the Ant Man movie. Why all the dumb comic relief humor?

[XandertheWise]

watching the first Ant Man movie today and while Im watching it, the movie forces you to enjoy the dumb comic relief humor that goes on with Scott and his ex con buddies.

Why and what for?

[Bunch of Coconuts]

watching the first Ant Man movie today and while Im watching it, the movie forces you to enjoy the dumb comic relief humor that goes on with Scott and his ex con buddies.

Why and what for?

Why not?

/10char

[Riv86672]

I like that they had Garrett Morris cameo in the movie, as he was the first live action Ant-Man.

[Refrax5]

watching the first Ant Man movie today and while Im watching it, the movie forces you to enjoy the dumb comic relief humor that goes on with Scott and his ex con buddies.

Why and what for?

It's an MCU movie?

[The Cool Thatguy]

What's wrong with a few laughs, given the outrageous concept?

No one wants a Snyder flick

Beyond that, the Ant-Man movie radically redefined how powerful the pym particle concept is. A few laughs shouldn't change that.

[Refrax5]

What's wrong with a few laughs, given the outrageous concept?

No one wants a Snyder flick

Beyond that, the Ant-Man movie radically redefined how powerful the pym particle concept is. A few laughs shouldn't change that.

I feel like there's a happy medium between "dumb focus-group one-liners" and "Snyder flick." Honestly, dismissing any criticism of these movies and viewing anything that takes its subject matter remotely seriously as bad is part of the reason the MCU grew so stale with people. It's just bred mediocre, formulaic action-comedies with little substance for fear of being the ever-dreaded "dark and gritty."

[Chris0013]

I don't think the comedy in Ant Man was all that bad. Most of it just came from personalities and situations...unlike some other MCU movies where it was just over the top for the sake of trying to be funny.

[Dreaded Porcupine]

I liked the comedy. I enjoyed the first two Ant-Man movies. More so than most of the MCU movies. There was more plot and character development than just constant battles and destroying stuff.

[Chris0013]

I liked the comedy. I enjoyed the first two Ant-Man movies. More so than most of the MCU movies. There was more plot and character development than just constant battles and destroying stuff.

Quantumania just went too big for a solo movie. Should have kept the size of the threat more in scale to 1 and 2.

[ComicNoobie]

Ant-Man in general is a funny/silly concept. How can you not think the final climatic battle taking place in a little girl's bedroom on her toy trainset is not awesome and hilarious at the same time? Or using giant Hello Kitty toys as weapons? I think it works far more naturally for comedy then something like the Thor movies. Quantumania was really missing that real world vs size changing antics that made them so much fun.

Scott's ex con friends help flesh out his cast of characters. I don't see a problem with them. Many missed them in Quantumania.

[scribbleMind]

Ant-Man was the first movie being worked on in the MCU, before there was an MCU. One can argue that Edgar Wright is as responsible for the MCU as Kevin Feige. However, you have to understand what era of Edgar Wright this was. We're talking Three Flavours Cornetto trilogy. It was always going to be a heist comedy. Why? If you want a detailed and honest answer, you'd have to go to the source and ask Edgar.

I do think if Edgar wasn't scared off it would be a slightly smarter comedy, but at the same time, I'm not going to pretend he hasn't dipped his hand into dumb comedy. He can do both. It might be a very similar movie, just better directed.

[Anthony W]

I feel like there's a happy medium between "dumb focus-group one-liners" and "Snyder flick." Honestly, dismissing any criticism of these movies and viewing anything that takes its subject matter remotely seriously as bad is part of the reason the MCU grew so stale with people. It's just bred mediocre, formulaic action-comedies with little substance for fear of being the ever-dreaded "dark and gritty."

I 1000 percent agree with this.

[Refrax5]

Ant-Man in general is a funny/silly concept. How can you not think the final climatic battle taking place in a little girl's bedroom on her toy trainset is not awesome and hilarious at the same time? Or using giant Hello Kitty toys as weapons? I think it works far more naturally for comedy then something like the Thor movies. Quantumania was really missing that real world vs size changing antics that made them so much fun.

