Dark Phoenix X-Men: Dark Phoenix Skepticism Thread

[henzINNIT]

I also find it funny and telling that you act like I have impossibly high standards. Jean in TLS is a villain because she has a mental illness. That is different than a villain with mental illness.

It's clearly presented that Charles tried to bury Jean's problems. Jean's situation can just as easily be seen as the result of terrible treatment of mental illness, not the illness itself.

 

[The Guard]

Jean only uses her powers in that way because she is mentally ill. She would not have killed Scott if she was not mentally ill.

That doesn't translate to a demonization of mental illness in general.

Evaporating those close to her is a metaphor for the destructive way mental illness can force someone to act, lashing out at loved ones for no reason.

And this is a very real consequence of some mental illnesses. But it is also something that people who are considered sane can do (lash out irrationally at their loved ones, not evaporate people with their minds)...and again...doesn't translate to a demonization of mental illness in general.

With the exception of Scott, Jean/Phoenix doesn't tend to lash out at others for no reason. She has been hurt, is scared, and is clearly trying to avoid being controlled or to have herself diminished. In the case of the third act, she is directly threatened with both military force and the cure.

I'm not saying there isn't a potentially good story here that can go into the nuances of mental illness, but X3 did a terrible Job.

Which is a separate argument. Your argument is that the film demonized mental illness, and your only evidence of this is that the film showed a negative portrayal of mental illness. That's not enough to suggest that something is being demonized. I'm not going to get into the overall quality of X3 in this discussion. It's largely irrelevant to the issue at hand.

 

[Mad Ones]

The only mentally ill character in the film looks like an actual demon LOL

 

[Mad Ones]

It's clearly presented that Charles tried to bury Jean's problems. Jean's situation can just as easily be seen as the result of terrible treatment of mental illness, not the illness itself.

Sure, but she kills Charles because she is a mentally ill villain, Storm gives his eulogy and everyone cries (presumably, we're supposed to be sad too even though the movie told us Charles mistreated her illness), and Jean is left unforgiven (wouldn't know because no one talks about her after Wolverine murders her). Another example of the film's poorly thought-out thrown together half assed "multifaceted" messages.

 

[The Infernal]

Fiction absolutely matters. It produces and is produced by cultural norms. Scrutinizing popular texts tells us how society feels about certain things. The fact that mentally ill villains are a reoccurring trope tells us that mental illness viewed negatively. Again, TLS does not exist in a vacuum and it participates in this, intentionally or not.

Also, you don't know the intentions of the writers/director of X3 anymore than I do. You don't have access to their brains back then right now. But it doesn't matter. What we have is the text in front of us. If you don't think EVIDENCE matters, then there is no point to this conversation.

I also find it funny and telling that you act like I have impossibly high standards. Jean in TLS is a villain because she has a mental illness. That is different than a villain with mental illness. And where did I say no minorities couldn't be villains? Magneto is a jewish and he is a wonderful villain.

But in a world where mentally ill villains is a trope, why do we need any more?

Listing how you interpret/feel about certain scenes is not evidence and you still don't come anywhere near explaining why fiction should be given importance enough to be censored in a way we aren't exposed to something you feel is problematic (even regardless of author intention). In fact your opening paragraph seems more like an arguments for why we shouldn't censor, so we can accurately gauge society's views.

If you don't have a problem with female or minority villains, then my bad, it just seemed like a reasonable extension of the logic given your previous posts.

 

[Mad Ones]

Listing how you interpret/feel about certain scenes is not evidence and you still don't come anywhere near explaining why fiction should be given importance enough to be censored in a way we aren't exposed to something you feel is problematic (even regardless of author intention). In fact your opening paragraph seems more like an arguments for why we shouldn't censor, so we can accurately gauge society's views.

If you don't have a problem with female or minority villains, then my bad, it just seemed like a reasonable extension of the logic given your previous posts.

It's an interpretation with evidence from the film to back it up. If we passively consume this material, we end up reproducing a lot of crap. Society has historically treated mentally ill people as "evil" so it's not surprising to see that reproduced so often in entertainment media. It's not about censoring, whatever you even mean by that. It's about sending messages that do not reinforce historical violence.

These films have real effects. Why do you think Black Panther is so important right now? Do you think that because that movie is fiction, the celebration of Africa and black life isn't important? Dismissing these movies because they are "fiction" just discounts these films and what they can do.

 

[The Infernal]

It's not about censoring, whatever you even mean by that.

Oh ok then.

 

[Mad Ones]

Although the movie probably would have been a lot better if someone "censored" Brett Ratner's "art," if you know what I mean lol

 

[Elayis]

This argument is like when Rose McGowan called this poster sexist and that it promoted violence against women:

 

[Mad Ones]

Or you dont care about it so therefore its silly. Nice contribution.

