Skip to main content

X-Men: Apocalypse Review - X-Mess


X-Men: Apocalypse is in a really tricky situation. Not only does it have to top the fantastic X-Men: Days of Future Past, but it also has to compete with the outstanding Civil War and the star power of (the otherwise okay) Batman V Superman. Does it succeed? Err…

Okay, honestly, I really enjoyed this film. For one, James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender are still brilliant at their respective roles, Professor Xavier and Magneto. Xavier comes off as far more human than I think I’ve ever seen him, especially in a brilliant scene between him and Rose Byrne’s character, Moira, in which he does a terrible job of hiding the fact that he fancies her. It gives the character a much more realistic appearance when he’s given a flaw as ordinary as being nervous around girls. Meanwhile, Magneto, or Erik Lehnsherr, is easily the best written character in the entire film. He struggles throughout the film with the way humans treat him in some really harrowing ways, meaning even when he does do all of the evil stuff he does, you really sympathise with him.

The other characters aren't as good, unfortunately, with the exception of Quicksilver of course, who is just as amazing as he was in DOFP and I still want to see more from him. Jennifer Lawrence is sort of okay as Mystique, whose character is really quite boring in this film and all the other mutants aren’t that great either. Admittedly Cyclops’s origin story is dealt with very well, but his character stays fairly underdeveloped from that point on and young Jean Grey was horrendously miscast, as she felt nothing like Famke Janssen's character in the original trilogy. Apocalypse, the big blue villain guy, is very well performed by Oscar Isaac, but he’s not a very three dimensional character and his minions (or the four horseman of the apocalypse) range from boring, but cool looking (Angel), to slightly more interesting, but less cool looking (Storm) to really boring and really stupid looking (Psylocke). The only genuinely good horseman is the aforementioned Magneto, who seems to be the only one with real motives.

There is more stuff I like, however. The film has this brilliant ‘80s movie aesthetic, as it is set in 1983 and has quite a few 80s references in it, from Quicksilver’s Pac-Man arcade machine to a surprisingly meta joke about Return of the Jedi and how the third film is always the worst (*cough* X-Men: The Last Stand *cough*). There’s another brilliant slow motion sequence with Quicksilver set entirely to Sweet Dreams (Are Made of This) and in fact generally there are a lot of really creative visuals, including one of the best X-Men opening title sequences ever that travels forward in time from ancient Egypt to ‘80s America, and the final showdown between Apocalypse and Professor X that takes place entirely inside their minds is fantastic. The final climactic fight at the end isn't all good, however. The first fifteen minutes or so is very repetitive and dull, with lots of way too similar looking shots repeating over and over and the action itself is very weightless and special effects heavy.

As a result of all this conflicting stuff, the film feels very messy. There’s so many characters that the film doesn’t have enough time to focus on the ones you really care about, like Magneto and instead focuses for way too long on ones you don’t, like Mystique. X-Men: Apocalypse would also often switch dramatically in tone, from incredibly sad to silly and comical to gritty and disturbing and then to unrealistic and flashy. The thing is though, it kind of works in the film’s favour. Avengers: Age of Ultron had a similar problem with the characters and, whilst it did do a better job at juggling them, the tone didn't jump about like mad, which is probably technically a good thing, but honestly I found the drastic changes in mood far more entertaining and I never felt myself getting bored, as I never really knew what was going to happen next, unlike Age of Ultron, which could often be a bit too predictable.

So, does it top its predecessor? No. Is it as good as Civil War? No, but it is far more entertaining than Batman V Superman and whilst it is easily director Bryan Singer’s weakest entry into the X-Men franchise, it’s still an entertaining film in its own rights, even if it is dragged down by way too many boring characters and a sluggish final showdown. In the end though, X-Men: Apocalypse takes a seat comfortably in the middle of the epic 2016 battle of the superheroes.

7.2/10

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Star Wars: The Force Awakens Review - A Dazzling Celebration of All Things Star Wars

The Force Awakens was supposed to be bad. It's the seventh film in a franchise, following on from three films that were not well received and is (technically) a Disney sequel. I have now gone to see it four times. Technical Brilliance As far as fundamental filmmaking is concerned, The Force Awakens surpasses any of the previous Star Wars films. It's by far the best written Star Wars film, not that the bar was set particularly high. Still, it's a surprisingly witty film. Aside from the odd line of obligatory exposition, dialogue is very snappy, fast paced and unexpectedly funny. I've probably laughed more in this film than I have in many so-called comedies. While it's not exactly Aaron Sorkin level, J.J. Abrams’ fantastic directing and the actors brilliant delivery, as well as the tight, fast paced editing do help to elevate it. Speaking of the editing, The Force Awakens is also much better paced than any of the other Star Wars films. It's constantly ...

Doctor Who: The Tsuranga Conundrum Review

We are now halfway through the series and showrunner Chris Chibnall has been involved in writing every episode so far. This is quite unusual. Even in their first series as showrunners, Russell T Davies and Steven Moffat weren't responsible for the entire first half (in both cases, Mark Gatiss wrote the episode the showrunners didn't). Of course, Rosa was co-written by Malorie Blackman, and I suspect Chibnall was the lesser involved of the two given the episode's themes. However, Chibnall has controlled the start of this series very carefully. This makes sense, considering how different Chibnall's vision for Doctor Who is from his predecessors. It's important that he establishes this new, character-driven focus so that viewers can get used to it and other writers can build on it. That said, it's also nice to have contributions from different writers and The Tsuranga Conundrum indicates that it's about time that happens. The Tsuranga Conundrum is proba...

Hail, Caesar! Review - Genius Behind the Madness

On an entirely surface level, Hail, Caesar! is a really silly film. The sets are bright and colourful, the characters are bombastic and larger than life and the plot is completely insane and all over the place. If you take a closer look, however, it's much more intelligent than it initially comes off as. Yes, the sets are bright, but their attention to detail is so fantastically minute, you're totally convinced that this is the 50's. The fake film sets are also just as convincing and the films themselves could easily pass off as authentic, if it wasn't for the 21st Century actors populating them. They are obviously slightly exaggerated, for the sake of satire, which probably resonates more with those familiar with retro cinema than regular filmgoers. It's also shot brilliantly by cinematographer Roger Deakins (who was recently Oscar nominated for his work on Sicario ), who manages to make the film feel like something that's not only set in the 50's, bu...