X-Men: Days of Future Past (2014) – Review

Review: X-Men: Days of Future Past gets a lot of things really right, but still does not quite bring the X-Men franchise up to the same level as The Dark Knight Trilogy or recent Marvel Cinematic Universe films (such as The Avengers, Iron Man 3, and Captain America: The Winter Soldier).

In an attempt to bridge the X-Men films of the early 2000s with (the initially intended reboot) X-Men: First Class (which sees many of the characters as their much younger selves), Days of Future Past employs a time travel narrative to send Logan (Wolverine) back in time (or his consciousness) to warn young Charles Xavier and Erik Lehnsherrr of the dangerous path Raven (Mystique) is on; one that will see the world destroyed by Sentinels (giant robots that initially target mutants but then begin rounding up and/or killing all of humanity). Director Bryan Singer (who directed the first two films in the franchise) returns to the helm (after First Class writer-director Matthew Vaughn bowed out). Singer changed a lot of the elements of Vaughn and writing partner Jane Goldman’s initial story so that he could again bring back his original cast. The results are a mixed bag.

A lot of what Singer does with the film is fantastic. He certainly has a love of and flare for the characters and what they can do. The action scenes, especially those in the future, are phenomenal, exciting, and get at a lot of what is really cool about seeing the X-Men using their powers as a team to combat an enemy. The new mutants introduced in the future (particularly Bink) are also very well done, though with limited screen time. It might be nice in a future installment of the franchise to again see these characters (if that is even possible now). The style of the film is also very good, as Singer takes full advantage of the 1973 setting and juxtaposes it against the future visually. Though he makes a brief appearance as well, Peter Maximofff (Quicksilver) is also a lot of fun and steals his scenes. Again, Singer does a great job with the X-Men themselves and showcasing their abilities in a very entertaining and visually impressive manner. It terms of its visuals and action scenes, Days of Future Past is the most thrilling and absorbing of the franchise to date. These elements alone also create what is ultimately a strong comic book film, but the film also has a lot of issues that do hold it back.

The first thing that strikes the viewer as the film ends (something that is often tricky with time travel narratives) is that if the X-Men in 1973 do succeed in altering the future then every other X-Men film (other than First Class) is thus rendered irrelevant in terms of their stories affecting how the characters mature and grow in the future. Essentially by Singer bringing the two franchises together as one, he has erased his own films from the X-Men timeline as well as last year’s The Wolverine (which does not seem very forward thinking by Fox). Yes, those films can still exist on an alternate timeline, but they are still nonetheless greatly devalued. It just seems that it may have been better served to just leave the two sets of films separate as unrelated entities instead of forcing them together. The Days of Future Past story very easily could have been told solely with the original cast or with the new cast. Bringing the two casts together, while cool, ultimately seems to inflict more harm on the franchise than good (though, to be honest, the franchise was in tatters anyway thanks to a few poor films and timelines that make no sense).

This leads to the next point. The film suffers from Wolverine fatigue (and this may just be my own bias), as this is his sixth appearance as the lead character in an X-Men related film (plus he has a cameo in First Class). Fox does not seem to trust the franchise being able to succeed without him (and maybe they are right), and thus he is thrust into the narrative, ultimately not really serving any purpose other than being a plot device, spending most of the film just standing around as a bystander to the real action and drama. This issue also stems from Singer’s need to merge the two sets of films. Because Wolverine does not age (or ages very slowly), he is the only choice as the character to have his consciousness sent back in time (as he will look the same in 1973 and 2023). The comic book version of Days of Future Past features Kitty Pryde sending her own consciousness back in time to her younger self. Had the two sets of films remained separate, it would have been interesting to see a richer, fully fleshed out Kitty Pryde interact as a much needed leading female character (as really, Mystique is the only female character of substance), sending her consciousness back from the Sentinel-ravaged 1970s to the 1960s (say before Magneto is implicated in the assassination of JFK leading to the US government asking Trash to build his Sentinels to deal with the mutant problem). As is, this film, like almost all the X-Men films, sort of just becomes another Wolverine film; although, his character serves no purpose once he informs Charles Xavier of the impending doom of all mankind (which happens in the first act; and thus he stands around for two acts doing nothing important or interesting – he is not so much a character, but something that allows the plot to move forward).

