Ant-Man and the Wasp

Ant-Man is a bit second tier in the Marvel universe, but purely feeling-wise I’m a bit more satisfied with the resulting product in many aspects than I with the A-list blockbusters about destroying the world in a number of ways. It's more intimate script-wise, emotionally lighter, and at the same time fresh and mostly funny. An exceptional Marvel movie with a good script that is full of twists and turns, but at the same time the core makes sense, without any twists pulled out of thin air. Bombastic visual effects that culminate brilliantly in the most breakneck action scenes, but the digital rejuvenation is good too. It’s still mass-produced stuff from the M brand, but it’s watchable, at least once. (10/10/2018)

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. (27/07/2018)

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% (03/09/2018)

Lots of funny situations just like in the first installment, but this time we also get a whiff of humor at all costs. Perhaps I was expecting the main protagonist to be a little more adult and that the plot would be a little more serious - more fateful (I was much more interested in the story of Hank and Janet than the main story), but this did not happen and by the ending I figured out that something like this might not actually suit Ant-Man. Maybe. (07/07/2018)

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. (16/12/2018)