^ Though there's hardly a film or tv series that comes out which isn't denounced by Salon for being sexist/racist/misogynistic/sizeist...you name it.
Spoilers Suicide Squad - Grading & Discussion
- Thread starter Commander Richard
- Start date
That's not fair. Many lower budget movies have intriguing trailers or ad campaigns.
Race and gender guilt is Salon's stock in trade.
Sometimes those charges are unwarranted, but really, sexist tropes and characterizations are rampant in pop culture. Most have the good sense not to be blatantly racist, but still slip up sometimes.
Enchantress, yes, but Waller is deliciously bad, and Flagg is the straight man essential in a cast full of, um, jokers.
Yeah, I think that's a fair summary. I'm unashamedly liberal and pc but every now and again a salon article pops up in my Facebook newsfeed and I go "oh FFS..."
There was one accusation of racism I found a little confusing. I think it was in the review on io9, and the critic was upset when Croc wanted to watch BET. Is that really considered racist?
Only if people thinking a black character wanting to watch BET is racist. A saw a lot of claims of bigotry, but no one actually demonstrating such.
If I was a busy body and had nothing better to do, I could make an argument that Jubilee, Psylocke and Storm were token inclusions to X-Men Apocalypse. All 3 characters thrown in for "diversity" but none of them actually contribute to the story or have more than two lines. That's offensive. Again, if I was a busy body, I would make a big deal about it.
Apocalypse had bigger problems than tokenism. 
Arguments about sexism in SS are easy to make in regard to Harley, though the curse is taken off to a significant extent by her kickass, assertive, defiantly individual attitude throughout the movie.
You'd have to squint awful hard to see SS as racist though.... (apart from that rather suspect abbreviation of the title of the film
)
Arguments about sexism in SS are easy to make in regard to Harley, though the curse is taken off to a significant extent by her kickass, assertive, defiantly individual attitude throughout the movie.
You'd have to squint awful hard to see SS as racist though.... (apart from that rather suspect abbreviation of the title of the film
)
T
I don't think Suicide Squad is racist... mostly. The fact that Slipknot it Native American and basically exists to be killed as a warning to the others, while Captain Boomerang is an annoying racist white Australian who survives the narrative, is annoying. But I'm not quite willing to say it's outright racist, especially since the "hero" of the film is Will Smith.
I'm sorry, but Suicide Squad is a bit sexist. Every female character not named "Amanda Waller" is dressed in sexually provocative clothing and filmed from a sexualized "male gaze." You might make an argument that Harley Quinn's dress is appropriate to her character because she is a woman who sexually objectifies herself for men, and particularly for the Joker, as part of her own dysfunction. (ETA: That argument is questionable, though, since Harley managed to be depicted as a vivid and interesting and damaged character in Batman: The Animated Series in spite of a notable lack of ass shots in booty shorts. And indeed, depicting Harley's relationship with the Joker as being some kind of good or enviable thing is itself a sexist decision; her relationship with the Joker is abusive and should not be depicted as something to be envied or glorified. End edit.)
But there's no reason for Katana to bear her midriff or show off her cleavage in a combat situation (certain Rick Flagg doesn't dress to show off his pecs or his abs). (ETA: Same with Harley's costume -- it's ridiculous from a combat standpoint. End edit.) And Enchantress spends much of the movie just standing around in what amounts to a magic bikini doing belly dances. You could make an argument there about the thematic intersection between female sexuality and power -- except that at no time does the narrative explore the ways in which women gain power through exploitation of their sexuality or what the costs of that kind of power are; she's just there, belly dancing in a bikini, when she could just as easily be wearing jeans and a sweater for all that her costume matters to her character arc or to the plot.
Suicide Squad undeniably objectifies its female characters, so, yes, it is a bit sexist.
Considering that this film glorifies the relationship between the Joker and Harley (a relationship that starts with him electrocuting her; a relationship that has always been depicted as implicitly abusive since its source material in Batman: The Animated Series; and a relationship which deleted scenes would have made its abusive nature more explicit before studio interference); and considering that this film also asks us to feel pity for El Diablo because he lost his temper and killed his wife and children? I think that that criticism is completely fair.
