REVIEW: Logan

It's almost easy to forget just how old the X-Men film franchise is. The first movie came out back in 2000 and very few things since have stayed consistent (especially when it comes to both quality and continuity). After nearly two decades, we've had some excellent films (X2, Deadpool) and some not-so excellent films (X-Men Origins: Wolverine, X-Men: Apocalypse), as well as more in-universe reboots, retcons, and time-travel shenanigans than anyone could have predicted (X-Men: First Class, X-Men: Days of Future Past). Throughout all of these sequels and prequels and alternate timelines, there has been one constant in each and every X-film (with the exception of Deadpool); Hugh Jackman as Wolverine. For the past 17 years, Jackman has been the only actor to portray Logan on the big screen; he made the role his own and now, in Logan, he sets out to give the character the swan song he deserves in his final appearance as Wolverine.

The year is 2029 and mutants are all but extinct. The X-Men are a distant memory and Logan (Hugh Jackman) finds himself working as a chauffeur to support an ailing Professor Xavier (Patrick Stewart). The years haven't been kind to them; Logan's healing factor isn't what it used to be and Xavier is suffering from a degenerative brain disease (which, considering his telepathic abilities, makes things far more dangerous and complicated than one would hope). Their quest to escape persecution and live out their remaining days at sea is interrupted by the introduction of Laura (Dafne Keen), an 11-year old mutant who's on the run from the shadowy Transigen corporation. At Xavier's insistence, the three set off on a cross-country road trip to shepherd Laura to safety, all the while being pursued by Transigen's head of security, Pierce (Boyd Holbrook), and his team of Reavers.

This is the very definition of a multi-genre film. Naturally, it's a comic adaptation, and while it falls into the superhero genre, it's far more low-key than something like The Avengers. This is the story of a broken man learning how to be a hero once more, and the overall themes of sacrifice and redemption are core ideals of the superhero archetype. At the same time it's also a western, taking inspiration from classics like Shane and employing hefty doses of Johnny Cash music and iconography throughout. The dusty, southwestern landscapes give things a vaguely post-apocalyptic feeling, despite plenty of evidence to the contrary (Las Vegas is as popular as ever and limousine services are still in high demand); as far as Logan and the Professor are concerned, the world may as well have ended years ago. 

Director James Mangold also took inspiration from classic film noir and German expressionism, citing their similarity to comic book panels in terms of lighting and framing. As a result, we have an utterly gorgeous film that manages to leave a real visual imprint, and all without a single destroyed city or exploding setpiece. The action here is purely in service of the story and characters (rather than what will make for a good "wow" moment in the trailer), so every fight scene feels both necessary and incredibly visceral. Wolverine's most obvious superpower is built entirely around slashing and stabbing, and here we finally get to see that power at its goriest. Similarly, the stakes are far lower than your standard superhero fare. Like Deadpool, this is a film where the world isn't hanging in the balance; the conflict is far more personal, allowing us to form a more intimate connection to our protagonists. This is a film that isn't afraid to get close to its audience and sink its proverbial claws right into your heart.

It might sound like a laugh to call this a family road trip movie, but that's not an entirely inaccurate description. The X-Men series is very much about family; in Logan, we see Professor X and Wolverine coping with the loss of that dynamic. With the addition of Laura (who has never been able to experience life as a normal little girl), the three are able to come together and rediscover what it feels like to love and be loved. It's fitting how Logan, a film starring a character whose mutant power is regenerating from wounds, is thematically all about healing after past traumas. Logan, Xavier, and Laura all have their crosses to bear, and they gradually learn to make peace with themselves over the course of the film. It's a really excellent character study that doesn't miss a beat; I sometimes found myself surprised by just how invested I had become whenever the tension flared up. This is a movie that will make you feel things, especially if you're one for parent-child dynamics.

Of course, all of that emotion is thanks largely in-part to a stellar lineup of actors. The supporting cast members all do their jobs well (Holbrook is easy to root against and Stephen Merchant wields a surprising amount of dramatic energy as Caliban), but this movie is very clearly all about the main trio of Logan, Charles, and Laura. These three are so good that I really can't decide who I liked more. Hugh Jackman meant for this to be his swan-song as Wolverine, and I honestly can't think of a more fitting send-off for the role. As I mentioned, he's played the part for the past 17 years. In that time, he's completely captured every aspect of Logan's personality; both the tortured immortal and the feral beast. We've watched him portray this character for nearly two decades, and every ounce of emotion implied by that statement is visible in his performance. 

