Category Archives: Sci-Fi

It’s probably fair to say that the original “X-Men” was the film that kick-started the modern deluge of superhero movies. Ever since then, the X-Men franchise has generally been one of the stronger players in the superhero film market. And the recently released “X-Men: First Class” continues this trend – it’s an elegant, streamlined prequel with remarkably developed characters. While not quite up to the level of “Thor,” it’s a solid adventure that many fans will find compelling.

“X-Men: First Class” focuses primarily on the relationship between Charles Xavier (James McAvoy) and Erik Lensherr (Michael Fassbender). One will ultimately become the kindly, genial Professor X…while the other will rise as the dreaded villain Magneto. Their upbringings could not be more different – Charles is raised in privilege, while Erik endures the horrors of the Holocaust. While Charles pursues success in academia, Erik travels the world exacting revenge against his Nazi tormentors. When their paths finally cross, an unlikely friendship is forged.

The year is 1962. CIA agent Moira MacTaggart (Rose Byrne) has stumbled onto a conspiracy: a group of evil mutants known as the Hellfire Club, led by ex-Nazi scientist Sebastian Shaw, are planning to instigate a U.S./Soviet world war. She recruits Charles (known for his telepathic abilities) and Erik (a manipulator of magnetic force) to stop Shaw and his comrades. Along the way, they build a team of mutants from all over the U.S., forming them into the first “X-Men” (as opposed to “G-Men). The film culminates in a fascinating “retelling” of the Cuban Missile Crisis, filled with plenty of explosive action.

In many ways, “X-Men: First Class” feels like a good James Bond movie. There’s the same witty dialogue, the same international-conflict setting, and the same breathlessly paced action scenes. (It also means that there are many of the same content problems present in the “Bond” franchise). The 1960s setting really works in the movie’s favor – it gives the film a clever alternate-history tone, much like its predecessor “X-Men Origins: Wolverine.”

Where the film really transcends its predecessors, however, is in developing a complex relationship between Charles and the shapeshifting mutant Raven (also known as Mystique – played by Jennifer Lawrence). Whereas in earlier films her character lacks real depth, in “First Class” her true insecurities are revealed. Tortured by the horror of her “true” physical appearance, she longs to find acceptance as she is…even if that means abandoning convictions in the process. Her attitude is, ironically, summarized by the recent hit song “Born This Way” (Don’t hide yourself in regret / Just love yourself and you’re set / I’m on the right track, baby / I was born this way). And in the end, it is this aggressive antagonism that leads to her undoing.

This illustrates one of the predominant themes of the film: alienation from society. It’s easy to draw parallels between the X-Men and any arguably “disenfranchised” group…accordingly, many have tried to link the film series to the modern gay rights movement. If the film is read in this way, however, its message may be the opposite of what many “gay rights” organizations promote: Magneto, the film’s antagonist, is a vocal supporter of “mutant pride,” while the nobler Charles advocates subtle coexistence. This directly contradicts many of the “out and proud” themes present in the modern homosexual movement. Though an offhand reference is made to the “don’t ask, don’t tell” system, it’s played for laughs. The film is perhaps closer to an analogue of the Civil Rights Movement – in which peaceful, nonviolent integration (e.g. Martin Luther King, Jr.) is held up above violent animosity (e.g. the Black Panthers and other related groups).

The film doesn’t trample on individuals’ self-worth, however – rather, it celebrates uniqueness and individuality. Instead, it rejects the destructive attitude of “just be yourself, no matter what.” Sometimes, personal desires must be subverted for a higher purpose – in order to foster greater acceptance of mutants in the long run, Charles is willing to “turn the other cheek” and be treated like a monster. Christian viewers will likely find much food for thought here, as well as some good topics for discussion. Clearly, the film is a few philosophical notches above the average summer blockbuster.

Where “X-Men: First Class” stumbles, however, is in its supporting cast. While McAvoy and Fassbender are outstanding in their roles, the rest of the new X-Men simply lack appeal. Gone are series stalwarts Storm, Cyclops, Wolverine, and Nightcrawler – instead, viewers get Angel, Havok, Banshee, and Darwin. At times, the film feels like it’s scraping the bottom of the barrel for fresh characters. I recognize that the film is intended to be a jumping-off point for the “next generation” of Hollywood stars, but these characters simply lack depth.

Objectionable content is, unfortunately, well above the median for superhero movies. In addition to language (including one f-word) the film also carries a rather strong sexual undercurrent. Blue-skinned mutant Mystique has always been a sensuous character, and “First Class” certainly accentuates this. The requisite female villain, Emma Frost (January Jones), is a sultry Bond-girl figure who wears little more than lingerie throughout the entire movie. And while the violence isn’t much worse than other superhero movies, it’s depicted in an especially harsh, realistic way. This isn’t a particularly “family-friendly” film.

Older viewers, however, will find much food for thought in “First Class.” Though it doesn’t pack the same emotional punch as “Wolverine” or “X2,” it offers a nuanced, philosophical story garnished with stylish action. It’s a strong fifth installment in a remarkably long-lived superhero franchise.

VERDICT: 8/10
A rousing, thought-provoking action film that recalls the best of “Bond.”

Normalized Score: 5.8

Aside: There is no extra scene after the credits…unfortunate, I know.

