28 May 2014

DAYS OF BEING MUTANTS

New rule: Bryan Singer should only direct X-Men movies, and X-Men movies should only be directed by Bryan Singer. For here we are with X-Men: Days of Future Past, which is almost indisputably, I'd say, both Singer's and the franchise's best picture since X2 back in the long-ago of 2003 (from which early perch it remains, I would insistently claim, one of the five best superhero comic book movies of the 21st Century). Not bad for a series that's just hit its seventh entry and 14th year, and has spent more than half of that span lost in the rushes. Wanna run right out and re-watch X-Men Origins: Wolverine? Goddamn right you don't.

Written by Simon Kinberg - making up and then some for his contributions to the dismal, franchise-derailing X-Men: The Last Stand way back in 2006 - with a story he co-wrote with Jane Goldman & Matthew Vaughn, the film takes the title and plot hook and very little else from one of the best-regarded plotlines in the history of the X-Men comic book universe, written by Chris Claremont and John Byrne in 1980. In its cinematic incarnation, DOFP picks up in 2023, where everything is going terribly for the mutants we've come to know so well through so many films - and by the way, the film expects you to have seen all of the previous films except for the aforementioned Origins: Wolverine, because standalone movies are for moral degenerates, apparently - with giant anthropoid robots that can adapt to, and reflect any attack launched against them demolishing what's left of the once-mighty X-Men and much of humanity besides. There's only one silver lining: at some point since The Last Stand, Kitty Pryde (Ellen Page) has gained the ability to send other people's consciousness back in time to an earlier point in their life, and the mutant leaders Charles "Professor X" Xavier (Patrick Stewart) and Erik "Magneto" Lehnsherr (Ian McKellen) have decided that the thing to do is send somebody back to 1973, when the key event in the development of these robots - Sentinels - took place. The volunteer, since 20th Century Fox is well aware what pays the bills, is Logan (Hugh Jackman), AKA "Wolverine", he of the indestructible body and almost non-existent aging process.

So back to '73 Logan goes, with an insurmountable job: find the younger versions of Charles (James McAvoy), now a miserable bastard who has locked himself away from the world, and Erik (Michael Fassbender), who has been locked up by others, specifically the U.S. government. With their help, he needs to stop Charles's former friend and Erik's former protege Raven (Jennifer Lawrence), now going by "Mystique", before she kills the inventor of the Sentinels, industrialist Dr. Bolivar Trask (Peter Dinklage), and stirs up unprecedented amounts of anti-mutant sentiment.

So that's a lot of convoluted twaddle, I know, but DOFP presents it cleanly enough, and it understands, anyway (unlike a lot of its increasingly po-faced superhero genre colleagues) that it doesn't matter if these things actually make perfect sense as long as they have the appearance of making sense en route to being a grandly entertaining popcorn action-adventure. And in the particular case of DOFP's time travel gamesmanship, that grand entertainment is about bringing the cast of the initial trilogy that began with 2000's X-Men back into the fold and mixing them up with the best parts of X-Men: First Class from 2011 (which is to say, instead of having to make do with a movie where Stewart & McKellen or McAvoy & Fassbender are the highlight, we get to have all four of them in one go, though never, tragically, all at the same time - though Stewart and McAvoy do have a chance to interact, in one of the film's better scenes). And about wiping away all the shitty parts of the franchise so that future sequels can have a relatively clean slate, and given the intensity of some of the shittiness in the X-Men films, that's a pretty fantastic achievement all by itself.