(I think Suicide Squad would have been less "domestic-violence-is-okay-y" if the narrative had been constructed to depict Harley as recognizing her relationship with the Joker as abusive and as something she needed to escape, instead of constructing it as "mad love" that Harley was "right" to want to have. In fairness, it's unclear if this was David Ayer's fault, or if it was the studio trying to get rid of anything explicitly abusive in the narrative and play up the idea of "mad love" as a reaction to the backlash against Batman v. Superman.)
That's not an "imagined slight" on the film's part. That is a conclusion that may be reached by somebody who has engaged in a critical analysis of the plot, characters, and thematic elements. You may or may not agree with it, but it is not the same thing as attributing an objectively immoral trait to the film such as racism, sexism, or glorification of domestic violence.
I'm sorry, but do you actually read film reviews and critiques on a regular basis? People call out racism and sexism in movies all the time. Nothing unique about it with Suicide Squad.
Hell, at least these criticisms of Suicide Squad only emerged once critics had actually seen the film. Compare that to the vitriol unleashed against this year's Ghostbusters remake just in reaction to the mere idea of an all-female version of that story before anyone saw it.
Most of what you just outlined are perfectly fair critiques that can easily be supported by citing the elements of the film.
Please describe this "agenda."
Because of course, that liberal rag The Wall Street Journal is well-known for agreeing with their socialist comrades over at Vox all the time.
Let's get real here. A lot of people dissed Suicide Squad because it was a mess of a movie. I happen to have found it an enjoyable mess, but this was not a good movie, and the critiques that it is sexist and glorifies domestic violence are completely fair. When a lot of different media outlets' film critics dislike a movie, that is not evidence of "something more going on here." It is evidence it was a movie that violated their aesthetic standards. There was no hidden agenda against The 5th Wave, or Dirty Grandpa, or The Divergent Series: Allegiant, or Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the Shadows, or Independence Day: Resurgence, or The Legend of Tarzan, or Ben-Hur, or Yoga Hosers, or what-have-you.
Hell, let's make a comparison here. Suicide Squad got bad reviews, but has been a generally successful film. That doesn't mean the's some grand media conspiracy to thwart the film which the public has rebelled against because it's secretly good. If that were the case, we would have to conclude that Twilight and its sequels were also secretly good films because they were successful -- and I don't see anyone making that argument here.
Suicide Squad got bad reviews because it is a mess of a movie. Many people -- myself included! -- found it an enjoyable mess, but still a mess. Others seem to enjoy it uncritically. But there's no media conspiracy here, no "agenda." It's jut people's honest reactions.
I don't think Suicide Squad is racist... mostly. The fact that Slipknot it Native American and basically exists to be killed as a warning to the others, while Captain Boomerang is an annoying racist white Australian who survives the narrative, is annoying. But I'm not quite willing to say it's outright racist, especially since the "hero" of the film is Will Smith.
I'm sorry, but Suicide Squad is a bit sexist. Every female character not named "Amanda Waller" is dressed in sexually provocative clothing and filmed from a sexualized "male gaze." You might make an argument that Harley Quinn's dress is appropriate to her character because she is a woman who sexually objectifies herself for men, and particularly for the Joker, as part of her own dysfunction. (ETA: That argument is questionable, though, since Harley managed to be depicted as a vivid and interesting and damaged character in Batman: The Animated Series in spite of a notable lack of ass shots in booty shorts. And indeed, depicting Harley's relationship with the Joker as being some kind of good or enviable thing is itself a sexist decision; her relationship with the Joker is abusive and should not be depicted as something to be envied or glorified. End edit.)
But there's no reason for Katana to bear her midriff or show off her cleavage in a combat situation (certain Rick Flagg doesn't dress to show off his pecs or his abs). (ETA: Same with Harley's costume -- it's ridiculous from a combat standpoint. End edit.) And Enchantress spends much of the movie just standing around in what amounts to a magic bikini doing belly dances. You could make an argument there about the thematic intersection between female sexuality and power -- except that at no time does the narrative explore the ways in which women gain power through exploitation of their sexuality or what the costs of that kind of power are; she's just there, belly dancing in a bikini, when she could just as easily be wearing jeans and a sweater for all that her costume matters to her character arc or to the plot.
