Subtext in the ending of Days of Future Past

•April 5, 2015 • 4 Comments

For those who were really upset with the fact that Days of Future Past ended with another nearly silent parting of ways between Erik and Charles, and Erik’s subsequent absence from the “altered future” when Logan awakens in the school, take comfort in this (well, eventually, when I decide to share it openly…)–

It’s my prediction that the end of X-Men Apocalypse will see Erik and Charles officially together. Here’s why:

Pay attention to Hank and Raven in this scene, and compare them to Erik and Charles. This is after Raven knocks Erik out cold so she can shoot Trask, and Charles persuades her not to do it. This is also after she removes Erik’s helmet and says “He’s all yours, Charles.” (Oh?) Charles gets inside of Erik’s mind (besides his dramatic announcement earlier in the film that he’d “never get inside of that head again”) and makes Erik lift the metal scaffolding under which Charles is pinned. And then…he lets Erik go. When Erik comes to, he realizes this, gives Charles a questioning look, and Charles gives back a look of anger and resentment. (Like all of their freaking conversations, they take place either in silence or telepathically, neither of which the audience is privy to, so we have to glean what was said from elsewhere):

image

image

Then follows this dialogue:

Erik: “If you let them have me, I’m as good as dead. You know that.”

Charles: “I know.”

(So, wait a minute, Erik is basically telling Charles to keep him out of the authority’s hands, and Charles is basically agreeing to do just that? Kinda strange for two people who supposedly “hate” one another.) Then we get this look from Erik to Charles. I mean, there’s all kinds of emotion underneath this, not to mention the camera lingers on this for as long as possible.

image

Erik: “Goodbye, old friend.”

image

Charles: “Goodbye, Erik.” (Charles is an.gry. But…it’s not just anger there, is it? There’s something else. Hurt. Betrayal. Resentment. And… Love. Serious love.)

I’ll prove it.

From First Class on, Raven and Hank were set up immediately as subtext for Charles and Erik. Whatever emotional/relationship dialogue between them that couldn’t be covered up with silent looks or telepathic conversations happens between Hank and Raven.  (I’ve since confirmed this- in the director’s commentary for First Class, it’s stated that Hank and Raven are the B-side to Charles and Erik.)

As an example, here is my favorite example of the two couples mirroring one another from First Class. These two scenes immediately follow one another. First we get Hank and Raven, sitting in chairs across from one another, in front of a lit fire. Hank is telling Raven he’s finally invented the serum that can make them both “normal,” and that it won’t “change abilities, just appearance.” (hmm.) Raven responds with a very Erik thing to say: “Should we have to hide?” Hank tells her in a very Charles way: “We already do. You’re hiding right now just as I have my entire life.” (Hmmmm.) Hank tells Raven: “We need this cure.”

This scene, right here, is where the “split” happens between both couples. It’s not coincidental. They’re made to mirror one another for a reason, as illustrated here (Raven/Erik on the right, Charles/Hank on the left. Similar room layout, pretty obvious.)

image

When the scene switches to Erik and Charles, it’s noticeable right away that they’re in the middle of a chess game, and in the middle of a conversation- and there’s a significant amount of tension in the room. Why? Because Charles just put an end to their physical relationship. Why? It’s been stated from the beginning of the film that Charles doesn’t like mutations that aren’t normal or “pretty.” Homosexuality in the 60s would definitely fall under that category. And, so, it’s only fitting that Erik and Charles’ relationship conversation would take place in “hiding,” or in the Raven/Hank scene.

So, here we are, in the middle of the game and the conversation, but we’re privy only to the second half, which demonstrates their split in ideology- Charles wants integration, Erik wants a mutant brotherhood. The old standby argument. They’ve just split up- physically and ideologically. (I’ll go way into this in a later post because I LOVE how Hank’s “cure” works into Charles’ “cure.”)

Hank and Raven are made to be paid attention to because they ARE Erik and Charles’ hidden relationship. (Cool, huh?)

