Reviews

Why I Walked Out of ‘The Legend of Tarzan’

the legend of tarzan

Not long after the halfway mark of The Legend of Tarzan, I did something I almost never do. Something I haven’t done in several years.

I walked out.

The strange thing is that I’ve sat through worse films. Last year’s Pan, for example, was a movie I opted to sit through until the bitter end, and this year’s Divergent Series: Allegiant (while tempting to bail on) had me following along until the moment the credits started rolling.

I’ve sat through The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor, both Hitman movies, even Drillbit Taylor, and many more movies that deserve to be listed here. But Legend of Tarzan couldn’t get me to stay in my seat. It lost me around the time a grim and depressing Tarzan played by Alexander Skarsgard forced whoever it was Samuel L. Jackson was supposed to be against a wall with broody threats, despite the fact that this man had saved Tarzan’s life half a scene prior and was the only spark of life to exist in this story.

the legend of tarzan

To be fair, the movie lost me a lot earlier than that when it forced me to read through one of the most boring opening paragraphs set over black screen I’ve ever read, citing various political matters regarding a section of the Congo focusing on characters I know nothing or care nothing about — not because Belgian conflicts in the Congo aren’t interesting, but only because they’re not interesting when I’m in the theater to watch a Tarzan movie.

It’s strange because The Legend of Tarzan does very little to hold its viewers’ hands when it comes to the lore behind the story that this movie is essentially following up. It’s like watching the sequel to a movie that doesn’t really exist, perhaps because they decided enough people have either watched the old serials, read the old books, or even grew up on the Disney movie, even though that is a vastly different take on Edgar Rice Burrough’s original tale.

The movie gets started in a world where the classic Tarzan story already happened a long time ago, and he’s now a rich bloke in England married to Jane. One of the film’s first major red flags to me was how misappropriated the characters were to the plot they were acting. It was as if none of what was said or done mattered to them at all. Even Margot Robbie, who normally infuses quite a bit of energy into any movie she’s in, struggles to seem comfortable in this role and beside a brooding man who says little both verbally and nonverbally.

the legend of tarzan

There’s a glimmer of intrigue in the flashback scenes, which they use to eventually reveal more of Tarzan’s origin. But even these promising and gritty realizations of a boy growing up in a savage jungle are undercut by hideous CGI gorillas that look more dated than Rise of the Planet of the Apes, despite that movie being 5 years old.

Christoph Waltz plays the film’s bad guy, because for whatever reason, Hollywood can’t seem to get over that role they’ve pre-ordained for him because of one incredible performance from seven years ago. In the short time I stuck with the film, Waltz seemed incredibly restrained and unfocused on what was happening around him, very similar to last year’s Spectre.

The movie is bleak, colorless, and a victim to dreary pacing that even Batman v Superman would scoff at. It seems Warner Bros. is trying to capture a very specific aesthetic of dashing cinema that makes seeing these films on the big screen quite worth it. When they get it right, like with Mad Max: Fury Road, they accomplish this in spades.

But it seems these specific restrictions placed on decently talented filmmakers like David Yates manage to cripple most of the spectacle WB is trying to entice us with. The result is a movie like The Legend of Tarzan, which is just so boring and flavorless, I don’t hate it. I’m completely indifferent to it, which is a lot worse.

the legend of tarzan

I can have a lot of fun watching a bad movie. There’s a reason I bought Batman v Superman: Ultimate Edition, against all odds. I find failure just as fascinating to dissect and analyze. But is it interesting to delve through the recipe of a Pop Tart? Maybe for some, and you know who you are, but even a meal that tastes bad can be worth the adventure realizing that fact. The Legend of Tarzan is anything but a worthwhile adventure.

Review: ‘The BFG’ Is Big and Friendly, But Maybe Too Giant

Big friendly Giant review

Based on the Roald Dahl book of the same name, The BFG (Big Friendly Giant), probably shares more in common with Zemeckis’s animated rendition of A Christmas Carol with Jim Carrey in 2009.

