DYFL? > Weblog > Archives > X2: X-Men United

<< Previously |
FILM | X2: X-Men United
Thursday, May 01, 2003

First off, I didn't think I would ever be so geeky as to actually have to write one of these warnings, but here goes: This review may contain spoilers. I'll do what I can to not reveal major surprises, but if you don't want to have specific details about the movie revealed before you see it, then don't read this. OK? OK. God, how lame am I. And how lame are you, if you're heeding this. We are all lame together.

So. X-Men 2. Or as they seem to have decided at the last minute, X2: X-Men United. This might be the first major blockbuster in film history to not have an official title. The opening sequence calls it X2. The posters call it X-Men 2. The press materials call it X2: X-Men United. I call it pretty good.

But yes, sadly, just pretty good. The first film was pretty OK and this one was just pretty good. Yes, the budget's much larger, yes, the action sequences are much more entertaining, and yes, the new characters are very, very cool. The script, however, is gimpy. Even more so than in the first film, it's just... there. Essentially the first scene of dialogue in the film runs as follows:

JEAN GREY: Stilted bullshit about my superpowers.
CYCLOPS: Superpowers superpowers?
JEAN GREY: Superpowers, but also superpowers. And stilted bullshit. About superpowers.
CYCLOPS: I love you.

The level of discourse rarely goes up from there, although Magneto definitely gets this movie's "You're a dick" moment -- watch for it, it's very very catty and gay. Magneto throughout the film is a bit catty and gay, but it's heartily welcomed, because McKellen is obviously having a lot of fun and isn't phoning it in. The acting generally does fill the gaps that the script leaves empty. There's very little attempt at naturalistic, human dialogue -- thankfully there are few overdramatic pronouncements of the stock superhero-movie variety, but there's no spark in the dialogue otherwise.

In the absence of a detailed, engaging script, though, several of the actors really do rise to the occasion and invest their performances with -- HOLY FUCKING SHIT, IN A COMIC BOOK MOVIE? -- subtext. McKellen's the most interesting one to watch here, because in addition to being campier and overplaying more than the other actors, he simultaneously does the most ensemble work -- by which I mean he plays off the other actors superbly. He only chews the scenery when nobody else is in the shot with him. Harry Knowles, of all people, picked up on this in his (perhaps over-exuberant) review of the film, and what he says about the interplay between characters really does hit it on the head. Hugh Jackman is, sadly, not as note-perfect in this one, though he is very good. He's occasionally too swashbuckling, too likeable and personable, but in other moments he's phenomenal -- the moment he shares with Cyclops (the surprisingly good James Marsden) immediately after the film's climactic moment (which I won't spoil for you, but holy shit, there were actually tears in my eyes) is perfectly played. James Marsden really worked for me this time out; I love the unspoken dynamic about his age that hangs between him and Jean, and though he does vanish entirely for the entire middle portion of the film, which is a bit criminal, he plays the parts he is given with exactly the right tone. Also, he is very attractive (sorry). Rebecca Romijn-Stamos as Mystique is another pleasant surprise. If you'd told me, immediately after seeing the first film, that Mystique was going to be a major character in X2, I'd have groaned. But again, she really rises to the part. Most of the performances aren't perfectly steady, but when they're good, they're excellent.

The only actor really miffing it consistently was, again, Halle Berry as Storm; however, she's much more tolerable than her dire "What am I DOING?" act in the first film. Brian Cox as Stryker is also just a bit too high-pitched for reason to accept. But the performances don't really grate because Singer's very strange directing (there's something not quite right about it that Jeremy and I couldn't put our fingers on) sets a tone of heightened drama that's just enough to nurture believable, human moments while also rising to the challenge put across by the more overblown acting decisions. It's a volatile mix that doesn't always work properly, but does occasionally really gel.

My only other vigorous complaint was the score. It's been taken as a kind of geek fact-of-life that the first movie's score (by Michael Kamen) was lame, and Singer brought in his frequent collaborator John Ottman to do this one. And it's much much worse. Honestly, I liked Kamen's sparse and unconventional score for the first movie, and Ottman's tramples all over the action here. There's too much choral work, and the score itself is used too often, adding unnecessary content to otherwise low-key scenes. It simply didn't sit with me the way Kamen's score did, and does -- everyone complains that the original film "didn't have a theme," but I could hum it for you right now. I've already forgotten Ottman's so-called theme for this one. Blah.

I had a good time, though. I had a good time. I've resigned myself to the fact that this creative team just isn't going to nail the X-Men with the 10,000% accuracy I dream about (every night -- sigh), but they are doing respectable work and it could have been a lot worse. I had my sad geek thrills (Colossus! WOO! And he was SO HOT!), and I also had my Film Snob Moments of Appreciation, and since most action films wouldn't even think about forking over that kind of enjoyment, I have to respect the attempt at least. It is bigger than the first -- the plot's a lot more roomy, and the pacing more enjoyable -- and it is better, but not by a huge margin. It fixes some of the first film's problems (Where's the energy? Where's the epic sweep?) while ignoring others (Uh, dude, where's the dialogue?). BUT IT HAD NIGHTCRAWLER IN IT SO ALL IS FORGIVEN. God, you really shouldn't listen to me on this subject, really you shouldn't...