And that one example leads me into the ending of Days of Future Past. If you, like me, wondered what the hell kind of goodbye that was between the two men after yet another battle between the two– seriously, Charles is gonna help Erik stay a fugitive after *everything* that’s gone on between them in both films?? The hell, why would he do that??– just pay attention to Hank and Raven.

Look, here are Erik and Charles’ goodbye gazes at one another:

image

See Hank’s expression? Now, look at this:

image

After Erik and Charles exchange their looks, Erik looks at Raven. She looks back. Erik looks back at Charles, then back to Raven. He opens his arms to raise up and leave, keeping his eyes on Raven. As soon as Erik looks away, she turns to look at Charles. Charles and Hank have the *exact* same look on their face as when they were both looking at Erik. Then Raven looks at Hank alone- and we get those two bottom pictures, those two looks of obvious love between them.

Those are Erik and Charles, that’s the underlying emotions fueling the both of them in this scene. That’s what they couldn’t/didn’t show, so they hid it in Hank and Raven.

And the dialogue that comes right after this?

Hank to Charles: “Are you sure you should let them go?”

Charles: “Yes. I have hope for them. There’s going to be a time, Hank, when we are all together.”

(boy, that word “together” is used quite a lot for Charles and Erik in this film… I’ll detail that in a later post.)

Point? Erik and Charles, despite everything, are still in love. Charles just promised Erik in so few words that he’d do what he could to keep Erik away from the authorities, and Erik leaves without his trademark helmet- the helmet he uses to keep Charles out of his head. They want to be together, they just don’t know how to be– yet. We’ve still got one more decade to go, Apocalypse takes places in the 80s– and, well, this on par (and hilarious at times) analysis of the Charles and Erik storyline should sum it up:

http://ishtar79.dreamwidth.org/tag/erik+and+charles+in+canon

All this dialogue, all these scenes were done to these exact specifications. The subtext is not only intentional, it’s becoming more textual, and I’m hoping this last film will go where I believe this is leading. Moira is gone, Raven left Erik, the only obstacles left between Erik and Charles now are their inability to compromise with one another. They find a way to do that, I guarantee they’ll live happily ever after. (Yes, I know Moira’s character is in the last film and I’m praying to GOD she is there to bring the two men together, not as a heteronormative out. Should that be the case, that Moira will be there as a friend, not as Charles’ canon lover, then that’ll be yet another similarity to Sherlock and how they’re using Irene Adler…)

Like I said before, I have zero faith in the American film industry, so I don’t expect the ending we *desperately* need, I expect Hollywood to cave. I expect to see the heterosexual norm. But I hope…I hope against everything that I’ll walk out of the theater in 2016 with a proud heart. I hope my prediction of where the X-Men subtext is headed is right. I hope that we definitely will see them all “together.” Charles and Erik deserve nothing less, *we* deserve nothing less.

Come on, Hollywood.

We need this cure:

image

Come on, now.

•April 2, 2015 • 1 Comment

image

Oh, for FUCK’S sake, just kiss him already.

#unnecessarydrama #justfuckandgetitoverwith #likemutantscareaboutgender

Darwin is code for Civil Rights.

•March 31, 2015 • 1 Comment

This is my favorite examples of subtext in X-Men First Class. Besides being beautiful, it’s also extremely moving once you understand what the scene is all about.

Charles and Erik, at the point in the film, are scouring the globe for mutants like themselves. There are *several layers* of subtext in this entire montage- which I’ll detail once I get the finished subtext into a coherent post- but I’ve chosen the scene where Charles and Erik find and recruit the African-American mutant known as Darwin. He’s currently working as a cab driver in New York City, and the scene begins with Charles and Erik climbing into the back of Darwin’s cab.

Immediately, the scene seems strange. Why? Because this cab has absolutely no partition between the driver and the passengers. It’s just open space. However, despite that, when Erik and Charles get into the cab, Darwin decides to address them through the rear view mirror, even though he could just turn around and look right at them. So, right off the bat, the subtext is set up where Darwin is looking into a mirror and the reflection is Charles and Erik.

