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

A Horrible Christmas Rant

Horrible, Horrible Christmas, In Every Single Sense of the Word Horrible Christmas - A Quick Rant by Nathan Brooks The Good When you expect one thing, and get something else, you can get very angry. You can get so angry that you refuse to acknowledge the positives of what you have got, and just focus on what you haven't got. For example, Agents of SHIELD. I think Agents of SHIELD is great, but unfortunately I don't appear to share that opinion with a lot of other people. Why? Because they're too busy whining about the lack of all the superhero-y stuff they expected and fair enough, considering you are watching a Marvel TV show. However, I've managed to let that initial disappointment go, and I've found I really enjoy this show.  The Bad Horrible Christmas, a Horrible Histories stage production, is the complete opposite of this. As the theme of this post suggests, I expected something great. Horrible Histories is the only children's educatio...

Is Nativity 3: Dude, Where's My Donkey?! Any Good?

Dude, Where's My Funny?! Nativity 3: Dude, Where's My Donkey?! - Film Review by Nathan Brooks Nativity's lack of critical success completely baffles me. I thought Nativity was a great movie. It was funny, it had more depth to it than most comedies and was overall just a fun movie. Nativity 2: Danger in the Manger's lack of critical success, I understand a lot better. I still remember it being fairly entertaining, but I was about 11 then, and I didn't have a brilliant judgement of what makes a good movie. Of what I can remember, however, it was nowhere near as good as Nativity in terms of story and character and basically everything important needed to make a good film. I also remember that they spent most of the movie in a bus. Nativity 3: Dude, Where's My Donkey is proof that the film makers have given up on trying to please the critics. This is an awful film. Nativity 2 was not a brilliant movie, but it at least kept me entertained for however long it...

Is Avengers: Age of Ultron Any Good?

Avengers Assemble! Again! Avengers: Age of Ultron - Film Review by Nathan Brooks And they say English Weather's bad. Back in the summer of 2012, a little film came out called Avengers Assemble. It wasn't much. It's only the biggest superhero film of all time and it only made $1.518 billion. Everybody loved it, I loved it and clearly moviegoers did as well.  Due to its massive success, obviously a sequel was going to be made. In this case, that sequel is Avengers: Age of Ultron, but with all the hype it's received, is it actually any good? Story The story in this film is definitely not for first time Marvel viewers, you really need to see most, if not all, of the previous Marvel Cinematic Universe films. It is packed full of references to earlier films and understanding a lot of elements of the story will require you to have seen the others. But is the story any good? I thinks so. The main story centres around the fact that Tony Stark, or Iron Man, has ...