This review focuses on comparing the movie with the Age of Apocalypse comics

Rating: 10/10 (21 May 2016)

I've recently read the "Age of Apocalypse Complete Epic" collection released by Marvel. Having just watched the movie I thought it would be cool to compare both while they're fresh in my mind.
I'm giving this review a 10 because I loved the movie. As an adaptation of the original storyline it's a poor effort at best. The comics themselves haven't aged well. The episodic format, too many characters, repeating story structures, recurring clichés and lack of depth are not up to scrutiny compared to superior works like Neil Gaiman's Sandman and Katsuhiro Otomo's Akira.
The Age of Apocalypse comic series is an alternate timeline in which Charles Xavier died before bringing the X-Men into fruition and in his stead Magneto became their leader and mentor. In this alternate reality a supremely powerful alien (Apocalypse) takes over the planet, making mutants the ruling class, exterminating and enslaving normal humans.
First of all, half the fun of the comics is Magneto leading the X-Men. Normally a villain, to see his potential for good realised is awesome and in many ways he is a better leader than Xavier, much more active and passionate in his leadership. In the movie, of course, this is explored by having him join the X-Men in the final confront, but this happens too late and he is not explored at all as a leader, becoming just a powerful ally instead.
In the comics Alex (Havoc) and Scott Summers (Cyclops), Hank McCoy (Beast) and others are made into villains. This brings strong reactions from fans - to have us see how a few mishaps in destiny would turn our beloved heroes into a ruthless racist (Cyclops) and mad scientist (Beast). Again in the movie this is done by having Storm and Angel become bad guys but they're not explored as such, they're just there as mere opponents and when Storm decides to stick around and become a X-Men no one even think it's weird at all (neither the audience nor the other mutants). If instead we could see Storm enjoy her darkside and repent later, it would be much closer to what we see in the comic saga.
Apocalypse is a one-man army in the movie, always directly involved in leading his horsemen. In the comics he is instead a distant and ominous figure. He has built an entire empire to enforce his will on his behalf. Not only this gives him a much bigger air of empowerment but it also brings a much complex structure to his ranks. His horsemen are often battling against themselves for his favor, lower ranking officers are always eager and plotting to bring down current horsemen so they can take their place in the hierarchy, etc.
This internal backstabbing is created by the design of Apocalypse's philosophy - his belief that "the strong will survive and the weak must die", which he constantly preaches. This quasi-religious faith gives Apocalypse (and his Age) a lot more depth and relevance as a metaphor for survival. The closest thing in the movie is a single line when he asks to "be taken to the strongest mutants" and Psylocke tells her she'll do so. It hardly comes close to what we see in the original saga.
This is made only worse by the fact that this philosophy has a central role to play as contrast to the overarching philosophy behind X-Men. All the talk of the human species (homo sapiens) evolving into mutants (homo superior) is a metaphor for cultural evolution and personal empowerment. It tell us that it's OK to be weird and different because evolution is often weird and makes the new-and-improved stand out from the old. How normal humans react to mutants is a mirror of how society reacts to anything different ("not normal").
In this light, Apocalypse's philosophy, while still being as much rooted in biology (Charles Darwin's theory of evolution) as the genetics that explain the mutant phenomena, is at times a ruthless exaggeration of Magneto's views that mutants are stronger/better than humans and at other times is a step backwards in the sense that it doesn't care about who is "more evolved", just about who has the raw power to crush his enemies - which as we see in other X-Men movies is often the non-mutants that control government, technology, etc.
The resulting philosophical debate is a pretty interesting and enticing backdrop. In the movie, it's utterly lost and no attempt at all is made at preserving it.
Visually, the comic book landscapes are urban post-apocalyptic ruins, like in Mad Max or the Fallout games. Again, this is hardly true to the film - except for a few scenes: like the aftermath of the University's destruction and the ruined cityscape of the final battle. It's understandable that producers wouldn't want to change the entire visual style of the X-Men movies and I was content with the few throwbacks in the movie.
So, would it be possible to create a true X-Men: Apocalypse adaptation? The "Complete Epic" collection is almost 2000 pages long and it's not even complete. I don't think it's impossible though: much of the comics are episodic and many add little to the overall plot. The basic outline would boil down nicely to be explored in a single movie (or 2 if you wanted greater detail). Movies like Terminator do a great job of telling a complex story while still featuring great action. The same could have been done here.
Unfortunately, there will never be another X-Men Apocalypse movie adaptation. It's sad so many elements that made the original series so unique to start with were lost in translation. Alas, despite being a poor adaptation, it turned out to be a pretty good X-Men movie and maybe even one of the best super-hero movies ever made, and it is undoubtedly more mature, grim and violent than earlier movies in the franchise.