X-Men: Apocalypse

Considering the fact that "X-Men: Days of Future Past" is my favorite X-men movie, I was concerned that "X-Men: Apocalypse" was going to be a let down for me by comparison. As this film clearly alludes in one scene, the third installment in a film franchise can be a nail in a coffin. Unlike other viewers, I don't think that will be the case for the X-Men franchise. "Apocalypse" was entertaining even though its climax can overload your senses. The actors continue to do their jobs very well and the story kept the audience guessing.

"Apocalypse" takes place in the year I was born, 1983. Of course I don't remember that year but the 80's as a whole is something I do remember enough of and I felt the film wasn't as true to the 80's as its predecessors were to their respective decades. "Days of Future Past" had a color scheme of oranges and browns that was perfect in portraying the 70's. In this movie though, you kept forgetting that you were in the 80's. I think most of this had to do with the perceived age of the returning characters. Continuity is very important to me and while I can forgive some mistakes, it can be hard to overlook others. In "First Class", I would guess that Charles was in his 20's while Erik was in his 30's in 1963. For "Days of Future Past", they were aged quite convincingly ten years. But for this film, Charles should be in his 40’s, which would make Erik in his 50's. They still look the same age as they were in the last film. What's more, Patrick Stewart was in his late 40's when he was on "Star Trek: The Next Generation" in the late 1980's and Michael Fassbender was in his late 30's when they shot "Apocalypse". They could have at least grayed Fassbender's head for this movie. Other characters like Hank, Alex and Peter were also not aged as much as they should have been. That all being said and done, I guess I will have to learn to forgive these incongruities otherwise the movie will not become better over time. On a more positive note, Moira was aged quite well. She looks to be in her 40's unlike Charles. I can dig Charles' 80's hairstyle. I also love how Kurt wears a Michael Jackson red jacket. I'm also glad the filmmakers did not overload the movie in terms of nostalgia.

While others might dislike "Apocalypse", they can't say it is due to the retelling of an already known origin story. "Days of Future Past" set these characters on a new timeline. Even though the ending is known, how the characters got there does not necessarily have to follow the timeline of the original X-men trilogy anymore. There will still be some continuity mistakes but not as many because of the time travel in the previous film. What happens to Weapon X in "Apocalypse" is a good example of what I am talking about. This isn't a replication of what happens in "X-men Origins: Wolverine" thank heaven but Weapon X is sent on a similar path thanks to Jean. All the characters when you think about it are following the same destiny they would be if this was the original timeline. They are just taking a different course. This gives the filmmakers a little bit of leeway to create originality and subsequently entertainment. Another argument for this movie being a let down is that the filmmakers, by including Weapon X, are forcing supporting characters into the film even though they don't contribute to the story. I would like to point out that Weapon X does allow for our heroes to escape Alkali Lake. This short cameo also sets up a future film and answers a lot of questions about the very ending of "Days of Future Past". I always have to choose a favorite new X-men character every time a new movie comes out but "Apocalypse" didn't introduce very many new characters. Therefore by default, I choose Apocalypse himself. I have heard that he comes across as cliché for a superhero movie but I would argue that his level of power sets him apart. He creates of formidable challenge to all the characters and we as the audience have to go along for the ride, uncertain about how things are going to turn out. The launching of the nukes had me concerned for example. I wasn't expecting the filmmakers to acknowledge the relationship between Magneto and Quicksilver. I only learned about it in between the release of "Days of Future Past" and this film. As a result, I didn't even catch the line in "Days of Future Past" about Peter's mom knowing a guy once that could control metal. Having not been much of a comic book fan growing up, I learn something new with every film. I also didn't catch that Alex's last name was Summers until I saw "Apocalypse". The year after the release of "Days of Future Past", the character of Quicksilver appeared in a separate comic book film frachise portrayed by a different actor and usually a reboot or remake is the cause for this. The two franchises in this case are produced by different studios. It is important to note that the two Quicksilvers are quite distinct from each other and the Avengers' incarnation appeared in only one film. The "Time in a Bottle" scene was so good in the previous show and that is why we get the "Sweet Dreams (Are Made of This)" scene in this film. It was fun too but lacked originality obviously. As mentioned, the self-referential "Return of the Jedi" scene was noteworthy as was the use of Beethoven 7th symphony. This movie does resolve one issue I had with "First Class". It is established in the first X-men movie that Magneto helped Charles build Cerebro. The concluding scenes of this movie show just that. Speaking of the first X-men movie, I love how the concluding lines of "X-men" are re-used in the ending of "Apocalypse"

For "First Class", James McAvoy didn't completely impersonate Patrick Stewart in order to allow for character growth. He made the same choice for his second film as Xavier. After making that movie, he mentioned that if a third film was to be made, he would then watch all of Stewart's old movies in order to make that full transition. I can't say that I saw that so maybe he changed his mind. I like the new path that Raven is on in this timeline. I think that Jennifer Lawrence was using some of her experience from the Hunger Games franchise in order to portray Raven as a mentor. You could tell that it was Oscar Issac as Apocalypse even with the makeup but his performance made you forget enough of "Star Wars" in order for you to accept this new mutant. I think if I had gone into the movie not knowing that it was Oscar Issac, I would have been fooled. Apocalypse's voice at one point was rendered a little weird but other than that, I like this villain. Kodi Smit-McPhee had Nightcrawler's accent down perfectly but I still like Alan Cumming a bit better. I have seen some of Smit-McPhee's work in the past but this role stands out. I can't believe how much Alexandra Shipp looks like a young Halle Berry. For this Stan Lee cameo, his wife appears with him. That is cool. I think a big reason why I accepted this movie is the direction of Bryan Singer. Michael Dougherty and Dan Harris collaborated with Singer for the first time on "X2" and all three reunited for "Apocalypse". I also consider that a factor for my liking to this sequel.

I wasn't expecting much from this movie but as a result, I was entertained enough that I bought it on Blu-ray. I wasn't able to predict the plot and the acting was good. The next sequel after "X-men Apocalypse" took place in the 90's and I had supposed that setting it in that decade might be hard for me to accept because of my desire for continuity, seeing as how we are catching up to the ages that the characters were in "X-men". There were bigger flaws in "Dark Phoenix" than that to worry about though.

4 Stars out of 5