Originally published June 8th, 2023
Revised January 8th, 2025
_____________________________
Lemme give you the TL:DR up front, X-Fans: I have a completely different read on the (initial) X-Men movies, at least where it comes to Cyclops & Jean Grey, than seems the norm; you may not be getting what you'd think with Envisionings.
--------
So now let's get into that in full.
Last night I closed out my evening with this video by user "SUPER FRAME":
How to Make a BAD X-MEN Movie - YouTube
To say first, I liked the video. I found it interesting and thoughtful, and liked what SUPER FRAME was getting across. It just became rather apparent to me -this not being the first time, but the time that drove it home- that I have a different read on the initial X-Men
movies than seems to be the general, and this time made me want to speak on that.
So launching right in: One of the things SUPER FRAME mentions (10:11) is "the movie frames you to want to see Logan steal Jean from Scott. This isn't helped by the movie completely butchering Scott's character; emasculating him, with turtlenecks, and cardigans, boy bands..." To me, his wardrobe just read practical; he's a day-to-day, regular man, not flashy (the costume designer described his attire as "stodgy"). One of the things I've actually mentally praised the initial X-Men movies for, were that they didn't go the easy route of pitting Scott and Logan against each as the "boring, less-of-a-man, pushover" and the "more interesting, masculine, bad-boy" -- to be sure, "bad-boy" is the framing of Logan in the scene leading up to his and Jean's makin' out in X2, with Scott described as the "good guy", but their conversation there is a simplification (and I'd argue, by both their intonations, it's played that way).
In-practice, I feel the movies allow Cyclops and Logan to just be. They're both their own kind of (equal) man, who each are a mix that bucks the trend of the boxes they could be put into. In Scott's case, he's the one with the motorcycle, the typical "bad boy" ride. He owns a car besides; teaches mechanics -he's a vehicles guy; another typically masculine thing. He's also got attitude. He gives what he gets, he's no push over. I mean in the first X2 scene where they -Cyke, Jean and Wolverine- are all present, Scott's not just standing there passively or submissively (he's not Richard from Superman Returns), and he's not coming on overly aggressive; he's just level (then tosses the keys back to Logan when the latter tries to pawn off refueling the motorcycle on the man he stole it from -fun stuff).
I have no read that the movie wants you to root for Jean and Logan and that Scott is only there as an obstacle. My read is, the movie presents you with these two men, this situation (the love triangle), and how you lean is up to you.
Neither Logan nor Scott fit a stereotype; neither is 2D (and least of all Scott, in my opinion).
SUPER FRAME also cites (20:45) "Jean [should be] the empathetic centre of the team. Not a useless character designed to shout Scott's name". Uh...okay. I think they're conflating different adaptations -and none-the-less exaggerating- on that shouting Scott's name bit, as Jean does it like twice across the movies? Both times in relation to fighting Cyclops while he's mind controlled; nothing excessive. And she's certainly not useless. Sure maybe if you're going by comparative power output, but Jean -and her actions- are actually key to both movies --you can remove the love triangle stuff from the movies without changing really anything, but you can't remove Jean Grey without needing to change plot-driving elements.
So now let's analyze who they said the character of Jean Grey is, and in relation to Cyclops (13:50): "It's a character then, like Jean Grey, someone who leads with empathy, someone caring, who centres [Cyclops]. She becomes his lightening rod. Someone that allows him to have a sense of play, passion, and joy."
I see that.
I totally feel that in movie-Jean. My #1 impression of Jean from the movies is she's compassionate (and smart).
Why I like the writing of that Jean Grey is a topic for another X-Talk,
But to speak on her & Cyclops now, there are several scenes--
-When he rushes to her after her use of Cerebro; -When he amuses her by his response to Wolverine in the X-Jet (watch the "yellow spandex" scene, and notice how Jean is the only one not giving Cyke a look like 'where do you go in your head?', and actually smiling --sure, she may've been reacting to Wolverine's reaction or that image, but I digress); -His response to her in the museum (from the comfortable exchange of smiles, through the checking-in talk and comforting embrace); -And most of all his whole manner when he reunites with her, finally free from mind control, after they dueled in X2
--where you see this vulnerability (or in the case of the jet scene, a possible shared sense of humour) that, with that reuniting scene in X2 especially, gives me the read that there's this whole other side to Cyclops that probably only Jean gets to see.
Maybe Xavier knows this side, too. Cyclops' vow at Xavier's medical bedside was also a sensitive moment. But I think Jean sees the most of him; certainly understands him, and he feels this. And I feel this.
When Cyclops, near the end of X2, finally breaks at the acceptance that Jean's gone, I love how they had him cry on Logan's shoulder --the last guy Scott would probably ever want to even be around him when he's dealing hard with something, but in that moment it didn't matter who it was; everything that did matter is gone. (obviously not everything-everything; the students, the mutant race etc. matters to him. But I digress). When Jean dies (and afterward), to watch it, it feels like Cyclops lost the only person he had, because in a way he did; no body is for him what Jean is.
