Much better than anticipated, I actually thoroughly enjoyed 'Ant-Man'. The concept is silly, but I felt it made it work very well.
It starts off as more Paul Rudd-esque than Marvel-esque, especially with the comedy. I wasn't expecting much from it at that point, not that it was necessarily bad or anything but it wasn't what I'd expect from an MCU film. However, positively, it turns into something that fits in this universe.
I enjoyed the action, score and humour. The cast do good things, with Paul Rudd filling the titular role nicely. I also really enjoyed Michael Douglas. Evangeline Lilly and Michael Peña are pluses, too. Corey Stoll, meanwhile, is a little meh I will say - entirely passable, but nothing memorable.
This is a pleasant watch, one I'd recommend.

Ant-Man is a much needed breath of fresh air from all the city-breaking, galaxy saving epicness of the past five Marvel movies. It's a nice, light, fun heist movie with some pretty cool effects and a great cast of characters.
Michael Pena, T.I. and David Dastmalchian make this movie so much more enjoyable. Not that Paul Rudd, Evangeline Lilly, Michael Douglas, and Corey Still aren't great, but those three as a sidekick trio crack me up.
Edgar Wright's stamp is all over this movie and it's a shame his directorial touch is missing, because he would have known what to remove to make it even better.
But all in all, Ant-Man is great entertainment with a feel good story about a man trying to be the hero his kid thinks he is.

***Ant-Man?***
Released in 2015, "Ant-Man" stars Paul Rudd as Scott Lang, a cat burglar who is offered redemption and the opportunity to be a hero. Michael Douglas plays his mentor, Hank Pym, and Evangeline Lilly Pym's daughter; meanwhile Corey Stoll co-stars as the heavy.
In my vast arsenal of old comics I have only one issue where Ant-Man is the main star: Marvel Feature #10, which featured Hank Pym as the hero, not to mention his wife, the Wasp, AKA Janet van Dyne. The character's run in that comic ceased with that very issue. By the 80s Scott Lang, a good-intentioned thief, became Ant-Man after stealing Pym's Ant-Man suit to save his daughter. With the encouragement of Pym, Lang became Ant-Man full-time.
The movie is based on these events and I was surprised at how entertaining it is considering how relatively minor the hero is. The movie even makes a joke about this when Ant-Man comes face-to-face with the Falcon (Anthony Mackie). Speaking of which, it's great to see the Falcon in action. It's also great to see Yellowjacket who, in the comics, was Hank Pym after Lang took over as Ant-Man. In the movie Yellowjacket is the villain (Stoll), which is okay since Pym's Yellowjacket in the comics sort of became a villain when he had a mental breakdown and was eventually divorced by Janet, the Wasp. The filmmakers incidentally did an excellent job with the Yellowjacket suit.
"Ant-Man" was a surprise hit at the box office and understandably so. It's a quality superhero flick done with style and brimming with confidence. It's nothing more than this, but that's all it needs to be. It's nice to see Michael Douglas who was, believe-it-or-not, 70 years-old during shooting. He shines in the movie as Pym and could easily pass for ten years younger. I also really liked the Quantum Realm sequence when Lang is reduced to microscopic size.
The film runs 117 minutes and was shot in Georgia and San Francisco, CA. ADDITIONAL CAST: Judy Greer, Bobby Cannavale and Michael Peña.
GRADE: B+/A-

Less spectacle than most MCU films have been serving up, particularly in phase two, but the story and characterisation is actually a little stronger than the past couple of tales Marvel has served up.
Villain Darren Cross, AKA “Yellowjacket” (originally a hero in the comics) lacks the onscreen presence of top tier Marvel-evil Loki, but is certainly one of the stronger offerings the MCU has given us. His twisted relationship with his former mentor gives another level to this Marvel film not seen since _Winter Soldier_.
Not so much a super hero film as a super heist film, _Ant-Man_ was a welcome refreshment to the comic book movie party, and though I always like to give myself some time to find exactly where MCU films fit in my overall experience, at the moment I would say _Ant-Man_ sits somewhere comfortably in the middle, maybe even a bit below, but is still well worth a watch, even for those who aren’t deeply involved with the film series as a whole.
_Final rating:★★★ - I liked it. Would personally recommend you give it a go._

