Something's gotta give

Fri, Jun 10th 2016, 03:19 PM


In this image released by Twentieth Century Fox, Mystique, portrayed by Jennifer Lawrence, appears in a scene from, "X-Men: Apocolypse." (Photo: AP)

X-Men: Apocalypse (Rated T)
Cast: Jennifer Lawrence, James McAvoy, Michael Fassbender, Oscar Isaac
Genre: Fantasy/ Science Fiction
Dwight's Rating: 2.5 Stars

Apparently, there is no X-Men character named "Groundhog."

There's "Wolverine", of course. There's also "Beast". And even a "Maggot". But no "Groundhog" -- not on the comic-book page nor on the silver screen. At least not yet!

Out in the audience, however, and especially at showings of the new film, "X-Men: Apocalypse", there may be quite a few people feeling like "groundhogs". Not because of a superb ability to chuck wood or burrow in deep tunnels, but rather, in reference to the phenomenon known as "Groundhog Day", popularized by the eponymous 1993 film.

You'll recall how Bill Murray's character finds himself reliving the same day over and over and over again; doing the same things, day-in, day-out! Several folks watching "Apocalypse" -- the eighth film in the 16-years-running "X-Men" film franchise (ninth, if you include this year's wonderful "Deadpool") -- may find themselves saying "this seems awfully familiar".

In this edition, we learn that the immortal Apocalypse, worshiped as a god since the dawn of civilization, becomes the first and most powerful mutant. Awakening after thousands of years, he recruits the disheartened Magneto (Michael Fassbender) and other mutants to create a new world order. As the fate of the Earth hangs in the balance, Professor X (James McAvoy) and Raven (Jennifer Lawrence) lead a team of young X-Men to stop their seemingly invincible nemesis from destroying mankind.

So is it just me, or wasn't this, or something to this effect, the premise of the original "X-Men"? -- Something about killing every non-mutant human, or every mutant, or making every human a mutant? Or was that the "X:2" premise? Or maybe, "X:Men: The Last Stand"?

It's hard to keep track of all of the films in the franchise. Some of those were sequels and others were prequels. Some were sequels to prequels. Others were spinoffs and sequels to spinoffs. At least one of the spinoff-sequels was a prequel. "Apocalypse" is a sequel to a prequel, and thus, is itself, also a prequel, to something. Got it?

While some other franchises have done reasonably good jobs of eliminating the need for viewers to have watched all previous iterations, these "X-Men" films seem to require you to have seen at least one, if not all. And to best appreciate "Apocalypse", it just seems that a viewing of at least one of the earliest films, and most of the recent flicks -- the prequels -- "X-Men: First Class" and "Days of Future Past", the immediate predecessor of this film, would be beneficial.

Otherwise, this may largely be a treat for long-time fans and comic book fan-boys. That doesn't mean there's not a lot to like here. As has been a highlight of the prequels, Michael Fassbender is fantastic as always. And Evan Peters as Quicksilver is again a scene-stealer.

Also, as with most of the films in this largely arresting franchise, "X-Men" is always its most fascinating when it explores the themes involving these poor mutants struggling to accept themselves and their differences. Observing them try to hide their mutations and control their powers and live as normal lives as possible, in a cruel human world while facing persecution, has helped these stand out among the many comic book based superhero movies.

But again, we've seen this before. And it is beginning to feel repetitive. Perhaps eight or nine (or wherever we're at) is more than enough.

This edition is nowhere near as energetic as its predecessor. The character Apocalypse, played by Oscar Isaac, is rather uninspiring as the great villain. And as this is a prequel, we pretty much know that almost every single character on the screen is going to be okay. That removes a lot of suspense and tension.

Two years ago in "Days of Future Past", it was great fun seeing Wolverine going back in time to prevent an event from happening that could impact the future. But most of the fun has vanished from this generic-feeling "Apocalypse". And, why is this movie so long? It's a very drawn out 44 minutes (though it feels closer to three hours).

Going back in time to alter history is similar but not quite the same as living the same day over and over. (That sounds a lot like the Tom Cruise flick, "Edge of Tomorrow"). Perhaps that would be quite an interesting mutation for one of the future X-Men, if it hasn't been done before. But for moviegoers to be the groundhogs, that's no bueno! And if this franchise keeps this up, many moviegoers are going to wish they could really go back in time, and actively opt out of watching any more.

o Dwight Strachan is the host/producer of " Morning Blend" on Guardian Radio. He is a television producer and writer, and an avid TV history and film buff. Email dwight@nasguard.com and follow him on twitter @morningblend969.

Click here to read more at The Nassau Guardian

 Sponsored Ads