Suicide Squad undeniably objectifies its female characters, so, yes, it is a bit sexist.
Considering that this film glorifies the relationship between the Joker and Harley (a relationship that starts with him electrocuting her; a relationship that has always been depicted as implicitly abusive since its source material in Batman: The Animated Series; and a relationship which deleted scenes would have made its abusive nature more explicit before studio interference); and considering that this film also asks us to feel pity for El Diablo because he lost his temper and killed his wife and children? I think that that criticism is completely fair.
(I think Suicide Squad would have been less "domestic-violence-is-okay-y" if the narrative had been constructed to depict Harley as recognizing her relationship with the Joker as abusive and as something she needed to escape, instead of constructing it as "mad love" that Harley was "right" to want to have. In fairness, it's unclear if this was David Ayer's fault, or if it was the studio trying to get rid of anything explicitly abusive in the narrative and play up the idea of "mad love" as a reaction to the backlash against Batman v. Superman.)
That's not an "imagined slight" on the film's part. That is a conclusion that may be reached by somebody who has engaged in a critical analysis of the plot, characters, and thematic elements. You may or may not agree with it, but it is not the same thing as attributing an objectively immoral trait to the film such as racism, sexism, or glorification of domestic violence.
I'm sorry, but do you actually read film reviews and critiques on a regular basis? People call out racism and sexism in movies all the time. Nothing unique about it with Suicide Squad.
Hell, at least these criticisms of Suicide Squad only emerged once critics had actually seen the film. Compare that to the vitriol unleashed against this year's Ghostbusters remake just in reaction to the mere idea of an all-female version of that story before anyone saw it.
Most of what you just outlined are perfectly fair critiques that can easily be supported by citing the elements of the film.
Please describe this "agenda."
Because of course, that liberal rag The Wall Street Journal is well-known for agreeing with their socialist comrades over at Vox all the time.
Let's get real here. A lot of people dissed Suicide Squad because it was a mess of a movie. I happen to have found it an enjoyable mess, but this was not a good movie, and the critiques that it is sexist and glorifies domestic violence are completely fair. When a lot of different media outlets' film critics dislike a movie, that is not evidence of "something more going on here." It is evidence it was a movie that violated their aesthetic standards. There was no hidden agenda against The 5th Wave, or Dirty Grandpa, or The Divergent Series: Allegiant, or Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the Shadows, or Independence Day: Resurgence, or The Legend of Tarzan, or Ben-Hur, or Yoga Hosers, or what-have-you.
Hell, let's make a comparison here. Suicide Squad got bad reviews, but has been a generally successful film. That doesn't mean the's some grand media conspiracy to thwart the film which the public has rebelled against because it's secretly good. If that were the case, we would have to conclude that Twilight and its sequels were also secretly good films because they were successful -- and I don't see anyone making that argument here.
Suicide Squad got bad reviews because it is a mess of a movie. Many people -- myself included! -- found it an enjoyable mess, but still a mess. Others seem to enjoy it uncritically. But there's no media conspiracy here, no "agenda." It's jut people's honest reactions.
That's not racist, because Slipknot was not singled out for death because of his ethnicity. He was on team called the Suicide Squad and was the first to die on the mission. It was a homage to a similar scene in the comics back in the 80s.
Boomerang puts the idea into Slipkot's head, Slipknot decides to take a chance and run for it, and ends up losing his arm.
Remember, with the exception of Katana and Flagg, the members of the SS are villains and anti-heroes. A collection of cut throat pirates who are only in it for themselves. Scoundrels, the lot of them.
Does sexy = sexism?
Sexism being discrimination and prejudice against a specific sex, in this case women.
Harley Quinn was designed to be a sexy type character. This was to off set her repressed doctor persona she had before she met the Joker. HOWEVER, Harley being sexy and promiscuous is always on her own terms. She's not available sexually to anyone she chooses not to be with. The Joker originally, but now it's down to Ivy and Red Tool (Deadpool parody. We don't need to use our imaginations of how Harley reacts to men disrespecting her.
Batman The Animated Series
Harley's solo series.
Harley's solo series.
