MovieChat Forums > X-Men: Apocalypse (2016) Discussion > Why exactly do people hate this?

Why exactly do people hate this?

posted 5 years ago by PotatoWithEyes (145)
10 replies | jump to latest

My only complaint was too much Mystique, which was also an issue in DOFP but admittedly not as pronounced.

Do people just think it's too much action and not enough plot and character development? Yeah, so was Avengers Age of Ultron, but people don't hate on that movie nearly as much (although actually, its imdb rating isn't much better than this...).

I liked Apocalypse, I liked the 80s setting, I liked the character selection (i.e. seeing younger versions of characters from the first trilogy), and yes I liked the action quite a bit.

[–] VIDEOSTOREVANDAL (313) 5 years ago

COMPARED TO OTHER SIMILAR FLICKS IT IS MEDIOCRE.THE CHARACTERS AND STORYLINES ARE ALL JUMBLED AND CONDENSED.ITS AVERAGE BUT FUN.

[–] FFNogoodnik (775) 5 years ago

I like it too. I do, however, like what they did with Mystique in the recent films. It clearly shows how timelines can be different.

I will agree with VIDEOSTOREVANDAL that the storylines are a bit condensed but not enough for me to not enjoy the film.

[–] DracTarashV2 (4493) 5 years ago

Yeah, so was Avengers Age of Ultron

And there we go with one of the easiest MCU targets.

Well, no it wasn’t. Hell, if you ask me AOU has always been a more character-driven film than the first Avengers (and Avengers 1 has top-notch character development). It was darker, too.

But let’s say AOU did rely too much on action... you can deny it but, while not all of them have been home runs, MCU movies have always made story a priority... news flash: it easily is the least-liked Avengers film. That’s right. It’s probably fair to say that AOU isn’t seen as a terrible film in general, albeit enough people did consider it a letdown compared to the first one (I’m not one of them). Lately though, it seems more fans are coming around to it.

Now generally speaking, sure, the second Avengers was received well by many compared to the unrelated Apocalypse. How come? Oh, Idk, maybe it’s because (anti-MCU conspirator nutjobs be gone) AOU has superior direction, action, visual effects and, yes, story. Basically, it doesn’t have the many problems Apocalypse does.

With the obligatory this-one-MCU-movie-is-liked-better-than-another-cbm-for-some-reason-rhetoric out of the way, Apocalypse is a film that felt rushed and bloated. From bad character depictions to some of the action & CGI being less-than-stellar, Apocalypse simply wasn’t handled all that well. I genuinely like Apocalypse (it’s thoroughly entertaining and it has a few great moments in it), however my fondness for it can’t hide the fact that it has a number of issues. Hate to say it but the backlash it got was warranted.

[–] PotatoWithEyes (145) 5 years ago

I am a bigger X-Men fan than Avengers fan (just like most comic fans who grew up in the 90s)...this is true, but I still think overall that the MCU has been better than the Fox X-Men films, which have been underwhelming as a whole and focused too much on some characters at the expense of others. Also, they've done a piss poor job of keeping continuity straight.

However, Age of Ultron was definitely one of the MCU's weaker efforts. I don't feel like its story, action, or visual effects were better than Apocalypse. It's just that the casual moviegoing public (and critics) both a) prefers the Avengers' characters to the X-Men characters and b) is turned off by the X-Men films' recasting characters from the original trilogy. Other than the Iron Man vs. Hulk fight, Age of Ultron was very forgettable.

[–] Ace_Spade (9544) 5 years ago

So, I have several gripes:

1) Most of the action I felt I'd seen before. For instance: the Quicksilver scene was basically a re-tread of Days of Future Past's scene (I loved that scene, for the record). It didn't bring anything new to the table. Most of the action lives here for me; I've seen it before, there's no innovation.

2) The action also just felt like it was being shoehorned in. Obviously, this is somewhat true of every action script ("We need another action beat in here!"), but some hide it better than others. This did not.

