X-Men: Apocalypse suffers from “2016 superhero syndrome.” This disease is a result of the glut of superpowered films on the docket each year. To truly stand out, the stakes have to be raised in some way; X-Men: Apocalypse is content to just exist and be ok. What’s most disappointing for fans like myself is how much talent is wasted on a simply decent film.
After an intro flashback showcasing Apocalypse’s (Oscar Isaac) formation, we return to present day with a splintered mutant world in stasis. Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence) is covertly saving trapped mutants, Charles Xavier (James McAvoy) and Hank McCoy (Nicholas Hoult) are harboring and teaching younger mutants to help them harness their powers, and Magneto (Michael Fassbender) chose exile, working at a Polish factory living the simple life. These 4 get thrust back into each others lives with Apocalypse’s attempt at namesaking himself. The fight also drags in some other familiar comic faces like Scott Summers (Tye Sheridan), Jean Grey (Sophie Turner), Quicksilver (Evan Peters), and Nightcrawler (Kodi Smit-McPhee) and perhaps a certain Michigan based animal.
Look at those actors. All the principals are household names and the newcomers have had big roles in big movies. Bryan Singer and Simon Kinberg’s story disservices them in almost every way. All the newcomers have one identifying trait, meaning comic novices will find little to root for. Lawrence takes too much of a backseat here, sidelining her magnetic charisma that is only used to motivate once. X-Men’s strongest element, the Magneto/Xavier relationship, is kept at a distance until the third act, setting adrift James McAvoy (although Fassbender gets the best material here, albeit in a very horrific way). A great deal of time is spent with Apocalypse, a perfect superhero villain….in 2003. The guy waxes evilly poetic about cleansing of the humans and taking care of his mutant children, but there are no other layers there, making him VERY boring. Oscar Isaac is so interesting and charismatic that Star Wars invested multiple movies in the guy, so why the hell would you heap gobs of makeup on him and make him look like a Jim Henson bad guy and spout robotic vitriol? Creative question marks abound in X-Men: Apocalypse that collectively drag the movie from the stratosphere to the ordinary.
If you had not seen previous superhero movies, X-Men: Apocalypse is a decent example of what you see from a generic superhero film at the point in time. The special effects are quite amazing, villains aside. Watching gravity stop working and buildings shapeshift looks spectacular on a big screen. Each of the superhero mutants has a specific power that is decently well thought out in its execution, particularly Quicksilvers, whose big scene is the highlight of the movie (however, we already saw it in the last film). There are small, underdeveloped allegories to our world about people with power and how to control it. The third act is a CGI spectacle that drives home some of the themes of the movie, and resets the status quo to make another film with the cast. If you want to intro your kids to superhero films, this is a good benchmark for the current superhero filmography.
X-Men: Apocalypse is a competent, decent superhero movie. I suppose I mean it as a compliment, but you could easily interpret that as a big detractor. Bryan Singer’s streak continues of inconsistent moviemaking, meaning his next one should be awesome. I have a superhero trade though that would make two mediocre superhero films better: if we put Apocalypse in Age of Ultron and Ultron in this film, both movies would have been substantially better. Let’s make this happen Fox: make a deal with Marvel to pit the X-Men against the Avengers. The internet would explode.