Anatomy Of A Box Office Failure, Why Isn’t R.I.P.D. The Next Men In Black?

The Good: Decent acting, Moments of humor, Generally good effects.
The Bad: Very predictable plot/character arcs, Incredibly familiar to anyone who watched both Dead Like Me and Men In Black
The Basics: R.I.P.D. failed to make a splash not because it was bad, but because it was way too familiar to moviegoers.


When it comes to Summer Blockbuster Season, one of the big factors working for movies is hype. The power of hype makes otherwise mundane films into huge successes long before they can end up at gas stations everywhere on DVD in a $5 (or less) bin. The fascinating thing about hype is watching which movies live up to and which films fall completely based on the audience response once that hype is stripped away. Hype before the release, as it so often happens, has almost nothing on word of mouth after the product or film is widely available. One of this summer’s big films that might have been able to use some more hype and certainly did not get much regard from word of mouth, is R.I.P.D..

R.I.P.D. is a pretty simple concept film, based on a Dark Horse comic series. It is worth noting up front that I have not read this particular comic book series, so this review is a very pure one of only the film version of R.I.P.D.. R.I.P.D. is essentially a simple concept: Men In Black (reviewed here!) meets Dead Like Me (reviewed here!). Or, it’s Spawn (reviewed here!) where the protagonist is not a monster and with a bit more in the way of humor. Either way, the concept did not quite land, at least with the summer moviegoing audience. And I, for one, am at a bit of a loss as to explain why.

The Men In Black comparison is not at all a bad one. Ryan Reynolds plays Nick, a corrupt Boston cop who is given the chance to return to Earth after his death to collect runaway souls for the Rest In Peace Department. The R.I.P.D. is basically Men In Black for the undead, as opposed to alien life forms.

Opening with a chase, the protagonist Nick reveals that he now works for the Rest In Peace Department and is part of a world he never knew existed. Flashing back days before where Nick sweetly plants an orange tree for his wife, Nick and his corrupt partner Hayes have a discussion about how they buried some gold from a bust. The two Boston cops are called to take down a notorious drug dealer and cop killer, Garcia, when Hayes turns on his partner and kills him. Sent to, essentially, purgatory, Nick is introduced to the concept of the R.I.P.D. by Proctor, who gives him the choice of taking his chances with divine judgment or joining the R.I.P.D. and repenting for his corrupt ways. Nick joins the force, partners with Roy, an old Western sheriff, and he returns to Boston to execute the will of the R.I.P.D. After witnessing his own funeral, Nick gets to work with Roy.

When their first case turns up some gold, much like Nick buried, Nick becomes suspicious. His suspicions are confirmed that there is a conspiracy between the living and the dead when Hayes turns up to recover the gold Nick buried and he turns it over to a dead man that Roy and Nick then pursue. Recalled to the R.I.P.D. offices, Eternal Affairs reveals that the gold is part of the dismantled Staff Of Jericho. If the Staff Of Jericho is assembled, the dead will rain down upon the Earth and with only a day before Nick and Roy are erased from existence, they set about trying to expose the criminals on Earth who are trying to recover the artifacts to build the Staff.

R.I.P.D. includes several concepts instantly familiar to those who were fans of Dead Like Me. Roy is from a different time and he and Nick have avatars who look exceptionally different from themselves. Nick (Ryan Reynolds) and Roy (Jeff Bridges) look like an old Chinese man and a hot blonde starlet, respectively. They have the ability to see the undead (whom Roy refers to as “deadoes”) and the undead reveal themselves to the officers and are not particularly thrilled about being recalled to the afterdeath. The relationship between Nick and Roy is, sadly, remarkably like the one between Kay and Jay.

There are some nice differences between Men In Black and Dead Like Me and R.I.P.D., like the way Indian food (it’s probably the cumin!) exposes the deadoes and transforms them into monsters. The film has quite a bit more action than Dead Like Me and the main narrative of this film is much tighter than Men In Black. Instead of really rambling around the new, larger world that Nick discovers, his death is deeply tied to the world of the undead. Bobby Hayes is the mortal villain, something which Kevin Bacon almost instantly telegraphs with his performance, and his evolution into the undead villain occurs very organically, making for an enjoyable progression. The events leading up to the undead jailbreak happen in a reasonable progression that is very entertaining.

