X-Men: Apocalypse (2016 film directed by Bryan Singer)

[crocodile 8,012]

That is what I'm hoping for exactly. I've got a ticket for a midnight showing next Tuesday anyway. Hope it's fun at least.

 

Karol

[A24 4,333]

On 10-5-2016 at 6:16 PM, crocodile said:

Based on 36 reviews it receives a 47% RT rating. 

 

Oh dear. Not a good sign.

 

Karol

 

People are just slow to catch on. It's gonna be just as bad (and same old, same old) as the previous one, perhaps even worse. 

 

 

Quote

Bryan Singer proves that he no longer has any interesting X-Men stories to tell.

 

[crocodile 8,012]

It's gone up to 53%. 

 

I like the consensus: "Overloaded with action in a vain effort to compensate for a lack of genuine excitement, X-Men: Apocalypse is a middling disappointment for the franchise."

 

Karol

[nightscape94 965]

The villain doesn't look at all interesting to me.

[Wojo 2,453]

I liked the villain in the 90s cartoon series. I'm not interested in this movie. 

[crocodile 8,012]

14 hours ago, nightscape94 said:

The villain doesn't look at all interesting to me.

And apparently he isn't.

 

Karol

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I have faith in Singer!

[Jay 37,363]

I don't think this movie looks good, but I'm kinda interested to see Sophie Turner in another role besides Sansa Stark

 

 

 

No to mention Olivia Munn too

[mstrox 6,651]

I thought Olivia Munn was a decent enough talk show host on Attack of the Show, but I don't think I've liked her acting in anything that I've seen thus far.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

On Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 0:20 AM, Alexcremers said:

 

People are just slow to catch on. It's gonna be just as bad (and same old, same old) as the previous one, perhaps even worse. 

 

 

 

Day's of Future Past was wonderful. It was also wonderfully reviewed. Weren't you the one who championed Rotten Tomato scores until movies that were not  for you got high scores?

Days of Future Past 91% certified fresh

[A24 4,333]

Like I said, people are just slow to catch on. The negative critique the new one is getting is also applicable to the previous one. 

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Revisionism!

[JoeinAR 1,949]

3 minutes ago, Alexcremers said:

Like I said, people are just slow to catch on. The negative critique the new one is getting is also applicable to the previous one. 

So full of shit. The new one does not look good I agree  but Days of Future Past 91%. It's been that way for two years. It isnt going to change.

[A24 4,333]

Of course it will change. Movies change when people change. 

 

Critics are finally saying how I already felt during the previous instalment. That proves that people are just slow.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

You come across as an emotionally challenge being. You should laugh with somebody instead of your usual at somebody.

One day you should take a class of proofs. Or a logic class. 

[crocodile 8,012]

Ah, well. Will find out tonight. Not expecting much.

 

The score is ok I guess.

 

Karol

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

People really loved the last one that much?  These films haven't truly been *good* for me since X2.  Passable, but nothing more.  Regardless of reviews, the trailers haven't been encouraging.  And Ottman, well, he's seeming more and more like a one trick pony.  X2 and parts of his Superman score are about all one needs to hear. 

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

The last one was very good.

[mstrox 6,651]

I didn't care for the last one.  I loved First Class and The Wolverine, and really liked X2.  All of the other X-Men movies have just been passable (except for Origins: Wolverine which was not even that).

[crocodile 8,012]

It's not a complete disaster. I liked some bits and pieces but they don't really ever come together into a coherent whole. Lazily plotted and messy. Seems like there is both too much stuff in it and not enough meat on the bone. All of which is funny cause it looks more "X-Men the comics" than ever.

 

Karol

[Trent B 337]

The only X-Men movie I really haven't liked so far is X-Men The Last Stand.  I've enjoyed the others, even Days Of Future Past (particularly the Rogue Cut) and even the two Wolverine films.

[Jay 37,363]

Karol how did Sophie Turner and Olivia Munn do?

