Logan Spoilers from post 212

El Duda · 23-03-2017 06:03PM

Just coming in here for a quick lol at Griff

23-03-2017 08:07PM

I rewatched it last night. Only copped that during the trip, right after the Hotel, they were listening to the radio and it mentioned the Westchester accident and how mutants were killed, including several of the X-me -- at which point Logan turned off the radio.

Dr Crayfish · 23-03-2017 11:44PM

As someone who's not really into comic book films I saw this last night and loved it. I absolutely love Patrick Stewart and it was amazing seeing him effing and blinding in a superhero film! Great performances from the little girl and Hugh and P-Stew. I was quite upset at the end, Hugh Jackman has such an amazing presence on screen, I hope he can knock out some more great films.

Seanachai · 24-03-2017 12:51PM

Dr Crayfish wrote: »

As someone who's not really into comic book films I saw this last night and loved it. I absolutely love Patrick Stewart and it was amazing seeing him effing and blinding in a superhero film! Great performances from the little girl and Hugh and P-Stew. I was quite upset at the end, Hugh Jackman has such an amazing presence on screen, I hope he can knock out some more great films.

His performance is all the more impressive given how unlike his own personality Logan is. There's a lot of guys in action films throwing shapes that just couldn't summon up that kind of grit, he brought a very vulnerable human element to the role too.

ps3lover · 26-03-2017 05:30PM

This is now the first solo Wolverine movie to cross the $200 million mark in the US box office. I seem to recall wondering why they couldn't make the first 2 R rated and being told that an R rated Wolverine movie wouldn't make much money.

Earthhorse · 26-03-2017 07:29PM

ps3lover wrote: »

This is now the first solo Wolverine movie to cross the $200 million mark in the US box office. I seem to recall wondering why they couldn't make the first 2 R rated and being told that an R rated Wolverine movie wouldn't make much money.

That was the conventual wisdom in Hollywood up until Deadpool. Who knows, perhaps it was even true for the demographics at the time? Nobody knows anything.

constitutionus · 27-03-2017 11:13PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I rewatched it last night. Only copped that during the trip, right after the Hotel, they were listening to the radio and it mentioned the Westchester accident and how mutants were killed, including several of the X-me -- at which point Logan turned off the radio.

took me the second time around to cop the "waiting for you at the statue of liberty" bit xavier was saying near the start was about the Motel laura and her "mom" were at and not Charlie having a "moment" in relation to the first X movie.

lotta nice stuff in this.

Seanachai · 28-03-2017 09:46AM

constitutionus wrote: »

took me the second time around to cop the "waiting for you at the statue of liberty" bit xavier was saying near the start was about the Motel laura and her "mom" were at and not Charlie having a "moment" in relation to the first X movie.

lotta nice stuff in this.

I thought when Charles whispered 'Sunseeker' to Logan while he was dying he was referring to Logan himself and not the boat. He must have saw Logan overcoming his resistance to getting involved with people again and helping them.

28-03-2017 11:29AM

constitutionus wrote: »

took me the second time around to cop the "waiting for you at the statue of liberty" bit xavier was saying near the start was about the Motel laura and her "mom" were at and not Charlie having a "moment" in relation to the first X movie.

lotta nice stuff in this.

It was excellent. What it also meant was that these still happened in the new timeline, which was altered when Logan went back to the 70s in Days of Future Past.

Agent Coulson · 29-04-2017 02:27PM

Logan is getting a Black and White limited release.

The Black Oil · 30-04-2017 11:21AM

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Logan is getting a Black and White limited release.

https://twitter.com/mang0ld/status/858061142609940480

01-05-2017 10:47AM

It might just be me, but I can't see what adding a black and white release would add to the movie.

Earthhorse · 01-05-2017 10:57AM

Dollar bills.

Sad Professor · 01-05-2017 11:07AM

Deleted User wrote: »

It might just be me, but I can't see what adding a black and white release would add to the movie.

It's just a fun alternative for fans that seems to suit the film's gritty western aesthetic, I guess. The official Instagram account posted a series of black and white stills from the film on the run up to release. It looks good in b&w.

Digital colour grading has kinda destroyed the cinematography of blockbusters, so these b&w versions may be the start of a shift away from the orange-and-teal look, which is pretty much the default now even in films trying to avoid it.

MilesMorales1 · 01-05-2017 11:18AM

I hope they include it on the blu ray though. Mad Max FR got a rerelease recently with the Black/White edition.

Fysh · 01-05-2017 01:23PM

MilesMorales1 wrote: »

I hope they include it on the blu ray though. Mad Max FR got a rerelease recently with the Black/White edition.

According to some news reports about the B&W version it'll be included on one of the home releases. I haven't watched Logan so far, but a B&W version that hews closer to the feel of the early trailers/teasers that used "Hurt" as the music would definitely get me watching.

