Ummm, so you might like one of these things?
The premise: a good natured and violence avoiding cat burglar (Paul Rudd) is tabbed to become the Ant-Man by an elderly genius scientist/inventor (Michael Douglas), much to the chagrin of the scientist’s feisty daughter (Evangeline Lilly)
In a suit which instantly shrinks him to ant size, and equally quickly to normal adult size, Ant-Man must save the world from another scientist inventor – this time an evil one – who would put the world in jeopardy.
Oh and he must do it all for his daughter who loves him…
Here’s what is unarguable about Ant-Man;
- – it has and will continue to make hundreds of millions at the box office
- – it will end the year somewhere in the top ten grossing films of 2015
- – it will mean more Avengers characters, and Paul Rudd can buy that island he has had his eye on for the last few years. Finally…
Here is what Ant-Man won’t do;
- – it won’t win many awards. The effects are unremarkable, ‘look he’s ant size! Yes, and so were Rick Moranis’s kids 20 years ago – and Honey I Shrunk the a Kids was more fu
- – it won’t make a capital S ‘Star’ out of Rudd or Lilly. Both were likeable B pluses before this film, and there they will remain
- – it doesn’t have an action scene to rival twenty others in the Avengers series
- – it doesn’t have the stream of jokes of other Avengers films, especially the Iron Man films
But most important of all;
- – it won’t offend anyone…
It seems to me that after Edgar Wright left the director’s chair citing ‘creative differences’, that the filmmakers decided their primary focus was to pull off the bare minimum. The cast? Good enough. The plot? That’ll do. The sfx? Kids can’t tell what is cutting edge anymore.
Everything about Ant-Man screams ‘first do no harm’. It lacks any sort of edge. The origin tale is as banal as anything I can remember; guy makes suit that makes guy small. (But what of the Pym Particle you say? Oh you mean the jar of goo? Woooowwww.). The action lacking flash and slathered with predictability. Even the presence of Rudd and several other character actors can’t add many laughs, save for some hilarious rapid fire jibberish from Michael Pena. In other news the bad guy is mediocre and the omnipresent ants feel tacked on. There’s an Avenger alright, but… Wait, which one is he again?
Anyone who labels this as one of the films of the year needs to think again, or wait until puberty kicks in.
In the last dozen or so years superhero films have raised the bar with regard what a blockbuster really is, ‘super’ or otherwise. Now it seems they are either running out of ideas or energy. In a film about an insect that can lift fifty times its own weight, this film can’t be bothered even pretending to exert more than minimal effort for the audience.
Ant-Man is not a blockbuster. It is sorta good, sorta funny and sorta interesting, while being none of those things to any worthwhile extent.nit has nothing to hang its tiny ant-sized hat on. It’s not action. Not comedy and not drama. It is a big budget film that talks big and aims low – somewhere around the hip pocket area. I can’t label it a dud, but I sure as hell won’t grant it worthwhile status.
Final Rating – 6.7 / 10. Forget trying to lift fifty times anything. Avengers: Lift. Your. Game.
