Is Transformers:Age of Extinction the reboot that fans deserve?

‘Transformers: Age of Extinction’ is NOT a great film; it’s not even a good film. Quite simply: it’s terrible. The great shame is that $165 million was given to Michael Bay and he has produced something so bad that there’s no certainty that even loyal fans of the previous three films will find it in their hearts to pay hard-earned money to see ‘Age of Extinction’. If they do, they will come away feeling the same way they did after the last film in the series, ‘Dark of the Moon’, which itself was a very mediocre affair. On the upside for the film’s financiers, there will be millions of teenagers on summer vacation in the Northern Hemisphere who, with nothing better to do, will flock to their local cinema complexes in search of some mind-numbing entertainment that will outlast their investment in the jumbo popcorn that they paid too much for at the Candy Counter. ‘Age of Extinction’ is tailor-made for that purpose.

There’s no doubting the success of the ‘Transformer’ franchise. Michael Bay has hit on a formula that has been very successful and he may be one of film-making’s great unheralded geniuses because his first three ‘Transformer’ films generated a combined $2.6 billion in box office receipts between 2007 and 2011. Sadly, the fact that Bay’s films have been successful has more to do with the intent with which these films are conceived and represents the great conundrum that faces movie-makers of the 21^st Century. ‘Age of Extinction’ is a by-product of this problem and Bay is the poster-boy. Entertainment produced for the lowest common denominator has the best chance at appealing to the broadest possible audience. Without sounding like a film snob, this type of film is manufactured for an audience that does not regard film as a culturally significant communication medium. Rather, the enjoyment comes from how well the viewer’s visual and auditory senses are stimulated in comparison to the latest game, app or social media outlet. The biggest disappointment about this film, as well as the previous three, is Steven Spielberg’s association with the ‘Transformers’ franchise. In 2013, Spielberg and George Lucas publicly bemoaned the spiralling budgets of blockbusters like ‘Age Of Extinction’, yet, less than a year later, Spielberg has his name attached to the very type of film he declared was killing diversity in movies. From an individual who has contributed so much to movies as an art form, it is frustrating to see his name emboldened alongside Michael Bay’s on a ‘Transformer’ film.

The other big problem with this new film is that, not only does it set low expectations; it is in and of itself a poor piece of film-making. All films start with their story, followed closely by the screenplay, and ‘Age of Extinction’ fails on both fronts with a poorly constructed narrative and a screenplay that is so directionless at times that it becomes quite obvious that sequences have been stitched together in the editing suite in an effort to deliver a story that makes some kind of sense. The architect of all of this Ehren Kruger, who, even after the mess that was ‘Dark of the Moon’, gets another shot at the franchise and, once again, hamstrings the whole project with a screenplay that is devoid of logic, good dialogue and any real character arc for either humans or robots!

Goodness only knows in which management meeting somebody came up with the idea of 'Transformer' dinosaurs 

The story and screenplay, however, are but one of the problems with ‘Age of Extinction’. The cinematography is worthy of mention because of how varied the results are from one sequence to the next. Cinematographer Amir Mokri continues his association with the franchise and provides some genuinely inspired shots mixed with some truly horrible efforts. Mokri has become a specialist in this sort of big budget film, having worked on 2013’s ‘Man of Steel’, ‘Transformers: Dark of the Moon’, ‘Fast & Furious’ and ‘National Treasure: Book of Secrets’. The film’s final act, set in Hong Kong, is the film’s most visually interesting section and Mokri and Bay do a nice job at capturing images that portray the cityscape in a favourable light. Viewing the IMAX version of the film is especially unforgiving of the film’s mixed photography, as the non-IMAX footage looks grainy and almost out-of-focus in parts.