When I first saw the trailer for “The Adjustment Bureau” I thought I was watching a preview of “Bourne 4.” Matt Damon was once again playing a protagonist named David…and, along with a beautiful woman, running away from what appeared to be government agents. As it turned out, I was quite mistaken. “The Adjustment Bureau” – the directorial debut of George Nolfi, screenwriter of “Ocean’s Twelve” and “The Bourne Ultimatum” – is a fast-paced, romantic action thriller with more philosophy than “Inception.” Adapted from a short story by science fiction legend Philip K. Dick, the film explores complex questions of God, fate vs. free will, and the cost of true love.

Disclaimer: This film doesn’t officially release until March 4. (I attended an advance screening.) Out of respect for the filmmakers, I’ll refrain from posting any major spoilers, but will also address the worldview-related underpinnings of the movie.

“The Adjustment Bureau” opens with a failed Senate bid from New York Congressman David Norris (Matt Damon). Shortly before delivering his concession speech, he encounters the mysterious Elise Sellas (Emily Blunt), a spirited ballet dancer. Despite the instant chemistry between them, three years pass before David encounters her again. He is promptly confronted by the mysterious “Adjustment Bureau” – a secret organization of entities dedicated to ensuring that “things go according to plan.”

Harry, the particular Bureau agent assigned to David’s case, explains the situation: the members of the Bureau have been described as “angels” through the course of human history. Acting under orders from the enigmatic “Chairman” (i.e. God), the Bureau supernaturally manipulates events in order to make sure that reality conforms to the Chairman’s grand plan. David’s second encounter with Elise is NOT part of the Chairman’s plan…which means he must break off his relationship with her, or risk disrupting the continuum of destiny.

It’s a complicated premise, but one that can be reduced to two questions: in a world operating according to plan, what does it mean to exercise free will, and what will be the consequences of doing so? The Adjustment Bureau believes that humans’ free will must occasionally be subverted in order to achieve greater goals (although it is unclear whether the Chairman himself endorses this attitude). In a pivotal scene, Bureau member Thompson explains that they have attempted to relinquish control twice before: in one instance, this led to the Dark Ages; in the other, World Wars I and II and the Cuban Missile Crisis. The Bureau believes that humans are not yet capable of governing themselves, and require frequent “recalibration” in order to remain stable.

The worldview of the film may best be summarized as “transitional deism” – essentially, an evolutionary progression from theism (the direct involvement of divine agents) to deism (divine agents allowing human history to proceed without intervention). While the ending of the film is somewhat ambiguous (more on that later), this idea of gradual progression is reflected throughout the movie. In some sense, this reflects both Christian and non-Christian views of man’s essential nature: while humans are basically corrupt if left to their own devices, they are capable of attaining “perfection” over the course of history (with a little help from the Bureau, of course). The movie carries a strongly existential bent as well – it affirms that meaning is found through personal choices, regardless of the morality underlying those choices.

A full discussion of these issues from a Christian standpoint inevitably revives the age-old predestination debate. Personally, I believe that free will is a necessary element of transcendent morality – but this is a complex subject beyond the scope of this review. Suffice it to say that “The Adjustment Bureau” does an excellent job of raising thought-provoking questions, but does little to answer them.

And interestingly, that is precisely the point. During a question-and-answer session with the director at the screening I attended, it became clear that Nolfi’s purpose was to raise questions, not to answer them. “The Adjustment Bureau” certainly implies some things about God, reality, and destiny…but it doesn’t truly drive any of its points home. Whereas James Cameron clearly had a strong sociopolitical motive for making “Avatar,” Nolfi seemingly has no such rationale. “The Adjustment Bureau” is more of an “exploration movie” than a “message movie” – and on that level, it excels. It deftly succeeds in provoking viewers to independent thought and analysis, while leaving many of its own questions unanswered.

This movie was polarizing among the group I went with. Some of us enjoyed it, while others disliked that the film left so much unanswered. (To be fair, the ending feels like a tacked-on Hollywood addition – I would have liked to see the original drafts of the screenplay.) Personally, I found “The Adjustment Bureau” fascinating, intense, and thought-provoking…and a welcome breath of fresh air in an increasingly action-oriented Hollywood.

Worldview elements aside, “The Adjustment Bureau” is an excellent movie. The relationship between David and Elise – the emotional touchstone of the film – is one of the best romances I’ve seen in any movie. The two leads have genuine chemistry, adding emotional resonance to an otherwise very cerebral film. The film’s few chase scenes are exhilarating, but not overpowering. Overall, it’s quite a well-crafted package.

From an objectionable-content standpoint, there are two f-words and one sensuous scene between David and Elise. Although not graphic, it’s an unfortunate inclusion that detracts from an otherwise outstanding love story. There’s plenty of tension in the movie, but virtually no violence…a throwback to a Hitchcockian era of suspense. With one scene and a few profanities deleted from the script, “The Adjustment Bureau” would easily earn a PG rating.

Should you see it? If you’re a fan of “Inception” and Alfred Hitchcock movies in general, you’ll probably like “The Adjustment Bureau.” It’s thought-provoking, romantic, and exciting…and, for the most part, devoid of major problematic elements. And while it doesn’t really answer the questions it poses, it challenges viewers to consider these issues for themselves. Definitely recommended.

VERDICT: 9/10
A fast-paced, intellectually provocative thriller.

Normalized Score: 7.9