Logan Logan - news & discussion - Part 2

[def28]

Well, I think what Gueststarr is saying is that things like Aliens and Predator and Terminator, while r rated and technically not for kids, have that "action" appeal that kids could latch onto. While I'm SURE logan will have a good amount of action, it seems like the marketing is pushing more of the emotional drama aspect of it. Basically, it looks like No Country for Old Men with Wolverine. No Country is not a film I expect younger kids to want to see.

I'll be curious to see how trailer #2 markets the movie and if it tries to push more of the action aspect to try to draw in younger audiences.

No Country isn't a film kids want to see cause it doesn't have X-23 and Wolverine going around fighting people. Which this trailer clearly features. As far as comparisons I keep seeing Last Of Us. Which is something that alot of this younger gen love.

Sorry I just don't get this debate. There is enough action, guns, helicopters, people jumping and stabbing in this trailer. It's just set to a slow song. It's not saying this is just a drama with no action in any sense.

 

[Smilodon]

The argument that "What may work for Batman, may not work for other characters" doesn't hold its weight in water against a character like Wolverine, who is tonally an equally flexible character as Batman.

As def said, Wolverine has an appeal for all ages. He is one of the most iconic comic book characters of all time, played by the same actor that many people have known for a very long time. The trailer showcased its action going for it in addition to its drama, and now this time it'll have incredibly strong WOM to back it up. If the strong reviews keep up like they have been up until now, it'll undeniably do it's fair share in box office. Mangold has played coy, but Dafne Keen is Laura Kinney as she lives and breathes. People have seen the Logan trailer and it's many imitations. They will know about this film and see it.

 

[GuestStar2004]

The argument that "What may work for Batman, may not work for other characters" doesn't hold its weight in water against a character like Wolverine, who is tonally an equally flexible character as Batman.

The tone works for wolverine but is watching Wolverine brood In a western type setting gonna have the same appeal as watching the dark knight brood in Gotham city? They are very different characters after all

As def said, Wolverine has an appeal for all ages. He is one of the most iconic comic book characters of all time, played by the same actor that many people have known for a very long time. The trailers showcased its action going for it in addition to its drama, and now this time it'll incredibly strong WOM to back it up. If the strong reviews keep up like they have been up until now, it'll undeniably fill it out.

Thing is while kids will go see deadpool to laugh aswell as enjoy the action they may go to see Logan just waiting for the next action scene depending on if the drama is or looks As appealing to them as deadpool wisecracking.

I ain't saying I don't think any kids will see it but I can't see as many as who likely see deadpool.

 

[Smilodon]

What makes you think people, especially children, watch Batman films because they want to see Bruce brood around? They watch Batman because he's Batman - the world's greatest detective, fighting the most iconic villains in the history of comics, teaming up with his fellow DC icons etc. Bruce did his fair share of being callous and dark in cartoons, but I doubt children saw that as a selling point as well. Kids (and people in general) like it because they care about the character and the iconic things that he does.

And again, just because there will be drama, doesn't mean children will be turned away. They buy the tickets to see the characters, and if the story is good, it will only help even more. Kids can handle serious stories too.

 

[GuestStar2004]

Edit: Might have to Agree to disagree to a certain extent.

 

[kguillou]

No Country isn't a film kids want to see cause it doesn't have X-23 and Wolverine going around fighting people. Which this trailer clearly features. As far as comparisons I keep seeing Last Of Us. Which is something that alot of this younger gen love.

Sorry I just don't get this debate. There is enough action, guns, helicopters, people jumping and stabbing in this trailer. It's just set to a slow song. It's not saying this is just a drama with no action in any sense.

Fair enough, I mean, I think trailer #2 will give us a clearer indication of the film's content. Obviously, Fox would never greenlight a character drama with little action in it, I'm just hoping they didnt force another jarring tonal shift CGI s*** fest in the third act on Mangold again.

 

[def28]

Fair enough, I mean, I think trailer #2 will give us a clearer indication of the film's content. Obviously, Fox would never greenlight a character drama with little action in it, I'm just hoping they didnt force another jarring tonal shift CGI s*** fest in the third act on Mangold again.

Yeah, I totally agree

What makes you think people, especially children, watch Batman films because they want to see Bruce brood around? They watch Batman because he's Batman - the world's greatest detective, fighting the most iconic villains in the history of comics, teaming up with his fellow DC icons etc. Bruce did his fair share of being callous and dark in cartoons, but I doubt children saw that as a selling point as well. Kids (and people in general) like it because they care about the character and the iconic things that he does.

