Translated material
Anton Dolin. Cinema-9: Nietzsche and the Mutants
Towards the release of the films "X-Men" and "Asterix and Obelix vs. Caesar"
One of the undoubted, although dubious, achievements of twentieth-century culture is comics . That is, in one form or another, stories in pictures existed before, but the development of the genre took place precisely in the last hundred years. In essence, comics are a mutant genre. For centuries, humanity studied writing in order to eventually replace it with drawing... Ray Bradbury considered this a disaster. However, as experience shows, literature easily coexists with comics; there is no global replacement. The same is true for the comic book genre. If initially the authors of the first comic book adaptations wanted to turn a series of pictures into a film, then later the situation turned around, comic book poetics (if you can call it that) turned out to be stronger, and a new way to make films appeared. The authors of the American "X-Men" and the French "Asterix and Obelix vs. Caesar" resorted to it.
In general, the topic for speculation is huge: we can talk about how and why France, in the course of implementing a national program to maintain the status of a film power, decided to switch to a purely Hollywood style, and about how the extraordinary American independent director Brian Singer (“Ordinary suspects", "Apt Student") turned to comic book pop... But, in the end, Luc Besson himself did not disdain either comic books or Hollywood - his last two films are proof of this, and in general, good directors often turned to comic books, sometimes not losing, but earning a reputation from it. Tim Burton directed two Batman films before Ed Wood, and then turned them into comics - extremely successful! - a classic novella by Washington Irving. So let’s not worry about dying talents: every director knows what he’s doing, and those who don’t know everything rely on the producer - and rightly so. It is much more interesting to try to briefly explore the mutation of cinema towards comics.
The film comic presents us with a very special world. And the less it has to do with the reality that extends beyond the walls of the cinema, the better. Therefore, the most successful are comics that take place in a fictional, relatively independent space - for example, the city of Gotham from Batman. The landscape should be collective and at the same time unreal, full of giant skyscrapers and indescribably beautiful forests, lakes, fields. A comic is close to a hand-drawn cartoon: it must be beautiful and flat. This does not affect the artistic qualities in any way, because their own laws apply here. In accordance with them, only global problems can exist here that threaten the entire existence, if not of planet Earth, then at least of this bright, seemingly advertising world. X-Men is about the danger facing humanity; the scene of action is New York of the future (and in the present - a city of the most fantastic appearance), in the vicinity of which there are fictional worlds where evil and good wizards are hiding; The decisive battle takes place on the Statue of Liberty. In "Asterix and Obelix" there is a danger threatening the ancient Gauls, who are about to be conquered by the power-hungry Romans; The setting is magical Gaul, a country of ancient fortresses and wondrous thickets.
The plot of the comic is necessarily connected with a global confrontation in which all the characters are involved. However, the idea is such that the viewer does not feel involved in this confrontation: he is told and, most importantly, shown a fairy tale in which there is no place for the everyday world. Therefore, despite all the globality, the negative pole of the battle for humanity is always located in the realm of the fictional. The rougher the fiction, the easier and more pleasant it is for the viewer. He does not tense up, looking at the terrible mutants - the werewolf Sabretooth, the greenish and tongue-tied Toad, the blue, jagged chameleon girl Mystic and the power-hungry professor Magneto. If he shudders, it’s only like a child who heard a terrible retort from a witch in a Brothers Grimm fairy tale. Because both the child and the viewer of the comic book know: in a couple of minutes the witch will burn with a blue flame. So the danger of Magneto's plans does not concern anyone. Moreover, no one will be scared by the infantile heroes of the French comedy and children's film about the adventures of the resourceful Vikings Asterix and Obelix: Julius Caesar himself with a huge “Roman” nose, and the petty swindler and traitor Poganus ( Roberto Benigni ) can only cause laughter.
