The Fault in our X-Men

Another week of movie madness! Starting this time, with X-Men: Days of Future Past and ending with The Fault in our Stars.

Well, X-Men was certainly something new for me. I enjoy action films and I like science fiction but the X-Men franchise was never something that excited me. I've seen all of the originals but never rushed to the cinema and stood in line to watch them. And I haven't seen any of the films past the trilogy that ended in 2006. It's very rare that I go see a film, like the new X-men one, without first watching all of the films leading up to it. I love knowing everything there is to know about a character before watching their next steps. But with this film, I didn't bother. It was just something to do on a Wednesday night that was enjoyable and didn't require much thinking after a long day at work. The cinema was packed, which was shocking considering this wasn't the first week of the film being in cinemas. But I suppose, it was a Wednesday night so tickets were cheap and the film works well for date nights! I didn't go with a date, instead I went with one of my best friends and sometimes that's much better. We can have a proper giggle before the film and a proper analytical discussion after it.

For someone who knew relatively little about the film going in, I enjoyed it. The premise was good, the acting was solid and the special effects varied from believable to... 'Come on, as if that would ever happen!' One of my favourite aspects of science fiction films that explore mutations or special powers, is finding out what everyone has. It always provided me with new answers to the age old question - 'What superhero power would you choose?' In this film, I really loved Blink! The mutant who could create portals. I could see that coming in handy if I suddenly needed to be elsewhere! There was also the appearance of fire, ice and speed which could be considered basic powers in that universe but are still highlighted within the main group of characters. Jennifer Laurence seems to be hit or miss for me. Sometimes, like in American Hustle, I find her captivating and frankly genius but then other times she falls short. Although her body and her fighting skills were on point, she was rather unbelievable as young Mystique. She lacked reason (something she supposedly still had before her 'first kill') and her movements were forced. When she's shot in the leg she limps away no better than a first year pupil in drama class - overworked and over thought is my opinion.
**SPOILERS**

Now... What the hell was with that ending? I have to ask what the writers were thinking when they ended it the way the did! Does this mean all of the films prior to this one are now redundant? The last five films, six if you include Wolverine's origin story, now no longer matter because the writers decided that the characters didn't have to be tortured and that a happy ending was best for everyone. I understand that sometimes these endings work. Sometimes an audience really needs a conclusion they are happy with. But honestly, in my eyes, X-Men didn't need that. The characters had more depth because of their troubled past and now so much of that is gone. In the final scene, when Logan is walking through the school and seeing all of his old friends again, I felt that none of the characters had purpose being there any more. Now that only the audience, Logan and technically Dr Xavier know of the real past and how it came about, I can't help but feel like the movie was a waste of time. We don't really witness any real progress with the characters. Yes, it's entertaining and at it's core that is what film is supposed to be but I can't help but feel annoyed and disappointed. It's like when a film transpires to be a huge dream sequence. The audience feels cheated.

With both of us in the movie watching spirit we decided to go to the unlimited screening of The Fault in our Stars. Unlimited screenings are for anyone at cineworld with an unlimited movie card and allows you to see films in advance of it's national release. Obviously the buzz surrounding this film has been crazy and with the American release only last week, the internet had all sorts of things to say about John Green's book in comparison to Josh Boone's film.

Firstly, I want to say that Ansel Elgort grew on me much like his character did in the book. At first I found him annoying and entirely wrong for the role. Gus was a powerful character who grew and then quickly shrunk as he became a shadow of himself by the end of the book. But by the time the young couple were in Amsterdam, I appreciated everything about Elgort's creative choices with the role. He ultimately was perfect for the final scenes because he was able to make the transition that the character demanded. Not forgetting of course that what made him really shine came straight from the book and John Green's captivating writing. I feel like Ansel will enjoy all of the perks that come with being the male lead in a romantic comedy aimed at teenage girls. No doubt we'll be hearing of romps and scandals within the year.

Secondly, I hate Shailene Woodley. I'm pretty sure I've written before about how I feel about her and her acting. I will say however, I did enjoy her performance in Divergent. Sadly, the same can not be said for this film. It seems like Hollywood producers have seen the success that (average actress) Jennifer Laurence has received and have decided to produce another in the shape of Woodley. For some reason she is dominating the movie theatres this year with White Bird in a Blizzard, Divergent and TFIOS. There will always be some who are unhappy with casting and that just so happens to be me this time! But back to the film in question... Clearly, she read the book and made notes as many of her movements and reactions were subtle but similar enough to the way they were described in the book. I was a little disappointed that they chose not to explore her slight health improvement after Amsterdam. I think it was a lost opportunity to explore the characters positive yet realist approach to life.

My third and final point - having already read the book didn't make me cry any less. Somehow, even knowing the ending, I still shed more than one tear. But that's why I love seeing book adaptations. You get the opportunity to see a great book realised on screen and appreciate someone else's interpretation of the story. Obviously this film was incredibly faithful to the book, which in the end will likely prove to be the best decision. Still, I love when a director changes things up and emphasises different aspects of the story or the relationships within it. Even with the comments I've made about this film sounding more negative than positive, I actually really enjoyed the film. Sometimes when we judge a film, a book or a play too critically we forget to acknowledge our pleasure. So, to clarify, I liked the film and I would recommend it.