In 2014, the old X-Men movie characters and the younger cast joined forces through some time-traveling Wolverine shenanigans in a movie called "Days of Future Past". In my opinion it was fantastic, and the perfect sendoff for the original cast, with an almost Star Trek VI like depiction of all the characters alive and well at Xavier's School for gifted youngsters. It was the perfect note to end Patrick Stewart and Hugh Jackman's X-Men careers with. Then came "Logan". -sigh- "Logan" is totally unnecessary, and yet it is the final time we see these characters. It's also super dark and gritty and features an older Wolverine poking fun at how the comic books were "never like" how his adventures went. Pretty rude, since without those comics these movies wouldn't even exist. These are minor problems though, compared to what comes next. We find out that ALL the X-Men are dead, Professor X is killed by some clone of Wolverine and then buried in a ditch on the side of the road (!?) in the most disgraceful disservice to a character on film that I have EVER seen, and Wolverine himself dies fighting his own clone, and is buried by a bunch of mutant kids in a field somewhere. What else happens in this movie? I have no idea, the rest was totally forgettable and the cliff notes above are the lasting damage this film did to the X-Men film legacy. AND YET. For some reason Sir Patrick Stewart fawns over this film like it was some great triumph of drama, when his character said and did nothing of any consequence, and had the most anticlimactic death scene in the history of cinematic superheroes. I really don't understand. This wouldn't be so bad if he didn't play Xavier in Logan. You could write the story so Xavier was all a hallucination of Logan's mind, or hell, replace Xavier with another X-Men character altogether. Or just have Logan be ON HIS OWN. He's a loner after all, why the hell is he dragging poor Charles Xavier along anyway, especially after the deaths of the rest of the X-Men? Really, this movie as it is should NEVER have been made, and "Days of Future Past" should have been the final say on the old X-Men cast. But thats just like, my opinion, man. What are your thoughts?
I'm not keen on superhero films but Logan is at least an attempt to do a) something interesting and b) say something. So by that measure alone better than most of the rest.
Logan is the best of the X-Men movies and it isn't even remotely close, so, yes, it was a fine end for the characters.
Logan was awesome. No it was not a happy ending for the X-Men, but it gave us phenomenal performances from Hugh Jackman and Patrick Stewart. Logan was not the kind of character who was going to get a happy ending, so Logan was pretty much a perfect end for him.
i think Patrick Stweart just reveled in the ability to be able to swear in a comic book movie. i think the idea that Professor X would want his death be something of positive consequence (rather than peacefully in his sleep) is "realistic". But offscreen massacring the rest of the X-Men? Yeah , that was kinda lame (unless it was a cover story...and since don't see the bodies). I wonder how/if they connect the "old" X-Men universe with the inevitable MCU version. (Where it might be like a 2009 Star Trek transition)
It's simple: Logan gave him the most screen time, and the most intense emotions to play. I don't think he particularly cares about Professor X one way or the other; he just liked a meaty part, especially when such a hefty paycheck is attached. Anyhow, I basically agree with your criticisms of the movie, except I'm not bothered by them. I view it as a "what if" alternate ending, with DoFP the "real" last X-film, chronogically speaking. (Deadpool 2, meanwhile, is pretty much in another reality of its own.) And I stand by what I've said about the movie before: Logan is a thoroughly average and overlooooong movie whose feints toward pretension ("there's no living with a killing") are entirely hypocritical (just look how awesome it is to see Wolverine finally going R-rated berserk!). Its weird subplot about mutant-suppressing corn is a lame alternative to mutants being straight-up hunted, and not bringing back Liev Shreiber for the peaceful family interlude is a head-banging missed opportunity. (Add to this baffling decisions/plot holes like driving a bullet-riddled car up to a fancy downtown hotel rather than hiding in a discreet, out-of-the-way motel.) Anyone who calls it "one of the best superhero films ever" very likely simply dislikes the genre in general. I like deep and soulful movies, but there's nothing particularly deep or soulful about Logan; it's just a cliche-filled* and overlong opportunity for the actors to growl and pout at each other in person rather than holding their hands up for CG artists to add superpowers later. It's certainly not a bad movie, but it's not a particularly good one, either. *I mean, really: doesn't matter if it's a genetically modified clone in a sci-fi flick or an illegitimate child from a fling decades before in a regular drama; the storytelling trope of a washed-up, middle-aged adult immediately bonding with a young child, preferably a girl, he didn't know existed days before, in order to give him an emotional rooting interest, is as lazy and tired as they get.
Logan wasn't a good ending for any of the X-Men, except Wolverine. But FOX was never interested in making actual X-Men movies, just Wolverine movies.
The stuff with all of the other heroes dying comes from the Old Man Logan comic that was the inspiration for the movie, although in that case the majority of the superheroes were killed the supervillains managed to take over.