X-Men: Apocalypse early review

[JasonEvans]

So, a few days ago I had pizza for dinner. It was a fabulous pie -- the sauce was from tomatoes that had ripened that afternoon and there was rosemary and other herbs fresh from the garden. It had a homemade sausage on top, made from some of the finest meats. For dessert, the chef made a homemade apple crisp with hand-whipped cream on top. Truly memorable and special.

Today, I had a Dominoes pizza. They threw in one of their brownies for dessert, but I think they threw it in because it had been made last night and left out for a bit, so it wasn't exactly fresh.

So, I ask all of you -- is Dominoes horrible? No. Do you regret eating it? Probably not. I suppose there are some folks out there who hate it, but most of us find it pleasant enough so that we order it multiple times a year. Nothing wrong with it -- but nothing special either.

Ordinarily, that Dominoes pizza would be fine with me. No complaints... but coming just days after the amazing pizza of the other day, with that delicious pie still fresh in my mind... well, the Dominoes just felt awful in that light.

In case you have not guessed, the fabulous fresh pizza is Cap: Civil War... and X-Men: Apocalypse is the Dominoes meal.



The problem with X-Men:Apocalypse is that it is, in almost every way, the exact opposite of Civil War. The stakes in Civil War were personal and small. The destruction was fairly limited. The story was all about the characters and our engagement with them. And all of that was a good thing. I liked not seeing entire cities crumble to the ground. I liked having characters where the fight really mattered to them. I liked mostly spending time getting to know the people who were part of the plot.

In Apocalypse, the stakes are huge. As the title indicates, the very destruction of our world is at stake here. As a result, the destruction we see is so immense we become numb to it. I can't even think about how many people die in this film, it has to be in the millions, though we really don't see any of it or connect with any of them. The mutant characters are just not all that interesting or compelling. None of them have much of an arc or journey. At one point, a key character dies and we don't even see it or realize that he/she is dead for several minutes. There is zero emotional punch to the death because we don't really care much about him/her in the first place. In fact, just about anyone could die and I'm not sure I would have cared.

Some of the characters are just awful -- Sansa Stark (I mean Sophie Turner) portrayal of Jean Grey requires her to look concerned and unsure and really do nothing else until she does stuff that is almost impossible to understand. Poe Dameron (I mean Oscar Issac) is utterly unrecognizable under his Apocalypse makeup. His powers are never well-defined other than "he can do whatever he wants, I think" and his motivations are equally unclear. I have no idea why he wants to kill most of mankind and enslave the survivors other than that's just how he rolls. Apocalypse's 4 Horsemen just seem to join him because they can, not because there is something about their story or character that would make them want to kill most of humanity. I am sure Jennifer Lawrence made a big fat paycheck for returning at Mystique, because she sure doesn't seem to enjoy this character.



At one point (spoiler!!!)

Spoiler!

Hugh Jackman as Wolverine

shows up. He's on screen for about 3 minutes and doesn't really accomplish other than showing up and killing a whole mess of innocent people (with more blood than we usually see in these films). He's hardly integral to the plot or advances the story. I bet he got a huge paycheck too -- massive waste of money.

I'm dumping on this film pretty hard. Like I said with my Dominoes comparison, it isn't a terrible film, not even a bad one. It is just so relentlessly mediocre. The film does have very impressive visual effects. Once again Michael Fassbender is great as Magneto and he is given at least a bit of an arc. Quicksilver from the fabulous Pentagon escape scene in Days of Future Past is back and the demonstration of his powers is easily the best scene in the movie, though I have a problem with just about everything else he does because the way they show off how fast he is, it almost makes him into a god. If Apocalypse had Quicksilver on his side, no way they ever lose any fight! Aside from a couple scenes with Magneto and Quicksilver, the rest of the film feels like it is just going through the motions. There's nothing new or exciting here, nothing special or notable. I really felt like I had seen all of this before.

At one point, the young X-Men crack a joke about 3rd films in trilogies being the worst -- in reference to Return of the Jedi but also in reference to X-Men:The Last Stand. Clearly, this is the worst of the new X-Men trilogy (First Class, DOFP). I almost wonder if everyone involved knew they were making just an ok film and decided to own it with that joke.

