X-Men: Days of Future Past Review - You Had Me At Mutants and Time-Travel

I watched Days of Future Past earlier this week and after that, and after a few conversations with @dlf219, I went back and watched all the movies in the franchise again. These are my thoughts on X-Men: Days of Future Past and the franchise as a whole (including spoilers).

I loved the movie. I thought it was great. I thought the acting was superb. The story was well-written (which is something we usually forego when it comes to superhero blockbusters). But this was the first movie since The Dark Knight in 2008 that drew me in and enveloped me with its plots and character conflicts. I felt for Charles Xavier, just as much as I felt for and resonated with Magneto. The X-Men franchise as a whole has always dealt with how minorities are treated and the injustices they are subjected to. I preferred this current installment to Mystique in X-Men: First Class saying this: 

That aside, I'm glad to see that James McAvoy, Michael Fassbender and Jennifer Lawrence reprise their roles Professor X, Magneto and  Mystique. It's really the first time since Heath Ledger in 2008, that we've gotten to witness professionals flex their acting guns in a superhero movie, especially from Fassbender and McAvoy. 

The audience is immediately thrown into the fray at the start of the movie, which is pretty important. Which marks this as one of the first superhero blockbusters (that I can remember) that looks past the origin story or tries to introduce and familiarize its audience with what they should know or not. These guys jumped right into it. By doing so we had a movie that didn't dedicate thirty minutes to an hour, discovering powers, explaining back stories and really without any of the fluff that you would usually find in an origin movie. This allowed the writers to plunge right into the story, which I loved as a comic book geek. I did the time reading all those issues and watched all those animated TV shows as a kid. LET ME REAP MY REWARDS!

Sidenote: That's one of the reasons why geeks and critics alike prefer a majority of the animated movies (especially those produced by DC Comics and Warner Bros). A story is taken from the pages and put on the screen; end production. Not to be ungrateful, but no I don't need the first hour of the movie to explain to me why Joker does what he does. I understand why it's done, but whatever. Random tangent anyway. Back to X-Men.

More action scenes, or more plot. I prefer the latter, which is really what makes this a movie I can watch again and again.

I loved the introduction of newer, less popular mutants; Sunspot, Blink, Shadowcat, Bishop and Colossus make an appearance in a battle against the new and improved Sentinels. Quicksilver makes his big screen debut for the mutant movie franchise and it was AWESOME! If you haven't watched the movie yet, I'm sure you've heard about his 2-3 minute scene. Witty, playful, oddly calm... Evan Peters does a good job portraying his character. It's the best action scene I've seen in a superhero movie since Nightcrawler's assassination attempt on the U.S. President in X-2. This scene was damn near perfect. Jim Croce's "Time in a Bottle" was the perfect song and allowed us to witness one of the best bullet-time scenes I've seen since The Matrix.

Looking back, I kinda feel bad. I was disgusted when the movie posters were originally released and I saw the costume design etc. My apologies. Good job Bryan Singer and co.

Sidenote 2: I don't get why his character wasn't utilized more in the movie. He was obviously a big help earlier. You'd think Wolverine would recruit to help save the world. You could argue that it was because he's a kid but...

I digress. I loved the movie. Even though it's essentially a reset button that allows us to forget everything they did in the first two movies (yes I wiped Last Stand completely from memory). This is good for screenwriting purposes cause they can erase all the plot holes and inconsistencies from those and start on a clean slate. This is great for the studio franchise, cause guess what? It's all about money. Sony has Spider-man, Warner Bros has DC Comics and Disney/Marvel have the Avengers. It's an arms race guys, and Disney/Marvel is in the lead. Everyone else is playing catch-up. This is the healthiest reboot I've seen by far which means we don't have to suffer through any more origin stories (hopefully) and I cannot wait for the next movie in the franchise. The post-credits scene showed a young Apocalypse. Fox can't afford to mess this up. You literally cannot mess up an Apocalypse story in 2014. I won't stand for it! A great movie will give Fox the push they need to gain ground on the Avengers franchise.