And again, just because there will be drama, doesn't mean children will be turned away. They buy the tickets to see the characters, and if the story is good, it will only help even more. Kids can handle serious stories too.

Bingo.

 

[kguillou]

I know its beating a dead, dead horse, but it gets me so frustrated when watching The Wolverine and that third act pops out of nowhere. The first two thirds of that movie were SO good, that I'm positive that if Mangold had been left to his own devices he would've not only made the best "X-Men" film ever, it would've been on Dark Knight level good. That's how good the first two acts were.

I think of how much better the final battle would've been if Silver Samurai wasnt a CGI robot and instead a, you know, real person in a in samurai armor having a real, well choreographed sword fight with Wolverine. It boggles my mind, wouldn't that have been a much cheaper option, too?

 

[GuestStar2004]

While I was surprised they went with a robo samurai I think I was still more bothered by the Jean stuff personally.

 

[DavidHaller]

I loved the Jean stuff. I found her very Shakespearean. It also gave X3 a certain emotional depth which the movie was not capable to create.

The entire last chapter of The Wolverine is unwatchable to me. The movie should have ended with a great choreographed Ninja fight. Wolverine vs. Shingen was the true highlight for me. Such an amazing fight: claws vs. sword. Mangold succumbed to lazy genre cliché with this robo samurai awkwardness...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGgpFkyrm7M

BAM!!!

 

[2kt09]

Looking back, a ninja end battle would seem rather anticlimactic since he had to take on a swarm of them and eventually had to resort to his healing factor just to walk away. Viper was about the only really "what the hell were they thinking?".

The Wolverine had a great variety of fights, which I hope Logan has just as much of ...though a larger-than-life final boss would seem far more-so out of place here.

 

[Iceman]

I got the Logan trailer before Rogue 1 today.

 

[psylockolussus]

You just love tap dancing around the point don't you? Yeah dude, the drama in Alien and not the Alien itself is what got us 80s and 90s kids to watch that film. Just like the shark in Jaws and Dinos in Jurassic had no appeal.

Wolverine is still a superhero action star with powers. If you don't think that has appeal to kids you are just in denial.

Agreed!

 

[CyclopsSummers]

You've seen LOGAN already and know it's mediocre? Tell us more please.

I love the entire MCU and the X-Men films. The poster was just pointing out a fact, Marvel Studios will never make a hard, R-rated film; they've said so themselves. But they're very close to it with their Netflix series

Fortunately, Netflix and ABC produce MCU series instead of Disney
Disney would never include dark characters as Ghost Rider, Dardevil and Punisher

I also wanted Deadpool and Wolverine in a same movie but because of Fox they never intended to direct several x-men movies in retconned timeline
Pretty sure that they will recast Logan Cyclops Jean ... to include thses characters in present day

 

[Web-Head]

Fortunately, Netflix and ABC produce MCU series instead of Disney
Disney would never include dark characters as Ghost Rider, Dardevil and Punisher

I also wanted Deadpool and Wolverine in a same movie but because of Fox they never intended to direct several x-men movies in retconned timeline
Pretty sure that they will recast Logan Cyclops Jean ... to include thses characters in present day

Disney still owns ABC

 

[X-Maniac]

I just can't feel that excited about this film. It doesn't lead anywhere.

Prof X and Wolverine likely die, the other X-Men are probably already dead, and we get an 11-year-old X-23 introduced.

X-23 can't really join X-Force at that age, so this is a once-and-done for that actress. An older actress will have to be cast and then recruited from the future to join X-Force.

Timeline seems confusing as hell, even for us fans following every snippet and knowing the source material. Mainstream audiences are going to be confused too, and so will critics.

 

[2kt09]

X-23 can't really join X-Force at that age, so this is a once-and-done for that actress. An older actress will have to be cast and then recruited from the future to join X-Force.

Pfft...chances are she's going to be pretty violent in this movie. Chances are some time-related thing we clearly know nothing about is going to send Hit Gir~
I mean X-23 into whatever time period this X-Force frolics.

 

[GuestStar2004]

Depending if X-force will be set in the future period then she doesn't have to go anywhere.

We will have to see where they are going with X23 and all this mutants declining stuff I guess.

 

[Smilodon]

Why would they need to recast Dafne? She's pretty much in it for the long haul, it's not like she's going to stop growing. If she's a hit with the GA as much as she was a hit with everyone else that's seen the opening of the movie, then she'll last just like Hugh/Ryan/Patrick have.

