vids: x-men first class

[seperis]

Love the Way You Lie Part 2 (Rihanna) by Brevanna03, X-Men First Class, Charles/Erik - and winner of most gutting chorus ever, lyrical literalism, and I think I might cry if I watch it--more than I have already, which is a lot.

Til the End of the World (Brittany Spears) by talitha78, X-Men First Class, Charles/Erik - and the other winner, fantastic build to the yes, still gutting ending. Just. Hell yes.

Black Star by TheDyingPain, X-Men First Class (also, X-Men the Movie, X-Men the Last Stand), Charles/Erik - shorter and not sweet, but let's face it, the movie didn't give us a lot of sweet. It did, however, give us this, which makes me happy. You know, when there is not wincing.

*curls up in a ball* Yeah. Of course I'd fall for this fandom. I wrote Clex. It's not like I couldn't see this coming. Send help. Or hey, fic.

Comments

[domarzione]

I don't think Erik displays any signs of sociopathy. You can have a full and complete understanding that murder is wrong and still believe killing someone is the only acceptable option. Erik is motivated by revenge for a murder, after all. Erik doesn't ever try to kill anyone without provocation (whether you share that appreciation of his standards of such is something else). He doesn't kill because he's bored or he's annoyed or because he doesn't appreciate that this is not how normal people behave.

The death of Shaw was interesting to me not for Erik's actions, which I get and frankly share, but for Charles's. He held Shaw in place even when it was completely obvious what was going to happen, followed it through to the end despite the personal cost (physical/psychic, philosophical). And I'm still puzzling through why he did that. He didn't have to drop control of Shaw to save his life, even if it ended up being only temporarily. He didn't have to keep Shaw frozen to keep Shaw from killing Erik. He could have had Azazel grab Shaw, he could have made Shaw run, he could have done a million other things that would have disrupted that confrontation and given him another chance to talk Erik down (because Erik clearly has plans for this scenario; he won't just shoot Shaw in the back without a goodbye). But he didn't do any of these things. He held Shaw in place so that Erik could fulfill his chosen purpose. And that's a real interesting choice as far as I'm concerned.

[seperis]

No, murder isn't sociopathic--forcing Charles into the process as participant and victim, however, is a real problem and not just in boundary lines but in the means versus ends and where you draw the line. I kill someone for killing a family member is one thing, but requiring my BFF to hold them still while I do and experience it is something else entirely.

He held Shaw in place even when it was completely obvious what was going to happen, followed it through to the end despite the personal cost (physical/psychic, philosophical). And I'm still puzzling through why he did that. He didn't have to drop control of Shaw to save his life, even if it ended up being only temporarily.

Before Erik went whee-helmet, Charles, under obvious strain, said he couldn't hold a man like Shaw long; they were on a timeline to do whatever they were doing (I will argue what in the name of God was supposed to be the plan there, though). I'm thinking from what they showed--and from the fact Charles was under obvious strain and no one really wants to live through being lobotomized before death--he couldn't risk dividing his attention from Shaw and risking Erik dies by nuke. Once the execution started literally, he couldn't let go and was trapped in Shaw's death.

I will admit, there's a fair to good chance that purely by observation of Charles using other people's senses and controlling their bodies, there's no way he could have predicted Charles would live that death.

That part was a choice; he valued Erik's life over Shaw's--but I dont' think, from the way the movie set it, that there were many more options than hold or let go entirely.

[domarzione]

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree here; I don't think Charles was that restricted in his choices (except by a director who wanted a pretty effective visual, the same way Erik deflected bullets instead of ripping the gun out of Moira's hands). I don't think Erik was thinking much about Charles at all, let alone that he was forcing his friend to experience Shaw's death so intimately. If he spared Charles a thought, it might have even been that Charles was helping Erik because he'd realized that Erik was right. But I suspect Erik's entire universe at that moment was him and Shaw in that room and that coin and everyone else ceased to exist.

You might be able to ring him up on callous disregard as a side effect of pure obsession reaching satisfaction, but I can't really say he was willfully cruel.

Also, you're probably right that even if Erik had thought of Charles, there's very little reason for Erik to understand that Charles had to be there so completely, to hold on so tightly, and not let go even then. He's never really seen Charles struggle with his telepathy, hit a limit beyond which he couldn't do what he wanted. Certainly not when Emma's out of the picture.

[seperis]

*grins* I always think of the gun with Moira bit as Erik seriously wanting to scare the shit out of her; grabbing her gun is one thing, but nothing says "PUNY HUMAN" quite like deflecting bullets.

He's never really seen Charles struggle with his telepathy, hit a limit beyond which he couldn't do what he wanted. Certainly not when Emma's out of the picture.

I am curious how he'll handle the difference between Emma and Charles.

[domarzione]

Except that every other time Erik's had a gun pointed at him, he's never let anyone get a shot off. ;)

I think Erik will exchange Emma's lack of brute strength for the ability to take the helmet off when he sleeps. He doesn't trust her, so he doesn't mind that she's less powerful than Charles. She's less scrupled, which makes up for it in a lot of ways.