X-Men
- 2000
- Tous publics
- 1h 44m
In a world where mutants (evolved super-powered humans) exist and are discriminated against, two groups form for an inevitable clash: the supremacist Brotherhood, and the pacifist X-Men.In a world where mutants (evolved super-powered humans) exist and are discriminated against, two groups form for an inevitable clash: the supremacist Brotherhood, and the pacifist X-Men.In a world where mutants (evolved super-powered humans) exist and are discriminated against, two groups form for an inevitable clash: the supremacist Brotherhood, and the pacifist X-Men.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
- Awards
- 14 wins & 26 nominations total
Rebecca Romijn
- Mystique
- (as Rebecca Romijn-Stamos)
John Nelles
- Rogue's Father
- (as John E. Nelles)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Summary
Reviewers say 'X-Men' is lauded for introducing iconic characters, strong performances, and tackling themes of discrimination and identity. Hugh Jackman's Wolverine and Ian McKellen's Magneto receive particular acclaim. However, the film faces criticism for outdated special effects, underdeveloped characters, and a perceived shallow plot. Pacing issues and certain character choices are also noted. Despite these drawbacks, 'X-Men' is recognized for revitalizing the comic book genre and establishing a standard for subsequent adaptations.
Featured reviews
The film version of Stan Lee and Jack "The King" Kirby's best-selling comic book creation, X-Men, has finally succeeded where more than twenty years of four-color, superhero movies have failed. They have finally got it right...
It is a stunning cinematic experience, faithfully adapting nearly 40 years of continuity into a stream-lined, fast-paced, wonderfully exciting trip into the legendary Marvel Universe. X-Men features incredible portrayals of much of the classic mutant cast, especially virtual unknown (at least here in the States) Hugh Jackman as Logan, the Canadian wildman we all know and love as Wolverine. Jackman seems born to play this coveted role with every bit of gruff and grim gusto; his Wolverine looks as if he simply stepped off one of Chris Claremont and John Byrne's exquisitely crafted pages. The rest of the cast was also pleasantly well-casted and well-suited for their roles, including the handsomely chisled James Marsden as the stoic field commander Cyclops and the gorgeous Anna Paquin as the can-never-touch-but-wish-we-all-could Rogue. Famke Janssen and Halle Berry are beautiful and bold as Jean Grey and Storm, respectively, not just appearing as fleeting shards of eye candy, but actually adding depth and strength to the flow of the film. Patrick Stewart's excellent Professor Charles Xavier is in fine Stewart fashion, extrapolating on his Jean-Luc Picard character, and adding genuine compassion and warmth.
Ian McKellan is superb as the tortured master of magnetism, Magneto, playing the part with malicious glee, tempered with an extreme form of jingoism for his cause of the militant uprising of mutants over "normal" people. His Brotherhood of (Evil) Mutants is composed of Sabretooth, viciously and animalistically portrayed Tyler Mane, The Phanton Menace's Ray Park is the wickedly amusing Toad, and the stunning Rebecca Romaijn-Stamos is the shape-shifter Mystique. Park actually had the most to say of Magneto's henchmen, but it was appropriate as these three comprise an awesomely evil team of muscle and not philosophy like their leader.
The productions values were spectacular, as were the settings, taking us from a stark, malign concentration camp in Poland to the wilds of the Canadian north to the serenity of Westchester, New York to a mind-bending climax on Liberty Island. The action sequences were well-paced and action-packed, and much more smoother and better choreographed than any of the Batman films. The special effects, especially Wolverine's legendary adamantium claws, were truly awe-inspiring.
X-Men was meticulously directed by Bryan Singer, who along with 20th Century Fox, actually listened to and cared about what X-Fans thought and wished to see on screen. Although we would have all liked to have stayed in that theater for another 95 minutes, there are many more stories to tell, and God willing, Fox will let it happen.