I have to say that I did not have great hopes for this movie. However, I found it surprisingly enjoyable. As can be expected from a Marvel super hero movie it is not the most intelligent plot around but instead rather heavy on special effects.
Having said that the plot is not bad given the context. I have never read any of the Ant-Man comics so I had no idea what to expect. The little expectation I had was of some guy turning into some ant like creature smashing things left right and center. So it was somewhat of a surprise to me when I found out that the guy was actually shrinking himself to ant size. Actually I went a bit “what the f…” when I first realized this and felt that this was going to be boring.
However, in the end, I felt it worked out quite well. If it would have just been about some guy shrinking himself then it would indeed have been somewhat boring but the added coolness of this guy being able to command armies of bad-ass ants really helped stave of the boredom.
As I wrote above it is a Marvel super hero movie so it is heavy on special effects and, personally, I felt they where quite okay. There is of course quite a bit of action in the movie as well as a bit of humour. I quite liked the parts where the Ant-Man and his nemesis slugged it out in a children’s room and a giant size Thomas the Tank Engine was thrown through the roof and into the garden. Maybe I liked it because Thomas the Tank Engine is a TV show that my kids liked to watch when they were smaller. There where of course a few of the usual Hollywood silly, brain-dead stunts like the tank scene. It could have been so cool but it was really ruined by the total lack of intelligence in the stunt following the cool revelation.
I really liked Michael Douglas as Dr. Hank Pym as well as Evangeline Lilly as Hope Van Dyne. I was not too impressed by Paul Rudd but on the while I guess he was not too bad. It is a bit of a shame though that when Hollywood feels they need to throw in a bit of family drama they always have to throw in a divorce. It is rather depressing for us that have lived through such a tragedy after all.
Bottom line, this was a surprisingly enjoyable movie. Far better than quite a few of the super hero movies that Marvel/Hollywood have produced like for instance the abysmal Spiderman movies although that is of course a personal opinion.

I like Paul Rudd and was hoping this would be as funny as 'The Guardians of the Galaxy' but it wasn't. It looked good and the direction was solid but I think it suffered from the constant screenplay rewrites that the film underwent by changing the screenwriters (Edgar Wright and Joe Cornish).
I also felt it was a bit too long-winded and it was unbalanced. However, the main good feature in this film was the special effects.
★★★

> Size doesn't matter if he's a superhero who committed to save the world.
My confession is I never read 'Ant-man' comics and I never knew such kind of superhero even exist in Marvel till this movie was announced. (But I know Danish film 'Antboy'.) So I'm glad they brought cinematic version of 'Ant-man' and I'm sure he'll return to the next 'Avengers' as they promoted strongly in this film itself to know what would be the audience response. I don't know others, but I definitely welcome the idea.
Another CGI magic, another Marvel's wonder. As long as they pick the right cast and crew with a good story, the sci-fi like this continues to rule the cinema world. It was a great team work, that must be appreciated. As usual the top notch visuals as well the performances, even the sidekicks. But I was surprised to see when Paul Rudd was attached to this project. I believed it would be a comedy sci-fi packed with full of action, and I was wrong. It was a simple tale, a heist theme and of course it was fun to watch, but never was a comedy movie.
A wonderful beginning, especially for the first film in the series. You know strong foundation is the key to raise a building above. I know the sequels would only get better by progressing and it should be. Because in all the Marvel's superhero flicks, this one was the most family and young kids friendly. That does not mean there were no violence, but from the title to the characters and presentation, all were so casual and can be understood by all.
It was so great to see a legend like Michael Douglas to be a part in the modern movie. Now I am eager to see Evangeline Lily as Wasp-girl in the follow-up. It would be like Peter Pan and Tinker Bell, but in a sci-fi version. The extras were very interesting, I enjoyed them as well. If you're are yet to see the film, don't expect anything like Disney's 'Honey' trilogy, after all, if you enjoy the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) then you would do same for it which is the twelfth to follow.
7.5/10

The Pocket Rocket.
Given the production problems and its long gestation period, Ant-Man is arguably far better than it had right to be. Unsurprisingly with a Marvel Super Hero film, the critical reactions have been mixed, but given it's not as gargantuan as most Marvel pics it proves to have a big entertaining heart. A pic cunningly viewing the Marvel Universe from a different angle, whilst also not over egging the pudding.
The effects work is impressive, the origin story narrative engrossing and with it carrying a lightness of touch, and there's a very enjoyable cast enthusiastically buying into the comic book frivolity. Sure, some of it's just plain daft, our hero's powers are hardly blunderbuss stuff, while the family melodramas bubbling away feel tired, but come the glorious finale, pandering to the child in us all, it's another Marvel winner readying itself for further adventures of Ant-Man. 7.5/10

