Wolverine: Why is he so popular?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
regarding wolverine upthread, why *is* he so popular?

-- dave k (operad200...), October 11th, 2005.

Huk-L (Huk-L), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 15:44 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

because he's a trash-talkin', cigar-smokin', masochist tough guy with a heart of gold!

s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 15:48 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

why is han solo so popular?

s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 15:49 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

"I know."

David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 15:51 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

He is a pretty well-concieved character who came along at exactly the right time, ie when superhero comics were edging in a 'grittier' direction, and has thus become the symbol of all that macho 'hard-edged' stuff that 12-15 year olds love in their comics. His trademark cool sound effect also surely has something to do with it.

chap who would dare to kill all the threads (chap), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 15:51 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Because in the second X-Men movie he totally stabs that motherfucker in the chest. With his claws. Even if Cyclops had claws he'd never use them.

PS Cyclops is way better than Wolverine--repression and pouting are more fun than beer-swilling and running from Alpha Flight.

adam (adam), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 15:53 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

What was the deal with the eye-patch? Was that his version of Clark Kent glasses?

Huk-L (Huk-L), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 15:57 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

I prefer Cyclops too, but he's so much more dependent upon context than Wolverine. Scott is a man who is more often than not defined by his relationships - Jean, Madelyne, Emma, his devotion to Charles and the "dream." He's at his best when he's playing off of Wolverine. Cyclops and Wolverine are easily one of the best combos in comics history. I'd argue that they are like the Superman and Batman of the Marvel Universe in this way.

Wolverine has chemistry with a lot of different characters, which is very key to his popularity. You can use him in a lot of different types of stories, especially since he's very old and plays well in 20th century period pieces.

Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 15:59 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

You know, in general, Wolverine is the Batman of the Marvel Universe.

Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:00 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Wolverine is a nice guy masquerading as a bastard.
Cyclops is a bastard maquerading as a nice guy.

The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:01 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Exactly!

Wolverine is not the type of guy who would abandon his wife and kid for his ex-girlfriend on a whim, but Cyclops is because he's a whiny narcissist. He's the Nate Fisher of the X-Men!

Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:05 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Yeah, I hate Cyclops. They should do a story line where Phoenix comes back from the grave and totally kills him. Never trust a man who has to wear shades all the time.

jel -- (jel), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:08 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Wolverine is also a hard worker - he's on three X-Men squads, the New Avengers, and goes off on loads of solo and team-up adventures! People admire his work ethic. If you think of it, all the other X-Men must have lots of downtime, but he must be mixing it up every day of the week!

Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:08 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

He's short and extremely hairy but women still like him - he's a role model for people who are not conventionally attractive. But then again, he's rejected by many of the women he fancies, and people can relate to that too. Loads of young men know what it's like to be in love with some girl who'd rather go out with a straight-laced preppy asshole.

Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:12 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Wolverine: Pretty In Pink a ten issue maxi-series written and drawn by Joe Q, coming in 2006!

Huk-L (Huk-L), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:14 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Gah!

Wolverine is overplayed yet still manaages to be awesome. He's such a simple template, you can put pretty much any type of story on him and it will work out great (although I do draw the line at pink chiffon, Mr. Huk).

The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:20 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Oh my God, Wolverine is also the Duckie of the Marvel Universe!

Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:22 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

HAHAHAHAHHAH

Jonothong Williamsmang (ex machina), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:27 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

TS: Duckie vs Cameron

The Ghost of You Can Make Them Both Work (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:28 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

C/D Universes where every character is Wolverine? ie mid-90s Image or Valiant after it got lame or Lady Death or whatever. I think that's done more harm to the idea of Wolvie as a legit character around whom stories can be told than anything else.

Wolverine is also popular because he has elaborate and unrealistic hair that predates the current megapopularity of manga by like decades.

adam (adam), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:30 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

The last time I checked, Wolverine didn't have Lady Death's amazing ludatits.

