Jump to content

Welcome to Nightly.Net
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Logan


61 replies to this topic

#26
Driver

Driver

    Tank

  • Supporters
  • 6,591 posts
Well that was intense!

Overall that was great, I feel like Jackman and Stewart put everything they had into it to make up for any missteps in the franchise. They were both always perfectly cast, so it was great for them to finally have the material they needed to really kill it.

As far as superhero movies go, it's up there as one of the best I think, even if it did suffer from the exact same structural predictability when it gets to the third act as every other Marvel/Fox/DC/Sony superhero movie. At least this time there wasn't a giant uber-robot-mutant-beast of some sort to kill, destruction-porn, or a giant CGI swirly thingy of doom to stop (or in Evolution's case, all of the above). I really hope studios pay attention to THAT and not the R-rating in how Logan's box office effects the future of superhero movies.

I can't believe I'm saying this, but I think I would have been fine with a PG13 version of this. Language and gore aside, it wasn't an R-rated movie. It was dark sure, but no more so than any Nolan Batfilm. People like to complain about making superheroes gritty, but it's obviously always been the reverse for Wolverine. He was sanitized up until now to an extent. I think it's lame that it took Deadpool (which I adore) to justify this movie. But if they wanted to go dark, they could have gone past the gore and language. Maybe killing kids is r-rated material... sure didn't dissuade a few parents in my audience from taking the kids to see an x-flick! Point being, the F-bombs and head-stabby seemed gratuitous after awhile.

X-23 was great. Caliban was great. The Reavers were cool to see, even if they were a little more on the leash than their comic counterparts. My complaints were few. Obvious act 3 start aside, there wasn't a lot that bothered me.

Honestly, continuity was my only sticking point. Which is funny considering X-Men are known for discontinuity in the comics and film to the fact that they've sort of had to embrace it. We've seen two timelines in X-films. The one that ends in the dark Sentinel future, the "happy ending" fixed timeline that was the result of Wolverine interfering in the past in DOFP-- which I have to (for my sanity) assume lead to a lot of changes seen in Apocalypse, like the second class X-Men being gathered much earlier and Mystique being good.

Logan doesn't seem to fit into either of those cause there are no Sentinels, and it would be really mean to say this is after the happy future... though I suppose it could be. Given Logan saying that X-Men comics in the Logan universe were exaggerations of what really happen, maybe it just so happens they made movies too and Hugh and Patrick were cast for their resemblance to the real world Logan and Charles? That's the only way this movie even remotely could be tonally on book-- especially following Apocalypse.

I'm bothered by tonal shifts more than most. No one but me seemed bothered that Rogue One was tonally way off from ANH. Sure, you could watch them back to back narratively, but tone-wise they are different universes. It's like watching Kubrick's 2001 then the 80s era 2010. Same story-- but feels way off.

That said, it didn't stop me from enjoying the movie. The only thing I wuld have liked to have seen were maybe a few more X-Men easter eggs. I know the prime movies have overdone that to the point that it's just annoying, so maybe that's for the best. But some mention or image of Jean for broken Logan would have worked... and I won't lie. For a split second when he was in shadow, I thought that the Wolverine-clone was actually Leiv Schriber. Part of me would have loved to have seen him given the same chance to redeem himself from Origins that Stewart and Jackman got. Leiv's Sabertooth was one of the few good things about that movie and I think there could have been a little narrative closure for Logan to face his arch-nemesis... though that may have required a little more story than they had room for. One thing that made it work so well was a very simple plot line, which frankly, after pretty much all the other x-filems was a welcome surprise.

#27
Poe Dameron

Poe Dameron

    Member

  • Member
  • 2,485 posts
For a split second when he was in shadow, I thought that the Wolverine-clone was actually Leiv Schriber. Part of me would have loved to have seen him given the same chance to redeem himself from Origins that Stewart and Jackman got.

 

Oh yeah, I had that exact same thought at first and got excited for a second.  Having those two basically kill each other would have been fitting and I don't think would have required much backstory to get across.  Sabretooth on some sort of leash would have made for a MUCH better baddie than cloned Wolverine at the very least.

 

I think we're past the point where actors fighting themselves is cool, right?

 

 

 

I'm bothered by tonal shifts more than most.

 

Here's the deal on that.  I like that they tossed the tonal rule book out the window and create something new that wasn't a part of the other X-Men or Wolverine movies.  The MCU makes it all seem effortless, but I can't help but think that trying to fit everything into a certain box in the end causes more problems than it solves.