Illustrated here:

image

image

(note Charles’ arm around Erik and their close proximity to one another. It stays that way for the duration of the scene.)

“Where to, fellas?” Darwin asks Erik and Charles.

Erik responds with “Richmond, Virgina, please.”

Darwin laughs, responding with “Right, so you want the airport, the station, what?”

image

And this line of dialogue leads into this *amazing* exchange between Erik, Charles, and Darwin. The scene switches back to Erik and Charles, but this time as the reflection in the rear view mirror. Charles responds with the innuendo/subtext laden line (which he says as seductively as fucking possible): “We were rather hoping you would…take us all the way.” As soon as Charles says the word “would,” Erik turns to look at him, and Charles eyes move to Erik’s reflection in the mirror, sees Erik looking at him, and ends with “take us all the way.”

image

image

Oh, it’s gorgeous, isn’t it?

Darwin responds with (still addressing them through the mirror) “That’s a six hour drive.”

Erik says: “That’ll give us plenty of time to talk.” As he says that, he raises his hand to lower the taximeter, using a gesture I’ve never seen him use in any other films, and strangely resembles the iconic “benediction” or blessing gesture attributed to Christ in ancient and medieval art. (Which I find interesting, considering Erik is a Jewish man.)

image

So, yeah, weird scene, huh? But it’s so beautiful, and let me tell you why:

1) Despite there being no partition in the cab, and Darwin could easily just turn around and talk to Erik and Charles, the entirety of their conversation happens in the rear view mirror. Why is that significant? Because it’s pointing to the correlation between civil rights (which were THE issue in the 60s, which is the time period in which this film takes place) and gay rights, which are THE rights issue today. Darwin and the two men reflect one another because their fight for rights and recognition are the same.

2) Darwin. His name says it all. The writers/director could have picked any character from the enormous X-Men universe, but they chose him. Why? Because his name is synonymous with evolution. Civil rights in the 60s were part of evolution, so are gay rights. And he is the one driving the cab- evolution is in the driver’s seat, baby.

3) The entirety of the dialogue is riddled with subtext. “Where to fellas?” (Where is evolution headed next?) “Richmond, VA, please.” (This place is significant, but part of another post. I’ll deal with it later.) “Right, so you want the airport, the station, what?” (Do you want to get there faster/take another route/take another form of transportation to your end goal?) “We were rather hoping you would take us all the way.” (Obvious sexual innuendo and gazes between Erik and Charles during this line aside, they’re asking evolution to take them all the way to the day when gay marriage/love is legalized/accepted.) “That’s a six hour drive.” (That’s gonna be a while, and it’s gonna be pricey/take a lot/require serious work.) “That’ll give us plenty of time to talk.” (We can discuss the particulars through time/discuss things and work them out/figure out how to reach our goal of acceptance.)

4. Darwin is African-American. He is looking at Erik and Charles not only as a reflection in the mirror, but at the two men *behind* him. As in, he’s looking at the past to his own civil rights battles. Charles and Erik are looking forward to their own. Note that Darwin’s face is never shown in the rear view mirror- why? Because the focus is now on Erik and Charles/gay rights, and Darwin sees them as his reflection, not his own face because even though the battle of racism continues, the civil rights advocates won the war, therefore Darwin/black race/evolution is in the driver’s seat.

5. This entire conversation takes place in NYC- which is where Darwin is from, and where same sex marriage was famously legalized in 2011, the same year this film was released.

(and once again, I love the mixing of faiths here with Erik’s Christlike “Christian” gesture in direct contrast to his Jewish upbringing.)

