Fox Studios' WOLVERINE 3 - LOGAN starring Hugh Jackman (2017) 8 8

[Logan510]

6 minutes ago, Straw-Man said:

you're talking to the guy that opined jackman was horrible in the role (not just in logan, but across all the films), because he's too tall and handsome (a "joke," he said). i'd put him on ignore if I didn't so like having mmehdy as my only one, ever. 

You'd put me on ignore because I think Hugh Jackman was absolutely wrong for the role?

 

Wow

[Logan510]

23 minutes ago, kevhtx said:

Disliking a movie is no big deal. Even calling it ridiculous or ludicrous is not. But, when trying to explain that everyone else liked it purely for a specific reason or reasons (language and violence?) and beyond that its , you leave yourself open for the shots. Even ridicule since the critical audience which wouldn't fall into that category liked it.

Simply say you don't like it, justify why and stand by it. Trying to explain why everyone else is wrong is really a losing battle.

I honestly can't understand why people liked it ( other than the reasons stated ) let alone alleged fans of the character.

That is 100% sincere.

[kevhtx]

1 minute ago, Logan510 said:

I honestly can't understand why people liked it ( other than the reasons stated ) let alone alleged fans of the character.

That is 100% sincere.

Not trying to make a direct comparison of these 2 subjects, but just the concept. I can't stand Jackson Pollack paintings and don't see how any can like them. But, a lot of people do and to each their own. They are critically and publicly popular (and worth a helluva lot of money). Sometimes with subjective material we just have to understand our tastes are different with others. 

[jsilverjanet]

I think Pollock was a genius 

[kevhtx]

25 minutes ago, jsilverjanet said:

I think Pollock was a genius 

It was the violence and language right?? 

[Logan510]

2 hours ago, kevhtx said:

Not trying to make a direct comparison of these 2 subjects, but just the concept. I can't stand Jackson Pollack paintings and don't see how any can like them. But, a lot of people do and to each their own. They are critically and publicly popular (and worth a helluva lot of money). Sometimes with subjective material we just have to understand our tastes are different with others. 

That’s a great analogy as I consider Pollack to be one of the greatest scam artists / hacks in modern art history.

[Logan510]

2 hours ago, jsilverjanet said:

I think Pollock was a genius 

He’s such a genius that you could do the same exact style of painting...or a spastic chimp could do it, either way.

[kevhtx]

1 minute ago, Logan510 said:

He’s such a genius that you could do the same exact style of painting...or a spastic chimp could do it, either way.

Haha....I agree....but point being, people see so many different things in art. In Logan, I thought the performances by most of the actors was so much better than most comic books movies. The writing and cinematography were as well. The R rating was a nice touch too since it made it more adult. I would not put it on the level of other classic films that I like though. I was just comparing to other comic book movies when I was watching it. That bar is not so high unfortunately. The Nolan batman movies were better imo, but not much else in the comic book realm.

[jsilverjanet]

12 minutes ago, Logan510 said:

He’s such a genius that you could do the same exact style of painting...or a spastic chimp could do it, either way.

Yet he did it first. Was successful and his works now hang in Moma and other art museums. 

[Logan510]

35 minutes ago, jsilverjanet said:

Yet he did it first. Was successful and his works now hang in Moma and other art museums. 

It’s paint splatter dude, don’t make it out like he was Michelangelo.

[kevhtx]

Ha, didnt mean to derail this train. I think Im actually gonna put on Logan right now. Ive never seen the noir version all the way through yet. 

[jsilverjanet]

35 minutes ago, Logan510 said:

It’s paint splatter dude, don’t make it out like he was Michelangelo.

[kevhtx]

1 minute ago, jsilverjanet said:

I get it.

I dont really like Pollack, but a lot of people dont like Monet/impressionism. For some reason, in Paris, one of Monet's paintings really got me emotional. Have absolutely no reason why. Something about art. All subjective and sometimes just hits people differently. I studied some of the history of Pollack and the Guggenheims. I found that interesting. I think thats a big reason he became famous (his relationship with their daughter).

As for Logan, back on topic slightly), I did see that article about the possibility of Laura/X-23 solo movie getting lost in the merger shuffle. I really hope that doesn't happen. I hope they do one and use the same actress to keep portraying her. I read that Mangold wanted to write it for her. Hope that still happens. 

