Logan Logan - news & discussion - Part 3

[OutOfBoose]

Damn, cinematography in this movie is something else...

 

[psylockolussus]

Its weird that its out in 27 days from where I live.

 

[Zant]

Its weird that its out in 27 days from where I live.

Oh, does this get an early overseas release? That would make sense,considering the heavy competition in March and the movie drought in late February.

 

[henzINNIT]

27 days? Damn. I'm crashing at yours.

 

[Smilodon]

Damn, cinematography in this movie is something else...

I was surprised to learn that John Mathieson was the DP for this film - his work on stuff like Gladiator was great and I love how rich the film looks, despite it's desert setting. Kinda like Fury Road, but not as saturated.

I think the UK gets the film on March 1 and a few other places as well. So yeah, with February being a short month, we're a little over 3 weeks from the film landing. It's probably already in the can though, as the film is going to have its world premier in like 10 days.

 

[Leo Zelinsky]

"The theory was that he originally lost all his hair because it’s just too damn busy [in his head] to grow hair – the idea for me was, well, maybe there’s a little fringe on there, because things are slowing down mentally."

Apocalypse just came out how is this so hard to keep track of

 

[Ivan Drago]

No one cares about Apocalypse. It was one of the most forgettable movies of 2016.

 

[henzINNIT]

Apocalypse just came out how is this so hard to keep track of

It's remarkable. Fox are trolling us at this point, surely.

 

[OutOfBoose]

I was surprised to learn that John Mathieson was the DP for this film - his work on stuff like Gladiator was great and I love how rich the film looks, despite it's desert setting. Kinda like Fury Road, but not as saturated.

My favorite work of his - Kingdom of Heaven. And plenty of shots from Logan remind me of that film.

 

[Leo Zelinsky]

It's remarkable. Fox are trolling us at this point, surely.

It's getting annoying

No one cares about Apocalypse. It was one of the most forgettable movies of 2016.

If nobody cares then why do we have to be stuck with its continuity for X-MEN 7?

 

[LoganPool]

No one cares about Apocalypse. It was one of the most forgettable movies of 2016.

Truest statement of the year so far!

 

[LoganPool]

If nobody cares then why do we have to be stuck with its continuity for X-MEN 7?

Because FOX cares about it.

 

[marvelrobbins]

because otherwise it would be a reboot.the anti-fox people can't call it X-Men 7 and expect
them to not have any contunity.

 

[Stan Lee]

You guys need to brush up on your X-Men history. Cyclops' hair came after he merged with Apocalypse.

Spoiler

 

[Roose Bolton]

People getting worked up over hair loss/hair growth, something that probably won't even get brought up in the movie itself....

 

[EnDz0n3]

Why make such a big deal about it in your movie, have it be a plot point, make it a dramatic scene when you're gonna forget about it in your next entry?

See also: Magneto, Mystique and the rest of the Brotherhood recruiting Emma Frost from the CIA; Wolverine losing his Adamantium claws; Mystique as Stryker fishing out Wolverine from the Potomac.

I guess "Who cares" right? Why should the audience invest in these characters? It's gonna be ok in the next entry anyway.

This is why I'm not the biggest fan of the decade jumping. Most of the characters' developments and interesting plot points could be "blamed" as happening during that 10 year gap. Then there's the flip side, even with the decades' long gaps, the characters and situations are developing at a snail's pace. It's taken Charles forever to form the X-men (you know, the title of the series?).

But seemingly within that week (at the most) that X-men: Apocalypse was happening, they couldn't control themselves and introduced all these heavy-hitters, a decision that handicapped the film and introduced yet again mute characters.

Which ultimately goes back to the lack of general planning with this franchise.

 

[Roose Bolton]

If you seriously believe that Xavier's hair is going to be any kind of a plot point in this movie then I don't know what to tell you. To get so worked up over what is probably an aesthetic choice by Stewart and Mangold...it's crazy.

 

[EnDz0n3]

If you seriously believe that Xavier's hair is going to be any kind of a plot point in this movie then I don't know what to tell you. To get so worked up over what is probably an aesthetic choice by Stewart and Mangold...it's crazy.

Who said it was gonna be a plot point *in this movie*?

I don't know what to tell you. Maybe start by rereading my post?

 

[Roose Bolton]

You're complaining about them undoing things from previous films, but of all the things to get worked up about...Xavier losing his hair? Really?

