X-Men

[jducoeur]

We went to see X-Men: First Class last night. Summary: frankly, that rocked.

(Quick background, in case anybody doesn't know what this movie is about: this is the origin of the X-Men as a *concept*. It doesn't include most of the familiar characters like Cyclops or Jean Grey; rather, this is the background prequel that lays the ground for them.)

As previously mentioned, I don't expect comic book movies to be utterly faithful; rather, my metric is, "Did they *get* it?" In this case, I have to say that the answer is a smashing "yes". It doesn't quite match any existing rendition of the origins of the X-Men -- but frankly, is probably the best version I've seen to date. In particular, this is a complex and nuanced joint origin of Professor X and Magneto, showing the two of them creating themselves and each other in the early 1960s.

Of course, purists *are* going to get annoyed here and there. The timeline just plain doesn't work in some places. (They seem to have missed the fact that there are more than 12 years from 1944 to 1962.) They pulled several C-list characters into the 1960s, almost at random. And they kill the one character who it makes absolutely no sense to kill.

But those are quibbles. The important thing is, the main characters -- Charles Xavier and *especially* Erik Lehnsherr -- are played with real depth and complexity. Frankly, Magneto entirely walks off with the movie. Charles is a frivolous twit who turns into a self-righteous twit, but Erik is genuinely interesting and tortured, searching for a path. It's heartbreaking when he finally chooses his direction -- and unsettling that you can sort of see his point of view. There is no subtlety here, but his arc has the flavor of a Shakespearean tragedy: a man who has defined the boundaries of his life in a way that can only allow him evil as an outcome.

As for the considerable supporting cast, there are a bunch of interesting choices. Hank McCoy is played just right, the shy scientist slowly becoming the lovable blue Beast. Raven Darkholme actually gets an origin story that makes sense and ties deeply into the story for once; indeed, she gets more arc here than any of the simpler heroes do. And a few mid-level X-Men like Havoc and Banshee are pulled in and used to good effect.

On the villainous side, they violate much of what I know about Sebastian Shaw, but make him a much more chillingly evil character than his usual portrayal. As played by Kevin Bacon, he's a delightful 1960s Bond villain, frankly: stylish, over-the-top, and *quite* insane. His sidekick is, of course, Emma Frost -- a singularly shallow and annoying version of Emma, but that's kind of true to what she was like in the early days. (Plus a couple of random bad guys who I assume were minor X-Men villains who I don't even recognize, including one who can only be described as Dark Nightcrawler.)

Mind, it's still a Marvel movie: it's not going to win any Oscars. But they get pretty much everything right: story, script, cast, music, and of course special effects. This is an A-list action flick with enough brain to actually be interesting. A fine summer movie, worth seeing in the theater. (And as a special bonus, it's not in gratuitous 3D! Yay!)

Comments

[pale-chartreuse.livejournal.com]

We saw it today. We all enjoyed it. Note: despite being a Marvel movie, there are no Easter Eggs at the end of the credits.

re: Emma Frost

[etherial.livejournal.com]

I got a serious vibe of Shaw's entire plot being simply one plate she was spinning, and her character being *way* more complex than she let on.

Maybe I'm just an optimist.

Re: Emma Frost

[rosinavs.livejournal.com]

I think you're an optimist. She was remarkably flat. Mystique was the only female character to have real dimension, but I think the movie still passed the Bechdel test.

[jadasc.livejournal.com]

"Dark Nightcrawler" was Azazel, a relatively new character created to be "Kurt's real dad" in a really terrible storyline. The guy with no lines was Riptide, who's a real non-entity.

[baron-steffan.livejournal.com]

And again I offer the Marvel-naif perspective. (I'm a DC guy and all I know from Marvel I learned in the movies).

I loved it. The reality of the characters' motivations and reactions is stunning in the face of the overall, well, cartoonishness of the story. It really grabs you. And I don't see Xavier-vs.-Lensherr as good-vs.-evil. It's more Babylon-5: this isn't about pure good vs. pure evil. This is about pursuing the same end by different means, more law-vs.-chaos. I agree with your assessment of Charles's and Erik's characterizations: well done, but Erik especially. It makes sense. Human sense.

Given my lack of investment in any prior continuity, I'm perfectly happy with this as the origin story.

