X-Men Apocalypse

CdeC · 25-05-2016 11:44am

Ok,
So I think these super hero movies have run their course. This without doubt should have been the strongest instalment and was easily the worst of the last 3 Xmen movies.

So here are my main gripes.

1. Dialogue was terrible
2. Costumes were ridiculous
3. Not nearly enough fight scenes and the one at the end was not that exciting.
4. Psylocke was terrible and the actress was clearly uncomfortable in that outfit.
5. Apocolypse was reduced to a cartoon character with none of the menacing presence everyone was expecting.
6. 4 horsemen were just lounging around a lot of the time looking like bored hipsters.
7. Script was shocking

The movie has so much potential. If they had kept it simple. For example

The start was very good and built up the character well. His awakening was equally good and his reducing of people to dust was quite gross but had impact.
The four horsemen were good but not utilised.
If they had apocalypse going about his plan, trying to destroy the world as he views all the other life forms as insects.
He doesn’t do that much until the very end just building his presence and meance but anytime the Xmen try and get even near him the 4 horsemen are there to take them out. This should be most of the movie. Then a massive battle scene at the end when apocalypse has to get involved etc.
I like Jean grey character but

the “let yourself go” **** at the end. Come on.

The final episodes of the Xmen cartoon : X men evolution was much better than this movie. Much more exciting.

Oh and finally, every movie ends

with Magneto and Prof X ribbing eachother “maybe one day you’ll join my school old chum”

“prob not old pal”

Script writer should be shot or at least told off.

oxygen · 25-05-2016 2:25pm

I haven't seen this yet, going tonight, but I think they should have stuck to the 60's a la first class. Continuity is an absolute shambles now...

FunLover18 · 25-05-2016 2:54pm

oxygen_temp wrote:

I haven't seen this yet, going tonight, but I think they should have stuck to the 60's a la first class. Continuity is an absolute shambles now...

I honestly can't get my head around why they decided to skip ten years for each film. They actually references Magneto's WW2 origins here and it's just weird watching a 39 yo Magneto get upset about something that happened 40 years ago, he should be in his 50s.

McLoughlin · 25-05-2016 3:43pm

FunLover18 wrote: »

I honestly can't get my head around why they decided to skip ten years for each film. They actually references Magneto's WW2 origins here and it's just weird watching a 39 yo Magneto get upset about something that happened 40 years ago, he should be in his 50s.

A trilogy in each decade with a different cast would have been a better option I think First Class didn't do well on some level and a decision was made to bring back the old cast in a team up movie.

Fox need to wipe the slate clean and start fresh and really rest some characters

A clip removed from the film can be seen in this tv spot

BMMachine · 25-05-2016 4:05pm

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

You can't accept that some people would disagree with that and just enjoyed the film for what it is?

I absolutely can. I enjoy wrestling for what it is. I know its crap, but I enjoy it. I am able to distinguish between my own enjoyment of a piece of entertainment and looking at it objectively. Its not that good a film, it has a lot of hype behind it and a lot of hype for the character, but its riddled with problems.
Its the same with this film. I enjoyed some of the fight scenes and stuff, but it doesn't stop it being riddled with problems. Thats why its scored so averagely with the critics and has been poorly received. There was a lot of potential here and I think it was squandered by lazy writing, lazy execution and board-roomed to all hell.

The "taste is subjective" argument is as weak as they come when it comes to analysis as it essentially means nothing

DanielDI · 25-05-2016 4:12pm

I did find some minor flaws with the film though, particularly with the visual appearance of some of the characters and how their ages don't compute when the first X-men film of 2000 is taken into account. However, asides from that I thoroughly enjoyed X-Men Apocalypse and thought it was a solid & worthy addition to the other X-Men films. The films had spectacle, action, laughs and carried on with the journeys of the characters we have got to know and love over the past sixteen years.