Also saying that Harley was sexualized for the "male gaze" doesn't really mesh I feel. Because the people who appreciate and champion Harley are primarily women. Just look at all the cosplays in the US and in Japan (surprisingly).
https://www.japantoday.com/category...g-across-japan-ahead-of-suicide-squad-release
By Halloween, there will be more.
Also, look at Harley's sales in the comics. Harley stars on 4 -5 books.
Harley Quinn
Harley's Little Black Book
Harley Quinn and Power Girl
Harley Quinn's Gang of Harley's
Sucide Squad
The non-Suicide Squad books being the main comic and spin-offs authored and illustrated by the same team.
In terms of sales for just female lead books, Harley is below Spider-Gwen, Jane Thor, Wonder Woman, Batgirl and Ms Marvel, but above Captain Marvel, Supergirl, Catwoman, Silk, Spider-Woman, Black Canary, Scarlet Witch, Starfire and Angela Queen of Hel. The character is very popular! And it's women who made that possible.
I don't consider exposed mid-driffs to be a sexualized area. Katana's cleavage was never exposed, that I could see. Compared to say the way Black Widow's cleavage is always visible in the MCU movies. Katana is a stretch to make a claim of sexism.
Enchantress spent a lot of time in the film being gross looking and covered in mud. Like Slave Leia if she crawled out of hell. I never got the feeling like it was a "come hither" for the straight males or gay females in the audiences. Sex and beauty were never her strategies. The way they are strategies for Mystique and Emma Frost. As for her look and belly dancing, well...
I take issue with this, because the violence against Harley's person were not in the actual film. We know Harley is getting a solo movie now, so they can explore the relationship more there. Just like the animated series and comics started off showing Harley as a girl so in love with the Joker, before he started to turn his violence against her. Character development for everyone who is not up to date with Harley's growth since the 90s.
El Diablo losing it and killing his family is tragic, and makes us empathize with him. Demonstrated throughout the film with how reluctant Chato was to use his powers, until he found the power of friendship. Cheesy, but it worked for the film's climax and his own full circle growth.
The film isn't titled Harley Quinn and the Suicide Squad, it's Suicide Squad. So they chose to excise those scenes from the film, because they just didn't add to the main story. Intentions can change with a film while they're shooting it, and that's likely what happened her. Harley is getting a solo movie to continue her own story, thanks to SS's success. So they'll be plenty of time to focus on Joker and Harley there.
Difference is, people in the media were praising GB, while it was the general audience that was left cold by it. The reverse was true for SS. Critics were praising Ghostbusters before and after it came out. Hell, people were spinning GB's performance long after it became apparent that the film was going to be a flop. By rights, GBs had every opportunity and more to be a success and the film just didn't deliver. Domestically or internationally.
I disagree, but you've already read about that above. Haha.
Don't pay to see this film because it's racist, sexist, misogynistic, is Donald Trump of super hero movies. Don't financially support depictions of this kind of bigotry and intolerance! And if you do, you are a terrible person. Hahaha
The accusation is the evidence. Why would anyone go see a comic book movie if people on site after site are saying these negative things about it?
With all the accusations lobbed at SS, I'm surprised no one accuses the film of having "unsolicited opinions on Israel".
From Angela Queen of Hel.
That is Bor, father of Odin and grandfather of Thor. Former king of Asgard, protector of the 9 Realms, worthy of wielding Mjlonir.
Been dead for millenia, but somehow has kept up with the current geopolitcal climate of the 21st century, and holds anti-semitic views on a country and people that didn't exist when he was alive. That's where we are nowadays.
I enjoyed it too. I just feel the criticisms didn't all stem from how the film was executed and told it's story. Instead opting to sling mud at the film and the target audience who would go to see a film like this. Using racism as an example: When you accuse something of being overtly racist (not casually racist or dog whistle racist) you better be able to back up your claims. Otherwise the word and others, lose their meaning.Because of course, that liberal rag The Wall Street Journal is well-known for agreeing with their socialist comrades over at Vox all the time.
