Ant-Man

The build up to Ant-Man has left many Marvel fans questioning how successfully the Hollywood Goliath will be able to pull off  a film on one of their lesser known characters, particularly without the guiding directorial hand of Edgar Wright. Well I'm not a Marvel fan so who knows, I might like it! 

Dr. Hank Pym (Michael Douglas) is an unparalleled technological scientist that discovered a group of particles with the ability to change the distance between atoms, effectively able to shrink and grow objects at will. After safeguarding the technology from those that wanted to weaponise it in the 1980s, Pym gave control of his company to Darren Cross (Corey Stoll), his protégé, who know has a sinister interest in re-developing the technology. Pym's daughter, Hope van Dyne (Evangeline Lilly) has a broken relationship with her father, but nonetheless turns to him when she becomes worried about Darren's actions.

Scott Lang (Paul Rudd) is a former burglar who can't throw punches, and has just been released from jail. Taking up residence with a former cellmate, Luis (Michael Peña), he hopes to foster a new relationship with his daughter, increasingly difficult thanks to his ex-wife and her new partner. Soon Scott is on the look out for another score to pay child support, and burglarises the home of a wealthy old man with meticulous precision. However all he finds is a dusty old suit. Scott is soon hired by Dr. Pym, planning a heist that will save the world. 

There's no doubt that Ant-Man follows the typical Marvel construction: out-there technology, a self-referential universe, CGI, CGI and also CGI. Where the film diverges is the heist sub-plot that dominates the second half of the film. You can detect the penmanship of co-author Wright, whose other work holds similar crime/heist-centric elements, particularly in Spaced and The Cornetto Trilogy. Ant-Man also scales down on the barraging action and takes some time-out for decent character development - not commonly found in Marvel films - however this also leads to relentless exposition and too many over-emotional scenes that try to get a rise out of the audience. Also tedious is the compulsory attempts to address the cross-franchise Marvel connections. "We'd better call the Avengers", we get it, they all exist within the same universe, enough already! Stop trying to set-up future cross-overs and self-advertise to us! 

Some held concerns that given the...uhh....somewhat trivial nature of Pym's technology, Ant-Man would try not to take itself too seriously and resort to an all-out joke fest similar to Iron Man 3 - which I happen to like, but is not that popular amongst the fans - Well you can rest easy, because it manages to strike a good balance between situational humour and plot development, and the comedy works well with Rudd's usual style. Whilst the action sequences rely heavily on computer generated visuals, the unique qualities of the Ant-man story allow for some equally unique sequences, including a run-in with a newly-enormous bathtub early in the film.

Unfortunately though, there's nothing new or interesting about most of the other visuals, which are stock Marvel and ultimately monotonous, especially when it could have been so much more. It's impossible to ignore the departure of Edgar Wright from the project, who reportedly left due to differences in vision between the Hot Fuzz director and the studio. His attempt at Ant-Man would have most likely been a standout film in the Marvel cinematic universe, where instead we get largely the same recycled formula that the studio knows can produce the revenue. It's a sad situation, but we can be thankful that his influence appears to have made it into the film in some ways, no matter how small they may be. 

Ant-Man is not a great film by any stretch of the imagination. However it does manage to pull away from the pack somewhat, which is crucial if we want to see Marvel develop any unique content in the ever-expanding Hollywood superhero bubble.

The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

Opening where the second film left off, Smaug’s attack on Laketown, The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies is the last (as far as we know) of Peter Jackson’s Middle Earth fantasy films. The Second in the series of incredibly long names (with running times to match), The Desolation of Smaug, was infinitely better than the first (despite the unnecessarily-long barrel sequence) but stretching an epic trilogy out of a book shorter than any of the Lord of the Rings novels has always been a concern. Now, with the blockbuster release of the third Hobbit, it’s up to Jackson to tie it all together. 

Jumping straight into the action, the dragon, Smaug (Benedict Cumberbatch) inflicts brutal destruction on Laketown as the residents flee, with only Bard (Luke Evans) left to fight the beast. Up at the Lonely Mountain, the leader of the dwarves, Thorin (Richard Armitage) is inflicted with Smaug's "dragon sickness", a powerful urge to find the Arkenstone, which is affecting his sanity. Bilbo (Martin Freeman), who is aware of Thorin’s state, continues to hide the Arkenstone from him. Gandalf (Ian McKellen) remains imprisoned by the Necromancer (Also Benedict Cumberbatch) in Dol Guldur, until Galadriel (Cate Blanchett), with help from Elrond (Hugo Weaving) and Saruman (Christopher Lee), frees Gandalf. Whilst others are gathering their forces to raid the Lonely Mountain, Gandalf rushes back to warn of the approaching Orc army. The battle for Smaug's lair of gold is about to begin.

Epic in visual scope, The Battle of the Five Armies is, as the name would suggest, brimming with action. The battle sequences which dominate the second half of the film are impeccably choreographed and are exceedingly stunning, with effects-heavy visuals that justify the $250 million budget. However, whilst these sequences do try to draw some points about the lives lost in the useless battle for gold, they are basically just excessive battles. This is where the flaws of the trilogy format slide through the cracks. What could have been two very solid movies, have been extended to three, and whilst the running time of this third instalment is blissfully shorter at a not-unreasonable 144-minutes, there doesn't seem to be enough plot left to justify a full movie. This sees much of the second-half of The Battle of the Five Armies stretched out into an unnecessary display of mindless battling, only marginally justified by the strong first half of the film.

Whilst the already well-established characters don't exactly require much more development, the strained story would certainly benefit from it. Thorin is the only one that really evolves in any way, inhibited by his changing states of sanity. However it must be said that the performances certainly stand up to the calibre of the first films (as well as the Lord of the Rings trilogy for the characters that appear in both). Freeman is very good as Bilbo, although he doesn't get as much screen-time as I would have liked. Richard Armitage shines as Thorin, and it's always fun to see the 75-year old Ian McKellen and 92-year old Christopher Lee involved in some battles. The only real issue with the characters is in the various death scenes (which you ought to expect in the final instalment), which are heavily clichéd, with slow motion and somber music that somewhat undermines the emotions that are being put forth. 

The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies finally wraps up a trilogy that should really have been concluded in two films, and hence there are certainly some issues with stretching it out into a third. But it does seem, in many ways, a fitting conclusion for the series, with big-budget action and strong performances. I'm sure that long time fans will enjoy this film.