[A24 4,333]

12 hours ago, TheWhiteRider said:

People really loved the last one that much?  These films haven't truly been *good* for me since X2.  Passable, but nothing more.  Regardless of reviews, the trailers haven't been encouraging.  And Ottman, well, he's seeming more and more like a one trick pony.  X2 and parts of his Superman score are about all one needs to hear. 

 

When everything is said and done, I only like the first one. It's the Star Wars of the X-Men movies. X2 is more like TESB. Last Stand is of course ROTJ.

[publicist 4,643]

12 hours ago, TheWhiteRider said:

People really loved the last one that much?  These films haven't truly been *good* for me since X2.  Passable, but nothing more.  Regardless of reviews, the trailers haven't been encouraging.  And Ottman, well, he's seeming more and more like a one trick pony.  X2 and parts of his Superman score are about all one needs to hear. 

 

I don't think that's a fair evaluation. He did a lot of noteworthy bits and pieces up to 'Jack the Giant Slayer' (of course for movies hardly anyone saw, like 'Incognito' etc.) - and i wouldn't even include those you mentioned (which sound a bit Hollywood-bland). At least compared to a lot of his contemporaries he at least has standards even if he compositionally can't really match his idols.

[Wojo 2,453]

Last Stand is ROTJ? Hmm. Maybe. Both significantly divided their fan bases and showed the filmmakers had run out of ideas in the present, which forced subsequent movies to be set in the past. It would take years for sequels to correct the mistakes and take the franchises forward. 

 

At least ROTJ is watchable. 

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Did ROTJ really divide people back in 1983? Surely only Alex saw it for what it was?

[A24 4,333]

14 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

Did ROTJ really divide people back in 1983? 

 

Yes. We all hated it. There was just too much childish silliness. Star Wars lost its cool. George Lucas was not a god after all. And so on ... Even today, when nostalgia comes into play and people tend to be more forgiving, it's still regarded as the worst of the trilogy. But in 1983, I did not find ROTJ very watchable (rather very painful).

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

42 minutes ago, publicist said:

 

I don't think that's a fair evaluation. He did a lot of noteworthy bits and pieces up to 'Jack the Giant Slayer' (of course for movies hardly anyone saw, like 'Incognito' etc.) - and i wouldn't even include those you mentioned (which sound a bit Hollywood-bland). At least compared to a lot of his contemporaries he at least has standards even if he compositionally can't really match his idols.

 

All I can say is that I have actively sought to hear as much of his music as possible, precisely because he does so many jobs in the shadows, and it's exactly those two I mentioned that according to my ears escape the kind of generic, however competent, symphonic demeanor that makes up everything else.  They have orchestral and harmonic color at least.  I don't like to be so overtly disparaging of any composer, but a lot of the rest sounds like it was composed by committee, if you get my drift.

 

I may also still be unfairly critical since his pastiche of Zimmer's lovely Time for DOFP is the most egregious thing in film music I've heard in years.

[crocodile 8,012]

2 hours ago, Alexcremers said:

 

When everything is said and done, I only like the first one. It's the Star Wars of the X-Men movies. X2 is more like TESB. Last Stand is of course ROTJ.

Funny you should mention that, Alex. This movie takes place in 1983...

 

2 hours ago, publicist said:

 

I don't think that's a fair evaluation. He did a lot of noteworthy bits and pieces up to 'Jack the Giant Slayer' (of course for movies hardly anyone saw, like 'Incognito' etc.) - and i wouldn't even include those you mentioned (which sound a bit Hollywood-bland). At least compared to a lot of his contemporaries he at least has standards even if he compositionally can't really match his idols.

It's like someone once said in one FSM podcast, Ottman has an ambition that leads past his skills. And he should be commended for that. I really like some of his older scores like The Usual Suspects, Incognito and a some others. His modern stuff is less defined stylistically but there's a sign he's willing to learn. And learn he does.

 

5 hours ago, Jay said:

Karol how did Sophie Turner and Olivia Munn do?

Olivia Munn's Psylocke is Darth Maul of this film. And that is a best way to describe her role. What you've seen in the trailers is basically what she does.

