ANT-MAN AND THE WASP QUANTUMANIA
an underwhelming starter for MCU's Phase 5
The Ant-Man movies have always been the palette cleansers of the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU), with the first one released after “Avengers: Age of Ultron” in 2015 and its 2018 sequel “Ant-Man and the Wasp” released after “Avengers: Infinity War.” These Avengers movies had a sequence of events where things got dark at the end. As such, the following MCU entry should have something more light-hearted for the audience, which is where the Ant-Man movies come in.
Both of the Ant-Man movies have had low-stakes storylines that focused more on its heist concepts. There was supposed to be Marvel’s own version of “Ocean’s Eleven”, where Scott Lang (Paul Rudd) uses his petty theft skills for good since he is the superhero after all. They were never meant to be part of the top-tier MCU films, but it always felt fun to watch the misadventures of Lang, and his crew members Luis (Michael Pena), Dave (T.I.), Kurt (David Dastmalchian), his love interest Hope van Dyne aka The Wasp (Evangeline Lilly) and her father Hank Pym (Michael Douglas). These films were never meant to set up something big in the wider universe.
The third Ant-Man movie is a total departure from the earlier two films’ heist concepts, leaning more towards the sci-fi adventure genre as it sets up the next big bad of the MCU after Thanos – Kang The Conqueror (Jonathan Majors) – positioning itself to be the starting chapter of the franchise’s Phase 5.
“Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania” focuses on Lang, his teenage daughter Cassie (Kathryn Newton), Hope, and her parents Hank and Janet van Dyne (Michelle Pfeiffer) as they get themselves transported to the quantum realm that has been ruled by Kang. It also elaborates on the backstory of Janet who has been missing in the realm for 30 years before being rescued in the previous Ant-Man film, shedding light on why she is hesitant to share her experience in the realm with her family.
Its departure from the tone of the first two feels abrupt and unjustified. Instead of watching a fun superhero heist movie, we are seeing more of a formulaic, generic MCU film on auto-pilot, using the characters from the Ant-Man franchise to set up something bigger in the wider cinematic universe. It feels like this film really stripped down what made Scott Lang and his characters engaging to watch in the first place.
Of course, “Quantumania” had its saving graces, namely, Majors’ and Pfeiffer’s performances as Kang and Janet, respectively.
MCU fans can recall that Majors played a similar character in the 2021 MCU Disney+ series “Loki”, albeit named differently as the “He Who Remains” as he was revealed to be a variant of Kang. This film shows a much different, scarier version of Kang that it’s easy to distinguish these variants as different characters. Majors’ performance in “Quantumania” shows how exciting it is to see how he performs different renditions of the character (villain or not) in future MCU projects.
Pfeiffer should also get well-deserved praise as Janet who gets a bigger spotlight here. Her take was subtle but perfect as a traumatized, yet strong woman who just wanted to be a good mother to Hope and a good wife to Hank.
Unfortunately, their performances couldn’t erase the film’s major flaw that could stain the Ant-Man franchise as a whole. Most of the MCU sub-franchises had a distinct, unique style which is important in a massive cinematic universe that pumps out movies and television shows every year. “Guardians of the Galaxy” often uses throwback ‘70s and ‘80s music as soundtracks to move the story forward, “Spider-Man” movies starring Tom Holland are basically what superhero flicks would look like if they were written by John Hughes, and “Captain America” movies are basically political thrillers in a superhero setting.
It’s not uncommon for an MCU sub-franchise to depart from its original concept if it does not work. One example is the “Thor” movies where the first two films stuck to its Norse mythology yet the execution felt bland. When Taika Waititi helmed the third Thor movie, “Ragnarok”, it amplified Thor’s already-established humor to give the waning sub-franchise a much-needed boost for the audience to care about the character outside the Avengers movies. This success led to “Thor: Love and Thunder”, which, despite the mixed reactions from critics and fans, still gave the MCU franchise some uniqueness.
This is why stripping off the Ant-Man sub-franchise’s unique “heist” characteristic is what made “Quantumania” feel so bland and sort of joyless in scenes where humor was absent. There was no call for the producers to change the direction of the Ant-Man movies as the heist concept is what made the sub-franchise distinct. It almost feels like they are only using Ant-Man and his characters to advance a bigger plot taking place in the wider universe, at the expense of some interesting characterization of their own.
The biggest sin in this departure was that the unique fight scenes in the first two Ant-Man movies were missing. There were no close-up shots of the characters fighting the enemies when they turn small. Their powers feel more like tools to advance the story, rather than showcase what made their characters feel so cool in the first place.
With Lang’s gang absent in this film, the new characters in the quantum realm take over their place as supporting characters. Unfortunately, “Quantumania” gives no good reason for the audience to root for or even care for them. When one of them dies during a battle scene, they are gone. That’s it. They are quite forgettable that if these characters appear in a future MCU film, the audiences probably can’t remember them.
There is already some sense of superhero fatigue within the general public due to the franchise’s oversaturation of constant content over the last few years. People who are already tired of the MCU will definitely not enjoy “Quantumania.” Even some of the MCU diehard fans may find themselves struggling with whether they like it or not. Those who want to see where the MCU is heading next in a slow-paced manner regardless of its quality may somehow enjoy this film. What these three categories have in common is that they might enjoy watching Majors and Pfeiffer, which may help this two-hour film feel slightly less of a snoozefest. Three stars out of five.