Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Ant-Man' started by Mr. Dent, Jan 19, 2014.
Can't wait to see a hot toy version of him
So, Where does Yellowjacket's Pym Particles go in his suit since there are no visible devices to administer them on his suit like there is on Ant-Man's? Also would Cross call them Pym Particles or rename them Cross Particles?
Meet Darren Cross of Cross Technologies from Marvel's Ant-Man
I hated the concept of this film and of them ruining Yellowjacket from day one since I heard about this movie.
Well, it looks like I'm going to have to admit that I was one wrong whinny fanboy. 70 year old Hank Pym still displeases me but that looks to be easily set aside. I can't believe how much I'm actually looking forward to this film a week out.
I'm in the same boat.
so hearing that this once again a forgettable villain for Marvel
Man this is disappointing
Movie sounds great overall but man another one and done sucks
Yup another one along with Whiplash, Mandarin, Killian, TDW, GOTG..etc The villain is pretty weak.
I also don't understand what was his goal in this movie ? Why does he want the Ant-Man suit when he already has the yellow jacket ? Why does he want the Pym particles when he already shrank the sheep using his own formula? Why does he want to kill Hank Pym when he already broke the code for shrinking molecules ?
And the way he was dispatched....... whoa. Underwhelming.
Marvel are gonna pay the price eventually if they keep butchering the bad guys in their films.
I don't think he was weak. Yellowjacket was way more fleshed out than those villains you mentioned.
Darren Cross motivation is clear and is shown to be incredibly ruthless.
His goal is to get revenge on Hank and prove he is superior to him.
The character adopted Ultron's relationship with Hank Pym from the comics
Darren Cross is a surrogate son to Hank but Hank has pushed him away to keep his Ant-Man technology from him. Hank also lied to Darren for years saying the technology was just a rumour. Cross felt betrayed and abandoned so forced Hank out of his company. Cross has been taking Hank's technology and improving it as he believes he is better than Hank but is really just bitter.
He is selling the Yellowjacket suit. By having the Ant-Man suit there is no competition for his suit. Cross says this in the movie.
Cross keeps the Pym Particles because the suits need them to work. If he controls the supply of Pym particles he controls the people using his suits. It is leverage and makes him powerful. This is said in the film.
Cross wants to kill Hank because he has been made crazy from to much Pym particle exposure, because Hank is trying to stop him and because of his surrogate daddy issue with Hank.
Yellowjacket was awesome. Corey Stoll was perfect in this role.
Stoll was good. Unfortunately, Cross is yet another mediocre Marvel villain. I'm becoming more and more clear to me that they just flat-out don't care about making their non-Loki villains truly interesting/memorable. "We just need a bad guy for them to fight" seems to be their mantra. I'm also getting tired of them getting great actors for these roles and then not using them to their full potential.
chamber-music nailed it. I thought Cross' motivations were pretty clear cut, if a little thin. Even so, Stoll really did give it his all and played the part really well.
Was he crying when they were locked in the Future Lab and he was about to shoot Hank?
imho, i just don't think there's enough time to introduce the hereos and devote time to the villian too. that's why i think netflix is the true arena for comic book to video adaptations. fisk was done beautifully.
I agree with John Campea when he says that the actor is there to serve the character, not vice versa.
I liked Cross. He was actually one of the better villains these films had, simply because I REALLY hated him. Ronan looked fantastic but he didn't came off as hatable. I mean he was evil (and GOTG is perhaps the best MCU film, and one of my Top 5 CB films ever) but...He was just there. Malekith was just there. Whiplash barely did anything, same for Hammer.
Cross was a complete prick. I hated him. He was smug, he was nasty, he was plain good ol' fashioned evil. Typical handsome, dark executive villain? Yep. But Stoll nailed it. I loved to hate him. He did better with this archetype than Guy Pearce did in IM3. Which is a feat by itself.
And the suit itself was incredible. My only beef, is not getting more of him actually. I mean, they should have spent some more time on his backstory/the influence of his research on him. Otherwise...Really good badguy.
Villains are not Marvel's priorities when it comes to movies.
The heroes are clearly the main focus in the films and I'm fine with that. I do dislike when they completely waste villains like Baron Von Strucker though.
I liked when Cross
shrunk Frank the dissenter to mush so casually and kept gloating at Hank
Oh yeah, that was a huge disappointment.
I get the disappointment with Strucker, and that's on Whedon. They set him up as this big villain when he was really a side show pony, but I just reject the "weak villain" premise.
Not all villains or antagonists are presented in the same way in every movie. Take the villains from the Indiana Jones series. They aren't presented any differently than what Marvel has done in a number of their films, and you don't hear anyone complaining about them. Someone else said something about them being like Bond villains. How is that bad? Goldfinger is perhaps the most recognizable villain in film lore, and yet he has one of the most silly motivations for a character ever, but it's awesome.
I agree with the quote from Campea, but in addition to that I'd add the villain has to serve the script not the other way around, which is exactly all the "weak villain" arguments are trying to do....make the script serve the villain.
I really liked Stane in Iron Man. That character did not need an elaborate backstory into why he was a villain.
Stane was a clear cut unscrupulous arms dealer and Tony stark was an annoying ass**** who kept undermining him/getting in his way so he tried to kill him off.
Simple and effective.
i liked Cross motivation and how he just basically was looking for approval from Hank Pym and was jealous that Hank choose Scott Lang over him. The fight between Ant-Man & Yellowjacket was very personal but also well constructed .
Hole is a bad word?
Yeah, I have to say I was severely disappointed with Yellowjacket in this.
It's lazy writing. There's nothing that says that you can't have the hero focus with a compelling/memorable villain in the same film.
It's more complicated than that. I think this explanation is a bit of an exaggeration. I don't believe it's true by any stretch of the imagination that Marvel doesn't "care" about their villains. If they didn't care, they wouldn't consistently go out of their way to find top talented actors to portray them. Also, they wouldn't work so hard on the villains' costume designs, which are almost always excellent.
No, the problem comes from the limited screentime the villains tend to get. Marvel has obviously made a conscious decision that they want to develop their protagonists first and foremost, and as a result, the filmmakers end up investing the lion's share of time, energy and resources into giving the heroes top-notch portrayals. In almost every MCU film, there's no doubt that the heroes are the undisputed stars of their movies. The drawback, of course, is that there's a limited amount of time and resources left to develop the villain characters.
So it's less a matter of "not caring" and more a matter of priorities. Marvel obviously has made the protagonists their first priority. Consequently, only so much time remains for the villains. In this movie, Darren Cross has some very good scenes, but his screentime is fairly limited, so we only get to learn the bare bones about his character. The film obviously wants us to learn about Scott, Hank, and Hope first and foremost.
This pattern shows up in most MCU movies. To be clear, I'm definitely not someone who thinks that all non-Loki MCU villains suck. I think that's a gross exaggeration and distortion. For the most part, I think most MCU villains have interesting, enjoyable things about them (Malekith was the one I felt got neglected the most). It's just that there's not often enough time to develop them to their full potential, given Marvel's chosen priorities. In the future, if they want their villains to have deeper characterization, they should either give the villains more screentime or give them more character-driven scenes.
I loved him but I think we can stay away from the militaristic industrialist trope for a little while.