[Darkowl]

On 12/28/2017 at 4:25 PM, Logan510 said:

No accounting for taste.

Needless to say, most people loved Logan, yet you hated it. I wonder If the opposite would be true If they made the film to your liking. 

[Logan510]

3 hours ago, Darkowl said:

Needless to say, most people loved Logan, yet you hated it. I wonder If the opposite would be true If they made the film to your liking. 

We'll never know as "most people" who watched the movie don't have any frame of reference except the other X-Men movies that Wolverine was in.

I've liked several comic book based movies that have done very well at the box office. But I frankly don't care how well a movie does or how much it makes for the most part and I certainly don't give a *spoon* if "most people loved it"...which I find to be a silly argument for why one should enjoy a movie.

[Bosco685]

LOGAN Secures WGA Nomination; Is A Best Adapted Screenplay Oscar Nomination Around The Corner?

Quote

Despite failing to secure any Golden Globe or Screen Actors Guild nominations, Logan is being recognized for its exceptional screenplay by the Writers Guild of America.

 

Scott Frank & James Mangold and Michael Green wrote the screenplay, while Mangold also receives story credit.  Other films competing in the WGA Adapted Screenplay category include:

• Call Me by Your Name, screenplay by James Ivory; based on the novel by André Aciman; Sony Pictures Classics
• The Disaster Artist, screenplay by Scott Neustadter & Michael H. Weber; based on the book The Disaster Artist: My Life Inside the Room, the Greatest Bad Movie Ever Made by Greg Sestero and Tom Bissell; A24
• Molly's Game, Screenplay by Aaron Sorkin; Based on the Book by Molly Bloom; STX Entertainment
• Mudbound, Screenplay by Virgil Williams and Dee Rees; Based on the Novel by Hillary Jordan; Netflix

 

[Darkowl]

Just now, Logan510 said:

We'll never know as "most people" who watched the movie don't have any frame of reference except the other X-Men movies that Wolverine was in.

I've liked several comic book based movies that have done very well at the box office. But I frankly don't care how well a movie does or how much it makes for the most part and I certainly don't give a *spoon* if "most people loved it"...which I find to be a silly argument for why one should enjoy a movie.

I would argue that people actually had plenty frame of reference, especially at a time when superhero movies are constantly being pumped out. The bar had been raised pretty high (and Logan even raised it higher). People already knew what kind of a Wolverine movie they wanted, and just by looking at the ratings, Logan delivered, and it was a lot more than just "Wolverine slash people apart grindhouse style or because they got to see Prof X use the F word." Of course, It was incredibly fulfilling to see Wolverine doing what he does best! 

I'm not  saying you should like Logan just because everyone else did. That would be closed minded. I just don't think it's cool to come to the belly of the beast to tell us why you think we all liked it.

[Logan510]

2 minutes ago, Darkowl said:

I would argue that people actually had plenty frame of reference, especially at a time when superhero movies are constantly being pumped out. The bar had been raised pretty high (and Logan even raised it higher). People already knew what kind of a Wolverine movie they wanted, and just by looking at the ratings, Logan delivered, and it was a lot more than just "Wolverine slash people apart grindhouse style or because they got to see Prof X use the F word." Of course, It was incredibly fulfilling to see Wolverine doing what he does best! 

I'm not  saying you should like Logan just because everyone else did. That would be closed minded. I just don't think it's cool to come to the belly of the beast to tell us why you think we all liked it.

I said most peoples frame of reference was the other movies with Wolverine so I wouldn't expect them to be disappointed. I think we can agree that most people watching comic book movies know very little about the characters except what they've seen in the movies.

As far as assuming why people here liked the movie, I did so only because I found it so bad and so silly, I could find no other reason why people here might have enjoyed it 

[Bosco685]

1 hour ago, Darkowl said:

I'm not  saying you should like Logan just because everyone else did. That would be closed minded. I just don't think it's cool to come to the belly of the beast to tell us why you think we all liked it.

Same thing in the Star Wars thread with some folks.

"I didn't like The Last Jedi."

"Oh, because Luke died?"

"No. The way he died."

"Nope. People that disliked the movie didn't like that Luke died."

If someone didn't like a movie, that's fine. Why they disliked it is certainly okay to share as well. But be open to hearing why people liked the movie. If folks have to be open to the negative responses, they should also be open to the positive responses.

 

[fastballspecial]

Well they made Luke a  that's why I didn't like it.