 

[Elayis]

Superheroes are not direct analogs for everyday people. In particular they have powers that humans in real life do not possess. A super-powered individual with psychological problems that has the ability to cause destruction on a catastrophic level is not the same as an everyday human being that happens to hear voices. There is a clear and present danger when a walking nuclear bomb is mentally unbalanced.

Same goes for Mystique in that situation. She has abilities that regular women do not possess which allows her fight back. Yes, she’s outclassed by Apocalypse, but so was virtually every other X-Man apart from Jean.

You can’t treat superheroes like regular people because there are clear and major differences to them.

 

[psylockolussus]

Definitely!

 

[henzINNIT]

Sure, but she kills Charles because she is a mentally ill villain, Storm gives his eulogy and everyone cries (presumably, we're supposed to be sad too even though the movie told us Charles mistreated her illness), and Jean is left unforgiven (wouldn't know because no one talks about her after Wolverine murders her). Another example of the film's poorly thought-out thrown together half assed "multifaceted" messages.

Storm's general lack of compasion is staggering in TLS. There's certainly no argument that the film was poorly made and severely under-written.

Demonizing mental illness though? Nah. Jean is still sympathetic. If only she was given more time and agency in the story we could have had something great. Oh well, at least we have Legion.

 

[Mad Ones]

Superheroes are not direct analogs for everyday people. In particular they have powers that humans in real life do not possess. A super-powered individual with psychological problems that has the ability to cause destruction on a catastrophic level is not the same as an everyday human being that happens to hear voices. There is a clear and present danger when a walking nuclear bomb is mentally unbalanced.

Same goes for Mystique in that situation. She has abilities that regular women do not possess which allows her fight back. Yes, she’s outclassed by Apocalypse, but so was virtually every other X-Man apart from Jean.

You can’t treat superheroes like regular people because there are clear and major differences to them.

You know the X-men are very popular for being a metaphor for real world things like stigmatization. It's pretty silly for these movies to tell a story about oppression while being so lazy with its depiction of mental health.

I don't know why you want to talk about that Mystique image so much, but in a world where women in superhero movies were scarce, people expect the X-men to showcase their awesome female characters in empowering ways. Like Storm looking like a badass with lightning, Jean with the Phoenix effect, or any other character. But we got Mystique being chocked by Apocalypse all over the marketing, in a franchise where its iconic and most popular hero murdered a woman (for her own good!). No one wanted that and it was obviously ineffective.

Storm's general lack of compasion is staggering in TLS. There's certainly no argument that the film was poorly made and severely under-written.

Demonizing mental illness though? Nah. Jean is still sympathetic. If only she was given more time and agency in the story we could have had something great. Oh well, at least we have Legion.

It should have been given as much care as Legion. That way my family and friends wouldn't have left the movie saying "I didn't like that the crazy lady killed everyone." The movie doesn't sympathize with Jean much at all. She's just a demonic looking psycho who destroys an island.

 

[psylockolussus]

I thought this was about Dark Phoenix not X3.

 

[Mad Ones]

I thought this was about Dark Phoenix not X3.

Post about Dark Phoenix then

 

[psylockolussus]

What gets me about Phoenix in this movie is that it's a retread of X-men Last Stand in that they are going with Jean being schizophrenic again. Kinberg says he wants to get it right this time round but he's just amplifying the same problem as last time from what I've read. Not only that but they have alien villains this time round which makes it seem even more redundant.

Can you just imagine if Simon Kinberg gets this wrong again and there's no Zak Penn/Brett Rather to blame. My God. Fox what were you thinking giving this guy too many chances. He's no JJ Abrams or Sam Raimi.

 

[RalphieRandy]

What gets me about Phoenix in this movie is that it's a retread of X-men Last Stand in that they are going with Jean being schizophrenic again. Kinberg says he wants to get it right this time round but he's just amplifying the same problem as last time from what I've read. Not only that but they have alien villains this time round which makes it seem even more redundant.

Where are people getting that they're making Jean schizophrenic again because I don't remember seeing that anywhere? I do remember Sophie Turner saying she studied schizophrenia for the character which would make sense because Jean and Phoenix often fought for control in the comics and cartoons. But I don't see how that would be a retread of the last stand.

 

[psylockolussus]

What gets me about Phoenix in this movie is that it's a retread of X-men Last Stand in that they are going with Jean being schizophrenic again. Kinberg says he wants to get it right this time round but he's just amplifying the same problem as last time from what I've read. Not only that but they have alien villains this time round which makes it seem even more redundant.

This is the problem with these films being a prequel. They always have to referenced the earlier films and some things would have to be repeated even if they are rewriting history. Like if we get a sequel from this and it is set in 2000s... Rogue, Wolverine, Iceman, Kitty, Colossus could be introduced again like in the ot though maybe in different circumstances but it would still be a retread.