First Man (2018)

At the risk of opening myself up to relitigating 2016, it was the year Damien Chazelle demanded I take him seriously with La La Land, a beautiful film which I perhaps overhastily dubbed “best of 2016” (though then-runner-up Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice has only risen in my estimations). He had physically rattled me with Whiplash, one of the only movies to leave me visibly shaking, but La La Land was something else entirely, revelatory and emotional, resonant and instant Personal Canon material. With First Man, a movie at once quite different and yet of a piece with his oeuvre, Damien Chazelle three-peats and earns himself a spot on my “worth a look” list.

Ryan Gosling stars as Neil Armstrong, the aforementioned “first man” on the moon in this biopic that begins with his application to NASA and culminates (spoilers?) with his walk on the moon. Claire Foy co-stars as his wife Janet, the emotional center of the film amid her husband’s obdurate refusal to acknowledge that his missions are increasingly dangerous.

As a true story, First Man is quite different from Whiplash and La La Land, and though it continues Chazelle’s exploration of the sacrifices necessary to achieve greatness, it puts the audience in the interesting position of knowing that Neil Armstrong does indeed succeed; we didn’t know if Andrew, Mia, or Sebastian would achieve their goals, which added a tension to those stories (and a heartbreak if the costs ever outweighed the results). With First Man, we know where this is going, which lets Chazelle and screenwriter Josh Singer flip the script and examine the emotional toll of this achievement and the grave uncertainty that leads up to it. Here Foy is particularly riveting, playing opposite a veritable cipher in the form of Gosling; where Gosling bottles up every emotion he has, Foy proves unable – or more likely, unwilling – to curb those feelings when they are killing her. Gosling, meanwhile, plays the portrait of restraint, single-minded focus with a twitchy flinch at the prospect of facing his fears. 

Also returning from La La Land is Justin Hurwitz on score duties, and I have to say it does show. There’s something about the way Hurwitz organizes a melody and a musical refrain that recalls the sweeping score of 2016’s top musical. New to Hurwitz’s repertoire is the theremin, underappreciated and right at home in a science-fiction movie (this being, of course, nonfiction); invoking the score from The Day the Earth Stood Still is never a bad idea, and hearing the theremin build up to the moon landing sequence proves highly effective. 

Equally (and perhaps more) successful is the way the film drops out most of the audio during the moon landing. There’s been much ballyhoo about “needing” to see the film in IMAX, and I’ll certainly agree that it’s a standout feature when the aspect ratio opens up and the film goes dead silent – I’ve never seen a theater audience that respectful of silence. Emphasizing that the only things on the moon with Neil are what he brings up with him, the score focuses on a swirling martial beat, John Barry by way of Hans Zimmer (or is it the other way around?), before ceding to the majesty of the lunar surface. It’s a breathtaking sequence, worth the price of admission even in spite of the fact that we know he’s going to stick the landing – Hurwitz and Chazelle give a real powerhouse of a moment.

The film ends on a much quieter note – I won’t spoil it, because the film does go beyond the moon landing just a bit. The silent closing sequence is tremendously powerful, even after the bombastic scope of the moon; it’s a potent scene between two performers who should earn Oscar nominations on those facial expressions alone. Whiplash left me shaken, and La La Land left me sobbing; First Man is somewhere closer to the latter end of the spectrum, but softer, less painful by far. It’s a poetic conclusion to a movie with a surprising emotional core, but then Chazelle has hit me with more than his fair share of sentimental sucker punches. Three in a row, at least, guarantees I’ll be in attendance for whatever he tries next.

First Man is rated PG-13 for “some thematic content involving peril, and brief strong language.” Directed by Damien Chazelle. Written by Josh Singer. Based on the book by James R. Hansen. Starring Ryan Gosling, Claire Foy, Corey Stoll, Jason Clarke, Kyle Chandler, and Ciaran Hinds.

Ant-Man (2015)

When a movie studio takes on “juggernaut” status in the way that Marvel Studios has, there’s a rubbernecking tendency among the media as they begin to speculate when it will fail, when that first flop will fall. We saw it with Guardians of the Galaxy, which succeeded more than anyone expected (especially for a film with talking trees and raccoons). Now, between the departure of initial director Edgar Wright and the problem of name recognition, Ant-Man had been floated as Marvel’s first failure. The truth is, however, that Ant-Man stumbles through its exposition before ending up as a surprisingly entertaining superhero film.