Let's get real here. A lot of people dissed Suicide Squad because it was a mess of a movie. I happen to have found it an enjoyable mess, but this was not a good movie, and the critiques that it is sexist and glorifies domestic violence are completely fair. When a lot of different media outlets' film critics dislike a movie, that is not evidence of "something more going on here." It is evidence it was a movie that violated their aesthetic standards. There was no hidden agenda against The 5th Wave, or Dirty Grandpa, or The Divergent Series: Allegiant, or Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the Shadows, or Independence Day: Resurgence, or The Legend of Tarzan, or Ben-Hur, or Yoga Hosers, or what-have-you.
Hell, let's make a comparison here. Suicide Squad got bad reviews, but has been a generally successful film. That doesn't mean the's some grand media conspiracy to thwart the film which the public has rebelled against because it's secretly good. If that were the case, we would have to conclude that Twilight and its sequels were also secretly good films because they were successful -- and I don't see anyone making that argument here.
Suicide Squad got bad reviews because it is a mess of a movie. Many people -- myself included! -- found it an enjoyable mess, but still a mess. Others seem to enjoy it uncritically. But there's no media conspiracy here, no "agenda." It's jut people's honest reactions.
Or maybe it's just tricks of the trade. Nothing sells better than bad news. So why not keep it going, right?
Last edited:
That's supposed to help Americans hear it in an "Australian accent". I think I became desensitized to it after all those Claremont X-Books.
The could definitely understand the argument that Harley and The Enchantress's costumes were sexist, but I didn't think the actual characters themselves, in terms of actions and personality were. Harley was a sexual character, but that's just the way Harley is, and Amanda Waller and the Enchantess (costume aside) really didn't seem to me to be as sexualized as she was. For me, for something to be sexist then all of the women are portrayed in the same negative manner.
Suicide Squad is just a sexist most movies, TV shows, comic books, advertisements, etc, that treat woman differently than their male counterparts. Unfortunately, objectifying women has become such a part of our culture, that we're almost blind to it sometimes. To single out this movie is silly when there are so many more examples that are far more important to popular culture.
None of those characters were "thrown in for diversity". They're all long-standing characters in the comic. Jubilee contributes nothing as always, but Storm is a major character and she contributed to the story at a crucial moment. And everyone knows what purpose having Olivia Munn around serves. Hint: it ain't diversity.
I don't know if you're quite following what I mean when I say that one might interpret the narrative as being sexist or racist.
You're evaluating this from an in-universe perspective -- "Slipknot wasn't targeted by other characters for racist reasons, therefore it is not racist."
I'm arguing from a metatextual perspective.
Here's a way to illustrate the difference:
Black Dude Dies First is an undeniably racist trope. Yet when we say that, that doesn't mean we're saying that the characters in a film that employs the Black Dude Dies First trope are themselves racist. Indeed, when a monster kills a black dude first in a horror movie, it is not that the monster is racist. It is that the narrative is racist because it is constructed in such a way to depict black lives as being less valuable than white lives -- as "filler" people there to die so that we will feel tension over the fate of white characters.
Now, you may or may not argue that Slipknot's fate is significant enough to mark Suicide Squad as a racist film. As I said, I'm not quite willing to go that far myself, because this film doesn't particularly depict anybody in a good light, and both its most sympathetic (Deadshot) and least sympathetic characters (Waller) are persons of color. But whether or not Slipknot was targeted by other characters for being Native American does not in and of itself determine whether or not the film is racist. You have to examine things metatextually.
False dichotomy. No one claimed sexy=sexism. But there are ways to be sexy without being objectified.
That is too narrow of a definition of sexism. A narrative that depicts women as being sex objects for male pleasure may not be engaging in discrimination or prejudice per se, but this is still sexism.
Not particularly. I mean, she wore a unitard in Batman: The Animated Series, but it wasn't particularly sexualized. It would be more accurate to say that she was reinterpreted as a sexualized character who would dress in a sexually provocative manner for later projects, such as the Arkham video games, or this film.
What repressed doctor persona? Nothing in the film suggested she was repressed before meeting the Joker, nor anything in the original version of her in The Animated Series.
There are two problems with this argument:
1. She is depicted in the film in explicitly proprietary terms vis a vis the Joker. She does things like wear shirts that say "Daddy's Lil Monster" or clothes that say "Property of Mr. J," and her entire character is oriented around pining for him, around "giving her life" for him early on; she is depicted as someone who is a "being for others" (to paraphrase Paulo Freire in Pedagogy of the Oppressed), as someone who exists for the Joker -- and the film never outright depicts this as a bad thing. This, in spite of the fact that the Joker began their relationship by electrocuting her and demanding that she commit a faux suicide ritual to please him.