Also many of those stories suffered from leaving out the "nice guy masquerading as a" bit.

The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:31 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

(For example, Ellis's Stormwatch worked precisely because many of the characters were actually likeable underneath the gruff cynicism, or completely missed out on the cynical part and were genuinely nice; Swift for example didn't become a bastard until I THINK post-Millar Authority.)

The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 16:34 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Because he's the best at what he does, obviously.

Amadeo (Amadeo G.), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 17:51 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Wolverine is a nice guy masquerading as a bastard.
Cyclops is a bastard maquerading as a nice guy.

Is this consistent characterization, or just a series of writers saying "Hey, what's the most surprising thing we can do with this nice guy/bastard, that will really put our mark on the character"?

I may be misremembering, but I thought the original Lee/Kirby Cyclops was pretty much a milquetoast.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 17:54 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Wolverine is not the type of guy who would abandon his wife and kid for his ex-girlfriend on a whim, but Cyclops is because he's a whiny narcissist. He's the Nate Fisher of the X-Men!

haha, omg

Jordan (Jordan), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 17:57 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

But really, it's just the claws.

Jordan (Jordan), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 17:58 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Is this consistent characterization, or just a series of writers saying "Hey, what's the most surprising thing we can do with this nice guy/bastard, that will really put our mark on the character"?

This is the way they've both written ever since GS#1.

The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 18:02 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

but it's not just that he's popular, which i understand... as tom pointed out on that other thread, it's that he's popular enough that he can be the guest star in 4 books a month for 20 years, which is sort of insane... i really wish wolverine were the batman of the marvel universe, so there would be whole libraries of rainbow wolverine and whatnot.

dave k, Tuesday, 11 October 2005 19:04 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

wolverine's popularity reminds me of this line in "hot shots" where after charlie sheen stomps off, one of the pilots says in this dreamy voice "he's so conflicted!" ...

dave k, Tuesday, 11 October 2005 19:06 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Why would any woman fall for Daredevil when she could have Wolvering?

Huk-L (Huk-L), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 19:36 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Wolverine does not have nice suits, $$$, or blingin' sunglasses!

Jordan (Jordan), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 19:47 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

He has X's on his pant legs? SELL OUT.

Huk-L (Huk-L), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 20:41 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Rainbow Wolverine?

If only this was one of those forums full of photoshop geeks who would slave to make that cover a reality!

Vic Fluro (Vic Fluro), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 20:46 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

"Rainbow Batman" and action figures, Wolvering has had a more varied wardrobe than Batsmang through the years.

Huk-L (Huk-L), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 20:48 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

The claws, and rough demeanor for at least 25 years. Hell, when did he get big? 1980? the New Xmen was like 1976, wasn't it?

kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 20:53 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

"Essential Wolverine Vol. 1" might be the dullest collection of comics I have ever paid money for. I wouldn't have thought Claremont could manage to make a series starring Wolverine so boring, but oh he does, mainly by miring the character down in what seems like decades of unfathomable X-continuity, and a gang war plot which is even more tedious than "War Games".

Philip Alderman (Phil A), Tuesday, 11 October 2005 22:32 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

I don't think Wolverine really caught on til the Byrne run. The key issue is probably the one with him going buck wild on the Hellfire Club guards in the Dark Phoenix storyline. The Claremont/Miller miniseries cemented it.

Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Wednesday, 12 October 2005 00:20 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Yeah but there might be a point in what Philip's saying. Wolverine's a great character when he has someone to interact with. He's always been fascinating in X-Men (I ended up loving other characters like Kitty Pryde more than Logan, but he was the main reason I started reading X-Men) and he's also pretty good in team ups, but his regular series has always seemed pretty much of a drab. Except for the original Claremont/Miller series, which was loads of fun, but I'm not too sure it ended up being healthy for the character; from then on his solo outings became really dull versions of Daredevil.

iodine (iodine), Wednesday, 12 October 2005 01:52 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Blame Byrne. Cockrum never had much interest in Wolverine (he favored Nightcrawler). Byrne loooved Wolverine, and indulged him with multiple Canada arcs.

