The Wolverine : Post Production/Publicity

[alma]

Jul 23, 2013 23:21:55 GMT -5 ptflynn said:

I think I spotted Sue B and Ellen with Hugh outside Letterman. It looked very chaotic as usual.

He looked great with the bit of gray in his beard.

Fern

Sue B and Ellen, were you really there? PIX!! PIX!! :-/

Alma

[jo]

Video clip of the Fan Event at the AMC Theatre on Times Square --

theslanted.com/2013/07/8279/hugh-jackman-interviews-with-fans-at-the-nyc-premiere-event-for-the-wolverine


Excerpt:

Also featured in the video is how candid Jackman is with fans, something that he has become known for both in film, and outside the NYC theaters that he often stars in

The writer sees it, too -- this part of Manhattan is Jackman territory

Ladies -- has anyone spotted themselves in the queue or lobby - the lucky ones who were there?

Btw, the lady fan who was chosen to ask Hugh a question ( Jen) -- used to post on our old Ozalot board. She's with the SHH message board.



Jo

[ptflynn]

Here's a link to the Letterman interview.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKUB6t12EpQ

I spy Ellen, Sue B, Annette, Edie, and some other friendly faces. But that crowd looks, well, crowded. IMO the folks who gather outside the TV shows are not as courteous as the Broadway stage door crowds. At least that was my experience when we gathered outside Letterman in the Freezing cold this past February.

Fern

[jo]

On PEOPLE --





People should really pick him as the SEXIEST MAN ALIVE one more time ! Anyone who can charm as broad a fan demographic as he does...as well as many Hugh-smitten media -- deserves the title


Jo

[jo]

On the Jimmy Fallon show.

[JH4HJ]

I have sex dressed as Wolverine

Asked what it’s like to live with Hugh in full Wolverine mode, Deborra-Lee said: “Oh my God, it’s dreadful! Always with the claws. I’m like, ‘Mix the salad. Put them to use, come on!’” Hugh interrupted: “The sheets we go through...”

Full article

[jo]

I've never heard of BANKSY, the artist --

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banksy

But I guess this ties in with the couple's taste for modern art ( which I think includes their triplex as a form of architectural art). I do remember an article where Hugh had shared how he had bought a ( fairly expensive) artprint ( not sure but it might have been a Picasso print or something similar) for an anniversary gift.

I wonder if they have any Rothkos - living in NYC as they do. Maybe if I visit MOMA one more time, I might run into Hugh


Jo

[Jamie]

Jul 24, 2013 21:20:40 GMT -5 jo said:

On the Jimmy Fallon show.

Love when he goes on Fallon. It is always something different and they actually seem to have fun together. I won't be able to look at Wolvie again without hoping he will be careful with the "CLAMPS"

[mamaleh]

Jul 24, 2013 23:49:47 GMT -5 jo said:

I've never heard of BANKSY, the artist --

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banksy

But I guess this ties in with the couple's taste for modern art ( which I think includes their triplex as a form of architectural art). I do remember an article where Hugh had shared how he had bought a ( fairly expensive) artprint ( not sure but it might have been a Picasso print or something similar) for an anniversary gift.

I wonder if they have any Rothkos - living in NYC as they do. Maybe if I visit MOMA one more time, I might run into Hugh

Jo


Even after seeing that documentary (EXIT THROUGH THE GIFT SHOP) about Banksy, I am not a fan of his type of street art. I wonder how much cash they plopped down for his...stuff.

Nice to be able to drop a mill here or there for an oil painting that catches the eye. I hope it was better than Banksy's "art."

Ellen

[jo]

So many interviews --

Here's one of James Mangold with the LA Times. I will just reprint the portions about Hugh and working with Hugh.


herocomplex.latimes.com/movies/wolverine-james-mangold-on-hugh-jackmans-outsider-with-a-heart/#/0

HC: Could you describe how your relationship with Hugh has evolved since you directed him in “Kate & Leopold”?