The actors’ performances continue the uneven tone of the film, as the Autobot vocal performances are completely at odds with the live-action work. Mark Wahlberg has been drafted into this fourth film, in place of the fast-falling Shia LeBouf, and tries valiantly to drag something out of his dialogue to make his character more than just an adjunct to the computer animation that dominates the film. One incredibly grating issue with the live-action performances is the use of post-recorded dialogue into scenes that call for an injection of humanity that would be otherwise dominated by the conflict between the various robots featured throughout the film. Of all the performances, the only actor who comes out of this with any shred of credibility is Stanley Tucci, who plays the billionaire owner of a company who is complicit in a plan to weaponise the Transformer technology for the American Army. Tucci clearly worked out during the shoot that this film was not going to be one for the ages and chews the scenery, at first, with the megalomaniac air of a Bond villain and, then, as a likeable rogue who sees the error of his ways and injects some much needed humour into a story that is taking itself much too seriously. As for the rest of the cast, there’s not much to say. Peter Cullen returns for his fourth feature as the voice of ‘Optimus Prime’, this time joined by John Goodman and ken Watanabe as fellow Autobots ‘Hound’ and ‘Drift’, while Kelsey Grammer is entirely forgettable as CIA operative Harold Attinger.

Why are these two men laughing so hard?

There is not a great deal to recommend about this film. At 165 minutes, it’s far too long. The screenplay lacks structure and jumps from set-piece to set-piece with no real thought. There’s the unending product placements, many of which have been positioned to appeal to the massive Chinese audience the film is banking on to provide a large slice of its box office receipts. These become so obvious by the end of the film that no longer is it a question of whether they will or won’t appear, it becomes a game of how many you can count throughout the duration of the movie. There are two things that are disturbing about ‘Transformers: Age of Extinction’. One, there will be a ‘Transformers 5’. Paramount have already announced it before they’ve even seen how this film fares. That’s confidence! Second, despite everything that is wrong with this film, it will be hugely successful. That seems wrong. In a movie season where a well-made, original science fiction film like ‘Edge of Tomorrow’ will be judged a failure because it makes $350 million at the worldwide box office, ‘Age of Extinction’ will do more than double that despite the fact that it is  bloated, ill-conceived and poorly-executed… Despite an inability to speak at public gatherings; privately, Michael Bay is laughing, but it may not be “with” us.

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes Exclusive Footage Presentation!

20^th Century Fox hosted an exclusive screening of approximately 15 minutes of footage from the new Matt Reeves film ‘Dawn of the Planet of the Apes’ On Thursday June 19, 2014. The screening was attended by Erik Winquist, who was the Visual Effects Supervisor for New Zealand’s WETA Digital Effects on the movie.

The screening showed a lot of new footage and, given Winquist’s attendance, concentrated on depicting the evolution of the Apes in this film. As previously reported, the new film is set ten years after the conclusion of the first. For those with a good memory, you’ll recall that the end credits of the first film showed the spread of the ‘Simian Flu’ around the planet with the inference that mankind was in for a rough time in the near future.

From the footage shown, this film is certainly more ‘epic’ than the first. It’s clear that the Apes have not seen or heard from the humans since the outbreak of the ‘Simian Flu’ and Caesar, once again played by Andy Serkis, is not even sure there are any still alive. The Apes themselves have flourished in their woodland setting and appear now to number in the hundreds if not the thousands. The Apes questions about whether or not humanity has survived are soon answered when a group humans, lead by Jason Clarke, cross paths with two Apes in the woodlands. The scene is punctuated by Caesar yelling at the trespassers to “GO!”

Not to spoil what was in the footage, or the movie for that matter, the revelation of Caesar’s development to a new group of humans brings their own survival in to sharp focus. On the one hand, Clarke’s character seeks to understand Caesar and his civilisation, while Gary Oldman’s character is more of a ‘Hawk’; advocating all-out pre-emptive attack to ensure the Apes can never grow strong enough in number to overwhelm the remaining population of San Francisco.