In terms of boxoffice potential, I suspect there is little chance this film breaks out with anyone other than the die-hard comic book audience. First Class made $146 mil and DOFP made $233 mil. This film will fall somewhere in between those two. If I had to guess, I'd go with $185 mil as its domestic boxoffice figure... not bad, but not nearly what many had hoped/expected.

-Jason "sigh... I really had hoped for more, but this pales by comparison not just to Civil War but to DOFP and First Class" Evans

[Doria]

Hmm, well, this sounds terribly written to be sure. I'd pretty much assumed they'd almost have to limit Apocalypse's canonical powers, since he's so intrinsically OP as to lead to real contrivances when it comes to filming a live action version. I guess I made the wrong assumption (for the record, he pretty much can do anything he wants, since as I recall it, he has atomic-level control of matter). But the powers aside, to be able to see an entire movie devoted to Apocalypse and come out of it not understanding his motivation is mind-bogglingly baffling. His motivation, at least in the comics, is probably easier to understand than those of 99.9% of comic-book antagonists.

I do feel that comparing Civil War to this movie, as you describe it, may not be the most helpful comparison because--as you point out--the movies themselves have different goals and methods. The only real link is that they're both based on comic book characters. It's a fair comparison, and one that everyone will no doubt see a lot of, but it would be more helpful for me as a potential (likely) viewer to compare it to other more similar movies; not having seen it, I'm not sure what those would be, but maybe Ultron or Man of Steel or BvS?

Also, I take your point that Jean and Apocalypse sound pretty poorly written, which doesn't surprise me with everything else you say, but did your problem with those characters extend to the performances by the actors? Or did you think their failure as characters stemmed from the poor writing, such that pretty much anyone wouldn't have been able to save them?

Given how mediocre this sounds, I am very surprised Fox is allowing for such early reviews, especially on the heels of Civil War. Forbes's headline ("Franchise-Killing Disaster") is almost certainly not what they were gunning for. At this point, based only on this review, I am going to mentally write off the film's writing, and hope for the best with respect to the action. After all, I like gourmet pizza as much as anyone else, but I probably prefer Dominoes for all but special occasions.

Thanks for posting the review. I am disappointed, but also kind of think it's for the best that it gets trashed early. I was probably overhyped for Civil War, with the result that neither my roommate nor I wanted to see it more than once last weekend (we expected to want to see it 2-3 times opening weekend); BvS's terrible reviews, coupled with our dislike of MoS, resulted in our being shocked that it wasn't as disastrous as we expected. So maybe this will lower expectations to the point where I can actually enjoy it. Again, thanks for the early review.

[brevity]

In case you have not guessed, the fabulous fresh pizza is Cap: Civil War... and X-Men: Apocalypse is the Dominoes meal.

So... Avoid the Noid?

This strikes me as one of those movies that makes $150 million before audiences realize they don't like it, and then makes another $75 million as its punishment. It's tempting to compare this to Fantastic Four last year, but (1) that film had behind the scenes turmoil that became very public, and (2) people need a positive reason to see a movie in August. This X-Men movie sounds like your standard, critically maligned, lesser franchise filler that audiences will see in early summer because they always have.

Unless Alice Through the Looking Glass (its Memorial Day competition) is perceived as anything better than a shameless money grab, both films will be fine.

[JasonEvans]

Also, I take your point that Jean and Apocalypse sound pretty poorly written, which doesn't surprise me with everything else you say, but did your problem with those characters extend to the performances by the actors? Or did you think their failure as characters stemmed from the poor writing, such that pretty much anyone wouldn't have been able to save them?

I don't blame the actors here. It was mediocre writing and direction that made the characters less than compelling. As I stated earlier, the film just does not bother to explain much of anything about Apocalypse other than he's an ancient mutant who wants to destroy almost everything and enslave the survivors. He can waive his hand and turn people or objects into dust (it never explains why he does not do this when battling the X-Men). He also teleports around and does some other magical stuff -- again it is never really explained.