3) Plot meandering and a general lack of focus. The film kills Havok pretty capriciously. It throws in characters like Angel and Psylocke without really doing anything with them. It doesn't seem to know who its main character is (I think it should be Jean Grey, but it sort of implies it's Cyclops, although Professor X and Mystique are also candidates). The Wolverine cameo, etc. This is one of the bigger issues for me because it makes the whole movie feel disjointed and because it winds up leaving the characters who should be the focal point getting short shrift (too many characters) and, as a result, I care little for the heroes and I don't get what the big deal about Apocalypse is (but for the fact that the movie just tells me he's a big deal).

4) Inconsistent powers, particularly in Apocalypse, make it hard to invest in action scenes or in the peril the heroes are in, or aren't in. Sometimes Apocalypse can use sand grains to kill people and tele-fuse them with rock. Other times, he can barely defend himself from Cyclops' laser eyes. Storm and Angel take hits that should kill them. In general, the movie plays fast and loose with its internal rules and, in consequence, I only ever know a hero is in danger when the action scene is over and the hero lost. It's a writer getting him or herself out of trouble, not crafting a great story.

Those are my biggest gripes. I have some others, but those are the biggies.

[–] looper007 (1158) 5 years ago

On the Mystique thing, that what happens when you hire a up and coming talent at the time who by the time you are into the reboot ends up been the new IT girl of Hollywood. So the studio or producers probably want her front and center and in doing that set's back the remain films in the franchise.

I think Apocalypse problem was it followed probably the best X-men film in the Day's of Future Past. Oscar Isaac's Apocalypse wasn't a very good villain. It dragged in places and just wasn't as awesome as Day's of Future Past. None of the young cast were as interesting as Magneto or Professor X. It probably go down as the third best out of the newer X-Men Franchise, I think the new film is the weakest film.

It be in the middle of the pack in the overall X-Men franchise.

[–] PotatoWithEyes (145) 5 years ago

Yeah, I know WHY Mystique got a big role...but that doesn't mean I have to like it, right? I also know why Wolverine got the lead in Days of Future Past despite him not being the lead in the original comics storyline or the 90s cartoon's adaptation of it.

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7699) 5 years ago

I liked this movie. Though I will admit that although I liked the version Apocalypse a bit in it I would've rather had one straight up adapted from the 90s X-Men cartoon. And that the actor playing him just couldn't do as cool a voice as John Colicos.

[–] Flybynight45 (165) 4 years ago

It’s a terrible movie for many reasons:

A) the opening scene is so rushed. Develop it a little more. Apocalypse is stopped by moving a stone ? You got to be kidding me.

B) Apocalypse looks and talks ridiculous. He’s like a cross between the Emperor and the wicked witch of the west. He has this blah expression in his voice.

C) Apocalypse’s powers are so undefined. It’s as if the director just kept making them up as the movie went along. Turn people into sand.. why? In the opening scenes it seemed like he could steal other mutant powers. This would have. Even a better idea.. kind of like rogue but copies and amplifies those powers. Would explain why he wants to find mutants from the get go.

D) Apocalypse motivations are kind of all over the place. Society is weak but he learned about world wars and nukes and more people died in the past 50 years from 1983 than in like thousands of years passing in the time of ancient Egypt.

E) The 4 horseman are weak and poorly developed. Their motivations for joining apocalypse are not well explained except for Magneto.

F) overall lack of character development. No explanation why Magneto.. after trying to cause a war 10 years ago just have it up to raise a family in Poland. I think they knew Magneto needed to be in the film but didn’t know what to do with him properly. We had already seen Magnetos tragic past. There’s also very little Prof X character development that was so well done in DOFP.

G) There’s overall too much CGI diarrhea on the screen. It’s like they had some kind of quota.

[–] PaladinNJ (21509) 4 years ago

Personally I think Apocalypse was poorly portrayed in this movie. Instead of being a mega villain with delusions of grandeur they made him into a power vampire.