When one thinks of a typical super-hero actioner, they imagine the boisterous boundaries that are associated with such an explosive genre: eye-popping special effects, outlandish and grand-standing villains, world domination escapades, complex yet flashy super-heroes that seem unreal and unapologetic and a big scale of unbelievable escapism that is tellingly becoming of a comic book epic on the big screen for the hungry eyes of the giddy moviegoer. Remember, all these described elements are not a bad thing when it comes to larger than life comic book/superhero fantasies. In fact, we almost insist that our volt-minded vehicles have some kinetic kick to its pulsating, pithy adventures. After all, there is certainly nothing wrong with that approach to the cinematic sensationalism of summertime popcorn pleasers and the costumed heroes that take us on that daring, rollicking ride of magical mayhem.
However, director Peyton Reed’s ‘Ant-Man’ symbolizes a different texture and tone to the familiar action-packed world of Marvel Comics’ outrageous universe both on the printed pages and in the dark movie theaters. It does not necessarily use the overwrought or ultra-stimulating tactics to sell its percolating product as a super-charged heroic fable of mighty manipulators out to save the planet in the tradition of frantic favorites such as ‘The Avengers’ film franchise for instance. Instead, ‘Ant-Man’ relies on its small and intimate take of quirkiness, introspection, a gentle doomsday message of despair and a measurement of an awkward man that wears his bugged-out wardrobe with a sense of curiosity and conviction. In essence, ‘Ant-Man’ is a costumed caper that is high-spirited in its low-key excitement…something quite refreshing and revered in the wild and wacky world of Marvel Comics’ representation of the super-studs and sasses that invade our cinematic sensibilities in the hazy days of summer.
‘Ant-Man’ lead Paul Rudd, an affable actor that has shown various levels of competence in both comedies and dramas over the years, is the unlikely source to don an ant-oriented attire and let his charm and cheekiness take over as the tiny bugged-eyed avenger of right and might. Rudd plays Scott Lang, a former troubled lawbreaker and gifted engineer whose demons come back to haunt him when he gets involved in the burglary shenanigans with his bad news buddies (T.I. and Michael Pena). The reason for Lang’s lure back to crime: a cockeyed but convenient way to win over the affections of his estranged young daughter.
Interestingly, another great analytical mind of mechanics and science in stand-offish Hank Pym (Oscar-winner Michael Douglas) is spotlighted as he too struggles to relate to his daughter as well in the pretty Hope Van Dyne (Evangeline Lilly). Anyhow, Pym has a colorful backstory as it is revealed that he used to save the world from harm as the underrated crime-fighter Ant-Man. There was no glory or special recognition for Pym’s heroics as the buggy super-hero but his devotion to his crime-stopping craft was realized nevertheless.
As ANT-MAN Paul Rudd's Scott Lang has plans to stop the criminnal foolishness besides raiding a giant-sized picnic basket in Peyton Reed's modest costume caper.
As ANT-MAN Paul Rudd’s Scott Lang has plans to stop the criminal foolishness besides raiding a giant-sized picnic basket in Peyton Reed’s modest costume caper.
The conflicted father-daughter tandem of Pym and Hope eventually recruit the beleaguered Lang to climb into the exo-skeletal red-and-black suit and become the current Ant-Man to continue the mission of promoting goodness over evil. In this specific case, Lang’s Ant-Man is asked to foil the nefarious agenda of Pym’s former protege and associate Darren Cross (Corey Stoll) who threatens to expose the revolutionary shrinking technology to anyone sinister that offers him an insane and immediate price for such secretive scientific information that could jeopardize mankind in the long run. Of course, it goes without saying, that Cross has an ominous alter-ego in the vile Yellowjacket whose back-and-forth clashing with Lang’s Ant-Man leads to the calculating and corrosive chess game of one skillful insidious insect trying to outwit and outmaneuver a conscientious one.
Some may dismiss ‘Ant-Man’ as being too low-grade, cheesy and incidental in its confrontational canvas of saints versus sinners. Still, Reed’s handling of his Marvel-inspired ‘battle of the bugs’ is a winning formula in simplicity because it does not have to be rooted in a spectacular and showy landscape as the other successful bombastic blockbusters that come out of the frivolous factory of Hollywood. Essentially, ‘Ant-Man’ demonstrates the right kind of personality and prestige for its presentation as a scaled-down comic book actioner steeped in the personalized disillusionment of the characterizations and their assorted psyches. Sure, ‘Ant-Man’ will not let anyone forget its popular competitor in the much glorified and iconic standing of another insect-fighting Marvel mastermind in ‘Spider-Ma’n anytime soon. Yet Scott Lang’s Ant-Man is just as angst-ridden, impish, awkward and devoted as Peter Parker’s resilient web-headed wonder Spidey.
The drama unfolds so convincingly in ‘Ant-Man’ not so much because of the dire dilemma of comicbook goodness and badness but because of the examination of deteriorating relations between broken men and their families or more specifically between fathers and daughters. Both Rudd and Douglas are committed to their roles as the Ant-Men that saved the world with ease past and present but could not say the same thing about rescuing the domestic responsibilities that eluded them under their own roofs. As Lang tries to find an opening for forgiveness toward his little girl and remarried ex-wife (Judy Greer), his current adviser Pym struggles to put the pieces together with a disgruntled Hope that blames her father for the neglect of her well-being as well as the death of her beloved late mother known as the Wasp, a super-heroine that shined in her own shadow of accomplishment.
‘Ant-Man’ is a soulfully weird, witty sliced-down spectacle of a comicbook film that is rare in its skin to deliver the message of a connection not just to stamping out the cartoonish crime and chaos that is routinely found in the playful playground of Marvel’s movie machine of high-powered personalities armed with skillful brute and brilliance. It also has something called heart and hope as it tackles the alienation and isolation of fathers and their vulnerable daughters. It will take more than a gigantic can of Raid to destroy the indomitable presence of ‘Ant-Man’ and what his hedonistic heroics, both physical and psychological, bring to the prized picnic table.
Ant-Man (2015)
Walt Disney Studios
1 hr. 57 mins.
Starring: Paul Rudd, Michael Douglas, Evangeline Lilly, Crey Stall, Michael Pena, Tip “T.I.” Harris, Judy Greer, Bobby Cannavale, Wood Harris and Abby Ryder Fortson
Directed by: Peyton Reed
MPAA Rating: PG-13
Genre: Comic Book Fantasy, Super-heroes, Action and Adventure
Critic’s Rating: *** stars (out of 4 stars)

