Skip to main content

You're always sorry, Charles, and there's always a speech, but nobody cares anymore.

X-Men: Dark Phoenix
(2019)

(SPOILERS) To credit its Rotten Tomatoes score (22%), you’d think X-Men: Dark Phoenix was a travesty that besmirched the name of all good and decent (read: MCU proper) superhero movies, or even last week’s underwhelming creature feature (Godzilla: King of Monsters has somehow reached 40%, despite being a lesser beast in every respect). Is the movie’s fate a self-fulfilling prophecy, what with delayed release dates and extensively reported reshoots? Were critics castigating a fait accompli turkey without giving it a chance? That would be presupposing they’re all sheep, though, and in fairness, other supposed write-offs havecome back from such a brink in the past (World War Z). Whatever the feelings of the majority, Dark Phoenix is actually a mostly okay (twelfth) instalment in the X-franchise – it’s exactly what you’d expect from an X-Men movie at this point, one without any real mojo left and a variable cast struggling to pull its weight. The third act is a bit of an oof, so I can only guess how unworkable it was to begin with, but Simon Kinberg’s much maligned (penultimate) exercise can at least proclaim itself superior to a couple of its predecessors.

Those being? X-Men: The Last Stand and X-Men Origins: Wolverine spring to mind. If not for Dark Phoenix’s final act, it would probably beat out The Wolverine and X-Men: Apocalypse too; the latter is reserved a particular bruising, it seems, but I thought it was fine if nothing special. But then, I’ll go to bat for the likes of Josh Trank’s Fantastic Four and The Amazing Spider-Man 2 as being quite watchable, and Captain America: The First Avenger as a right slog, so you might view my superhero perspective as not entirely aligned with the rank and file.

There is, of course, now a tendency to label all things X-Men trash – Logan and Deadpool sometimes honourably excepted – as if the often equally formulaic and creatively underwhelming MCU is the one-and-only (with the DCU gradually gaining on the outside). It’s certainly true that Bryan Singer brought a slightly sickly design aesthetic to the series and that Fox, for all or because of the cash it raked in, seemed slightly ashamed of it; it’s thus been a rather rocky road with only sporadic, relative highs (X2, First Class, Days of Future Past, Deadpool 2 – I’m still not wholly convinced by Logan) and a tendency to make narrative and character choices that have understandably attracted mockery for their limited variations (in the same way that Daniel Craig’s Bond has to go rogue every movie). And yet, I rather like the manner in which it has played fast and loose with anything approaching continuity (the current leads are now more than thirty years older in the X-timeline than they were in First Class, but with no ostensible reason for setting the last two entries in their respective decades).

As far as retelling the same story again and again – for Charles and Erik, the old friends-combatants-uneasy allies is on stir and repeat – this time Kinberg (a frequent series screenwriter making his directorial debut, the kind of foolish thinking that regularly infects studios despite ample evidence, most recently The Mummy, that it’s never a good idea) returns to The Last Stand, to do it justice this time, as he sees it. It should thus come as little surprise that he’s a more sensitive director than Brett Ratner, if only because it should come as little surprise that anydirector is more sensitive than Brett Ratner. There’s a degree of flatness to Dark Phoenix’s narrative progression, evidencing a writer-turned-director’s lack of aptitude for the change of medium, but that doesn’t mean Kinberg isn’t obviously trying hard.

He’s keen to raise issues of abuse and empowerment (simultaneously at times) through the character of Jean Grey (Sophie Turner, both competent and entirely lacking the presence to take the leading role), and at times even hits his marks with something approaching verve; the opening, fateful incident involving Jean’s parents, and a later reunion with her father (Scott Shepherd) are particularly well sustained. Indeed, when Kinberg has the story he wants to tell, Jean’s tale of woe, in focus, Dark Phoenix is quite dependable, even if he consequently rather overeggs the hubristic qualities of Charles Xavier, so making the character’s decisions a little too boo-hiss (it doesn’t help that James McAvoy leans into this so much, unrestrainedly channelling the haughty, know-better rectitude of Patrick Stewart). The problem is, he hasn’t really worked out what do with his protagonist/antagonist once he’s had her blow a gasket, so he sends her on rather a half-assed road trip.