 

Sophie Turner was good, although I have a hard time seeing her as Jean Grey. She's not so much different from Sansa but at least she gets stuff to do.

 

Karol

 

 

[Jay 37,363]

Sounds about what I expected.

[crocodile 8,012]

Some good bits in the score, though. Two Apocalypse themes, new Jean Grey theme is pretty nice.

 

Karol

[Bilbo 3,709]

Any returning themes?

[crocodile 8,012]

Main theme appears a couple of times (other than main and end titles) and Xavier's theme.

 

Karol

[Bilbo 3,709]

Nice that the main theme features in the score as opposed to just credits! 

 

Is is the score out? I can't see it on Spotify!

[crocodile 8,012]

No, it's not out yet. The album comes out next month.

 

Don't hold your breath for many statements of the main theme. It's not really prominent.

 

Karol

[publicist 4,643]

23 hours ago, TheWhiteRider said:

All I can say is that I have actively sought to hear as much of his music as possible, precisely because he does so many jobs in the shadows, and it's exactly those two I mentioned that according to my ears escape the kind of generic, however competent, symphonic demeanor that makes up everything else.  They have orchestral and harmonic color at least.  I don't like to be so overtly disparaging of any composer, but a lot of the rest sounds like it was composed by committee, if you get my drift.

 

You mean the whole scores?

[Bilbo 3,709]

Think I'm seeing this tonight!

[Bilbo 3,709]

Well I liked it. 

[crocodile 8,012]

My review of the film.

 

My review of the soundtrack album.

 

Karol

[Luke Skywalker 1,795]

On 18/5/2016 at 7:56 AM, Alexcremers said:

 

When everything is said and done, I only like the first one. It's the Star Wars of the X-Men movies. X2 is more like TESB. Last Stand is of course ROTJ.

There is one joke in the film about ROTJ that must be directed at 'the last stand', isnt, it?

 

 

 

 

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

X-Men: Apocalypse

 

 

 

 

 

Spoilers

 

 

Following up from Days Of Future Past this is the 4th X-Men film directed by Brian Singer, the 6th film of the X-Men "saga" proper and the 9th to take place in the particular cinematic universe, which is currently the oldest and long lasting one of all these superhero franchises.

 

The trailers looked a bit poor and critical reviews are calling it lacklustre so I was surprised to really enjoy it.

Singer has never made a bad X-Men film.

 

While DOFP was more or less a loose sequel to First Class this one is more a direct continuation of the last two films.

It's 1983 now, and even though everyone is supposed to look about 2 decades older then when this trilogy began, they of course don't. (the film even points out Moira McTaggert hardly aged a day)

Charles is doing what one expects. Running his school for the gifted, but without the X-Men side project

Raven is still liberating mutants, having become something of a symbol after the events 10 years earlier in DC. And Magneto has settled down to a wife and daughter, working in a iron mill in Poland....so guess what happens there

 

The film has a lot of characters. Something Singer usually deals with well. He focuses on the most importamnt ones and leaves the lesser ones to just do what they have to do plot wise.

 

The film opens with essentially...The Mummy.

An all powerfull farao gets betrayed and buried for ages upon ages, just with some mutant fighting added. The character En Sabah Nur has essentially the same arc as the correspondant character from any Mummy film. To awake and cause curses and disaster upon the Earth. Oscar Isaac actually does rather well in a very limiting role.

 

The first part of the film resembles the first X-Men film in that it follows a young mutant finding his way into Xaviers care.

A new Scott Summers. Very lukewarm performance.

There's also a new Jean Grey. Sophie Turner is a completely different kind of actress as Famke Jansen, but she does rather well as the restraint and demure Jean. And is very convincing when she does finally morph into Dark Phoenix.

 

There is also a new Storm and Nightcrawler. Both are merely OK.

In many ways the film resembles the other two Superhero juggernauts of this year. Batman v Superman and Civil War.