JM: We’re both very consistent personalities so I’d have to say we kind of fell right back into the groove that we had been in 12 years ago when we made the other film. The agenda that Hugh had and that I had were really compatible about this film, obviously that’s part of the reason it came together. I think we really did what we set out to do. Whether that sticks for the public is the question to be seen, but we had goals and we went after them. For him, I know the goal was to go deeper in the role, was to feel more intimate in the role to the audience, to expose or show more sides of Wolverine — what is this rage, where does it come from? We structured an agenda for ourselves about how to get there both through script and how we were making the film. This is a Wolverine with a little less quipping, a little less cigar-chomping. That’s not unintentional. You can’t make “Outlaw Josey Wales” and have a “Friends”-style punch line every three or four lines. You can’t make a film with a tone of a darker western or a noir picture of a samurai picture [with punch lines]. Toshiro Mifune didn’t make jokes all the time. That’s not to say Logan isn’t funny and doesn’t have moments of dry humor, but we just tried to recalibrate the tone so that you’re not trying to please everyone. You’re trying to make the most real Wolverine you could.

HC: Did knowing Hugh so well help you when it came to casting Rila Fukushima as Yukio and Tao Okamoto as Mariko? Could you predict that they would have the right chemistry together?

JM: They just spoke to me when I met them. Hugh was neck-deep in ["Les Misérables"] when I was going through that process. There was one point I visited him on “Les Miz” and showed him tape of both Rila and Tao, who I was really invigorated about. The last thing we did was get him together with each of them and in both cases the chemistry was just fantastic, in the case of him and Rila and him and Tao. One thing I’d say about that also, both actresses who play Yukio and Mariko have not acted in almost any film let alone a film of this scale before. For me, part of the comfort of feeling like we could create an environment where they could excel was knowing that my partner was the actor who was going to be doing many of the scenes with them and was so generous in spirit and kind in spirit. You wouldn’t invite rookies to a movie filled with stress. I can do a lot but I can’t make the stress other people are bringing to the set go away.

HC: Hugh said you pushed him on set to improve his performance — in what ways did you push him?

JM: Hugh works so hard, it’s very kind of him to say that. Maybe he views it as pushing, I just tell him when I don’t think he’s done it yet. More than anything, I try for all the actors to serve as their kind of third eye. I’ve read with them from the beginning when they auditioned, with Hugh I’ve made a whole other motion picture and I watch Hugh very carefully in other people’s movies as well. He’s capable of delivering so many kinds of performances, if I play any role with him, it’s making sure he stays monomaniacally on the Logan track. There are some actors who don’t have so many colors on the palette, you don’t have to play guard rail for them quite as much. You just have to push them in a different way, to try to actually do something different within their limited range. With Hugh, there’s so much he can do. If he comes on set in a really buoyant mood I have to make sure it goes away on the screen. There’s so many moods and colors to him, but I just wanted to see Logan. The reality is pushing isn’t really in my repertoire with him but when you’ve been friends with him as long as I have, just being honest, telling him what I think we’re missing, then he goes back in. The way he rewards a director like me is there’s never a moment of exhaustion. What there is is the hunger of someone who just dives back into the ring. That’s all you can ever ask for...


HC: Could you describe Hugh’s relationship with Logan? What’s at the root of the bond between him and that character?

JM: Some of it is inexplicable, it’s like talking about great music. You can analyze it but there’s a point where the words become silly. But I think on a basic level I think you have in Hugh both a man of incredible masculinity and physical power and acting power who can mount this gruff exterior and play this sense of resentment and rage and being an outsider and connect with it. At the same time, you sense this tremendous heart, which is also a functioning feature of Hugh Jackman’s real-life character as well as his performance. I think what you’re always facing when you have dark heroes or dark characters, the challenge that is always there for the actor that you don’t really want to speak about because it’s not something you can look in a mirror and figure out how to play, you just have to do it – how do you do tough, aggressive, even vicious as a character and yet the audience always knows they’d be safe with you. They always know you’d take care of them. I think what he so brilliantly embodies is that duality of the dark hero, which is both somebody who’d be dangerous to anyone I don’t like, but I know would take care of me. I’d be safe. He’d make me laugh. He’d protect me. His ability to put that on the screen is just a function of the fact that he so completely possesses those two qualities.