Meanwhile, Patrick Stewart takes the character of Charles Xavier in a very different direction. Normally the calm, collected voice of reason, we now see Xavier's age starting to get to him. His mind isn't what it once was and Logan is forced to assume the role of his primary caregiver, very much in the way that many adults are eventually forced to care for their elderly parents. Gone are the days when Charles Xavier owned and operated a school for gifted youngsters; now he needs physical assistance to use the bathroom and get into bed. It's a humbling portrayal of a character who acted as a mentor to generations; children who saw him command the X-Men in 2000 are now adults themselves. His is a situation that is all too real, and is sure to hit close to home for many (myself included). This is just as much of a send-off for Patrick Stewart as it is for Hugh Jackman, and I wholly believe this is something they can (and should) be proud of. That said, the standout of the main cast for me was newcomer Dafne Keen as Laura (better known to comic and fighting game aficionados as X-23). This is her film debut, yet she manages to match the intensity and emotion of Hugh Jackman and Patrick Stewart (who are both very much on their A-game here). That feat alone, I feel, is worthy of note; I hope to see her in more.

What else can I say about Logan? It's basically a perfect film. Plenty of condescending snobs will say things like "Logan is an excellent film, despite being a comic book movie" or "surprisingly, Logan manages to transcend its superhero trappings and deliver something of genuine quality". Not only are statements such as these unapologetically pretentious, they're also completely missing the point; Logan hits as hard as it does, not in spite of its comic book origins, but because of them. Had this film existed on its own with no X-Men franchise behind it, it would still be a well-made, well-acted movie. But the fact that this feels like a culmination of 17 years' worth of ups, downs, and blockbuster iconography (and manages to exceed all expectations to boot) adds a vital element that simply wouldn't exist, were this not part of a long-running superhero franchise. More to the point, Logan is proof that comic books can lead to films that amount to more than a series of expensive CGI laser beams being fired at a bland villain. This is proof that a superhero blockbuster need not rely on city-leveling climaxes and sneaky sequel teasers in order to make money and please an audience. Moreover, Logan is proof that, when a film is motivated by artistic vision rather than by revenue, movies about superhumans can end up being the most human stories of them all.

REVIEW: X-Men Apocalypse

"Everyone always knows the third movie is the worst," quips Jean Grey (Sophie Turner), as she and fellow teen mutants Cyclops (Tye Sheridan), Nightcrawler (Kodi Smit-McPhee), and Jubilee (Lana Condor) exit a showing of Return of the Jedi. Ironically prophetic words, considering that X-Men: Apocalypse is the third in the semi-new line of X-Men movies (a line that started with the quite good First Class and was followed by the all-around excellent Days of Future Past). While it's likely that this joke was meant to be a dig at Brett Ratner's heavily-derided entry in the series, X-Men: The Last Stand, it still doesn't change the fact that it manages to predict where Apocalypse falls in relation to its siblings.

The year is 1983 and Professor Charles Xavier (James McAvoy) has begun transitioning his family home into a bonafide school for gifted youngsters. Meanwhile, the powerful mutant En Sabah Nur (better known as Apocalypse, played by Oscar Isaac), buried in ancient Egypt by those who feared his power, has emerged after millenia of slumber. Believing that humanity has lost its way and wishing to reclaim his place as god-king of all mankind, Apocalypse gathers four "horsemen" (Storm, played by Alexandra Shipp, Psylocke, played by Olivia Munn, Angel, played by Ben Hardy, and Magneto, played by Michael Fassbender) to assist in his conquering of planet Earth. As one would expect, it's up to the X-Men to stop him.

The heart of any good X-Men story is the relationship between mutants and average people; what fears and prejudices are brought to the surface when homo-sapiens are faced with homo-superior. Since the very first X-Men comic, the premise has involved special people who are dedicated to protecting a world that hates and fears them. Unfortunately for Apocalypse, that conflict is almost entirely absent here. Sure, there's the odd remark from Scott Summers or Jean Grey about how difficult it is to be a teenager with such fantastical powers, but human-mutant relations does not lie at the crux of the story here, as it did with First Class and Days of Future Past. The X-Men are not called into action to prove themselves before a world of bigots and naysayers, but rather because Apocalypse is a big evil dude who wants to rule the world, and they don't want that to happen. As I mentioned before, there's a scene where several of the students (including the demonic, blue-skinned Nightcrawler) take a trip to the mall to see a movie; this is the most obvious X-Men setup ever, clearly leading to a scene where we get to experience not only the culture of the 1980's, but the culture of intolerance and distrust towards mutantkind that is perpetually relevant in modern society. Instead we see none of it, aside from the aformentioned wink to the audience.