First Class takes place in 1962 and Days of Future Past takes place in 1973 and the plan is for X-Men: Apocalypse to take place in the 1980s. This creates another issue. Ten or eleven years pass between the events of First Class and Days of Future Past and yet the narrative picks right back up as if only a small amount of time has passed (a couple of years maximum); not to mention that the characters have clearly not aged ten years (as it has only really been three years since First Class). The jump forward in time seems to have only been done so that Singer could feature 1970s style elements and include the setting of the Vietnam War, but the setting does not actually matter to the narrative and thus feels like an unnecessary choice (that logically makes less sense once one actually thinks about the fact that ten or eleven years passes between the two films – which means Erik Lehnsherr has been sitting in that cell for at least nine years and Raven has not been able to find and kill Bolivar Trask in the same amount of time; when Lehnsherr gets out of the cell it seems as if he has only been in there a short while and it seems as though Raven is just now on the hunt for Trask; basically, the timeframe just does not seem to make narrative sense and is not supported by what is shown on screen). This is a case of style over substance (which usually does not make for a better film).

The plots over all three of the original X-Men films revolve around Xavier and his X-Men trying to stop Lehnsherr (Magneto) and his Brotherhood. Charles believes in mankind as a whole (that they are good) while Lehnsherr fears what man will do to the more evolved mutants and thus wants to preemptively strike against them (he believes they are bad). First Class was interesting because for most of the narrative, Xavier and Lehnsherr work together. In Days of Future Past the audience is again shown a united Xavier and Lehnsherr in the future, but once the narrative reverts back to 1973, the film quickly once again becomes an X-Men versus Magneto story, which has become somewhat tiresome as they are all essentially the same (as depicted on film at least). Thus, the narrative of this film plays as mostly uninteresting. Xavier and Lehnsherr do the same dance yet again while Wolverine stands off to the side marginally involved. Only Raven has an interesting character arc, as she must decide if she is ruled by her hatred of humanity (stemming from her own insecurities about being a mutant) or if she can mature into someone who can hope that one day mutants will be accepted in society (it is a battle within her between Xavier and Lehnsherr’s ideologies). The other prominent character is Hank McCoy (Beast), but he is not really given anything to do dramatically (other than have a few angst-filled looks aimed towards Raven). The rest of the X-Men are either included as plot devices (like Kitty Pryde and Wolverine) or to make cameo appearances.

The film’s villain (if he can be called that, as the villain quickly really becomes Magneto) Doctor Bolivar Trask is also not really given much to do dramatically. He basically just wants to make weapons that kill mutants and also experiment on mutants, presumably solely because they are different. His character is sadly fairly thin and lacks substantial motivation.

The narrative overall being essentially the same as the three original X-Men films leaves the film dramatically a little uninteresting, despite the great visuals, style and action. Wolverine sort of being the main character but having no dramatic arc or purpose after completing his mission in the first act also greatly hampers the overall narrative. Thus, the film feels very slow in a lot of moments. It may even feel tedious, which is strange because there is again so much to like and it is very entertaining and spectacular overall visually. The big issues with the film all stem from it having a poor narrative structure (even though Days of Future Past is one of the best X-Men stories in comic form). The choices Singer and his creative team make end up hampering the film (and franchise) for seemingly not very good reasons. Yes, it is cool to see the original cast and new cast in the same film, but the cost is a film that is not nearly as good as it could have been and a franchise that has now mostly been made pointless (as the events of all the films other than First Class have now been erased from the current timeline, unless you are Wolverine and remember everything but know nothing about the new timeline you are in thereby making any Wolverine moments between 1973 and 2023 pointless from a character perspective as the Wolverine that wakes up in 2023 is not the same as the Wolverine that exists between 1973 and 2023 – hooray time travel narratives!!!).

While this review does seem to feature quite a bit of complaining on my part, I want to reiterate that Days of Future Past is a good, fun film overall. It is easily the second best X-Men film to date (just behind First Class) and comes very close to being a great film; it just cannot overcome its many narrative shortcomings. My complaining stems from my love of the X-Men and desire to see them get a truly great film (or set of films). I do have high hopes for X-Men: Apocalypse but also have some concerns. Chiefly, I am not sure jumping forward another ten years is going to work for the narrative (as it certainly does not in this film); plus the film is rumored to again include time travel elements (as Apocalypse narratives in the past often have), which could make the resolution of this film moot (as this film has done to most of the past X-Men films). I am also sort of bummed that we could not see Xavier and Lehnsherr’s characters develop more fully as young men in the 1960s (which is probably America’s most interesting and turbulent time period, and also one that works quite well as a mirror to the mutant struggle with its civil rights struggle). But oh well.