Nervous Wreck · 25-05-2016 5:28pm

BMMachine wrote: »

I absolutely can. I enjoy wrestling for what it is. I know its crap, but I enjoy it. I am able to distinguish between my own enjoyment of a piece of entertainment and looking at it objectively. Its not that good a film, it has a lot of hype behind it and a lot of hype for the character, but its riddled with problems.
Its the same with this film. I enjoyed some of the fight scenes and stuff, but it doesn't stop it being riddled with problems. Thats why its scored so averagely with the critics and has been poorly received. There was a lot of potential here and I think it was squandered by lazy writing, lazy execution and board-roomed to all hell.

The "taste is subjective" argument is as weak as they come when it comes to analysis as it essentially means nothing

This is what I'm talking about. You say you can accept that people have different tastes but immediately attribute the success of the film to "hype", as though anyone who enjoyed it is a brainwashed pleb. Yes, the movie has its flaws. Literally every movie is flawed (except The Princess Bride, which is fcuking flawless), but that doesn't mean it's automatically bad; getting weirdly judgemental doesnt make your point any stronger; it just makes people more likely to ignore your points completely.

constitutionus · 25-05-2016 5:30pm

went to see it again yesterday and enjoyed it alot more the second time around.

dont know why but just did, same thing happened with the first captain america film. maybe my expectations were just lower.

its an alright film for what it is. i just cant imagine what comic book fan would ever come up with this line up for the team, or rather whom the focus is on. ya have the "heavy hitters " right there and its all about raven.

that never bothered me before in the other films but considering this was meant to be a reboot straight from DOFP im just not happy with her essentially forming/leading the xmen.

i mean christ does ANYONE besides brian singer actually want that ?

say what ya want about the avengers films the focus is always on the big three that most concede are the core of that team. with these films its continually like all the characters im interested in are just wandering in and out of it without ever becoming the TEAM i want to see.

its bloody frustrating at this stage.

Nervous Wreck · 25-05-2016 6:07pm

constitutionus wrote: »

went to see it again yesterday and enjoyed it alot more the second time around.

dont know why but just did, same thing happened with the first captain america film. maybe my expectations were just lower.

its an alright film for what it is. i just cant imagine what comic book fan would ever come up with this line up for the team, or rather whom the focus is on. ya have the "heavy hitters " right there and its all about raven.

that never bothered me before in the other films but considering this was meant to be a reboot straight from DOFP im just not happy with her essentially forming/leading the xmen.

i mean christ does ANYONE besides brian singer actually want that ?

say what ya want about the avengers films the focus is always on the big three that most concede are the core of that team. with these films its continually like all the characters im interested in are just wandering in and out of it without ever becoming the TEAM i want to see.

its bloody frustrating at this stage.

I reckon that's Sony insisting on her being front and centre cos JLaw is, for some reason, a box office draw. She's a crap actor and Mystique has no business being anything but a side-villain but they cast her before her fame exploded so they're making use of her contract. What's weird is she wants out, yet they still have her as the focus right at the end... You'd think they'd have killed her or had her move on...

BMMachine · 25-05-2016 6:29pm

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

This is what I'm talking about. You say you can accept that people have different tastes but immediately attribute the success of the film to "hype", as though anyone who enjoyed it is a brainwashed pleb. Yes, the movie has its flaws. Literally every movie is flawed (except The Princess Bride, which is fcuking flawless), but that doesn't mean it's automatically bad; getting weirdly judgemental doesnt make your point any stronger; it just makes people more likely to ignore your points completely.

no, im not. Im saying that people enjoyed it because they enjoyed it because people are different. You know what I like? Alien 3. Yeah, its crap, but I enjoyed it. There was no brain washing about it or anything.
And Im not saying it was successful because of hype (though it always helps), it was successful because people enjoyed it. Learn the difference between quality and enjoyment and be comfortable with that and you wont get so humpty when someone calls something you like bad.
And yeah, I can imagine people ignoring points in order to protect themselves and their own tastes, standards and opinions - its actually one of the core reasons why we get washed over with so many crap films that do well. Think adam sandler is a success by accident? You think the people that watch his films care about standards and quality? They do - their own. Deadpool was above average at best. Thats a harsh reality for some people because they are so invested in the character and film and they can't take it if something they think is 'glorious' is actually just mediocre