Also R.I.P.D. is smart enough to address some of the big questions viewers might have. When the exposition about the Staff Of Jericho is presented, Roy’s question is very smartly, “why would somebody make this thing?!” McGuffins are good, but so many of them make no rational sense for why they would exist. The only real question R.I.P.D. leaves dangling is why the Department would be so stupid as to store all of the recovered gold together (whatwith reassembling the Staff being the goal of the villains!).

Jeff Bridges delivers a familiar performance as Roy. This role is remarkably similar to his performance in True Grit (reviewed here!) and Ryan Reynolds delivers nothing we have not already seen from him as Nick, but the two play off one another well for a good buddy action/comedy movie feel. Supporting parts from Robert Knepper, Mary-Louise Parker, Kevin Bacon and Stephanie Szostak are ably presented, though none stand out as exceptional for the talents involved.

The special effects do save R.I.P.D. from being considered completely mundane. The familiar narrative and performances do not look the same as in every other, similar, genre film. Still, it is easy to see why the film did not explode at the box office. R.I.P.D. is good, but hardly original and even during Summer Blockbuster Season, we want to see something that at least feels fresh.

For other works with Robert Knepper, check out my reviews of:
Heroes - Season Four
Prison Break - Season 1
Carnivale
"Dragons Teeth" - Star Trek: Voyager
“Haven” - Star Trek: The Next Generation

5/10

For other film reviews, please check out my Movie Review Index Page for an organized listing!

© 2013 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Expectations Of Exceptional: Mystic River, The Average Great Film

The Good: Acting, Soundtrack, Moments of plot/character
The Bad: Movie never reaches its emotional potential, Somewhat predictable character arcs
The Basics: In a truly great, though unsurprising film, Mystic River presents a murder mystery centering around three childhood friends who have taken different paths. Does not exceed expectations.


If there were ever an "average great film," it would have to be Mystic River, the Clint Eastwood-directed drama that features one of the most impressive casts in Hollywood. In fact, if there is anything truly wrong with Mystic River, it is that the film is set up to dazzle an audience with such practiced, confirmed actors and themes as to make it almost impossible for the movie to ultimately underwhelm the seasoned moviegoer.

Jimmy, Dave and Sean are growing up together in a neighborhood as close friends, playing the street, planning pranks and writing their names in wet cement, when one day their lives change drastically. Two men approach the kids, scold them and because they are posing as police officers, they convinced Dave to get in their car under the auspices of taking him home to tell his mother about the trouble he's been getting into. Sean and Jimmy immediately inform their parents, but Dave is gone. Dave is held in a cellar for four days before he successfully escapes the tortures of the men who have captured him.

Flash forward twenty-five years. Dave is quietly raising his son, Jimmy is running a business and raising his three daughters and Sean finds himself trying to reconcile with his wife who abandoned him and left him shaken. Sean is a detective and when he and his partner, Whitey Powers, catch an especially brutal homicide, Sean finds himself in an unenviable position. The deceased is Jimmy's oldest daughter, Katie, and the best suspect for the murder is Dave.

Mystic River has all of the markers of a great movie: a wonderful cast, a dense and disturbing plot, phenomenal direction, layered characters and actors who are performing at the top of their game. Mystic River has all of these things. So, why was I so underwhelmed?

The movie is underwhelming because these are the expectations going in. Watching the trailer promises that this is going to be a big, bold movie in all the ways listed above. Are the performances good? Yes. Is the plot disturbing and complicated? Certainly. Does director Clint Eastwood deliver as far as establishing and developing a mood that tells the story well? Yes. But that was the expectation going in. The problem is, it doesn't do anything more. The movie lives up to expectations, but because the expectations are of greatness, when the movie is great in every technical sense, it merely reinforces the expectations.

One of the nice things about Mystic River is that the male characters are all utterly dependent upon the female characters for reassurance and genuine definition, which is why Whitey remains somewhat distant from the spotlight. Jimmy's actions throughout the movie characterize him strongly as a man who will defend his family at all costs. He is a man of love and vengeance, hardened by time in jail and likely criminal behavior since - there's no other good reason for his lackeys who have a parallel murder investigation to the police - and all that humanizes him and allows him to live with himself comes from his wife Annabeth. Annabeth removes his doubts and justifies all of his actions. Similarly, Sean's estranged wife provides him with definition and balance outside the job.