 

I suggested awhile back that DC should focus more on making good movies instead of a giant universe.  They got stuck with Man of Steal as the template and while I personally think it was a decent enough stand-alone film, its crippled the shared universe.Well, the X-Men films aren't nearly as much of a mess overall, but Fox seems to have taken that advise.  They hit a grand slam with Deadpool on a pretty low budget and the medium budget of Logan could well settle in behind it as the second most successful movie in the franchise.  Meanwhile, the safe tent-pole X-Men: Apocalypse using the old formula and old warhorse director under performed.

 

Comics are a varied artform.  Unless you're Disney and have unlocked the formula for replicating movies and keeping them fresh at the same time, then changing your delivery just makes sense to me.

 

 

 

I can't believe I'm saying this, but I think I would have been fine with a PG13 version of this. Language and gore aside, it wasn't an R-rated movie.

 

It could have been done, but like I said, I rather liked just how brutal the violence was.  This is Wolverine we're talking about.  In all his other movies he just shook off all of his wounds and nuclear bombs, which generally lowered the stakes.  But watching as his injuries just kept piling up and the indestructible Wolverine was slowly brought low was a very effective.  It's the opposite of what you expect to see from the character.  The head stabs may have been a bit overdone and sometimes unnecessary, but the movie itself really couldn't be told without the unrelenting punishment.

 

Plus, it was a nice way to make him a sick and dying old man, but retain his action credentials.

 

 

 

I think it's lame that it took Deadpool (which I adore) to justify this movie.

 

I'm wondering if that's just an assumption we're making.  Logan only started filming a couple months after Deadpool was released.  While I've no doubt that Fox was a little less reluctant to drop a thousand f-bombs, Mangold had to have already had the tone of the movie fairly well locked down by the time Deadpool was released.  Not to mention that his is a LOT different than Deadpool and a lot tougher film to market.

 

 

 

which I have to (for my sanity) assume lead to a lot of changes seen in Apocalypse, like the second class X-Men being gathered much earlier and Mystique being good.

 

Well, Mystique being good is provided for in Days of Future Past at least.  Assassinating Trask was supposed to be her point of no return and she spared him instead.



#28
Driver

Driver

    Tank

  • Supporters
  • 6,591 posts
I don't think Logan was tougher to market-- you have Hugh Jackman as Wolverine which is generally gold even when it's bad. It's why they put him front and center in DOFP.

Deadpool was a relative unknown outside of fandom. All it's marketing had was Ryan Reynolds being Ryan Reynolds, which to be fair, generally can sell tickets.

But I think overall, you're right and it supports what I'm saying in that the R-ratedness is more in the language and violence than the content. They could have been shooting it with alternate lines (which they do now for TV edits) and the violence could be cut around-- but once Deadpool was a hit they let Mangold go to town.

I don't doubt though they had a PG-13 cut ready just in case.

#29
The Maker

The Maker

    Old Hermit

  • Members
  • 11,429 posts

I really enjoyed the movie, it was so well done. Especially amazing performances from Patrick Stewart and young miss Dafne Keen, I swear they must have made her study Hugh's performance in the first X-film. My only real complaint is a thematic point, that Xavier's dream of peaceful coexistence between mutants and humans effectively and utterly failed. As a longtime X-Men fan, that point is a huge downer for me when looking upon the series as a whole.

 

I thought that was Liev Schriber for a split second, as well!



#30
Poe Dameron

Poe Dameron

    Member

  • Member
  • 2,485 posts
I don't think Logan was tougher to market-- you have Hugh Jackman as Wolverine which is generally gold even when it's bad. It's why they put him front and center in DOFP.

 

You have a point.  I was thinking the subject matter more than the built-in audience.  I'm guessing Deadpool's biggest marketing dilemma was deciding among the rush of funny ideas they had.  It had to be a lot easier to know what angle to sell a film about a wise-cracking, 4th wall breaking, genre subversive, R-rated comedy than this gritty end of a hero's journey which is practically independent of the rest of the series.

 

It sure had to have been harder to make a trailer for Logan than Origins: Wolverine at least.

 

 

 

As a longtime X-Men fan, that point is a huge downer for me when looking upon the series as a whole.