Most importantly, X-Men finally gives Marvel Entertainment Group a firm footing on film, a foundation that was never fully in its grasp until the surprise hit of two years ago, Blade. Now that Marvel has discovered that it can succeed with its top-tier characters, the sky is truly the limit for its varied cast of great characters. I hope that Warner Bros. will sit up and take notice at what X-Men has accomplished. Maybe this will be a wake-up call to those studio executives in charge of Superman and Batman, and make them realize that the fans' input really does count in the end...
Highest recommendation!
It is a stunning cinematic experience, faithfully adapting nearly 40 years of continuity into a stream-lined, fast-paced, wonderfully exciting trip into the legendary Marvel Universe. X-Men features incredible portrayals of much of the classic mutant cast, especially virtual unknown (at least here in the States) Hugh Jackman as Logan, the Canadian wildman we all know and love as Wolverine. Jackman seems born to play this coveted role with every bit of gruff and grim gusto; his Wolverine looks as if he simply stepped off one of Chris Claremont and John Byrne's exquisitely crafted pages. The rest of the cast was also pleasantly well-casted and well-suited for their roles, including the handsomely chisled James Marsden as the stoic field commander Cyclops and the gorgeous Anna Paquin as the can-never-touch-but-wish-we-all-could Rogue. Famke Janssen and Halle Berry are beautiful and bold as Jean Grey and Storm, respectively, not just appearing as fleeting shards of eye candy, but actually adding depth and strength to the flow of the film. Patrick Stewart's excellent Professor Charles Xavier is in fine Stewart fashion, extrapolating on his Jean-Luc Picard character, and adding genuine compassion and warmth.
Ian McKellan is superb as the tortured master of magnetism, Magneto, playing the part with malicious glee, tempered with an extreme form of jingoism for his cause of the militant uprising of mutants over "normal" people. His Brotherhood of (Evil) Mutants is composed of Sabretooth, viciously and animalistically portrayed Tyler Mane, The Phanton Menace's Ray Park is the wickedly amusing Toad, and the stunning Rebecca Romaijn-Stamos is the shape-shifter Mystique. Park actually had the most to say of Magneto's henchmen, but it was appropriate as these three comprise an awesomely evil team of muscle and not philosophy like their leader.
The productions values were spectacular, as were the settings, taking us from a stark, malign concentration camp in Poland to the wilds of the Canadian north to the serenity of Westchester, New York to a mind-bending climax on Liberty Island. The action sequences were well-paced and action-packed, and much more smoother and better choreographed than any of the Batman films. The special effects, especially Wolverine's legendary adamantium claws, were truly awe-inspiring.
X-Men was meticulously directed by Bryan Singer, who along with 20th Century Fox, actually listened to and cared about what X-Fans thought and wished to see on screen. Although we would have all liked to have stayed in that theater for another 95 minutes, there are many more stories to tell, and God willing, Fox will let it happen.
Most importantly, X-Men finally gives Marvel Entertainment Group a firm footing on film, a foundation that was never fully in its grasp until the surprise hit of two years ago, Blade. Now that Marvel has discovered that it can succeed with its top-tier characters, the sky is truly the limit for its varied cast of great characters. I hope that Warner Bros. will sit up and take notice at what X-Men has accomplished. Maybe this will be a wake-up call to those studio executives in charge of Superman and Batman, and make them realize that the fans' input really does count in the end...
Highest recommendation!
With so many movies out right now that are designed solely for entertainment puposes--from "Gone in 60 seconds" to "MI-2" to "Scary Movie"--it is promising to sit through a 90-minute film based on a comic-book that actually gives you an opportunity to think and be challenged.
Bryan Singer's "X-men: The Movie" is nothing more than an introduction to the lives of the characters from the comic book. The very fact that his movie doesn't try to add new elements, or change elements that already existed within the comic, is what makes it so successful.