Nervous Wreck · 25-05-2016 7:25pm

BMMachine wrote: »

no, im not. Im saying that people enjoyed it because they enjoyed it because people are different. You know what I like? Alien 3. Yeah, its crap, but I enjoyed it. There was no brain washing about it or anything.
And Im not saying it was successful because of hype (though it always helps), it was successful because people enjoyed it. Learn the difference between quality and enjoyment and be comfortable with that and you wont get so humpty when someone calls something you like bad.
And yeah, I can imagine people ignoring points in order to protect themselves and their own tastes, standards and opinions - its actually one of the core reasons why we get washed over with so many crap films that do well. Think adam sandler is a success by accident? You think the people that watch his films care about standards and quality? They do - their own. Deadpool was above average at best. Thats a harsh reality for some people because they are so invested in the character and film and they can't take it if something they think is 'glorious' is actually just mediocre

So, yeah, just gonna refer you to this:

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

getting weirdly judgemental doesnt make your point any stronger; it just makes people more likely to ignore your points completely.

I'm out of this one.

BMMachine · 25-05-2016 7:30pm

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

So, yeah, just gonna refer you to this:

I'm out of this one.

as I said, protecting yourself. Still doesn't stop reality

Sad Professor · 25-05-2016 8:03pm

BMMachine, in this forum a film's quality is a matter of personal perspective. So sorry, but you don't get to arbitrate on whether a film is good or bad and tell other users they are wrong. Read the charter please, specifically the bit about making generalised judgments on users for having a different opinion to you.

This is the second in-thread warning, so lets drop this please and get back to discussing the film. If anyone has any questions or problems with what I just posted, PM please, thanks.

Ben Gadot · 25-05-2016 8:29pm

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

I reckon that's Sony insisting on her being front and centre cos JLaw is, for some reason, a box office draw. She's a crap actor and Mystique has no business being anything but a side-villain but they cast her before her fame exploded so they're making use of her contract. What's weird is she wants out, yet they still have her as the focus right at the end... You'd think they'd have killed her or had her move on...

Lawrence being a "crap actress" is not the problem. The studio had a choice to make: placate her or drop her. Unfortunately they made the wrong decision.

Lawrence was a strong part of the previous two films, so for me she's fine in the role (never mind the accolades she's accumulated over the years to demonstrate her ability as an actress), she was just put in an utterly ridiculous position in this film.

And if that was a position she demanded then it was up to Singer and Fox to tell her to sling her hook.

brianregan09 · 25-05-2016 9:59pm

For me the problem with Mystique leading the X-Men is simple in the comics she's rarely if ever on the good side , She's a cold blooded manipulative assassin which is how she was portrayed in the 1st set of X Movies and nothing more than that, even in the Brother Hood Magneto has no respect for her at all

Now bear with me for a second but lets say....a lackey from one of the Avengers Movies leads the avenger ...someone like say Crossbones (the guy who was in the start of civil war with the riot gear ) This would be **** on from a height by the fans no matter who the **** the actor is this is the problem with people who didn't make the source materiel making the films about them , and yeah sure you have to change certain things because what works on paper might not work on screen , But what Fox do is pick and choose between characters they have available to them and throw them here there and everywhere with little respect to the alliances and enemies built up in the books ...that's just my take on it

25-05-2016 11:41pm

How many deaths was Magneto directly responsible for?

oxygen · 26-05-2016 12:16am

McLoughlin wrote: »

A trilogy in each decade with a different cast would have been a better option I think First Class didn't do well on some level and a decision was made to bring back the old cast in a team up movie.

Fox need to wipe the slate clean and start fresh and really rest some characters

A clip removed from the film can be seen in this tv spot

Absolutely this would have made easy more sense. I liked DoFP and thought mixing the two cast was very clever. A 70 yea old magneto in X1(00s) makers chronological sense, but a 40 year old magneto in XAoA(80s) does not. Even when quicksilver was saying he saw magneto on tv 10 years ago... they both look exactly the same

even prof X references it in the movie "Moire hasn't aged a day" all the rebooted cast movies should have stuck to the 60s, clothes looked cooler then anyway

Goldstein · 26-05-2016 1:17am

Not sure this was the best movie to be inserting a gag about how crap The Last Stand was. Glasshouses and all that...