From that long professional association - no truer words were said! Hugh's extreme professionalism is a well-documented narrative. But I thought JM's analysis of Hugh with the duality in his personality ( strength and soft cores ) speak very well of Hugh Jackman!

"A man of incredible masculinity" -- that is the main reason for his popular appeal with both male and female fans!

Jo

[JH4HJ]

Love when he goes on Fallon. It is always something different and they actually seem to have fun together. I won't be able to look at Wolvie again without hoping he will be careful with the "CLAMPS"

Looks like Hugh's interview was removed from YouTube - but it is available on NBC's website for the show.
Scroll down to find all the pieces

[alma]

Cute anecdote from Andy Samberg about Hugh on Jimmy Fallon tonight. I hope it's available on the web tomorrow...

Alma

[alma]

Here it is!

www.crushable.com/2013/07/26/entertainment/andy-samberg-hugh-jackman-funny-story-video/

Scroll down for the video. The Hugh story starts around 3:10...

Alma

[birchie]

Anyone who complains that the movie isn't exactly like the comics should see this:

While there were a few subtle changes to make the film story flow better they got a lot of it spot on.
Sue

[jo]

An unusual video re The Wolverine -- all behind-the-scenes clips!


Warning : You may want to keep your illusions - lol - and keep away from this video


www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmarV-DYQuE


*It is really hard work to be involved in an action movie, especially if it is a blockbuster spectacle like a comic book film. I almost flinch when I see Hugh go through the physical motions - jumping, running, faux-fighting, wire-work, etc...repeatedly and at such exhausting pace. Even green-screen work must be very difficult - esp the simulated bullet train action that Hugh was acting out!

*Hugh is so lacking in self-consciousness before a camera!

*Rila ( Yukio) was a real natural for the role.

*The blending of the funeral scene ( which takes place, filming-wise, in two countries and two locales - the solemn rites in the Tokyo temple and the long fight scenes in Sydney's Chinese Garden) is fantastic. No one realizes there are two sets of scenes put together in a seamless long scene!

*Intimate scenes like the ones with Jean are filmed with so many people present that I wonder how the actors can still emote so well and so intimately.

*Street scenes must be difficult to film - with a lot of people doing different things included in the camera lens.

*On an ironic note, I think the musical theatre actors who dissed LES MISERABLES are not fully aware of what it takes to film a story and portray a character ( and sing!) before a constant camera eye! If they had been envious that film actors had been chosen for the film musical version, they only have to look at behind- the- scenes to see that film acting is not for everyone!

Jo

[jo]

Len Wein talks about the character he created on the pages of the comics and on the actor who personified his creation on film --

herocomplex.latimes.com/comics/wolverine-len-wein-on-hugh-jackman-comic-book-movies-getting-paid/#/0

Wolverine: Len Wein on Hugh Jackman, comic book movies, getting paid

Aug. 03, 2013 | 11:27 a.m.



“The Wolverine,” the latest film starring Hugh Jackman’s rage-fueled mutant Logan, offers a more intimate exploration of the character — one Jackman and director James Mangold attempted to fashion based on an influential comic book arc crafted by Chris Claremont and Frank Miller in the 1980s. But it was Len Wein who first introduced Wolverine to comic readers in 1974, when the character appeared in “The Incredible Hulk.” Wein recently spoke to Hero Complex to share his thoughts on the latest movie, the joys of being a fan and the frustrations of sometimes standing in the shadows while iconic characters of your creation enjoy robust onscreen lives.

Hero Complex: Twenty, thirty years ago, could you have imagined a point where we’d see so many superhero films? At this point, they’ve become a genre unto themselves, and there’s so much variety in terms of tone and style.

Len Wein: I think what’s happened finally is that we won, the geeks have inherited the Earth. So many of the major film producers today are guys who grew up on this stuff and really wanted to see it happen. Technology has finally reached a point where what could only be done in comics can now be done on screen. I think people rush to it. I had a friend in the business who had a lunch meeting probably a decade or more ago with Sam Raimi and he thought, “Oh good, Sam wants to talk to me about a project.” Turned out all Sam really wanted to talk about over lunch was this writer’s run on Spider-Man. This was before Sam was doing the Spider-Man films. He was just a big Spider-Man fan. I think that’s true of most directors and producers. There are people who are now running the entertainment industry and love it.