X-men the comic series has been around for more than 30 years. And for good reason. It has dealt with all of the important elements that good storytelling includes--rejection, loneliness, hope, fear, distrust, love, selfishness, power, and the price you pay for doing what you believe is right. By consistently exploring various difficult elements of humanity, the X-men comic has been able to be not only entertaining but stimulating as well.
Thankfully, Singer's movie translation is no exception. "X-men" is very well executed, with excellent character work for the leads (Logan, Rogue, Magneto and Xavier), a good exploration of the motives of each character, and dialogue that is sharp and intelligent. However, lest you think X-men is only intellectual, let me assure you that the special-effects department has done an incredible job of mingling the human elements of the story with action. From Wolverine's claws to Rogue's devasating touch, from Storm's namesake displays of nature to Magneto's awesome power, "X-men" constantly finds new and arresting ways of showing-off each mutants power. And the closer you get to the end, the more exciting it is.
True, the movie was not perfect. Certain story elements were modified slightly for big-screen adaptation (nothing, however, that is disloyal to the ethic of the series). The soundtrack was only sufficient, rather than being something truly memorable. And not all of the characters were given equal time on screen (some important characters were completely missing).
But for a 90 minute movie that needs an action plot, it's obviously impossible to give all the X-men (and their evil counterparts) equal attention or character development. In fact, the sheer scale of the series alone all but requires a sequel to flesh out what was missing in this first, "Intro to X-men" movie.
Yet, as a beginning exploration of the "X-men" universe, this movie shines. It is attractive, fun and meaningful. Whether you're an X-men fan, you're looking for something that will make you think, you want an action movie, you enjoy sci-fi, or you just want to leave the theater feeling like you didn't just waste a couple of hours and seven bucks, go see Bryan Singer's "X-men." You won't be disappointed.
Bryan Singer's "X-men: The Movie" is nothing more than an introduction to the lives of the characters from the comic book. The very fact that his movie doesn't try to add new elements, or change elements that already existed within the comic, is what makes it so successful.
X-men the comic series has been around for more than 30 years. And for good reason. It has dealt with all of the important elements that good storytelling includes--rejection, loneliness, hope, fear, distrust, love, selfishness, power, and the price you pay for doing what you believe is right. By consistently exploring various difficult elements of humanity, the X-men comic has been able to be not only entertaining but stimulating as well.
Thankfully, Singer's movie translation is no exception. "X-men" is very well executed, with excellent character work for the leads (Logan, Rogue, Magneto and Xavier), a good exploration of the motives of each character, and dialogue that is sharp and intelligent. However, lest you think X-men is only intellectual, let me assure you that the special-effects department has done an incredible job of mingling the human elements of the story with action. From Wolverine's claws to Rogue's devasating touch, from Storm's namesake displays of nature to Magneto's awesome power, "X-men" constantly finds new and arresting ways of showing-off each mutants power. And the closer you get to the end, the more exciting it is.
True, the movie was not perfect. Certain story elements were modified slightly for big-screen adaptation (nothing, however, that is disloyal to the ethic of the series). The soundtrack was only sufficient, rather than being something truly memorable. And not all of the characters were given equal time on screen (some important characters were completely missing).
But for a 90 minute movie that needs an action plot, it's obviously impossible to give all the X-men (and their evil counterparts) equal attention or character development. In fact, the sheer scale of the series alone all but requires a sequel to flesh out what was missing in this first, "Intro to X-men" movie.
Yet, as a beginning exploration of the "X-men" universe, this movie shines. It is attractive, fun and meaningful. Whether you're an X-men fan, you're looking for something that will make you think, you want an action movie, you enjoy sci-fi, or you just want to leave the theater feeling like you didn't just waste a couple of hours and seven bucks, go see Bryan Singer's "X-men." You won't be disappointed.
Though "X-Men" starts slowly, the slow buildup and great payoff proved that this film is worthy of the successful franchise it spawned.
"X-Men" is a rare treat-- a blockbuster that lives up to its hype and a comic book adaptation that hits the mark.
