Ant-Man and the Wasp

2018

Action / Adventure / Sci-Fi

403
Rotten Tomatoes Critics - Certified Fresh 88%
Rotten Tomatoes Audience - Upright 80%
IMDb Rating 7.2 10 123821

Synopsis


Uploaded By: FREEMAN
Downloaded 2,287,448 times
October 04, 2018 at 02:34 PM

Director

Cast

Evangeline Lilly as Hope Van Dyne / Wasp
Paul Rudd as Scott Lang / Ant-Man
Judy Greer as Maggie
Michelle Pfeiffer as Janet Van Dyne / Wasp
720p.BLU 1080p.BLU 720p.WEB 1080p.WEB
1009.21 MB
1280*534
English
PG - 13
23.976 fps
1hr 58 min
P/S 731 / 4,021
1.89 GB
1920*800
English
PG - 13
23.976 fps
1hr 58 min
P/S 1,120 / 6,231
1005.06 MB
1280*534
English
PG - 13
23.976 fps
1hr 58 min
P/S 1,032 / 5,068
1.89 GB
1920*800
English
PG - 13
23.976 fps
1hr 58 min
P/S 887 / 4,967

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by erkbr 2 / 10

More of the same

Even though I enjoyed the first one as a comedy movie itself (and not a hero movie, more like an "introduction" movie into becoming some sort of hero), it was "ok" for me the fact that they inserted a very generic, uninteresting, forgettable villain in it (by now we always expect this kind of villain in MCU introduction movies).

Well, this time they expanded the team into Ant-man + Wasp, which was nice. But that was the only main change (besides the after-credit scene).

They still managed to create the same structure of the previous movie, instead of a "hero movie"...again a comedy movie... instead of a well developed villain, again the same uninteresting and forgettable villain.

Personally I think I lost money watching it since it was again more of the same, maybe I have should waited until it was on Netflix or something.

Reviewed by nothimme 3 / 10

It's okay

If you love shallow movies.

There isn't any depth in this movie. The jokes, story, villains, subplots. It all falls flat. It all one-dimensional. We have a mysterious-looking antagonist named Ghost, but she can't be mysterious, and at one point she serves up a clot of over complicated exposition that gives the film little bit action. You don't care if she'll accomplish her goal or not. You don't even care which side is going to win. We have lots of jokes, but they're all stale. If you guys find this humour funny, I'm sorry, I just can't take the movie seriously. While some ''intense'' interrogation scene was going on someone's cell is ringing with a joke sound. And this call is in this movie just because to be there - just because to be ''funny''. It doesn't have any contribution to the story. We have a story that concerns a rescue mission. But there isn't any complexity or twist that blows the audience away. Just flat. You could easily predict what's going to happen next. We have a subplot concerning a romantic relationship between Antman and the Wasp. But there isn't much, it just teases us around. And that's all. We have another subplot concerning a lovely relationship between a dad and a 10 years old girl, which is not very well developed but a little bit heartwarming because it's a relationship between a dad and a 10 years old girl.

While a woman who is in constant physical and emotional pain is trying not to die, the movie is trying to be funny. Peyton Reed maybe should've gone for the head, not chest. But then again, he can't, Disney has the strings. It got to try to be colorful, amiable, ''funny'' with forced jokes. I really wonder when Marvel and Disney are going to take some risks and make a groundbreaking superhero movie. I guess never. Critics and audience fine with eating this.

There isn't any climax, or depth, or emotion. Just a filler movie with no heart and soul.

Reviewed by Brian Sciro 3 / 10

Flat.

So I think I can officially say it this time:

This is the first Marvel film I can undoubtedly say I thought was bad. VERY bad, as a matter of fact.

Let's start from the beginning; I enjoyed the first 'Ant-Man' film. It's not perfect by any stretch of the imagination. It reeks of re-writes and five different people working on its script. That said, it's imaginative and fun and I can at least roll with it and find it amusing at its worst lows and creative at its highest highs.

But this...this...this just felt like it was there to just be 'there'.

The characters: Paul Rudd is Paul Rudd. That may sound like a joke, but in all honesty, I have trouble finding a character in Scott Lang beyond "Paul Rudd". His character lacks any real depth, and I find it a struggle to truly care for him by the end of this film or even grasp onto a new development of his character that resulted in his film. He gives off the AIR of being likeable, and I DO like Paul Rudd's performance in this, but other than that...he's an actor playing himself. I don't see "Scott Lang". I see "Paul Rudd".

Michael Douglas? Again, I LOVE Michael Douglas as an actor, but...he spouts technobabble, we're left confused as to what it all means, and we end up just seeing Hank Pymm as a dispensary of science talk and lacking a character. This entire film is about him and his quest to find his wife...yet we never get anything intimate for his character beyond a scene or two (Which are played for laughs anyway, so who cares?).

Evangeline Lily and Michelle Pfeiffer, however, suffer the most here. Never have I seen such flat female characters in a superhero film since the mid-2000's of half-baked Marvel adaptation films. Hope Van Dyne is positioned as such a vital character in this film (Her character's name is IN THE TITLE), yet she feels completely jammed into a "Badass girl who kicks you" stereotype with little-to-no depth. For a character who we were "promised" would be vital to this film, I know very little about her beyond what I already knew from the first film.

Pfeiffer suffers just as much, as she too is treated as only the role of "Woman who must be rescued". We get no development of her character as they search for her, no characterization, no scene that at least gives us an idea of what she was like or what she did.

But what development we DO get is expressed through some truly awful sequences where the events of the first film are needlessly recapped, character backstories are flipped through and swatted-away just so the writers can say they included it, and take away any and all depth that could be explored with these characters.

Instead, everything is FLAT. And I think that word describes this film perfectly. "Flat".

"Flat" is what the characters are. "Flat" is the cinematography and lighting of the film that looks like any other cut-and-dry comedy film with no inventiveness or seeming effort to make this look creative.

And "Flat" is how the humor of this screenplay falls. For the thousands of swings this film takes at humor, it lands it about 20 times, and misses all the rest. The theater I was in was awkwardly quiet, simply because it was trying TOO HARD to be funny. The wit of the first film worked far better in that it didn't need to TRY to be funny.

Instead, we have Michael Pena and Paul Rudd's heist friends rambling in scenes that feel improved and landing no jokes whatsoever. Other than a few scenes that were indeed humorous and garnered a big laugh or two from the audience and myself...clearly, the audience wasn't feeling it.

And neither was I.

In addition, the editing for this film incited a rare reaction of mine where I felt total whiplash in a jump from one scene to another. Quite literally, one transition from a scene to another was the most jarring and disjointed thing I've ever seen, and it left myself and my girlfriend audibly asking ourselves in our theatre seats if we just missed an entire scene. Not good at all.

All that considered...I didn't absolutely hate every aspect of this film. The action scenes where they play with size are still mildly interesting, although even they can't save this film as they lack the ambition and creativeness that the first had. Paul Rudd is entertaining enough as...Paul Rudd, and even a few scenes involving Michael Pena and his friends elicit a chuckle or two.

That said...I can't help but feel this film is an utter mess. A mess of mediocrity, poor editing, poor character writing, 2-3 action scenes that are nothing beyond "Serviceable", and attempts at humor that throws the entire buffet at you...but in the end, you only end up with empty calories.

And that's how I feel about this film. Empty.

...+1 whole point for that Tim Heidecker cameo, though...

Read more IMDb reviews

287 Comments

Be the first to leave a comment