HC: Have you had those sorts of encounters yourself?

LW: Every so often, I say to my wife, “If I could go back in time and tell my 15-year-old self what my life was going to be like at this point, I wouldn’t believe me.” The people who are my friends, the people who, when I meet them and I’m a big fan, just leaves me befuddled. I have this constantly. There are people I know, who, again, grew up on my stuff and are thrilled to meet me, but I always think, “I’m supposed to be thrilled to meet you.” At this point, this was about five or six years ago, I was a fan of the TV series “CSI” and they were in their seventh season. I thought they were doing amazing work, so I sent them a fan letter. I got the e-address of one of the producers and simply sent a fan letter going, “I think you guys are doing amazing work and I just wanted to thank you for the entertainment.” Thirty seconds later, an email came back, “Are you that Len Wein?” I went, “I guess I must be.” They invited me down to the set to have lunch, watch them shoot.


Hugh Jackman at the “X-Men: Days of Future Past” panel at San Diego’s Comic-Con International on July 20, 2013. (Kevin Winter / Getty Images)



HC: I love the idea that you’re sending fan letters. That’s really sweet.

LW: I still am a fan. I think part of why my work still works is that I still come at it from the point of what would I like to see.

HC: You’ve talked in the past about how you were eager to see Wolverine’s Japanese saga on the screen. What were your thoughts on this latest film?

LW: I loved it. We’re going to go see it again this week, in fact. My wife and my family have not seen it yet, so I’m going to take them to see it this weekend. It is in very many ways not really a superhero film; I thought that makes it spectacular. It’s really a character study. There’s all the superhero action you could ask for, but at the heart of it that’s not what it’s about. It’s about exploring who and what makes Logan what he is.

HC: That’s certainly what made the source material, what Chris Claremont and Frank Miller created, so compelling. Is that one of the reasons you were excited to see the story told cinematically?

LW: It is where we first start realizing there are many layers to Logan, that he’s not just the berserker monster that people perceive him to be. He’s lived a lot of different lives, with a lot of different backgrounds, and I think getting a chance to start exploring other aspects of who and what make him what he is is always great, the more you can get into that sort of thing. Any good character is like an artichoke; you want to peel away the layers.

HC: That’s a nicer comparison than an onion … James Mangold has described how he went back to the comic design to tweak the claws a bit for this movie. Is that always nice for you to hear, when there’s special effort made to get the details right with regard to the characters you’ve created?

LW: I love that sort of thing, when someone comes at a character from making him as good as possible. For many years, superhero movies mostly didn’t work. That’s because the people producing the films had little regard for the source material. Their attitude was always, “it’s just a comic book, don’t worry about it,” and that kind of attitude gives you “Catwoman” as opposed to “Wolverine.” When they take the time to go that extra yard to make the character as close as possible to what the audience expects him to be, I think you get a much better film.



HC: For those who might not know the story, could you share Wolverine’s creative origin?

LW: It’s one of my favorite stories to tell. Wolverine came out of my writing an entirely different book. I was writing a book called “Brother Voodoo” for Marvel at the time, which was set in the Caribbean. I like writing accents, I like to write so you can sort of hear the voice. So, I was writing a number of the characters with Caribbean accents. Then the editor in chief at Marvel, Roy Thomas, called me into his office and said, “You know, I hate you.” I said, “Thank you so much!” He said, “No, seriously, you write these great accents and I can’t do accents.” He said, “I’d love to see how you would write a Canadian accent. I have the name.” The name was Wolverine. He said, “Come up with a Canadian character called Wolverine.” So, I went and researched w-olverines and discovered they were short, really hairy, feisty animals with razor-sharp claws who are utterly fearless and would take on animals 10 times their size. I went, well, that’s the easiest character I’ve ever created. I developed him out of that particular definition. The weird thing was, I actually did a lousy Canadian accent. I thought he ended up sounding more Australian in that first story. The irony of that is so amazing to me. (laughs) I made him a mutant because there had been discussions about reviving the X-Men as an international team of mutants. I thought I would provide for whoever ended up writing that book ["Giant-Size X-Men" No. 1]. I never realized I would be the guy who ended up writing that book. I made my own life much more interesting and simple than I expected.

