X-Men First Class: The Temptation of Mystique
June 20th, 2011




Amazingly enough, I saw X-Men: First Class yesterday and, like everyone else, liked it quite a bit. It’s not Matthew Vaughn’s best movie, or the best comic-book movie, but it ranks pretty high on the list and was, by most any standard, an enormous amount of fun. Some thoughts:

* Henry Jackman’s score had an eerily similar feel to the score in Layer Cake. It was great; catchy and interesting.

* Also great: Any time Michael Ironside appears. But for some reason he was credited as “M. Ironside”. Wonder why.

* Has Kevin Bacon ever been more fun? Not that I can think of off the top of my head. He was fabulous.

* Yes, Michael Fassbender should take over the Bond mantle as soon as Daniel Craig is ready to move on. It’s funny: In Layer Cake, Vaughn included a little moment of Craig moving around a corner with a handgun almost as an overt audition for the role. And he does the same for Fassbender here, especially in the bar in Argentina.

* A point made by Galley Friend Mike Russell: To get a PG-13, you can only use the word “fuck” once. This was the single greatest MPAA-targeted use of the word in the history of film.

* Vaughn did lots of things right, but the biggest was the skill in sketching characters in just enough detail that the movie could be both ensemble and character-driven. He balanced spending the right amount of time with each. That can’t have been easy.

* Now a longer point: I’d argue that X-Men: First Class is really about Mystique. Charles and Erik are the two poles of the film, each making a slightly-complicated moral argument. Their dialogues are pitched exactly to Mystique, who is the archetype of the mutant every-girl. She is the movie’s heart: Winning us over when we first meet her as a scared and hungry little girl. Throughout the film, she’s the most likable character: Sabotaging Charles’ attempt to seduce a girl at the bar; drinking Cokes while he pounds the hard stuff; curling up in his arms to sleep, not quite the way a little sister would, but even more comfortably than a child-hood best-friend; longing for Hank McCoy to look up from his test-tubes and kiss her. And not only is she the most endearing character, she’s also the only character with a real arc: Charles and Erik’s minds are made up from the moment they meet one another. They have a friendship–a real one–but neither is ever in danger of actually falling for the other’s worldview.

But the most important thing about Mystique is that, more than any other mutant in the film, she embodies both sides of the Charles-Erik divide. Charles understands that homo sapiens will be afraid of the power of mutants, and Mystique’s power is uniquely threatening to society. (More on this in a moment.) This is why he urges accommodation. Erik understands that mutants will be outcasts because of their powers, and Mystique’s appearance is exactly the sort of burden which marks her for specially unpleasant treatment. Unlike Beast, whose appearance marks him as mutant, but whose powers are unthreatening; or Charles and Erik, whose appearances are normal, but whose powers are destabilizingly dangerous, Mystique has the worst of both worlds. That the most sympathetic character should have to bear this double burden makes her situation all the more affecting.

And when Mystique chooses Erik’s path–chooses it despite her conflicted heart and very real love of Charles–it makes X-Men: First Class a work of real tragedy.

* Also, Jennifer Lawrence was great in the role, giving it exactly the right blend of sweetness and melancholy. I’m now totally on board with her as Katniss in Hunger Games.

* It’s been well-remarked on that it’s interesting to see the early Magneto, but it’s equally interesting to see the early Professor X. Later in the comics, Professor X is not always a teddy bear. He has to make hard choices and when he does, he can be quite ruthless. Watching him flirt with girls in a bar carried the same sort of sadness that you feel at the beginning of Fellowship of the Ring, when Frodo is playing sweetly in the grass with not a care in the world.

* Finally, one serious complaint. The biggest weakness of the X-Men world is the inability to take seriously the concerns humans might have about homo superior. That’s okay so far as it goes–this is comic book material and we’re meant to identify with the mutants. But if there really were X-Men-style mutants, society–any society–would have a hard time figuring out what to do. Not with most of the mutants–Beast and Angel and Cyclops and Toad don’t represent existential threats to a stable society. But some mutants–Charles, Erik, Mystique–do. In a world where Charles Xavier can freeze people, blank their memories, and read their minds, how could you trust the stock market, the justice system, or elections? In a world with Mystique, how could any identity be secure? In a world with Magneto, we all exist only subject to his whim–in Ultimatum, he pulls the earth slightly off its magnetic poles, making him a walking, talking, doomsday device.

You don’t have to be Senator Kelly, the bigoted sponsor of the Mutant Registration Act, or some other generic black-hat trotted out by Marvel to have very real concerns as to how society might remain liberal and functional in a world with Mystique and Charles and Erik. Maybe there’s a way. Maybe there isn’t. (Maybe there’s a third alternative, like giving mutants their own homeland, Genosha-style.)

But neither the comics nor the films ever take these concerns seriously. Instead, mutants are mere civil rights champions struggling for acceptance against a cruel and bigoted world of “mutie” haters. It’s all “mutant pride” and Malcolm-Martin arguments, as if the ability to end the world or make the courts, elections, and financial markets unworkable were no different than skin color or sexual orientation.