The proof of the value of women in the men's lives is evident in the relationship between Dave and his wife, Celeste. Celeste is suspicious when Dave returns home the morning of Katie's murder with blood on his clothes and a nasty cut on his chest. She listens as he tells other people different reasons for the blood and becomes troubled when his stated reason - taking out a mugger who tried to attack him when he left the bar - does not appear in the newspapers. Celeste stops believing in Dave, reinforced when he reveals the truth about what happened when he was abducted to her. It is when Celeste stops believing in Dave that his reality shatters and he begins to be unable to function.

And Dave is a sympathetic character. The viewer empathizes with his struggle; the idea of him being tormented and trying to live a normal life after that is a compelling character journey. When Dave's truths are revealed, he becomes vivid and pitiable. It is difficult to watch him struggle, so vivid is his experience and the ramifications of it.

Similarly, Jimmy Markum is exceptionally empathetic. In the world we hear is increasingly dangerous, Jimmy becomes the logical extension of the desire to protect one's family from the realities of those dangers. Jimmy is arguably a man who is doing what society demands of him - reinforced by the love and support of his wife for doing it.

Jimmy is played by Sean Penn. Penn, who has impressed me in All The King's Men and I Am Sam (reviewed here!) continues to prove he can be a true dramatic heavy. With a gaze, with the setting of his jaw, Penn is able to create a vivid characterization. From his earliest appearances on screen, the audience is able to figure out exactly what kind of man Jimmy has become in the years since his childhood. The viewer is able to buy completely a quasi-thug who is still able to ask his childhood buddy, "Do you ever wonder what would have happened if you had gotten into that car?" because of the way Penn portrays Jimmy. He's not just a dumb thug or hitman here, he's layered and that role is somewhat demanding. And Penn delivers.

Kevin Bacon is surprisingly good as Sean Devine, though the role is not much of a stretch for the intense actor. Instead, Bacon comes naturally to the role of a detective. Similarly, Laurence Fishburn, who plays Sean's partner Whitey, seems naturally cast as a detective and the role falls more within his established caliber of acting rather than an actual challenge for him. Marcia Gay Harden (Celeste), Laura Linney (Jimmy's wife Annabeth), and Emmy Rossum (Katie) all give wonderful supporting performances. All three have been in roles where they are leads and prove their acting worth and Mystic River merely offers them another outing, continued practice. Harden, particularly, is unchallenged by the role she plays in this film as she plays it quite closely to her character from The Spitfire Grill (reviewed here!).

The performance that makes Mystic River worth coming back to more than once is that of Tim Robbins as Dave. Robbins is quiet and understated, the very model of deeply wounded in this movie. Robbins plays Dave in such a way that the viewer knows he's not right even before he delivers his first line. With his body language and soft-spoken delivery of most of his lines, Robbins wonderfully embodies a man whose childhood demons still live within him.

The DVD is scant on extras, which I was disappointed by. It is, however, the only real disappointment coming out of Mystic River. Everything else lived up to the viewer's expectations, high as they were.

For other works with Spencer Treat Clark, check out my reviews of:
The Last House On The Left
Unbreakable
Gladiator

6/10

For other film reviews, be sure to check out my Movie Review Index Page for an organized listing!

© 2012, 2007 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

History With No Punches Pulled: Frost/Nixon Succeeds Admirably!

The Good: Great acting, Wonderful direction and character work
The Bad: Pacing at the beginning
The Basics: Despite some pacing issues that distract viewers from the emotional resonance, Frost/Nixon is a smart, powerful political interrogation film.


Sometimes, I am amused to do things out of order. It surprised me to find that I had not actually reviewed Frost/Nixon, despite loving it. So, there is some amusement to me that I end up posting my review of it after Michael Sheen's more recent film Underworld: Rise Of The Lycans (reviewed here!), though having seen that film allows me to truly gush on the acting quality of Sheen. Having returned now from my second viewing of the film, I find myself eager to recommend that viewers catch it while they can. Frost/Nixon might not be a big budget effect film that seems to demand the big screen, but it is a solid film and it does more than a play does.