HC: What are your thoughts on the way Chris Claremont shaped the character?

LW: I loved it. I knew he would do a good job with the book. He was one of my assistant editors and the day I realized I’ve got to give up most of my writing, I was editor in chief at the time and I couldn’t edit 54 books a month, plus write four books a month, so I had to give up everything but one book. I’ve always been a huge fan of the Hulk and that was one of the books I was writing. I started giving away my books to other people. Chris sat at a desk outside my office in what was then the bullpen and when I said, “Gee, I wonder who I can give X-Men to,” he started pinwheeling his hands, going, “Me, me, I’ll take it!” I thought anybody that enthusiastic deserves a shot. One of the best choices I ever made. He did a remarkable job for, God help me, 17 years, I think, straight.




HC: At Comic-Con International last month, Hugh Jackman made a point of thanking you for creating the character that launched his career from the Hall H stage. What is it, do you think, about Jackman’s portrayal of Logan – and really about the character himself — that has so strongly resonated with audiences?

LW: I think sincerity. I think that counts for a great deal with any performance. If people believe you believe, you can carry off anything. The amazing thing about Hugh is that on many levels he’s the antithesis of Wolverine. He’s one of the nicest, most gracious guys I’ve ever known. My wife absolutely adores him. She’d throw me over for him in a second. He’s just that guy. He’s sincere, he’s generous and thankful and appreciative. I think he realizes he sort of fell into the role of his life. They’re going to have to pry it out of his cold, dead hands one day, I think. He loves doing the character. He’s a terrific actor. I’ve always said, to my mind, the most talented person in his industry is the casting director who looked at Hugh playing Curly in “Oklahoma!” and said, “Yeah, he could be the most dangerous man on Earth.”

HC: Hugh Jackman does have a range that is pretty unique.

LW: Yeah, he can go from Wolverine to Jean Valjean. He’s everything he appears to be. He’s a wonderful person. He’s so dedicated to keep in the shape he’s in. In between takes, he’s on the floor doing one-handed pushups.

HC: When you’re thanked from the stage at Comic-Con like that, how do you feel? What is that like?

LW: It’s gratifying. To the best of my memory, he’s the only person to portray one of my characters that has ever done that. He’s done it a couple of times now. He wants people to realize where his character comes from and the debt he owes and I’m thrilled by that. He’s one of the most gracious men I’ve ever met.



HC: When these films come out, is it fair to say that it’s something of a bittersweet experience? Characters you’ve created continue to have these long screen lives, but you don’t have credit on the movies.

LW: I still haven’t had credit on one of these movies.

HC: Is that frustrating?

LW: Yes, of course it is. It’s less frustrating for the characters I created at DC. Money comes with the anonymity, at least. I have contracts that guarantee me some small piece of the action. Lucius Fox has earned me a great deal more money than Wolverine ever has, although I will say that for the latest film Marvel did send me a nice check. A lot of people don’t realize how many movies are [based on] comics. “2 Guns,” this weekend, is a Steven Grant comic originally, “Red” is a comic book, “R.I.P.D.” was a comic book. We might not want to mention “R.I.P.D.” I haven’t seen it, but I imagine I’ll be able to see it on cable.

– Gina McIntyre | @latherocomplex

[jo]

From his appearance at Good Morning America --

[alma]

Jo! Thanks for posting this!

I completely missed it on TV. But I looked it up and you can watch it online here:

abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/hugh-jackman-wolverine-interview-2013-gma-actor-role-19770408

Stick around: there are THREE video segments one after the other.

