Ant-Man

Ant-Man tells the story of one man’s struggle against an evil corporation – Edgar Wright against Marvel Studios.

Most of you know Wright as the director of side-splitting British comedies, Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz. For his American debut, he adapted the graphic novel, Scott Pilgrim vs. the World. It was a dazzling box office bomb. Universal foolishly released it on the same weekend as The Expendables. Its fate was sealed by the backlash against Michael Cera, growing since the abysmal Year One.A lifelong Ant-Man fan, Wright originally pitched the film more than a decade ago. Since then, Marvel went from fledgling film-makers to the world’s most successful, influential studio. Out of its twelve films, the studio made only one major misfire, The Incredible Hulk (2008). Production was a debacle: volatile star Edward Norton rewrote entire scenes every single day. Co-star Tim Roth admitted he “wouldn’t even bother looking at them until I got into the make-up chair”. Marvel left a whopping 70 minutes of footage on the cutting room floor. Following lukewarm reviews and a disappointing box office, Marvel now keeps its directors on a tight leash. As a result, most directors part ways after a single film. Edgar Wright didn’t even get one film. Forced to shoot Marvel’s own rewrites, he abandoned the project mere weeks before filming. Adam McKay (Anchorman) also turned down the role. C-List director Peyton Reed stepped in at the eleventh hour, making Marvel’s first C-List superhero movie. Ant-Man isn’t a bad movie. I enjoyed it more than the Avengers sequel, which had twice its budget. Its pace is zippy. Its tone is decidedly light. The teeny-weeny action sequences are imaginative. It foregoes Marvel’s typically overblown third act. Leading man Paul Rudd is affable. His co-stars Michael Douglas and Evangeline Lily add dramatic weight to the proceedings. The dual father-daughter relationship is effective, if somewhat overfamiliar. (*cough* Interstellar *cough*.) Amusing details are peppered throughout – listen for the whistling of a certain Disney song.

Yet the film has more than its fair share of problems. Its opening scene breaks Hollywood’s number one rule: Show, Don’t Tell. An exciting introduction was once planned: the original Ant-Man single-handedly invades a 1980s Soviet base. Instead it inexplicably begins with a boardroom scene, where Douglas angrily resigns. Seriously. It’s like Steve Jobs, but with zero context and dull writing.Paul Rudd’s casting is spot-on. But his character is too “safe”. Yes, he’s a convicted cat-burglar. However, the film stresses, he broke into some evil, thieving financial institution. After being fired by them for whistle-blowing. And he didn’t hurt anyone in the process. And he returned all the money to its rightful owners. Dear Lord, Nelson Mandela went to Robben Island for a worse crime! It feels like a focus group smoothed down all Rudd’s “rough edges” – and his personality. Even his relationship with his estranged daughter is overly peachy. He has ostensibly been behind bars for half of her life, yet she still calls him Daddy. Wouldn’t it be more effective if she called her step-dad “Daddy”? In that case, Rudd would have truly lost everything. He would have a strong reason to go from zero to hero.

“What is this? A school for ants!?”

The film’s villain is another weak spot. Corey Stoll showed pathos as House of Cards’ cowardly Peter Russo. But he has little to work with as this one-dimensional mad scientist. He has no downfall, no descent into madness. His righteous anger is established from the get-go. It doesn’t fester or warp over time. Lip-service is paid to mumbo-jumbo “chemicals” poisoning his thoughts. But this is soon forgotten. One scene is frankly shocking, showing his callousness. But most are in dire need of a twirling moustache.Like Guardians of the Galaxy, the film sometimes feels rushed and overcut. Frenzied action scenes hurtle forward breathlessly. But comic timing and spontaneity of humour are sacrificed in quieter scenes. I don’t know why they had to rush: more than ninety minutes pass before the much-hyped Yellowjacket is donned. I waited for the rug to be pulled from under me. Maybe Ant-Man would be captured? Maybe they would introduce the Wasp? Like the original Iron Man, much of the film is straight-forward and predictable. However, it lacks the buoying effect of Robert Downey Jr’s career-defining performance.

As in other Marvel films, the military industrial complex becomes the boogeyman. This makes sense in Iron Man: Stark Industries begins as a weapons manufacturer. The foes are arms dealers and terrorists. It makes sense in Captain America: Winter Soldier: the film itself is a scathing attack on the civil liberty intrusions of the Patriot Act. But in Ant-Man, it has no thematic relevance. It feels forced. Likewise, the appearance of a certain third-rate Avenger feels shoe-horned.

Overall, Ant-Man remains something of a missed opportunity. The transition between British and American humour is jarring: Wright’s wry deadpan doesn’t mesh with McKay’s broad one-liners. I couldn’t help but wish I was watching Edgar Wright’s original vision. An underwhelming box-office proves I am hardly alone.

Ant-Man is worth watching for Marvel “completionists”. But it is unlikely to win over any new followers. An unambitious origin story, it remains one of the studio’s weaker efforts. There is certainly room for improvement in the inevitable sequel. Indeed, Paul Rudd might work better in the ensemble Captain America: Civil War. However, I expect Ant-Man to be literally overshadowed by bigger superheroes.