demeter918 (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
demeter918) wrote2011-06-15 04:06 pm
demeter918) wrote2011-06-15 04:06 pm
Entry tags:
Charles and X-men
Now that the moment of unabashed fangirling is done and passed, lets go take a look at the things that bothered me.
This is a better-worded, better-written, and more articulate piece about X-men and superhero movies/comics in general!
Alexander Chee's critique of the American superhero comics>
This movie is not without its flaws (it's glaringly obvious they didn't watch for the fact that they had a Token Black Guy and then killed him off first, and that at one point, it was a wall of white people against the only ethnically diverse characters in the movie, and that all the women switched sides at one point or another) and problems (this is a Marvel movie; of course it will have problems) but I honestly think that some of its problems could be argued as a part of the plot.
One issue I've read is Charles Xavier's lack of acknowledgement of his white male privilege, which I agree with - the movie is blissful in its ignorance that there are a lot of things going during that same time period that, granted, are not about nuclear weapons (plot device of choice in Hollywood!) but are so important to the world Outside of Hollywood. We're shown none of that. The movie is very much preoccupied with Charles and his naivete of what the world is really like at that point. This is Hollywood and a Summer Movie, so color me not surprised. But I'd argue that that is precisely why this movie works for me as a prequel and why it sets up for further movies down the line. Charles has a line at the end that kind of perfectly sums it up for me: I've promised you a great deal of things, I'm afraid. I'm sorry.
FirstClass!Charles is not a the wise leader we know in the first franchise. He is cocky, unafraid, unabashedly geeky, and a bit of a prick. He does not seem to change at all until the end (we get the moments in between when he delves into Erik's mind and seems to be completely unprepared for the carnage there... god, I do love those Single Tears of Pain) and even that's iffy (Moira's mindwipe was the singularly most baffling thing to me about this movie; what was the point of that?)
He doesn't seem to get it; this is the sixties we're talking about it. The Cuban Missile Crisis is the international topic of choice, I'm sure, but how about the second wave of the Women's Movement and the Civil Rights Movement, both of which are literally happening as this movie goes on? We do not get any reference to them. (But then, we don't get much reference to anything about the sixties. If not for the timestamps at the beginning of each arc, I don't think I'd have actually known we were in the sixties. They make a miniscule effort at it - we are obviously induced to think that the CIA are dumbnuts because they disapprove of women in the CIA. Oh and look, sometimes the weaponry matches the era, and of course, there are no cellphones or computers, but we've got Hank McCoy and a telepath, so we can just make things up. To say that this movie was time-accurate is like saying X-men: The Last Stand was the best movie of the trilogy. Um. And I think I just digressed. So anyways.)
We don't get any sense of that, and that is a failing because it does what every superhero movie does: it simplifies everything into black and white and do try not to get anything else in the way of the world crisis. It misses the trees for the forest. And this all matches what Charles is - a privileged, white male in the United Kingdom where male privilege reigns supreme in good old Oxford. This is not something that surprises me. This is who he is. My biggest issue is not that he is this way, but rather that it's not recognized. That, rather than his characterization, is one of the failings of the movie, since it would have underpinned Erik's role in being the other half of the same person. With the way the movie played out, we're supposed to feel for Charles rather than Erik, because Erik is the obvious side to not root for. But how do we, when we see the naivete and relative innocence that almost gets everyone killed? How, when we watch the opening scenes and never, at any point, feel an ounce of sympathy for the people Erik kills in revenge? Sometimes, the movie seemed to be be confused by itself, which is actually kind of funny, when I think about it.
That is also what will make for a compelling movie question: what gets Charles from A to Z? The Xavier we see later on is wise, kind, understanding, and above all, knowledgeable about his mistakes and his flaws. (this can be argued, but my love for Xavier precludes me from conceding this.) He tamps down his desires, with an almost ruthless amount of control, and I would love to see a long, thoughtful look at how he realizes how lucky he is, even as a mutant, and how Logan's 'fuck off' represents a lot more than him being Logan. FirstClass!Charles does not think any other path or thought process could be the right one. He acknowledges Erik's pain and grief, but cannot acknowledge his rage and that, above all, accounts for their rift. In that same vein, Erik is actually the same way. Neither can acknowledge that the other has a point and neither can be completely in the right and that, I feel, is the true tragedy of their love for each other.
I think the movie attempted at it. Sort of. Or at least, McAvoy and Fassbender infused their roles with that sorrow and anger. In the end, though, this was a Hollywood Summer Blockbuster Action Movie; it was kind doomed from its inception.
Even with all its flaws, I adored it. I guess this is partly why I even wrote this rather confusing ramble; you can recognize something for its problems and still love it!
Also. Michael Fassbender is beyond hot and he and James McAvoy have the sort of onscreen chemistry I'm always wishing for. YUM.
This is a better-worded, better-written, and more articulate piece about X-men and superhero movies/comics in general!
Alexander Chee's critique of the American superhero comics>
This movie is not without its flaws (it's glaringly obvious they didn't watch for the fact that they had a Token Black Guy and then killed him off first, and that at one point, it was a wall of white people against the only ethnically diverse characters in the movie, and that all the women switched sides at one point or another) and problems (this is a Marvel movie; of course it will have problems) but I honestly think that some of its problems could be argued as a part of the plot.