Scott's ex con friends help flesh out his cast of characters. I don't see a problem with them. Many missed them in Quantumania.

I feel like the comedy was kind of bland in a lot of ways. The train set scene or them fighting in the falling briefcase with the cell phone playing that Cure song with the loud, distorted sound were very clever and fun parts, but so much of the humor just felt very safe, Marvel-ish humor. Don't get me wrong, I actually like the Ant-Man movies, but I feel like they should have been weirder and quirkier instead of the kind of generic action-comedy route.

I also don't think the concept is inherently more humorous than any other superhero power. Hank Pym was never a silly character, for example. I think we've gotten into an era where people are almost embarrassed to take any of this stuff seriously or have it played straight. As a result, a lot of these movies lack any real drama or emotion because no one wants to treat the subject matter with too much sincerity. You always hear that "Well, comics are supposed to be goofy and ridiculous" as a defense and while I understand a lot of these concepts are outlandish and silly to some degree, I feel like that attitude of "if these movies aren't silly and frivolous, it's grimdark and like a Zack Snyder movie" is what's dragging the genre down.

I look at stuff like the Burton Batman or Raimi Spider-Man films, which very much embrace a comic book-ish style and tone, but are very sincere movies that treat the characters with seriousness and gravitas. And honestly, I think both of those movies probably have better comedic parts than most MCU stuff. They aren't perfect films or adaptations, but they somehow managed to feel more like a live action comic book and work as films really well.

[mace11]

By the way could someone name all the mcu movies and shows that were action comedies?
Was incredible hulk ,wakanda forever,eternals,cloak and dagger, agents carter,helstrom,jessica jones, moon knight action comedies?
Nope.
Most of the mcu (shows and movies) are are not action comedies by the way.
In fact most of dceu on average were more action comedies then the mcu and only dceu show peacemaker was a action comedy.

[mace11]

This was posted awhile ago.

Why Marvel’s Success Story is More Than Just a ‘Formula’

Arguably, the closest Marvel comes to a film-to-film formula is a general approach to plotting that upends the typical view of “stakes” in action filmmaking. It’s not an accident that Marvel films are all named after their respective lead figures – these are character-focused stories first and foremost, and everything else comes second. Making the main character(s) likable (or, rather, compelling enough to follow from film to film to semi-annual crossover event) is the focus, and the arc of the story is usually also the arc of character growth. Which mean, yes, the world can be on the verge of ending (as it typically is in these movies) and it’s all just more opportunity for stunts and one-liners, because the drama is meant to be in whether or not the good guys overcome their personal demons and (where applicable) maintain their friendships. But, again, a recurring theme doesn’t necessarily constitute a formula.

The funny thing about the seemingly futile search for a “Marvel formula” is that, truth be told, there actually is one – it’s just not the “sexy” smoking gun that dedicated nit-pickers (or rival studios) want it to be, and neither is it the “just stick to the comics, duh!” self-flattery the fans often describe it as.

When a filmmaking operation succeeds as much as Marvel has, both fans and detractors want to assign some kind of magical flourish to the story of how they did it. “Write good scripts, hire good filmmakers, have a clear vision and stick to it” sounds too mundane and general – never mind what it implies if you’re in the same business and somehow not able to marshal the same success. “Start with the comics, but pay just as much attention to what the broader audience responds to” doesn’t sound as triumphant for message-board self-congratulation.
It’s easier to assume that someone at Marvel (or Pixar, or whoever) has some kind of special sorcery to imbue their productions with, or some top-secret blueprint to follow.

That’s the real irony at play here: The question that keeps being asked is “How does Marvel keep making this work?,” when the question that needs to be asked is closer to “Why is everyone else somehow unable to?”

To read more go here
http://screenrant.com/marvel-movie-formula-brand/
Note-most of the mcu movies if i could recall do not have world ending events by the ways.