In effect, DOFP ends up working for almost the same reasons (and - astonishingly - to something like the same level) as X2: it gathers up a whole bunch of characters we presumably enjoy seeing, puts them in a perpetual motion machine, and steps back to allow us to stare at them in bug-eyed delight as they fly around in setpieces that show off the very best shiny nonsense that computers today can make. The extravagant action scenes are particularly fine here; the film more or less opens with a sequence that I can't do better than the describe as a high-speed version of the game Portal done as a fight scene, with editing by John Ottman that flawlessly captures the rhythm of the action beats and always emphasises them just right (Ottman, Singer's go-to editor, is also more commonly employed as a music composer, which is 100% not coincidental in explaining how his editing works the way it does). It's the best fight in a comic book movie in years, recalling the same feeling of holy crap they can do that now that the Nightcrawler scene did when X2 was new. Later on, the film pulls out a legitimately great slow-motion action scene with a maybe too-obvious joke in the soundtrack, but it still works both as spectacular cinema and as a terrific character for one of the many, many mutants who gets nothing like enough development - as always, it's the Wolverine, Professor X, and Magneto show, with twice as many Professor Xes and Magnetos to go around (though the future characters get nowhere near enough to do - McKellen, in particular, is criminally underused, with only a couple of shots where he actually gets to demonstrate the depth of human feeling he's always brought to the franchise).

Still, the film figures out where to get its human moments in: Singer's aesthetic, which has largely remained unchanged since X2, feels positively stately in its willingness to slow down and let the characters be, in what are titanically long shots for the genre (that is, sometimes they are longer than five seconds). Nobody but McAvoy and Jackman really gets an opportunity to take advantage of that, though both of those actors rise to the occasion (the final scene includes what may well be Jackman's best facial acting in the series), and enough other characters get enough of their own beats that it has the feel of a movie that's balancing spectacle and character, even if it's not necessarily hitting that balance in actual fact.

The whole thing is definitely mired in fanservice (particularly in the post-credits scene, one of the worst that has yet happened in a modern superhero movie), a lot of in-jokes that don't do much besides pad the movie, and Lawrence, who we all know by now is a pretty solid actress, is still completely lost in the role of Mystique, like she has no idea how to play emotions using a latex-covered body, and so just kind of mopes. And it has the kind of non-resolution that modern franchise films tend to rely on in lieu of actually having storytelling discipline. But there's so much more that's going right! John Myhre's production design expresses a clear notion of 1973 that grounds the movie in a tangible place (compare First Class and its sort of vague "all the '60s lumped together" design), and Singer and cinematographer Newton Thomas Sigel aren't afraid to linger on those sets and move through them in some tracking shots that are there to let the action breathe, and not to show off. It's a fluid movie with kinetic, well-conceived action, and it does a fine job of portraying the broad-strokes emotional storytelling that popcorn movies are best at. It is, simply, both very fun and very operatic, large and imposing and dazzling in a way that I was honestly starting to lose hope about seeing in a superhero movie ever again.

Right about now, I usually would go with some kind of line like "of course, it's not a masterpiece or instant-classic in the genre". But you know, the jury might actually still be out on that one...

8/10

Reviews in this series
X-Men: The Last Stand (Ratner, 2006)
X-Men Origins: Wolverine (Hood, 2009)
X-Men: First Class (Vaughn, 2011)
The Wolverine (Mangold, 2013)
X-Men: Days of Future Past (Singer, 2014)
Deadpool (Miller, 2016)
X-Men: Apocalypse (Singer, 2016)

Other films in this series, yet to be reviewed
X-Men (Singer, 2000)
X2 (Singer, 2003)

24 comments:

  1. Perhaps it's the 5th entry after X-Men, X-Men 2, Last Stand and First Class. Last Stand, which was directed with all the sophisticated pacing of an EastEnders episode, did set up the key plot development after its credits. Whatever else was in Origins and The Wolverine, do viewers really require any of the exposition in that?

    Ah the game's a bogey anyway. The superhero franchise's ability to ingest itself, is making our old disc collections at home much harder to keep in order these days.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hm. I don't know, I liked it, but I'm not sure why everyone is so up on this superhero movie among all contemporary superhero movies. To a great extent, I found it to be a reprise of the plot beats of X2, but mired in all manner of overcomplicated set-up and unconscionably contrived plot-devices (the serum that helps Xavier walk also suppresses his psychic powers? What?)