God it's been a while since a bad guy, let alone an iconic one, was represented so terribly and dully with such a nothing story. Afterwards I was just thinking: That was it? THAT was Apocalypse? They were given the greatest bad guy in the franchise and THAT'S the best they came up with?

That, bar another very enjoyable Quicksilver scene, was shît.

26-05-2016 8:08am

Yes. They get an actor with as much range as Oscar Isaacs and they put him in makeup. And that's the problem: with Mystique and Nightcrawler you can at least imagine that they're the creatures, but with Isaacs all you could see was the makeup. Then they have the 4 horsemen, which, apart from Magneto, was given absolutely nothing to do. What else did Olivia Munn do apart from frown or look good in a swimsuit? She barely had any dialogue! In a series that is known for having rich and complex female characters it felt like a misstep! And I'm almost certain that Apocalypse was wearing platform shoes.

And the new versions.. the only one they got right was Nightcrawler. The younger incarnations of Cyclops, Storm, and Jean Grey are awful.

The worst crime ?

The f*cking branding on f*cking Cyclops' f*cking glasses, so that wherever it showed them, which it did, a lot, that's all I could see, like an air siren screaming, "Product Placement. Product Placement".

pixelburp · 26-05-2016 9:32am

Well it was a bit of a lumpen mess in the end really; not a total disaster by any stretch, but it was so scattershot and lacking that bit of polish or thought in the writing department that the whole thing felt very underwhelming rather than ostensibly terrible; not half as good as this could have been & there was an intelligent, tightly-focused film buried somewhere within all the clutter. Ultimately, the film's chief crime was simply to be boring, if I'm honest: pacing that was stop-start throughout and could never truly get itself going. And after the thrill of Civil War's narrow finale within the confines of a single building, it was quite the comedown that Apocalypse reverted the genre back to current fashion, with a fairly laughable level of CGI destruction by way of a finale. I wonder if after the success of Days of Future Past's epic scope and juggling of a huge cast of characters, the studio felt they could repeat the trick; it certainly smelt of enlarging the scope just for the sake of bigger spectacle.

The studio's 'name' driven script also further undermined the whole enterprise, shoving Mystique to the front of the films focus, purely due to the fluke that they hired what turned out to be the biggest actress in Hollywood. It was almost as obnoxious as the studio-mandated

Wolverine cameo

, a token nod to continuity in a film drowning in goofs that even the most casual of X-Men fans would have been scratching their heads over.

26-05-2016 9:38am

You know what I find odd? Magneto is responsible for the deaths of possible millions of people, given the destruction was worldwide and given that we saw multiple buildings collapse in New York. Sure, he was all about the death of people, if previous movies are anything to go by, but even then the character is shown to have a moral compass and a conscience, especially in the Fassbender portrayal and which leaks through in the McKellen one, all of which was completely lacking in the end. And it wasn't anything to do with mindcontrol, because Apocalypse just didn't.

What are they going to do in future movies? Will they do a Iron Man-esque moral shift (which, to be fair, Marvel have handled extremely well between Iron Man and Civil War) or will they just continue with Fassbender more or less ignoring his essential genocide against the world?

Brief_Lives · 26-05-2016 10:46am

Sure, they're only Homo Sapiens.....

constitutionus · 26-05-2016 3:56pm

brianregan09 wrote: »

For me the problem with Mystique leading the X-Men is simple in the comics she's rarely if ever on the good side , She's a cold blooded manipulative assassin which is how she was portrayed in the 1st set of X Movies and nothing more than that, even in the Brother Hood Magneto has no respect for her at all

Now bear with me for a second but lets say....a lackey from one of the Avengers Movies leads the avenger ...someone like say Crossbones (the guy who was in the start of civil war with the riot gear ) This would be **** on from a height by the fans no matter who the **** the actor is this is the problem with people who didn't make the source materiel making the films about them , and yeah sure you have to change certain things because what works on paper might not work on screen , But what Fox do is pick and choose between characters they have available to them and throw them here there and everywhere with little respect to the alliances and enemies built up in the books ...that's just my take on it

exactly.