I loved it it was so much fun and very funny, another marvel masterpiece

The first time I saw this movie I was 6 or 7 years old and my friend had it on VHS and since then I can't count the number of times I have seen it. Such a fun time travel adventure movie.

A quintasential '80s movie. A time-jumping rollercoaster ride everyone will enjoy getting on board.

Everyone who's ever seen this movie loves it. We all wish we could go back in time. I know I do.

Not sure how many times I've seen this (first time was on VHS ~1986 or 87 I think) but still an incredibly fun sci-fi comedy with Fox and Lloyd working perfectly off one another. Holds up so well each and every time I re-visit. **4.5/5**

"Robert Zemeckis remains the beating heart of modern science-fiction films"
The first time I have ever redacted a critic was down in 2015, since then, I learned how impressive productions could change lives and start movements throughout the world. Back To The Future represents one of those films, such a powerful, inspirational, comical, heartwarming, and innovative one. Probably, McFly and Doc Brown proffer the best duo-interaction I have ever beheld in an 80s film (which, happily, could end up being top-notch of all time). There are almost no blunders to be found because the flick essentially represents an instant classic of cinematic history as if to say, pure perfection. From this moment on, you might be thinking about the reason of having assessed the film as absolute perfection score.
First and foremost, we discuss relating to breaking formulas and experiencing new paths, in other words, means opening new cinematic genres and improving them, that is to say, films which leave a significant legacy. Back To The Future follows the proper steps to provide that brand-new feature we were all hoping. Secondly, we balance the film's highest moments and ordinary moments with humour, some 50's nostalgia, some drama and (even) some action moments which results in a win-win the film provides a mixture of genres carefully well-managed and accurately-needed. Third, if the goal is the production of an instant classic, we will need to focus on the cast, because they are the ones who will perform during the whole film, they embody the heroes and villains; therefore, they become fundamental. Michael J. Fox and Christopher Lloyd are the film's core, as excellent as Vince Vaughn-Owen Wilson's 2005 Wedding Crashers, I daresay.
Finally, but not least, the soundtrack and the environment, in spite of ending up being complementary, provides not only a trusting reality but an opportunity to show the audience the plot's main incidents. During the display, we will notice the most recurrent spots are the 80's and 50's at school, at traditional coffee shops and the streets, not forgetting the excellent pop-culture references introduced.
The audience ought to congratulate Robert Zemeckis' mind and, also, the crucial support of his staff (one of whom was Steve Spielberg) owing to this masterpiece. The montage is proof that everyone who has an incredible imagination is capable of creating chef-d'oeuvres, delivering the audience such an extraordinary time. What is more exhilarating is the fact that then-president Ronald Reagan loved the film to the point that he used famous BTTF quotes, for example, during his 1986 State of Union Adress. What an achievement ladies and gentlemen!
(90/100)

