Tuesday 7 March 2017

Film: 'Logan'

I did see the first 'Wolverine' film but not the more recent one. It hardly matters as the plot, such as any exists, is a standard one of grisly violence, bloody fights and chases. I kept thinking of Mad Max - and the scenario is very similar - futuristic (slightly) and barren wildernesses, this time in America. 

I only went to this because of the starring of our hunky Hugie Jackman, here appearing at the end of his steel-clawed career as a sorry, washed-up, untidily-begrizzled, alcohol-dependent character, trying to keep father-figure and wheelchair-confined Professor X (Patrick Stewart) from the clutches of various nefarious characters, including Richard E.Grant as a demented scientist trying to create, by genetic engineering, an army of children with super-human powers and nature-twisting talents. One of these, a girl of around ten or eleven, he takes with him - a total irritant of a child who, it's revealed, is his daughter in a sense, as she's been given Logan /Wolverine's own DNA. Her ability to perform formidable feats of the physical is, rather strangely, far superior to her capacity to speak, as when she talks it's only in Spanish. She has the on-screen presence of an annoying little twerp and I wish they'd left her behind to her fate. The other children, about a dozen of them (Saints preserve us!) with their 'Superman' powers are held in reserve until the film's final quarter hour for the predictable grand confrontation.

Of some interest is the presence of Stephen Merchant whom I've only seen in comedies - as Ricky' Gervais' ineffectual agent and sidekick in TV's 'Extras' and popping up in the occasional British film comedy in brief cameo appearances. Here his role is quite substantial and 'serious' - a hapless albino with knowledge about Wolverine and his whereabouts with the girl which the adversaries are desperate to get hold of.

I found the film very disposable entertainment and hardly one I'd go out of my way to recommend. Direction is by James Mangold who is also responsible for the unimaginative story which is little more than a pretext on which to hang reasons for depicting bone-crunching, limb-lopping, blood-spurting fights. No doubt some are excited by seeing such whereas to my mind it's all very 'so what?'  
It wouldn't be right to say that I was bored, though it's all so standard without anything to lift it out of the rut. I do think the story would have been improved if that brat of a little girl hadn't figured so large in the telling. The two and quarter hours could also have been cut back by at least thirty minutes with no damage done. 
If this kind of film is your bag, then do go. On the other hand, if you only want to see it because of the main starring role of Hugh J., you may well feel disappointed to the same degree that I was.........5.    



10 comments:

  1. urgh, this sounds awful!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wouldn't go that far, Sol, unless you've got a genuine aversion to seeing graphic violence. I just thought it was the same old stuff we've seen too many times already.

      Delete
  2. I was so disappointed, I felt like laughing in some scenes, and it wasn't a comedy...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I know what you mean, Debbie. I don't think I laughed though. It was more a case of shoulder-shrugging!

      Delete
  3. Ray,
    Oh I do like Hugh Jackman but I may pass on this mayhem film of his. Pat and I saw "John Wick" while we were in Los Angeles. One totally plotless but bloody film is quite enough thank you.
    Ron

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is what I'd rate as probably H.J.'s most forgettable film to date, Ron.
      Didn't see 'John Wick' on purpose as it had nothing at all to grab me. If you'd said it was worth a peek I might have done so.

      Delete
  4. I love me some Hugh Jackman and his Huge Ackman, but I can't with these comic-to-movie characters.
    If it comes on cable and I'm bored .....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When the time comes to list his 'Ten Greatest Films' I guarantee that this will be on hardly anyone's list, Bob.

      Delete
  5. I'm not a fan of Hugh Jackman, but I really enjoyed this - pretty much everything worked for me other than Stephen Merchant's incongruous Bristolian accent.

    What I mainly liked is that it was superhero film in a recognisable world (without the sass of Deadpool) and with a human story at its heart.

    And Hugh Jackman didn't try to sing, which was also a relief.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good that you liked it, Andrew (and also good to hear from you again after a long time). Maybe being the HUGE Hugh J fan that I am and for which I make no apologies, that worked against my appreciation of this film. (I think his singing might even have perked things up a bit!).
      I'd not noticed Stephen M's accent though I should have. Maybe I was distracted by seeing him in such an unexpected role.
      I also like 'Deadpool', which I wouldn't mind seeing again, and I think this would have profited by having some of that film's humour. Alas, I wouldn't wish to sit through this one a second time.

      Delete