look at angel becoming archangel. in the comics it mattered because warren was a founding member of the team whom scott jean bobby and hank loved. when his wings got mutilated and he lost them the lad tried to commit suicide before ending up with apocalypse and getting turned into his "death" horseman.

theres fuking NONE of that pathos in this, and thanks to the way the characters have been handled over 6 films now no bloody chance of it happening for any of the existing cast. so what we get is one of the coolest reinterpretations of a character to come along in years in the x universe essentially be reduced to a drunken cage fighter with a grudge cause he's no film universe history with ANY of what the fans know is his team mates.

When you contrast that with the MCU where the characters relationships are respected you see just how shambolic the handling of the x franchise at fox has been.

theres simply little to no respect for the characters in these films outside xavier and magneto. its not as bad as the casual contempt micheal bay has for the transformers characters, but its getting too bloody close to that now for comfort.

i think the franchise needs to be take away from singer and given to vaughn. the more i look at it the more "first class" seem to be the only real complete X film theyve managed

EDIT.

outside deadpool of course , but as was mentioned by others fox didn't give fuk one about that and are probably STILL in shock its done so well.

26-05-2016 4:02pm

How does Quicksilver find out about Magneto being his father? I can't remember it being mentioned in DoFP.

constitutionus · 26-05-2016 4:05pm

oh it was mentioned in DOFP, but only in passing by quicksliver himself with his "my mom knew a guy that could move metal" line.

26-05-2016 4:09pm

No wonder I had forgotten about it.

TBH this movie could have been much better. What they should have done is gone the Star Wars route and had a different voice for the character. Imagine the Mountain being the body and someone like Laurence Fishbourne being the voice. Or at least someone else with a suitably booming voice as Apocalypse.

Foxtrol · 26-05-2016 9:25pm

constitutionus wrote: »

exactly.

look at angel becoming archangel. in the comics it mattered because warren was a founding member of the team whom scott jean bobby and hank loved. when his wings got mutilated and he lost them the lad tried to commit suicide before ending up with apocalypse and getting turned into his "death" horseman.

theres fuking NONE of that pathos in this, and thanks to the way the characters have been handled over 6 films now no bloody chance of it happening for any of the existing cast. so what we get is one of the coolest reinterpretations of a character to come along in years in the x universe essentially be reduced to a drunken cage fighter with a grudge cause he's no film universe history with ANY of what the fans know is his team mates.

When you contrast that with the MCU where the characters relationships are respected you see just how shambolic the handling of the x franchise at fox has been.

theres simply little to no respect for the characters in these films outside xavier and magneto. its not as bad as the casual contempt micheal bay has for the transformers characters, but its getting too bloody close to that now for comfort.

i think the franchise needs to be take away from singer and given to vaughn. the more i look at it the more "first class" seem to be the only real complete X film theyve managed

EDIT.

outside deadpool of course , but as was mentioned by others fox didn't give fuk one about that and are probably STILL in shock its done so well.

They could have so easily done something similar with Angel if they'd bothered to do any planning for the trilogy. They even state how only

2

of the original team are left,

with the only death of that group that had any sort of meaning being Havoc, with the deaths banshee and female angel not even happening on screen

.

All they needed to do was sub him in for Banshee's role in First Class (learning to fly and aerial support), see him get hurt on the beach, name drop him disappearing because he couldn't fly during DOFP, and then come back to him in this movie in a scene when he was at his lowest point and Apocalypse appears.

It takes no extra time and knowing him from before would add to both

Havoc's death, the shock/panic outside the mansion after that Angel was with the bad guys, and his own (presumed) death at the hands of the new crop of x-men in the final battle.

There's so many examples of how it appears they just start from scratch after each movie. If there wasn't a teaser for Apocalypse after DOFP there's no sign that there was one thing planned.

