Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania may work well as an introduction to Kang the Conqueror and offer a chance for Michelle Pfeiffer’s Janet van Dyne to shine, but this tonally inconsistent film fails spectacularly at functioning as an Ant-Man movie.
Overall Score: 6/10
Image: Marvel Studios / Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
“Oh, Marvel. If only you’d thought this through,” I keep saying to myself. The first two Ant-Man films, while often regarded as some of the smaller MCU installments, are also known for being extremely entertaining and having massive hearts. And as a huge fan of both of these flicks, naturally, I wanted and expected the third one to be more of the same thing: a small-scale heist movie.
However, what we’ve gotten instead is… How should I say this? It’s somewhat of a mess. It’s not as bad as critics are saying it is, but it’s also nowhere as good as it should be. As for why this is the case, I’ve concluded that it’s because this film consists of two halves that don’t exactly add up to a whole. We’ve got one half that’s trying to be an Ant-Man movie and another much more interesting one that’s there to set up Kang the Conqueror and give us an idea of where the MCU’s headed.
Let’s start with the former. Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania is simply not a good Ant-Man film. Why? Well, to put it shortly, it’s not a heist movie, the jokes don’t always land (and most aren’t even funny), too many key side characters are missing, and the fun dynamic between the main cast isn’t nearly as prominently utilized as it should be. Granted, Quantumania does try to retain some of these elements, but even so, it seems like all of it’s done with minimal effort. Moreover, this all gets overshadowed by the MCU’s grander (but arguably misguided) ambitions. People often say “the bigger the better.” I disagree. The size of something shouldn’t be the only aspect that matters. Other things like quality should be taken into account as well. You don’t need to go big in order to be good. Sometimes, being small is a virtue. Just ask the previous two Ant-Man films if you’re in doubt!
Okay, now let’s move on to the latter. Sure, Quantumania may not be a great addition to the Ant-Man franchise, but as a set-up movie for Phase 5 and beyond, I think that it works well. If anyone felt confused after watching Loki and disappointed because there wasn’t a proper follow-up to it for over a year (Spider-Man: No Way Home and Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness don’t exactly count), fear not because Quantumania finally gives us some much-needed answers. I’m not going to reveal any of the details of the plot, but I will say that the multiverse feels much more significant now and that the crisis related to it finally feels urgent.
Speaking of multiverse-related crises, Kang. At last, the MCU has a new Thanos-level villain, and I’ve gotta say, he’s every bit the successor that a purple-skinned warlord with a “nutsack of a chin” — as Star-Lord would say — could hope for. Kang, or at least this specific variant, is shown to be formidable and menacing, and throughout the course of the film, our heroes learn firsthand just how much of a force he is to be reckoned with. We’re talking about a guy who can and will murder an infinite number of people and timelines/universes just to get what he wants.
But while establishing the threat that Kang poses is important, it’s also equally crucial to make sure that he’s played by an actor who can clearly show the richness and complexity of his character. Luckily, Jonathan Majors is more than up to the task. Majors, through his outstanding performance, gives Kang a commanding presence and infuses him with a healthy balance of coldness and charisma. And while this is a role that demands a certain level of physical commitment, a lot of Kang’s nuances are conveyed through Majors’ eyes. For example, it’s evident that Kang truly believes that what he’s doing is right and that he’s an extremely emotional person. How do we know all of this? Well, it’s made quite clear by how Majors tears up while delivering specific lines and how he moves his eyes a certain way. The man gives it his all, and it’s safe to say that his performance ranks among some of the MCU’s finest.
One last thing. The other element that sticks out in the midst of all of the craziness of Quantumania is Michelle Pfeiffer. Here, she essentially gets to be the heart of the movie, giving her the rare opportunity to outshine the titular heroes and truly steal the show. Pfeiffer’s performance isn’t as showy or as nuanced as the one given by Majors, but it’s great nonetheless and arguably just as memorable.
That said, Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania is still pretty messy. It’s tonally inconsistent, the quality of its visuals is all over the place, and, as I mentioned earlier, its two distinct halves (one of which is a terrible, dysfunctional Ant-Man film) never really come together. Yet, this movie’s done something that Marvel films haven’t been able to do for a really long time: It’s gotten me excited about the future of the MCU. On top of that, it gives us a great introduction to Kang, a stellar performance from Jonathan Majors, and a scene-stealing turn from Michelle Pfeiffer. That doesn’t make up for all of the film’s flaws, but if you add all of that up, I’d say that it’s enough to count it as a pretty decent, albeit not all that memorable, time at the movies.
Comments