The only thing I have left to add is this. As much as I love Ian McKellen and Patrick Stewart and their on-set chemistry and real-life bromance, I think it's time the reins of those two characters are passed on to Fassbender and McAvoy. I don't know how that would happen without creating more inconsistencies but whatever. I enjoy their dynamic as friends turned enemies and the franchise just needs an a change. A breath of fresh air if you will, and I think those two can give it what it needs.

All in all. Great movie. B+. The franchise gets an A for near-seamless restructuring and execution. Well done. 

X-cutioner Style: Days of Future Past Review

NO MAJOR PLOT SPOILERS!!!!

On its knees knelt, on its last stand, the "present" and initial vehicle of the X-men franchise. With its back to the wall and seemingly devoid of any oxygen to utter it's last breath, a tourniquet of some sorts arrived in the form of a spin off.

As we both know, tourniquets only temporarily ease the problem and once again, there is a bullet 2 seconds from being in its head. Then a blast from the past arrives like Brendan Frasier in `99 and the gun jams, giving the X-men enough time to regroup, and us enough time to go to the bathroom.

Back on death row, we return to see the X-men on its last stand, now wasting material, thirsting for relevance, and we can't help but to wonder how in the Raven-Kurt-Hank blue Hell are they going to get out of this one.

But just as the trigger is being pulled, and the bullet is being relieved from its chamber, nothingness occurs. Existence disapparates (check your Magical Terms for Dummies book); it ceases to exist, or does it? Did this wonky-eyed situation really ameliorate or did Nightcrawler abscond with Time itself, like he did with my head?

Well, I think the camp at Fox would like you to think or at least believe as though nothing occurred in this apologetic production. But the fact of the matter is, it did occur; X-men The Last Stand DID happen; it was that one night that you wish you could have back; the three that you thought was an eight due to your beer goggles, the same night Bryan Singer turned his back on the franchise, and consequently his ace pilot, to go home with his ex, with whom he only got to second base with because of her subscription to Mother Nature Monthly...I'm sure she knew.

Cyclops reincarnated into "this" guy

I'm very impressed with Mrs. Donner as a producer and no one in this blogospgere or vast space that which we do not have a complete grasp on yet (insert net neutrality quip here) can tell me that this was not a ploy; they can't tell me that She did not consciously sit down and ponder over the Rita-like aftermath of her third X-men stepchild, searching for an alternative or "way out".

THIS porcupine is Kid Omega?!?! I guess I'm Spiderman

Well she found it in this X-men Something Something Time Travel movie, based off of probably one of my top five favorite X-men story arcs, Days of Future Past (The Hunt for Xavier, House of M, Age of Apocalypse **daily double**, and Necrosha are the other four).

However, if for S's & G's (shits & giggles) we were counting (which I'm not), then this would technically be the franchise's third mulligan.

They received one for The Last Stand (finally atoning for its sins) and then another one for Wolverine Origins (rebooting that into The Wolverine), and another unbeknownst mulligan for botching and back-burning the production of the Magneto: Origins (somewhere David Goyer wails); it's so hard to get a movie made about you.

But wait there's more, not only did the movie attempt to right it's wrongs, but it essentially wronged it's rights. In comparison to the other X-men movies, this is the first one with an actual purpose but where it made up in actual direction, it lacked in direction. Wait? What? Yes, I absolutely mean Bryan Singer had a rather heavy hand, and (I know this isn't his department) the editing made it look heavier.

Like Mystique, the film limped and limped with a sallow demeanor; the events were lain out rather lazily, correcting itself at the end but the rising phase was a snoozer without much density, in my opinion; I was left wanting a little more substance with less shooting in each scene, as they lily-padded throughout the movie.

These are not tears of joy

Now that's not to say that the movie didn't have substance; the material that was covered in the film was substantial as far as quantity, it's just I'm more so bothered by the quality displayed with the source material and the characters within the medium; if you can't read between the lines, I'm currently scalping the writers.

On the operating table, the writers lie, anesthetized (this isn't Saw, geez), as a formaldehyde drenched swine on its last oink. Yes, the end goal was attained but the pathway meandered towards it; I swear they wrote this movie with a crayon.

