Marvel's Antman and the Wasp: Quantumania

[jye4ever]

Ah, OK... so I got to see it.

As long as the villain is good, I should be happy.

I think I'll still wait for Disney+ though.

 

[chrisstbh]

Just like with Avatar…the focus on family did it for me.

Man you must love the Fast & Furious movies

 

[jye4ever]

Man you must love the Fast & Furious movies

Ok you got me I have nothing to counter that like at all zilch nada nothing

Bunch of savages here lol

 

[Wor-Gar]

 

[wormlander]

That's not entirely the case though. The director, believe it or not, directs the actors. Actors can bring a part of themselves to their roles but fighting awful directors and writers is often a losing battle.

Because that's what they're intended to be, like it or not.

Directors, writers and scripts for all future projects have not been set in stone. These actors are locked into 10 year contracts, they can't just decide they don't want to do one movie they don't like. If that were the case then the Game of Thrones cast wouldn't have disliked the final season as much as they cleary did, and John Boyega/Oscar Isaac wouldn't be so dissatisfied with the Star Wars sequel trilogy.

Plus something can sound great in a meeting or on paper and turn out terrible. The same way us regular folk can accept a job at a company we think will be great and it turns out to be a miserable experience.

The Mandalorain is hardly the best example of Pedro Pascals acting ability. The entire DCEU was poorly written and cringe.

But agree to disagree, because we could go back and forth on this forever.

Ok, I'm gonna assume that you're 100% not trolling here so let me just say this. I couldn't care less about who contributed more in creating these on-screen abominations (the actors, writers, directors or producers). As far as I'm concerned they're all guilty and must therefore also suffer equally in the eternal flames of Hel. Now, since yourself and I are so obviously not going to create any magic together here on this fine forum, I bid thee farewell...

 

[karamazov80]

I saw this tonight. Not as bad as I feared based on rotten tomatoes. I felt it was way better than thor 4. But the ending dragged it down. Too much going on, didn't give itself breathing room to really let the story resolve in a compelling way. CG wasn't horrible as I had heard, but could have been better. Kang was really good. Gets brownie points for having Gregg Turkington return.

 

[chrisstbh]

Is this real?

Spoiler

 

[karamazov80]

Is this real?

View attachment 624590

Spoiler

Yes, that's how MODOK looks in the movie without his face mask on. And I understand people complaining about the CG there, but it was clearly done for laughs in the movie. I didn't personally think it was very funny, particularly the very last scene he was in, but that was the intention so I give them more of a pass on that one. The other area where the CG was noticeably rough was when there were many Scott Langs appearing in a single scene, but other than that nothing really jumped out at me as being horrible. Run of the mill type stuff with a movie like this. Blade Runner 2049 it isn't.

 

[chrisstbh]

Spoiler

Yes, that's how MODOK looks in the movie without his face mask on. And I understand people complaining about the CG there, but it was clearly done for laughs in the movie. I didn't personally think it was very funny, particularly the very last scene he was in, but that was the intention so I give them more of a pass on that one. The other area where the CG was noticeably rough was when there were many Scott Langs appearing in a single scene, but other than that nothing really jumped out at me as being horrible. Run of the mill type stuff with a movie like this. Blade Runner 2049 it isn't.

I dunno they could still make it funny and look good. That looks like something from a slightly cursed kids show from the 90's

 

[ironwez20]

Is this real?

View attachment 624590

That’s hideous. Shark boy and lava girl did a better job lol. Sometimes I wonder if ditching practical effects for this bright *** cgi in the late 2000s was such a good idea.

Of course it wasn’t

 

[chrisstbh]

That’s hideous. Shark boy and lava girl did a better job lol. Sometimes I wonder if ditching practical effects for this bright *** cgi in the late 2000s was such a good idea.

Of course it wasn’t

The best CGI always comes from blending it with practical.

 

[karamazov80]

I dunno they could still make it funny and look good.

Agreed, though in that case I think it looked weird and fake by design as part of the gag. They constantly make fun of it in the movie itself. But as I mentioned before, the joke fell flat with me and, I think, for most of the audience who saw the movie last night.

Another thing I didn't mention was that the actress playing Cassie didn't do anything for me. Either she was phoning it in, or maybe just isn't that great as an actress. Paul Rudd did what he could, but even he seems to be getting a bit tired playing this character. Their emotional scenes didn't feel genuine, which is a problem when that is at the crux of the story. On the other hand, I thought Michelle Pfeiffer did a really good job, and it's a shame that she doesn't get more work. Of all the actors in the movie, I would put her and the guy playing Kang at the top.

 

[The Buffinator]

Is this real?

Spoiler

View attachment 624590

Spoiler

MODOK looks like that because Darren Cross's body was horribly disfigured when he got zapped to the QR during AM1 in a Yellowjacket suit that had been damaged in his battle with Scott. Kang saved him & built that suit so he would survive (provided he serve as his henchman/hitman). As a backstory for having MODOK in an Ant-Man movie that actually worked for me. And yes I suppose the CGI could have been better but a live action MODOK was going to look goofy regardless.

 

[chrisstbh]

Spoiler

MODOK looks like that because Darren Cross's body was horribly disfigured when he got zapped to the QR during AM1 in a Yellowjacket suit that had been damaged in his battle with Scott. Kang saved him & built that suit so he would survive (provided he serve as his henchman/hitman). As a backstory for having MODOK in an Ant-Man movie that actually worked for me. And yes I suppose the CGI could have been better but a live action MODOK was going to look goofy regardless.

Nah I know what the character is, this just looks like absolute ****. Say what you will about the Avengers game but this looks miles better.

 

[The Buffinator]

Nah I know what the character is, this just looks like absolute ****. Say what you will about the Avengers game but this looks miles better.

View attachment 624596

That does look better but I have zero knowledge of MODOK's comics background (and even less interest, if I'm being honest lol), so that's why

Spoiler

the deformed Darren Cross explanation worked for me.

This is one villain that I'm perfectly fine with the one-and-done approach.

 

[Dave_W]

Is this real?

Spoiler

View attachment 624590

There's no way in hell that's legit right?

 

[chrisstbh]

There's no way in hell that's legit right?

 

[ironwez20]

Really could use victor right about now to give us the run down on modok

 

[jye4ever]

For me MODOK’s CGI face actually added to the horror and tragedy of his character not reduced it.

I thought he was a great addition albeit

Spoiler

with a change of conscience that happened maybe too fast although he was so messed up and abused by Kang that it kind of worked.

 

[goatchumby]

Is this real?

Spoiler

View attachment 624590