[jducoeur]

Well, the good-vs-evil comes from knowing where it ends up: Erik spends the next several decades drifting into an ever-deeper "the ends justify the means" mentality to protect his people. He does wind up nearly as bad as Shaw eventually, before (in relatively recent years) really pulling back and starting to more-or-less sincerely repent his own extremism.

(At the moment, things are *quite* grey. Cyclops has gotten more hard-assed, and Magneto more moderate, to the point where the good-vs-evil line is deeply ambiguous. Very normal for Marvel when they're doing it right.)

Anyway: frankly, despite having a fair amount of investment, I'm *still* happy with this origin story. Like I said, minor flaws aside, this is probably the best telling of it we've had to date...

[dragonazure.livejournal.com]

ealdthryth and I went to see it last week. I was trying to explain to ealdthryth who some of the characters are. One thing that didn't phase me much were the discrepancies in the relationships between Magneto, Professor X, and (now) Agent MacTaggart. Over the decades, there have been several variations on how they all met and the interpersonal relationships, so one more variation didn't bother me at all. For ealdthryth, it didn't matter. All she knows are the movies, so she had no predetermined bias about what it "should have been". Which I've come to believe is the right way to watch the movies.

The rules for story, character development, and presentation are vastly different for a cinematic experience versus a serial print format. End result: we enjoyed it, and it seems to fit right in with the other movies. We missed seeing a Stan Lee cameo, though. :(

[jducoeur]

... you're right, I didn't see a Stan Lee cameo. Did he really not appear? How odd.

But yes: the movies are best taken on their own terms. So long as the movie groks the heart of the story, I'm willing for it to go in its own direction, and want to see it succeed *as* a movie. This one does so exceptionally well...

[dragonazure.livejournal.com]

It didn't look like the usual Marvel film crew or producers, but I'd have to double-check. I think the primary team was working on Thor and the Avengers origin movies. That might explain why they didn't think (or forgot) to include Stan Lee. The Marvel movies normally include him, sort of like Alfred Hitchcock's appearances in his own movies or John Ratzenberger having a role in Pixar features.

On the other hand, he doesn't appear in every Marvel feature. I don't remember seeing Stan in the Elektra movie either.

[querldox.livejournal.com]

Actually, it wasn't a Marvel movie, thus explaining the lack of an Easter Egg or Stan Lee cameo. Movie rights to X-Men, Spider-Man, and Fantastic Four (I think that's it) belong to other studios. While that doesn't stop a Stan cameo (re: Spider-Man or, I believe, some earlier X-flicks), it does mean they're not tied in with the "Avengersverse" that the owned-by-Marvel movies have been setting up, so no Easter Egg to set up cross-movie continuity.

[johno.livejournal.com]

I like the "what is beautiful/normal?" sub-plot.

I've grew up the Green Orion Women from Star Trek, Mystic from X-Men, much anime...etc, etc. I have no real "must be race w/ {insert color} hair" type of basis for beauty. Preferences, for sure, but not bias or requirements.

So while Jennifer Lawrence is beautiful (and that whole 60 vibe is amazing), I found her more striking and attractive when she was blue.

I wanted to reach into the screen and smack Hank when he made that one beautiful comment.

[jducoeur]

Yes, have to agree. (Both about the blue, and about Hank's comment.)

And it made the Mystique/Magneto dynamic absolutely *fascinating*. One thing that came through, crystal clear, in this movie is that Erik *believes* in his people in a way that Charles (the assimilationist) fundamentally does not. Indeed, you can make a strong case that he's a much better and more open-minded person. So when Raven makes her choice, it's utterly believable, and it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the ideological choice -- it's simply a matter that, on a purely personal level, she believes more in Erik as a person, and you can totally understand why...

[mneme]

*researches*

Apparently, Azazel (dark nightcrawler) really -was- Nightcrawler's father once introduced in the comics (in this century).

Who knew? That even makes sense!

Angel Salvadore was apparently mostly-heroic in the comics, (and a this-century X-man).

Riptide is the only one of the three who overlaps with my comics reading (maybe? I started reading X-men right after the first Marauders plotline in which he appeared), but his most noticable powers in the movie (making whirlwinds) are pretty different from those in the comics (spinning, shooting missiles very fast), and if I did ever "meet" him before I can't recall it.