Earth Angel And The Nuclear DeLorean.
It's 1984 and director Robert Zemeckis, fresh from the success of Romancing The Stone, is trying to film Back To the Future - a film about a young teenager called Marty McFly who is accidentally sent back in time to 1955 and inadvertently risks the future of his family. Zemeckis is troubled by his leading man, Eric Stoltz, who just isn't capturing the youthful teenager exuberance that he wants for Marty McFly. Stoltz is jettisoned and in comes Michael J. Fox who was busy wowing audiences in the hugely popular sit-com Family Ties. Fox had been first choice anyway but couldn't get a release slot from shooting with Family Ties. Luckily the wasted time with Stoltz created an opening for Fox to play Marty McFly as well as work on the show - the result of which would turn out to be one of the most beloved fantasy trilogies of the modern era.
It's honestly hard to find anyone who seriously doesn't like Back To The Future part one. The second one has its critics, because, lets face it, it's a bridge between two better films, while the third film loses some people because of its Western themed plot (the heathens that they are). Yet really this trilogy opener is as near perfect cinema for all the family as you could wish to view. It's a water tight script from Zemeckis and Bob Gale that not only encompasses witty time travel paradoxes, but also dares to be dramatic into the bargain. The first 15 minutes contains a real shocker that is as cheeky as it bold, something that really gives Marty's 1955 quest a real urgency that the audience can buy into as the comedy relief then comes in spades. The set pieces are first rate - hello skateboard - hello rock "n" roll 101, and the makers have fun in winking towards other notable sci-fi pictures along the way. Hell they even manage to deal in an Oedipal strand that is tasteful, handled superbly and garners guffaws aplenty. No mean feat that last one actually. Alan Silvestri provides a whirring & pleasing score and the theme song, The Power Of Love, by Huey Lewis & The News, is infectiously enjoyable. Finally it's the cast that seal the deal for why this is as good as it gets for fantasy escapist cinema. Fox, Christopher Lloyd, Lea Thompson, Thomas F. Wilson & Crispin Glover are the perfect quintet, each feeding off each other and doing justice to the excellently constructed story.
Made for $19 million, Back To The Future went on to make a worldwide gross of over $381 million, and those are the kind of figures you really can't argue with. It's snappy, happy and down right funny, so really, if you don't like Back To The Future then seek medical help immediately. 10/10

**Entertaining**
A man goes back in time to save his mother - or something like that anyway - I was too entertained to fully grasp what was going on. Seriously, this film moves so fast that you will find yourself having to try your hardest to keep up with it.
Great movie. Great soundtrack. Great performances. A shame that the sequels did not live up to this one.
- Ian Beale

"Wonder Woman" was a groundbreaking film that revitalized the DC universe and reignited excitement for the Justice League. Gal Gadot's portrayal of Wonder Woman, while criticized for her acting skills, was visually captivating and suited the role perfectly. The film's World War I setting and character interactions added depth to the storyline, with quick wit enhancing the overall experience. The fight scenes were exhilarating, showcasing Wonder Woman's badass persona and making the movie a must-watch despite any shortcomings in acting.
On the other hand, "Wonder Woman 1984" failed to live up to its predecessor, delivering a disjointed and disappointing sequel that veered off course from the established DC universe. The film's messy plot, lackluster excitement, and underdeveloped villain undermined the legacy created by the first movie. Director Patty Jenkins' handling of the story and character arcs fell short, leaving viewers with a subpar viewing experience marred by excessive CGI and a lack of substance.
Ultimately, "Wonder Woman 1984" was deemed a misstep in the Wonder Woman franchise, failing to capture the magic of the original film and disappointing fans with its lackluster execution. The film's flaws overshadowed any potential it may have had, leaving audiences longing for a more cohesive and engaging continuation of Wonder Woman's story.