Screeching to a halt as I dismount from my soap box pummel horse, I will ask if the movie was effective by its standards. Was it? Well if conveniently erasing all of what we know formerly as the X-men franchise was it's objective, then I tip my mask to them. But as a consumer and a cog... SWEET CREAM ON AN ICE CREAM SAMICH! did you think that a wave of your magic cinematic wand would be satisfactory enough to justifiably nullify three movies?!?

Well in the words of a modern day showman and philosopher, it doesn't matter what I think; I will sit here and be force fed whatever post-apocalyptic, allegory of the cave/Matrix-like gruel that Fox feeds me.

So, when should you go see it? I would definitely go to see it this weekend, so it's second/third weekend worthy because it lacks the blockbuster appeal that garners an opening weekend crowd (outside of the comic fans); it lacked the amount of action that the average person would expect, this allowed it to really focus on the story.

It also has a dark undertone, which is understood when dealing with mass genocide; moreover, the emotional and physical grief that three of the four main characters bore, along with the amount of death, could be used to argue for a superhero drama genre label.

Moreover, the performances by the four leads (especially James McAvoy) were gripping. Grant it, three of four have been nominated for Academy Awards (Hugh Jackman, Jennifer Lawrence, and Michael Fassbender); with J-Law having earned two Academy's thus far (Winter's Bone and Silver Linings Playbook); and all four have been nominated for Golden Globes; J-Law and Jackman own three between them. With that said, the acting was spot on; James McAvoy had a stellar performance compared to his performance in First Class (not that it was bad or anything; Fassbender just stole the show).

The lack of action and the dark, dramatic tone were well welcomed by me, I just feel that summer blockbusters have less of those two characteristics and more laughs and explosions; nothing wrong or awry with that fact, just go see it this weekend or next weekend if you didn't see it opening weekend.

Grade wise I'd give it a B because despite my disdain for the technicalities and production, it accomplished its mission effectively by its own terms. Demerits are given for the fact that this movie carried out a "Clean Slate Protocol" to ultimately ask the comic book superhero movie gods for forgiveness.

That along with a boatload of inconsistencies and unanswered questions that would drive Monk crazy, the movie picked and chose aspects to incorporate and black out, leaving an attractive, overall coherent Frankenstein monster; all it wants is love from its fans.

Penny Dreadful Sundays 10:00 pm ET/PT (nice Showtime ad)

So, I feel as though I have every right to be perturbed by Fox's expensive and elaborate parlor trick. A parlor trick that has left me with a jammed gun in the middle of a desert, and what seems to be the long lost member of the Blue Man Group building pyramids, and two other pale riders. I mean really though, after two hours of apologizing, I don't even know if Wolverine has adamantium claws...you dodged another bullet my elusive, and dear friend.

The Wolverine identity crisis

The Wolverine was released in theaters this weekend and the pre-Wolvie hype did not channel the amount of gigawatts as it did the last time Logan had his solo act. Why? The imbalance between expectations and results ratio was out of sorts, due to the massive expectations placed on Origins during Fox's first go around with a Wolverine spin off. Make no mistake, I liked Origins, but let's face it, it was an action sequence sandwich with a side of salad and no dressing.

Subjectively, it was the tits; objectively, it was the shits. However, the real reason why comes from the development of PCDKs, the syndrome recently placed in the DSM-IV. Since 2008, the amount of viewers affected with symptoms has grown exponentially; symptoms include darker, reality-based demands on campy, fantasy fiction films, Oscar worthy expectations from superfluous character actors, and the push towards a more centralized, universal theme with marginalized, deep material, to just name a few. 

If you don't know what I'm talking about by now, I'm referring to Post-Cinematic Dark Knight syndrome along with the now effervescent, colloquial phrase "the dark knight treatment".

Well, well, well what do we have here? The reboot within a spin-off film, formerly known as Wolverine: Origins, is finally here. WARNING this review is spoiler-free for the most part; I will not give any major details about the plot or conclusion of the movie. If you want to get to the point, skip to the bottom and work your way up. If you like the extra bacon, cheese, and calories then continue on. 