Both films center around revolutionary visuals (for the time) that emphasize a digitized performance by a great actor — Mark Rylance in BFG‘s case. But both films also stumble in the same ways. They’re both trying to force a small story into something bigger and broader for the big screen.

Taking place sometime in the 80s, The BFG starts off with a young orphan girl named Sophie (played by usually-precocious newcomer Ruby Barnhill) who sees a “giant” man sneaking around the foggy streets of London. To prevent her from blabbing his existence, the giant (Mark Rylance) snatches her from her bed and whisks her away to Giant Country, only for her to discover that this fearsome creature is actually the runt of his kind.

The rest of the film focuses on Sophie’s discovery of this side of the world, where dreams can be chased and massive cannibal giants skate across the hills with cars under their feet. At its best points, The BFG fully embraces the charismatic imagination Dahl envisioned with these characters, placing them in amusing set pieces that make us want to dig into their world even further.

Big friendly Giant review

What suffers in this take, though, is the lack of substance with Sophie and the BFG himself. The two form a bond through ambiguous means that seem to be lacking a key scene or two. And so much attention is placed in the spectacle of the film, you walk away having no idea what The BFG is even supposed to be about.

Even a children’s film needs to firmly establish the motivations and desires for every character. But the film is so adherent to Dahl’s ephemeral whimsy, it forgets that a big screen story absolutely needs characters who yearn for something, as well as conflict that is substantial enough to make us care about them by the end. In BFG, everyone is quite reactionary and wooden as soon as the plot comes into play. And that’s not even mentioning the rushed third act, kicked off by a slow and bizarre turn of the plot that feels like another movie, entirely.

Perhaps the saving grace for BFG, which keeps it from being an overall disappointment, is how full of life its world is, made possible by stunning visuals that blend naturally with practical effects. The uncanny valley takes some time to dissipate, but once it fades, you’ll forget that the BFG and Sophie aren’t actually that different in size.

This is also a humorous movie that pulls off some of the best physical comedy of the year, actually earning laughs in a way that would plague most kids’ films that rely on fart jokes and slapstick too often to make an impact. When a joke likes this happens in The BFG, it’s sparing and almost always gets the laugh.

Big friendly Giant review

This isn’t the best of the film adaptations on Dahl’s work (that honor still belongs to Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory after all these years), but it’s just as good as James and the Giant Peach and only a notch below something like Matilda. It still has that air of a movie that kids will love because it’s as dark as they are, allowing them to feel as if they’re getting away with something while watching it. For families looking to escape each year into smaller films suitable for their kids, The BFG will probably persevere as a popular choice for years to come.

Grade: B

Extra Credits:

  • There’s a lot of interesting trivia behind this film, which I cover in more detail via next week’s podcast. Suffice to say, Dahl movies are always a fountain of nerdy film facts.
  • This is the first time Spielberg has ever directed a Disney film (his 30th film, ever). And honestly…it kind of shows.
  • This is also the first time since E.T. in 1982 that Spielberg has worked with screenwriter Melissa Mathison, who sadly passed away last year. The film is dedicated to her.
  • It’s a Spielberg film, so of course John Williams did the score.
  •  Disney has made only one other film based on Dahl’s work, and that is James and the Giant Peach from 1996. I have a feeling The BFG will have about the same notoriety.
  • In case you forgot, Mark Rylance was in Bridge of Spies just last year, which was also directed by Spielberg. He won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor in that film.
  • Disney hardly ever co-produces a film, especially with Walden Media considering their fallout over the Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian fiasco. This is their first time back together since.
  • The BFG enjoys being part of a weird trilogy of Spielberg movies that have acronym titles. E.T. (Extra Terrestrial), A.I. (Artificial Intelligence), BFG (Big Friendly Giant).
  • If you want to catch up on Dahl’s book of the same name, don’t forget to also read the short story he wrote that inspired BFG, which is called “Danny, Champion of the World.”

