Why “X-Men (2000)” Remains Important Today
Based on the Marvel comic book series of the same name, Bryan Singer’s X-Men seems like your typical early 2000s superhero blockbuster along the lines of Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man. However, X-Men is not like your typical comic book film, whether it was back then or even now. Much like its source material, the film explores the intricate and intense social and power dynamics between humanity and “mutants”—evolved humans who develop special abilities. This idea was created by both Stan Lee and Jack Kirby to explore the oppression of minority groups in the world, but most notably in the United States.
The film opens with a congressional hearing regarding the Mutant Registration Act proposed by the conservative Senator Kelly. Dr. Jean Grey, a student of Professor Charles Xavier (played by Sir Patrick Stewart), argues against the act as it compromises the mutants’ individual freedoms. Despite her best efforts, the act gains tremendous congressional support. This follows into the next scene, where Charles and his old friend, Erik Lehnsherr, aka “Magneto” (played by Sir Ian McKellen), verbally spar over their ideals. Personally, this is one of my favorite scenes in the entire film, as it shines a light on how similar their views are while presenting their visions through different life experiences: Charles wants peace and coexistence between mutants and humanity, while Erik strives for mutant supremacy, as he sees the Mutant Registration Act as a way to imprison and further demean mutant-kind. He has seen this exact same scenario before as a young boy sent to Auschwitz-Birkenau.
This simultaneous difference and reflection is further enhanced by the lighting. At the start of the scene, we are not shown Erik’s face at all. He is either hidden in shadow or has his face obscured from the viewer. We hear the authoritative, yet gentle, tone of his voice when Charles confronts him, but it isn’t until Charles begs for him to give humanity another chance that the face reveal occurs. Throughout the rest of the scene, where Erik chastises his old friend for still clinging to hope, his face is half shrouded in shadow. Meanwhile, when the camera cuts to Charles, we see the shadowing on his face is mirrored to match Erik’s. However, there’s a small caveat: the shadowing on Charles’ face is a few shades lighter than Erik’s. This small detail shows us that the two are actually more similar in ideology than we initially believe. They both want what’s best for mutant-kind. However, Erik had always been more radical than Charles, even back then, which ultimately led to the two going their separate ways, with Charles leading the X-Men and Erik leading the Brotherhood.
It’s interesting to note that despite growing up in a Nazi death camp, Erik has slowly become his tormentors, the very people he swore to destroy. His insistence is that humanity will always fear and never accept mutants because they don’t understand evolution. And even though he has a point, his plan is to use a machine to accelerate the mutant gene within the entire human population so that he and his followers will be welcomed back as “brothers.” He has two of his followers, Mystique and Toad, capture Senator Kelly so that he may be given a test subject. It’s also here where we witness Erik’s god complex rear its ugly head. Despite looking to God as a “teacher and bringer of light,” Erik believes that he can do what God does “too slowly” with his machine. This god complex is seen once again near the film’s climax, where he uses his powers to float above New York City, looking down on the humans as he’s about to witness the new step of evolution.
The film feeds your brain these complex philosophical and political feasts all while still mixing in plenty of stylized and intense action sequences to remind you that this is a comic book film. Almost like your best friend’s mom who mixes spinach into her brownies. And if you ask me, this is what so many modern superhero movies are lacking. Most are mindless, CGI-infused action set pieces. And those that try to incorporate any real-world issues either address them on a surface level or dial it back down to protect the status quo. But X-Men sows seeds into why each philosophy has its limits and where they can be improved upon; it doesn’t give us clear-cut answers on who’s right or wrong. Because at the end of the day, both Charles and Erik had a point. Charles’ core belief of integration and peace aligns with Martin Luther King Jr.’s very own approach, while Erik’s more extreme views are more in line with Malcolm X’s beliefs. The scale isn’t a coin toss; it’s a pendulum.
Even though X-Men came out in 2000, it is still as prevalent today as it was back then. Hell, I’d even argue that it is even more prevalent now. People like to pretend that hatred stemming from a failure to understand is a relic of the past, but movies like X-Men remind us that marginalized groups still face tremendous obstacles even today. Not only does it effortlessly present these issues in a summer blockbuster, but it keeps you thoroughly entertained while doing so. If you have Disney+ or are in the video rental store, go give X-Men a watch; you might gain a greater appreciation for the struggles those less fortunate endure daily.