But Apocalypse is more substantial a film then Civil War, which was mostly people who actually really like each other, fighting over something external.

It's also far less oppressive then BvS, and has final act that is actually connected to the rest of the film.

 

Like Civil War, the film is actually a bit less HUGE then it's trailers (and title) suggests. The Apocalypse starts, but we mainly see Cairo being obliterated . Some US cities are seeing getting the Emmerich treatment, but not quite so much.

Singer directs  a film of an epic score, but keeps it mainly focused on it's characters. And despite the large cast and unwieldy storylines I never had any issue keepng track of who was where, doing what.

 

Hugh Jackman has a slightly bigger then you expect cameo in this, as he is unleashed as a weapon while the good guys are trying to escape from a military base. No dialogue, but plenty of fighting, and then finally Jean calms the beast and gives him back a few distant memories (which actually solves the plothole from The Wolverine about Logan being about to recall Hiroshima...but of course that story took place in a different timeline then this film....)

 

Since there have been so many of these films you kind go in knowing what to expect. Almost like a Bond film. The elements are all familiar, it's mostly a matter of execution. And in that Singer does well. Like DOFP there are some nice directorial touches. And once again a virtuoso rescue by Quicksilver, who's more unsubstantial to the story this time, and also hasn't aged 10 years...

The film is nice and colorful, with subtle but fun 80's throw backs. And as usual Singer throws some Star trek in there.

 

Interesting that even though this is the 6th or 9th film, it's ending makes it essentially feel like a part 1, with a new team of X-Men training under Professor X (McAvoy finally looks the part after shaving his head). Magneto not being a part of the team, but going his own way, and a new villains Psylocke skulking away.

 

The X-Men series had been around in comic form for decades now. So there must be an incredible wealth of stories to get inspiration from. Apocalypse however does seen to stick to what it knows. J=Jean Grey becomes Dark Phoenix again. There's a new weapon X program, which is Wolverine in this. (how did Wolverine get caught by Stryker after the events of DOFP, when Raven was impersonating Stryker???)

 

Again, the continuity of this film series is really screwed up. DOFP didnt really fix that, but it did clear the way for a new continuity without having to worry about the previous films (everything before First Class and The Wolverine)

[A24 4,333]

Of course you enjoyed it, besides crocs, you're the biggest Marvel fan I know

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Hardly.

 

But it's typical that you would assume that. 

 

This isnt for you, Alex. Just stick with the first one.

[crocodile 8,012]

Already forgot this existed.

 

Karol

[A24 4,333]

9 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

 

 

But it's typical that you would assume that. 

 

 

 

It's not typical but logical because I visit JWfan! One can't miss it. 

 

9 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

This isnt for you, Alex. Just stick with the first one.

 

I will! Even though it's been ages that I've seen that one.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Maybe it's not aged well? Or it was never that good and you just didn't pick up on it???

 

I maintain that so far none of the characters they have recast is as good as the original actor. McAvoy, Fassbender, Lawrence etc...they are all a step down 

10 minutes ago, Alexcremers said:

 

It's not typical but logical because I visit JWfan! One can't miss it. 

 

Like no one visiting JWfan knows Jason is a huge fan of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles?

[Bilbo 3,709]

I've seen it twice and I've enjoyed it loads each time. It's a lot of fun. 

I enjoy the Fox X-Men movies but can't stand the MCU. Don't know what it is. There's something slightly goofy but more comic book like about the X-Men ones. The X-Men actually feel like real people which helps and the conflict always feels human. Billionaires, Super Soldiers, and Norse Gods aren't very relatable I find. 

[A24 4,333]

14 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

Like no one visiting JWfan knows Jason is a huge fan of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles?

 

It's useless to deny it when the evidence is so overwhelming.

 

You never got my post about Jason's Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, did you? That's your problem, Steef, you take everything too literal.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

The problem with you often seen to lie with the other person, doesn't it?

[A24 4,333]

Yes, I should stop overestimate them.

 

About Jason's Turtles, it's not my fault that you didn't get it.