Isn’t that beautiful? It’s so beautiful. When I first saw this scene for what it was, I cried my eyes out. I realized, for the first time, that this trilogy of X-Men films references past (and still raging) rights battles- women, African-American, children, gingers- no, I’m not kidding- anyone who is different and has been stigmatized for it.), but the *core* of the story is about gay rights and same sex love/marriage as symbolized by Erik and Charles/Professor X and Magneto. (I mean, let’s face it, these two have been in love for forever. It’s about time they get their due.) Beautiful, isn’t it? This amazing universe of mutants is precious to us because of it’s universal and timeless message that can continually be updated and retold to reflect whatever rights battles are being fought in the current age. (And why I love the graphic novel series so much, or even why I’m a fangirl at all.)

Please, writers/directors/producers of this updated trilogy: give us Erik and Charles. It’s so important, so vitally important that people see this, recognize it, confront it, so they- and we as a species- can move forward. Please let love win out. Turn the tears and heartbreak from the break-up on the beach-

image

(fucking GOD, their expressions.)

and bring them back home, together, hand in hand and side by side to teach, guide, and integrate their  community into the world, so that we may all benefit from their love:

image

(From Claremont’s X-Men Excalibur series where Charles and Erik finally move in together.)

and:

image

(Note all the x’s in the fencing. X’s are all over the place in the films. X marks the spot.)

and:

image

Please. GIVE US LOVE.

(PS- isn’t Darwin’s smile dazzling? I love him.)

Any Day Now

•March 26, 2015 • Leave a Comment

image

After wrapping up my subtext for X-Men First Class, I took a break after putting my daughter to bed and watched the next film on my list. It ended up being the one pictured above.

I…had no idea what the hell I was getting into. This film depressed the fuck out of me tonight. If I could cry any more over it, I would. It’s a true story, detailing the story of two gay men, Rudy and Paul, who take in their neighbor’s child- who has Down Syndrome- after she abandons him. The entire thing is about the love between the two men- one a prim lawyer, the other a drag queen with a velvet voice- and how they come together as a family when the boy, Marco, is put into their custody. Their battle to keep him, though, is the real drive of the film. Marco’s mother is a serious drug addict who neglects and resents her son, and winds up in jail on a drug charge. She signs papers granting temporary custody to Rudy and Paul. There is a glorious family unit that forms when Marco moves into his new home, and it’s perfect in every way. So much love between these three unlikely people, so much acceptance and patience and understanding. But, since the film takes place in the 70s (and still syncs with today), you know the happiness won’t last- someone will find out that the boy is in a home with two gay men, and he’ll be taken away. And the men will have to fight an uphill battle for the boy they consider their son, and they’ll fucking lose. You know it’s gonna happen, but it rips your soul apart nonetheless.

This film should be REQUIRED VIEWING for ANYONE who DARES to vote against same sex marriage and LGBT adoption. If you can watch Any Day Now, and process it for the true story it is, and still come out and vote against those issues, then there is no hope for you at all. Zero.

And to Alan Cumming, who plays Rudy in the film: you are *breathtakingly gorgeous.* Thank you for your performance here. I don’t know where you had to go or what you had to do in order to give us this character, but I heard you. I heard you loud and clear, and I love you so much for it.

The X-Men Clue

•March 25, 2015 • 2 Comments

image

Isidore Locked Room Mystery Story

This kept me up last night. Still is tonight.

A screenshot  shot of the clue in question: this is the scene in DoFP when Erik boards Charles’ plane after he’s been busted out of jail. He goes to reach for the newspaper in front of Wolverine, but he extends his bone claws to stop Erik from taking it. First thing- Wolverine has his three claws on the paper, Erik has three fingers on the paper. Wolverine is being protective here of a newspaper- why? Well, the camera zooms in on the paper for a reason. If you pause the screen and look at the article in question, nothing looks out of place until you start reading it. At first, the article does appear to be about the Paris treaty, but as you read on, halfway through the first column the story shifts abruptly to a different story, then returns to the Paris treaty. But by the bottom of the second column, and continuing on through the rest of the article, the other story takes over and repeats over and over. It’s a crime report, detailing the murder of a laundry owner named Isidore Fink. What the hell? Why the hell is that there?

