Ant-Man and the Wasp

The final credits sum it all up – Ant-Man is really nothing more than a little tyke's Saturday afternoon with a giant Lego set. On the one hand, it's irritating in the randomness of the situations, where basically nothing has any greater internal integrity; on the other hand, it's pleasing to see a lot of creativity in the action scenes and generally the second half of the film, when a bunch of people keep tossing a building around between them like a hot potato. By the way, I'd like to see the interior of the building when it's enlarged. Unfortunately it’s never quite daring enough to make me respect the film, and instead still clings to juvenile humor built around a confused hero in a strange situation, with Paul Rudd playing pretty much a family-friendly version of Deadpool here, i.e. not funny and sorely in need of a beating. After ten years of this, we should all be asking for more from Marvel. I'm dropping it a star for that reason, though compared to Black Panther or Infinity War at least this was fun. (10/03/2018)

I had a problem already with the first Ant-Man. I said to myself that within the entire Marvel Universe, he is a very average character that, on the other hand, has the setting in which it takes place working for him. Well, and the sequel? It lost even the entertaining setting, or well, it depends… There isn’t much going on in the first 80 minutes of the film and every now and then Michael Peña comes in to the rescue, as he is at least a bit entertaining. But in the final almost 40 minutes, things finally start happening, which fortunately makes the movie a bit livelier. Otherwise, I would have had to go with less than three stars. All in all, however, the Ant-Man did not convince me even the second time around and I rank him among the least interesting heroes in the entire Marvel Universe. (12/16/2018)

For me weaker than the first one and also a weaker cinema visit this year. This is a downright Marvel movie for kids. Not much Action, childish humour (at least Michael Peña was funny at times, but I don't find Paul Rudd funny at all). A weak villain who didn't really show much of anything, it dragged at times unfortunately and I would have preferred sleeping in places. Compared to The Avengers and Deadpool it's a big drop down, but it still sort of holds that standard average. 55% (09/03/2018)

More of the same, you could say. I wasn't particularly interested in the first Ant-Man, I don't really like Paul Rudd. Visually, the film reminded me of a more expansive episode of a TV series and I rank it as one of the last among the Marvel movies. On the other hand, I can easily respect it as popcorn entertainment that's supposed to be for the whole family. And that's what Ant-Man and The Wasp is. If you liked the first one, the second one won't disappoint you because it relies on the same things. Logically, I wasn't that blown away by it. Peyton Reed still can't do anything that is visually interesting and relies on Rudd, jokes and weird side characters. It's a shame, because he's got a very interesting villain that someone more skilled and with a more serious approach could have pulled off much better. Here, though, he crams in a lot of fun up front, which was unnecessarily too much for my taste, plus it often teetered on the edge of awkwardness. I don't want to be unfair to the film, however. With Marvel, I appreciate that they try to make the films somehow genre-specific. And for me, this genre simply doesn't fit well. (07/27/2018)

With its confident approach, better team dynamics, and the abilities of the main hero expanded by a hair better than the first installment, it is also surprisingly a strong part of the whole universe. Given that it has not deviated from its heist schemes, family pathos, or even purely physical comedy, Scott Lang himself (and now perhaps Hope van Dyne) is an easily fitting piece of the puzzle that can shine on its own. (07/07/2018)