 

Well, the whole movie was a downer where everyone's either dead or will be soon.  And apparently Canada is a refuge, which, come to think of it, is an odd choice for a Wolverine film.

 

It'll be interesting if any of the threads get picked up, like Xavier's seizures.

 

 

 

I thought that was Liev Schriber for a split second, as well!

 

Now I'm starting to wonder if they tried to do that on purpose.



#31
Driver

Driver

    Tank

  • Supporters
  • 6,591 posts
I don't think threads will be picked up.

Stewart would play again, and while Jackman has said he's done as often as RDJ has said he's done being Tony-- Jackman has literally played the part 8 times (9 if you count the first class cameo) over 17 years. This was a swan song. Singer is now off making his Freddie mercury biopic and Jennifer Lawrence is the only other star power they have, and she's clearly not into it.

This is pretty much the end for this version of the X-Men. They're basically going to be soft rebooting the X-Men around Deadpool and working toward an X-Force (sans Wolverine) movie. While going for building up stuff on TV, like Legion. There was supposed to be a New Mutants TV show too, but it didn't make it past a pilot script.

Eventually, I'd expect to see new faces in the classic X-Men parts, but not for awhile. Doing it around Deadpool, the "undercover" X-Force would keep them more secretive so that if they ever decided to play ball with Marvel they could re-introduce the X-Men proper alongside the Avengers without having to figure in all the world-ending doom of the x-films.

But that's a long way off.

Edited by Driver, 09 March 2017 - 01:14 AM.


#32
Brett

Brett

    ...

  • Member
  • 1,979 posts

I thought it was damn near perfect up until the point when they reached the Old Navy family farm. The movie felt like it ground to a pointless halt when, up to then, it wasn't exactly running at breakneck speed anyway. Once X-25 showed up I was like, yep, there's the Wolverine-movie-cheese I know and love. Don't get me wrong, it's one of the best X-Men-related films, but boy does the quality take a sudden dip. It really felt to me like an amazing short film awkwardly pasted to the standard X-fare. Still excellent, but it really felt like the narrative ran out of creative steam very quickly. 



#33
Darth Wicket

Darth Wicket

    Member

  • Member
  • 17,400 posts

 

3.  I thought it was a bit funny how Charles keeps trying to get them to spend the night at the farm and Logan's all like, "I know that if we stay, I'm going to get Eriq La Salle's family brutally murdered, but if I take the wheelchair-bound man and just leave, that would be impolite."

 

I'm telling ya, social conventions are insanely entangling.

 

 

This part bothered me a little. Why would Xavier be so insistent that they stay knowing they would be putting that family in danger? That family got seriously Munsoned.



#34
Guest_El Chalupacabra_*

Guest_El Chalupacabra_*
  • Guests

Saw this today.  Very good, but what a downer.  Did not think they would have the balls to go there with BOTH Xavier and Logan!  Very few flaws, if any.  Loved X23. But there were a couple missed opportunities:

 

1. The time being set in the future messes things up for X23 as the new Wolverine.  I am not up on the Marvel  comic universe, but even I knew going in who Laura would turn out to be X23.  I just assumed with Jackman saying this was the last wolvie film for him, that they were passing the torch to Laura for the following films. Unless time travel?

 

2. Why X24?  This is where they could have brought back Victor Creed, one of the few GOOD points of Xmen Origins Wolverine.  

 

 

 

Honestly, continuity was my only sticking point. Which is funny considering X-Men are known for discontinuity in the comics and film to the fact that they've sort of had to embrace it. We've seen two timelines in X-films. The one that ends in the dark Sentinel future, the "happy ending" fixed timeline that was the result of Wolverine interfering in the past in DOFP-- which I have to (for my sanity) assume lead to a lot of changes seen in Apocalypse, like the second class X-Men being gathered much earlier and Mystique being good.

Logan doesn't seem to fit into either of those cause there are no Sentinels, and it would be really mean to say this is after the happy future... though I suppose it could be. Given Logan saying that X-Men comics in the Logan universe were exaggerations of what really happen, maybe it just so happens they made movies too and Hugh and Patrick were cast for their resemblance to the real world Logan and Charles? That's the only way this movie even remotely could be tonally on book-- especially following Apocalypse.

After seeing this and NOT recently rewatching the other 2 Wolverine movies (didn't have the time), all I know is I am confused as F****.  It's like there are 4 different continuities going on there for Wolvie.

