brilliant

i stole "plot-advancement scenes" from this brilliant review

http://grantland.com/hollywood-prospect ... an-review/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

BRILLIANT I SAY.

Really enjoyed it. Really hit its stride in purpose. I'll always say yes to more Evangeline lily

I'm not a big fan of the name either

Saw it a second time and enjoyed it a bit more. Thought it was on par with Avengers 2 which I thought was good but not great.

Must say though, all the stuff with Michael Douglas was pretty great.

I don't get how he went subatomic and came back. Somebody needs to show me the science behind that

The Afronaut wrote:Saw it a second time and enjoyed it a bit more. Thought it was on par with Avengers 2 which I thought was good but not great.

Must say though, all the stuff with Michael Douglas was pretty great.

was on the fence about going back to see it again but you've convinced me to do it

especially cuz i missed the 2nd post-movie jawn