Indeed, while I often argue for the use of the medium - railing against such things as excessive voice-overs - I find I have no argument with Frost/Nixon. Instead, Frost/Nixon might well be the Ron Howard film that illustrates Howard lives up to the hype. In this film, Ron Howard captures perfectly the human emotion, the nuances and the subtle body language of two people who have gone to verbal war with one another.

Having resigned the presidency in disgrace, Richard M. Nixon has been pardoned yet America exists in a state of a crisis of conscience in its politics. In a self-exile from Washington and the Eastern states and their politics, Nixon seeks a way to make a comeback. David Frost, a television interviewer, is seeking a comeback as well. Having lost his television show in the United States, he now finds himself interviewing celebrities in Australia. Watching the numbers surrounding the collapse of the Nixon presidency and the potential viewership around Richard Nixon's post-presidency interviews, Frost concocts a plan to win that first interview.

Struggling to pull financiers together - because he is best known for far less serious interviews - Frost teams with James Reston Jr., Bob Zelnick and biographer John Birt to try to create a series of interviews that will allow Frost to give Nixon a public trial he never had. Nixon, defended by Jack Brennan and a small quintillion including Diane Sawyer, prepare to use the interviews to launch their return to Washington. And as the interviews begin, Frost finds himself deeply shaken and slow to counter the former President's verbal deflections and jabs. But as the lone day Watergate will be the subject approaches, Frost begins to marshal all his personal and financial resources to save the show.

Frost/Nixon has been said by many to be analogous to a chess match and in some ways, that is true. Equally true is that the film Frost/Nixon mirrors the interviews that are the subject of the movie in their form and pacing. The film and the interviews get off to something of a false start as both begin with an anticlimax: Nixon's resignation in the film and Frost's ambush of a question and realization that he may have gotten in over his head with the way he approached the former president. Then, as his friends research how to go after Nixon and Frost struggles to get funding for the program, the movie leaps ahead, much as the more nebulous middle interviews are omitted from the movie; this film is not telling that story. Then, like the movie's final half hour, the final Nixon/Frost interview is a rapid, no holds barred barrage between the two principles.

The chess match analogy works as well as the film takes quite a bit of time to establish the characters and the situation. Unfortunately, this is mostly preparing the board and moving the pieces into alignment; the real game does not start until the second half of the film. This does not work so well for the film as it meanders and is a bit slower as the mechanics of the arrangements behind the interviews are delved into much to the neglect of the characters, save David Frost who simply appears single-minded to an extreme that is possibly the best characterization he could get.

Indeed, while James, John and Bob fret about the specific questions, the early days on the film project and the money, Frost is concerned mostly with the money and making sure the project is completed. As a result, Frost is shown to be a character who is single-minded and truly has all of his livelihood running on the one project. While John Birt is obsessed with getting a confession and arranging a cathartic experience for the public, Frost is just trying to get a show made and he is content to leave the hardest parts for the end. But when forced to rise to the occasion, David Frost does and the impressive thing is that he is magnanimous in his victory, for what it is.

But for every bit that Frost is cunning and desperate, Nixon is cold and calculating. He strategizes well and it is easy to see why - despite the pre-interview attempt to block extensive inquiries by him - Jack Brennan is behind him once the cameras get rolling. Brennan is a military man and he handles Nixon after the fall and it is clear he has a lot riding emotionally on the status of Richard Nixon. And for his part, Nixon plays the game, unsettling David Frost early on and he has an easy quality to him that makes it seem at moments like he is not playing as deep of a game as he is.

It is director Ron Howard who makes sure the audience knows that Nixon is actually on his game and he does it subtly, by directing and editing the film to capture the small details. Panning slowly off Nixon to a dumfounded Frost early in one of the interviews, for example, Howard shows the viewer what is truly important - and it is not what Nixon is talking about then, it is the way he is talking and the effect it is having on David Frost. In the integral, climactic scenes of the film - which I shall not ruin for those who have not seen the previews - Howard captures the details, the looks in Nixon's eyes, the way Frost bites his tongue at the right moment and the patience to capture moments with silence in them. This is what makes the movie truly great.