    I’m Jon and thanks for reading this. You can subscribe to my posts by clicking “Follow” in the right sidebar. Or just say hey on Twitter! @JonNegroni

Review: ‘Independence Day: Resurgence’ Is Loud and Dumb, Just Like You Expected

review independence day resurgence

Despite what you may be led to believe from its title and the marketing for it, Independence Day: Resurgence is more “requel” than sequel, in the sense that while it does continue the storyline from the 1996 blockbuster, it’s still in the business of kicking off a new series of movies, rather than tying up any loose ends.

During parts of Resurgence, this works well and is paid off with some impressive world building that ties in logically with the events of the first film. Since the alien invaders of that movie were defeated 20 years ago, a more unified mankind has adapted their technology to prepare for their inevitable return.

Many players from the first film make a return for continuity’s sake, though Will Smith’s character was killed offscreen in between movies. If you aren’t caught up or haven’t seen Independence Day in a while, you might get a bit confused when some of these secondary characters show up without much explanation. But for the most part, Resurgence balances its focus with the next generation of heroes, most of them eerily being offsprings of the first film who all happen to know each other.

review independence day resurgence

Sadly, the new kids are probably the worst characters in Resurgence, and that’s amidst some trying competition.

Resurgence is the epitome of a film that tries so hard, yet fails so miserably at what it sets out to do in terms of plot, narrative, and even the basics of humor (rivaling some of the most painfully unfunny movies of 2016 so far). There’s some good spectacle to be had here, which is all most moviegoers are getting in the seats to see in the first place, but Resurgence makes a lot of the same mistakes as its predecessor during an era where they’re not quite as forgivable.

Independence Day was a silly, dumb disaster movie, but it resonated with audiences because its tone was of the moment. It spoke to the children of the Reagan era, who witnessed America bringing an end to the Cold War through their president’s own mouth.

Resurgence, by default, has to carry on this dated approach because it’s in an alternate timeline where “no armed conflict has taken place in 20 years,” as the audience is told early on. This sequel/requel would have been far more interesting if it displayed any sort of progression from the themes before it, especially throughout the entirety of the third act, which undoes almost everything worthwhile presented before it, finished with an ending that might as well have put dollar signs in each of the characters’ eyes to translate Fox’s plans for a franchise.

review independence day resurgence

And again, these problems are coupled with some incredibly weak storytelling, editing, and dialogue. Massive coincidences involving characters running into each other or happening to be connected occur on top of each other so much, it’s jarring when something unpredictable happens or the pacing feels right.

As expected, there’s a lot of death and devastation, but the camera moves so quickly to other characters, that none of the loss resonates, thanks in no small part to the seemingly dozens of key players all trying to contribute something valuable to this film. It worked somewhat in Independence Day because Smith and Goldblum had enough gravitas to lead attention to their stories above most of the rest, but Resurgence lacks that point of view that grounds the viewer and gets them invested. It tries, perhaps, with Liam Hemsworth, who essentially reprises Smith’s role for him, even though his son is right there.

That said, Independence Day: Resurgence isn’t as offensive or catastrophic as it could have been. At least a third of the movie has real potential in how it sets up a world that feels more evolved and interesting than it deserves to be. But by the end, you’re still waiting for someone to say, Welcome to Earf’, or I’m BACK.

Grade: C-

Extra Credits:

  • The writers of Honest Trailers are going to have a field day with this one.
  • I was excited to see Maika Monroe — who was in one of my favorite films of 2015, It Follows — playing one of the better characters. She deserves a better franchise than this.
  • Seriously, what was even going on with some of the “humor” in this film? I was in a packed screening with tons of people who seemed primed for some lighthearted jokes and quips. Yet there were maybe two or three soft chuckles over the course of two hours, even though someone made a joke every two minutes.
  • Some of the good things in this movie: the Warlord. The scientist bromance, I guess. The ship with the arms. Jeff Goldblum not sucking.
  • Some of the worst things in this movie: Characters and world governments behaving like the most insanely moronic minds ever put to film.

