Glory and I took in the new Marvel film, Ant-Man and The Wasp: Quantumania, on Tuesday. Despite it having the worst Rotten Tomatoes score of any recent Marvel Studios release, we still had a pretty good time. But it did raise some interesting questions about the future of the MCU and people's expectations for an increasingly immense franchise.
Quantumania is not the worst film the MCU has ever made (I would personally rank Thor: The Dark World and Iron Man 2 as greater wastes of opportunity, but still wouldn't call them awful films), but it is a long way off from peak features like Captain America: Winter Soldier or Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2. It lacks both a real sense of coherence or a convincing notion of genuine stakes, and sometimes mixes its goofiness with its pathos.
But kudos for having such a frankly bizarre film swing so far in both directions in the first place! The first act of the film is probably the most enjoyable, with the extended Lang/Pym family (including Scott Lang's daughter Cassie) being sucked into the sub-atomic Quantum Realm by the villainous Kang the Conqueror (Jonathan Majors).
The initial explorations felt like familiar MCU characters like Ant-Man (Paul Rudd), Henry Pym (Michael Douglas) and The Wasp (Evangeline Lilly) being dropped into an episode of Rick & Morty. Hearing the acerbic senior Pym ruminating about how intelligent life in the Quantum Realm means re-evaluating biology, physics and evolution and then interrupting himself to interject, "holy shit, that guy looks like broccoli," was a delight.
Things turn more serious when Kang shows up, the first real introduction of the MCU's "bid bad" to fill the overarching gap left by Thanos. Jonathan Majors largely eschews megalomaniacal scenery chewing in favour of quiet menace and a sense of multiversal weariness which could make him as fascinating and compelling a villain as Josh Brolin's. But such a shift in tone is difficult to maintain, making the earlier, goofier parts of the movie more enjoyable on the whole.
Some of the carping I just don't get though; I loved seeing an iteration of MODOK from the comics, because if you can't shoehorn a ludicrous character like this in via the Quantum Realm and all its weirdness, we will never, ever see him in the MCU. But if you don't know about his provenance, he might seem needless or out of place.
Despite people going on about the bad box office (tbh: who cares? it's not like the tickets prices change! but as a measure of popularity I suppose it has weight), Wikipedia reports "the film made $46 million on its first day, including $17.5 million from Thursday previews that began at 3 P.M. It went on to debut to $106.1 million (and a total of $120.4 million over the four-day frame), marking the best opening of the Ant-Man series and the third-best for a February release, behind Black Panther ($242.1 million in 2018) and Deadpool ($152.1 million in 2016)."
And while reviews are mixed, Quantumania is hardly being panned (although it deserves to be ranked lower than both of its predecessors.) I suspect some of these metacritics may be the same people saying "mark my words, Marvel is going to lose their shirt trying to sell a movie about a walking tree and talking raccoon in space" just prior to Guardians of the Galaxy becoming a bona fide smash.
I have heard people complaining about the CGI, something Marvel has a reputation for rushing on, but honestly, unless they are so egregiously bad that it pulls me out of the film, I am not concerned with weird biological spaceships or broccoli-headed dudes looking particularly photorealistic - because I know they aren't real. I am seeing these movies first and foremost as a comics fan, still amazed that second and third-tier characters like these are getting greenlit for major cinematic releases, based largely on the strength of the universe grown out of two dozen films and umpteen streaming series underpinning them.
But even some of the fan criticisms have credence, like the idea of "if I am watching a film about an adventuring family being pulled into another dimension and facing an implacable foe in a psychedelic environment, why the hell is that family the Lang/Pyms and not the Fantastic Four?"
It seems a lot of people have begun to drift away from the MCU, and some of the reasons they give are easy to understand:
- there is no time left to anticipate MCU films any more, with 3-4 movies a year and as many series and Special Presentations on Disney+
- plus the mythology and canon is getting top-heavy from the number of releases and making the connections feel less like a treat and more like a burden
- "superhero fatigue" setting in with other comics properties entering the fray and now anti-hero or irony-driven shows like The Boys or Invincible gaining ground in the public consciousness
- Phase 4, the films following Avengers: Endgame, have all felt smaller and less joyful than the foundational MCU films
And that last point is probably the most fair: how the heaven's name can anyone be expected to stick the landing the way Kevin Feige and Co. did with that first glorious run, and then just pick up and carry on from there?
So I kind of get it, and I think Marvel is hearing some of this too, with reports now coming that they intend to slow down their release schedule and perhaps pare back some projects. Because the more recent projects have felt diminished, and I think taking more time and care can only help mitigate that.
But the other reason they have felt diminished is because the subject matter is simply not as legendary as it once was. Leading off the creation of what would become the MCU with a second-tier property like Iron Man was a brilliant move that let the filmmakers and studio set the tone and interconnectivity at their own pace, so they could bring more well-known and larger-than-life figures like Captain America, Thor and eventually flagship character Spider-Man into the picture.
And frankly, after so many films scoring 8+, every 6 is going to feel a bit like a failure, isn't it?
In a post-Endgame world, where many of the franchises are trying to pass the torch from legacy characters like Captain America and Iron Man to newcomers like The Falcon and Ironheart, the transitions are even more difficult onscreen than they are in the comics that inspired them. And this places even more pressure on lesser-known and but well-established characters like Ant-Man to carry an increasingly immense MCU narrative forward.
So I have reconciled myself to the fact that I am unlikely to ever experience anything like Avengers: Endgame ever again. And I am okay with that! It was miraculous enough I got to experience it at all, and more movie franchises should aspire to stick the landing so well as that film did.
And I suspect that at some point down the line, maybe sooner, maybe later, the MCU will take a hard look at rebooting the whole thingamamajig and recast all the Phase 1 characters and take another swing at, well, everything - but do it differently too. Maybe let Hydra be the villain in more that one or two flicks this time around, I dunno.
But in the meantime, I am still going to look forward to seeing comic book adaptations like Quantumania, because even if they don't transcend the source material the way some of the earlier films did, it is still great to see these sometimes goofy characters dealing with absurd situations in almost unimaginable locales like the Quantum Realm. And part of that is because of the sheer joy I take just in seeing the words and images of comic books re-presented on the big screen.
Remember, it was not that long ago that David Hasselhoff playing Nick Fury in a tv movie was about all we comic fans could hope for. Actually, 1998 was pretty long ago after all I suppose... but my point is not that we should just lower our expectations or standards for the current iteration of the MCU, but to recall those times when just an offhand reference to Metropolis by Val Kilmer in 1995's Batman Forever was enough to set fans excitedly speculating. "What it might be like to have two major comic characters in a single movie?" - unimaginable at the time!
Anyhow, depending where your interests or degree of fandom lies, I believe Ant-Man and The Wasp: Quantumania is worth seeing if:
- you like the idea of seeing MCU characters in a Rick & Morty-type setting, or
- you still find high-concept comic hijinks enjoyable, or
- you want to see Jonathan Majors play a different type of MCU villain, or
- you want to keep up with things because you know another Avengers movie is coming, or
- you just want an interdimensional adventure movie with some neat weird ideas and a few laughs in it.
In the end, going on a Tuesday instead of opening weekend suited Glory and I just fine in terms of money spent to entertainment gained, and we are already stoked for Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 in May.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIf you hadn't said that was The Hoff in that Nick Fury pic I would've sworn it was Jensen Ackles, which would be an interesting turn after being Soldier Boy in The Boys.
ReplyDeleteoh wow, I can sorta see that...
Delete