Logan Movie Official Trailer*

Logan Blu-Ray Will Contain Black & White Version Of The Film

 

Spoiler

Knowing it was going to be Jackman's final performance as Logan (and Stewart's as the Professor), I wasn't at all surprised that they both ended up dying. I was, however, expecting Logan's demise to be more ambiguous, a la Shane, which they referenced earlier in the movie. Like have him send the kids off to Canada, while he rambles off into the sunset to an uncertain fate.

 

But we know for sure.

 

Hey, superheroes never die, so it's always possible for them to be cloned, recreated, or they return from an alternate dimension or a different timeline. Superman has been played by at least five or six people in 70 years, Batman by even more. They can always reboot it and go with another actor. "Teenage Wolverine!" Don't laugh, it could happen.

I thought the episode had a lot of finality to it and I didn't mind the ending at all -- I knew this was gonna happen when Hugh Jackman said, "I'm almost 50, and it takes too much out of me to get in shape for this role after 18 years." He had a great run -- nobody I can think of ever played a fictional character (James Bond, Tarzan, Batman, etc.) longer than Jackman.

I gotta say, both Deadpool and Logan prove you can do a different kind of superhero movie where not everything has to blow up, and it's not necessarily about the end of the world or some cataclysmic battle. This was just one guy and maybe a dozen kids fighting a black ops squad.

Again, to me the key to the movie were the quiet moments between Logan and Professor X, plus a handful of moments with the little girl. The single greatest moment to me was when Patrick Stewart reveals he remembers the terrible disaster he created the year before (which they do not visually show), and we assume his mental problems got out of control and killed all of his mutant students. (This is not a reveal -- this is purely guesswork on my part.)

Maybe this will show Marvel and Warner Bros. and Paramount that it's OK to make movies like this that have quiet, introspective moments with at least a vestige of emotion and character, and it doesn't have to be all slap-bang explosions and crap. I wouldn't so much call this the "anti-Marvel" movie, but I would say it's "Anti-Transformers" and all those other silly movies that are as devoid of any real feeling as a lawn chair.

 

I was thinking Hugh probably has the record for most performances as a superhero -- he's starred as Wolverine in seven movies, plus made cameo appearances in two others.

He's going to be passed pretty soon though by Robert Downey Jr., who by 2019 will have played Tony Stark in nine movies, plus a cameo in a tenth... and all of those in only 11 years compared to Hugh's 17.

 

Robert Downey has said that because he's playing a rich guy wearing a metal robot suit, he could basically keep doing this part for another 10-15 years at least. A gray-haired, slightly old Tony Stark could still work fine as a character.

 

What's interesting is that the vibe I get from Downey is that he's rather "meh" already about doing those Marvel movies. I can't imagine him *wanting* to do those movies, even in a co-star capacity, for another 15 years.

But what would probably lead to an end to his doing the role is that they surely won't have *all of the other* actors doing their respective roles for 15 more years, so if they "reboot" the other characters, they might just reboot Iron Man as well.

I just watched the 2013 "The Wolverine" film (it's the only one I hadn't seen in the "X" film series), and while it's not nearly as impressive as "Logan", I would say that Jackman seems to put about ten million percent more effort into playing Wolverine/Logan in the various films than Downey does playing Iron Man. I'm sure part of it is down to the intended demeanor of the characters, but beyond that even, Downey just seems to sleepwalk his way through his Marvel films at this stage. I was stunned when I finally went back and watched the first "Iron Man" movie not too long ago, and was surprised by the sort of "gusto" Downey seemed to have in that film compared to his rather bland, autopilot performances in the more recent films. Not that I found the first "Iron Man" movie that great, but I surprisingly enjoyed it much more than any of the recent Disney/Marvel stuff.

More than anything else, what I like about "Logan" and what I think objectively makes it so impressive is that, unlike the Disney/Marvel stuff and the new "DCEU", they just decided to make *A* great movie. While they introduce the "X-23" character, they don't shove a bunch of stuff into the movie to make it part of a big universe. They had surprisingly little in the way of callbacks to previous films, and they weren't setting anything else up (there's always obviously room to keep the story going if they want, but they didn't do something dumb with the story to allow for an obvious sequel). In my opinion, ALL of these superhero movies should do this. Is the "Logan" character really the only character that can actually take on a full movie without 27 Avengers being in it, or every Justice League member, etc.?

 

Just saw it today with my son. Two big thumbs up from this team. Easily the best action movie we have both seen in a long time.

 

Shouldn't you have Spoiler warnings on some of this?

 

Hugh Jackman has been interviewed 9000 times over the fact that this is his last time as Wolverine in the Marvel movies.

 

Excellent film indeed. I could hear quite a few men and women crying in the theater at the end.

 

Saw it twice, amazing film. Just left emotionally drained, even more so the second time. Tremendous acting from Jackman, a must own when it comes out on Blu-ray.

 

Think he's throwing away the Wolverine role too early. It's his big money earner...sure if Marvel offer more money he'll bulk up again. Doesn't suit the skinny tie dude that appeared on the Tonight Show recently.

 

This is why I see any movie that I have interest in on the Thursday preview performance, then less is spoiled for me, and I can read these threads without concern for being spoiled. I'm probably;y overly sensitive to this, heck I'm cautious to not spoil an 80 year old radio show with my introduction and even I know that's taking it a bit too far.

 

I saw it this evening, I didn't like it, it bored me.

 

I don't recall seeing a Stan Lee cameo.
Maybe that's being retired in favour of a boob flash...

 

He wasn't in any of the of the other Wolverine movies either. He was in the on-line extended cut of the Deadpool teaser though.

 

Generally, I think Stan Lee has been more involved with the Disney/Marvel films rather than the Fox films, which are sort of separate... though I think by contract, he still gets paid a certain amount along with getting a credit as "Executive Producer" (in name only).

I heard that Stan Lee just shot three cameos for films coming out in the next few years, which may be a sign that his health is not great.

 

Given how he's described the process and how unpleasant it is--and considering he's 48--I very much doubt they have enough money to tempt him.

John K.

 

Daniel Craig's in the same boat, at least he doesn't have to bulk up for each film playing the character.

 

I agree....and I was groaning at the loud, annoying trailer to the new Power Rangers movie played before Logan which appears to embody everything I hate about the Transformer-typed movies.

I watched Logan with my 22 year old son and it struck me that he watched the total transformation of the X-Men / Wolverine from their beginning to their current state. He had no interest in seeing last year's X-Men movie, but he really enjoyed the dark, downbeat "Logan". He also liked Deadpool.

 

I've mentioned this in other threads.... but, your sentence here makes me want to re-iterate it:
I personally believe, these past 20 years of 'comic-book/magic/sci-fi' films are going through the same 'progression', (or, as you say, 'transformation') as 'rock' did!
Between the constant up-grade of technology and the 'mature' themes, I find it fascinating...
A child who was a 'pre-teen' when the "Harry Potter" films came out, would now be old enough to deal with "Game Of Thrones", with it's cursing, blood, and nudity.
The same goes with the early 'comic-book' movies, to this film and "Deadpool"
to me... just like 'rock'!

 

He's got good taste. The filmmakers have got to push the envelope on what can be done in these movies -- it's not always about blowing things up.

 

I watched it this weekend. I loved it. I said to a friend at work "There's actually acting in this superhero film".

 

Yeah, you could see everybody was stretching as much as they could to actually fill out the characters. It was good for Patrick Stewart as well -- I think he did far more in this than in any of the X-Men films.

BTW, Stewart has been making the interview rounds lately and it's amazing how good he looks for his age. He's not nearly the aged, out-of-it guy he portrays in this film.