1.  Xmen Origins

2.  Xmen 1-3, The Wolverine

3. Xmen First class, DOFP (in the beginning, then creates a new branch), and I guess Apocalypse from that branch off (?)

4. Logan

 

But, also, if you don't think too hard about the X3/The Wolverine connection, and disregard the Deadpool movie, you can ALMOST look at Xmen Origins Wolverine, The Wolverine, and Logan as its OWN continuity outside of the X films. 

 

Don't even ask me where Deadpool, Legion, and The Gifted are supposed to fit in with the Xfilm continuities.  Could someone please sort that out for me?



#35
Guest_El Chalupacabra_*

Guest_El Chalupacabra_*
  • Guests

 

 

3.  I thought it was a bit funny how Charles keeps trying to get them to spend the night at the farm and Logan's all like, "I know that if we stay, I'm going to get Eriq La Salle's family brutally murdered, but if I take the wheelchair-bound man and just leave, that would be impolite."

 

I'm telling ya, social conventions are insanely entangling.

 

 

This part bothered me a little. Why would Xavier be so insistent that they stay knowing they would be putting that family in danger? That family got seriously Munsoned.

 

But for an Adamantium bullet to the head, it's like Wolvie learned NOTHING from Origins! That seemed a little redundant, but worked.  



#36
Poe Dameron

Poe Dameron

    Member

  • Member
  • 2,485 posts
Could someone please sort that out for me?

 

I'm just going with Logan being a separate continuity and leaving it as a stand-alone film until they find a way to integrate X-23 into the main series.



#37
Driver

Driver

    Tank

  • Supporters
  • 6,591 posts
The current continuity, from inside Fox, is basically the two timelines I laid out, with Logan more or less floating mysteriously in between. Now that they've established alt timelines it's a catch all for any time they stray.

That said, they've quietly rebooted, Deadpool is more or less the new starting point. The Gifted and Legion exist in this timeline/universe and they are going to slowly build up X-Force around Deadpool.

Basically, how they treated Logan/Jackman before. It's not going to be obvious they've technically started over until down the line when one of the classic X-men appears and is recast.

#38
Guest_El Chalupacabra_*

Guest_El Chalupacabra_*
  • Guests

Thanks for explaining that.

 

I think it is going to be very hard to recast Hugh Jackman, though.  That is why I felt this would have been a good way to introduce Laura as his successor as Wolverine, because correct me if I am wrong, but they pretty much did that in the comics, right?  Not that they can't still do that with a DOFP style story, though, but I can't think of an actor who can "be" Wolverine the same way Jackman has been.  

 

To me (and I know he is like a foot taller than the actual character), Jackman was one of the best castings of any superhero, outside of Christopher Reeve as Superman (He WAS Superman and post movies comics at least through the 80s and 90s were like they wrote/drew Superman to match Reeve), and Robert Downey JR as Ironman (it was like he was born for that).  Not that they didn't do a good job casting Captain America or Thor, but  few actors really pull off superheroes like Jackman did for Wolverine.  I personally would have liked seeing him do a few more movies, but I understand they want to go out strong, so they probably made the right call making this Jackman's last Wolverine movie.  



#39
Driver

Driver

    Tank

  • Supporters
  • 6,591 posts

Here's basically the timeline for the existing movies sans Logan and Deadpool. I suppose they could say Logan takes place in the same universe as Deadpool, Legion and Gifted despite the tonal differences.

 

First Class ---> Dark Future DOFP (past) -----> Wolverine: Origins ----> X1-3 ----> The Wolverine ----> Dark Future DOFP (future)

                               |

                               |

                               |

                          Wolverine Altered DOFP (past)  -----> Apocalypse -----> (some alt version of X1-3 where Jean lives) ------> DOFP (happy future)



#40
Tex

Tex

    Member

  • Member
  • 0 posts

I finally saw it and liked it. It did suffer from the same predictability that all comic book movies do, but I like that fact that they tried to be different.

 

It's still amazing to me that Jackman has been doing this for over 15 years.  I remember thinking as a kid that they would never make an X Men movie, and now in 2017 Jackman has played Wolverine more than anyone has ever played James Bond. 



#41
Guest_El Chalupacabra_*

Guest_El Chalupacabra_*
  • Guests

Weird you say that because a while back I remember there was speculation that Jackman could end up being the next James Bond.  Not sure if that was just a rumor, but he'd probably make a pretty decent one.