 

[Stan Lee]

Why make such a big deal about it in your movie, have it be a plot point, make it a dramatic scene when you're gonna forget about it in your next entry?

See also: Magneto, Mystique and the rest of the Brotherhood recruiting Emma Frost from the CIA; Wolverine losing his Adamantium claws; Mystique as Stryker fishing out Wolverine from the Potomac.

I guess "Who cares" right? Why should the audience invest in these characters? It's gonna be ok in the next entry anyway.

This is why I'm not the biggest fan of the decade jumping. Most of the characters' developments and interesting plot points could be "blamed" as happening during that 10 year gap. Then there's the flip side, even with the decades' long gaps, the characters and situations are developing at a snail's pace. It's taken Charles forever to form the X-men (you know, the title of the series?).

But seemingly within that week (at the most) that X-men: Apocalypse was happening, they couldn't control themselves and introduced all these heavy-hitters, a decision that handicapped the film and introduced yet again mute characters.

Which ultimately goes back to the lack of general planning with this franchise.

To be fair Apocalypse didn't really make a big deal out of Xavier losing his hair. Which was never established as permanent, nor was it the case in the comics.

 

[EnDz0n3]

You're complaining about them undoing things from previous films, but of all the things to get worked up about...Xavier losing his hair? Really?

It goes hand in hand with all the continuity errors this franchise has been known for. Some of which I've mentioned in the post above yours.

Again, did you even read my post?

And no offence, coming from someone who's said that "they could make 14 Calibans for all I care" you're not really the most objective when it comes to calling out mistakes in this franchise.

 

[Leo Zelinsky]

Why make such a big deal about it in your movie, have it be a plot point, make it a dramatic scene when you're gonna forget about it in your next entry?

Exactly

 

[Leo Zelinsky]

You guys need to brush up on your X-Men history. Cyclops' hair came after he merged with Apocalypse.

Spoiler

Has zero to do with Xavier

To be fair Apocalypse didn't really make a big deal out of Xavier losing his hair. Which was never established as permanent, nor was it the case in the comics.

Come on now

 

[Roose Bolton]

It goes hand in hand with all the continuity errors this franchise has been known for. Some of which I've mentioned in the post above yours.

Again, did you even read my post?

And no offence, coming from someone who's said that "they could make 14 Calibans for all I care" you're not really the most objective when it comes to calling out mistakes in this franchise.

I read your post, I just don't think something as small as Xavier growing a few whisps of hair whilst stilling remaining largely bald is some massive canon breaking issue that you seem to feel it is. Do you know why they went with that look? They probably thought it added to the visual aesthetic of Xavier being run down and broken. He's still recognisable as Charles Xavier and there's something like five decades separating this film and the event in Apocalypse. Did they even say, absolutely that Charles would forever be without hair? I don't think they did and I don't think it matters.

And you know what? They could make 14 Calibans. If Stephen Merchant is great in this film and the character is done justice in this film, then I don't think it especially matters. For all of these movies, as long as the film itself is great then the strength of the continuity shouldn't really be a concern. Yeah Logan lost his claws in TW and had Adamantium in DOFP, but did that make DOFP a bad film? In my opinion it didn't.

 

[X-Maniac]

Fox (and the filmmakers) don't care about the comics.

Or about the other films in the franchise.

Or about following any rules or existing framework (they're probably bipolar, in my view, it's one of the typical traits).

Just bear in mind that whatever notable plot points or significant moments/changes are made in Logan, you don't have to get invested in it because it will be undone in the next movie. Just stop caring. That's the attitude of Roose Bolton and Ivan Drago: "Who cares?"

The new Brotherhood formed at the end of FC with the Emma Frost prison break was undone in DoFP. The loss of adamantium claws at the end of The Wolverine was undone in DoFP. I could go on but you get the picture.

Don't bother caring. They don't. And it will be forgotten anyway when the next movie is made. X-23 will suddenly be aged 25 back in the present day with no explanation in X-Force. Zander Rice will be revealed as Sinister and blown to pieces but then be miraculously alive in the next movie, and a different age. This will be Jackman's final movie but then he will appear in a Deadpool movie or X-Force. Save your gasps and tears, they'll ignore it all when the next movie is made. There'll probably be another Caliban in it as well. Woo-hoo!