This is not to say the film is flawless; far from it. Frost/Nixon takes a bit to get going and in its uncertain beginning, the viewer begins to wonder if this will be more like Charlie Wilson's War (reviewed here!) where the film is not about the events or the effects, but rather the behind-the-scenes exclusively. The difference, of course, is the difference between the show and the show behind the show. Frost/Nixon dallies in both stories, but it is definitely heavier in the process story for the bulk of the film, the fight to get the interviews made and aired. The actual interviews only comprise a small part of the film. As well, after the defining blows, the significant pieces are cleared from the board (in the chess metaphor for the movie), the movie goes on. The denouement is somewhat drawn out, but it does not feel extraneous.

But when the movie gets to them, the actors are given a huge chance to shine and explore their characters. Indeed, before the interviews actually begin within the film, the best acting arguably comes from actor Kevin Bacon. As Jack Brennan, Bacon is given to a very reserved array of facial expressions and on-screen emotions. Bacon has the ability to deliver his lines coldly and with a minimal amount of revelation and that plays perfectly to this type of character, the loyal bodyman. Bacon steals his scenes by not stealing them, by providing a subtle, constant presence that feels integral.

Frank Langella lives up to all of his hype as Richard Nixon. Classically trained and looking very little like the former president, Howard does not insult the viewer by pressing a fake nose on the actor and setting him before us. Instead, Langella hunches over, lowers his voice even more than usual and he, quite simply, sells it. There is not a moment he is on the screen that the viewer is pulled out to any of the many other roles that Langella has played. He is solidly and completely Richard Nixon in this film.

But it is hard not to rave over Michael Sheen in Frost/Nixon, despite all of the deserving praise being heaped upon Langella. Sheen, after all, is utterly convincing as the pasty-faced British journalist in this, with equal credibility as the werewolf slave-turned-king in the utterly dissimilar Underworld: Rise Of The Lycans. But this is the true essence of great acting; those who have seen the Underworld films would never guess that this is the same actor who played Lucien. That ability to so completely convince viewers of the reality of the character under both extremes is what defines an actor's range and Sheen has it. He plays this role with a deep, underlying sense of quiet seriousness and he illustrates he is exceptional.

On DVD, the film is impressively presented with decent sound and visual quality. As well, Ron Howard provides a full commentary and there is a behind-the-scenes featurette and deleted scenes. The bonus features are decent and pretty much what one expects from a drama of this caliber.

More than just great performances, Frost/Nixon has a multi-generational sense of sadness to it. I, for example, was too young to have seen the original Nixon interviews with David Frost air and my catharsis in watching this film is more vicarious. It is also a hopeful one, despite my feeling of once again being cheated by history. After all, it is hard for those of us who have become adults within the last decade and a half to not feel somewhat cheated watching Frost/Nixon; where is our David Frost to go after our generation's Nixon?

For other political works, please check out my reviews of:
The West Wing
All The King's Men
Elizabeth

8.5/10

For other movie reviews, please check out my movie review index page by clicking here!

© 2012, 2009 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Sad, Funny, And Gory/Violent, Super Has A Lot Going For It!

The Good: Moments of humor, Moments of character, Acting
The Bad: Plot is essentially Kick-Ass, Disturbing levels of gore.
The Basics: Super is surprisingly smart, amazingly well-acted and very funny when it is not bathing the viewer in violence and gore.


A few weeks ago, my wife and I got Peep World (reviewed here!) and before that movie began, we saw a preview that actually made us want to hunt down the advertised film. That film was Super. In many ways, Super looked like it would be a comedic version of Kick-Ass (reviewed here!), so I was thoroughly prepared to love it. After watching the film tonight, I am glad I did, though it had a somewhat erratic quality that made it difficult to recommend as enthusiastically as I might have hoped to.

There has been a disturbing trend in genre movies of late where violence and humor are combined. Before Super, the only film I had truly enjoyed that combined the two was Zombieland (reviewed here!). Tonight, I came to understand exactly why the blending of excessive violence with humor upsets me so much. With the pleasure centers of the brain open from laughter, the viewer is bombarded with violent or gory images. This causes the viewer to associate violence and/or gore with pleasure on some level and that is a trend that is beyond disturbing, it is outright sick.