OK, calm down....I am going to address the "controversy" around this first...and I can't believe I just had to write that. It's freaking Wonder Woman!!!!! I can see the X-Men being controversial, what with being primarily about Civil Rights and equality for minorities...but this is DC Comics.
OK, so let me put it this way...
...I do NOT think that Wonder Woman is the greatest female protagonist in an action movie or sci-fi movies...and I am NOT a misogynist.
My "lack of respect" of Wonder Woman doesn't stem from a hatred of strong female leads...I just think Sarah Conner (Especially in "Terminator the Sarah Conner Chronicles") is the absolute coolest and most bada$$ strong female lead that has ever graced the silver screen or your home television.
Not only that, I was livid when it got canceled and, for the cherry on top, if you want a strong female role model...have one with the cold soldier discipline and the willingness to sacrifice her life for the mission that Sarah Conner has.
Not only that, but to be further controversial, I don't believe that Wonder Woman is the first awesome strong female lead in an action movie. I mean, Ellen Ripely is almost as pure awesome as Sarah Conner...and who can forget Buffy, OK Buffy is touchy, when I mention her I am talking about Buffy from the TV show, not Buffy from the movie.
Those are only to name a few. And then there are lesser ones that we hate yet still came before Wonder Woman....most recently the Ghost Busters and Mary Sue from the new Star Wars.
So cool down on the politics...people that don't think Wonder Woman is the greatest female lead aren't necessarily misogynists forcing a male agenda....they may just be aware of Sarah Conner and Echo.
Now...back to Wonder Woman.
WHY DOES IT HAVE TO BE DARK, REALISTIC, AND GRITTY?!?!?! Seriously, I only like one (1) of the Nolan Batman movies and...Wonder Woman and Superman and the Justice League are NOT Batman.
I don't want to sit through a Super Hero movie that is bucking for ultra-realistic. If I wanted that, I'd see a drama.
There are few super heroes that you can go totally dark and Gritty with, Batman, Dare Devil, Green Arrow....
Speaking of Green Arrow, notice how he was dark and the Flash wasn't? Why can the WB understand this but not the film department? What you have here is a director trying to make a Batman movie using Wonder Woman and that doesn't work. If I want a dark and gritty female action protagonist I already have the Terminator and Alien franchises.
the director, the studio, the writers should have concentrated more on making a Wonder Woman film and not another Batman movie...this failed for the same reason Batman V Superman did.

**Overall : Wonder Woman exceeds the high expectations of existing fans while winning new fans with its amazing action, fantastic visuals, and sincere characters.**
Zack Snyder’s casting of Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman was a masterstroke that shined in its full brilliance in this film. While I had high hopes for Patty Jenkins’ Wonder Woman, I didn’t expect this kind of excellence! Gal Gadot delighted as the powerful yet compassionate Diana. Jenkins carried that balance of elegance and strength throughout the entire film. The No Man’s Land scene stands out as one of the best action scenes in a comic book movie. Wonder Woman is full of fun, action, grace, and significance, making it a true stand-out in the ever-growing ocean of comic book films.

I truly enjoyed Wonder Woman after Diana’s BvS intro with that amazing theme music.
I was disappointed Diana didn’t have the bullets and bracelets contest to return Steve to Man’s World.
Director Patty Jenkins must have watched Justice League the animated series because Diana stole her costume in that episode.
I read moviegoers review the 3rd act as a heavy CGI fest but but butt Diana’s a demi god fighting Ares,the God of War certainly they wouldn’t be mimicking a Saturday morning WWE wrestling match.
Traveling by ship instead of invisible plane was another missed opportunity to stay true to the CB.
The Themyscria healing waters was okay I would have liked the Purple Healing Ray - but but butt Director Patty Jenkins kept with the au naturel order of Mother Earth no guns, no electricity, no meat/fish only fruits and vegetables honouring the harvest goddess.
10/10

Such a really nice one & Gal Gadot is the perfect Wonder Woman

I was wrong about Gal Gadot taking the role as Diana Prince/Wonder Woman since BvS. She was not bad.
Then this film, her standalone film, really brought emphasis on female empowerment.

***Wonder Woman and Captain Steve Trevor seek to end WW1***
Near the end of WW1, an American spy (Chris Pine) is chased by Germans to the hidden island of Amazonian women created by Zeus to protect mankind. The princess of the island (Gal Gadot) leaves with the captain to help end the Great War and destroy Ares forever.
"Wonder Woman" (2017) combines the Wonder Woman TV series (1975-1979) with elements of “All Quiet on the Western Front” (1979), "Raiders of the Lost Ark" (1981), “The Dirty Dozen” (1967), “Captain America: The First Avenger” (2011) and “Man of Steel” (2013). It’s a well done modern superhero flick and superior to both “The First Avenger” and “Man of Steel.”
The opening paradisal island sequence is good without overstaying its welcome. The story really picks up when Captain Steve Trevor and Diana depart the island. They have great chemistry and their relationship adds human interest.
Unlike “Man of Steel,” which devolved into super-beings constantly pulverizing each other in the second half, “Wonder Woman” has the poise to take its time and establish an interesting assortment of characters. The entire midsection is great, but the last act, to be expected, comes down to two super-beings pounding each other. But at least the creators tried to add a weighty moral.
The film runs 2 hours, 21 minutes.
GRADE: B