Along with Tim Burton's "Batman", this stands head and shoulders above all other superhero movies. It's a genre that's usually synonymous with silly, campy, cartoonish crap, but Bryan Singer delivers a long-awaited exception to the rule. "X-Men" is smart, stylish, and very cool... one of the better sci fi/fantasy films of the last decade.
Of course, it helps to have good source material.
The X-Men comics, which originated in the 1960s, are more politically progressive and morally complex than older superhero stories such as "Superman" where the heroes are always right, and truth, justice, and the American Way always prevail. The series is a well-crafted parable about individuality and discrimination. The characters are mutants--struggling to find a place in a society that rejects them. Its primary villain, Magneto, isn't an evil lunatic-- he's a sympathetic character, a misguided revolutionary playing Huey Newton to Professor Xavier's Martin Luther King. The iconic character, Wolverine, is a beer-swilling anti-hero who cares little for ideals and fights only to protect himself and his loved ones. The female characters are as powerful and important as the men, rather than being mere love interests.
Rather than making just another flashy explosion-per-minute-special-effects-extravaganza, Singer practices the lost arts of character and plot development. As a result, the movie has a far greater depth than the average big budget summer flick. The acting is also quite good on the whole. Hugh Jackman, who plays Wolverine, is fantastic--a bona fide Clint Eastwood caliber badass. Some of the dialogue is fairly cheesy, but in the hands of Ian McKellan and Patrick Stewart it sounds quite convincing. (Stewart has made a career out of making lame dialogue sound cool.)
Hard-core fans of the comics have complained about the omission of several popular X-Men. This is silly. A movie that gave the background on every character in the comic books would be 6 hours long. There will be plenty of time to develop new characters in the forthcoming sequels. Fans have also complained about the casting of Anna Paquin as Rogue. I disagree. Rogue is unable to touch another human being without harming them--she would not realistically act like a confident, sassy warrior. Paquin did a tremendous job of conveying the fear and isolation that such a young woman would feel. She will undoubtedly grow into the part in future movies.
In the end, "X-Men" is a comic book movie. Superpowers are explained with silly pseudoscientific babble, the plot revolves around a fairly ridiculous take-over-the-world scheme, and names like "Magneto" are spoken with a straight face. Don't read all the glowing reviews and expect Citizen Kane. But don't underestimate "X-Men" either. It is an intelligent movie that people will enjoy whether or not they are familiar with the comic.
Along with Tim Burton's "Batman", this stands head and shoulders above all other superhero movies. It's a genre that's usually synonymous with silly, campy, cartoonish crap, but Bryan Singer delivers a long-awaited exception to the rule. "X-Men" is smart, stylish, and very cool... one of the better sci fi/fantasy films of the last decade.
Of course, it helps to have good source material.
The X-Men comics, which originated in the 1960s, are more politically progressive and morally complex than older superhero stories such as "Superman" where the heroes are always right, and truth, justice, and the American Way always prevail. The series is a well-crafted parable about individuality and discrimination. The characters are mutants--struggling to find a place in a society that rejects them. Its primary villain, Magneto, isn't an evil lunatic-- he's a sympathetic character, a misguided revolutionary playing Huey Newton to Professor Xavier's Martin Luther King. The iconic character, Wolverine, is a beer-swilling anti-hero who cares little for ideals and fights only to protect himself and his loved ones. The female characters are as powerful and important as the men, rather than being mere love interests.
Rather than making just another flashy explosion-per-minute-special-effects-extravaganza, Singer practices the lost arts of character and plot development. As a result, the movie has a far greater depth than the average big budget summer flick. The acting is also quite good on the whole. Hugh Jackman, who plays Wolverine, is fantastic--a bona fide Clint Eastwood caliber badass. Some of the dialogue is fairly cheesy, but in the hands of Ian McKellan and Patrick Stewart it sounds quite convincing. (Stewart has made a career out of making lame dialogue sound cool.)