Scott Lang (Paul Rudd) is a reformed cat burglar who wants to support his daughter, but his criminal past and ex-wife won’t let him. Meanwhile, Hank Pym (Michael Douglas) discovers that his shrinking technology is being appropriated by his protégé Darren Cross (Corey Stoll). Against the advice of his daughter Hope Van Dyne (Evangeline Lilly), Pym tasks Scott with stealing the technology from Cross, offering him the Ant-Man suit to accomplish the heist.

Let’s get the bad news out of the way for those of us true believers who love these movies – Ant-Man is a little bit clunky, especially in the exposition department. There’s a very funny line in the trailers – slightly different in the finished film – where Hank Pym tells Scott, “I need you to break into a place and steal some stuff.” The thing about Ant-Man is that the first twenty minutes or so is exactly like that, with characters very directly expressing their motivations, desires, and plot arcs. Scott’s relationship with his daughter could have been somewhat poignant, but every scene he’s in involves him telling someone else how much he cares for his daughter before being reminded that he has a criminal record. It’s very on-the-nose screenwriting that distracts from the Marvel emphasis on character; compare, for example, to Iron Man and the way it introduced Tony Stark by showing him in his natural habitat rather than telling us, “Tony, you’re irresponsible.”

Having said that, with a first act that feels very perfunctory, once Ant-Man gets going it’s a much more successful film. It manages to walk that line between acknowledging how absurd the concept is and just running with it, without feeling parodic or naïve. It’s aware of the innate absurdity of a superhero whose power is talking to ants, but at the same time it demonstrates just how much can be done with that power. There are several moments in the film where I said to myself, “Oh, I hadn’t thought of that,” moments that demonstrate the creativity of the writers and the way in which they’ve taken the concept seriously without being too serious about it.

A large part of the film’s attitude comes from Rudd’s naturalism in the role; for me, he’s always been the member of the Judd Apatow “Frat Pack” who can step back from the material and wink at it without compromising the integrity of his performance, and he brings that grounded irony to Scott Lang. At the other end of the spectrum, it is an absolute delight to see Michael Douglas in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. I’ve said before that he’s one of those actors who is watchable no matter what he’s doing. In the role of the mentor – Marvel’s first “legacy” character – Douglas shines as someone crippled by loss and haunted by his past. Lilly, for those who haven’t seen her since Lost, is also quite compelling as Hope, the kind of character of which we just can’t wait to see more, and thank heavens we’ll almost certainly see her in a film down the road, because Hope has the potential to be a breakout star of the MCU – spirited, heroic, and unique (there isn’t really a comparison character, fortunately).

The thing that makes Ant-Man a real success, aside from the inevitable tie-in aspects (including cameos from Howard Stark, Peggy Carter, and one other name I won’t spoil - though for God's sake, people, stay through the credits!), is its adherence to the formula of the heist film. Marvel’s been pretty good with this lately, giving us a 70s spy film with Captain America: The Winter Soldier and a space opera with Guardians of the Galaxy, so the genre play here keeps the superhero genre from growing stale (really, how many times can one replicate the structure of Superman before wearing it thin?). Think of it like Ocean’s Eleven if Danny Ocean could shrink. And the rousing score by Christophe Beck helps that atmosphere work for the audience.

I went into Ant-Man expecting it to be a passable superhero venture, one of a dozen generic entries, but the film won over the cynic in me fairly rapidly and convinced me it had something to offer – a return to form of sorts, something akin to Iron Man with its emphasis on corporate espionage rather than saving the world. It’s not as strong a film as Iron Man, but it’s no less entertaining than at least half of what Marvel has put out in the last decade.

Ant-Man is rated PG-13 for “sci-fi action violence.” There is a fair amount of running, jumping, and punching, done at an atomic level so we only see full-size people recoiling from being hit by Ant-Man. There’s also the usual amount of peril and menace from the principal antagonist.