**The Amazonian princess Diana's quest-come-self-discovery!**
From all the superhero films, this was one of the most anticipated. Mainly because of the woman oriented theme. People were desperate to see the solo woman superhero. Today, we have the great visual effects technology, that anything can be possible to bring on to the screen. And actress like Gal Gadot, even better it gets. Yes, it was a wonderful film. A simple storyline, but a well made film.
The Amazonians who are cut off from the rest of the world, is preparing for the battle if Ares returns. All these years nothing has happened, but one day a fighter pilot crash on the cost of their island. Then the princess embark a journey back with him to find, and end the Ares threat forever. But she only ends up in the WWII, and what happens in the following sequence are the rest of the film.
Who would have done a better job than Patty Jenkins. She nailed it, and so set to direct the sequel too. Even the supporting cast was good. DC's visuals always high standards and so this one. Action sequences too amazing. There's lots of changes in the character, as well as in everything. Firstly a nice superhero costume. And connections like Diana's father, the island, all pretty nicely written out. The DC universe just got extended. I can't wait to see 'Justice League'.
**8/10**

I quite enjoyed this movie. When I learned that Zack Snyder had his fingers in it I got a worried since he recently wrote such atrocities as Batman vs Superman and sure enough the story is a really the weakest part of the movie. A typical nonsensical, unintelligent, Hollywood story/script were you are better off putting your brain in idle when watching it.
However it makes up for this with cool special effects and, surprisingly, quite enjoyable characters. This is definitely a movie that you watch for the sake of the special effects. Well, if you are a male teenager you might also be watching it to drool over Gal Gadot of course (I have to admit that she is hot).
There is not too much to say about the plot. Our Amazon hot chick discovers that there is a war going on and goes out to stop it. Since she has been overly protected by her guardian she is amazingly clueless about life outside of her little island. Especially aspects involving men. Something which creates some funny moments as well as some embarrassingly silly ones. This, Diana’s gradual evolution where she not only is learning about life but also discovers her considerable powers, is one of the enjoyable aspects of the movie though. It is of course also one of the dummer aspects of the movie. How the f… could the Amazon Queen race Diana to be so ignorant about everything?
Another not so enjoyable part of the movie is the ludicrous scenes where the britts are trying to obtain peace at all costs as well as the stereotypical portrayal of Ludendorff as some megalomaniacal, half crazy war-mongerer. This was just dumb. I guess Zac Snyder just picked the name out of some history book without bothering to read up on the character. Typical lack of intelligence and respect, a la Hollywood, for anything outside of their, very limited, sphere of knowledge.
Well, at least Danny Huston did a pretty decent job of the shitty role he was given. So did most of the rest of actors. I definitely liked Gal Gadot as Super Woman but then, although I am not a teenager, I am still a male so maybe I am biased when it comes to her?
I definitely liked the special effects. The showdown at the end was great as far as I am concerned and the rest not bad either. They could have been even better though if it would not have been so obvious that the Germans where mostly incompetent extras waiting for Wonder Woman to show off her gymnastics and slow motion abilities. Come on, even superhero special effects should make some pretense of being “realistic” superhero special effects.
The movie is definitely aimed at the young adult segment. Unfortunately it do not seem to know what it is aiming for. Sometimes it is almost adult, sometimes it is late teen and sometimes just so bloody TV-show silly that you’re wondering if it is aiming for even pre-teens.
Anyway, regardless of its faults I did enjoy my 2+ hour spent on this movie. Enough to give it a 4 out of 5 rating

I like the portrayal of the Greek/Amazonian myth; the part where Chris Pine is naked; the part where Wonder Woman overturns the tank; and the post-battle dance scene with her and Steve Trevor, and that's it.
This could be mistaken for a mediocre, melodramatic, cheesy TV movie. Visually, it's less interesting than any of the other nu-DC fare; I never thought I'd miss Zach Snyder's sensibility but I did in this flick. Storywise, it may be a step up from the rest of the DCEU, but it still barely rivals the worst of the Marvel movies. Gal Gadot can't act, and Chris Pine couldn't make the clunky dialogue sound not ridiculous.
Wonder Woman is tolerable. That's more than can be said for the other nu-DC movies but it's not a compliment.