SUPER FRAME also stated (20:50) how "Cyclops [should be] a focused leader", and goes on to imply all he was in the movies was a non-man jerk,"designed to get in the way of Wolverine" (20:53). To be sure, Cyclops leadership is not focused on in the movies, watching them it could be forgotten that's what he's supposed to be. I agree with anyone that the movies are not Cyclops' finest hour (I don't know that he even has an hour of screentime all told). But focus aside, if you pay attention to his manner, the disposition is there. I didn't catch this until I was watching the scene back, but in the Statue of Liberty, when they're trying to free Rogue/destroy the machine, there's some good subtle team dynamic going on.
Sure, Wolverine is the first to state an action plan "Cyclops, can you hit it?" but Cyke is assessing the whole way; rings are moving too fast, he'll kill her; immediately thinks to use Storm to get himself up there; when that's a no-go he considers and -off a look from Jean- trusts in Wolverine's plan, adding to it, rather than letting his feelings get in the way; holds off 'til the last breath from Jean's caring insistence; sees an alternative which saves everyone (Rogue included) by blasting Magneto in the end, not the machine-- --Cyclops listens to and respects/trusts in his team, especially Jean, though he's ultimately the one making the calls. Like again, I'm not saying it's showcased well, just that it is there at least foundationally, even if it failed to get developed.
(Aside: There's in fact a scene you can find on the X-Men 1.5 DVD that makes me think there was a more leadership/leading a wild card angle the movie was going to showcase. It plays during the Making-Of and looks like it could be an alternate and/or extended take of the scene where this exchange takes place:
XAVIER You don't like him.
CYCLOPS How could you tell?
XAVIER
Well I am psychic, you know.
The deleted scene plays out as follows:
XAVIER He could be a valuable addition to us here.
CYCLOPS He's not one of us.
XAVIER But he is. Don't forget that.
CYCLOPS Fine. But if you put a guy like that in a combat situation there's no way he's gonna' take orders.
XAVIER Give him an order worth following, he'll take it. I love this scene and wish they'd kept it/this angle.
And while we're on the topic of deleted scenes and further angles, there also seemed to be one for Jean to do with her powers, given this exchange which takes place in Cerebro:
JEAN Still no trace of them?. . .You look tired, Charles.
XAVIER It's frustrating. . .And I'm afraid, Jean. Knowing he's out there somewhere. I had hoped we'd be much more prepared before it came to this."
JEAN Let me try.
XAVIER Not yet. When you're ready.
JEAN I am ready. I know it.
I can feel my power expanding all the time.
XAVIER Yet at the senate hearing.
JEAN . . .I know. . .I lost control.
XAVIER I just don't want to see you get hurt.
I actually have a theory on movie-Jean's power that could explain away any lack thereof, but that's a potential X-Talk for another time; I digress).
I think a thing about the movies is, the details that are focused on are one thing, and the details you're wanting to be focused on are another.
Like a lot of the character details are actually nuanced. It's in the acting, the intonations, the subtext, to use a technical term. The main text is one thing, then a lot of the subtle stuff takes rewatching with certain attention (if it didn't jump out at/resonate with you initially).
Like once more, to me it's there, it's just not showcased.
And on that point, I agree -balls were dropped. Though there are some contextual and situational points, especially to do with Cyclops, that set these iterations of these characters on a different trajectory, which I will be going into in another X-Talk (as well as share some fun food for thought for those who judge by power output alone). But to summarize and reiterate my thoughts on this X-Talk: I'm not saying the characters are fully-accurate, I agree with SUPER FRAME that they didn't get due consideration (and Cyclops especially. By 'Last Stand' he got egregious short shrift -though I actually think Storm got shortest), I'm just saying that the characters are fuller than they initially appear. SUPER FRAME concludes his thoughtful summary of Cyclops & Jean as characters, with (14:50): "Turning back to the movies, you can now see how hard it is to process the Cyclops and Jean we've been given." Again, on the one hand, yes. Once you get to know the depth of these characters' history, the movies' presentation feels, to say the least, lacking (if it didn't already). On the other hand, what is there, what James Marsden and Famke Jansson brought through --to me, they are that Cyclops & that Jean Grey. I feel Cyclops as the leader that, as SUPER FRAME puts it "hurts. That wrestles with feelings of inadequacy, wrestling with not having all the answers, wrestling with the burden of being leader" (13:34), I feel Jean as the character "that leads with her empathy" (19:50), I feel them connected in a way somehow more real and deeply, believably than most characters in love on-screen; I feel it, it just wasn't realized in the sense of being front and centre.
Which forever makes it honestly painful that FOX couldn't just wait for Superman Returns to finish to get on X-Men 3, or -because I know they were contracted to put out a product every few years- put out some different X-Men movie first (like one of their other planned Origins which couldn't have been any worse than the one we got). If multi-verses exist for real, I would like to take a trip to the one where X3 got made as originally intended. And with that I leave you with this takeaway, X-Fans: don't judge a book by its cover, a man by his wardrobe, or -in the case of Envisionings- an adaptation by its source!
thX
P.S.
I think the details like wardrobe are more informative of Scott as a character himself,
not informative of "Scott as a man as opposed to Wolverine".
-And if you listen to that "boy band" song in full that's briefly playing in Cyclops' car, it's actually hilarious if you do it with the love triangle in mind. It's got an attitude edge to it -it's just fun; don't read too much into it playing on Cyke's speakers! Heck, maybe he's just tryin'a stay up with what the students are listenin' to. ; )
Comments