Ant-Man and The Wasp (Peyton Reed, July 6, 2018) Movie • Page 8

I was thinking about this too. I think it’s either a set up for future villains or they just needed someone with henchmen so they could have chase scenes.

 

Well, the main villain was Ghost and she was great. Goggins was just there to add another obstacle for that chase sequence at the end. It was a lot of fun having three parties fighting over the lab. I don't think he needed any development since he wasn't a real threat, it's just a B story. Some of the Spiderman movies have this too many villains problem, because the focus should just be on one. I liked that Goggins wasn't important and just popped up now and then as a nuisance.

 

"Too many villains" is a myth. I'm pretty sure The Dark Knight uses the same number of costumed villains as Amazing Spider-Man 2. "Too many subplots" is what people really mean.

Anyways, I personally think this film's story worked well. I liked all the loosely connected threads and how they would collide with each other. I really liked that there wasn't a true main villain, but rather a few antagonists with different reasons for chasing the protagonists. It was a web of motivations that helped keep the momentum going while keeping the stakes grounded.

It didn't use the various plot lines as expertly on a thematic level as Guardians 2 or The Last Jedi, but it was a smaller, lighter film, and I liked that about it. 'Twas a nice change of pace between the two halves of this massive Infinity War event we're in.

 

I thought the villains were fine. Burch put a little logic into how Hank/Hope were able to build things while on the run and, with his motivation all financial, helped move the plot along by having access to the one key piece left for them. (Also, his connection within the Feds complicated it more for Scott and logically tied that into his Civil War efforts.)

Ghost was really in the same way as Hank/Hope, but selfishly wanted the quantum energy to save herself. With similar interests and the nice connection to bring in Bill Foster, she was a good addition that could really be more of a hero in the future.

All in all, I think it also sets up another sequel with the question of "who was Burch working for?"

 

All signs point to Norman Osborn

 

Oh boy, I literally didn't think even once about who was behind the scenes. It didn't feel important to me at all.

Though, I also didn't care about the mid-credits scene. I realize I'm an outlier. I've always loved set-up and the like in credits scenes, but after the monster that is Infinity War, I needed to watch a Marvel film without considering that junk.

 

oh fuck yeah i’d be into that

 

i thought the movie was fine. that's the most i could say. some good action scenes courtesy of the size-shrinking elements, a lot of the comedy fell short for me though. there weren't a lot of laughs from the audience the whole film.

what was the second post-credit scene? i left after the mid one, i didn't think there'd be two (i don't know why) someone let me know in a spoiler tag

 

The second one is just the ant playing the drums from the trailer. Not using a spoiler tags because it was fucking stupid.

 

really? oh okay, thanks, i was worried i missed something lmao

 

I was really hoping it would be like something about Ghost.

 

I actually liked it the second post-credits scene a fair bit. It was pretty ominous with the emergency broadcast signal and the silence. It almost felt like it was a metaphor for how Ant-Man and the Wasp related to Infinity War: an ant having a carefree time while everything around it went to shit. And yeah, I'm looking too far into it.

 

I find it hilarious how convenient the deaths from the snap are. "Oh look, we left behind the original Avengers and took away their loved ones to force a direction for our second film where they have to reconcile in order to defeat Thanos only to end up sacrificing themselves to save everyone else" and "Scott's in the Quantum Realm (at conveniently the right time) and ALL THREE of the people watching him from the outside get wiped because we have to force everything into this nice little predictable box or else our fucking minds will explode"

 

Sounds like you're describing basic storytelling...

I have my critiques of Infinity War and my questions about how they'll handle Avengers 4. But, the "convenience" of the deaths certainly isn't one of 'em. That's like getting mad at convenient aim in a shootout. You gotta tell your story, and part of that is massaging probability.

 

I get what he’s saying. The circumstances and outcome make it seem like it’s not just a random 50/50 chance of dying from the snap.

 

It just sounds like such a Cinema Sins style complaint to me. Like, there's convenience in every story ever that can be nitpicked if you want. Nobody, when writing a story, picks character deaths and similar events truly randomly; they pick the odds that the story demands. Sorry that they didn't put the characters' names on balls and pull out half of them while blindfolded.

The biggest shortcoming of Infinity War is how it sits with the other Marvel films in regards to character arcs. A lot of undoing and wheel-spinning happened over the course of the film. Leaving the original 6 Avengers for the next film, which is supposed to be a culmination of sorts and the end of an era, is the most promising sign that next film might actually work on a character level. I hate how white male heavy it's set up to be, but that lingering major shortcoming of the entire MCU aside, it's a great decision to have the table set the way it's been set for the sequel.

 

I'm not saying be random. That's not the point. It's a legitimate problem. I'm already asked to suspend my disbelief a lot because it's a super hero film, right? Then in Infinity War, they undo all of Ragnarok, nerf powers, have unrealistic decision making, and completely abandon logic in a lot of ways and that pushes my suspension way too far. Characters have sacrificed a lot more in previous movies for far less significant threats, but suddenly, when half of all life is on the line, people have trouble making the right call. Thor, a seasoned fighter who just watched his people and loved ones slaughtered would be out for blood with an unquenchable desire to kill and doesn't bother going for the head or even more logically the arm of Thanos? Okay, sure. All these heroes in Wakanda are going to attack Thanos one at a time to do a cool montage/emotional scene? Fine, that's cool. Star-Lord is going to punch a God out of anger and basically taint the memory of his loved one, Gamora, having her die in vain because he can't wait two seconds and more importantly, forgets how to be a hero? He's killed his own father after watching a loved one die and sacrificed himself before, but they need to lose to Thanos? No problem, I'll allow it. But it just keeps going on and on and on.

It doesn't matter that they ended up with the original team for the next movie, of course they have to get from point A to point B, that is a basic need in storytelling. It's the fact that they opted for convenience and predictability over logic and ingenuity.

 

Most of what you complained about can easily be researched and answered in interviews with the directors and writers as to why the characters did what they did.

 

I know, I've read a lot about it. Justifications for decisions still don't make them good decisions. I don't see how that's hard to understand...

 

There are more than a fair share of legit complaints about characters in IW but the Quill one with regards to Thanos doesn't bother me. The dude unloaded into Ego the second he discovered the truth about his mother. Doesn't negate others complaints but I sort of don't get that one. We've seen him be emotionally reactive before.

 

All that shows me is a lack of character growth, but to each their own.

 

The characters are not perfect and shouldn’t make good decisions all of the time without the script being “illogical”. The characters have flaws and IW did a good job at showing them. Thor has always been prideful and big mouthed. Star-Lord has always been has always been hot headed. The writers for IW capitalized on those. I don’t see why people would expect the characters to react in a perfect manner in the situation they were placed. Everything was chaotic.

 

The script was illogical and I'm well aware the characters have flaws, but it's just a poor excuse for bad writing. We are clearly not going to agree on this. Was it a bad movie? No. It was an enjoyable super hero flick and that's all one can really expected out if it. Does it deserve unanimous praise for being the best movie in the franchise, etc? Of course not.

 

There are very good critiques of Infinity War. A lot were made in that thread the week after the release.

Complaining about some perceived convenience in who was and wasn't snapped out of existence isn't one of 'em. Sorry that it's something that bothered you personally about the film. But, of all the failings to be found in Infinity War's storytelling, that one isn't one that holds up at all to me.

 

Infinity War is horrible. Not even one clue as to what happened to Darcy.