Technical, aesthetic & acting achievements: Days of Future Past is director Bryan Singer’s ninth and probably his best film to date (as I have said many times before, I think The Usual Suspects is vastly overrated). As stated in the review, Singer does a marvelous job with the action and the X-Men themselves in terms of showcasing their powers. The action set pieces take center stage as the film’s greatest achievement. It is too bad that Singer could not have also devised a stronger narrative structure to support his remarkable visuals and grand spectacle. That said, I am looking forward to seeing X-Men: Apocalypse and what Singer does with it.

Composer John Ottman brings back a lot of the musical score and themes that he did for X-Men 2. It is particularly recognizable in the future sequences. For the 1970s scenes, however, I did miss the great score and themes that Henry Jackman brought to First Class and wrote for the characters. It is too bad that they could not be incorporated as well. The score during the 1970s is very forgettable and is often overshadowed by the era-specific soundtrack. Cinematographer Newton Thomas Sigel does fantastic work on the film. The change in look and style between the future and 1970s is dazzling. I also enjoyed the look of old film stock when TV feeds and character hand-held camera footage are used. Production designer John Myhre also does very strong work. The future is mostly just rubble in darkness, but his style choices for the 1970s are very fun and cool. In particular, I like Bolivar Trask’s office.

Overall, the cast is very good; most of whom only have very small roles. Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen are both great reprising their roles as Professor X and Magneto. They feel right at home and can convey so much without much screen time. Even though I think the film would have been better off if Singer had not brought the two series together, it was really cool to see them again. Ellen Page plays Kitty Pryde (also reprising her role from X-Men: The Last Stand); and while she mostly serves as a plot device (the one who transfers Wolverine’s consciousness back in time), she does bring some dramatic weight to the role. Peter Dinklage is wonderful as Bolivar Trask. The character is underwritten and somewhat sidelined as an afterthought, and yet he still brings a lot to the character, creating a man who hates the mutants maybe because of his insecurity about his own looks. Like Page, Dinklage brings dramatic weight to a fairly thin character.  Evan Peters has a ton of fun with Peter Maximoff and his scenes almost (or do) steal the film. Nicholas Hoult’s Hank McCoy is fine, but his character is almost nonexistent in the narrative. Jennifer Lawrence is very good as Raven and benefits from having what is probably the film’s most interesting character arc. The role takes advantage of Lawrence’s strengths as an actress, such as her immutable will and charisma. Michael Fassbender is again brilliant as Erik Lehnsherr. He is able to convey the complexity of his inner struggle without dialog maybe better than anyone else in the main cast. He also carries himself wonderfully, displaying the sheer force that Magneto can be. James McAvoy is good has Charles Xavier because he delivers a character that truly does care about humanity and has deep moral feelings; but unlike Stewart’s interpretation, McAvoy is a bit more sharp witted and playful. Hugh Jackman turns in his typical Wolverine performance, but does not really benefit from a narrative that sidelines him dramatically for most of the film (even though he has the most screen time).

Summary & score: X-Men: Days of Future Past is both a fantastically impressive X-Men film and a narratively disappointing one. 7/10

Trance (2013) – Review

Review: Trance is a stylishly designed psychological thriller that succeeds on its great twists. The film is about Simon, an art auctioneer who approaches a group of criminal partners offering to help them steal a valuable painting in exchange for paying off his gambling debts. During the heist, Simon is hit on the head and cannot remember where he stashed the painting. The leader of the group, Franck, decides to take Simon to a hypnotherapist, Elizabeth, to help him remember – however, her work starts to bring up old repressed memories blurring the line between what is real.

The first thing that stands out about Trance is the ‘hip’ energetic style that director Danny Boyle gives the film – from the thumping score and slick camera work/editing to the modern production design. Boyle’s work has always had a very kinetic and hypnotic feel, but here he takes it a step further. The whole narrative to some extent relies on the film’s style, which creates the atmosphere for the audience to fully experience Simon’s psychological transformation.