Alma

[jo]

For the true-blue Wolvie fans -- here is one of the most insightful interviews with James Mangold about the Man of Gold wolverine

Sharp comeback: James Mangold hones new adventure for Hugh Jackman's Wolverine

July 22, 2013


-By Frank Lovece



James Mangold is the director, but the superhero known as Wolverine is (pardon the pun) man gold. With the new film The Wolverine making the perennially popular character an even more valuable franchise—and with the equally popular Hugh Jackman making his sixth appearance in the role—this latest 20th Century Fox film based on Marvel Comics' X-Men hopes to be what 2009's X-Men Origins: Wolverine was not.

Not that that previous solo outing was a dud: Made for an estimated $150 million, it grossed over $373 million worldwide—which by the rule-of-thumb of a film having to earn twice its production cost to turn a profit makes director Gavin Hood's Wolverine a more-than-respectable earner. But some films have a stigma, and despite good reviews by the likes of the Los Angeles Times, the New York Post, USA Today and Film Journal International itself, most critics were unimpressed. As the late Roger Ebert pondered about its hero—a mutant with preternatural self-healing abilities, fused to a metal skeleton with retractable claws—“Why should I care about this guy? He feels no pain and nothing can kill him."

Mangold—who among other efforts directed and co-wrote both Girl, Interrupted (1999), which won Angelina Jolie an Oscar, and Walk the Line (2005), which earned one for Reese Witherspoon, plus a nomination for Joaquin Phoenix—understands what Ebert meant. In the new film—which finds Logan a.k.a. Wolverine anguished over having had to kill his love, a world-threatening Jean Grey, in X-Men: The Last Stand (2006)—our hero isn't kindler and gentler but he's notably more vulnerable, both physically and emotionally. He's still up for a good fight, though, when he has to be: In a story that takes him to Japan—where a dying electronics mogul offers to take away Wolverine's healing powers and give Logan the ability to grow old and find peace in death—the taciturn X-Man finds himself facing ninjas, Yakuza, a power-sapping mutant named Viper and a power-suited foe called the Silver Samurai. One amazingly original action sequence, taking place atop a 300-mile-per-hour bullet train, is like no train-top sequence you've ever seen.

We spoke by phone with Mangold, a New York City native who as a child moved upstate to the Hudson River Valley with his parents, painters Robert Mangold and Sylvia Plimack. He came onto the film in June 2011 after director Darren Aronofsky and screenwriter Christopher McQuarrie had developed a version for several months. Reworking the script—based largely though not entirely on writer Chris Claremont and artist Frank Miller's 1982 four-issue miniseries Wolverine—he shot primarily in Australia from late July to late November 2012.


Film Journal International: That top-of-train fight scene was one of the most original I've ever seen.

James Mangold: That's great—thanks. The idea occurred to me when we were scouting in Japan and I was riding the Shinkansen bullet train all the time to find locations. It's so interesting that you say "original"—and I appreciate that, believe me—because it is and it isn't. The history of movies is just filled with fights on top of trains, but never at this speed. And the idea occurred to me because when you ride on these trains you're seeing overpasses and underpasses and power girders, so if you were somehow clinging to this train, these flying guillotines would be going by at 300 miles an hour with such a small tolerance of space between the top of the train and the overpasses. Of course, you couldn't imagine doing a sequence like that if you weren't doing it with a hero who has built-in claws and could cling to the surface of the train at that speed almost instinctually.

FJI: And there's the point—you did something with it that was intrinsic to this character, which makes it different from the train-top fight scenes in the last James Bond movie and in The Lone Ranger, both of which were very good—but those characters couldn't have done this sequence.

JM: It's a kind of a trope of action films, the fight on the train, and the great task, without being gimmicky, is to try to find a new way to do these things. To me the important thing is to find a way that actually relates to your character and his unique abilities, so it's not something you could just plug into any movie.

FJI: After Aronofsky left, there reportedly were eight directors on the shortlist and you were up against people like Doug Liman and Antoine Fuqua, to name just a couple. Did you sit down and talk to the producers so you could feel each other out? A lot of times, so directors tell me, what it comes down to is they'll get assigned a movie after they sit down to a meal and pitch their vision.

