Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania

• Directed by Peyton Reed
• February 6, 2023 (Regency Village Theatre)/February 17, 2023 (US)
• Based on Marvel Comics featuring the characters Scott Lang/Ant-Man and Hope Pym/Wasp

Scott and his allies are transported to the Quantum Realm and must escape from Kang the Conqueror.

I am not big on the current MCU. There is said to be a ‘Marvel Formula’ and it certainly does look to be a real if unofficial thing. Thus my expectations for Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania were very low but decided to give it a watch because it struck me as a change of pace from what I had been viewing. It was better than expected but certainly not perfect.

First off is the treatment of Scott Lang (Paul Rudd). Every character seems to be trying to knock him down a peg or three and just belittle him. I know there’s a trend of ‘deconstructing’ heroes in movies but if you want to actually become invested in a story or the hero you can’t be doing it every moment you get. It is not as if Scott is learning a lesson from any of it. He is just a punchline/punching bag for others.

I’ve seen plenty of memes comparing the visuals in this movie to Spy Kids. I did find them funny, but I also thought they might be a bit harsh. After all this is a significantly better budgeted movie than any of the Spy Kids movies were. Not to mention the heavy advancements in special effects technology since then. But there is some validity to those comments. This was made for $275 million in comparison to $35 million even adjusted for inflation. Twenty years does bot cover that much.

The general appearance makes this look extremely cheap. It is clearly more CGI than real. The CGI meshes very poorly if at all with the few live action elements. As a whole I feel Quantumania would have been received much better if it had been an entirely CGI animated film. The story is nothing special by any stretch but given the generally weak nature of the effects it would have improved overall perceptions.

The appearance of Bill Murray as Krylar while intriguing feels a bit out of place. He’s a talented performer and a welcome appearance in any movie, but he largely overshadows everything else when he shows up. He takes the focus off the central characters and puts it squarely on him because he IS Bill Murray. The man has that level of talent and presence that drowns out weaker performers and those he is paired with on camera are nowhere close to him. Michelle Pfeiffer is talented but does not have Murray’s energies.

Perhaps the most egregious sin is that this was the cinematic introduction of the next big MCU villain. It’s not that they introduced him, but they introduced him in a sillier movie. How can you take seriously a deadly villain introduced in what amounts to a comedic adventure story bordering on fantasy?

Jonathan Majors, I dare say, kills it as Kang. He was easily the best part of Creed III and like there here shows that he can turn dreck into solid gold. Kang’s dialogue is often garbage but Major’s delivery and talent makes it engaging as well as weighty. If it had been any other person in the part the movie would’ve been virtually unwatchable. Kang becomes the villain you kind of want to win because he’s so charismatic. You know he’s evil, but you want him to succeed because Majors is just so good in the role.

With so many characters old and new coming in this our two title characters are often sidelined with Ant-Man getting what feels like the least amount of screen time of all of them. He just shows up to do some Ant-Man stuff and then goes away. Speaking of the new characters as well as the old ones characterization is often lacking. Majors’s Kang gets crafted the most but then again he’s meant to be the big bad of the coming MCU arc.

There is a strong social justice element in this. It smacks you upside the head and is exemplified by Cassie (Kathryn Newton) regularly complaining to her father how he doesn’t do anything or change the world or just doesn’t care. Clearly saving half of all life on Earth and the universe is not enough. Scott notes that reality but quickly gets put in his place because that is most certainly not enough.

Anybody else though think that the story bares similarities to Tron: Legacy? In both movies a character is trying to leave one reality for another with their armies. In both one character holds the key to making that possible and because they return to the prison reality it suddenly becomes possible.

Despite a plot that seems like a barely altered version of Tron: Legacy and being a comedic film introducing a serious villain, it’s not a bad movie. It’s certainly not great, but it is an enjoyable film. Rather than taking the material seriously to introduce the big bad cinematic baddie they decided to be humorous which was a big mistake. It undercuts the villain or villain(s) depending on how you view Kang.

People love to hate. Hating certain things can even become trendy. Quantumania certainly deserves criticism, but I feel for some it has crossed into being trendy to dislike this. While a run of the mill film it’s certainly not as terrible as everyone says. It’s just that the poor CGI as well as other elements served to highlight poor decision making behind the camera and give people an excuse to engage in mockery that snowballs.

There are some imaginative visuals here and the inhuman characters have some interesting and humorous designs. Where it falls apart as I said before is that heavy CGI that doesn’t blend well with the minimal live action. Either more sets should’ve been used or this should’ve been a completely animated feature.

Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania isn’t terrible but because of certain trends in Marvel films it’s not nearly as good as it could be. Not a complete waste of your time, but not a travesty either.