Review: X-Men: Days of Future Past

OK, so I’ll give it my best shot: We start off in the near future, with things looking bleak for mutant-kind as they are being hunted down by super-awesome robots called Sentinels. The plan is to have a mutant named Kitty Pryde (Ellen Page) use her special powers to send Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) back to 1973 to convince the younger, wayward Dr. Charles Xavier (James McAvoy) to fight for the cause in preventing the events that started the chain events resulting in the Sentinels’ dominance. This means stopping Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence) from assassinating Sentinels creator Trask (Peter Dinklage). I know how that sounds, but it’s really the plan. The plan also involves trying to get Xavier to form an alliance with arch-enemy Magneto (Michael Fassbender).

 

Full disclosure here folks: I tapped out. I just plain tapped out to this one. Director Bryan Singer (“X-Men”, “The Usual Suspects”) and screenwriter Simon Kinberg (“X-Men: The Last Stand”, “This Means War”) must be a whole lot smarter than me because for at least the first half of this film…I just couldn’t find my bearings in this. Sure, I haven’t been a die-hard fan of this series, but I’ve seen every single one of the films (including the “Wolverine” spin-offs), and for at least the first half of the film, I just couldn’t keep track of all these people. I know this is kind of a fanboy film, and so perhaps Singer just assumed the only people watching this would be the faithful. However, I review films, not comic books, and so whether this film was aimed squarely at me or not, I think it’s still fair for me to give you my thoughts. Besides, we all know this was meant to be a summer blockbuster for the masses, so Singer surely wasn’t aiming for just the comic book geeks (And let’s face it, comic book geeks are kinda mainstream now anyway). If you’re gonna give us a film that operates on several timelines, you’ve got to make sure the thing makes sense to more people than just you. I get the feeling Singer, Kinberg, and Kinberg’s fellow story writers Jane Goldman and Matthew Vaughn (“Stardust”, “Kick-Ass”) didn’t pass the script around to anyone outside of their own inner circle, and that’s screenwriting ‘no-no’ numero uno, isn’t it? The film operates on several timelines, features both the younger and older versions of certain characters, and gives us new characters on top of that, without giving us an absolutely clear idea at the outset as to who is who and when they’re who. Hell, at one point I was even questioning if Ellen Page wasn’t actually reprising her character from “Inception”, given the character’s slightly similar plot function.

 

Given that I’m only mildly appreciative of this franchise and not much of a comic book reader, I’ll accept some of the responsibility for a hazy recollection of previous characters and events (Indeed, it turns out that I should’ve recognised some of the younger cast here from previous films. Whoops). If you’re a die-hard fan who remembers every single little detail about the previous films, you might actually like this film. However, I still think there’s an ineptitude and arrogant attitude adopted by all involved here. I felt excluded at the outset when I really didn’t need to be. The film has other problems, which I feel allows me to give it a pretty low score anyway, even if the confusion were more on me than the filmmakers. The confusion, however, is certainly the biggest problem. While I don’t want to be spoon-fed, I just think this has been poorly written. Just look at the opening scenes and honestly, I feel like things could’ve been far more coherently set-up. The rather dorky opener gives us a bunch of younger mutants who come off as lame poseurs for an “X-Men” spin-off TV series. Although some of these guys were in “The Last Stand”, I have to admit to drawing a complete blank on all of them, and they seemed like third-rate knock-offs. Given it feels like one has walked into the middle of a film, why should I care about any of this? It’s clunky, and when original “X-Men” characters start turning up, the timeline confusion begins and I felt at a huge distance for quite a while.

 

I don’t think the entirety of that blame falls on to me, I’m afraid. There’s plenty of evidence of poor writing throughout, such as constantly cutting back to Patrick Stewart’s Xavier and his young charges, having the distinct feel of characters standing around waiting to be written into the film. That’s just poor structuring right there. Meanwhile, I know time travel films often have characters change the past to try and change the future (The best of these being “Terminator 2: Judgement Day”), but the way it is done here causes way too many problems for those of us who are predisposed to notice such things. There’s a shitload of butterflies getting stomped on here, folks. I also have to say that aside from the “Bill & Ted” movies, I’m not a fan of characters meeting their future/past selves. “Looper”, for instance, was idiotic. I know time travel in and of itself is bullshit, but even within the realm of bullshit, we all have our limits of what we’ll accept, and for me, I’ve always hated that idea. “Bill & Ted” got away with it due to being a dopey (really, really dopey) comedy. Here, there’s no such excuse, though having Patrick Stewart and James McAvoy on screen at the same time has problems that go beyond just the time travel stuff. Even more so than in “First Class” (which was actually a pretty good film), McAvoy’s Xavier and Stewart’s Xavier seem worlds apart, and not in any credible way. I get it, not everyone’s the same person at 30 as they are at 60, but that’s just something we say, really. We’re still recognisably ourselves in at least some way, no matter how many years go by. Not so with McAvoy’s Xavier and Stewart’s Xavier, I just couldn’t buy them as the same guy. McAvoy plays Xavier as the British version of ‘The Dude’, a douchy, drunken tool. He’s meant to be a wayward and on some kind of drugs to allow him to walk. He’s a tortured genius I guess, but he comes across as the English equivalent of a douchy frat boy. That’s far too much of a gap between him and the aging, headmaster-ish mentalist mutant. They aren’t the same guy at all and having McAvoy and Stewart share the screen together just reinforces it. McAvoy gives a good performance, creates an interesting character…it’s just not Xavier. At all.

