SUMMARY
This is AI generated summarization, which may have errors. For context, always refer to the full article.
MANILA, Philippines – The previous two X-Men movies, First Class and Days of Future Past, have done well with the critics, so the expectations for X-Men: Apocalypse might be astronomical. But the prospects aren’t totally dim with director Bryan Singer returning to helm the latest film.
As the sequel to Days of Future Past, which was set in a politically tumultuous era (with some time travel thrown in), Apocalypse is bound to up the ante with the titular dangerous villain (Oscar Isaac), who sums up his sinister plan (as heard in the trailer): “Everything they’ve built will fall. And from the ashes of their world, we’ll build a better one!”
A new generation of mutant joins the original crew consisting of Magneto (Michael Fassbender), Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence), Beast (Nicholas Hoult), and Quicksilver (Evan Peters). There are exciting newcomers: Cyclops (Tye Sheridan), Jean Grey (Sophie Turner), Psylocke (Olivia Munn), Nightcrawler (Kodi Smit-McPhee), and Storm (Alexandra Shipp).
As the crew grows larger, how does the film fare? Does Bryan Singer deliver again? The first reviews are in, and it seems that the critics have a consensus on several matters. Read on:
Indiewire’s David Ehrlich brands Apocalypse an “audacious” superhero movie. “For a very cartoonish movie full of latex outfits and boasting a set piece soundtracked by Eurythmics, Apocalypse doesn’t hesitate to grapple with some very delicate subjects. The harmony that Singer strikes between the silly and the sacred has been crucial to the success of his previous X-Men installments, and it’s this one’s greatest strength.”
“Apocalypse, for all its faults, has the audacity to make the [Marvel Cinematic Universe] look small, and the conviction to make the [DC Comics movies] – if there even is such a thing – look foolish for confusing self-seriousness with gravity,” he argues. “If only these characters were allowed to be as complex as the ideas they fight for, Apocalypse could have represented a new beginning for superhero cinema.”
Chris Nashawaty, Entertainment Weekly
Meanwhile, for Entertainment Weekly critic Chris Nashawaty, the new film falls short of expectations. He says, “After the rejuvenated one-two punch of 2011’s First Class and 2014’s Days of Future Past, there was reason to expect better. A lot better.”
“Apocalypse feels like a confused, kitchen-sink mess with a half dozen too many characters, a villain who amounts to a big blue nothing, and a narrative that’s so choppy and poorly cut together that it feels like you’re watching a flipbook instead of a movie,” he continues, concluding: “It is a movie with way too much of everything except the things that should matter the most – novelty, creativity, and fun.”
Todd McCarthy, The Hollywood Reporter
Todd McCarthy of The Hollywood Reporter remarks that there are a lot of action set pieces, but also says that the movie suffers from the size of its ensemble. “The weight of so many characters defrays the impact and interest, just as it deprives key veterans of the franchise, most notably Jennifer Lawrence (more often seen as Raven than Mystique), of much chance to contribute,” he writes.
“X-Men: Apocalypse is decidedly a case of more is less, especially when compared with the surprising action and more interesting personal interactions (including the temporary subtraction of some characters) in other big Marvel franchises.”
The Guardian’s Peter Bradshaw says that the action “eclipses” what he calls the entire X-Men series’ “unique strangeness.” He writes, “The idea of an apocalypse means every dial has to be turned up to 11 and this film certainly provides bangs for your buck, although there is less space for the surreal strangeness of the X-Men to breathe, less dialogue interest, and they do not have the looser, wittier joy of the Avengers.”
While Bradshaw takes notice of standout scenes involving Cyclops and Quicksilver, he also argues against the size of its cast, saying that “the future X-Men films have to mutate into something with fewer characters and more characterization.”
Geoff Berkshire of Variety compared the film with the past X-Men titles: “Director Bryan Singer pioneered the contemporary wave of superhero movies with 2000’s X-Men, and made a welcome return to the series just two years ago with the time-jumping Days of Future Past. Perhaps he should’ve quit while he was ahead. Even though Apocalypse hardly reps the franchise nadir […] this is easily the least compelling, surprising and satisfying of Singer’s entries.”
“While the best X-Men movies are defined by their keen intelligence, casual wit and deep reserves of emotion, Apocalypse serves those virtues up in minimal doses, settling for an extravagant display of visual effects that would have scarcely been possible 16 years ago,” he argues.
He adds that while the wide cast “isn’t short on talent or charisma,” he says that “Singer and scribe Simon Kinberg give the players precious little to sink their teeth into.”
Alonso Duralde also makes references to Singer’s past work in X-Men. “Singer’s take on the material has always put character and theme at the center, giving us interesting people grappling with issues that felt recognizable in the real world, and never at the expense of thrilling action or wildly imaginative set pieces,” he writes.
“With X-Men: Apocalypse, however, Singer seems to have acquired a new mutant power of his own: monotony,” Duralde argues, later illustrating: “Where Apocalypse falls apart is with its titular villain: He’s generically evil, setting out essentially to destroy everyone and everything on the planet, a plan that’s not only difficult to take seriously but also gives screenwriter Simon Kinberg (Fantastic Four) no metaphorical meat.”
“Previous X-Men installments used the mutants and their struggles to comment on everything from the civil rights movement to coming-out in the LGBT community, but all we can take from this film is standard-issue superhero battles.”
“Even with its two-and-half-hour running time, the story focuses more on introducing characters than developing them,” Adam Rosenberg writes for Mashable, echoing other critics who mention the size of the cast as a disadvantage. “Why, in this age of long-form storytelling at the movies, didn’t Fox didn’t deliver its new X-Men as a two-parter?” he asks.
However, he spares the filmmakers and looks instead at the entire series as a whole, “This is really more of a franchise problem. Either the movies leading up to Apocalypse didn’t create strong enough connections, or they’re simply old enough that said connections resonate poorly.”
Rosenberg nonetheless assures: “This really is a fun movie.” He points out that the film “doubles down on fan service,” albeit mostly on the visual front “with big action moments.”
X-Men: Apocalypse starts its theatrical run on May 18. Will you be seeing it? Let us know in the comments. – Rappler.com
Add a comment
How does this make you feel?
There are no comments yet. Add your comment to start the conversation.