I don’t mean to make too much of this point–as I said, I love the X-Men and this is what they are. But in the same way that The Dark Knight was able to transcend comic-book material by grappling honestly with a Big Question (Can liberalism protect the liberal order?), I suspect that X-Men stories would be even richer and more interesting if they dealt more honestly with the question of why society would be threatened by mutants.



  1. mrmandias June 20, 2011 at 3:14 pm

    In law school one time we got to talking about this and couldn’t figure out *any* political perspective from which something like the MRA wasn’t arguably justified.

  2. REPLY
  3. X-Men: First Class — The League of Ordinary Gentlemen June 21, 2011 at 11:13 am

    […] of fun, largely because of Michael Fassbender and James McAvoy. Here’s Jonathan Last with a pretty interesting post on mutant assimilation. On a more serious note, I was a little uncomfortable with the film’s […]

  4. REPLY
  5. tom June 21, 2011 at 12:20 pm

    Losing trust in our economic system is small-time. Just in the movies, we’ve seen that Magneto has the power to destroy the Earth and the Professor (with a machine’s power) can be used as a tool to kill all humans and/or mutants. And Jane is stronger than either of them.

    There’s no possible stable co-existence between humans and mutants. And there isn’t any possible stability among mutants either.

    The best X-Men movie would be the one where it turns out that the Professor has long known that mutants are too strong and has been working on a way to prevent any more mutants from being born. Then, once he has done that, he kills all mutants to allow humans to survive. A human scientist has separately reached the same conclusion about humanity’s threat to the Earth, and soon after the Professor’s mutantocide kills all humans. (Or, for a happier ending, instead of the human scientist killing all people, the Professor could reboot humanity in a small Eden in Africa and strip away all knowledge and evidence of technology. Then during the credits, the Cylons and space humans land and meet the rebooted human population in Africa and they all smoke space cigars while walking off into the sunset in the shadow of Kilimanjaro. If we go the Eden route, Roland Emmerich would direct.)

  6. REPLY
  7. Jason O. June 21, 2011 at 12:50 pm

    …plus, Tom, we’d also get to see Famke Janssen on the big screen again, she’s the cat’s meow.

    Nice work, Last: I thought you were a DC guy?

  8. REPLY
  9. Steve Sailer June 21, 2011 at 8:26 pm

    Matthew Vaughn’s obsession with James Bond is natural since the man his mother always told him was his father, actor Robert Vaughn, played the most successful TV knock off of Bond, Napoleon Solo on “The Man from U.N.C.L.E.”

  10. REPLY
  11. Fake Herzog June 23, 2011 at 1:26 pm

    Last,

    Is there a reason you are the movie reviewer for TWS? I love J-Pod, I really do, and I think he’s done a bang-up job with “Commentary”. But after his freak-out over this movie, I think it is time to quietly retire him from movie reviewing and give the gig to you.

    I couldn’t agree more with you about Kevin Bacon — he really was hamming it up, but doing it with panache and just the right amount of menace. The perfect villain for the film.

    Your analysis of Mystique as the emotional center of the film is spot on — I also think it is interesting to consider the fact that she is essentially seduced by Magneto to join him, not convinced by a rational argument. Her heart wins out over her head.

    Your broader argument about powerful mutants is a good one and the movies would benefit from dealing with this political issue more seriously. X-Men 3 had a chance, as it was obvious that Hank McCoy was cooperating with the government because he really believed in the idea of a cure for being a mutant, although in his case one could understand why he wouldn’t want his powers. Alas, X-Men 3 was such a sad mess…

    P.S. The political problem w/r/t mutants exists for many superheroes, which is why Marvel’s crop of movies with S.H.I.E.L.D. makes a lot of sense — as soon as the government got wind of super-powered beings, they would want to control and/or know about these beings at all times (if they weren’t developing the super-powers in the first place!)

  12. REPLY
  13. Fake Herzog June 23, 2011 at 1:31 pm

    Obviously meant to say “are_not_the reviewer…”

  14. REPLY
  15. Foxfier June 28, 2011 at 8:41 pm

    I’ve long thought the X-Men comics would benefit greatly from having the non-mutants act like actual people. Having folks recoil like they’ve just been informed someone has the plague doesn’t work if there’s a random mutation that, at least half the time, results in mutants that are non-threatening– especially doesn’t work when a decent number of folks have relatives that are mutants.
    (Being scared of Beast? Really? Angel? Dazzler?!)

  16. REPLY
  17. Tempo October 1, 2011 at 2:12 am

    Loved Mystique. But I have a hard time making the jump from “embrace myself and join Magneto despite my love for Xavier” to the “I’m ok with killing Xavier and/or maiming/crippling him” that we see in the first X-Men.

    Anyone else see that growth as a bit too dehumanizing?

  18. REPLY
  19. Women in Marvel Movies — Jonathan Last Online July 9, 2012 at 8:31 am

    […] thing Marvel’s feminist critics are missing is X-Men: First Class, which I’ve argued can reasonably be read as a movie about Mystique. All of which got me thinking about Mystique and […]

COMMENT