A couple of disconnected thoughts:

Ian McKellen is right -- the movie really is about being gay. Look especially to the scene in Bobby Drake's (Iceman's) house, when his parents first clap eyes on Wolverine. Imagine his mother saying "Bobby? Who is this sweaty, burly man you've brought home?" It works. (On a related note, this movie is much more erotically charged than the first one. Which is always a good thing. And did I mention that Colossus is so hot?)
I think one of the things that makes me generous when it comes to my appreciation of these movies is just how much they do get right. It's not like Daredevil, where every single aspect of the tone and character development misfires; there's a certain baseline of good work in the X-Men movies that keeps me from being too hyper-critical (though it does also draw attention to the places where the work turns weak).
Plot holes. Why? Some of the plot was extremely well thought-out. Some of it wasn't. For example, Nightcrawler's disguise in the opening scene -- would they REALLY let somebody dressed like that into the White House? And Wolverine's exploration of Alkali Base in the film's opening -- in the light of what we later learn about the base, how could he get out of there without any incident whatsoever? When so much is working in one of these movies, as mentioned above, little things like this become obvious and it makes me wonder why the scripting & plotting isn't tighter than it is. I know it's stupid to say it, but if they'd just given one more draft of this screenplay to me, or to someone else who knows their shit about the characters and has a basic handle on how to write well, it would've sung like a bird...
That "twist" ending = great. Just great. I knew what was coming but I still responded so strongly. Again, it wasn't note-perfect but it was gooooood.

I'm too tired (not enough sleep) to engage this subject with the intellectual rigor my heart cries out for me to devote to it. I've never written my ur-myth about the X-Men (y'know, the That's What They Mean To Me story). While it would shed a lot of light on my personality, it would also be horrendously dorky and horrendously involved, and I rarely have the strength of will to carry off such a task. But I think I might watch the first film, and this one, again this month, and flip through my comics and the interviews & creator essays I have on hand, and really lay it all down about why I love these characters, and this concept, so much. If you're interested, prod me about it a bit. But for now, the bottom line is: Pretty good stuff, you might enjoy it, check it out.

Links:

Rotten Tomatoes: X2. All the reviews in one place. As of this post most of them aren't up yet (it comes out a day before the US here in the UK), but tomorrow (Friday the 2nd) there should be tons.
Harry Knowles' review at AICN. He overestimates the movie on the whole, but says some surprisingly insightful things in the process.
Neill Cumpston's review at AICN. Brutally stupid but it makes me laugh. Contains major spoilers.

05.01.2003 | 05:43 PM | TrackBack (1)

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

Wow, you really know your X-Men. I was going to post something about the movie (saw it tonight too), but ended up drinking directly afterwards. So now I don't want to.

I like the way you sheepishly comment that you think James Marsden is attractive, then in like the next paragraph, inhibitions are OFF (about Colossus)! Not to be too faggy here, but I thought Colossus was pretty cool looking. Don't think I saw enough more to say any more.

But Bobby Drake... oh shit, man. Nice. And I've got to agree about Marsden. Fuck, can't actually believe I'm going to post this comment, when the main subject is hot film characters. And I totally thought of the Bobby/parents scene like that too, but that's gotta have been intended.

Anyhoo, like I say: comment is an embarassment to myself. Feel free to delete it. And, also, cool review. That first scene with Nightcrawler was the best thing I've seen in a long time.

Posted by: Andy at May 3, 2003 12:48 AM

............

I find it interesting that this movie seems to play off of the direction Grant Morrison has taken in New X-Men while he supposedly took his direction from the first movie. He's pretty much moved the mutant metaphor from race to sexual orientation over the course of his run so far (and it was probably due time after 40 years).

Good observations.

Posted by: Jeremiah at May 5, 2003 06:07 AM

............

I love the 2nd X-Men movie. It was much better than the 1st one. It has a lot of great special effects and action in it. It was a great idea to add a human rival in the movie and not just the X-Men fight against the Brotherhood. They also made a big sacrifice, because Jean died to save the others, and that is like dropped a bomb on the X-Men. It also had a big empact on Scott Summers/Cyclops, because he really loved Jean. The poor guy, I feel sorry for him. Not just that, He dosen't seems to get any spotlight in the movie, it is always Logan, Logan, and Logan. I hope in the 3rd movie that he will get a lot of spotlight time that he didn't get in the 1st and 2nd movie so he won't be wasted for others to get in the spotlight again.

Posted by: Belinda at June 20, 2003 09:12 PM

............

Post a new comment:

<< Previously |