BMMachine · 26-05-2016 11:39pm

there was a lot they could have done with this film which they didnt do and a lot they did which they didn't need, hence its a mess. Its the 3rd of the new trilogy too and absolutely nothing happens

Hercule Poirot · 27-05-2016 7:20am

Apocalypse does absolutely nothing apart from stomp around giving speeches and demanding the world - even in the final "showdown" (and I use the term very loosely) he doesn't actually do anything apart from the Harry Potter rip-off CGI.

The only x-man to die (Havok) does so through his own stupidity - "Hmmm, the Professor is being carried away from us, how do we get him back? Let's unleash an explosion in that general direction". But of course this had to happen because only then could Jean see that Scott had actual feelings and was not a complete Ferris Bueller rip-off. And there's nothing like tears to make a woman decide how much she would like to bone a man

The more I think about it the more pathetic the film becomes.

FunLover18 · 27-05-2016 12:14pm

More of a general question; can Mystique replicate other mutants powers as well?

I rewatched the first X-Men and she when she becomes Wolverine she has his claws? Is it just physical attributes she can replicate?

27-05-2016 12:23pm

AFAIR Mystique can only replicate what they look like. So maybe this also means all of their physical qualities, but not their mutant powers. Wolverine has the bone claws as well, so she'd have that, but not his invulnerability?

Mickeroo · 27-05-2016 2:51pm

She'd be able to replicate claws visually but not adamantium, they wouldn't be useful in a fight I would think.

FunLover18 · 27-05-2016 3:42pm

Mickeroo wrote:

She'd be able to replicate claws visually but not adamantium, they wouldn't be useful in a fight I would think.

That makes sense, Wolverine hacked them off fairly handy

Hellrun · 27-05-2016 3:57pm

Watching this was a long and painful experience, my missus loved it though. Each to their own.

Ben Gadot · 27-05-2016 6:38pm

Was just thinking that Id watch a film based on Apocalypse, his original horsemen and the revolt against him. That opening scene was probably one of the best of the film with horsemen that were actually intriguing.

Sure they can pull some time travel sh1t to add some popular X-Men to sweeten the deal. :pac:

jcsoulinger · 27-05-2016 10:28pm

Seen this last night, Im not a comic book fan so how it relates doesn't interest me. My first reaction was that it was really good but thinking about it a bit more there were times when it was a bit too cheesey, it also has some continuity issues like when a group of them are captured and put in a cell that prevents them from using their powers, why isn't Mystique blue?.

Still much better than Age of Ultron or Bat v Super imo, 7/10

Kirby · 27-05-2016 10:37pm

As somebody who enjoyed x1,2,3, First class and Days of future past......I found this really quite poor and is easily the weakest of the six movies. X3 did a lot wrong but it has some redeeming qualities that I just struggled to find in this one.

It was a mess. The plot barely made sense, most of the cast were wasted and it was difficult to understand the motivation of many of the characters. DoFP is a much, much, much better movie.

And as for Jlaw throwing a strop, I'm sorry sweetheart but this is what you signed up for. Sitting in the make up chair for half the day must be awful but you are being paid millions to do it and far loftier actors than you have done it for a lot less money. Tbh I echo the sentiments that a few have said in here. The studio should have put their foot down.

oxygen · 28-05-2016 4:15pm

FunLover18 wrote: »

That makes sense, Wolverine hacked them off fairly handy

I remember winching watching that scene in X1, thinking didn't he just cut off her biological appendages, similar to fingers

oxygen · 28-05-2016 4:33pm

I would just about trust Singer to take the helms of the next movie. X1, X2 and DoFP were great (albeit DoFP had the great gimmick of two fully established movie cast) but man, AoA was such a let down.

I think the next one should go full 90s, use the story "X-cutioner's Song" basically the release of a mutant killing virus by a maniac who turns out to be Cables clone. Humans should be suitably racist by now, after the destruction caused by Magneto.

things I'd like to see

-Cable (after being established in the next Deadpool movie)
- Bishop and blink from DoFP,
- Strife and Sinister(he will be established in the next wolverine movie, and AoA post credit scene)
- Xavier and Taggart aged 20 years
- Storm
- A Cyclops and Gene romance
- A Gambit and Rogue romance
- Rogue with full flight and strength powers
- No Magneto
- No Mystique

Riddle101 · 28-05-2016 6:43pm

Saw it today and honestly I enjoyed it. I actually went into that movie with lower expectations due to the reviews on this thread, but I left feeling a lot happier with it.