As for Jean, as I mentioned, she just largely stands around and looks concerned. She does a little bit of ind-magic stuff and Charles keeps on talking about how powerful she is, but she spends most of the movie as a worried wallflower. Not Sophie Tucker's fault, just the reality of the writing. In fact, that brings up another problem for the movie -- the very divergent powers of the various X-Men. The ones who are physical fighters like Hank (Beast) just seem so unimportant and impotent when facing off with bad guys who manipulate matter and fly and the such. It just makes the battles feel tedious.

Given how mediocre this sounds, I am very surprised Fox is allowing for such early reviews, especially on the heels of Civil War. Forbes's headline ("Franchise-Killing Disaster") is almost certainly not what they were gunning for. At this point, based only on this review, I am going to mentally write off the film's writing, and hope for the best with respect to the action. After all, I like gourmet pizza as much as anyone else, but I probably prefer Dominoes for all but special occasions.

I was so excited when I heard Fox was doing screenings 2 weeks in advance and that the review embargo was the same day as the screenings. 95% of the time, this is a sign that the studio thinks it is going to generate great word-of-mouth and buzz. How did Fox bungle this so badly? How did they not realize what critics would think of the movie?

I'm dumping on this film pretty hard. Like I said with my Dominoes comparison, it isn't a terrible film, not even a bad one. It is just so relentlessly mediocre.

I wanted to again mention that it is not a terrible film. It is far better than The Last Stand or pretty much anything DC has done lately. It is far, far from being a "franchise killer." I think the current Rotten Tomatoes score is entirely accurate -- 44%. As I scroll through the reviews on Rotten Tomatoes I see a ton of 2 or 3 (out of 5) star reviews. That's about right. You won't hate it, but you won't love it either.

-Jason "and many of you may like it more than I did thanks to lowered expectations" Evans

P.S. - They really need to make a Quicksilver stand-alone movie. He's the biggest standout in this film.

[Reddevil]

I wanted to again mention that it is not a terrible film. It is far better than The Last Stand or pretty much anything DC has done lately. It is far, far from being a "franchise killer." I think the current Rotten Tomatoes score is entirely accurate -- 44%. As I scroll through the reviews on Rotten Tomatoes I see a ton of 2 or 3 (out of 5) star reviews. That's about right. You won't hate it, but you won't love it either.

-Jason "and many of you may like it more than I did thanks to lowered expectations" Evans

P.S. - They really need to make a Quicksilver stand-alone movie. He's the biggest standout in this film.

Thank you, I enjoy these reviews and find them much more informative than most. I can't help but wonder how it would have been different if you had seen and reviewed this one before Cap./Civil War.

[JasonEvans]

Thank you, I enjoy these reviews and find them much more informative than most. I can't help but wonder how it would have been different if you had seen and reviewed this one before Cap./Civil War.

Yeah, what would my review have been like if I had seen BvS just a week or so before this film? I suspect the review would have been better, but not overwhelmingly so. The failings of this film in terms of plot and character development are hard to miss. They would be there no matter what.

-Jason "thanks for enjoying my reviews!" Evans

[Doria]

I don't blame the actors here. It was mediocre writing and direction that made the characters less than compelling. As I stated earlier, the film just does not bother to explain much of anything about Apocalypse other than he's an ancient mutant who wants to destroy almost everything and enslave the survivors. He can waive his hand and turn people or objects into dust (it never explains why he does not do this when battling the X-Men). He also teleports around and does some other magical stuff -- again it is never really explained.

As for Jean, as I mentioned, she just largely stands around and looks concerned. She does a little bit of ind-magic stuff and Charles keeps on talking about how powerful she is, but she spends most of the movie as a worried wallflower. Not Sophie Tucker's fault, just the reality of the writing. In fact, that brings up another problem for the movie -- the very divergent powers of the various X-Men. The ones who are physical fighters like Hank (Beast) just seem so unimportant and impotent when facing off with bad guys who manipulate matter and fly and the such. It just makes the battles feel tedious.