One issue I've read is Charles Xavier's lack of acknowledgement of his white male privilege, which I agree with - the movie is blissful in its ignorance that there are a lot of things going during that same time period that, granted, are not about nuclear weapons (plot device of choice in Hollywood!) but are so important to the world Outside of Hollywood. We're shown none of that. The movie is very much preoccupied with Charles and his naivete of what the world is really like at that point. This is Hollywood and a Summer Movie, so color me not surprised. But I'd argue that that is precisely why this movie works for me as a prequel and why it sets up for further movies down the line. Charles has a line at the end that kind of perfectly sums it up for me: I've promised you a great deal of things, I'm afraid. I'm sorry.
FirstClass!Charles is not a the wise leader we know in the first franchise. He is cocky, unafraid, unabashedly geeky, and a bit of a prick. He does not seem to change at all until the end (we get the moments in between when he delves into Erik's mind and seems to be completely unprepared for the carnage there... god, I do love those Single Tears of Pain) and even that's iffy (Moira's mindwipe was the singularly most baffling thing to me about this movie; what was the point of that?)
He doesn't seem to get it; this is the sixties we're talking about it. The Cuban Missile Crisis is the international topic of choice, I'm sure, but how about the second wave of the Women's Movement and the Civil Rights Movement, both of which are literally happening as this movie goes on? We do not get any reference to them. (But then, we don't get much reference to anything about the sixties. If not for the timestamps at the beginning of each arc, I don't think I'd have actually known we were in the sixties. They make a miniscule effort at it - we are obviously induced to think that the CIA are dumbnuts because they disapprove of women in the CIA. Oh and look, sometimes the weaponry matches the era, and of course, there are no cellphones or computers, but we've got Hank McCoy and a telepath, so we can just make things up. To say that this movie was time-accurate is like saying X-men: The Last Stand was the best movie of the trilogy. Um. And I think I just digressed. So anyways.)
We don't get any sense of that, and that is a failing because it does what every superhero movie does: it simplifies everything into black and white and do try not to get anything else in the way of the world crisis. It misses the trees for the forest. And this all matches what Charles is - a privileged, white male in the United Kingdom where male privilege reigns supreme in good old Oxford. This is not something that surprises me. This is who he is. My biggest issue is not that he is this way, but rather that it's not recognized. That, rather than his characterization, is one of the failings of the movie, since it would have underpinned Erik's role in being the other half of the same person. With the way the movie played out, we're supposed to feel for Charles rather than Erik, because Erik is the obvious side to not root for. But how do we, when we see the naivete and relative innocence that almost gets everyone killed? How, when we watch the opening scenes and never, at any point, feel an ounce of sympathy for the people Erik kills in revenge? Sometimes, the movie seemed to be be confused by itself, which is actually kind of funny, when I think about it.
That is also what will make for a compelling movie question: what gets Charles from A to Z? The Xavier we see later on is wise, kind, understanding, and above all, knowledgeable about his mistakes and his flaws. (this can be argued, but my love for Xavier precludes me from conceding this.) He tamps down his desires, with an almost ruthless amount of control, and I would love to see a long, thoughtful look at how he realizes how lucky he is, even as a mutant, and how Logan's 'fuck off' represents a lot more than him being Logan. FirstClass!Charles does not think any other path or thought process could be the right one. He acknowledges Erik's pain and grief, but cannot acknowledge his rage and that, above all, accounts for their rift. In that same vein, Erik is actually the same way. Neither can acknowledge that the other has a point and neither can be completely in the right and that, I feel, is the true tragedy of their love for each other.
I think the movie attempted at it. Sort of. Or at least, McAvoy and Fassbender infused their roles with that sorrow and anger. In the end, though, this was a Hollywood Summer Blockbuster Action Movie; it was kind doomed from its inception.
Even with all its flaws, I adored it. I guess this is partly why I even wrote this rather confusing ramble; you can recognize something for its problems and still love it!
Also. Michael Fassbender is beyond hot and he and James McAvoy have the sort of onscreen chemistry I'm always wishing for. YUM.
no subject
I think I'm just burned out over everything in fandom needing to be politically correct. I haven't seen First Class yet, but Erik has his own issues with anti-semitism, but because it isn't fandom's current trendy issue everyone overlooks that.
no subject
As a fan, I thoroughly enjoyed the movie and am going to fangirl it to the end of time. As a female, Asian viewer, I can see the small things that could be overlooked, that might not seem like a big deal, but is glaringly obvious to me. Yes, it's like Cosmo for guys, and I have my opinion about Cosmo as well. And that's the thing. I think you can honestly love something, and still openly critique its flaws. I love reading trashy celebrity magazines because they're trashy celebrity magazines. There's not a lot of redeeming value about them, but they're vastly entertaining to me and I'm going to enjoy the occasional US Weekly and not feel any guilt about it.
That all being said, I get where you're coming from. Fandom tends to pile around each other into groups (group mentality, even online) and while I very much agree with a lot of the criticism of X-men: First Class, I'm also not going to be shy about saying: I FREAKING LOVED THIS MOVIE!
no subject
Clearly, I was watching this wrong because my favorite parts of the movie where Erik getting revenge and I ended the movie going, "I'm team Magneto!"