X-Men Reviewed

ROVIN' AND RAVIN' WITH MIKE

X Marks the Spot

I am writing a review of X-Men almost as handicapped as I was in reviewing Scary Movie. My problem with Scary Movie, is that it is a parody, and it was hard for me to appreciate it, since I am not familiar with the material that it was parodying. Perhaps my handicap with X-Men, that I am not at all familiar with the almost mythic characters that have been around for decades, is not so serious. I had never read Winston Grooms’s novel Forrest Gump, when I first saw that film, and I had no trouble appreciating the movie as a movie, not as a visual aid.

A movie based on a literary work, whether a play, a novel, or a comic book, has to stand or fall on its own merits as a movie. Comic books have proven a special challenge for filmmakers, with failures ending up staler than yesterday’s popcorn (Popeye). Comic books are a kind of folklore of our day, and we take our folklore very seriously. And fans of X-Men are very serious indeed. From what I’ve heard about X-Men over the years, Jack Kirby and Stan Lee, who created the series decades ago, wanted something more than the usual weird characters engaged in the usual extreme actions. Of course, the weirdness and the extremity are part of the appeal of the X-Men, but there is a deeper level given to the tales of mutants concerned about the humans who hate them. While as an outsider I appreciated all the background and exposition to set up the story, as a jaded movie-viewer and reviewer, I felt that the film was weighed down by a bit too much explanation, telling rather than showing.

That deeper level is evident throughout this film. In fact, I suspect that some X-Men fans (X-philes?) may feel that the levels are a little too deep and that there is not enough violent action for their tastes. This outsider was impressed by the kind of story and film that X-Men turns out to be, something closer to director Bryan Singer’s harrowing Apt Pupil than anything I would have imagined a film based on comic book characters could be. Was he paying some tribute to the earlier film by having this one begin in a Nazi concentration camp and by once again directing actor Ian McKellan, who plays Magneto?

Magneto has an intriguing solution to the prejudice that divides the mutants and the "normal" human beings? He has developed a way to turn the humans into mutants as well. His major obstacle is fellow mutant, telepath Charles Xavier (Patrick Stewart), who trains young mutants to use their powers for the good of humans and mutants alike. He is also aligned with the powerful mutants known as the X-Men—Storm (Halle Berry), who can manipulate the weather; Jean Grey (Famke Janssen), who is telekinetic; and the laser-eyed Cyclops (James Marsden).

Rogue (Anna Paquin), who can kill with a touch, and Wolverine (Hugh Jackman), who sports metal claws, are two teenagers with whom it seems we in the audience are supposed to identify. I could identify with Wolverine’s almost comic, hardly heroic cynicism.

I surprised myself by honestly liking this film. It fits in nicely with this summer’s dark, even brooding films and attains an almost epic sweep, while getting us out of the theater in just over an hour and a half, which probably means that a sequel is already in the making. There is a poignancy in these not so super superheroes caught in their webs of loyalty, dependence, and even weakness. Some crackling good dialogue sounds too good to be caught in the text-balloons of comic books, and McKellen and Stewart are not wasted on material like this.

Again, very much to my very pleasant surprise. Keep your feet dry, your heart full of noble thoughts, and your eyes clear to see the mutant in every hero, not to mention vice versa.