Peyton Reed is as one of those anonymous Hollywood directors whose career is quite literally all over the place. He's not the worst of those worrisome "directors for hire," and he has made some okay-ish films over the years like cheerleader comedy Bring It On and The Break-Up. But even this guy would be the first to admit that he's no Stanley Kubrick, and that his filmography is a scattershot affair (Down With Love, anyone? Thought not). And yet Peyton Reed helmed Ant-Man, which is - without question - his best film to date; a dozen steps up (in terms of quality) than anything that he's put out before. It's difficult to know how much credit to give Peyton Reed for Marvel's latest flick, though, given that he came on board at such a late-stage in the game. Did he help to shape the movie personally, or was he simply there as a scapegoat who Marvel could hang out to dry if the picture ultimately came out as a fully-fledged disaster of the highest order? Maybe it doesn't matter. Two points stand. Firstly, Reed actually took the job in the wake of Edgar Wright leaving the project, knowing full well that people would deride him as a replacement choice. That's a pretty bold move. Secondly, Ant-Man is a good movie - fun and entertaining from start to finish, and that has to be - partly, at least - Reed's doing. If taking a movie in crisis and delivering solid results isn't a redeeming feature, what is?
Sam Hill is an ardent cinephile and has been writing about film professionally since 2008. He harbours a particular fondness for western and sci-fi movies.