Thank you for answering my questions. If Singer really wants a crack at the Phoenix story (presuming this does well enough to justify it--which I actually do presume), I wanted to make sure Turner wasn't just terrible here.

Weirdly, the divergent powers of the X-Men are normally why they are able to defeat him, so it's unfortunate that they couldn't find a way to show that in the battle with him (again, he does canonically have all the powers you mention and more; I thought they'd dump all the alien tech powering him up, to give him a more realistic power set to oppose, but it sounds like that's not the case).

[JasonEvans]

Thank you for answering my questions. If Singer really wants a crack at the Phoenix story (presuming this does well enough to justify it--which I actually do presume), I wanted to make sure Turner wasn't just terrible here.

Weirdly, the divergent powers of the X-Men are normally why they are able to defeat him, so it's unfortunate that they couldn't find a way to show that in the battle with him (again, he does canonically have all the powers you mention and more; I thought they'd dump all the alien tech powering him up, to give him a more realistic power set to oppose, but it sounds like that's not the case).

I don't want to get into how they defeat him, but I will say that a lot of folks take part in the final battle. Hardly a surprise there. Still, it is not entirely clear how he is defeated -- I just can't say more without spoilers.

As for Apocalypse's powers and how he got them, that is never discussed. There certainly wasn't any mention of any alien technology. They do talk about him merging his consciousness with a new body and that being how he acquires new mutant abilities. I think you mentioned he has the ability to manipulate matter and now that you say that, it does appear much of his power does reflect that. But they also imply something about him being able to amplify the powers of his 4 Horsemen, though that is never explained at all.

-Jason "lots of incoomplete and inexplicable storytelling going on in this flick" Evans

[Doria]

Well, in the comics, he's had the power to warp reality, so you know... They can justify pretty much any power for him by the source material, but that doesn't equate to a good story. I really assumed they'd just go with manipulating his own matter and maybe technologically explain how he changes his horsemen. (I'm not actually sure that I recall how he amped up his horsemen before, but I kind of think it had to do with using his celestial tech. Note: I do not regret that they skipped the alien part.)

Uh, merging with another body... That sounds awful. I think I'm just going to stop reading about this movie. I want to preserve the off-chance that I'll be able to enjoy it ;_;

(Thanks again, though, for your answers. I appreciate it.)

[ncexnyc]

Just got home from watching this movie and the question on my mind is, "Why all the hate?"

My only answer would be that after a steady diet of comic book based movies there has to be a breaking point and unfortunately for this movie that point has been reached.

You want a steady stream of action without any dull moments, this movie has it.

You want great visually appealing characters, this movie has it in spades.

You want Oscar worthy material, well you won't find any here, but then you haven't had that in any of the previous comic book movies.

When all is said and done the numbers for this movie will be solid and the critics will be left wondering why the latest flick they're raving about is bombing at the box office.

[Wander]

You want Oscar worthy material, well you won't find any here, but then you haven't had that in any of the previous comic book movies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...y_Heath_Ledger

I'm not just posting that to be snarky. Now that the Dark Knight trilogy and some of the Marvel movies have shown us how good comic book movies can be, I think there's a lot less reason to settle for mediocre movies (which may have been considered "good comic book movies" 15 years ago).

[Doria]

Just got home from watching this movie and the question on my mind is, "Why all the hate?"

My only answer would be that after a steady diet of comic book based movies there has to be a breaking point and unfortunately for this movie that point has been reached.

You want a steady stream of action without any dull moments, this movie has it.

You want great visually appealing characters, this movie has it in spades.

You want Oscar worthy material, well you won't find any here, but then you haven't had that in any of the previous comic book movies.

When all is said and done the numbers for this movie will be solid and the critics will be left wondering why the latest flick they're raving about is bombing at the box office.

This is pretty much exactly the reaction I'm hoping to have when I leave the theater tomorrow.

Though, if the breaking point wasn't reached by F4, I don't know what it would take!

[luburch]

I was able to catch a showing yesterday evening and I personally enjoyed it as much as I enjoyed Civil War.