Kinberg’s also evidently aware of the responsibility he’s given himself in taking on the mantle of a blockbuster franchise, and the action set pieces that come with it. You can see he wants to impress with them, but they lack the fluidity we saw when Bryan Singer had the reins (or, more likely, discharged the reins to an entirely competent second unit while he got on with whatever more important and less reputable activities were preoccupying his attention). There’s a space shuttle rescue opener that riffs on many of the crowd-pleasing moments of yore (Kodi Smit-McPhee’s Nightcrawler teleporting in line of sight, Evan Peters’ Quicksilver super-rushing about) but the need to include a rollcall of super skillz (behold how Alexander Shipp’s Storm… freezes shit) adds an underlying element of the formulaic. To be fair, this is nothing new, or old, as the Russo brothers encountered similar in their Endgame finale; they were just more confident with the derivative aspects.

There are further such incidents, such as the encounter at Jean’s dad’s house and a helicopter wrestling contest at Erik’s hippy commune (Michael Fassbender’s really not too convincing with his acting masterclass “imagine you’re straining and suffering metal fatigue” posturing), a New York street battle pitting Erik’s earthy undesirables against Charles’ allegiant adepts, and the aforementioned finale, a mixture of shoddy, sometimes psychedelically so, CGI effects – so about as psychedelic as a fractal screensaver – and unconvincing hero moments that feels entirely familiar and less than essential (I find it difficult to believe the original version’s reputed space set battle was more underwhelming).

Part of the problem with the finale is that the picture’s best realised moments come with the uneasy sympathetic villainy of Jean; when it relocates that to the entirely banal Vuk, Jessica Chastain in albino guise, a gaping hole of tension is left. Chastain is given one good scene, in which, as her character’s original human form, she’s goes out to check on her barking dog, but after that she’s as rote and undistinguished as they come. There ought to be a degree of empathy for the D’Bari, given the fate that befell their race via the cosmic force possessing Jean, but instead they just want to take the power for themselves and use it for destruction. It’s yawn-stifling.

Which means the weight of conflict and motivation for the rest of the X-players has to derive from Jean’s actions, which in turn spin heavily on her accidental killing of Raven. Jennifer Lawrence apparently persuaded Kinberg to put himself forward as director, so she’s at least partly responsible for the messy results. Presumably, she savoured the prospect of an impaled, spluttery death scene to add to her resumé, although it says a lot about how her stock has plummeted in the last few years (Passengers, Red Sparrow, Mother!) that she’s now objectively reduced to extended cameos in a second-league superhero franchise (which, let’s face it, it largely is without Hugh Jackman). Raven is duly granted a spiel about Charles’ irresponsibility – you know, a meaty acting moment where she can avoid the blue paint job she loathes so much – which is entirely spoiled by a puerile bit about calling the X-Men “X-Women” instead, as the women do all the saving. It’s not quite as savagely patronising as the MCU sisters line-up moment in Endgame, but its evidence of a similarly stultifying level of cynicism and absence of wit on the part of those joining the dots of furthering a progressive agenda.

When Matthew Vaughn made First Class, it felt that, in McAvoy, Fassbender, Lawrence and Hoult, he’d cherrypicked the best possible younger incarnations of Singer’s X-band. Now, getting on for a decade later, only Hoult is still impressing with his choices. Fassbender increasingly seems to have headed down a career cul-de-sac through flaunting his Hollywood wares to diminishing returns (no matter how juicy a part android David is), such that it seems entirely appropriate that his character should be a washed-up site manager of a broken-down caravan park. McAvoy will appeal in any old shit (Victor Frankenstein) but at least there’s a degree of entertainment value in his flexing of his B-movie muscles (Atomic Blond, Split). Only Hoult seems to be able bring anything vital to the material, and he’s saddled with a standard “feeling betrayed, going to the other side and back” arc that rather undermines how methodical we know Hank to be. Cumulatively, there’s something rather slumming it about their all reuniting for this last-legs X-Men outing, almost an apologia rather than a grand send-off, given that it will be rebooted in the next few years by Kevin Feige. 