This actually has special relevance to Super in that Ellen Page's character, Libby, begins to explicitly derive pleasure from causing pain and the line she crosses is never satisfactorily confronted in the film. Libby becomes something of a maniac and while it is easy to see the protagonist, Frank, loathe her actions, he does not effectively stop her rampage under the guise of virtue.

That said, viewers who are comic book readers and those who like dark, ambiguous stories are bound to love Super and it is easy to see why it is already drawing a cult following. I was actually surprised to discover there is not already a line of Super action figures.

Super follows Frank Darbo, who has two shining memories in his life: the day he married Sarah and the day he pointed out the direction a fleeing criminal went in to a pursuing cop. When Sarah, once again off the wagon, leaves Frank for Jacques, Frank becomes despondent and goes to the police. There he finds no recourse, so he prays. After receiving a vision from god, Frank visits the local comic book shop to learn about becoming a super hero. There he meets Libby, the clerk who seems to like the unassuming Frank.

Frank creates his costume and outfits himself with a pipe wrench and the catch phrase "Shut up crime!" Out on the streets, he begins violently assaulting those who rob, sell drugs and molest children. When he decides to take on Jacques and his goons, the Crimson Bolt finds himself outmatched and shot. With no other refuge, because his assailants know he is Frank, the Crimson Bolt takes refuge with Libby. Libby is thrilled to learn that Frank is the vigilante from the news and she joins forces with him as Boltie. After a disastrous training mission, the pair arm themselves and make an assault on Jacques' compound in the middle of a very dangerous drug deal.

Super has been criticized by some as "not knowing what it wants," but I found the film to be one of the pleasant rare ones that actually develops. As a result, it is heartwrenchingly sad, then laugh-out-loud funny. The humor turns dangerous, but the weight of the transformation is not lost on the characters involved. In other words, when Super gets dark and gritty, the characters seem to understand that the world they are in is troubling and dramatic. At that point, the jokes stop.

Frank Darbo is an exceptionally depressing and realistic character, mired as he is in a love that has no further use for him. He is agonizing to watch and his character's arc is an interesting one. Anyone who has been through a traumatic divorce will understand how Frank can cling to his hopeless love for Sarah even when she shows no compassion to him getting beaten up by a trio of goons.

Frank is played with amazing dramatic gravitas by Rainn Wilson. Wilson starts the movie with a sense of his character being lost that is unlike any role I have ever seen Wilson take before. In the middle, he is given the opportunity to deliver his trademark dry humor and wit. Those hoping to see a great Rainn Wilson comedic performance will get exactly what they hope for. But what those who have seen other works Wilson has been in might not expect is the dramatic force Wilson exhibits at the film's climax. The Crimson Bolt's final declaration could be cheesy if delivered improperly, but Wilson lands it with a spittle-flying vehemence that makes the character of Frank compelling and the Crimson Bolt seem like the coolest vigilante since Rorschach in Watchmen (reviewed here!). Wilson rocks in Super!

Ellen Page gives a decent supporting performance as Libby. I've seen plenty of films she has been in where terrible things happen to her characters, but in Super, Libby gleefully pummels a guy who may or may not have keyed her friend's car. Ellen Page lands it with Libby's maniacal laugh and her role is arguably the most disturbing of the film.

The homogeneously good acting continues from Liv Tyler and Kevin Bacon. Tyler seems an unlikely choice to play Sarah in that it is hard to see the connection between her and Rainn Wilson, though the connection between Sarah and Frank is adequately explored. Kevin Bacon foreshadows his X-Men: First Class role as Jacques and he makes the character delightfully bastardly.

Writer and director James Gunn does a decent job with Super in that most of the special effects are actually special. Some of the direction, though, is a little questionable, notably the use of handheld cameras at some moments when static shots might have worked better. When Frank first becomes the Crimson Bolt and goes out to wait for crime to happen, the shaking camera seems more sloppy than stylish. Fortunately, that is the exception to the rule in Super.

In the end, Super lives up to its name, though it is a little more mellow than entertaining at some points. On DVD, it features a commentary track, deleted scene and three featurettes on aspects of production. It is enough to keep viewer's happy and entertained outside the primary programming.

