X-Men: First Class

Fans of comic book blockbusters can rest assured. My sole star does not mean that they would be in any way deprived of a hefty portion of special effects, action, and adventure of their favorite heroes, presented undoubtedly on a decent craftsmanship level. My rating is mainly related to the fact that adaptations of superhero comics are a genre that I have a decidedly negative relationship with. I consider myself a rational person and prefer the scientific method when exploring the surrounding world. Superhero comics have always repelled me with their close connection to the sphere of paranormal mysticism. The exceptional abilities of superheroes stem from religious beliefs and their world is based on the idea of ritual supernatural forces. Scientific discoveries and technology usually serve as mere props, and the X-Men superheroes are much closer to pagan gods than to characters from my favorite sci-fi genre. So Superman and X-Men have a particularly hard time with me. If they still want to impress me, they must come up with significantly deeper psychology than what is customary in typical blockbusters (unfortunately, the psychology of the characters in X-Men: First Class is very shallow), and with fully developed characters (in First Class, even such crucial decisions as choosing sides on the barricades seem like the actors just flipped a coin). The director must come up with ingeniously structured storytelling (compare the incredibly polished intro of Snyder's Watchmen with Vaughn's First Class, which reeks of popcorn from afar). I understand that exaggeration is essential in the genre, but even here, I appreciate moderation and, to the extent possible, prefer adherence to natural laws. The final nail in the coffin is Vaughn's ability to cater to the needs of entertainment-hungry teenagers. He simply knows what to make for teenagers, but in my case, it's precisely the opposite and I simply do not belong to his target audience. Overall impression: 25%. (06/12/2017)

Don’t let my high rating mislead you. Matthew Vaughn doesn’t pick up where Bryan Singer left off; his movie is closer to Brett Ratner’s X-Men: The Last Stand. What makes Vaughn better than Ratner, however, is the balance between childishness and maturity in telling the story (both are present in Vaughn’s work while Ratner was just childish), remarkably more characters and a much faster pace (at “normal” speed, the film would have lasted three hours) and much more epic, top-notch action, which never seems botched up or over-the-top. This properly colorful eye-candy action-packed blockbuster, which will impress even teen viewers (for whom Singer’s films were too psychological), is made more playful by the fact that its best scene is a few-second-long “go-fuck-yourself” cameo by Hugh Jackman lounging around in a seedy bar. By this, the creators prove that they didn’t choose this direction because they were unable to follow in Singer’s footsteps, but because they know how to perfect this pulp genre and bring more pleasure to a wider audience than anyone before. Of the actors, Michael Fassbender turns in the best performance; I can easily see him as a new Ethan Hunt or James Bond (the second-best scene of the movie, which coincidentally also takes place in a bar, is Fassbender’s in Argentina). Kevin Bacon makes a very convincing villain. James McAvoy is more or less okay, which, however, is not enough for the character of Charles Xavier. The rest of the cast are just their sidekicks, but the cameos by a number of stars (e.g. Platt and Ironside) are nice. (06/01/2011)

I have so much to tell you :-) But after leaving the cinema, my head is spinning and I'm unlikely to get anything coherent out of myself. Anyway, I'm impressed with the grandeur, thoughtfulness, and color. The moment Charles shed a tear when he entered Eric's head, I shed two. I was almost rolling on the floor during the few minutes when the "youngsters" learned to control their abilities. So, Vaughn has clearly scored again for me and I look forward to all his future endeavors. Yes, X-Men just knocked Inception out of my top 10. (06/28/2011)

Phenomenal! Vaughn brings the series back to where it originally started. As a comic book movie that uses its brain where others flex their muscles, it doesn't for a moment compromise on the audience-appealing spectacle, which doesn't lack wit, exaggeration, and... action. It is mature in its acting, plot, and direction, with no dead spots or lapses in pace. I’ll have more to say (hopefully) after the second viewing. Now I am just reveling in the memories of a film that was satisfying in every way. PS: There is nothing for me to add the second time either. Except that Fassbender rules like nobody’s business. Perfect in every detail. (06/02/2011)

Somehow I can’t bring myself to give this movie five stars, mainly because I’ve never been exactly fond of X-Men. The movies were great, but I never thought, like with Watchmen, that they were perfect and that I would devour every movie that had the word X-Men in the title. Anyway, I don’t mind X-men and that was also the reason why I gave this movie a go. However, I must say that this film is probably the best thing that could have happened to the franchise, because in addition to great actors, it features an absolutely perfect story, which, if you do not know the source material, you do not know how it will develop in the next moments. And that it will eventually develop differently than is customary in American films? That’s the icing on the cake. If I said a moment ago that actors were great, then I need to repeat that because they were truly divine. That goes for probably everyone who appears in the film, and there are a lot of characters. For example, the one-minute cameo of Hugh Jackman is totally great. The same goes for the special effects. I felt a bit sorry that X-Men weren’t closer to my heart. But if another film is made, which could easily happen, I will think about going to see it at the cinema. It seems that I’ve grown fond of X-Men after all. (12/29/2012)