So, I look up this story, right. And hells bells, it’s an actual unsolved crime from New York City that appeared in the New York Times in 1929. So, what the hell is it doing in a paper that’s supposed to be from 1973? The crime in question is one of the more famous real life LOCKED ROOM MYSTERIES. (Link above is to the Isidore murder story.) Anyone familiar with mystery stories will know what that is right away. For those of you who don’t (and I was you a few months ago), here’s what it is (from Wiki):

“The locked room mystery is a subgenre of detective fiction in which a crime—almost always murder—is committed under apparently impossible circumstances. The crime in question typically involves a crime scene that no intruder could have entered or left, e.g., a locked room. Following other conventions of classic detective fiction, the reader is normally presented with the puzzle and all of the clues, and is encouraged to solve the mystery before the solution is revealed in a dramatic climax.”

The Locked Room Mystery trope can be used in many, many ways. And, in fact, it’s the heart and soul of the Sherlock series. Except, instead of just being a crime story, it also stands for a way of introducing a romance- Sherlock’s heart is the locked room and John Watson is the killer- the one who gets into Sherlock’s heart- and vanishes. This particular real life story of Isidore Fink has quite a few clues that lead me to believe this is about Erik and Charles.

1. Isidore lives with another man, Max Schwartz. Well, well. (And Erik’s real name in the comics is Max. Still looking for a possible connection with Isidore to Charles.)

2. Max says during police interviews that Isidore had started to shut himself away more and more a few months before his murder. (Charles slowly retreats from Erik in FC, eventually breaking it off.)

3. Their neighbor, an African American woman strangely named Locklin Smith (lock smith?), is the one who hears the murder happen- but never heard gunshots- and calls the police. (Yet another callback to the previous civil rights battles of the African Americans. I’ll go into detail in my subtext analysis about this, but they are constantly used as a parallel to gay rights.)

4. Isidore was shot with a gun. (“Erik’s always had a way with guns.”)

5. The running theory is that Isidore was shot in the hallway and then retreated to the room in which he was later found. So, he was shot outside the room (Charles’ heart is somewhat open/he’s shot in the open on the Cuban beach) then later retreats where he dies. (foreshadowing Charles’ decade long descent into depression, drugs, and alcohol in DoFP.)

6. Witnesses claim that they’d seen two well dressed women in the hallway just before the shooting, but Max shot down this theory by saying that Isidore never consorted with women. (Two well dressed women- Moira and Raven, the two women who are always the obstacles between Erik and Charles /never consorted with women because Charles is in love with Erik)

7. Isidore and Max lived in New York City. (Charles’ school for mutants is in New York.)

8. In order to get the locked room open so the police could investigate, they had to find a small child to squeeze in through the transom window above the door so he could undo the lock. (Wolverine was the only one with the ability to go back in time and open the locked room/save Charles and Erik’s relationship/bring them back together.)

9. The motive had not been robbery, and the police couldn’t figure out how the killer had just vanished without a trace. (Erik didn’t want any of Charles’ money, he wanted his love. And when Charles rejected him, he vanished- literally.)

10. Max Schwartz, Isidore’s “roommate” and sometimes called landlord, was never considered a suspect. Ever. (No one believes Erik is the one who broke Charles’s heart. The entire audience believes it’s Raven that had that effect. Yeah- “they used her powers of transformation and what, they weaponized it?” You fucking bet they did.)

….So. All this from one repeating story on a close up shot of a newspaper that no one would consider looking at twice, even me, until I started studying subtext. And then I remembered how many graphic novels are FILLED with subtext and symbolism- in fact, in another similarity to Sherlock, one of their cases called The Geek Interpreter (which is THE case that proves the johnlockers are right) is about a young man who convinces Snerlock that his favorite comic book is starting to manifest in real life. Subtext in X-Men is obvious because the story IS subtext for all kinds of civil rights issues, that’s how it was written in the first place. And what is our current civil rights battle?- LGBT.