The film was directed by James Mangold (Walk the Line, 3:10 to Yuma), produced by Laura Shuler Donner (the queen bee behind the X-men franchise and wife of the genius who directed Superman 2), and backed and distributed once again by 20th century Fox. 

The general premise of the movie, displayed in the theatrical trailer, is centered around the titular hero's travels to Japan and his confrontation with the previously inconceivable opportunity to end his eternal plague of life. 

Since when has life been a plague? To the mutant who physically cannot die, life is as plague-filled as an Exodus verse. Well, I'm no immortal or theologian but it sounds like we're in a hell of an existential ride. ¡Vamos!

Okay, five words and one comma: Knight and Day, with claws. If you are not familiar with the film, it is another work of art by James Mangold, with Cameron Diaz and the Hollywood prime minister of scientology himself, Tom Cruise. Basically, the Wolverine teeter-totters between establishing it's identity, loosely similar to the execution of Knight and Day.

Throughout the movie, I found myself questioning whether the Wolverine was an action movie or romantic-drama (not in the vein of the Notebook or the English Patient). Imagine the film Terminator with more sex scenes and romantic relationship development between Sarah Connor and Kyle Reese.

Hold your horses, I'm not making a direct hypothetical comparison between the two films, but the lack of romance or the excess of imminent danger created in the Terminator gave the movie it's firm identity and allowed you to focus on the bad-ass futuristic robot trying to perpetuate the dominance of his artificial intelligent kind.

The Wolverine's action sequences were extremely ambitious and Wolvie opened up a can of whoop ass on plenty of Yakuza goons, but they felt more like cutaways than embedded into the movie. The romantic scenes between Logan and his love interest were believable, but they were not genuinely honest.

Lack of chemistry? Not quite, the chemistry was there; however, the issue derives from the lack of development of romance between the characters. The surface was scraped leaving the viewer with nothing but shaved ice. We like it, but where's the flavor?

In the film Bourne Identity, the romance was a cutaway amongst the action suspense. In the Wolverine, the romance lingered, and rightfully so, but it's lack of commitment to that important aspect of the story muddled things up, in reference to its genre.

Aside from that, Logan's individual scenes where the "pity for the eternal vagabond" was supposed to be milked from the viewer, did not do a very good job at milking. I credit that to lack of investment in the scene.

Not from the recipient of the Oscar nomination for best actor last season, but the Oscar award winning director James Mangold. Did he or did he not let you wallop in your thoughts with scenes of Angelina Jolie as the caustic Lisa in the film Girl, Interrupted or Reese Witherspoon as warm, yet heavy June Carter Cash in the film Walk the Line? Well, he did which is what got those two lovely ladies the Academy hardware to prove it. 

Ultimately, I never felt Logan's pain or sensed that his life was an eternal damnation. If anything, Jean Valjean was laissez-faire about his existence and didn't develop enough French-noire-black-and-white-coffee-shop depression on screen to evoke the "awhhh poor baby Wolverine moments" from the crowd.

Compiling those three points together create an overall lack of investment, or one could say "equal balance", with the three focal points of the film (action, romance, and drama), which, in theory, should be avoided at all costs when developing a summer blockbuster. Along with the movie's "equal balance" of genre's, the film's purpose was ambiguous as well. 

Typically, movies have a general purpose. For instance, some movies have the sole purpose of generating dollar signs, some to make the audience laugh their bowels out, or some to mundanely entertain.

Leaving personal expectations at the ticket kiosk, why does the screenwriter, director, producer want me to spend money to see their movie?

Since the Wolverine is a summer blockbuster, I would like to think that it's purpose was to make money and entertain. It will make money, that's for sure. The purpose is not coherent until about 68% of the movie is finished. At that point, you can finally forget any miscellaneous misfortunes the movie might had made up until then.

Another minor issue with the movie comes from its obvious and weak attempts at concealing information, forcing the "target audience" to ask 17 questions during the movie.