Erik: Just one game, for old times' sake.

Kinberg, like Alex Kurtzman, would have been best to start small rather than jump straight into a blockbuster, as he won’t be trusted with the same again in a hurry, but there have been far worse entries in this genre, and from more successful directors (Tim Story and Mark Steven Johnson both earned repeat shots and delivered negligibly on each occasion). Of course, Kinberg hasn’t entirely capped Fox’s two-decades spanning franchise with X-Men: Dark Phoenix. There’s still the even more delayed The New Mutants to come next year, by which point it will have been two-and-a-half years since principal photography wrapped (whether it garners a cinema release has been questioned, though, as it might seem like throwing away advertising spends). What will the series’ legacy be? Inconsistency, in part, and the perils of a studio with no inherent affinity for the material beyond gross. But X-Men still gets points for perseverance, effectively kicking off the modern era (with Spider-Man) and managing to stick it out until the end of what may – given that peaks necessarily need subsequent troughs – come to be seen as the golden age of the reigning champ that is the MCU.


Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

He’s so persistent! He always gets his man.

Speed (1994) (SPOILERS) It must have been a couple of decades since I last viewed Speed all the way through, so it’s pleasing to confirm that it holds up. Sure, Jan de Bont’s debut as a director can’t compete with the work of John McTiernan, for whom he acted as cinematographer and who recommended de Bont when he passed on the picture, but he nevertheless does a more than competent work. Which makes his later turkeys all the more tragic. And Keanu and Sandra Bullock display the kind of effortless chemistry you can’t put a price tag on. And then there’s Dennis Hopper, having a great old sober-but-still-looning time.

How would Horatio Alger have handled this situation?

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998) (SPOILERS) Gilliam’s last great movie – The Zero Theorem (2013) is definitely underrated, but I don’t think it’s that underrated – Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas could easily have been too much. At times it is, but in such instances, intentionally so. The combination of a visual stylist and Hunter S Thompson’s embellished, propulsive turn of phrase turns out, for the most part, to be a cosmically aligned affair, embracing the anarchic abandon of Raoul Duke and Doctor Gonzo’s Las Vegas debauch while contriving to pull back at crucial junctures in order to engender a perspective on all this hedonism. Would Alex Cox, who exited stage left, making way for the Python, have produced something interesting? I suspect, ironically, he would have diluted Thompson in favour of whatever commentary preoccupied him at the time (indeed, Johnny Depp said as much: “ Cox had this great material to work with and he took it and he added his own stuff to it ”). Plus

But everything is wonderful. We are in Paris.

Cold War (2018) (SPOILERS) Pawel Pawlikowski’s elliptical tale – you can’t discuss Cold War without saying “elliptical” at least once – of frustrated love charts a course that almost seems to be a caricature of a certain brand of self-congratulatorily tragic European cinema. It was, it seems “ loosely inspired ” by his parents (I suspect I see where the looseness comes in), but there’s a sense of calculation to the progression of this love story against an inescapable political backdrop that rather diminishes it.

To survive a war, you gotta become war.

Rambo: First Blood Part II (1985) (SPOILERS?) I’d like to say it’s mystifying that a film so bereft of merit as Rambo: First Blood Part II could have finished up the second biggest hit of 1985. It wouldn’t be as bad if it was, at minimum, a solid action movie, rather than an interminable bore. But the movie struck a chord somewhere, somehow. As much as the most successful picture of that year, Back to the Future , could be seen to suggest moviegoers do actually have really good taste, Rambo rather sends a message about how extensively regressive themes were embedding themselves in Reaganite, conservative ‘80s cinema (to be fair, this is something one can also read into Back to the Future ), be those ones of ill-conceived nostalgia or simple-minded jingoism, notional superiority and might. The difference between Stallone and Arnie movies starts right here; self-awareness. Audiences may have watched R ambo in the same way they would a Schwarzenegger picture, but I’m

You were a few blocks away? What’d you see it with, a telescope?