This transformation has a clear arc across the film’s three acts. When Simon first appears in act one, he is the film’s likable protagonist, but that starts to change as the film progresses – and it is this transition that makes the film kind of brilliant (along with the third act in general). The first act, with its plucky voiceover narration, feels a bit like Boyle’s Trainspotting – Simon inviting the viewer into his world, and explaining how everything works. The second act, however, very much ushers in a very different film, Boyle never wanting to retread the same narrative territory.

With the second act, Boyle plays with the viewer – persistently questioning the motivations of each of the three main characters (Simon, Franck, and Elizabeth), never quite giving an indication who can be trusted and who cannot. This both works in the film’s favor and does not.

The second act comes very close to losing its audience as it jumps around presenting cases in favor of and against each character while also outlining multiple couplings (and possible betrayals) – it is easy to get lost in all the shifting. This all results in a very muddled narrative with no clear protagonist (as Simon seems to be someone different than who was first introduced to the audience), and the forward momentum seems to almost come to a complete halt, mangled in the confusion of an array of twists and reverses (diminishing much of the good will a strong first act built up).

But, the second act also wonderfully sets up the third act (though, it almost ruins the film in the process). It plants the seed of doubt for the audience in Simon, leaving them open to embracing either Franck or Elizabeth should the narrative turn to them, while still keeping Simon as a man put upon by outside forces (allowing him to return as the protagonist at any moment, which is something Boyle constantly teases) – thus all three characters enter the third act as both protagonist and antagonist (the audience truly does not know how it will all end – and is thus completely in the hands of the film’s narrative). The psychological jumbling also leaves the audience open to accept whatever explanation is given (the reveal), because they have seen (and accepted) what hypnosis has done and can do to the characters in act two (they believe in the world of the film – which for a film like this, is very important for it to work).

The third act is quite genius in its reveal, the way Boyle brings everything back together and ramps the pacing back up. Everything is different, and yet makes sense (which is exactly what you want from a film built on a twist). It is too bad that the second act is structured so poorly, because otherwise this might be a great film.

Trance is very stylish and aesthetically compelling, well-acted, and has one of the best twist endings in recent memory. But, all that said, the pacing of the second act brings it all down (almost completely). What is left is a film that is fantastic at the beginning and at the end, but with a middle that is over long and too chaotic and tedious.

Technical, aesthetic & acting achievements: Danny Boyle again showcases his brilliance as a visual and aesthetically modern filmmaker with Trance. Visually, everything in the film works together creating an aesthetic of illusion, playing into the narrative of hypnosis altering memories. From an aesthetics standpoint, it is a fun piece of art.

Much like Boyle’s past work, this film also has an electronic music infused score, this time from Rick Smith (a member of the group Underworld, whom are frequent musical collaborators with Boyle). The score perfectly melds with the tone and aesthetic of the film. Anthony Dod Mantle’s cinematography is also excellent, particularly in his aggressive colorful lighting, which, like the other collaborative technical aspects, very much matches the psychological atmosphere of the film. However, Mark Tildesley’s production design is a notch above the rest. The design work and architecture of the film sets and the locations used are phenomenal (especially given Boyle’s style for the film). It is the most aesthetically interesting design work I have seen so far this year in any film (it almost as a sci-fi feel). Boyle has a great collaborative relationship with his team, which can be seen in their overall great work.

Even with the gleam of Trance’s aesthetics and the great feeling it gives the viewer when everything is revealed and it all comes together, the film is also a bit of a character piece at its core, and thus is dependent on strong performances, which it has. Tuppence Middleton and especially Danny Sapani are good in small supporting roles. Rosario Dawson, playing Elizabeth, is asked to be very steady throughout the film, and yet she must also make the audience believe that both Franck and Simon are capable of being the good guy or bad guy in different moments. She does this very well. Vincent Cassel is quite good as Franck. He is ruthless yet charismatic and charming. James McAvoy’s Simon feels like a typical Boyle protagonist (along the same lines as those played by Ewan McGregor), but he also brings such a great inner darkness to Simon, who is outwardly delightful.

Summary & score: Trance is a good twist-driven thriller, but only because it ends well. 7/10

TV Series of the Month – State of Play

This month’s TV series is State of Play (2003).