The key issue is probably the one with him going buck wild on the Hellfire Club guards in the Dark Phoenix storyline. The Claremont/Miller miniseries cemented it.

This is 100% correct. (As is Vic's addendum).

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/1d/Uncanny133.jpg

The last panel of Uncanny 132 had (very young) me chasing my tail for a month. And Byrnemont, with their long-term lease on the book, had been building to this for YEARS. Every single time Rule-Following Older Brother Scott held him back, dressed him down for engaging claws before brain, it was a chip in the bank.* And now, at last, there'd be no one to hold him back, and a bunch of baddies who truly Had It Coming.

This pretty much sealed the deal. And yeah, it's a classic, but I mean just the cover alone:
http://www.dynamicforces.com/images/xmen-daysoffuturepast-tpb.jpg


*Most of the time (e.g. vs. Magneto, vs Sauron), poor straight-man Scott really was OTM. The resolution of the Alpha Flight arc gave Logan a chance to show he'd absorbed the message.

rogermexico (rogermexico), Wednesday, 12 October 2005 03:46 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

In his introduction to the tpb of the Miller mini, Claremont says he thinks the key to the character is that he's a "failed samurai". Which is obviously crap. Its the claws. And the mysterious past. And the propensity for psychotic ultraviolence. He appeals to 14 year-old boys, basically. He was my favourite X-Man when I was a 14 year old boy.

David N (David N.), Wednesday, 12 October 2005 23:14 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

obviously crap

Wrong.

The appeal is that he's cool and a rebel, but Claremont is right to point out the significance and value of the noble-savage character arc and the long, shadowy (hence endlessly extensible/retcon-friendly) past.

Cool and a rebel doesn't buy 25 years of HOT. Ask Guy Gardner.

rogermexico (rogermexico), Wednesday, 12 October 2005 23:31 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Look at the loving attention paid to all those intricate swirls of arm hair in that first cover!

Leeeeeeeeee (Leee), Thursday, 13 October 2005 00:23 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

LOW BLOW, ROGER.

Huk-L (Huk-L), Thursday, 13 October 2005 00:37 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Hard to be cool when you look like a fourth Stooge. Guy Gardner's bowl haircut

scamperingalpaca (Chris Hill), Thursday, 13 October 2005 01:43 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

whoops - there were "

scamperingalpaca (Chris Hill), Thursday, 13 October 2005 01:48 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Feeling feeble here. Tried included symbols to show Wolvie's haircut as far superior to Guy's.

scamperingalpaca (Chris Hill), Thursday, 13 October 2005 01:49 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

I never thought I'd see the day when somebody said Guy Gardner was "cool"!!!

Guy just wouldn't be the same without the "ernie" hairdo!

iodine (iodine), Thursday, 13 October 2005 01:55 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Miguel got that right. GG wouldn't be the same without the "ernie" hairdo.
Besides, I think what caused GG to stop being cool was the whole retconning origin / vuldarian warrior thing, which made a perfectly good character convoluted and difficult to comprehend.

Wolverine, on the other hand, and despite all the false memories / origin / blah blah blah is a character that's been kept relatively simple and his core characteristics have been the same for years, that contributes to his enduring appeal.

Amadeo (Amadeo G.), Thursday, 13 October 2005 03:33 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

Isn't there some sort of weird macho appeal going on with his "healing factor" also (and was this and its terminology stolen from some older SF material? I know Claremont used to do that occasionally)? You can beat the crap out of him but he *will* always get up again and get you back-- scales better into the average teenage boy's psychology than being invulnerable to bullets (more a fantasy for teenage nerds who feel vulnerable to everything)?