2. This is in the context of a work of fiction created by a man, which features other inappropriately sexualized female characters.
Uh-huh. Yeah, sure, there's no male gaze at work here:
What you are describing here is how members of the audience choose to appropriate and reinterpret works of art for their own personal aesthetics goals. It's awesome, but it has nothing to do with whether or not a film employs what academics have identified as the male gaze.
So why didn't we see Rick Flagg's abs?
The MCU films are also sexist.
Dude, you're literally comparing her costume to Slave Leia while trying to arguing it's not sexist? Seriously?
There was no reason for the magic bikini to be there.
As for her look and belly dancing, well...
Homage, man.
So what? It is still objectifying and sexist. Being an homage does not change that.
We literally see the Joker electrocuting her after his goons capture her when they take over Arkham.
That does not make the relationship as depicted un-abusive.
Dude, the narrative has literally constructed a female character who exists solely to die at the hands of her husband so that you will feel bad for that husband, and you're arguing with a straight face that this isn't sexist and isn't asking us to feel sympathetic towards a perpetrator of domestic violence? The film literally asks us to feel bad for El Diablo for murdering his wife. It glorifies a domestic abuser.
El Diablo losing it and killing his family is tragic -- for his wife and children. It should not make us empathize with him, because he is the murderer and abuser. It should make us empathize with his wife and children.
Now, I'll give the film some credit here -- it also insists on saying that El Diablo cannot run away from his sin, that he has to own it. But his wife literally didn't even get a name. It is a deeply troubling depiction of domestic abusers, and the criticism that Suicide Squad either glosses over or glorifies domestic violence is completely fair.
Yeah, and they kept scenes in that glorified an abusive relationship and which asked us to empathize with another domestic abuser. Had they constructed Harley's character arc differently, then the criticism that the film glorifies domestic violence would have less validity.
After they saw it (not before they saw it), because it turned out to be a generally good movie.
According to Box Office Mojo, Ghostbusters: Answer the Call had a total domestic gross of $127.3 million as of 22 September 2016. It has a Rotten Tomatoes critics score of 76% and an audience score of 56%. It is an exaggeration to say audiences were "left cold" by it. It wasn't a mega-hit, but it was seen by a great many people and was enjoyed by most people who saw it.
Point is, you asked for another movie that had been "unfairly tarred and feathered." I pointed out that Ghostbusters was trashed before it was even released because a lot of people got butt-hurt at the idea of a female Ghostbusters remake. So that's a perfectly fair and prominent example of a film being unjustly tarred and feathered.
Suicide Squad, by contrast, only started being the target of any critics when it actually screened for them and it turned out to have all sorts of narrative problems.
Who?
Because it was a generally good movie with a few flaws -- as opposed to Suicide Squad, which was a generally flawed movie with a few good parts.
This is circular logic. What agenda do they allegedly wish to advance by hurting Suicide Squad's box office?
An accusation is never its own evidence.
Dude, comic book movies have ruled the American box office for going on ten years now. If you're trying to argue that they're some endangered genre if one or two of them are derided by critics, I think you're not keeping up with the times. They're not gonna stop making action films because critics didn't like Olympus Has Fallen or its sequel, and they're not gonna stop making comic book movies -- not even DC Comics movies! -- because critics didn't like Batman v. Superman or Suicide Squad.
Last edited:
Long standing characters who had glorified cameo appearances. Like I said, if I was a busy body with nothing better to do, I could make an argument for tokenism in Apocalypse.
You know, Apocalypse being Jubilee's third rodeo under Singer.
Here in X1, sitting next to X1 Kitty Pryde and Rouge.
Here in a mall in X2.
Here again in Apocalypse, in another mall, in another scene that was deleted.
(Sorry, I couldn't find a link to the video).
Three times and she's yet to play a role or use her powers on screen. Apocalypse went so far as to use Jubilee in the marketing for the film, and yet she served no purpose in the movie. Why put the character alongside Nightcrawler, Jean and Scott in the film and all the promotions, just to leave her out of the action? Why even include the character in the first place? Tokenism, man.
