Coming off the enormous success of The Avengers, it was widely felt by many following the industry and especially those who were tracking the evolution of the superhero movie genre that Marvel Studios had opened a box they would never be able to close. That film changed how the public would view superhero films. They had to now be ensemble pieces that functioned as blockbuster popcorn flicks. If there was a focus on one superhero within the space of a film, it had to now fit into the larger framework of the MCU. The individual films in Phase Two of the MCU largely struggled to measure up to what The Avengers brought to the table. So Ant-Man continues that tradition within Phase Two. It struggles to see how it can fit as a piece of the large MCU. It's a very odd way for Marvel to cap off the end of Phase Two and jump into Phase Three.

At least the film commits to the small stature of its titular hero. It knows coming in that this is going to be a film that is off-kilter, without the sort of name recognition from any member of the Avengers that could prop it up. And the film plays out that way. Ant-Man in the comics was an original member of the Avengers team. Hank Pym (Michael Douglas) and the Pym Particles play a significant role in the evolution of the Avengers team. In the MCU, Pym's purpose has been reframed to service a more solitary mission. Pym is obsessed with small-time criminal Scott Lang (Paul Rudd), released from San Quentin prison (possibly by Pym himself for the purposes of making him Ant-Man?), and now determined to make things right with his school-age daughter Cassie.


There isn't much that is special about Lang, other than the fact that he's an engineering expert, a master thief, and that he wants to be a good father. Ant-Man is committed to being an origin story, the first solo origin story for a Marvel hero in the MCU since 2011 with Captain America. When I realized that fact, it made me appreciate the breadth of what Marvel had accomplished since taking a risk on a B-level superhero called Iron Man seven years ago. In fact, Ant-Man's relatively small stakes and low-key manner made me appreciate the times when Marvel Studios swung big. To some, it may seem overwhelming to dive full-on into world saving mode, but that was the box that The Avengers opened three years ago and has been unable to contain since. 

Everything in the film screams ordinary. Paul Rudd's casting as Scott Lang is definitely against type, as Rudd has often played the supporting character in a variety of comedies. He just doesn't look like your typical superhero. Like Tony Stark and Iron Man, the "look" of this kind of superhero is largely defined by the suit he is wearing. His mission, as outlined by Pym and his daughter Hope Van Dyne (Evangeline Lilly), is simply to steal a copy of a shrinking suit that Pym's one-time protege Darren Cross (Corey Stoll) is intent on creating and selling to the highest bidder. 



Cross is a rather weak villain, one with no proverbial teeth. He's not much of a threat and sometimes feels like he's in an entirely different movie altogether. Ant-Man actually functions without a nominal villain for a large percentage of the film. It's somewhat different from how the other Marvel films operate. Cross only factors into the plot when it's time for Ant-Man to have someone to face off against.





The film is rather haphazard in what it wants to explore during its runtime. This may have been the byproduct of the film's rather tumultuous production history. The film was supposed to be directed by maverick filmmaker Edgar Wright at one time, then he decided to quit the project due to "creative differences" with the studio operation, re-writes were demanded by a new set of writers, and Peyton Reed was brought in to shepherd it to final release. It's hard to see where Wright's fingerprints remain, probably in the film's more wacky and subversive moments. Wright would have been more brave in his choices for the film, which has felt like a passion project for years. For example, there are a couple of really great fight sequences in the final film that feel like Wright and his co-writer put in themselves, one involving a previously established MCU character and the other, a clever fight inside a briefcase set to "Disintegration" by The Cure. 



Even the climax of the film, set inside a little girl's bedroom, is something that plays like a battle that hasn't been seen in the MCU before. But outside of those clever sequences, which do make the film come alive, the film is more run-of-the-mill. Reed plays things safe and within the margins. There's little to no ambition or innovation to the proceedings. Scott gets to learn the ins and outs of his time in the Ant-Man suit, eventually mastering how to fight within the abilities of the suit as well as controlling the ants that Pym has been harboring for years. In between all of this, Pym and Hope work out their myriad father-daughter issues. 



They try to inject a heist element into the proceedings, only the payoff isn't as satisfying as one would think or even expect. It's really nothing that a seasoned movie watcher (such as myself) hasn't really seen before. I didn't like the fact that the film marginalizes Hope's character. She trains Scott in the Ant-Man suit, then sits out the proceedings as the titular hero faces off against the Yellowjacket villain. Considering the fact that Marvel has caught some flak for how Black Widow was treated in Avengers: Age of Ultron after she was basically a co-lead in Captain America: The Winter Soldier, I don't think the studio wants to be perceived as backsliding with its treatment of female characters. It's definitely something I will keep an eye on in future installments.



It's become so difficult to truly surprise viewers these days. Especially within this genre. You go into a movie with the Marvel Studios headline or logo and your expectations are largely met. Watching Ant-Man actually made me acquire a better appreciation for what Avengers: Age of Ultron was trying to do. Those who have said that the Avengers sequel was a creative failure due to possible overstuffing of plot and/or characters can look at Ant-Man as that film's polar opposite. It's intended as a breather before all of the foreshadowed chaos of the Civil War goes down next summer. The question that hangs over this film is really how much all of it fits into a world that is much larger, and yet, is ignored. 



I don't think that was the intention of the higher up's at Marvel Studios. There were times watching this film when I wondered what else was going on in the MCU. I wanted to escape outside of the film to see what Cap or Tony Stark or even the Hulk was doing. I don't think Marvel can go small again these days. It's effective to a degree, but then everything ends up feeling like more could have been done and those involved were afraid to include it. This is an oddity for a studio that has been largely infallible for nearly a decade. I say swing for the fences more.