It's this facet of the movie that keeps Apocalypse from achieving true greatness; this is a movie that is massive in scale, but miniscule in scope. There are moments of brilliance, such as the setup for Michael Fassbender's Magneto, or the comedic return of Quicksilver (Evan Peters), or even the likely studio-mandated appearance by Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) that manages to somehow NOT feel shoehorned into an already dense plot. However, these individual moments aren't enough to change the fact that the primary conflict here is yet another braindead "powerful guy wants to rule everything, levels cities to do so" summer blockbuster plot that we've seen a million times before.

This is typically where I'd bring up the cast, but there are so many characters who do so little that I was hardly able to get a feel for their personalities by the time the credits rolled. Naturally, McAvoy and Fassbender are both spectacular as Xavier and Magneto, giving the strong performances we've come to expect from the two by this point (if the rest of the movie was on-par with Fassbender's story and performance, this might have been the best X-Men movie to date). Kodi Smit-McPhee is fun (if underused) as Nightcrawler, and Nicholas Hoult makes for a fine Beast, but the rest of the cast of merry mutants (Cyclops, Jean Grey, Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence), and ESPECIALLY Jubilee, Psylocke, and Angel) have very little to do in terms of characterization or relevance to the plot. Sure, the former three are present for the majority of important story beats, but I still wouldn't necessarily classify them as main protagonists. The pacing in this movie is a complete mess, as it can't decide whether it wants to focus on the established characters of Professor X, Magneto, and company, or build the more iconic team of characters that headlined the original series of movies back in the early 2000's. 

It's the Phantom Menace problem of stretching itself too thin over too many characters, and as such the movie lacks an emotional pillar for the audience to identify with and latch onto. Cyclops would be the ideal choice, seeing as how he's a fish-out-of-water thrust into Xavier's School after his mutation manifests, yet we see him instantly acclimate to this massive change in environment and lifestyle immediately after being given a pair of ruby-quartz Ray Bans. Professor X played a large role in the two prior movies, yet here he's left without an arc; he's a wise mentor who contributes to the plot, but the events of this film leave him essentially unchanged, save for a lack of hair. Even Jennifer Lawrence's Mystique, while a very prominent and vital character to both First Class and Days of Future Past, has surprisingly little to do here. Not that I'm complaining, considering how evidently phoned-in her performance is, but it would have been nice to have someone to latch onto. We feel the most for Magneto, but the things he does over the course of the movie greatly outweigh any empathy he may have earned. And while Evan Peters once again steals the show as Quicksilver, he's not given enough screentime or development to be anything other than "the jokey member of the team".

Oscar Isaac really does the best he can with what he's been given here. As the name would imply, Apocalypse is a fairly theatrical villain. I expected lots of dramatic monologues and villainous posturing and an ego of biblical proportions. I of course got all of that, but the way the movie is shot degrades the effect to a monumental degree. At 5' 9", Oscar Isaac isn't exactly an impressively tall guy. In order to make him appear more intimidating as Apocalypse, the forty-pound bodysuit he wears involves a fair amount of padding, as well as lifts in the boots. This wouldn't normally be an issue, as such techniques have been used for ages. However, the cinematography takes what should have been a physically imposing villain and makes him look more like a cosplayer with limited mobility. Not to make the obvious comparison to the MCU, but Marvel Studios has proved that there is a way to make silly, complicated comic book designs translate well to the big screen, so long as they are shot appropriately. Characters who dress as absurdly as Thanos and Loki don't lose an ounce of their gravitas, despite the oddball accoutrements. This sadly isn't the case for Apocalypse and his horsemen, who all appear passable at best, undeniably comical at worst. Not since Life is Beautiful have I laughed so hard at a scene taking place in a concentration camp, but I guess when your antagonists look like the Village People decided to pursue careers as Power Rangers villains, it's simply to be expected.

X-Men: Apocalypse is not a bad movie. Despite its problems with pacing and story, there are several moments sprinkled throughout that keep this from being a boring, mindless slog. That said, it certainly isn't a good movie either. It's entirely middling, a solid 5/10 with strong moments and performances scattered throughout. While it doesn't commit the same sin as Batman V Superman of spending far too much time hyping up future movies rather than improving the one we're currently watching, it does feel as though the editing process could have been much more thorough. The pacing is all over the place up until the climax, some of the CGI is simply embarrassing, and the whole thing just feels overstuffed; like it either should have been longer to flesh out what is already there, or trimmed down to give us a stronger sense of focus. It's far from the worst X-Men movie, but it's certainly not the best.