Somethings about the movies i'd like to address
People say that Jennifer Lawrence was kind've showcased all over the movie, and that it was more Jennifer Lawrence and the X-Men but in my opinion I think her role in the movie was ok. Everyone in that movie had their moments and scenes, and her level of exposure in the movie wasn't too bad.

I feel that William Striker is underused in the X-Men prequels. For someone who is supposed to be one of the X-Men's biggest antagonists, his role in these movies seems kind've mundane. I feel like they're just adding him in for the sake of making a connection between the sequels and the originals, and also because they wanted the Hugh Jackman cameo.

Potential-Monke · 09-06-2016 11:57pm

Just back from it, and having not read anything in this thread, and having heard bad reviews from critics but some friends loving it, I went in expecting a good film. But, I thought it was more than good. Not excellent, but still quite good.

I'm probably not going to say anything others on here have not already said, but even though Apocalypse didn't come across as as big of a threat as he should have been, he was menacing enough. Don't know why though, with all that power, he didn't just start tearing the world apart, seeing as you see him do it quite often. I know the story said he needed this and that, but he could have got all that without recruiting 4 buddies. And yes, he needed Magneto to

get his pyramid back out of the ground, even though he could probably have done that himself

, but other than that, his motives seemed pointless in recruiting.

But, I still enjoyed it. I knew what to expect, over the top action, skimpy costumes for the sexiest of the crew, plot holes and unexplained parts, humour, attempts at feelings, and a now necessary decision to leave the brain at the door. That's the problem with X-Men, it just can't be given the 90's cartoon justice it deserves in film. I heard there's going to be an X-Men tv series, and that will suit this better. I know it probably won't have the main X-Cast, but it will work better on the smaller screen.

I'd love if the Marvel Cinematic Universe crew were given the X-Men to build into their universe, as I just know they'd do a better job, having them stand alone doesn't seem to be working as great as they'd hope. I loved the reboot, they done a fantastic job with it, but I still think it would work better in the MCU.

Finally, Quicksilver. Some people on here saying his scenes weren't as good as DoFP, but that's because it came out of nowhere in that. We knew there was going to be another slow mo scene, and we all wondered how it would top the prison break. But I think they did it better in this. In both of his scenes. I was beaming from ear to ear during the

house explosion

, and similarly during the

Apocalypse fight, however short it was

, but they have nailed how Quicksilver moves in his own pace. Just the right amount of "AWESOME!!!" and funny. I'd love to see a stand alone film about him, but I don't think he could carry it for 90 minutes. Feck it, I just want to see Quicksilver shorts all in this exact slow mo style!

SpaceCowb0y · 10-06-2016 9:55am

I never make judgements on a movie based on anyone else's thoughts. I watched this two nights ago and sat down to it with an open mind and zero expectations neither good or bad.

It is what it is, a superhero move. Explosions, good guys, bad guys, lots of CGI and something I can switch my brain off to for a couple of hours. I liked it. It wasn't on the level of Civil War, but it was an enjoyable movie all the same.

I think McAvoy really looked the part of Dr X from the comics once he went bald, even more so than Stewart. I also really liked Quicksilver's scenes. I found him irritating in DoFP but thought they really made good use of the character and developed his personality this time around.

Fassbaneder can do no wrong in my eyes, that guy is just a brilliant actor! that scene

in the woods

it's rare to see that level of emotion in a superhero movie. Olivia Munn as Psylocke :eek: I dont care how little she had to say or even if she isn't a great actress, she looked EXACTLY like the comic book character and that was enough for me ha.

Also looking forward to seeing them develop the Storm character, this was the look i remember from the comics albeit she was an older stronger woman in the comics so will be cool to see the girl who played the part grow in to the role over time.

