Sequels What can X-MEN learn from LOGAN?

[Leo Zelinsky]

I'll edit this with more thoughts after I step out my second viewing*


I'll start by saying its not a secret I hate Hugh Jackman's Wolverine because he's hogged all the screen time these last 17 years. But when the movie ended I was in tears and I can't ever remember doing that at a movie.


The movie made me feel so much I've never felt during a X-MEN movie and I hope FoX uses some of this for X7.


- The cinematography was top notch how come this guy can't shoot the X-MEN films?

- The dialogue it actually felt the characters were actually talking to each other for once jmo

- The fighting! (Not the R rated stuff). But villains fighting and not just one guy attacks then gets beat then the next rinse repeat. Like for example in the very beginning when the chulos jumped him as a group

-

Spoiler

meaningful deaths, the X-MEN deaths in other film were meaningless IMO. People die and everyone doesn't seem to believably care IMO

 

[Weather Witch]

Focus on character relationships and the feeling of family. Kinberg already pointed that out as well, but they really have to make that happen.

 

[henzINNIT]

I'm more worried about the bad lessons this franchise will learn from Logan to be honest.

I hope that it will push Fox to continue to take risks on passionate creatives, and distinct but appropriate tones for each different property. I hope we're not entering another wave of "dark and edgy" nonsense. Fanboys basically killed my enjoyment of TDK over the years, and it pretty much ruined the DCEU from the start.

 

[Frankeh]

I'm more worried about the bad lessons this franchise will learn from Logan to be honest.

Exactly, like making the X-Men sequel R-rated.

Anyway, what you said is correct. Trusting creative minds with delivering something different for each entry. This won't happen if Mr. Kinberg is in control of everything in X-Men though.

 

[Rick the Ruler]

Exactly, like making the X-Men sequel R-rated.

That won't happen.

 

[Darepool]

I'm more worried about the bad lessons this franchise will learn from Logan to be honest.

I hope that it will push Fox to continue to take risks on passionate creatives, and distinct but appropriate tones for each different property. I hope we're not entering another wave of "dark and edgy" nonsense. Fanboys basically killed my enjoyment of TDK over the years, and it pretty much ruined the DCEU from the start.

Not to mention it can get pretentious and boring if not executed well and basically screams 90's nihilism to me when it's worn like a badge. I love X2, but the franchise has yet to fully embrace the comic book lore.

 

[The Guard]

Unless this movie makes AVENGERS money, I would imagine the only thing studios will learn is that critics reward really well-made films in the reviews.

 

[Leo Zelinsky]

Another thing I hope X-MEN takes from Logan is the opening.


The movie just throws you in without explanation. I hate how most X-MEN films have set ups for what everyone's been doing between movies.


And this is probably the only X-MEN movie besides Deadpool where I was just immersed in the world.

 

[Frankeh]

The movie just throws you in without explanation. I hate how most X-MEN films have set ups for what everyone's been doing between movies.

That's because: 10 year jump.

Since there is supposed to be a formed team maybe this time around we can finally get an opening sequence of the X-Men on a mission.

 

[NotNickFury]

Characterization and development. It's not fair for me to compare it to Apocalypse because we've had over a decade to get to know this Logan and Charles, whereas with Apocalypse, most of the young X-Men team is new. It's the adults we still know, and to be fair, McAvoy and Fassbender still resonate in their performances.

But Logan is the complete opposite of Apocalypse because of how intimate it feels in its storytelling, and I think a lot of credit for that is because of James Mangold's direction versus Singer and Kinberg going for global stakes which I'm glad Kinberg admits wasn't the best idea in hindsight.

So hopefully we get more intimate, personal storytelling.

 

[The Guard]

I for one, hope we get more close up shots of people waking up, falling asleep, and close ups on people's hands. That's what the X-Men franchise can learn from LOGAN.

 

[Frankeh]

I for one, hope we get more close up shots of people waking up, falling asleep, and close ups on people's hands. That's what the X-Men franchise can learn from LOGAN.

You're not very funny. Logan already did more opening money than Apocalypse. Damn right there are things to learn.

 

[x-er]

I really liked the fact this director has done two x-verse films and you don't see there was any rehash of anything. They are unique and original standalone films. On the other hand, I think we've seen Singer follow a very similar plot device three or four times (Prof X gets pulled out of the running, X-team have to get together to save the day).

But Logan (and Deadpool, The Wolverine) suggests you can change it up a bit. I think Singer would be great for a hardcore sci-fi storyline, but he'd have to be given writing that can take us in new directions.

Also we have to be very hopeful for the fact they're bringing in a new director for New Mutants! New talents are always good, as proven by Mangold.