For other works with Ellen Page, please visit my reviews of:
Inception
Whip It
X-Men III: The Last Stand

6.5/10

For other movie reviews, please visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2011 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

X-Men First Class Is More Than Just Great Casting!

The Good: Good acting, Great story development, Good special effects, Wonderful character development.
The Bad: Continuity, Michael Fassbender's accent.
The Basics: The prequel film X-Men: First Class is surprisingly good: smart, witty, well-performed and even better for those who are not fans of the franchise.


It has felt like a long time since I went to the movie theater and left feeling like I wanted to rave (positively) about the film I saw afterward. But that is where I am at following taking in X-Men: First Class. In fact, I enjoyed X-Men: First Class far more than I thought that I would, which is saying something. I have enjoyed the cinematic X-Men movies, but have not read any of the books, so when I write about them, all I am discussing is what is in the movies. And what was in X-Men: First Class was thoroughly enjoyable . . .

. . . except . . .

. . . in the context of the already created X-Men movies. And because I enjoyed the film so much, I've decided to dispense with the usual and leap into the worst aspects first. Quite simply, for a prequel film that begins where the first X-Men movie began and thus seeks to illustrate an important missing chapter in the history of mutants in the X-Men universe, there is a stunning lack of respect for what has come before in two key places. The first and most egregious error comes in making X-Men: First Class the entire history of Charles Xavier and Erik Lehnsherr (Magneto). This is problematic - to avoid spoiling anything for anyone who has not watched the other films and who wants to essentially go into seeing X-Men: First Class blind - because Xavier is bald and with Erik when they meet Jean Grey for the first time. Given that he is not bald at the end of this movie, but the rift between the two mutant titans has come, director Matthew Vaughn shows a pretty stunning lack of understanding of the continuity already established. Furthermore, because Xavier is bald (fans will understand this is being used as a euphemism for more telling character traits!) in the Wolverine prequel, there is a rushed quality to the overall story told in X-Men: First Class.

That said, the only other problems with X-Men: First Class are that the actor playing Hank McCoy, Nicholas Hoult, has absolutely no connection or stature that would make him a reasonable precursor to Kelsey Grammar (who played the role in X-Men III: The Last Stand) and that Michael Fassbender's Irish accent comes out more and more as the movie goes on. I'm not saying that there weren't a lot of Irish Jews living in Poland in 1944, but . . . wait, I think I can safely say that. Fassbender's acting or the casting here is a little off. Regardless, X-Men: First Class deserves to be a hit and if it is at all possible to avoid seeing any previews for the film (all of which seemed to pull from the last hour to half hour of the movie, annoyingly enough), one should see it soon and on the big screen.

Starting in Poland in 1944, Erik Lehnsherr inadvertently reveals to the Nazis his extraordinary power to bend metal with only his mind. This brings him to the attention of Nazi scientist Klaus Schmidt who tries to cultivate Erik's powers by killing Erik's mother in front of him. Meanwhile in Westchester at the same time, Charles Xavier walks into his kitchen and discovers his mother there, only he knows immediately it is not his mother and Raven, a shapeshifting mutant, is revealed to him. While Erik begins a search for Klaus and Charles becomes a world-renowned expert in genetics, tensions begin to rise in the world. In 1962, the CIA seeks out Charles when an agent witnesses Emma Frost and a powerful teleporting mutant she is working with abduct Colonel Hendry from a Las Vegas club.

When Charles and the CIA hunt down a vicious manipulator named Sebastian Shaw, they rescue Erik who is trying to sink Shaw's boat and desperately attempts to stop Shaw's submarine. Shaw is the man Erik knew as Schmidt and Erik's desire for vengeance leads him to an unlikely pairing with Charles. With the CIAs help, Charles, Erik and Raven are united with the brilliant mutant scientist Hank McCoy and Charles and Erik begin the search for more mutants. After finding several and encouraging them to begin honing their talents and to work for the U.S. government. This puts Xavier's mutants on Shaw's radar and puts the entire operation in jeopardy as Shaw attempts to create nuclear war through what we now call the Cuban Missile Crisis.