So, back to the scene at hand:

Wolverine is being protective of the locked room mystery on the newspaper/protective of Charles’ heart because Charles is the reason Wolverine survived his past pain and was able to move forward. He’s always been protective of Charles. Three claws/fingers on the paper from Wolverine and Erik. Erik saying- give him to me, Charles is mine. Wolverine saying- back the fuck off, dude, he saved my life and I don’t give a fuck that you two reconcile in the future, you’re not gonna touch a hair on his head on my watch. Erik says “imagine if they were metal”- of course referring to the fact that Wolverine’s claws become metal in the future when he’s tortured by General Stryker, but also referring to the fact that if he had the ability, he’d force Wolverine out of the way….. Which is exactly what he does at the end of DoFP.

Yeah, so. There’s a locked room mystery being used as a romantic trope in X-Men. I also have to say that I’m starting to believe that maybe it’s also foreshadowing a possible death for Xavier in the future, especially considering that it’s been reported that Ian McKellan, who plays older Erik, will be in the last film but Patrick Stewart, who plays older Charles, will not be. So, I’m thinking Apocalypse may end with the death of Charles, who in the graphic novels then hands over the school to Erik, begging him to continue with it and take over as headmaster. That scene is extremely intimate, and I think if that happens, this is where and when we’ll get the love confession/kiss. After all, every film has an almost death for Charles- FC he is shot in the spine, he and Erik share that amazing beach scene; Days of Future Past, Charles almost dies at the end when the Sentinels find his hiding place, and he and Erik have that love confession between one another. Every time Charles and Erik are in mortal danger, they come within inches of just a total outpouring of love. (Another similarity to Sherlock.) So, last film, I think Charles may actually die. And Erik will get the kick in the ass he needs to tell Charles he loves him.

But, as X-Men tends to do, Charles probably won’t die for real. He never does. And I think… I hope… They’ll end the film franchise with those two in the school, together, where they FUCKING BELONG.

Back to the rest of the subtext analysis. I’ve learned so much because of these films and Sherlock, it’s amazing. I wanted to dissect them both because I MUST know how they’re doing this. I’m nuts obsessed. It’s so beautiful. So, so, so beautiful.

Khal Drogo and Daenerys- Game of Thrones

•March 19, 2015 • Leave a Comment

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3XVHyhLB8Hg

Two things about this scene.

1: The erotic moments between Daenerys and her servant are beautiful. I wish they’d gone further. (But I always do.) however, the treatment I see here is still beholden to the whole idea that female bisexuality is only there for men’s pleasure, so it ruins for me what could have been a poignant scene. I understand that the set-up with the Dothraki coming into this story is that they’re base savages who treat women like property, but still. It feels all too familiar, but to the show’s credit, they did try to do what they could, and it does awaken something in Daenerys. I just wish, like always that the awakening not be treated like a passing phase or a just a stepping stone to men. After the death of Khal Drogo, I had hoped the show would revisit this scene and have Daenerys fall in love with a woman. After all there are male/male relationships on the show, so why not? Then maybe we can actually show a female/female love story in the serious and respectful light it deserves. And Daenerys is a very strong character. But… I don’t ever hold out a lot of hope for American television. Or film. Not yet.

2: I stopped really paying attention to this show when Khal Drogo was killed off. The chemistry between him and Daenerys was spot on. Easily the most interesting storyline in the show, in my opinion. I know she has her own interesting story outside of Drogo, and I’m glad they’ve kept such a strong female character at the center of the show. But- I’m a fanatic of sexuality and tension, and these two had it. Passion in that scene. Passion. Plus, Khal Drogo might very well be the most beautiful man I’ve ever seen. No, he definitely is. Sexy on a level that is…dangerous. Just…God. Look at him. Absolutely fucking ridiculously gorgeous.

Thoughts.