 

[Lip]

I haven't seen Logan yet, but based on a few things I know, I think there are these lessons to be learned from Logan:

1) When Logan was a super secret project, there was a lot of fan theories. A lot of them thought it would be Old Man Logan with some X-Villains. Some thought (and wanted) some X-Men members like Rogue or Jean because the relationship they had with Logan in the movies. Or even Scott, Kitty or Ororo. Some thought Sabretooth was a must and that Lady Deathstryke shoud be there too. And many wanted a Deadpool cameo. And they could've done all of that... but they didn't. There could be cameos of some OT cast members like Jean, Scott, Storm or Rogue. Apparently Sabretooth was in the script. And they could've shoved Deadpool up there too. But they decided to use two characters besides Logan and develop and focus on them. Great choice. I haven't seen the movie but I haven't heard anything about Xavier or X-23 being wasted. I think this is a huge lesson they should learn. Stop putting a lot of characters (beloved characters) just for the sake of power display (then killing them off and wasting them). There was no need for Psylocke, Jubilee, Angel and even Storm (who had a cringeworthy development) in XM:A. Reduce the number of characters, then focus and develop them.

2) A passionate project. Both Deadpool and Logan were developed by people very, very, very passionate and devoted to those characters. And this is not even about loving the comics, from what I heard Logan doesn't care much about the comics. But it's about the characters. Developing something great for the characters. And I don't feel that passionate vibe from either Singer or Kinberg. I have absolutely no doubt they're very passionate about Erik, Charles and Logan, but only them. And they did a great job with these three characters. But only them.
I think it could be great if Fox could give the franchise to people very passionate about the X-Men and the characters. To see producers, directors and actors (Olivia Munn <3) being very passionate about it. Maybe something as good as Deadpool and Logan could come out of that.

 

[x-er]

^ point one (1) might be true of Logan and Deadpool too. Focusing on smaller ensembles can really help the film

Also, the gore was not in bad taste for me. It is what the comic books portray and it is exactly what makes certain successful properties more compelling (Game of Thrones, Deadpool yet again).

 

[Frankeh]

Yeah I think focusing on four characters in an X-Men movie isn't an inherently bad idea, the problem is when they keep focusing on the SAME ones. They need to treat it like a revolving door. X-Men: The Last Stand should've been Jean and Scott centric, for example.

And henchmen can be given personalities through a couple of lines too -- they don't need to be mutes, especially when they're popular X-Men.

 

[Leo Zelinsky]

I think this is a huge lesson they should learn. Stop putting a lot of characters (beloved characters) just for the sake of power display (then killing them off and wasting them). There was no need for Psylocke, Jubilee, Angel and even Storm (who had a cringeworthy development) in XM:A. Reduce the number of characters, then focus and develop them.

I disagree... You can have a lot of characters... Just make sure they actually talk to each other

This is master level IMO

Spoiler

[YT]HDUCKCpRyrU[/YT]

I'd be happy as a clam for something like this done in that style

Spoiler

[YT]9PbT8YFq0Ns[/YT]

And henchmen can be given personalities through a couple of lines too -- they don't need to be mutes, especially when they're popular X-Men.

X-MEN: Apocalypse would've been a lot better if the Horsemen weren't Storm, Magneto, or Psylocke

 

[Lip]

I disagree... You can have a lot of characters... Just make sure they actually talk to each other

This is master level IMO

You have a point. Although I don't follow the MCU movies, I did watch and loved Civil War. However, it must be noticed that most of the characters have their own solo movie, or were developed before, like Black Widow. So it's easier to do it with The Avengers.

Introducing, working, developing, focusing on 15 characters in the same movie is hard. In XM:A for instance, they had to introduce Apocalypse, Jean, Kurt, Scott, Storm, Psylocke, Angel, (does Jubiliee even count?), continue the arcs of Charles, Raven, Eric, Hank and Pietro, while bringing back Moira.

I haven't seen Guardians of Galaxy, but I heard they worked very well with the team. And they have what? 6 or 7 characters? I think it's a good number.

And since you brought up Civil War, I think in this interview the Russo Brothers gives what I think should be the ultimate super lesson to be learned:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PuwK0KFKI30&feature=youtu.be&t=2m22s

There is going to be someone in the movie theater that came for the movie just for that one character, no matter how much screen time they have. So we want to make sure that fans get the best experiece they could possibly have. See the character do some really cool things, do some surprising things, have some emotional arc that is very engaging and relatable...

 

[x-er]

And those ensemble moments are exactly where they're headed with X-Force. For now, I could see another character piece (Gambit).

 

[Mike Murdock]

I think the biggest takeaway is tell a movie true to itself. Don't worry about the bigger picture, setting up something more, or fanservice. Find what fits the characters and themes of the movie and do that. Honestly, WB could probably use these lessons more than Fox. I'd also point out that a serious, dark movie like Logan still managed some nice moments of humor and levity. It's possible to do that without undercutting your tone.

 

[GuestStar2004]

I don't think there is much to take away from Logan at all tbh, i mean its like when people were saying the same thing about Deadpool some time ago but both Logan and Deadpool are to a certain extent complete opposites so you could probably learn little bits from both movies but overall the only thing that stands out is that they were good movies that were very well received.

What fox will likely get from it is that different types of movies with various different fresh tones interest the audience.

 

[marcvader]

Maybe, write smaller self contained stories and forget about doing huge blockbusters.

 

[Spider-Fan83]

treat every movie as if its your last

 

[GuestStar2004]

treat every movie as if its your last

I think thats something they pretty much already do.

 

[Mike Murdock]

I don't think they did for Apocalypse. That was very much set up with continuing the franchize in mind.