    As you say, the stuff that it does right outweighs the stuff that it doesn't - its emphasis on character and the conflict of Xavier and Magneto's competing ideologies is refreshing for the genre, and I appreciate the fact that the climax pivots on the characters' emotions and choices rather than who can punch hardest. McAvoy, Fassbender and Jackman all act the pants off their roles, and Quicksilver's "Time in a Bottle" sequence will go down in history as a classic.

    Even so, I just can't make myself get excited about it. Peter Dinklage just isn't as potent an antagonist as Brian Cox was in X2, and a lot of the franchise's visual design continues to alienate me (it amazes me that everyone involved seems to have looked at Nicholas Hoult's Beast form in motion and said to themselves "yep, this doesn't look the least bit goofy"). That, and for a film that's so insistent on inter-franchise continuity, it's riddled with the sort of continuity errors that would be utterly insurmountable if this wasn't both an X-Men movie and a time travel story, and you kind of expect it going in.

    My favourite X-Men flick is First Class, so take my opinion for what it's worth. Like I say, good film, just not one I find myself getting worked up over - certainly, I don't think it holds a candle to Captain America: The Winter Soldier as far as 2014 superhero movies go.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Completely agree with the score and general gushiness. I was pretty excited about Singer's return, but dared not hope it would be this good.

    The Wolverine and First Class were both okay, but pretty meh to me. Perfectly serviceable but imminently forgettable. This, however, this stands as the best mainstream superhero movie I've seen since 2008's double whammy of TDK and Iron Man.

    Now I can't wait for Apocalypse to crush fools in 2016.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Oh, but I'm really salty on how underused Quicksilver was. I mean, the dude can dance around bullets and casually flick them out of the way. You'd think they would bring him along to DC.. you know, since the plot revolves around Mystique trying to kill Trusk... with a bullet!

    ReplyDelete
  5. I really enjoyed this one.

    That Quicksilver scene was really worth half the ticket price by itself.

    And hey now the continuity is all convoluted and retconned and that's really a very faithful adaptation of the comics.

    I preferred Winter Soldier by a little bit, but I think that's more that I liked that one more than you, as opposed to liking this one less.

    It's interesting to see that Fox has pulled this franchise out of the middle and put it back to a top box office performer. It's already made more than 2/3's of what First Class or The Wolverine did, and while I don't want to get into counting coppers here, the popularity increase is something interesting. Maybe there's hope for the Spider-Man franchise if Sony actually makes a movie worth a damn again?

    ReplyDelete
  6. "the film more or less opens with a sequence that I can't do better than the describe as a high-speed version of the game Portal done as a fight scene"

    Okay, now I need to see this one.

    Also, perhaps Quicksilver isn't as prominently placed because his character features in The Avengers: Age of Ultron next year, and 20th Century Fox didn't want to do Disney any favors?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Bryan Singer Theme Song: He's gonna take you back to the past, to negate the later films that suck ass. He'd rather make a franchise reboot than have anybody count X-Men 3. He'd rather start up with a clean-slate, because no-one wants to watch Wolverine.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "Dr. Bolivar Trask".

    Oh comic book character names. Never change.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Bringing back Halle Berry as Storm and giving her exactly one line, and that one pointless: absolutely priceless.

    ReplyDelete
  10. @Diamen - Nerd reference FTW!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Damian*, wow, I don't know what happened there. Fingers just spazzed out on me.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I believe Halle Berry was only available for one or two days of shooting. It wasn't a slight, it was getting her with what little time they had.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Brian - I'm not complaining. Its the best performance she's ever given in an x-men film.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Hey, Tim liked the same $200m+ spectacle I did! All right!