If it's a concern about the Dafne being too young to be as violent as the character requires, then spoiler alert

Spoiler

She's violent and very much X-23

By the time an X-Force film comes around, we'll probably be close to where we heard where the Logan is set which is 2027 ish? Not that hard to just skip ahead a few years. Deadpool isn't even set in a specific time, could easily be shift forwards as necessary.

 

[GuestStar2004]

Timeline seems confusing as hell, even for us fans following every snippet and knowing the source material. Mainstream audiences are going to be confused too, and so will critics.

No one should be that confused as it isn't asking you to take in a lot of information.

 

[psylockolussus]

I just can't feel that excited about this film. It doesn't lead anywhere.

Prof X and Wolverine likely die, the other X-Men are probably already dead, and we get an 11-year-old X-23 introduced.

Timeline seems confusing as hell, even for us fans following every snippet and knowing the source material. Mainstream audiences are going to be confused too, and so will critics.

Here,here!

My only hope is here is that we might get a good movie. But the X-Men dead? Geez. If they are doing the reboot next, okay. But that is still unlikely for now.

 

[GuestStar2004]

Why would they need to recast Dafne? She's pretty much in it for the long haul, it's not like she's going to stop growing. If she's a hit with the GA as much as she was a hit with everyone else that's seen the opening of the movie, then she'll last just like Hugh/Ryan/Patrick have.

If it's a concern about the Dafne being too young to be as violent as the character requires, then spoiler alert

Spoiler

She's violent and very much X-23

By the time an X-Force film comes around, we'll probably be close to where we heard where the Logan is set which is 2027 ish? Not that hard to just skip ahead a few years. Deadpool isn't even set in a specific time, could easily be shift forwards as necessary.

Well we will probably get X-Force long before 2027 but also with her getting older the future period also has to move forward through the years since she won't age 2 or 3 years within the same year after all.

She could play X23 at 15 or 16 if she makes it to X-force but they could still end up recasting if they decide to make her an older.

Personally I don't think this film will end in Time travel and I am also keeping an open mind that wolverine may not die at the end.

 

[Smilodon]

When X-Force the film comes out isn't the point, the point is that Dafne can play Laura for a variety of ages as a teen and that X-Force can be set as close to when Logan takes place as necessary. She's not restricted to playing an 11 year old Laura. Even if Dafne is 15 years old and Laura is brought back from 2027 to when X-Force is set, she can still portray an 11 year old Laura (We don't know how old Laura is in Logan to begin with but...). It's not like a teen actor can't play a few years younger/older as necessary. It's not like we haven't been doing that for the greater part of the decade with other characters in this franchise?

And why would the future need to skip a few years just because Dafne grows older? Kid actors go through puberty but they're still able to portray people within a certain age range. Or recast someone in their 20s to be Laura? Why do we need an adult Laura? Especially if she time travels with Cable back in time, she can be picked up from any time period.

 

[GuestStar2004]

When X-Force the film comes out isn't the point, the point is that Dafne can play Laura for a variety of ages as a teen and that X-Force can be set as close to when Logan takes place as necessary. She's not restricted to playing an 11 year old Laura. Even if Dafne is 15 years old and Laura is brought back from 2027 to when X-Force is set, she can still portray an 11 year old Laura (We don't know how Laura is in Logan to begin with but...). It's not like a teen actor can't play a few years younger/older as necessary. It's not like we haven't been doing that for the greater part of the decade with other characters in this franchise?

You think Dane at say 15 would be able to pass for 11? I think that sorta thing is much harder for children once they hit puberty like did hit girl look the same in both the kickass movies?

According to her age range she can pass for 8 to 11 so yeah we are we are assuming she is playing an 11 year old

And why would the future need to skip a few years just because Dafne grows older? Kid actors go through puberty but they're still able to portray people within a certain age range. Or recast someone in their 20s to be Laura? Why do we need an adult Laura? Especially if she time travels with Cable back in time, she can be picked up from any time period.

The obviously answer is because she will get older and it's harder to hide kids getting older then it is trying to pass a 30 year old as a 20 year old which is probably the reason most the time that they cast older to play younger.

And really we don't know if she will time travel at all, it's an assumption we have no evidence to back up.

 

[GuestStar2004]

And as for why they would want someone older I dunno they may decide to get someone older, it's not the first time such a thing has happened.