•March 18, 2015 • Leave a Comment

Just finished a fabulous British film- Bedrooms and Hallways. Sexuality is all over the place in the story- straight guy falls for gay guy, gay guy falls for a straight woman, Hugo Weaving ties a guy to a bed and has his way with him (seriously, where has that scene been all my life! Fucking Elrond involved in some guy on guy BDSM, that’s straight out of my wacked out high as a kite wildest dreams right there.) I loved it. Fantastic. Everyone’s challenged, everyone’s happy. Now, of course, that’s not entirely realistic because we know it wouldn’t be so smooth a transition out here in the real world, but that’s the beauty of fiction- it can be whatever the hell we want it to be. And it has the distinct advantage of showing us what life could be like if we just let go of all our inhibitions.

It was nice to step away for a bit from the ubiquitous doom and gloom of so many same gender/transgender love stories and watch a sweet romantic comedy. Gotta do that, gotta remind ourselves of what the hell we’re working towards, and if we end up anything like Bedrooms and Hallways, I’ll be ecstatic. Plus, I mean, Hugo Weaving- HUGO MOTHERFUCKIN WEAVING- in a gay BDSM scene.

*****

Something I’ve been thinking a lot about recently- why is it that when we use the words masculine or feminine we immediately attribute them to male and female, respectively? Masculine and feminine aren’t exclusive to male or female. Both genders can inhabit the masculine and the feminine. Men can be feminine, they can have traditionally feminine characteristics like intuition, sensitivity, maternal love. And women can have traditionally masculine characteristics like cold reason, rage, and the “Hunter” gene. I just don’t understand when people immediately assume that men are only masculine and women are only feminine. Feminine doesn’t mean female, masculine doesn’t mean male. They’re just concepts, ideas- that’s it. There’s nothing that says they’re exclusive to one gender- in fact, they’re pretty all over the place. That’s humanity, right? So why are we so freaked out when we meet a feminine male or a masculine woman? Why is it we can’t figure out a male who has killer intuition or is a stay at home parent, or a female who is the main breadwinner or a soldier? Haven’t we been exposed to enough of the extreme variations of life where none of this should surprise us? I don’t get it. It drives me insane.

*****

I’m back into the X-Men subtext full force, trying to wrap it up. I love the hidden story- it’s so beautiful. So, so beautiful. It’s no secret that I’m obsessed with Charles Xavier and Erik Lehnsherr. What bothers me so much about these films is that even though I understand what the creators and writers are trying to do- trying to introduce the idea of a love story between them slowly so people can transition their brains- it still bothers me that it’s done entirely subtextually. At some point, they’re going to have to make the love story obvious, they’re going to have to reveal it to the mass audience. I’m hoping to GOD that they have the balls to do this, I really do. I found an interview with Simon Kinberg, one of the main writers for the last film in the new X-Men trilogy, Apocalypse, and this quote stuck out to me:

“If First Class was Erik’s story and Days of Future Past is Charles’ story, then Apocalypse will be both of their stories. The first movie was about Erik becoming empowered. That’s the origin story of a man’s power. Days of Future Past is about a guy who is a mess, masterminding the end of this massive movie. So they are both at their peak powers at the start of Apocalypse, so Apocalypse for me is the culmination of that three-act love story.” -Simon Kinberg.

LOVE story. Erik and Charles are a LOVE story. I just hope with this last film they’ll uncover that for all to see. Because, honestly, it’s not doing any good at all just staying in the subtext. It’s ruining an otherwise beautiful story, and we’re moving past the days when all queer romances in film need to be hidden. We have to bring these things to light. I’m hoping that quote, the quotes from Zach Stentz, and the direction the subtext is headed means we’ll see it. I know I harp on this a lot, but these guys have the *perfect* platform to address these issues in a pop culture setting that would have mass appeal. I don’t want to see Apocalypse end without Charles and Erik getting their due. I mean, the movie is called Apocalypse- I just hope it lives up to its name. End of the current world, beginning of the new one.