The six-part crime drama is about a London newspaper that investigates the murder of a local politician’s research assistant, uncovering a mystery that they never could have expected. Airing on the BBC, the miniseries is by writer Paul Abbott (who also created the British Shameless) and director David Yates (who directed the last five Harry Potter films). It has a brilliant cast (featuring a few actors who have since become well known in the States) with John Simm, Kelly Macdonald, Bill Nighy (Macdonald and Nighy also starred in Yates’s TV movie The Girl in the Café and each had a small role in one of the Deathly Hallow films), Philip Glenister, David Morrissey, James McAvoy, Amelia Bullmore, Benedict Wong, Marc Warren, Rebekah Staton, and Polly Walker. In 2009, Kevin Macdonald adapted the series into a Hollywood film (also called State of Play with Russell Crowe and Ben Affleck) but it is nowhere near as good. The series really draws the viewer in as the mystery unravels, taking its time allowing for wonderful character development. The supporting players are great (lead by Nighy, Macdonald and McAvoy), but the leads (Simm and Morrissey) are phenomenal, driving the narrative forward (AMC’s The Killing reminds me a little of this series). State of Play is often considered the best British TV Drama of the last decade and is a must-see for fans of crime dramas. Check out the trailer.

Available on DVD

X-Men: First Class (2011) – Review

Review: X-Men: First Class is the X-Men movie we have all been waiting for – full of great action, wonderful performances and direction that both gets the characters and how to make a fantastic genre film. Writer-director Matthew Vaughn seems to get better with each film he makes. Here, he took on the daunting task of making a sequel/reboot (it is sort of both) to a franchise that was all but dead thanks to the last two films (X-Men: The Last Stand and X-Men Origins: Wolverine) being complete disappointments for fans (and the first two done by Bryan Singer, the main producer on this film, only being ok but nowhere near as good as the great comic book films like Spider-Man 2, Batman Begins and The Dark Knight). This is among the best comic book films (and probably the second best Marvel movie made to date, behind Spider-Man 2). Setting the film in the 60’s is a stroke of brilliance, as it opens the world of the X-Men up to cool stylistic changes and to a period ripe with social and cultural chaos and change (the Cold War specifically, but also civil rights). Vaughn definitely pulls from period influences as some of the early sequences involving Erik Lehnsherr feel like excerpts from a Sean Connery James Bond film and Sebastian Shaw (minus the powers) could easily slip right in as a perfect nemesis to Bond. Critics to the film will say that it is overstuffed and really serves no point (since we already know where the story is heading, given the other four films in the franchise), but this film feels very much like a reboot (and sure, it does nod to the other films, but it does not fit story wise or in the timeline precisely). The characters have all been reimagined in the brilliant performances this fantastic cast gives them. In terms of the film being overstuffed, there is a lot going on in the film – a lot of story, a lot of characters (and origins), as the film needed to serve as both the beginning of a new trilogy (should one happen, and I really hope it does) and a prequel to the other films (should no more X-Men films be made with these actors), making it a very difficult narrative for Vaughn and screenwriter Jane Goldman to form. They do the job almost perfectly. Each character has their dramatic moments, which allows the audience to connect to them, even with very limited screen time. A slight issue does arise during the third act, as the relationship between Lehnsherr and Charles Xavier beings to deteriorate. The actor’s chemistry is so good that the audience is far more interested in their story and their relationship, that the villain, Shaw, and his evil plan do not seem as important. Plus (at least for me) when the film ended, there is such an expectation for more that the ending is unwelcome (especially with potential sequels yet to be confirmed). Vaughn also infused great humor into the film (something that had been in the previous films, but had never quite worked and came off really cheesy and just sort of bad). The humor works great in breaking up the dramatic tension and action and letting the audience release (an important element in creating a narrative that has good pacing). Vaughn does not shy away from the politics and social realities of the period either, as there is a strong sense of women being second class citizens among men in the film (something Vaughn apparently had to fight Fox to keep in the film), which plays off the whole mutants being scared and mistrusted in ‘normal’ human society (a theme prevalent in all X-Men media). Some have also complained about Vaughn and the writers rewriting history by inserting the X-Men into the Cuban Missile Crisis, but that is a fairly poor argument, as taking the film at face value and accepting the world in which mutants exist means accepting that it is different from our own, with its own history. X-Men: First Class may not appeal to all viewers, as it is made for genre fans specifically, but those that appreciate comic book films (and I would argue good cinema in general) will really enjoy what this film has to offer (as I stated above: this is the X-Men film I have wanted to see since I first became a fan).