Hard-core fans of the comics have complained about the omission of several popular X-Men. This is silly. A movie that gave the background on every character in the comic books would be 6 hours long. There will be plenty of time to develop new characters in the forthcoming sequels. Fans have also complained about the casting of Anna Paquin as Rogue. I disagree. Rogue is unable to touch another human being without harming them--she would not realistically act like a confident, sassy warrior. Paquin did a tremendous job of conveying the fear and isolation that such a young woman would feel. She will undoubtedly grow into the part in future movies.
In the end, "X-Men" is a comic book movie. Superpowers are explained with silly pseudoscientific babble, the plot revolves around a fairly ridiculous take-over-the-world scheme, and names like "Magneto" are spoken with a straight face. Don't read all the glowing reviews and expect Citizen Kane. But don't underestimate "X-Men" either. It is an intelligent movie that people will enjoy whether or not they are familiar with the comic.
There are some films which take the genre to some other level. This film is definitely the one to do so in the superhero genre.
Good : There's a whole bunch of good things that I can talk about. Bryan Singer does his best to tell the story, considering the comparatively weak script for an experimental film like this. This was the first time in YEARS that a superhero film was taken seriously. Given that there had been no introduction to any of the characters prior to this film, it does a really good job to make them interesting. Plus, it establishes the conflict between Eric and Xavier, which have been an integral part of many films that came afterwards. Not to mention, the character introduction, especially that of Wolverine, was incredible. We instantly know the basic characterization given to each of them, which was enough to get behind the movie. Hugh Jackman was the optimal choice for the role of Wolverine, and he proved it for next 17 years. Every single actor have done a good job in their roles. Also, I believe that X-Men films have been the best superhero films when it comes to "social" themes. We get to see the first of many times two friends with different world views clashing with one another. It has grown incredibly stale now, but was great to see back then and some other films after this, especially First Class and DoFP. The mutants wanting to be accepted by humans, and the other mutants wanting to destroy mankind - what other superhero series have given such a theme, or a similar one? This movie is the reason we are getting films like Infinity War, Civil War, Endgame, Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. While I prefer these over the first X-Men movie, if it didn't bring the genre back on track, we would've never gotten such films.
Mixed : It feels dated. Had it been made today, it would've been a lackluster. It was clear that they were trying to experiment with this movie and still figuring out how to get things right. While they got most of the things right, they could've made the story a little more complex.
Bad : The story is quite a bit of a throwaway story. While there's an interesting twist, it still feels like the movie becomes a little goofy and cartoony after that twist. Some moments feel like they were shoehorned just to give some "comic accuracy", but they didn't feel justified. I believe that if you get the basic elements right, it doesn't matter if it's not deadly accurate with the comics. But if you want it to be so, make some baseline for that. Don't do it randomly.
Conclusion : It's a movie that set the genre back on track forever. While the story and script might feel a little lazy when viewed today, you can see that the execution of the ideas were as good as humanly possible. If you are a superhero movie fan, it's a must watch. Not because it's insanely great, but just as a reminder of what led us to where we are. I am a huge fan of the genre. All credits go to Nolan's Batman films, the good X-Men films and Raimi's first two Spider-Man films. I absolutely love the MCU and many DC films apart from Nolan's trilogy - Man of Steel, Wonder Woman, Shazam, The Dark Knight Returns, Superman/Doomsday, etc. But for me, like for the genre, it all started with the first X-Men movie. So, I have a very special place for this in my heart, as a fan.
Rating.