    I’m Jon and thanks for reading this. You can subscribe to my posts by clicking “Follow” in the right sidebar. Or just say hey on Twitter! @JonNegroni

 

Review: ‘The Conjuring 2’ Proves Fiction is Stranger than Truth

the conjuring 2 review

As far as horror movies go, in the sense that they’re supposed to just scare you, James Wan’s The Conjuring is one of the better examples of how excellent the genre can be in the current era of hybrid special effects. And that goes the same for The Conjuring 2, also directed by Wan, which does more to establish a sort of franchise/continuity than almost any other horror series of the last decade, and that even includes the long-running Paranormal Activity movies.

Like its predecessor, The Conjuring 2 perpetuates an alternate timeline of reality where Ed and Lorraine Warren are paranormal investigators who care about people, not the hoax-crazed profiteers most people found the truth of not long after the Amityville incident.

In these movies, they’re heroes who swoop in to solve demonic problems, and thankfully, Conjuring 2 is so well put together as a horror flick, you’ll have an easy time forgetting that you’re watching pure fiction. So, in other words, Conjuring 2 is great horror fiction, even if it does go out of its way at times to be self-aware about Warrens’ reputation.

The movie actually picks up in the middle of the Amityville incident, setting up Ed and Lorraine’s struggle with a demon that supposedly haunted her years later, only to come to a head during the Enfield Haunting from 1977-1979, which is the film’s main story.

the conjuring 2 review

Surprisingly, The Conjuring 2 spends a lot of time fixating on whether or not the Warrens were con artists, regularly pitting them both against skeptics who sound quite similar to the real-life critics from over the years. And much of the film’s third act hinges on whether or not something paranormal is actually going on with the Hodgson family, especially 11-year-old Janet who finds herself being used as a pawn by the alleged spirit in her home.

While this could have been a distracting, even eye-rolling aspect of the movie, Wan pulls it off pretty well by focusing on what he does best as a horror director: excellent (and restrained) jump scares, striking set pieces, and an attention to detail in every location. It’s chilling to see the real photos compared to the ones in this film, which seem too creepy to believe at times.

It’s even weirder how easy it is to root for the Warrens themselves, played again by Patrick Wilson and Vera Farmiga, who add some unexpected heart to a movie that could have easily been very cold and emotionally one-note. This gets into more of how their relationship creates a unique thread between movies, more so than many other sequels and franchises, even outside the horror genre.

Some of this world-building won’t work well for all audiences, though, despite how easy it is to jump into Conjuring 2 without seeing the first film. The problem is that the movie almost crams too much material in its long running time to remain effective for long. Every scene is at least decently scary, but by the end, you’ll feel like some of the best scenes were scattered about instead of built up into one effective thrill ride.

the conjuring 2 review

But this pacing is only a minor complaint considering how well-crafted and executed The Conjuring 2 is as a haunted house story, enough to captivate even the harshest critics of who’ll find it weird that after 40 years, people are still anxious to believe in the Warrens.

Grade: A- 

Extra Credits:

  • If you stick around for the credits, you’ll be treated to the actual audio of the Enfield recordings, juxtaposed with the real-life photos being held alongside stills from the movie.
  • This is one of those rare horror films that has me excited for a sequel.
  • Vera Farmiga, once again, makes this movie a lot better than what it would have been without her.
  • Seriously, there are skeptics all over this movie who call BS on everything you’d expect. It takes lampshading to a whole new level for this film to address it. And honestly, it kind of works in a weird way.
  • This movie is a stunning 133 minutes long.
  • Speaking of Paranormal Activity, I sincerely hope Conjuring never goes that far.

    I’m Jon and thanks for reading this. You can subscribe to my posts by clicking “Follow” in the right sidebar. Or just say hey on Twitter! @JonNegroni

 

Second Opinion: The Best Trick In ‘The Conjuring’ Was Its Marketing

the conjuring opinion

What would you rather see? A horror film with a “PG13” rating for violence, some nudity, and language? Or a horror film with an “R” rating for being too scary?