The Eyes of Laura Mars (1978) (SPOILERS) John Carpenter’s first serial-killer screenplay to get made, The Eyes of Laura Mars came out nearly three months before Halloween. You know, the movie that made the director’s name. And then some. He wasn’t best pleased with the results of The Eyes of Laura Mars, which ended up co-credited to David Zelag Goodman ( Straw Dogs , Logan’s Run ) as part of an attempt by producer Jon Peters to manufacture a star vehicle for then-belle Barbra Streisand: “ The original script was very good, I thought. But it got shat upon ”. Which isn’t sour grapes on Carpenter’s part. The finished movie bears ready evidence of such tampering, not least in the reveal of the killer (different in Carpenter’s conception). Its best features are the so-uncleanly-you-can-taste-it 70s New York milieu and the guest cast, but even as an early example of the sub-genre, it’s burdened by all the failings inherit with this kind of fare.

No matter how innocent you are, or how hard you try, they’ll find you guilty.

The Wrong Man (1956) (SPOILERS) I hate to say it, but old Truffaut called it right on this one. More often than not showing obeisance to the might of Hitchcock during his career-spanning interview, the French critic turned director was surprisingly blunt when it came to The Wrong Man . He told Hitch “ your style, which has found its perfection in the fiction area, happens to be in total conflict with the aesthetics of the documentary and that contradiction is apparent throughout the picture ”. There’s also another, connected issue with this, one Hitch acknowledged: too much fidelity to the true story upon which the film is based.

The game is rigged, and it does not reward people who play by the rules.

Hustlers (2019) (SPOILERS) Sold as a female Goodfellas – to the extent that the producers had Scorsese in mind – this strippers-and-crime tale is actually a big, glossy puff piece, closer to Todd Phillips as fashioned by Lorene Scarfia. There are some attractive performances in Hustlers, notably from Constance Wu, but for all its “progressive” women work male objectification to their advantage posturing, it’s incredibly traditional and conservative deep down.

You don’t know anything about this man, and he knows everything about you.

The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s two-decades-later remake of his British original. It’s undoubtedly the better-known version, but as I noted in my review of the 1934 film, it is very far from the “ far superior ” production Truffaut tried to sell the director on during their interviews. Hitchcock would only be drawn – in typically quotable style – that “ the first version is the work of a talented amateur and the second was made by a professional ”. For which, read a young, creatively fired director versus one clinically going through the motions, occasionally inspired by a shot or sequence but mostly lacking the will or drive that made the first The Man Who Knew Too Much such a pleasure from beginning to end.

I don't like the way Teddy Roosevelt is looking at me.

North by Northwest (1959) (SPOILERS) North by Northwest gets a lot of attention as a progenitor of the Bond formula, but that’s giving it far too little credit. Really, it’s the first modern blockbuster, paving the way for hundreds of slipshod, loosely plotted action movies built around set pieces rather than expertly devised narratives. That it delivers, and delivers so effortlessly, is a testament to Hitchcock, to writer Ernest Lehmann, and to a cast who make the entire implausible exercise such a delight.

What do they do, sing madrigals?

The Singing Detective (2003) Icon’s remake of the 1986 BBC serial, from a screenplay by Dennis Potter himself. The Singing Detective fares less well than Icon’s later adaptation of Edge of Darkness , even though it’s probably more faithful to Potter’s original. Perhaps the fault lies in the compression of six episodes into a feature running a quarter of that time, but the noir fantasy and childhood flashbacks fail to engage, and if the hospital reality scans better, it too suffers eventually.