**DC Hits A...Bunt. But compared to the strikeouts, a bunt seems impressive.**
Wonder Woman had some things working for it--things other comic book movies have faltered on. But it had a lot of things not working for it too. The result is an average median between what works and what doesn't. While the film is spectacular within the struggling DCEU, as a stand alone film it's mediocre at best.
Diana's origin story--how she came to be and how she came to be a super hero was refreshing. It showcased the world of the Amazon warriors. It was unique in the often cookie-cutter super hero origin stories. Patty Jenkins did a good job of framing it, but I think the character's origin story dating back to the comics has always been unique in comparison to other super heroes.
The result is that the first third or so of the movie is satisfying--despite dull performances from Gal Gadot and Chris Pine (who had zero chemistry as a couple). But once we leave the confines of the island and enter the real world, the movie becomes hit or miss. WWI (that's right, WWI now, not WWII. The reason for the change in setting is never apparent) London is portrayed in a way that is almost a distraction. Yes, the world isn't white washed; diversity is a thing--a wonderful thing at that. But DC's version of Captain America's Howling Commandos consist of an Arab and an American Indian. Diversity for diversity's sake becomes distracting--especially when paired with a low-rent Simon Pegg whose soul function is being a deadly sniper who never fires his weapon (that's helpful on a top-secret mission behind enemy lines).
It's almost as if the movie telegraphs all of these unnecessary plot hiccups to remind you that this is a super hero film, and no matter how much the mortal humans fail, it will all be okay because the super hero will save the day.
The dialogue can be clichéd at times, and the final theme of the movie--one of love conquering all and the acknowledgement that, overall, mankind is good, is laughable in it's amateur preachiness.
But what the film lacks in substance and script, it makes up for in the visuals. I found the action sequences to be great fun. Heavily stylized "Matrix-style" fight scenes seem right at home in a film about super hero Gods. The freeze frames worked too--as fight sequences froze in over-the-top super hero poses that harkened back to the source material's comic book roots.
The final confrontation between Wonder Woman and Ares--while dragging on a little long--was well done, being one of the few super hero movie climaxes that delivered.
While aspects of the movie were so similar (Hell! Identical!) to Captain America: The First Avenger, I actually felt embarrassed for the filmmakers, I did come away thinking this was the movie Captain America should have been. It succeeded in places where Captain America failed miserably.
The movie is entertainment--pure, fun, pop-corn-gobbling entertainment. In that realm, it succeeds and succeeds well. But as a piece of cinematic art, it falls flat on its face with too many plot holes, script inconsistencies, clichés and mediocre acting. Wonder Woman will be an important movie for both the DCEU and the summer of 2017. But it lacks the magic and staying power of Nolan and Donner's contributions to DC comics' films.

**The First Great DCEU Film**
This film is the origin story of Diana Prince/Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot), who was first introduced in Batman v. Superman last year. She is born and trained on Themyscira, the hidden island where the powerful warrior women known as the Amazons live. One day, Steve Trevor (Chris Pine), an American World War I spy, crashes off the coast of Themyscira and is rescued by Diana and the two team up to take down Ares, the God of War, and the Germans, who are developing a very deadly form of mustard gas. There are fantastic action sequences in this film, especially by Gal Gadot. It's amazing to see her single-handedly storm the German front, inspiring the Allies to fight with her. Gadot takes over from the legendary Linda Carter and makes the role her own. She has great chemistry with Pine. They are complete equals in this film. It's refreshing to see the female lead in a superhero film not be the love interest. The only negative part of the film are the lackluster villains. Hopefully, Wonder Woman will have more formidable foes in future films.

I'd just like to thank Patty Jenkins for making a DCIThoughtSheWasWithUniverse movie that wasn't fucking garbage.
If I'm being completely honest, the two people I went to the cinema to watch _Wonder Woman_ with and I did spend the next two hours after coming out of our screening discussing the various problems with the movie, but we also all agreed on one thing: We still loved it.
Maybe it's just the rose-coloured glasses of comparison, but I had an excellent time with _Wonder Woman_, and I'm excited to go back to the cinema and watch it, at least one more time.
It's the first time I've said that about a DC movie since _The Dark Knight Rises_.
_Final rating:★★★½ - I strongly recommend you make the time._