This was the main hook for James Wan’s The Conjuring, which served as his spiritual followup to Insidious and perhaps even Saw for sheer inventiveness with the genre. The care he put into crafting a horror film where the horror comes first is probably what set The Conjuring apart for its hit box office run in 2013.

Even the incredibly loose “based on a true story” gimmick is underplayed here, as the movie centers around a couple of the case files of Ed and Lorraine Warren, who were actual paranormal investigators for decades known best for the story that became another well-known film, The Amityville Horror (along with its 2005 remake).

Set in the 70s, The Conjuring goes back in forth between point of view characters. First with the Warren couple (Vera Farmiga and Patrick Wilson) during some introductory exposition concerning the “Annabelle doll” case file, which was intriguing enough to green-light a standalone to release just a year later. The film then pivots to a standard haunted house narrative centered around a family with Ron Livingston and Lilli Taylor as the parents.

the conjuring opinion

Its the typical horror film fare with sudden noises, creepy atmosphere, and near-misses between ghost and human. But Wan prevents some of this familiarity to feel like fatigue, offering some much needed surprises in the form of his technique, always shifting perspective on the rooms and preventing the specters from getting too much facetime. Instead, we study the reactions of the humans who witness the supernatural for themselves, allowing us to fill in the blanks according to their fine performances.

None of these filming techniques are new when it comes to classic horror, but they’re a breath of fresh, foggy air for modern scare films that have adapted perhaps a little too much to the inviting world of “anything can happen” visual effects that are purely built in a computer. Perhaps it’s easy to accept the throwback nature of Conjuring due to the fact that its set in the 70s and has a slight filter that softens the picture.

While every performance is above grade here, there are some instances of somewhat forced drama used to round out the Warren couple, with lots of added dialogue concerning God’s purpose in their lives and how that will play into their marriage and family. Some of it works to contrast nicely with the chaos that ensues once they decide to aid the central family of The Conjuring, but the nicest thing to say about it is the fact that James Wan does a far better job with atmosphere and pacing than he does with living, breathing characters.

the conjuring opinion

Still, The Conjuring is one of the best horror films in the last few years, and mostly because of its restraint. As a result, the marketing for said movie (while inundated with the annoying Twitter quotes from screenings) was successful because of what it said about the love put into the film’s creation, rather than a forced superlative that would have sounded like white noise for most audiences.

(Second Opinion) Grade: A-

I’m Jon and thanks for reading this. You can subscribe to my posts by clicking “Follow” in the right sidebar. Or just say hey on Twitter! @JonNegroni

Review: ‘Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping’ Is More than Just a Lonely Island Movie

popstar review

It’s unclear how much the world needed a straightforward lampoon of the pop music industry, that is until you watch Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping, a mockumentary starring Andy Samberg and his fellow Lonely Island performers that picks apart Justin Bieber: Never Say Never, TMZ, reality television, and many other staples of late-2000s/early-20teens/and the present.

So if you’ve seen a rock documentary, perhaps even the wonderful This is Spinal Tap, then you can easily imagine the set up and format of the film, which was directed and written by Lonely Island’s Akiva Schaffer and Jorma Taccone (Samberg also shares a writing credit).

The mockumentary centers around Conner Friel (or his stage name, Conner4real), a massively successful pop star who deals with the highs and lows of fame as he prepares to release his sophomore album, claiming he’s a perfectionist because it just has to sell way more than his first album after splitting from his own version of Destiny’s Child, the Style Boyz (there’s obviously a not-so-subtle One Direction jab thrown in here and there).

popstar review

What follows is a series of well-constructed set pieces that consistently top the humor with each scene. Popstar is a viciously funny movie, for Top 40 fans, Justin Bieber fans, Justin Bieber haters, reality TV fans and haters, and pretty much anyone else somewhat clued in on what the jokes are dismantling.