Chris F. (servoret), Thursday, 13 October 2005 05:20 (thirteen years ago) Permalink

<i>if anything, dr. posh nosh should have not blabbed and bragged bond villain style, and they could have just let the camera rest ominously on a box of corn flakes</i>

...and speaking of product placement, wasn't it Kellogg's Corn Flakes that Laura was eating in Caliban's shack (before she calmly busts some heads)? That must have been a deliberate nod to the GMO storyline, I didn't catch that.

morrisp, Friday, 17 March 2017 21:13 (one year ago) Permalink

as someone in that general industry I assure you we are ambivalent to mutant powers

mh 😏, Friday, 17 March 2017 21:16 (one year ago) Permalink

I'm all 'bout them GMOs; don't care if they suppress my healing factor

morrisp, Saturday, 18 March 2017 02:15 (one year ago) Permalink

the worldwide by 2029 thing seems plausible, china actually planted as much corn as north america last year

mh 😏, Saturday, 18 March 2017 02:59 (one year ago) Permalink

People are complaining about glucose-fructose syrup's debilitating effects in the real world. That's corn derived I think.
Wonder if that's why I didn't take it in with the mutant demise cos it had me linking it elsewhere.

Stevolende, Saturday, 18 March 2017 06:19 (one year ago) Permalink

My wife declares Logan to be the most violent film we've ever seen, and I was all, "No, surely not!", but actually having trouble thinking of one more so, having avoided torture porn so far. Really liked it, the whole downbeatness and minimal apparent CGI. And the Xavier seizures were genuinely upsetting to experience as viewers.

I hear from this arsehole again, he's going in the river (James Morrison), Sunday, 19 March 2017 23:10 (one year ago) Permalink

Also, the actress playing Laura, where do they find a child who can act like that? Especially as it's almost all body language for the first 2/3 of the film.

I hear from this arsehole again, he's going in the river (James Morrison), Sunday, 19 March 2017 23:11 (one year ago) Permalink

watching this a couple days after my grandfather's funeral, when he was very mentally disconnected toward the end, made Patrick Stewart's role seem very true

the medicated parts where he doesn't know quite what's going on and lays blame on Logan, not for any specific thing but just all kinds of blame, because he has no control or even understanding of his life, was very realistic

mh 😏, Monday, 20 March 2017 01:30 (one year ago) Permalink

Jackman is getting the lion's share of credit/publicity for the film, but Stewart did just a great a job on his way out

Nhex, Monday, 20 March 2017 02:54 (one year ago) Permalink

Also, the actress playing Laura, where do they find a child who can act like that? Especially as it's almost all body language for the first 2/3 of the film.

Apparently they looked high and wide, and found her in a UK/Spain family of actors. Something else I read said that an earlier draft had Laura talking a lot, from the outset; and a writer came in and stripped the dialogue way down, confident that she shouldn't speak until towards the end. (I think this is all in the film's Wikipedia entry, which was pretty much the extent of my post-viewing "tell me more" research.)

morrisp, Monday, 20 March 2017 03:16 (one year ago) Permalink

Phew, that was heavy! Really good though. Feel like they could have left the violence offscreen for the first two-thirds of the movie and it would have been ok (and maybe a bit more impactful). I was numb to it by the end. The scenes between Logan and Xavier were heartbreaking. And yeah - the girl who played Laura was amazing.

DJI, Monday, 20 March 2017 03:39 (one year ago) Permalink

Also, as far as I could see this was wonderfully free of a Stan lee cameo! Hurrah!

I hear from this arsehole again, he's going in the river (James Morrison), Tuesday, 21 March 2017 21:40 (one year ago) Permalink

Pretty sure he was at the casino

Nhex, Tuesday, 21 March 2017 21:44 (one year ago) Permalink

Aw, fuck

I hear from this arsehole again, he's going in the river (James Morrison), Tuesday, 21 March 2017 23:16 (one year ago) Permalink

He should have left his wig off to respect the theme of aging

(±\ PLO;;;;;;; Style (sic), Wednesday, 22 March 2017 01:01 (one year ago) Permalink

yeah, the idea that stan lee will still be alive, still hanging around being boring in 2029 one of the most frightening things about that projected future