    The only thing I'd disagree with you on in substance is failure to dig on the post-credits scene. I'd probably put that as the best, and the only genuinely great teaser scene, since Thanos turned at the camera and smiled. And that was only because, well, Thanos. That one was only clever, not really that exciting in itself, especially given how immensely weak the Chitauri army he commanded had been. The one with Apocalypse is sort of genuinely spectacular.

    I knew I loved Days of Future Past, and I hope it's not the first flush of excitement, but I was making a list of all my favorite superhero movies and it came out as number 3. I didn't expect that. I do have my share of problems (The properties of Xavier's serum are, as mentioned upthread, distressingly convenient. And I'm inordinately bothered by Kitty Pryde taking Rachel Summers' place without a rationale beyond "she was the actual protagonist in the source material so she should be in the movie." But I'd feel almost like an ingrate asking for more Quicksilver, as that sequence was so wonderful.)

    Nos. 1 and 2 on that list are Watchmen and Thor, though, so feel free to fully discount my opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  15. The good definitely far outweighed the bad. Singer knows how to deal with Fox's demands for new and better mutants that kind of bogged down every film since X2. Every character besides the A cast (Wolvie, Prof X, Magneto, Mystique) is effectively interchangeable for another character from the comics. None really get any character growth or development, but they are used as mcguffins well enough that the film does not appear to be just throwing SFX at you. (Like lets say Angel in Last Stand who served almost zero story purpose outside of a scene for the trailer of him flying out the window)

    ReplyDelete
  16. Remarkably, Angel is actually arguably the driving force of one of the two main plot lines of that movie. But only by existing, not by anything he actually does (which is good, because the film gave him damnably little to do.)

    ReplyDelete
  17. But again, interchangeable mutant, not "Angel" per say. Could have easily swapped for another character with almost no rewriting.

    ReplyDelete
  18. This is true.

    I'm somewhat forgiving of Last Stand because of the insanity of it's pace to be made (Ratner, who is a pure hack anyway, didn't sign on to direct until something like 11 months before it opened, which for a big summer tentpole effects film is absurd) but then I actually try to watch it and it's just so bad. Especially because of the few good ideas in the script that never go anywhere.

    ReplyDelete
  19. God, that poster. I just can't.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Tim, glad you liked this one. I notice you've been saying that many of the recent Super-hero movies "may rank among the better ones of the 21st century..." or something along the lines. I'd love to see you produce a formal list (like you did with the Disney films) sometime. Hey, a guy can dream...

    ReplyDelete
  21. ^ Being a sad bastard, I actually have a list exactly like this sitting on my laptop, which I've been keeping updated for the last year. The difficulty is identifying what counts, exactly, as a superhero movie. The Hollywood tentpoles are easy, but then you start going into outliers like Constantine, Wanted, The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, et al. And that's not factoring in Marvel/DC's animated film cottage industry...

    ReplyDelete
  22. The list on my computer is of all theatrically-released comics-derived films that aren't obviously in some other genre (e.g. Ghost World, Persepolis). So the three that Thrash names I "count", though Wanted is borderline.

    Something about a sad bastard what now?

    ReplyDelete
  23. ^ I'm a sad bastard because I keep lists of superhero movies for my own amusement - you have a prominent online platform to share them if you want, so you're OK! :P

    ReplyDelete
  24. Zev - For whatever it's worth, Bolivar Trask's son was named... Larry Trask.

    ReplyDelete

Just a few rules so that everybody can have fun: ad hominem attacks on the blogger are fair; ad hominem attacks on other commenters will be deleted. And I will absolutely not stand for anything that is, in my judgment, demeaning, insulting or hateful to any gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or religion. And though I won't insist on keeping politics out, let's think long and hard before we say anything particularly inflammatory.

Also, sorry about the whole "must be a registered user" thing, but I do deeply hate to get spam, and I refuse to take on the totalitarian mantle of moderating comments, and I am much too lazy to try to migrate over to a better comments system than the one that comes pre-loaded with Blogger.