The pacing works well too, always shifting from scripted “fly on the wall” conversations that move the somewhat predictable (but entertaining) plot along, in between hilarious music numbers that range from stage performances to music videos, including one standout that parodies Macklemore’s “Same Love” by having Conner sing a marriage equality rights song where he reminds the viewers that he’s not gay in every other verse.

popstar review

This film has a lot of humorous moments, rivaling this year’s Deadpool even for how many jokes and references you’re likely to miss on the first viewing. But the majority of them land, and even the weaker scenes, mostly in the third act, are kept in balance by the consistently funny commentary aided by real-life music celebrities who offer deadpan reactions to Conner’s latest media disasters.

Though Popstar doesn’t offer anything that will pull in viewers at large who are mostly uninterested in the subject material (or the Lonely Island brand, for that matter), it’s still a competent entry in a genre that has been severely lacking outside of TV sitcoms. And it even has a fair share of ageless jokes that will be sure to crack your smile, even if you’ve never heard of Taylor Swift, Seal, and the peril of Yelp reviews.

Grade: B+

Extra Credits:

  • One criticism I left out of this review was how generic the main story is, concerning Conner’s “solo act” creating a rift between him and his fellow Style Boyz (played by Schaffer and Taccone). And the reason is because I think the story had to be a little familiar for us to appreciate the parody.
  • I didn’t get to mention one of the film’s best supporting actors, Tim Meadows, who plays Conner’s manager. He gets a lot of screen time in this one, and it’s all well-deserved.
  • “Pitchfork can be a little pretentious.”
  • Judd Apatow was a producer on this film, marking this as his first collaboration with Samberg.
  • Stick around the for the mid-credits scene, which features a last-minute send off to one of the film’s best gags.
  • Think of it this way. Popstar is essentially the Zoolander for the pop music industry.

    I’m Jon and thanks for reading this. You can subscribe to my posts by clicking “Follow” in the right sidebar. Or just say hey on Twitter! @JonNegroni

 

Review: ‘X-Men: Apocalypse’ Takes Fan Service to New Heights

x-men apocalypse review

Apocalypse will have a hard time swaying movie fans over to its clunky, bombastic style that feels more like a comic-book adapted to the screen than even Snyder’s Watchmen, and this latest X-Men sequel isn’t even strictly based on any one story.

Other factors work against Apocalypse in the sense that it will lose many different types of viewers along the running time. It still suffers from problems it can’t readily solve, like with how overwhelming this cinematic universe has become in terms alternate timelines, the large cast of characters, and keeping your mind off of its now irrelevant predecessors (especially when Sophie Turner’s Jean Grey makes a not-so-subtle wink at how Last Stand is the “worst.”)

These were problems with Days of Future Past, too, but for the first time since X2, an X-Men movie has come along that does far more with its material than we should have otherwise suspected. Flaws and all, X-Men: Apocalypse is an excellent work of film in both ambition and execution, despite how alienating it will be for a wide swatch of viewers.

Even at its most convoluted, director Bryan Singer offers a movie with some thrilling set pieces that connect a lot of meandering pieces. They’re some of the best moments in the franchise, even if they have to share screen time with some of the weirdest flaws in the franchise.

x-men apocalypse review

This is the third film of the trilogy started by First Class, and it even sports several flashbacks to both that and the second film in order to deepen the lore many of us took for granted over the years, including plot involvement from Rose Byrne’s Moira and even Alex Summers.

Some of the loose story threads from those films come to a head in Apocalypse, though not in a way that feels paid off by the main narrative of this movie. Apocalypse opens with the origin of its titular villain, the “first” mutant played by Oscar Isaac, a power-collecting man worshipped like a god who was buried by rebellious followers thousands of years ago. Mystique and Magneto’s actions in D.C. ten years prior have since sparked mutant cults, including one that sets out to resurrect Apocalypse for no real explanation beyond…well, he exists to be worshipped.

While this happens, the film spends a lot of time catching fans up with the established characters and setting up new mutant students that will inevitably team up to face this new threat. The pacing and plot jumping from these characters is actually quite competent, though sure to confound anyone who skipped First Class or hasn’t seen it since 2011. If you’re invested in this universe, it’s more exciting than worthy of head-scratching.

