Undeadcow

Overall I've enjoyed the X-men movies more than the MCU ones, the MCU tentpole Avenger films have seemed 'meh' but there are some epic installments like the later Captain America solo ones. I think the X-men movies have done a good job of world building and overall I enjoyed Apocalypse even if it is such a flawed movie.

Mild spoilers...

If they had better developed Apocalypse as a more sinister shadowy figure then that might have been an improvement. In the movie he just seems to pop up snap his fingers and the world turns upside down; there's no developing machinations and any apparent design is really over simplified. In the comics he's an epic villain capable of magnifying some of the interesting themes in the X-men (gradients of genetic superiority, an extreme to the extreme, testing fitness) but the movie glosses over this to a fault. I was excited to see the post-credit hint at Mr Sinister because that character could bring some needed stealth and scifi oddness to the franchise.

The cinematic horsemen are not menacing, they just sort of action stance around for a little bit. Olivia Munn is totally under utilized as Psylocke (I still can't believe they pulled off Psylocke so well) and even the movie design for Archangel of metal wings with a tattoo seems mild compared to how deranged he seemed in the comic introduction. Magneto is given a token daughter to explain away his role; but his involvement and ultimately just deciding otherwise doesn't seem convincing to me. Nevermind the forgettable involvement of Storm.

The Wolverine cameo was epic and a really smart explanation of his escape from Weapon X, recovery from the procedures, and connection to Jean Grey.

Boo for overlooking a perfect Cable introduction.

The re-appearance of Quicksilver was fun but also too familiar from his Days of Future Past role.

Giantrobo

BTW, is anyone complaining about all the DEATH AND DESTRUCTION PORN in this film? Or does that only apply to DC films? No way Magneto and Apocalypse didn't kill MILLIONS with their wacky antics. I don't feel like reading this whole thread to find out.

Why So Blu?

Nope, no complaints whatsoever.

Giantrobo

Yeah, thought so. Thanks

Solid Snake

Aside from just being pointless as fuck CGI mess of destruction w/ no impact of depth... no. It was so goddamn mediocre that nobody gave a fuck about it.

Michael Corvin

I think that was his point. Double standard when it comes to DC. Everyone ripped Man of Steel for the destruction porn and most consider it quite mediocre as well.

Thrush

Well to be fair the destruction was mostly in the Middle east. It only counts when the destruction is in America.

Cities get destroyed in movies all the time and no one bats an eye. I think people had a problem with MOS mainly because Superman (the hero) had an equal hand (if not more so) in the destruction. And was seemingly oblivious to the damage and loss of life he was causing.

Troy Stiffler

And they spent nearly an ENTIRE MOVIE addressing it.

Solid Snake

A mediocre movie unfortunately. Some really good spots here and there but a waste of money and time for the amount of quality of output from it to where it had to carry the next step of the property.

Troy Stiffler

Batman VS Superman did it. Captain America: Civil War spent a whole movie addressing the fallout from superhero carnage. The Dark Knight and Rises both focus a lot on the escalation of events caused by Bruce. And, for all we know, it'll be made a part of Logan (though I'm not clear if it's the same timeline, or what's going on there ... I didn't watch the first two yet).

Point is - all the superhero movies are doing it. It has become as common as the "save this city" theme.

fumanstan

It's not really as simple as just "destruction porn" and some sort of Marvel bias or double standard, it's the way the scenarios were portrayed in each franchise. While I didn't have a major issue myself, another common complaint I recall about Man of Steel is that end sequence also felt much longer then what we saw in the other movies referenced which seemed to wear on people. The way the action is framed makes a difference.

Michael Corvin

The final battle in Avengers seemed just as long as Man of Steel.
because of Man of Steel. Ever since everyone blew a gasket over it, every movie has to reference it now in some fashion.

fumanstan

I'm sure someone out there has timed it, but even if they end up a similar run time Avengers added in little bits of humor and character bits of our heroes saving people that broke up the constant action.

I know there's a few folks that will hang on forever to their Marvel bias hats, but in my opinion there's a lot of legit reasons why some movies seem to get a "pass" that are unrelated to the studio name.

Also, don't see how any movie is taking the city destruction stuff from Man of Steel. It's a pretty typical trope.

Thrush

Why are you forcing me to defend this position? I personally didnt have an issue with the destruction in MOS. I thought the movie was shit for a bunch of other reasons. I was just highlighting why some people took issue with it. And how it does differ to the destruction in most superhero movies.

Michael Corvin

Finally watched this one. Flawed but entertaining enough. Per the norm, McAvoy and Fassbender carry the film. They really should have gone through with a full on origin story for them instead of First Class. That being said, Magneto/Eric's constant flopping between good and evil is tiresome. Pick one and fucking run with it already.

On the positive side, Quicksilver brought the fun again. Eric's backstory was riviting. The action sequences were solid. Beast has really come into his own. Psylocke (Munn) looked fantastic, both hot and actually close to her comic design. The chemistry with the cast is solid.

I think the biggest issue holding the film back is the villains. Apocalypse never feels all that threatening and the Four Horsemen are never really developed. Bolivar Trask(Dinklage in DoFP) was a more threatening villain and had far more screen presence than Apocalypse, Psylocke and Angel combined.

On the X side of things you now have a full cast of characters weaker than their originals (Jean Gray, Cyclops, Nightcrawler & Mystique). They aren't bad, per se, just weaker. Speaking of, since the timeline was essentially reset, why do we need the same exact mutants, only younger? Seems like a wasted opportunity to bring in some new characters. Plot-wise, humans seem to have taken a backseat for an all mutant affair. There's Moira and random shots of a US military room. You can't have global stakes but only have a few actual human characters.

The Wolverine cameo was a waste of time. I guess it makes sense in the scope of things, but it wasn't necessary.

Overall, it's probably the weakest of the trilogy, but had real potential to at least be second to DoFP.

Oh, and Apocalypse's upper lip design made him look like the Cowardly Lion through the whole movie. Hardly scary.

Cusm

I wasn't a fan of the movie, but the problem I had with the destruction in MoS was the amount caused by Zod and Supes. We have seen a 747 blow through a building and not instantly bring it down, but two 200 pound flying guys punch each other through a building and it instantly comes crumbling down. To me it felt more like a Michael Bay destruction porn vs a "realistic" super hero movie.

TheMovieman

Laser beams will do that to steel and bring down a building. It wasn't just "punching". In addition, the terraforming machines and pulses that caused quite a bit of destruction to Metropolis as well.

Abob Teff

Magneto is excused because he helped rebuild the mansion. He's cool!

Enjoyable, but ...



Singer realizes this was the third one, right?

Why So Blu?

I know what you're saying but I think in context - this is technically the 6th X-Men film.

Giantrobo

How the hell wound you know what a building does when a 200 lbs Alien punches another 200 lbs alien into it?

And this

kefrank

The third one was X3: The Last Stand which everyone does agree is the worst.

Obi-Wanma

I'm guessing that yes, Singer thought that joke would work because everyone hates the last stand, but probably didn't consider that this is the third film in the "First Class" continuity and could also be interpreted to be talking about itself.

Hokeyboy

Saw this tonight. Really enjoyed it. 4 out of 5, and I thought it was better than DOFP (but not quite as good as FC). My 3rd favorite of the franchise after X2 and FC.

Josh-da-man

Or the ninth...

Abob Teff

Ninth by my count too ... Third in the second trilogy -- which would technically be episodes 1, 2, and 3 by a human calendar.