I hear from this arsehole again, he's going in the river (James Morrison), Wednesday, 22 March 2017 04:36 (one year ago) Permalink

This was like Mad Max + The Road + Hanna + X-Men

and a wee bit of children of men, right?

the late great, Friday, 31 March 2017 06:51 (one year ago) Permalink

i wasn't super into this for a lot of different reasons which are too boring to get into here but i thought the scenes that were about family dynamics were really well done, and yes patrick stewart and the little girl were both really great

the late great, Friday, 31 March 2017 06:53 (one year ago) Permalink

two weeks pass...

Downloaded this and loved it, mostly, but had to skip over the wholesome farm family interlude. I was shocked by how long it goes on--the action comes to a complete stop for 15 minutes! Feel like Wolverine and X23 could have learned the This Is What A Loving Family Looks Like lesson in a fraction of that boring time.

Dan I., Friday, 14 April 2017 15:43 (one year ago) Permalink

The farm family thing was where the movie really hit the skids for me - up until that point I was really digging on the setup, this very unfamiliar situation for the characters, seeing stuff like Wolverine loading Professor X's wheelchair in the trunk - so many really good details and you don't have a really strong sense of where this is all going. As soon as the farm family shows up it locks into a much more predictable movie: these guys are obviously all doomed and from there on out we're going to be in a Waterworld remake. There are still great moments after that (the little doctor's office scene was really well done in a non-showy way, I thought) but it becomes a more generic movie, with a particularly dicey final action sequence - oddly evocative of X-Men 3, of all things, and the kids alternated between forgetting they had superpowers, and then using them in ways that really felt like the B-team came in to do the shots and the effects.

Seemed particularly shitty that Wolverine basically dooms the family by getting involved in the confrontation with the evil agro corporation - hard to watch that and not think "oh, what, so Logan's gonna skip town tomorrow and these thugs are gonna come back around and burn the house down, or what?" It's also in this stretch that we wind up Professor X's arc and it seemed a really perfunctory end to this character, after all these years. But then the same could be said for Logan also.... evil twin Wolverine just didn't work well for me as a main antagonist. I get what they were going for thematically, but it doesn't quite take off as anything really interesting even if the fights are great.

long dark poptart of the rodeo (Doctor Casino), Friday, 14 April 2017 15:55 (one year ago) Permalink

y'know I was just thinking the other day about how I wish you had continued that Claremont/X-Men blog

Οὖτις, Friday, 14 April 2017 15:58 (one year ago) Permalink

I think about that a lot! Always feels like something we MIGHT pick back up again someday, maybe with slightly different expectations for ourselves. I fell out of keeping up with current comics again right around the time we lost track of the blog, and that was a small but subtle angle of interest, being able to refer to much more recent developments. But I was always really itching to get to the point where we could alternate between X-Men and New Mutants, all the different artists coming and going, the recurring themes becoming clearer and clearer with time even as you can feel Claremont constantly itching to escape any kind of fixed setup or status quo for the book... ahhhh, I love that whole period. Maybe! Maybe!

long dark poptart of the rodeo (Doctor Casino), Friday, 14 April 2017 16:02 (one year ago) Permalink

I'm not even a big X-Men fan (altho the apex of Claremont's run did coincide w my peak superhero-comics-buying years ie, the mid-80s), I just dug the approach and perspective on something that's so canonical

Οὖτις, Friday, 14 April 2017 16:10 (one year ago) Permalink

like there's huge gaps in my reading - I was really only paying attention for a couple years - so it was interesting to get all the details filled in from a post-mortem critical perspective

Οὖτις, Friday, 14 April 2017 16:11 (one year ago) Permalink

Thanks! Yeah, not to toot my own horn but it felt like we were finding a good balance. In hindsight we probably still did a little too much summary or lingering on silly things, but it was the kind of blog I want to read and want to write, where you're generally analyzing things at whatever level and not just listing everything that happens. It was also really cool because David has a much deeper knowledge of, for example, artist credits and careers, and could draw connections to other titles and things going on in the period that were really off my radar. It was a good pairing. Every time we meet up we talk vaguely about reviving it, but it's a schedule thing since projects like that do require setting aside dedicated time for reading, for having the conversation, and for editing/posting.

long dark poptart of the rodeo (Doctor Casino), Friday, 14 April 2017 16:17 (one year ago) Permalink

The lesson of the Farm Family thing isn't that "this is what a loving family looks like", it's that Logan is the harbinger of death.