For once, Tye Sheridan’s Cyclops is given the screen time worth his due, including a sub plot that better sets him up as a future leader within the ranks. Jean Grey’s character arc is a little messier, but easy to latch onto, and Nightcrawler is handed scraps he turns into some meaty offerings, thanks to a fun rivalry established between him and Angel.

x-men apocalypse review

Jennifer Lawrence plays a more relaxed Mystique than her somewhat lazy performance in Days of Future Past. She still seems miscast here, but Apocalypse seems to have a better idea of what to do with this hero/villain who constantly finds herself switching sides. In Apocalypse, she has a more solid foot in the heroic camp, and it’s refreshing to see her work with the X-Men without the tedious guesswork over whether or not she’s sincere. It’s a testament to the film’s willingness to allow Mystique a story in these movies that follows swiftly from the first two films, rather than a correction to make her evil for the sake of being truer to the comic.

As for Apocalypse and his four, loyal followers, the film falls a bit short in giving them time to shine, aside from a satisfying continuation of Magneto’s tragic story. Yet once again, we’re forced to sit through familiar stories that place Charles Xavier and Magneto at the center, with offhand characters (including the villain and a just-as-good-as-last-time Quicksilver played by Evan Peters) working around them.

In other words, Apocalypse lives, breathes, and dies as a comic book story, not a movie. Like a comic, it shifts locations quickly and without much cohesion. Its colors brightly match the 80s time period in a way that makes me wish for more X-Men films in this decade. And the plot boils down to a simple battle between good and evil that focuses more on the main characters deciding what truly is good and evil, as well as how their actions in this battle will affect future storylines in the series.

x-men apocalypse review

Its biggest flaw is probably where it falls extremely short with visuals. The CGI is either decent or poor to the point of distraction. You have to be fully onboard with this universe of zany characters and over-the-top action in order to overlook some of the weaker effects, but it’s somewhat matched by some of the most entertaining fight choreography seen in these films, including what may forever be a wholly underrated fight sequence between Beast (reprised by Nicholas Hoult) and Psylocke (played by Olivia Munn), that utilizes both characters in a way X-Men fans probably never expected to make it to the movies.

Perhaps along the way, Singer decided to make this the X-Men film that pays more service to fans of X-Men, rather than movie fans. Unfortunately, that’s sure to be a problem for plenty of big X-Men fans as well, but that doesn’t negate much of Apocalypse that is just solidly entertaining.

Grade: B

Extra credits: 

  • I really wanted to give this film a higher score, if only because I was so enthralled by it, in a way that rivals Deadpool and Civil War even. Unfortunately, it’s impossible to overlook some of the bigger flaws and how they will be deal breakers for most audiences. Hopefully, you’ll enjoy Apocalypse as much as I did, because it’s easily one of my favorite X-Men films to date.
  • No spoilers, but stick around for the end of the credits. Not like you needed to be reminded.
  • Comparisons will likely be made to Dawn of Justice, a film that is also likened to being too much of a comic-book in terms of structure, so it’s off-putting to movie fans. The big difference is that Apocalypse does a much better job, all around. At no point was I shaking my head at plot holes or gaps in character motivation.
  • I was always a fan of X-Men: Evolution more than the older animated cartoon. Sorry. But for that reason, Apocalypse worked on a deeper level for me considering the similarities. Something about seeing Jean, Scott, and Nightcrawler as students felt right.
  • Not enough Storm. Not even close.
  • I might actually be in the camp of people who now wish for an X-Men movie that takes a break from Magneto and Mystique for a while. Apocalypse might have been something really special (and for everyone) if it had streamlined its characters more and made this an Xavier vs. Apocalypse affair.

I’m Jon and thanks for reading this. You can subscribe to my posts by clicking “Follow” in the right sidebar. Or just say hey on Twitter! @JonNegroni