The footage ended with the standard pyrotechnic display associated with a big-budget Hollywood film and it was the visual effects that everyone wanted to hear about. Winquist spoke in great detail about the motion capture for this film, explaining that ‘Dawn of the Planet of the Apes’ represents an evolution of the mo-cap technology that WETA has helped to revolutionise in the film industry. One such evolution was the development of wireless mo-cap, which has obvious benefits for the performer; especially in such a physical role. The absence of any connecting wires for the head-mounted camera provides the actor a greater range of freedom and allows the Director more flexibility of his master shot of the scene.

Winquist spoke about the need for him to be on-set for the film’s principal photography because the motion capture performances are so integral to this story. He spoke about the emotion of watching the performances being played out on set and, at various times, the emotion coming mo-cap actors was so overwhelming that crew members were brought to tears. He relayed one such scene where Andy Serkis is sitting with his son, talking in sign language, and how it made him emotional to watch the scene being played out. He commented that these may be motion-capture performances but the people who are playing the characters are no lesser actors just because their final performance “look” is animated.

In addition to his duties as overall VFX supervisor for WETA on the film, Winquist also pulled double-duty, and was the lead supervisor on the character of ‘Koba’, who is explored more thoroughly in the second film and becomes a catalyst for the events that unfold in the second half of the movie. He was especially complimentary of the actor who took over the role of ‘Koba’ in this film – Toby Kebbell. With no prior motion-capture acting experience, Kebbell, according to Winquist, threw himself into the role and pulled off an amazing performance. If the results in the footage presentation are what audiences can expect from the character throughout the entire film, ‘Koba’ is going to be a real talking-point for Apes aficionados and a role model in villainy!

An opportunity was extended to the audience to ask questions and ‘Future Fantastique’ was ready to go with a series of questions about the motion capture process and how it’s integrated with the film’s other effects.

FF started by asking how many actors the motion capture was used for and Erik answered telling the audience that it varied depending on the scene. There are eight main Apes in the film’s story but the motion capture was used more extensively than just those eight depending on the requirements – especially the scope – of the scene.

This prompted the question from FF about the integration of all the different effects techniques into one seamless process. Winquist, who had earlier mentioned that the film’s climax occurs entirely within a CG environment, told the audience that the motion capture for this film was seamlessly blended with CGI.

While the CGI is a very technical exercise, location filming is not and FF was keen to understand what that means for the use of high-end technology on a shoot like ‘Dawn of the Planet of the Apes’. Winquist acknowledged that location shooting adds another dimension to the overall effects process, especially when the film integrates real environmental impacts such as rain and wind into the story. There’s a consideration to be made of the equipment being used such as the wireless motion capture cameras, which translates into a consideration for the animators back at WETA about having to include droplets of water on fur in close-ups and more dynamic elements such as wind pushing fur around when riding on horseback. He said it’s a time-consuming process which one this movie involved the creative efforts of 1000 staff just at WETA.

FF asked Winquist about Caesar’s voice; something that had been a point of intrigue from the first film. It was a simple enough question … Having seen the original performance, prior to animation, is Andy Serkis’s voice altered in any way in the post-production process? The answer was a surprising ‘No’. Erik said that Serkis has a tremendous ability to adapt his voice and found a very low, slow delivery for Caesar that allowed his dialogue to be captured without any work being done after principal photography wrapped.

The final FF question was about the complexity of ‘Dawn of the Planet of the Apes’ compared to other films that he personally and WETA as a company had worked on. Winquist stated that ‘Dawn of the Planet of the Apes’ has been the hardest, most difficult project the company has worked on so far, but it wasn’t the answer of a man who sounded in any way shape or form tired or sick of his job; quite the contrary. The tone of his answer was that of a man who relished the challenge and was more than happy to keep pushing the envelope of a movie-making process that he has become one of the best in the world at leading!

X-Men: First Class - Retrospective Film Review

X-Men: First Class is an entertaining story based on Marvel’s popular comic book property. The film is a big budget project, but it’s the acting talent that makes First Class successful. James McAvoy, Michael Fassbender and Jennifer Lawrence are great actors and, in their respective roles, deliver performances that help elevate the film to a level that transcends the somewhat forgettable slew of comic book films that have become part and parcel of the American Summer movie season since the beginning of the new millennium.