These tactics cause the movie to slow down, in a sense, because instead of driving the plot forward to progress, you're riding along searching for answers to previously mentioned developments. No, there is absolutely nothing wrong with doing that; however, the movie is still slowed down by it.

In summation, the movie is a slow paced film, that really and truly never picks up steam despite the strip tease it does. This further reinforces the movies questionable purpose because once you have your answer the response warranted is that of an "oh" instead of a more surprised "ahhhh". Which makes you ask, why bother? 

Okay now to the fun part, where I tell you my blatant, subjective thoughts on the movie.

Firstly, I would like to say that I absolutely liked the movie and would definitely go see it again, during a matinee.

Secondly, the critical statements I made above contributed to utter fact that the movie is boring, yes, boring in bold letters. I know the slow and steady win the race, but damn, if there's not enough drama to keep me anchored to the script or if the director doesn't take the time to fully invest into the dramatic aspects of the source material, why should I?

Thirdly and finally, I had an immensely disproportionate, prior knowledge about the film because I have read the story arc (from the comic) that the film was loosely based on. In saying that, I think that this is a great stepping stone for a deeper development of the Wolverine story and this movie is essentially the Batman Begins, Man of Steel, and the Amazing Spiderman of the X-men franchise.

Along with that, I thought the last 30 minutes (including post credit scene) could've been shown in a short film fashion, to save time and energy, and it would have been a tad bit better than the movie as a whole. But hey, who am I?

Now that you have all those letters, you're wondering whether the Wolverine is worthwhile or if it is worth it to wait a while and see it. Well, there are three types of people who will most likely see this movie: the fanboy crowd, the "imfamiliarenoughwiththesourcematerialbecauseiwikieverthingandwatchedtheanimatedshow" crowd, or the "target audience" crowd. 

Each group will most likely have three different sets of loose expectations. The fanboys probably expect a good movie representation of the Wolverine comic and less importantly a make up for the previous standalone debacle.

The hybrid crowd probably expects slicing and dicing with high octane like action sequences and an overall bad-ass, dark knight like movie, and more importantly a make up for the previous standalone debacle.

The "target audience" probably expects a nice, good summer movie to tell their friends about and possibly learn something new about the material. Most importantly the "target audience" probably has not seen Wolverine Origins or won't let it affect their expectations. Find who you most associate with and follow me.

Fanboys, I must say, this is possibly the most accurate display of a film representation of a comic book that I've ever seen. Since you know what to expect from the source material and since the film doesn't deviate much or take as many liberties as it could from the source material, you will ultimately enjoy your movie experience with minor criticism. I know you've already seen it because of your loyalty and support, so no need to waste my time.

Hybrids, strap in because this will be a long tumultuous ride for you. While this movie from a critical standpoint makes up for Origins flaws, it's slow, drawn out, elusive plot will ultimately put your movie-boner to sleep. Especially, if you're expecting the Dark Knight.

Whether you like it or dislike it, will come down to your personality. The more forgiving, patient crowd will be understanding and have a "half full" outlook, but the wrathful, impatient crowd will be disappointed (yes disappointed) and have a "half empty" outlook and honestly might contemplate walking out of the theater and off of a ledge.

The "target audience" will probably have the most luck. This film is catered to you and you will laugh at all the "inhumorous" , cheesy jokes presented. You will "ohhh" and "ahhh" when the action sequences commence. You will walk out the movies as soon as the credits hit the screen saying "that was a good movie". And you're right, in your precious ignorance, the movie is actually good.

Finally, I don't rate with stars or grades or numbers. I base my ratings on the expectations of the film production and whether it's worth it to see it at the midnight showing, opening weekend, within a couple of weeks, whenever you have free time, illegal online stream, dollar theater, Redbox, premium cable, borrow the dvd, or Netflix.

The Wolverine was good movie, accurate film adaptation, and a indecisive snoozer yet it is definitely worth going to see in a couple of weeks. The film production wanted to make loads of money and satisfy the target audience, while staying true to the source material. All of the film's goals were met, which is why the movie is ultimately successful in my eyes.