Score : 8/10
Grade : A-
Good : There's a whole bunch of good things that I can talk about. Bryan Singer does his best to tell the story, considering the comparatively weak script for an experimental film like this. This was the first time in YEARS that a superhero film was taken seriously. Given that there had been no introduction to any of the characters prior to this film, it does a really good job to make them interesting. Plus, it establishes the conflict between Eric and Xavier, which have been an integral part of many films that came afterwards. Not to mention, the character introduction, especially that of Wolverine, was incredible. We instantly know the basic characterization given to each of them, which was enough to get behind the movie. Hugh Jackman was the optimal choice for the role of Wolverine, and he proved it for next 17 years. Every single actor have done a good job in their roles. Also, I believe that X-Men films have been the best superhero films when it comes to "social" themes. We get to see the first of many times two friends with different world views clashing with one another. It has grown incredibly stale now, but was great to see back then and some other films after this, especially First Class and DoFP. The mutants wanting to be accepted by humans, and the other mutants wanting to destroy mankind - what other superhero series have given such a theme, or a similar one? This movie is the reason we are getting films like Infinity War, Civil War, Endgame, Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. While I prefer these over the first X-Men movie, if it didn't bring the genre back on track, we would've never gotten such films.
Mixed : It feels dated. Had it been made today, it would've been a lackluster. It was clear that they were trying to experiment with this movie and still figuring out how to get things right. While they got most of the things right, they could've made the story a little more complex.
Bad : The story is quite a bit of a throwaway story. While there's an interesting twist, it still feels like the movie becomes a little goofy and cartoony after that twist. Some moments feel like they were shoehorned just to give some "comic accuracy", but they didn't feel justified. I believe that if you get the basic elements right, it doesn't matter if it's not deadly accurate with the comics. But if you want it to be so, make some baseline for that. Don't do it randomly.
Conclusion : It's a movie that set the genre back on track forever. While the story and script might feel a little lazy when viewed today, you can see that the execution of the ideas were as good as humanly possible. If you are a superhero movie fan, it's a must watch. Not because it's insanely great, but just as a reminder of what led us to where we are. I am a huge fan of the genre. All credits go to Nolan's Batman films, the good X-Men films and Raimi's first two Spider-Man films. I absolutely love the MCU and many DC films apart from Nolan's trilogy - Man of Steel, Wonder Woman, Shazam, The Dark Knight Returns, Superman/Doomsday, etc. But for me, like for the genre, it all started with the first X-Men movie. So, I have a very special place for this in my heart, as a fan.
Rating.
Score : 8/10
Grade : A-
Did you know
- TriviaHugh Jackman took ice-cold showers every morning of filming in order to help get into character. This tradition started when jumping into the shower at 5 a.m. before realizing there was no hot water. Shocked awake but not wanting to wake his sleeping wife, he gritted his teeth and bore it before realizing that this mindset, wanting to scream and lash out at something, but having to hold it in, was the mentality that Wolverine is in constantly. He then made cold showers his Wolverine preparation routine for each movie featuring the character.
- Goofs(at around 1h 14 mins) Between when Cyclops blows open a door in the Statue of Liberty, and when he sees Jean in peril, he gains and loses a pair of gloves between shots.
- Crazy creditsWhen the 20th Century Fox logo fades away, the X in the logo stays for a second longer before it also fades away.
- Alternate versionsThe special edition DVD titled X-Men 1.5 features an option to add the deleted scenes back into the film, increasing the runtime to 111 minutes.
- ConnectionsEdited into FX2: Visual Effects (2003)
- SoundtracksStill I Long for Your Kiss
Written by Lucinda Williams and Duane Jarvis
Performed by Lucinda Williams
Courtesy of The Island Def Jam Music Group
Under license from Universal Music Enterprises
- How long is X-Men?Powered by Alexa
- Which characters were adapted from Marvel's X-Men comic books?
- What is 'X-Men' about?
- Is 'X-Men' based on a book?
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Official sites
- Language
- Also known as
- X-Men 1.5
- Filming locations
- Casa Loma - 1 Austin Terrace, Casa Loma, Toronto, Ontario, Canada(interiors of Xavier's mansion)
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $75,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $157,299,718
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $54,471,475
- Jul 16, 2000
- Gross worldwide
- $296,339,528
- Runtime1 hour 44 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 2.39 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content