Andrew Farrell, Friday, 14 April 2017 20:38 (one year ago) Permalink

Okay, but it's still pretty interminable.

Dan I., Friday, 14 April 2017 20:53 (one year ago) Permalink

and I do think that a strong theme of the section (or at least the parts I saw, I fast-forwarded through most of it), was that Xavier wanted Big and (especially) Little wolverines to observe these good-hearted folks and learn that it's possible to live in a normal, peaceful manner with people you love without shoving a metal spike through their skull at the slightest provocation.

Dan I., Friday, 14 April 2017 20:57 (one year ago) Permalink

what with her being repeatedly shown to be institutionally feral and all

Dan I., Friday, 14 April 2017 20:58 (one year ago) Permalink

Well, yeah, that was all pretty explicitly rammed home. I think the thematic beat is fine, if unsubtle - just how it was worked into a narrative was pretty weak.

long dark poptart of the rodeo (Doctor Casino), Friday, 14 April 2017 21:01 (one year ago) Permalink

Sure, but I'm saying but a point of the sequence is that Xavier is dead wrong there.

I mean as noted it's not subtle about it - they watch Shane fercryingoutloud.

Andrew Farrell, Friday, 14 April 2017 22:14 (one year ago) Permalink

Ah, fair enough.

long dark poptart of the rodeo (Doctor Casino), Friday, 14 April 2017 22:18 (one year ago) Permalink

As soon as they were on the freeway inviting them back for dinner I was wishing I could skip the next X minutes. Hoped it would be a fake-out where no one ended up murdered. :)

change display name (Jordan), Friday, 14 April 2017 22:36 (one year ago) Permalink

I thought the farm sequence was well-done; I just didn't need to see an innocent teenage boy murdered onscreen. That went too far for me.

morrisp, Monday, 17 April 2017 01:54 (one year ago) Permalink

one month passes...

I liked this movie despite everything. I'm biased towards the story, because I certainly empathize with a scruffy-bearded, self-loathing dad to a miraculous daughter who seems just like him in all the best and worst ways, and I'll give the time of day to any character whose emotional comfort zone is being angry at everything all the time even though they know it's self-defeating.

The villains, though - I had no idea why we were supposed to be afraid of them, much less interested in anything they had to say. They just seemed like an army of jerks. The orcs in LOTR were more believably fearsome, and you knew they didn't stand a chance either.

Stephen Merchant was completely unexpected. Didn't give him nearly enough to do.

My favorite part was (paraphrasing) "bad things happen to people I care about!" "then I'll be fine."

El Tomboto, Monday, 29 May 2017 00:03 (one year ago) Permalink

This movie was recently re-released in B&W for a weekend (limited-run), which is an interesting thing for a big studio to do.

face it, tiger... you just hit middle age (morrisp), Tuesday, 30 May 2017 02:05 (one year ago) Permalink

I'd pay to see the silent film cut, like the black & chrome version of the last Mad Max. I might even pay movie ticket prices.