 

Jennifer Lawrence, meanwhile, continues her schizophrenic acting career by giving us yet another terrible performance that makes her solid efforts in “Silver Linings Playbook” and “American Hustle” seem like they’ve come from a completely different actress. She, like McAvoy, is also absolutely nothing like her original trilogy counterpart, Rebecca Romijn. Thankfully for her, though, she’s never asked to act opposite Romijn at any point in the film, as Romijn isn’t here this time. The Mystique makeup/design continues to do negative things for Lawrence, both physically and in her performance. Apparently body paint was used in all previous films and a body suit here, but if that’s the case, then all I can say is that blue works much better for Romijn than Lawrence, because whether it was paint or a suit, neither Lawrence version of the character has looked right to me. She looks weird and awkward and although she has a perfectly lovely body and face, they’re not made to look flattering in these films. As for her performance, there’s something awkward about it that stands out like a sore thumb, yet at the same time she’s so bland that she never really owns the character or the screen. It’s the strangest thing. Oscar or not, Lawrence is alarmingly crap in most everything else and throughout her scenes in this film I got the distinct vibe of a little girl playing dress-up.

 

I’ve always had a massive problem with the Magneto character in this franchise, as even in the first film I found him way too sympathetic for a villain. In some of the subsequent films, hell he seemed like a damn ‘tweener’ (to use wrestling parlance for that grey area between ‘babyface’ and ‘heel’). In “First Class” I had a helluva hard time not siding with the guy, to be perfectly honest. Here, though, the film completely changes this guy. Especially when played by Sir Ian McKellen, he comes across as a straight up ‘good guy’ character this time. It’s like I was supposed to read some comic book tie-in prior to the film or maybe a short film was supposed to precede this one that explained why Magneto is now an unabashed hero this time. Fassbender is much better than McKellen in the role, and if there’s even a trace of villainy or darkness to the character here, it’s entirely due to Fassbender.

 

The film is also just plain plagiaristic and stale throughout. In particular, there’s a good chunk of “Watchmen” in here, with a large helping of the “Terminator” films to boot (Don’t believe me? Look at how Wolverine time travels in the nude! It’s not even a subtle steal!). I don’t want to get into a comic book geek debate here about what came first on the printed page, it’s irrelevant. I watch movies and try my best to judge them on their own cinematic level, even if they’re based on something else (I’m not perfect, though. I’m a hypocrite like everyone else). So I couldn’t help but notice a whole lotta “Watchmen” goin’ on here. And it’s soooo dumb, not just for the blatantly pilfered cartoony Nixon. Magneto caused the JFK assassination? JFK was a mutant? Fuck off. That’s so immature and lame. JFK gags are so out of date, not even the fact that this film occasionally takes place in earlier eras is enough of an excuse (Don’t even get me started on the fact that this is basically an anti-nuke film released in 2014. Geez, talk about ‘played out cliché’). Meanwhile, on tonight’s show the role of Dr. Manhattan will be played by…Mystique. Sorry, but Dr. Manhattan is superior in every single way.

 

Of the cast, Evan Peters, Nicholas Hoult, and Peter Dinklage are the clear standouts. Peters’ Quicksilver is the only new mutant to grab one’s attention, he’s really cool and interesting. It’s a shame then, that we only get one quick glimpse of him in the second half of the film, because he’s easily the best thing about the first half. Similarly, Nicholas Hoult’s Beast manages to steal his every scene. Peter Dinklage plays the closest thing this film has to a villain in idiosyncratic fashion without being annoyingly affected. Solid stuff. It was also good to see that veteran character actor Michael Lerner is still alive- I couldn’t even tell you the last time I saw him in something. However, this may be the worst usage of Halle Berry in any film ever, yes even “Catwoman”. For all the scant screen time she gets, I hope she was paid handsomely.

 

This is lousy, shoddy storytelling from filmmakers either too stuck up to let the uninitiated into their little secret club, or just plain inept at basic coherent storytelling.  Sadly, even if you’re a diehard fan who has less problem following the events than me (which may not be hard, I’m no Einstein), you’ve still got to contend with a film that blatantly rips off other films and thinks JFK conspiracy gags aren’t completely out of date. Really poor stuff, the worst film in the entire franchise thus far and Singer’s worst film to date. But hey, I’m the guy who thinks “The Last Stand” is the best film in the series (yet doesn’t seem to recall Ellen Page and Shawn Ashmore being in it!), so perhaps you should see it and make up your own mind.   

 

Rating: D+