The film’s story shows the formation of Charles Xavier’s ‘X-Men’ and Erik Lensherr’s ‘Mutant Brotherhood’ and, at its core, is a story an individual’s right to exist free of persecution. This theme has always been the core of the ‘X-Men’ stories, both on film and in the original comic book source material, where ‘Mutant’ powers were a euphemism for the real-world challenges of racism, sexism and religious discrimination. ‘First Class’ is quite overt about its theme. Right from the opening scene, which shows a young Erik Lensherr in a German concentration camp during World War II, the movie does not shy away from depicting both the physical and mental abuse being inflicted upon the film’s main characters. The young Erik’s persecution by Nazi Doctor Sebastian Shaw, played with scenery-chewing glee by Kevin Bacon, is the basis for all that follows and plays directly into the story’s climax. The older Lensherr, played by the versatile & excellent Michael Fassbender, is all consumed in his quest to track down Shaw. His quest for vengeance brings him into contact with Charles Xavier, played by McAvoy, who tries to help Lensherr balance his anger with a desire to show Mutants are humanity’s evolution to something better than what they have been.

At its core, ‘First Class’ is about Charles and Erik working together to find Mutants and convince them to join the fight against Shaw and his efforts to ignite World War III. Lensherr’s underlying motivation is to kill Shaw and avenge his mother’s death. The first act tells the story of how they meet and Xavier’s efforts to convince Erik that life can be good. Despite the Professor’s best efforts, Fassbender plays Erik in such a manner that the audience knows that Charles hasn’t convinced him to take the course of action that’s best for all concerned and not just for himself. When the two are shown working together, the film has some its best moments. The vignettes that depict their recruiting efforts are cleverly done and some of their exchanges provide the film with cross-franchise continuity that helps to clarify and rectify some of the problems created by previous entries.

The time spent establishing the relationships in the first and second acts sees the final act of the film dedicated largely to action and pushing the story to the confrontation between Fassbender’s Lensherr and Kevin Bacon’s Shaw. The film’s writers, of which there were six credited, cleverly use the real historical incident of the Cuban missile crisis as the smoke-screen for Shaw’s plan for world domination and sees the convergence of all of the film’s characters in one place at one time without it seeming forced and manipulative. Without ruining the ending of the film, it’s relatively safe to say that Fassbender’s Lensherr exacts his vengeance with a degree of precision that is consistent with his actions throughout this story, but is also consistent with the older Ian McKellen-version of Magneto from the original trilogy of ‘X-Men’ movies.

Director Matthew Vaughan, who had previously walked away from the chance to direct ‘X-Men 3’, was fortunate to secure James McAvoy for the role of the younger Xavier. McAvoy is a seriously good actor and the combination with Fassbender is a believable pairing in light of their older counter-parts from the previous films, played respectively by Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen. In addition to McAvoy and Fassbender, Jennifer Lawrence brings the younger version of Raven/Mystique to life. Rebecca Romajin played the character in the first three films, but she was always secondary to the focus on McKellen’s Magneto. Lawrence’s character takes centre-stage early in the film; meeting Charles Xavier for the first time when both are just children. She becomes a pseudo-sister to him as the pair takes comfort in their respective mutant abilities.

Kevin Bacon and Nicholas Hoult stand-out in their supporting roles as Shaw and Hank McCoy, who becomes the bright blue Mutant ‘Beast’. Kevin Bacon plays Shaw as a pre-cursor to ‘Magneto’ with one major difference. Magneto’s motivation is use Mutant powers to protect their own kind whereas Shaw is just plain evil and aspires to world domination through the control of Mutant powers. This one-dimensional characterisation does make Shaw seem a touch like the Bond villains of the 1960s and 1970s, whose raison d’etre usually involved new and unique ways to use nuclear weapons to destroy the world! The design of ‘First Class’ suggests a deliberate effort to pay homage to the Bond films, with the impressive set designs utilising large cavernous spaces that provide enough room to fit the ego of a budding megalomaniac!