01-05-2017 09:56PM

How does the B&W translate across when done retroactively? I might be totally wrong, but doesn't it have to be shot and lit in a very specific way for it to be proper? Or would it just be a case of applying a B&W filter?! :pac:

Fysh · 03-05-2017 01:27PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

How does the B&W translate across when done retroactively? I might be totally wrong, but doesn't it have to be shot and lit in a very specific way for it to be proper? Or would it just be a case of applying a B&W filter?! :pac:

It helps if it has been considered when framing and lighting the scenes during shooting, but with access to the original materials a lot can be achieved by reworking the grading and colour timing, particularly on newer digital kit. I guess we'll find out when it's released.

learn_more · 04-05-2017 04:20AM

I don't 'get' this movie at all. It was too disconnected from the series. I was constantly wondering what time frame we were supposed to be in, given the time warping themes of previous movies.

There was a LOT of fighting in this movie which isn't too much different from a lot of special effects. Take you pick which is better.

The movie turned out to be a long winded version of the trailer. You kinda see the whole move in the trailer but just much more long drawn out.

I think it was a really 'odd' movie overall and far too long which imo was an attempt to fake a good narrative.

Although Patrick Stewart was very good in his scenes and it showed that Jackman can act well if given the right roles, I think the movie was a mess. It did some things right but overall it was all meaningless.

I know this movie is quite popular but I have to say I found it quite boring.

Seanachai · 04-05-2017 03:38PM

learn_more wrote: »

I don't 'get' this movie at all. It was too disconnected from the series. I was constantly wondering what time frame we were supposed to be in, given the time warping themes of previous movies.

There was a LOT of fighting in this movie which isn't too much different from a lot of special effects. Take you pick which is better.

The movie turned out to be a long winded version of the trailer. You kinda see the whole move in the trailer but just much more long drawn out.

I think it was a really 'odd' movie overall and far too long which imo was an attempt to fake a good narrative.

Although Patrick Stewart was very good in his scenes and it showed that Jackman can act well if given the right roles, I think the movie was a mess. It did some things right but overall it was all meaningless.

I know this movie is quite popular but I have to say I found it quite boring.

Fair enough, I'm normally hyper-critical but this film got past my cynical shell. I'll take fight scenes, which I think were done very well in this case over CGI any day. I actually zone out with CGI now, I don't think the human eye will ever be fully fooled by it no matter how realistic it gets.

Nervous Wreck · 06-05-2017 01:42PM

Seanachai wrote: »

Fair enough, I'm normally hyper-critical but this film got past my cynical shell. I'll take fight scenes, which I think were done very well in this case over CGI any day. I actually zone out with CGI now, I don't think the human eye will ever be fully fooled by it no matter how realistic it gets.

Ironically, Logan was jammed full of CGI that you didn't notice!

TerrorFirmer · 06-05-2017 03:08PM

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

Ironically, Logan was jammed full of CGI that you didn't notice!

I don't think it's ironic, when most people talk about Logan they're more referencing the lack of plot dependent obvious CGI spectacle that normally dominates superhero movies.

Loads of movies have subtle CGI in every genre - look at something like the drama-thriller Gone Girl, huge amount of CGI in that movie but CGI isn't the driver of the film nor would the vast majority of people even have noticed.

Obviously Logan still has tonnes of conventional CGI necessitated by the script (as well as a lot of subtle CGI) but it's not in the same league as most other comic book movies.

Nervous Wreck · 06-05-2017 03:20PM

I was referring to the last sentence in the quoted post. "The human eye will never be fooled by cgi" Lots of CGI in Logan that you'd never spot.

TerrorFirmer · 06-05-2017 03:47PM

Yes but I got from his post that he actually meant in the sense of huge CGI spectacle like crumbling cityscapes, fantastical enemies, creatures, generally huge set pieces and the rest of it rather than subtle CGI.

I don't think he was actually talking about backdrops, overlays, etc - more just the typical superhero/comic book action fare that could not possibly be replicated via anything other than CGI.

With Logan, they wanted to tell a character driven story without the distraction of that lavish popcorn spectacle we've come to expect from comic book movies and as a result it feels more grounded and is a totally different experience. Doesn't mean there wasn't a ton of CGI but it was used in a very different and far more subtle way to previous outings.

At least I assume that's what he actually meant!

Nervous Wreck · 06-05-2017 05:26PM

Yep, that's very obviously what he meant, I was just having a little joke.

TerrorFirmer · 07-05-2017 10:16AM

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

Yep, that's very obviously what he meant, I was just having a little joke.

Hush you...let me have my pointless argument!

learn_more · 08-05-2017 03:23AM

Logans look was obviously half make-up and half cgi. The cgi part was easily noticeable on a tv screen , maybe not so noticeable on a cinema screen.

Seanachai · 08-05-2017 10:37AM

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

Ironically, Logan was jammed full of CGI that you didn't notice!

I did notice the cgi that was added, it was done in a subtle way that complimented the scenes though. It wasn't gratuitous and overpowering as it normally is on a lot of sci-fi. I watched an EPK on it on online so I'm aware of what was added. I'm not anti-cgi, I just feel that it should be used like you use embellishments on a cake.

MilesMorales1 · 13-05-2017 11:20PM

18491786_705529809630086_8998508989290159958_o.jpg?oh=8b75fd27cbb8af22b675c634071a7d28&oe=59BB771D

Hooray noir version.

Deisler · 14-05-2017 09:43AM

MilesMorales1 wrote: »

Hooray noir version.

Superb must order. Is b&w version getting a cinema release here?

Logan **Spoilers from post 212**

Comments

Logan Spoilers from post 212