When you look at Logan it was probably sorta the opposite of deadpool in many ways.
They went in a direction that was not only abit distant from the comics and other movies but also created its own thing, which is pretty much what the X-Men movies have always done and Logan is currently the highest critical movie of the series yet.
Yes, it has the highest RT rating, though only 2 per cent above DoFP.
But it's not the most successful at the box office. It comes 4th after Deadpool, TLS and DoFP; and, with inflation-adjusted figures, comes 6th.
It's done well as the swansong of Jackman and Stewart; as the best onscreen portrayal of Wolverine (helped by the R rating not giving us any bloodless action scenes); and for introducing X23.
The comic is a way-out 'what if' story that could never be adapted to the screen with the current division of film rights, and probably wouldn't be even if Marvel Studios had all the rights (it has visceral violence, cannibalism, incest, you name it, not to mention huge numbers of characters). It's Mark Millar going to extremes! There's some great ideas in the comic (America divided into zones ruled by supervillains, etc) and some insane ones (Hulk eating Wolverine, who regenerates in his stomach and bursts out).
*They didn't give him the costume because they didn't think it fit the tone
*X-Men comics apparently exist in universe, even though you probably could go nuts trying to work out the logic in that but i am sure it was done for symbolism if anything
*It was sort of an adaptation of old man logan but very different.
*Mangold decided the X-Men could die off screen to forward Wolverines story and that would be fine.
It took a few basic ideas from Old Man Logan, that's it. I wouldn't really call the film an adaptation of Old Man Logan, it was inspired by that comic book story but only loosely based on it with broad brush strokes such as the far-future dystopian setting, an ageing Wolverine, the tragic death of the X-Men by one of their own, abilities affected by poisoning (in the film, adamantium, in the comics it was Hulk by gamma poisoning), a child successor (X23 in the film, a baby Bruce Banner in the comic).
If they had included a version of the costume (something the kids made for Wolverine while he was out cold?) or some other comicbook touches, it would probably have engaged with fans far more. Whether critics would have liked it as much is unclear, but there are ways of doing these things to fit the tone.
Technically the world Mangold created couldn't be further from the comics but i wonder whether critics praised the movie because they did wolverine right... or whether it was praised because it was a good movie that you could have replaced wolverine with anyone and still had it be a hit. (Film adaptation of the last of us)
It was Jackman and Stewart's swansong and it was a well-made movie. Critics have no idea what the right version of Wolverine is.
You can bet that apart from Deadpool sequels and maybe X-Force most of the other movies will attempt to capture the tone of Logan.
I don't know how you can say that. Logan had a very distinctive tone that took a few broad ideas from the source but otherwise presented the comics as some fantasy story for kids (as we saw in the movie). Yet with Dark Phoenix we are hearing about Shi'ar and Hellfire Club, suggesting it's far closer to the comics. It won't just be Jean Grey having a meltdown somewhere in outer space. Also you can't do a space opera in the same grounded way as Logan.