Nicholas Hoult plays the younger version of Hank McCoy, who was played by Kelsey Grammer in ‘The Last Stand’. The focus of the ‘Beast’ arc in ‘First Class’ focusses on Hank’s experiments to reverse his mutation, the moral dilemma it creates in his relationships with other Mutants and, ultimately, the effect it has on speeding-up his transformation into his ‘Beast’ alter-ego. Hoult brings a youthful exuberance, naivety and insecurity to the younger Hank.

The challenge faced by ‘First Class’ was always how it was going to reference the three ‘X-Men’ movies and the stand-alone ‘Wolverine’ film. While it acknowledges many of the established characters and story arcs, the film is not a slave to its predecessors. The writers wisely choose to not retrofit any of the ‘X-Men III’ story and also ignore any implications that the stand-alone ‘Wolverine’ may have had on their story. The success of the story comes from the focus on the relationships, especially between Charles, Erik and Raven. Their story is representative of the greater drama at play in ‘First Class’, where there is ‘Light’ and there is ‘Dark’, but there’s also a hell of a lot of grey in between.

Edge of Tomorrow - Film Review

‘Edge of Tomorrow’ is an enjoyable science fiction action movie that asks for moderate investment from the viewer in order to keep up with the pace of the story as the film’s protagonists, +Tom Cruise  & Emily Blunt, hurtle toward their inevitable showdown with alien invaders whose mission it is to wipe humanity off the face of the Earth. There will be some audience members who feel confused by the first half of the film, as its non-linear story sees Cruise’s character, Major Bill Cage, forced to live the same day over and over when his blood combines with one of the “Mimic” aliens he has been sent to battle on the frontlines as part of the ironically-named ‘Operation Downfall’. Just at the moment of his death, Cruise wakes up back at Heathrow Airport the day before, where he has been unceremoniously dumped at an invasion staging-point after he has tried to blackmail the General in charge of the mission to recapture Europe from the alien invaders. It may seem hard-to-follow, but it’s not.

Tom Cruise is sent to the frontline with no training to fight, is killed, but, through a twist-of-fate, ends up reliving the day of the battle over and over and over!

The story’s MacGuffin sees Cruise’s Cage get far enough through the events of the battle with the aliens to meet Emily Blunt’s Rita Vrataski, a Special Forces soldier who has experienced previous success against the other-worldly invaders referred to as “Mimics”. After several re-sets, Vrataski, having also been caught in the time re-sets during a previous fight, recognises that Cage is caught in a temporal loop and gives him the vital piece of encouragement he needs to change his course-of-action upon re-awakening back at Heathrow the next time he dies. Doug Liman, the film’s Director, explained that he found this to be one of the challenges that drew him to the film.

“The concept of this really unique time loop hooked me in,” he says. “It opened everything up and created an opportunity to explore what was interesting about Tom’s character and to witness, day after day of the same day, what takes Cage to the brink. It also forces him to become not only the soldier, but the man, he has to be. When I find a project like this, which has a deeper meaning conveyed with tremendous action and great humour, that’s a movie I want to make.”

Audiences will be familiar with Liman’s work if they have seen ‘The Bourne Identity’ with Matt Damon or ‘Mr. & Mrs. Smith’ with Brad Pitt & Angelina Jolie. He likes fast-paced story-telling and is not afraid to jump the narrative forward without mountains of exposition to keep it moving. Liman has spent a great deal more time working in television than most motion picture directors and he brings an economy to his work that keeps the action in line with the story. This is extremely important to the first half of ‘Edge of Tomorrow’, where the time re-sets are better shown as short action sequences rather than as single camera set-ups focussed on story exposition. He does allow the pace of the film to slow slightly in the second half so that his two stars can show-off their skills and set the story on a course toward its climax. Structurally, ‘Edge of Tomorrow’ is not dissimilar to Liman’s break-through film ‘The Bourne Identity’, which carries the viewer along through the first two Acts with a series of chase-style action sequences and then slows in the Third Act to reveal the greater conspiracy in play.

Cruise as Bill Cage and Emily Blunt as Rita Vrataski work together to find a way to defeat the alien "Mimics" who threaten the existence of humanity.

The point at which the relationship between Cruise and Blunt is allowed to become the focus of the movie, which comprises most of the Second Act of ‘Edge of Tomorrow’, certainly gives the film its strongest moments. The first part of the Second Act sees an escalation in the use of the temporal re-set device, however, it is used less throughout the second half as the pair make more progress with each successive mission. This leads to a more conventional narrative in the second half of the movie and allows for some welcome character development between Cruise and Blunt’s characters. The story’s structure also allows Cruise to play some nice moments, as it becomes clear that both Blunt and the audience are experiencing events for the first-time that he has been reliving every day for as long as he can remember. Credit for this must also be shared with screenwriters Christopher McQuarrie and Jez & John-Henry Butterworth. McQuarrie is currently one of the global film industry’s more versatile writers, having written such diverse projects as ‘The Usual Suspects’, ‘The Tourist’, ‘Valkyrie’ and ‘Jack Reacher’. His previous collaborations with Cruise must have been enjoyable, as this marks the pair’s third film and McQuarrie has signed to direct him in the next ‘Mission: Impossible’ movie.

In addition to the film’s screenplay, other great behind-the-scenes talent has contributed to make ‘Edge of Tomorrow’ a first-rate piece of entertainment. Director of Photography Dion Beebe is also no stranger to working with Tom Cruise, having lensed arguably one of his best films, Michael Mann’s ‘Collateral’. Beebe was also the recipient of an Academy Award for his work on the critically-acclaimed 2002 film ‘Chicago’. German Production Designer +Oliver Scholl  is no stranger to big-budget science fiction movies and has designed films such as ‘Independence Day’ & ‘Godzilla’ for Roland Emmerich and also worked on ‘Jumper’, another Doug Liman movie. Scholl is highly-regarded conceptual illustrator and, in this capacity, has worked on a diverse range of genre movies including ‘Batman Forever’, ‘Bicentennial Man’, Steven Spielberg’s ‘A.I. Artificial Intelligence’, ‘The Polar Express’ and ‘Zathura: A Space Adventure’.

In front of the camera, Cruise and Blunt are supported by two very familiar character actors in Brendan Gleeson and Bill Paxton. Like many others on the film, Gleeson is no stranger to working with Tom Cruise having appeared in John Woo’s ‘Mission: Impossible II’. Gleeson’s character of General Brigham is the man responsible for sending Cruise’s character to the frontline of the invasion and plays an important role in enabling Cage and Vrataski to find out where they need to get to in an effort to stop the “Mimics” from successfully crossing the English Channel and invading London later in the story. Versatile character actor Bill Paxton is a familiar face to movie-goers around the world. He has been part of James Cameron’s go-to troupe with supporting roles in ‘Aliens’, ‘True Lies’ and ‘Titanic’. Paxton also played Bill Henrickson, one of the central characters in the acclaimed TV series ‘Big Love’ which ran from 2006 to 2011. In ‘Edge of Tomorrow’ he plays Master Sergeant Farrell, responsible for making sure that Cruise’s character is sent to the frontlines to what is certain death. It’s an important role, as Farrell, at points, has to demonstrate a sympathetic attitude without deviating from his orders. In the hands of the wrong actor it could have been very hammy, but Paxton, under Liman’s direction, gets the job done nicely.

Bill Paxton plays Master Sergeant Farrell, whose job it is to make sure that Cruise's Cage is sent into battle.

So, is ‘Edge of Tomorrow’ a good film? The answer is “Yes”. It’s well made. Tom Cruise and Emily Blunt work well together and, unlike some Cruise’s co-stars, Blunt retains her character’s strength throughout the film, largely unaware that Cruise’s Bill Cage has gotten to know her well enough to want to protect her from one version of the future in the hope that another one can play itself out.

The next question is whether or not ‘Edge of Tomorrow’ is a good science fiction film ... The answer to this is more problematic. It’s less of a science fiction film than ‘Oblivion’; Cruise’s 2013 entry into the genre. Besides the time re-set, there’s less ambiguity about what is happening. The film’s militaristic elements also make it feel less like a piece of speculative science fiction and many of the settings are present day environments such as London and Paris. The story’s “alien scourge” antagonists are more like the “Zombies” from Brad Pitt’s “World War Z” as they are somewhat homogeneous without any great character and have a singular focus on ridding the Earth of humanity. It may not be the best “Science Fiction” but the story does take Cruise’s Bill Cage on the ‘Heroes Journey’ and this examination of the lead character’s ability to cope with adversity is extremely important to good science fiction. Whether he succeeds or fails is best left for the viewer to discover on the big screen, where ‘Edge of Tomorrow’ is definitely best enjoyed!

X-Men: Days of Future Past - Film Review

Bryan Singer's return to the X-men franchise Director's chair brings a welcome return to form for the cast of the original trilogy of films. Singer and screenwriter Simon Kinberg have managed to bring to the screen a compelling drama whose focus on characters and themes harkens back to the highly-acclaimed 'X-Men' that launched the franchise and Singer's career fourteen years ago. In addition to key cast members Hugh Jackman, Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen, 'Days of Future Past' also sees the return of the key cast members from the prequel reboot 'X-Men: First Class'. Michael Fassbender, James McAvoy, Jennifer Lawrence and Nicholas Hoult have all seen their careers head north since their first X-Men outing and the combination of the two casts is arguably the best comic book movie ensemble ever assembled. Throw in 'Game of Thrones' star Peter Dinklage as the film's misunderstood villain - Bolivar Trask - and 'Days of Future Past' transcends its comic book origins to be a film that offers more than just slick set-pieces and zippy dialogue.

The gang's all here, as Mutants from the past and the future come together to collapse the X-Men timeline in on itself and provide a re-set for a franchise that had its fair share of story-telling mis-steps over the last decade.

The story is an allegory about the horrors committed by monolithic oppressors and, in part, continues Singer's fascination with the acts of violence committed by the Nazi regime in Germany during the 1930s and the Second World War. 'Apt Pupil', 'X-Men' and 'Valkyrie' have all dealt with this issue, but 'Days of Future Past' is different. Simon Kinberg's screenplay gives the near-extinct 'X-Men' of the future the chance to go back through time and convince their younger selves that they must change the course of history by preventing the death of the man who has discovered the means to eradicate the Earth of the perceived Mutant threat. It's a great moral dilemma and one that sees Hugh Jackman's Wolverine selected to have his consciousness sent back through time, as his self-regeneration mutation is the only type that can survive being forced fifty years back into the past. It’s convenient, but a clever move on Kinberg’s part, to use Wolverine, as he never ages; so it’s easier for those somewhat familiar with the previous X-Men films to accept that Jackman doesn’t look markedly different in either time period. At this point, if the viewer can suspend their disbelief of this MacGuffin, they will enjoy everything that happens throughout the rest of ‘Days of Future Past’, as Wolverine’s passage back in time is the critical story moment in understanding the relationship between the 'Past' and 'Future' storylines.

Hugh Jackman's 'Wolverine' gets the job of going back in time to prevent the assassination that allows the development of the Sentinels and, ultimately, the extinction of Mutants.

