X-Men: Apocalypse Reviews are coming in... dammit FOX!

[Trunkage]

Maybe, hear me out here. Maybe we should just make the judgement ourselves about the movie. I am not saying to distrust the critics but mostly some play on nostalgia and the, "I wanted it this way" attitude.

If the movie is bad, by all means it stinks like a bowl of ****. I just feel that nowadays people read loads of reviews with different conflicting opinions and then get pt off by it. Heck I did that myself a lot in the past and then when I finally saw the movie, most of the time I liked it a lot and didn't see some of the things the critics were complaining about.

Shut Up, Para. No one cares what you think.

It comes down to me having only limited time. If most reviews are saying its good, I'll consider it. I have a family so I don't want my time waste seeing poor movies (see Force Awakens for this as it wasted my time being A New Hope and, like the Prequels, this means I wont see the rest). I thought First Class was average and Future Past was below (which I only saw on Netflix). But knowing this, I had to make a decision on Deadpool. I didn't see it for a week to hear some reviews, but they were raving from multiple sources so I saw it. Same with Batman v Superman. Heard it was the worst and didn't see it.

I understand that critics have a bias. So does journalists and this very website. You don't read any blog or hear any podcast without acknowledging that there is bias. Also, critics are, by definition, nit-picky. If it doesn't work for you, then don't worry about them. They are not there to confirm your like/dislike of a movie (e.g. Civil War is seen as a good movie by reivewers, but I think it was just above average. Those reviews don't affect or validate my feelings on the movie). They are only there to help you decide to see it, knowing full well they are being paid to give a positive review.

 

[mduncan50]

Maybe, hear me out here. Maybe we should just make the judgement ourselves about the movie. I am not saying to distrust the critics but mostly some play on nostalgia and the, "I wanted it this way" attitude.

If the movie is bad, by all means it stinks like a bowl of ****. I just feel that nowadays people read loads of reviews with different conflicting opinions and then get pt off by it. Heck I did that myself a lot in the past and then when I finally saw the movie, most of the time I liked it a lot and didn't see some of the things the critics were complaining about.

Shut Up, Para. No one cares what you think.

It comes down to me having only limited time. If most reviews are saying its good, I'll consider it. I have a family so I don't want my time waste seeing poor movies (see Force Awakens for this as it wasted my time being A New Hope and, like the Prequels, this means I wont see the rest). I thought First Class was average and Future Past was below (which I only saw on Netflix). But knowing this, I had to make a decision on Deadpool. I didn't see it for a week to hear some reviews, but they were raving from multiple sources so I saw it. Same with Batman v Superman. Heard it was the worst and didn't see it.

I understand that critics have a bias. So does journalists and this very website. You don't read any blog or hear any podcast without acknowledging that there is bias. Also, critics are, by definition, nit-picky. If it doesn't work for you, then don't worry about them. They are not there to confirm your like/dislike of a movie (e.g. Civil War is seen as a good movie by reivewers, but I think it was just above average. Those reviews don't affect or validate my feelings on the movie). They are only there to help you decide to see it, knowing full well they are being paid to give a positive review.

Hmm...apparently Fox and WB have been missing payments.

 

[bartholen_v1legacy]

I'd been purposely avoiding previews out of principle (I do it for all movies these days). Now that the reviews are in, chances are I won't be seeing this. Days of Future Past was surprisingly good for what it was based on (seriously, I expected the movie to fuck up spectacularly), but it didn't really leave anything hanging enough to IMO warrant another sequel. At this point these new X-Men movies feel more like a non-continuity TV show than a series of films, where each film has its own separate plot that has the same characters, but little else connecting it to previous installments. And that's before we even get to the nightmarish continuity these movies have now tucked themselves into. Superhero movies with a cast of dozens are now dime a dozen, and if this is what comes of it, it doesn't look too good for the genre's future.

Well, at least Psylocke looks hot in the trailer.

 

[ScorpionPrince]

The only thing I really disliked about this review is that he did the whole arrogant "All the other reviewers are wrong" thing, which Chris is usually smart enough to not fall into.

That's not how i percieved it. He's a very modest guy, and he was more like: "Other reviewers see it this way, but I don't really see it." That's completely different than calling other reviewers wrong or stupid or what have you. He simply states he has a different opinion, you can't really call that arrogant.

 

[Hawki]

The only thing I really disliked about this review is that he did the whole arrogant "All the other reviewers are wrong" thing, which Chris is usually smart enough to not fall into.

That's not how i percieved it. He's a very modest guy, and he was more like: "Other reviewers see it this way, but I don't really see it." That's completely different than calling other reviewers wrong or stupid or what have you. He simply states he has a different opinion, you can't really call that arrogant.

He also says "I think some critics sometimes just tune out." Or, to quote another line from his Phantom Menace view, "you're [the audience] allowed to like these films [the prequels.]" As in, anyone who disagrees with his assessment is, by his good graces, given the 'privilge' of being allowed to like them. This kind of thing also shows up in reviews of films that belong to franchises (e.g. The Force Awakens).

like Chris as a reviewer, but I prefer it when his reviews are clear of baggage, so to speak, when he reviews more obscure films that have to succeed or fail on their own merits. And with Deadpool and Civil War being his top ranking films of the year so far...yeah...very much a case of "different folks, different strokes," in regards to personal preferences.

 

[Silence]

Ugh.

Never use this as written word in a serious post. Please. It undermines all points you make. (Speaking not only to you here, but to the general 'ugh'-user.)

OT: Well, I hope the bad reviews are saying too much. I'm enjoying the occasional X-Men-film. Probably won't see it in cinema now.

 

[mduncan50]

The only thing I really disliked about this review is that he did the whole arrogant "All the other reviewers are wrong" thing, which Chris is usually smart enough to not fall into.

That's not how i percieved it. He's a very modest guy, and he was more like: "Other reviewers see it this way, but I don't really see it." That's completely different than calling other reviewers wrong or stupid or what have you. He simply states he has a different opinion, you can't really call that arrogant.

He also says "I think some critics sometimes just tune out." Or, to quote another line from his Phantom Menace view, "you're [the audience] allowed to like these films [the prequels.]" As in, anyone who disagrees with his assessment is, by his good graces, given the 'privilge' of being allowed to like them. This kind of thing also shows up in reviews of films that belong to franchises (e.g. The Force Awakens).

like Chris as a reviewer, but I prefer it when his reviews are clear of baggage, so to speak, when he reviews more obscure films that have to succeed or fail on their own merits. And with Deadpool and Civil War being his top ranking films of the year so far...yeah...very much a case of "different folks, different strokes," in regards to personal preferences.

Yeah when he's using "I think some critics just check out sometimes if a movie doesn't just grab you from the first few scenes" to try to explain the low scores, pretty much claiming that those people aren't doing their jobs, it comes off as being arrogant to me. Again, I love the guy and his reviews (even the ones I disagree with)... this feels very out of character for him.

Edit:
Also pay no attention to the "ugh" girl... like seriously, what the fuck, right? At least "ugh" is a verbal sound, I wonder if she goes around saying "OT" whenever getting back to the subject at hand.

 

[SweetShark]

I'm a big fan of Stuckman as well, but he has some very strange opinions sometimes, as evidenced by his defending of pretty much all things Shyamalan as misunderstood artistic masterpieces. The review he's giving for Apocalypse is pretty close to the same he gave for Batman v Superman, so I'll take it with a grain of salt. The only thing I really disliked about this review is that he did the whole arrogant "All the other reviewers are wrong" thing, which Chris is usually smart enough to not fall into. To each their own and all that.

To be fair, he didn't exactly said that for the other reviewers. He just said he know many others will judge the movie more harshly after the first 20 boring minutes of the movie. Many people who get really bored and piss off [like me sometimes] start nitpick the sh*t of many movies just for enjoyment [like me].
And yes, I don't agree with many opinions he have like you said, but I always respect his opinion to put an actual effort to justify his way of thinking.
Respect always for this guy.

 

[Cicada 5]

Because from where I'm standing the X-Men movies were only ever considered good enough by the already low standards of comic book movies in 2002 or whenever the first one came out.

This just sounds like another exercise in mediocrity in a series defined by mediocrity.

Not true, plenty of people consider them damn good films.

And plenty of people loved the Twilight films.

What's your point?

People can have different opinions on what is good but the general consensus is that the first two Singer X films and DOFP were good movies. I haven't seen them receive anywhere near the same bile as Twilight.

 

[axlryder]

its not her fault the media obsesses over her

well if you mean "media" in reference to tabloids, entertainment networks, websites, interview shows, etc. then yeah, I couldn't care less about that. To clarify, I'm talking about movies, and specifically movies that feature Jennifer Lawrence playing Jennifer Lawrence trying to act, which is almost all Jennifer Lawrence movies (SLP, American Hustle, Hunger Games, X-Men). Granted, flash over substance is a common trait amongst movie stars, but there has been SO much Jennifer Lawrence lately that it kind of uncomfortably sticks out (thus overexposed). If that's what you meant, then I guess I disagree that her acting isn't her fault, at least not when it's so consistently bad.

and she isnt the one writing her character in X-Men.

I'm referring specifically to JL's Mystique here, I was saying "her" in reference to her in the X-men movies (you know, the topic of the thread). I'm saying Jennifer Lawrence's pervasiveness in film combined with her consistently bad acting that I have already seen enough of to have a conditioned response to overshadows the character of Mystique and takes me out of the movie. When combined with the poor writing (which actually amplifies her poor acting) it makes me hate it every time she comes on screen.

saying you loathe seeing her because of these things is like being rear-ended by a driver and getting mad at their kid in the backseat.

Well that simile might work if the kid's face was strapped to the hood of the cars that kept rear ending you, and instead of getting mad you just reflexively wince when you see the kid's face on the front of another car that's behind you. Though, this doesn't even compare directly to the point I was making....

y'know, I must say it's just not a very good analogy.

 

[mduncan50]

If that's what you meant, then I guess I disagree that her acting isn't her fault, at least not when it's so consistently bad.

There's a man named Oscar that would disagree with you. Xavier isn't the only one with an academy.

 

[axlryder]

If that's what you meant, then I guess I disagree that her acting isn't her fault, at least not when it's so consistently bad.

There's a man named Oscar that would disagree with you. Xavier isn't the only one with an academy.

Yeah, and given my specific mentioning of the film in question, I think it's obvious that Oscar and I don't see eye to eye. There are many who share and don't share my views on that. Thankfully, the potential argument(s) that could evolve from this has/have already been done about a million times, so we don't need to have them. If you really want to have one, you can enjoy it vicariously through the multitudinous individuals who share your position (whatever that position might be) available to you via google.

Oh, she was good in Winter's Bone though.

 

[Vykrel]

To clarify, I'm talking about movies, and specifically movies that feature Jennifer Lawrence playing Jennifer Lawrence trying to act, which is almost all Jennifer Lawrence movies (SLP, American Hustle, Hunger Games, X-Men).

you lost all credibility here, bud. none of those characters are even remotely similar to her own personality.

 

[Lone_Wolf]

Kinda sad to see the reviews. Was expecting a lot from this film.
Though I know it's not going to be bad.

 

[mduncan50]

So to update the current status at Rotten Tomatoes, they've nearly doubled the amount of available reviews now with 46 and the scores have increased a little bit, but not by much. Current Tomatometer is sitting at 52%, so still rotten, and the average score has nudged up just a little bit to 5.6/10. So it would seem that even the "good" ratings are considering it to be THAT good, Chris Stuckmann's review that we were discussing earlier appears to be the most positive review so far. Highlights from the rest:

X-Men Apocalypse is a mind-bending trip of a movie, one likely both to exhilarate spectators and to leave many either with severe feelings of sensory overload or scratching their heads.

X-Men: Apocalypse doesn't quite reach the lofty heights of the genre's best, but is a solidly entertaining film. Evan Peters steals the show again as Quicksilver.

Considering the amount of time spent watching Apocalypse round up his forces, you'd think he'd be a marginally interesting villain but that isn't the case.

It repeats a lot of what has come before, but solid thrills make it more fun than old, for now.

The lowlights:

The issue with X-Men: Apocalypse is that Bryan Singer suggests so many possible directions to go in and still chooses the least interesting one.

What's most disappointing is how familiar this end of the world feels. Magneto floats with his arms out. People put fingers to temples. Nothing new to see here. Nothing more to say.

The end - of the movie, not the world -can't come soon enough.

And the WTF?

The real, actual apocalypse may be happening right now! 'Apocalypse' the movie ... not so much.

Mark Jackson of the Epoch Times, do you know something we don't?

 

[Arnoxthe1]

The thing is... And I say this as an active Christian so fair warning, I don't know whether I should be offended with this movie or not. Also doesn't help that I haven't seen it of course but still.

What I am NOT saying though is that they never should have made it or blah blah needs censoring. Not at all what I'm saying. This is my personal opinion. And my opinion is that Jesus Christ cannot be rivalled in his acts, or in his power, or in his love. And of course, Jesus Christ's message was to love your neighbor and to pray for them which persecute you and spitefully use you. To give people the agency to choose their fate, not try to mind control them into doing your bidding. Human beings are much much more than just animals to be led around everywhere on a leash.

Or maybe that's all irrelevant because that's not really what the film is about. Again, haven't seen it yet. But from the trailer I saw, it sounded pretty offensively like they were hinting at Jesus Christ actually being a terrible person or someone insane or what have you. And whether you agree with Christianity or not is, again, irrelevant. Again, this is just my personal opinion as a Christian.

 

[jshrike]

My biggest issue with the film, based on the reviews, is that Magneto, who is by far the most interesting character in this run of X-Mens, is basically really good for his first few scenes, then becomes a bad guy and just is generic evil guy henchmen. It seems like a waste of a character they spent a lot of time building up on. It's worth noting, I suppose, that First Class was not directed by Bryan Singer. I'm wondering if that might have something to do with the declining quality since.

 

[mduncan50]

The thing is... And I say this as an active Christian so fair warning, I don't know whether I should be offended with this movie or not. Also doesn't help that I haven't seen it of course but still.

What I am NOT saying though is that they never should have made it or blah blah needs censoring. Not at all what I'm saying. This is my personal opinion. And my opinion is that Jesus Christ cannot be rivalled in his acts, or in his power, or in his love. And of course, Jesus Christ's message was to love your neighbor and to pray for them which persecute you and spitefully use you. To give people the agency to choose their fate, not try to mind control them into doing your bidding. Human beings are much much more than just animals to be led around everywhere on a leash.

Or maybe that's all irrelevant because that's not really what the film is about. Again, haven't seen it yet. But from the trailer I saw, it sounded pretty offensively like they were hinting at Jesus Christ actually being a terrible person or someone insane or what have you. And whether you agree with Christianity or not is, again, irrelevant. Again, this is just my personal opinion as a Christian.

My memory from reading the books is that the idea isn't that Apocalypse is actually Jehovah, Yahweh, Jesus, Shiva, etc, etc, but rather that he has impersonated these figures at times, so there is sometimes confusion as to whether a story attributed to those figures may have actually been him instead. As an atheist I don't see any issues with this, though I can understand how a believer may find it somewhat offensive. Maybe it would be easiest to look at it as he is simply a false idol that uses the religious imagery that best suits him in any given situation to gain what he wants, but I truly believe that it was never the intention of the original comic writers nor those making the movie to infer that your religion is a lie and that Apocalypse is the god which everything is based on.

 

[axlryder]

you lost all credibility here, bud. none of those characters are even remotely similar to her own personality.

Sorry, bud, but that's a swing and a miss.

No shit they're all different from her personality, but I never said she has the acting ability of Christopher Walken. My phrasing was specific. She's playing herself trying to act (like such and such a character). She mugs for the camera, she imitates, she has excellent screen presence, delivers high energy performances with a hint of subtlety, takes direction and pretty much does everything that a "good" movie star is supposed to do, but nothing about her performances really sells me that she is someone else or her character could be a real person (regardless of writing quality). She's in her own head. She's still very much "jennifer lawrence" and that comes through in her performances. As far as Hollywood goes, she's just dandy, but there's very little conviction or depth behind her acting, and without that it's all just smoke and mirrors. The main exception that I'm aware of being her role in Winter's Bone.

Like I said to the other guy, that's my view, and there are those who agree and disagree both with my assessment of her ability and my assessment of what it means to be a good actor, but that's not an argument I'm going to start right now because it will go in circles forever and has strayed very far from my original point which you simply misinterpreted and attacked me for (which seem to be a running trend with you).

 

[axlryder]

The thing is... And I say this as an active Christian so fair warning, I don't know whether I should be offended with this movie or not. Also doesn't help that I haven't seen it of course but still.

What I am NOT saying though is that they never should have made it or blah blah needs censoring. Not at all what I'm saying. This is my personal opinion. And my opinion is that Jesus Christ cannot be rivalled in his acts, or in his power, or in his love. And of course, Jesus Christ's message was to love your neighbor and to pray for them which persecute you and spitefully use you. To give people the agency to choose their fate, not try to mind control them into doing your bidding. Human beings are much much more than just animals to be led around everywhere on a leash.

Or maybe that's all irrelevant because that's not really what the film is about. Again, haven't seen it yet. But from the trailer I saw, it sounded pretty offensively like they were hinting at Jesus Christ actually being a terrible person or someone insane or what have you. And whether you agree with Christianity or not is, again, irrelevant. Again, this is just my personal opinion as a Christian.

well, whether your assessment is correct or not, these films are SOLIDLY rooted in that historical fiction category (mutants did the cuban missle crisis), and exist in a universe where the writer is basically god (TOAA).