Alex Vs Simon: 12 Steps To Decide If X-Men Apocalypse Actually Sucks
It's not as clear cut as you might think.
Judging by Rotten Tomatoes, X-Men: Apocalypse is the worst X-Men movie of all time (not counting spin-offs obviously, because Origins will always prop everyone else up). Is that really a fair assessment?
It currently sits at 49%, reflecting a split decision on the freshness (which is also corroborated by the number of fresh reviews to the number of rotten ones), but it would be fair to say that those who disliked it did so with a far greater fire than those who liked it did.
For Executive Editor (and comic book movie coverage veteran) Simon Gallagher - me - the film isn't exactly a soaring triumph, but it does a lot of things right and it deserves to be considered the fourth best in the series.
Film Editor Alex Leadbeater (who watched X-Men 2 endlessly as a teenager) was less forgiving. In his own words, the film is a major disappointment that fails completely on a character level and was full of misjudged decisions pretty much everywhere else. It's not a total car crash, but it's very hard to find things to like unconditionally.
Who's right? It's down to you to decide. Heres your helpful guide to whether X-Men Apocalypse actually sucks as much as some people are saying, broken into key points
12. The Acting
Alex: Theres been a lot of disparaging comments made about the quality of acting in X-Men: Apocalypse, a lot of which seems to be unfounded.
Sophie Turner is pretty awful she cant hold an American accent and doesnt have the emotional range to make Jean Grey both apocalyptically fearful and a believable teenager but other than that its just a case of mediocrity brought about by an unnurturing script.
The real issue is with a lack of freedom. James McAvoy is fine as foppish Professor X, but then has to grapple with an unestablished turn into seriousness, and Tye Sheridans solid Cyclops is undercut by not enough time to develop any element of his personality. The major complaints have been about Jennifer Lawrence, but while she brings brings nothing fresh, its really her off-screen insistence to not have to put on the make-up everyday that hurts Mystique. They could all do better, but for the most part everyones fine.
Michael Fassbender is the only one who rises above it, able to give Magnetos tortured part in the story actual weight (its a real shame hes not developing into a McKellen-esque megalomaniac).
Simon: I'll be honest, I don't think the acting in Apocalypse is anywhere near the level it's been widely suggested as generally: I think Oscar Isaac's performance has been massively underplayed, considering what he's up against. The fact that he can even remotely sell the character is a triumph.
Sophie Turner is fine, her accent is fine (it wanders across the Atlantic a hell of a lot less than Nicholas Hoult's) and she's much more impressive than she usually is as Sansa Stark. Kodi Smit-Mcphee does a great impression of a young Alan Cumming, Evan Peters is excellent as a conflicted Quicksilver, and there are solid performances by pretty much everyone, with Michael Fassbender excelling.
And I really can't stress how well Isaac does: he's the right blend of ham and measured theatrics, and to see him lambasted on look alone is horribly reductive.
Jennifer Lawrence though is a wreck, as she has been for the entire "new" X-Men series. Even without the blue make-up for most of the time, she's a shadow of her ability, and despite her claims to want to come back, she's pretty boring.