El Tomboto, Tuesday, 30 May 2017 03:13 (one year ago) Permalink

The b&w Logan cut is with the digital release as a freebie.

mh, Tuesday, 30 May 2017 03:53 (one year ago) Permalink

watched logan last night and was super-impressed by jackman, stewart and dafne keen's performances - patrick stewart in particular was fantastic in a role that could easily have been mawkish but he was great at swinging between lucid tenderness and rage and confusion

i also really, really liked the effects they put together for professor x's seizures

i think ultimately it's better than the sum of its parts mainly due to the familiarity of jackman and stewart and how good their performances are. for all the talk of it being the first 'real' wolverine movie it shared a lot of the faults of mangold's first one - shitty villains and weirdly slack pacing being the main ones. and while i understand that having wolverine face and overcome a younger, more feral version of himself was thematically appropriate it ended up being just kinda ham-handed in practice. having him face off against sabretooth instead would still fit the themes of family and redemption and might offer a bit more of an interesting villain for a final face-off

the other thing which bugged me was the utterly implausible exposition video put together by the nurse who rescued laura - if they were going to do that, couldn't they have mocked up the shots as like stolen surveillance camera footage or something instead of implying that the was walking around highly secure areas with her phone out filming like a tourist?

heck i've even been an 'oyster pirate' (bizarro gazzara), Wednesday, 31 May 2017 11:25 (one year ago) Permalink

also, while i remember: i'm sure it's hard to do a road movie about a grizzled burnout shuttling a precious human cargo across a dystopian landscape without invoking children of men or the road but mangold seemed to be leaning into it rather than offering points of differentiation most of the time

heck i've even been an 'oyster pirate' (bizarro gazzara), Wednesday, 31 May 2017 11:34 (one year ago) Permalink

the other thing which bugged me was the utterly implausible exposition video put together by the nurse who rescued laura - if they were going to do that, couldn't they have mocked up the shots as like stolen surveillance camera footage or something instead of implying that the was walking around highly secure areas with her phone out filming like a tourist?

Yeah, I made the same gripe up above (...I point out in a "gr8 minds think alike" way, not an "I scooped you" way)

face it, tiger... you just hit middle age (morrisp), Wednesday, 31 May 2017 16:59 (one year ago) Permalink

two great minds united by irritation at a minor detail in an action movie

heck i've even been an 'oyster pirate' (bizarro gazzara), Wednesday, 31 May 2017 17:01 (one year ago) Permalink

I think that's what brought Adorno & Horkheimer together

face it, tiger... you just hit middle age (morrisp), Wednesday, 31 May 2017 17:03 (one year ago) Permalink

captain and tennille too iirc

heck i've even been an 'oyster pirate' (bizarro gazzara), Wednesday, 31 May 2017 17:07 (one year ago) Permalink

I wonder if there will be an X-23 movie; I'd love to see Laura's story continue (although not necessarily the same story told in the comics). I read a blurb saying it may happen, but of course who knows.

I'm assuming the New Mutants movie coming next year has nothing to do with the world of "Logan" or the group of kids at the end.

face it, tiger... you just hit middle age (morrisp), Wednesday, 31 May 2017 19:04 (one year ago) Permalink

it's going to have Storm from Days of Future Past, so barring time-jump shenanigans I assume it'll be set in the early '90s

Nhex, Wednesday, 31 May 2017 20:22 (one year ago) Permalink

Grunge soundtrack!

face it, tiger... you just hit middle age (morrisp), Thursday, 1 June 2017 00:11 (one year ago) Permalink

Grunge soundtrack would be perfect for that Cable movie we were brainstorming a while back, that would just go all-in on 1991-era badassery, and have only solid colors as backgrounds for 3/4 of the scenes, five variant opening credits sequences, etc.... gah, what thread was that?

﴿→ ☺ (Doctor Casino), Thursday, 1 June 2017 05:09 (one year ago) Permalink

I reread some Cable stuff on Marvel Unlimited and it's not all bad? The badass gun dude cliche is horrible but any mid-/post-conflict era where dudes who are into guns and infiltrating our zeitgeist (and colonizing our police forces) makes a reasonable big gun man a viable alternative to "shoot everything" big gun man

plus pouches are back in

mh, Thursday, 1 June 2017 05:45 (one year ago) Permalink

one month passes...

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.