X-Men: First Class is incredibly clever on several levels and one of the things I enjoyed most about the film was that the previews made it appear like the actual crisis - the U.S. and U.S.S.R. squaring off over nuclear missile deployment in Cuba - was the central thrust of the film. Not so. Instead, Shaw becomes an intriguing villain who believes that a nuclear apocalypse will end human life and allow mutants to be created, spread, and/or be revealed to a world they will then dominate. His philosophy is ghastly, but it mirrors what Charles speaks about early in the film when he shares his thesis with Raven. Shaw's aid, Emma Frost, is a cool villain and the scenes she is in are electric - for more than just the costuming. Indeed, Emma is Xavier's foil as a fellow telepath and unlike Xavier, she has a secondary power, which is that she can become diamond. This is a pretty clever power and it is exceptionally well-executed with the special effects of the film.

The thrust of X-Men: First Class is in the relationship between Charles and Erik and that is where the film is very successful as well. Charles and Erik are men of about equal power, with opposing philosophies on the relationship between humanity and mutants. Their enthusiasm in hunting down mutants together is fun to watch and they interact well. Moreover, both James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender have the gravitas to realistically evolve into characters played by Sir Patrick Stewart and Sir Ian McKellen. I didn't, honestly, see the resemblance for Fassbender and McKellen until almost the very last scene, but near the climax there is a moment when Fassbender lets complete vulnerability into his eyes and in that moment, he looked like a young McKellen.

Despite the rushed plot of X-Men: First Class, the character journeys are compelling and well-executed. Xavier focuses on the betterment of mutantkind and preparing for a world where both humans and mutants may exist together. Erik, on the other hand, is focused with liberating mutants from the yoke of human oppression. Strangely, Xavier never points out to Erik that it was a mutant, not a man, who committed the worst crimes against Erik. But while Xavier philosophizes and is oblivious to advances of a fairly adult Raven, Erik tunes his anger and comes to believe that if mankind wants to wipe themselves out, he will happily help it along. How Charles and Erik then continue and evolve their relationship makes the movie more engaging as it goes on.

What also works is how the characters from the X-Men universe were selected. While I am sure there is a chronology that dictates such things, with only Xavier, Erik, Raven and Hank having been seen in prior X-Men films, there is a real sense of menace throughout the movie to other characters, like Emma Frost, Angel, Darwin, Banshee and Havoc. When Emma Frost is captured by Erik and Charles, for example, there truly is the sense that anything can happen to her and I like that. In a prequel it is hard enough to build in surprises, so that X-Men: First Class mixes it up with characters that can be casualties works.

In addition to great special effects, good plot development and good character development, the acting is pretty wonderful. I had not seen January Jones in anything outside the Jimmy Kimmel Live HoBo diet sketch, but she rules as Emma Frost. With equal grace and ability, Jennifer Lawrence recreates Raven (Mystique). Lawrence makes Raven very powerful in her convictions, but exceptionally emotionally vulnerable and the conflict is played out very well through Lawrence's performance. Indeed, it didn't occur to me until post-viewing analysis that Raven might be characterized as something of an easy mutant given that she expresses feelings for Charles, Hank and Erik. But I attribute the failure to view the character that was as an acting success on the part of Lawrence. Lawrence makes it clear that Raven's attraction to McCoy is more a transference of feelings for Charles to McCoy. Her budding romance with Erik works as a result.

Kevin Bacon makes Shaw plausible as a villain without ever appearing over-the-top.

For fans of the franchise, there are two wonderful cameos that play to the larger story of X-Men, though this was the first Marvel film I did not notice Stan Lee in. For those not invested in the franchise, there are clever tongue-in-cheek moments like when Charles unwittingly outs McCoy as a mutant to the CIA and Hank tells the director of the project, "You didn't ask, so I didn't tell." As well, there is no post-credit scene on this one. X-Men: First Class is solidly entertaining and while it is not at all perfect, it is one of the smartest super hero movies I've ever seen and so far the best movie I've seen in theaters this year.

For other X-Men films, please check out my reviews of:
X-Men
X-2: X-Men United
X-Men III: The Last Stand
X-Men Origins: Wolverine

8/10

For other film reviews, please be sure to visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2011 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |