Michael Fassbender is a (if not, THEE) standout in an other sloppy installment.
Considering what Bryan Singer did to Erik/Magneto (once again painting him as the antagonist rather than the anti-hero he is in the comics), I'm happy that Fassbender managed to make an out-of-character role fantastic :D
What do you all think?
I'm not surprised, though with McAvoy, Isaac and Lawrence in the mix that's quite an achievement. I gathered from the reviews that in the first part of the film, Magneto has a couple of very powerful scenes, while in the last part he's lost in CGI destruction. One review suggested that McAvoy and Fassbender were too good, as actors, to spend this much time in front of a green screen.
sharePeople said that Lawrence "phoned it in", Isaac and Apocalypse were neglected, and McAvoy didn't really expand his acting abilities (in comparison to his heartbreaking Days of Future Past performance).
I think part of the blame is on the writers of Apocalypse. Erik/Magneto is a VERY complex character, yet the writers/Fox/Singer decided to paint Magneto as the antagonist, once again. Erik could've been the anti-hero who leads the X-Men, not Raven/Mystique/Lawrence. Even Michael himself said that Magneto's characterization in Apocalypse was off. Erik/Magneto could've/should've been the hero of the film. It not only would've developed Erik as a character, but also expand Michael's acting abilities.
I think Singer/Fox wanted to compete with Batman vs Superman and Civil War. They replaced character development, fantastic actors, emotional and simple plots, and care for CGI-filled action sequences and too many characters. First Class was so remarkable because it was simple and didn't rely on action, but rather character development, to carry the film.
Days of Future Past was fantastic because it slowly integrated more evenly-paced action sequences, and focused on developing Xavier.