#42
Tex

Tex

    Member

  • Member
  • 0 posts

That was definitely a rumor, but I think he's too typecast as Logan to pull off a good Bond.

 

I do think it would've worked, though, but he's just spent too much time as Wolverine.



#43
Guest_El Chalupacabra_*

Guest_El Chalupacabra_*
  • Guests

Probably right, at this point.  I think he'd have to do a few dramas and kill it to break that type cast.  

 

Then again, Pierce Brosnan was type cast as Remmington Steele, before Bond.  



#44
Driver

Driver

    Tank

  • Supporters
  • 6,591 posts

People were dying for him to be Bond and he ended up being one of the worst ones in my opinion. I NEED Idris Elba to be Bond.

 

ANyway-- X-Men.

 

The New Mutants is going to be a movie that leans toward horror. Curious to see if they stick to the plan and tie them to Cable instead Chuck.



#45
Tex

Tex

    Member

  • Member
  • 0 posts
I don't think things are going to go well without Hugh. I really hope I'm wrong about that, but I just see the whole thing crumbling without his star power, much like the Marvel flicks without RDJ.

I was against the Idris Bond thing initially, but he's such an awesome actor I really hope they give him a crack at it. Of course Tom Hardy could also work.

#46
CoLA

CoLA

    Zero Calories

  • Members
  • 641 posts

People were dying for him to be Bond and he ended up being one of the worst ones in my opinion. I NEED Idris Elba to be Bond.

 

ANyway-- X-Men.

 

The New Mutants is going to be a movie that leans toward horror. Curious to see if they stick to the plan and tie them to Cable instead Chuck.

Demon bear storyline?!



#47
Driver

Driver

    Tank

  • Supporters
  • 6,591 posts

I don't think things are going to go well without Hugh. I really hope I'm wrong about that, but I just see the whole thing crumbling without his star power, much like the Marvel flicks without RDJ.

I was against the Idris Bond thing initially, but he's such an awesome actor I really hope they give him a crack at it. Of course Tom Hardy could also work.

Yeah it's pretty much clear that the more Hugh is onscreen, the better an x-movie does outside of Deadpool. But that wasn't marketed as an X-Men film. He's technically in all of them including bit parts and cameos, but hif he's not the star, they do not perform as well.

 

I think Fox's logic is that in Ryan Reynolds they at least have another opener to hang the franchise on.

 

And Tom Hardy can't be Mad Max, Bane, Venom, AND James Bond... can he!?



#48
Tex

Tex

    Member

  • Member
  • 0 posts
Yeah it's probably overload to make Hardy Bond. I totally forgot about Venom when I posted that.

My biggest fear with Idris is that there will so much backlash that it'll kill it before it even gets off the ground. I think it will scare producers from casting him.

I'm normally not a fan of PC casting, but when it's right it's right. As hard as it was for people to accept James Blond I just see people balking on James Black.

If anyone is going to make it work, though, it's Idris Elba. I'm game.

As for the X Men they need a bankable star, so I really hope they're smart with Deadpool. He's a great character, and RR is perfect for it, but Im worried about the joke wearing thin. Let's hope Brolin is a solid Cable.
  • Driver +1 this

#49
The Choc

The Choc

    Member

  • Member
  • 9,048 posts

 

I don't think things are going to go well without Hugh. I really hope I'm wrong about that, but I just see the whole thing crumbling without his star power, much like the Marvel flicks without RDJ.

I was against the Idris Bond thing initially, but he's such an awesome actor I really hope they give him a crack at it. Of course Tom Hardy could also work.

Yeah it's pretty much clear that the more Hugh is onscreen, the better an x-movie does outside of Deadpool. But that wasn't marketed as an X-Men film. He's technically in all of them including bit parts and cameos, but hif he's not the star, they do not perform as well.

 

I think Fox's logic is that in Ryan Reynolds they at least have another opener to hang the franchise on.

 

And Tom Hardy can't be Mad Max, Bane, Venom, AND James Bond... can he!?

 

If Julian Glover can be General Veers, A Bond villain, Walter Donovan, Aragog and Grand Master Pycelle then I don't see why Hardy can't be all of those guys.



#50
Driver

Driver

    Tank

  • Supporters
  • 6,591 posts

Because only a nerd would know those guys by name.


  • NumberSix and pavonis +1 this



Reply to this topic