I lean somewhere in between the two groups. There have been some amazing superhero films including The Avengers, X-Men: Days of Future Past, and Captain America: Civil War. Yet, there have also been some really bad ones recently including Batman v. Superman, Man of Steel, and X-Men: Apocalypse. So why does X-Men: Apocalypse fall short when Days of Future Past rose so high? One reason is probably recycled material. With the amount of villains we see in cinemas, it is hard for a villain to really stand out with an outstanding performance. Oscar Isaac was a good choice for a villain, but the plot made him out to be lame. A villain that can influence other people to fight for him has been done on the big screen before. Even the powerful voice modifications in the new film cannot give him the necessary innovation to provide audiences with an original character.
Yet, there are still some amazing small parts in the film that grant us an appreciation for the newer films in the X-Men franchise. Quicksilver gets another great scene filled with eye-popping effects and effervescent movements. All of the special effects look fluid and up-to-par with modern cinema. Even if we cannot fully appreciate the story, we must admit that the effects are well-created and took a lot of work. It is easy to look at the surface of X-Men: Apocalypse and write it off as another average/not-so-good superhero movie. However, if you delve into all of the bricks that it took to build this film, you can gain an appreciation for the crew that continues to keep the X-Men towards the top of the box office.
The Bottom Line: An underwhelming story grabs the audience's dismay, but effects still stay true to the evolution of the superhero genre.