Storm plays a bigger role by being one of the 4 Horsemen, but has one fight scene and a few lines at the beginning of the movie. We learn she's a fan of Mystique, but she never exchanges words with her and betrays Apocalypse when she sees Apocalypse strangling her. Given that Apocalypse's plan was to bring about world wide armageddon, this 11th hour defection to topple her boss is just lame. Storm's scenes of her speaking to Xavier and officially joining the X-Men were also cut. She's just there at the end with the other name characters we know. Boring, this is all boring!
In the comics, and several animated adaptations Storm was one of the X-Men who wanted to save Angel after his fall to Archangel. Storm and Angel having a close relationship of sorts. In some iterations Angel is the one who teaches Storm how to fly. Apocalypse had 4 of the Fab Five X-Men (missing Ice Man) and several of the X-Men from the 2nd generation team, and they did nothing constructive with them.
Olivia Munn being half white and half Vietnamese, playing a Japanese character (who in the comics has the mind of a British woman, comics are so weird) had as much to contribute to the film as Storm and Jubilee. She's there, she gets 3 lines and walks away at the end. Her position as a Horseman gives her platform, but nothing constructive was done. If they wanted to do something constructive, why not make Havok a Horsemen instead? In the Age of Apocalypse timeline, both Scott and Alex served Apocalypse. In a film, this would give Scott motivation to save his brother; whom we the audience would know is a good guy (from First Class and DOFP). As opposed to what they actually did with Havok in the movie.
Like @eyeresist said, tokenism is the least of Apocalypse's problems.
Havok is killed off in a silly way and glossed over.
Beast and Mystique's "relationship" is alluded to and for the 3rd time it goes nowhere.
Magneto is reset back to being evil, because reasons.
Mystique is made the central character of the movie to just absurd levels. (The designed the color of Cerebro after Mystique? REALLY?! It's blue in the comics too, you jerks!) People fawning over her, when she herself doesn't want to live up to her own reputation. And yet she is still help mutants and using her powers, for some reason? The relationship she has with Nightcrawler is glossed over. Why she went all the way to Germany, rescued him from a mutant fight club, paid for transport papers to America and took him to Xavier's school, I don't know. The film doesn't say, but I imagine we the audience are supposed to fill in the blanks and it's supposed to mean something. Lastly, JLaw's lick stamp, mailed in performance.
Mass destruction across the planet and the death toll is glossed over.
The film screws off to Canada (from upstate New York), just so we can have a scene with Wolverine and then promptly fly across the world to Egypt for the climax.
That boring climax! I know Singer has stated he isn't the best at shooting action scenes, but my god! The dude really lacks imagination for fight scenes. DOFP must have been a fluke!
Apocalypse himself being a total waif. The most powerful mutant ever. With access alien tech and any power he wants, and he put up such an anemic fight in the end.
Beast and Mystique's "relationship" is alluded to and for the 3rd time it goes nowhere.
Magneto is reset back to being evil, because reasons.
Mystique is made the central character of the movie to just absurd levels. (The designed the color of Cerebro after Mystique? REALLY?! It's blue in the comics too, you jerks!) People fawning over her, when she herself doesn't want to live up to her own reputation. And yet she is still help mutants and using her powers, for some reason? The relationship she has with Nightcrawler is glossed over. Why she went all the way to Germany, rescued him from a mutant fight club, paid for transport papers to America and took him to Xavier's school, I don't know. The film doesn't say, but I imagine we the audience are supposed to fill in the blanks and it's supposed to mean something. Lastly, JLaw's lick stamp, mailed in performance.
Mass destruction across the planet and the death toll is glossed over.
The film screws off to Canada (from upstate New York), just so we can have a scene with Wolverine and then promptly fly across the world to Egypt for the climax.
That boring climax! I know Singer has stated he isn't the best at shooting action scenes, but my god! The dude really lacks imagination for fight scenes. DOFP must have been a fluke!
Apocalypse himself being a total waif. The most powerful mutant ever. With access alien tech and any power he wants, and he put up such an anemic fight in the end.