Why does the unnaturalness of the comics touch us little and why do the computer blowups, jumps, and battles, first seen in “The Mask” and now becoming a mandatory part of every comic book movie, not seem unnatural at all? Yes, because comics are a more natural and familiar genre to the human race than ordinary psychological cinema, comedy or action. Comics are a genre immersed in the depths of myth, which, as the thinkers of the 20th century have proven, is how humanity has lived since time immemorial. Hence the heroism, hence the globalization, hence the unnaturalness. Sometimes long-known national myths are exploited - the case of "Asterix", the story read by every French schoolchild about the struggle of their ancestors for independence, the hostility towards Italians, the nation of the Antipodes, absorbed with mother's milk. Sometimes the myths are new, but still embedded in the culture. The myth of America is futurological, which is quite clearly shown in “X-Men,” which looks to a symbolic future when humanity will be full of mutants and both death and salvation can only come from the United States.
Artistic myths are added to the plot ones: America uses advanced special effects, without worrying about the actors (not counting Patrick Stewart, whose bald skull and smart eyes are close to all fans of television science fiction). France rides on the humor and charm of actors - comedians Christian Clavier (Asterix), beloved by all European people after the super-grossing "Aliens"; Gerard Depardieu - there is no need to introduce him, we can only say that in the role of Obelix he did not show himself at his best, although he used the traditional image of Porthos to the fullest; Laetitia Casta, who, having the appropriate bust and neckline in a pseudo-Gallic dress, can afford to remain silent throughout the film, but still be one of the main characters; finally, Roberto Benigni, whose idiotic jokes and clown habits can only be compared with the jokes and habits of Eddie Murphy and Jim Carrey.
Comic book heroes, like heroes of myths and fairy tales, are usually functional. They cannot have more than two qualities, and, as a rule, one of them determines their line of behavior, and the other is a weapon in battles with antagonists. Computer game layout: you choose a hero and his weapon, which will further distinguish you from the rest. Therefore, comic book characters cannot be confused with each other. Asterix is cunning and obstinate, and at the same time small in stature. Obelix is stupid and kind, but at the same time very strong. Wolverine is independent and capable of regeneration. Rogue is kind and kills everyone she touches. The secondary characters have only one function: Cyclops destroys with a glance, and Storm causes a thunderstorm. At the same time, they stand on the side of the forces of good, but this is not a quality, but a given.
Comics not only fulfill humanity's ritual craving for the consumption of myths, they exploit the most relevant myth of the last century: the myth of the superman. The ideas of Dostoevsky and Nietzsche (forgive me for simplifying) boiled down to the fact that after the death of God, a person can try - successfully or not - to take his place. What will this new, shining and free man be like? The comic gave the answer by featuring this "hero of the future." In every comic book movie, against the backdrop of a faceless and voiceless crowd (if anyone stands out from it, it’s only a potential, as yet unidentified superman), which the main character is trying to save, there are superbeings functioning. And the most curious thing is the fact that the superman turns out to be a freak. A mutant. A renegade. An alien (“Superman”), a mutation of a bat (“Batman”), a spider (“Spiderman”) - animals, by the way, are traditionally considered enemies of humanity. In X-Men, for the first time this topic is taken seriously - it is clear that normal people are not able to look at mutants as heroes and saviors. This becomes the cause of the war between the leader of conscious mutants, the telepath Xavier, and the general of aggressive mutants, Professor Magneto. But having posed the question, the director does not undertake to answer it. The problem is closed within itself; mutants choose the same mutants as worthy opponents. The same thing happens in Asterix and Obelix: the villain Poganus can fight the Gauls only after both of them drink a magical elixir of strength that turns them into mutants - super-strong warriors. Humanity, like the audience, remains passive as a result.
Mutants fight mutants, as it has been for centuries - whether Siegfried fought the dragon or Batman fought the Joker. Humanity does not rely on itself, so it creates a myth about mutants, dreams of them, as it once dreamed of the birth of a superman. It is the fantasized, unrealistic mutants on the screen that can evoke warm feelings among viewers. We give them all the best - including the right to fight for our survival. And it’s easier to breathe when you know that at the right moment Asterix will offer a glass of elixir, and Batman will descend from heaven.
By the way, it’s interesting which mutant would become the favorite hero of Russians if the authorities gave, say, Mosfilm (and why not the Gorky Film Studio?) money for a high-budget comic book? Probably a magic pike, at whose instant command everything would be fine for us - once and for all. Even Nietzsche will stop spinning restlessly in his grave.