Things i didn't quite like:
Tye Sheridan as Cyclops. Don't know exactly why i didn't like it as i'm a fan of his in general, the kid is a good actor but just wasn't feeling it. I preferred his brother Havok

shame they killed him off, would have been a good character to have in future movies. Wasn't he a younger brother in the comics though?

.

Sophie Turner, i know her character in GoT is finally taking a turn to a more stronger role and I know this movie is completely unrelated but i just can't stop myself from seeing her as a whiny, pathetic little girl.

Apocalypse. I don't think i need to point out the obvious flaws in this character so I wont, he didn't live up to the comic book version or even come close so i'll leave it at that.

10-06-2016 11:23am

Regardless of anything else, surely the one thing they needed to get right was Apocalypse. I mean, he's in the friggin' title. But they failed. Instead they gave us a limp cod in platform shoes.

Tefral · 10-06-2016 11:25am

Deleted User wrote: »

Regardless of anything else, surely the one thing they needed to get right was Apocalypse. I mean, he's in the friggin' title. But they failed. Instead they gave us a limp cod in platform shoes.

Fully agree.

And not to derail the thread but my fear is they will do the same to Thanos.

They just cant get the villains right.

Ben Gadot · 10-06-2016 11:41am

cronin_j wrote: »

Fully agree.

And not to derail the thread but my fear is they will do the same to Thanos.

They just cant get the villains right.

Thanos, at the very least, looks like he's going to be a physically imposing specimen. He's going to tower over the avengers.

10-06-2016 12:03pm

Ben Gadot wrote: »

Thanos, at the very least, looks like he's going to be a physically imposing specimen. He's going to tower over the avengers.

Apocalypse should have.

pixelburp · 10-06-2016 12:13pm

An all-powerful anybody is next to impossible to portray properly in a commercial-driven franchise; they can't put the heroes in any real peril thanks to the power and pull of the lead actors, so all those superpowered beings can do is stomp around and make grandiose threats. Thanos might look more imposing sure, but unless Marvel breaks the habit of Phases 1 & 2, I don't expect things to be any different in the MCU.

SpaceCowb0y · 10-06-2016 12:15pm

cronin_j wrote: »

Fully agree.

And not to derail the thread but my fear is they will do the same to Thanos.

They just cant get the villains right.

I wouldn't worry about that at all, X-Men are owned and produced by Fox the rest of the MCU is looked after by Disney and so far they have done great things IMO.

Hercule Poirot · 10-06-2016 12:30pm

This is a problem with superhero franchises in general, in order to make the villain villainous they bring in a minor character just for that film, have them killed off by the villain but the main cast remains untouched - like, Hawkeye left to be with his family, they could have killed him off so that Ultron would have had a lasting effect but no, the city comes down from the sky and the only hero to die is someone who we only met at the beginning of the film

And yes

they killed off Havok in Apocalypse but it wasn't through any great act of villainy

- this idea of villains making great speeches and doing little else is starting to get dull. We need to see a villain that actually kills multiple heroes for them to have any impact.

SpaceCowb0y · 10-06-2016 1:24pm

Hercule Poirot wrote: »

This is a problem with superhero franchises in general, in order to make the villain villainous they bring in a minor character just for that film, have them killed off by the villain but the main cast remains untouched - like, Hawkeye left to be with his family, they could have killed him off so that Ultron would have had a lasting effect but no, the city comes down from the sky and the only hero to die is someone who we only met at the beginning of the film

And yes
they killed off Havok in Apocalypse but it wasn't through any great act of villainy
- this idea of villains making great speeches and doing little else is starting to get dull. We need to see a villain that actually kills multiple heroes for them to have any impact.

Agreed.. it would be nice to see some sort of continuity with the villains, at least Thanos is as sort of super villain that has brief appearances scattered throughout the Marvel movies making his presence knows to the audience and his impending arrival rather than a single appearance and killed off straight away.

I'd like to think there could be multiple villains in all of the extended universes that could feature numerous times so it was more like they were defeated and ran away to fight again another day then the good guys get the job done again "Go team" crap we get at the end of most.

X-Men Apocalypse

Comments