While fans of the franchise will be delighted to see the return of Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen in their ‘Professor X’ and ‘Magneto’ roles, the 1973 'Past' storyline is far more interesting as the talents of Jackman, McAvoy, Fassbender and Hoult work together incredibly well in their efforts to prevent Jennifer Lawrence's 'Mystique' from setting the entire Mutant race on the path to extinction. The main four are joined for a short period of time by Evan Peters as 'Quicksilver', whose ability to travel at incredibly fast speeds is put to good use to break Fassbender's 'Magneto' out of an impossible-to-escape prison. Peters inhabits the role wonderfully and his youthful enthusiasm for his powers makes for the most visually striking sequence in the film, as well as one of its funniest, as ‘Quicksilver’ ensures his new-found Mutant friends make their way to safety. Kinberg's story doesn't allow 'Quicksilver' to overstay his welcome as the main players head to Paris where the backdrop of the 1973 Vietnam War Peace Accords are used for an extended set-piece that sees the Mutants revealed to the entire world and sets in train the events that lead to the film's Washington DC climax.

Evan Peters gets a scene-stealing turn as 'Quicksilver'; a character that should feature more the already announced follow-up to 'Days of Future Past' - 'X-Men: Apocalypse'.

To fully appreciate 'Days of Future Past' the audience is required to understand a lot of exposition and are asked to make a number of cognitive leaps to keep pace with the story. It also requires some knowledge of the four previous 'X-Men' films to fully sympathise with the character's crises in the events that unfold in the 'Future' time period. (Hugh Jackman's Wolverine Origins movie is completely ignored, while last year's 'The Wolverine' is obliquely referenced in a scene between Jackman and McAvoy's young Charles Xavier.) This may make the film’s story a challenge for the uninitiated, as the “destruction porn” so prevalent in current blockbusters is eschewed in favour of genuine drama built around the dynamic but challenging relationship that exists between McAvoy’s ‘Charles’ and Fassbender’s ‘Erik’. There is no doubt that the Producers of the ‘X-Men’ movie franchise backed two winners in casting these two great actors in ‘First Class’, but their skills are continuing to appreciate and there’s an added layer in both of their performances this time around that imbues ‘Days of Future Past’ with authenticity and maturity not seen since Christopher Nolan’s ‘The Dark Knight’ was released in 2008. Fassbender is especially good and the steely resolve of his eyes are put to good effect by Singer on more than one occasion where all that is required is a “look”.

On the production side, much credit for the success of the film must go to Kinberg’s screenplay; however, he was not a lone scribe on this project. Jane Goldman and Matthew Vaughan help Kinberg create the story framework for ‘Days of Future Past’ in a continuation of the work they started back on ‘First Class’. Goldman and Vaughan’s association dates back even further than ‘First Class’, as they were collaborators on the first ‘Kick-Ass’ movie. Bryan Singer brought back many of the original ‘X-Men’ movie crew to get this new movie up on the Big Screen. Newton Thomas Sigel returns to the ‘X-Men’ universe for a third time, following his work on both the first and second films. The multi-talented John Ottman returns as both Film Editor and Music Composer. The movie’s score is the best of the ‘X-Men’ films and the ‘Hope’ track, which is Charles’s theme, is an especially moving piece of music that beautifully captures the hopes and anxieties that both Patrick Stewart and James McAvoy convey throughout proceedings. Special mention must also be made of Production Designer John Myhre, Costume Designer Louise Mingenbach and the entire Make-Up Department; all of whom have contributed to realise the early 1970s in all its flared-glory and mutton-chop panache.

In ‘X-Men: Days of Future Past’, Bryan Singer has brought to the screen a remarkable film. Not only does it entertain in its own right, it manages to set straight many of the inconsistencies created through a lack of story coordination for the ‘X-Men’ franchise throughout the six previous films. This may not be important to the average movie-goer, but it’s important to fans of both the movies and the comic books that consistency exists within the ‘X-Men’ universe. The movie’s conclusion leaves plenty of story options for the already announced ‘X-Men: Apocalypse’, as well as any further stand-alone movies including a follow-up to ‘The Wolverine’. The final moments leave the franchise in the best place it has been since the end of ‘X2’ over a decade ago and, once again, demonstrates that when comic book franchise properties are handled with care they can deliver as much drama & emotion as they do action & excitement!