Recycled Plots (X-Men 3 Revisited)
Okay, I have to confess first of all that I’ve only ever seen one episode of Buffy, so forgive my ignorance. But I just read a paragraph in an Entertainment Weekly article (commemorating highlights of the WB channel) describing a key Buffy plot point thus:
Buffy “was compelled to slay her great love, Angel, to save the world. At that point, Angel (David Boreanaz) was switching in and out of his evil alter ego, Angelus, representing death and destruction as much as he did allure and romance. At the operatic climax, Buffy and Angel kissed, then she stabbed him in the chest.”
Sound like a certain recent film climax, anyone?
Jillian and Dormouse, you two watched Buffy faithfully. Did it bother you to see the same plot resolution in X-Men 3? Was it okay because it’s a pretty common myth pattern anyway?
Also, I wanted to bring to prominence a comment Dormouse made on the previous X-Men post, because it’s really interesting:
“Also, I really enjoyed the ending of the movie. B/c I felt like it drove home a really key point–mutation cannot be cured, which, in my mind, indicates there’s nothing wrong there to begin with.
Besides, Rogue’s tragedy really compels me, and I hate the idea that she could just cure herself.”
I definitely agree that there’s nothing about the mutants that needs to be cured. But, on the other hand, I felt quite sympathetic with Rogue’s decision. The form her mutancy took was, to her, more heartbreak than benefit (she can’t touch people she cares about AND she doesn’t have any other powers that work at a distance). Now I can see why you would be upset with her decision if you’re viewing mutancy as a parallel to homosexuality. But what about if you think of it as a parallel to disability? Take a deaf person. Now there’s nothing “wrong” there, either, nothing that makes that individual less than a person. But what if that individual chooses to have a cochlear implant? Some in the deaf community would never want cochlear implants, because they cherish the particularity of that community, including communicating through sign language. And I don’t think people who get cochlear implants are necessarily saying there’s anything wrong with being deaf–they’re simply making a choice about how they want to live their lives.
Of course, Rogue’s decision isn’t about either homosexuality or disability, and yet it’s about both, as well as a whole host of other issues. I do like the complexity of the questions the film raises, how the same question may look different through different angles.
However, given the wiggling chessman at the end of the film, I think we might surmise that Rogue’s “cure” won’t be permanent anyway.
3 comments June 3rd, 2006