Technical and acting achievements: Writer-director Matthew Vaughn has developed such a talent for interweaving violence, humor, drama, and action that his narratives not only entertain but also fully engage their audiences. He also brings out such great work from his actors. I (for one) really would like to see Fox continue the trilogy with Vaughn and Goldman directing and scripting the future installments with this cast, as I think they can only get better (and that is saying something given how good this film is), and a credit to producer Bryan Singer as well for coming up with the basic story idea and placing the series in the 60’s (and for bringing on Vaughn to direct). Composer Henry Jackman’s (who also scored a portion of Vaughn’s Kick-Ass) score is very interesting playing off the time period and Bond influences, while also infusing a powerful electronic undertone. It sounds very different from most superhero movie scores, which is refreshing (here is an example). However, he is still able to capture the action and scope of the film well. John Mathieson’s cinematography is very good and he worked well with Vaughn’s stylistic shooting style. His work along with editor Lee Smith’s gives the film a very comic book panel feel, which is really cool and worked well in the transition of the narrative. Mathieson’s lighting also went very well with Chris Seagers’s amazing production design (I pretty much loved all the sets) giving the film a great and unique look in the genre. The international aspect of the film, with many locations, also showcased the brilliant work of Mathieson and Seagers. The cast is phenomenal, with many wonderful performances and great bit part casting. Kevin Bacon (whose performances I am not always a fan of) is very good as the film’s villain. He is a tad zany, but plays the role just like a Bond villain (which I said before), and it works great (Vaughn was able to get just the right performance from him, much like with Nicholas Cage in Kick-Ass). Jennifer Lawrence has a difficult role in the film, with her character’s transformation and acceptance of herself. She plays it very well, reminding us of the great actress we saw emerge in last year’s Winter’s Bone. Even with all the good supporting work, the film completely belonged to James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender. They were perfect in their portrayals of Xavier and Lehnsherr. Their relationship and chemistry is a big reason for the film working as well as it does.

Summary & score: With exciting action, funny wit, engaging drama, and beautiful aesthetics, X-Men: First Class has established itself as a premier comic book film (and piece of cinema in general). 9/10

Movie of the Week - Atonement

This week’s movie is Atonement (2007).

The romance drama is about Robbie Turner, a man whose mother works for a rich family in England, Cecilia Tallis, the eldest daughter of the rich family who Robbie falls in love with, and Briony Tallis, her younger sister who does not understand their relationship, and a lie that devastates their lives (based on Ian McEwan’s novel). The film is split into three parts – part one takes place at the family’s home in 1935, while parts 2 and 3 take place during the early days of WWII (1940). Director Joe Wright does a wonderful job with the film, as the narrative jumps around in time yet is still very coherent. Of his four films, this one has more of a poetic tone and visual composition to it. The narrative exists more so on the feelings the audience gets from the visuals and performances than the dialog. Aesthetically, the film is marvelous as well. Composer Dario Marianelli does excellent work on the film (winning an Oscar), while cinematographer Seamus McGarvey (there are a few long takes that are great – specifically one on the beach at Dunkirk, France involving soldiers waiting to be evacuated that is a story onto itself), production designer Sarah Greenwood, and costume designer Jacqueline Durran (whose green dress that Knightley's character wears, is considered the best dress in film history) provide a beautiful visual experience (all in all, the film was nominated for seven Oscars, winning one for its score, but won the BAFTA for Best Film). The cast is also magnificent, highlighted by its principal actors: James McAvoy, Keira Knightley, Romola Garai, and Saoirse Ronan. There are also good smaller supporting performances from Juno Temple, Benedict Cumberbatch, and Vanessa Redgrave. What makes the film great is its overall aesthetic style, which mixed with the very good performances throughout creates a beautiful yet tragic love story. It is a must for fans of exquisite cinematography, directing and film scoring, as well as those that enjoy heartbreaking romances. Check out the trailer.

Available on Blu-ray, DVD and to Rent