JM: Well, certainly, I did that with both Hugh and 20th Century Fox. But I had made Walk the Line and Knight and Day for this studio, so I was a known quantity for them. And I think that what I was pitching was a very serious take on the film and a serious departure from what was already written. It wasn't a complete abandonment of what was there—I still love [Christopher McQuarrie's] source material. But I wrote on the back of that script five words: "Anyone I love will die." He had lost everyone he had ever known or loved, some even at his own hand. He had lost Jean Grey, he had lost the X-Men, he had lost his mentor, Professor X, and to be a character in that much pain and the belief that you're almost cursed, that your own affection, intimacy, could actually bring about that much death of your loved ones… So you put yourself in self-imposed isolation to avoid hurting anyone more than you already have.

FJI: You've talked about the burden of immortality as one of this movie's themes, but I'm not sure how that speaks to the human condition since it's not a real burden any of us have.

JM: I think it does, because people yearn for it in certain ways without considering the downside of it. We all fear death. We all want to cheat death—we're looking to live longer. In a sense we're all working against our own mortality all the time. We try to do the healthy thing, try to exercise…we're all working to increase and expand our lifetimes. What I wanted to present to the audience was, what is it like to feel a prisoner in a life you cannot escape? You accumulate pain and loss, and keep that with you as you keep on going. And that becomes a part—maybe even the explanation—of the gruff exterior of Logan.

FJI: There's also the idea that sometimes we have to kill—or more likely in everyday life, send away—something we love, or leave something we love, because we have to.

JM: Absolutely. In the changes I made to the script, I was very surgical about what I wanted to do in terms of unfolding this idea and this theme. I'm a big believer in—whether it was a film I wrote, like Cop Land or Girl, Interrupted or this, which I worked on with two friends while I was scouting and preparing—I was always interested in the idea of…let me use an example: In Ridley Scott's Alien, what's really beautiful is the way it's not just a horror film or a science-fiction film. It's also a real exploration of what it is to be human and alive. The way the story is constructed, it's no accident that the cat is on that spaceship. It's about the human and the non-human: you have the non-human monster and the non-human cat, each capable of killing, and then you have a human being, like Sigourney Weaver's character, and you even have an android, a soulless thing that looks like a human. The story starts to transcend the obvious tropes of horror and starts to become a meditation on what it is to be alive, to want to live.

Learning from films like that, I tried very hard to populate this film with an immortal or godlike character who's almost looking for a way out, looking for a way toward death. Then you have a mortal character in Old Man Yashida [Hal Yamanouchi], who is facing death and looking for a way to live. And then you have his granddaughter, Mariko [Tao Okamoto], who's young and not facing death, but is looking for a way out [of, among other things, family obligations that endanger her life]. You have a young mutant in Yukio [Rila Fukushima], who can literally see death around the corner. You end up constructing a story in which you have so many people who have this relationship to the finite nature of human life.

FJI: One thing you changed was that in the original script, Logan was in Japan through amnesia.

JM: I'm just tired of amnesia. I mean, characters who can't remember anything? There have been some excellent films about characters who can't remember who they are, but usually it's just a puzzle film. That's not my style, and I think there's so much to mine in Logan without robbing him of self-knowledge.

FJI: This movie, where Wolverine's lost much or all of his healing power, seems an answer to Roger Ebert questioning why we should care about a character who can't really be hurt. Was that conscious choice or something already in mind or something he'd put in the back of your head?

JM: It was supremely conscious. Roger is a hero of mine, as well as a real supporter and a good friend over the years. He communicated with me and I remember what he said about the first film. I think what he said was dead-on. If you have a hero who can't be hurt, there's only one way to create stakes or jeopardy and that's to put people he cares about in harm's way. And, not unlike the amnesia thing, that can get tired really fast.

FJI: Why the Japan story, which goes back to the 1982 miniseries?

JM: Well, I have to say that Chris [McQuarrie] is a brilliant writer, but Hugh was determined to make this new film and really latched on to the Miller/Claremont saga ever since he made the very first X-Men [movie in 2003] and was reading the comics. It occurred to him that that was just such a rich world.

FJI: Australia offered a lot of financial incentives to have you shoot there. One would think Japan would have liked to host a big-budget production. So what's up with that? They just not into tax breaks and things?

JM: Well, it's a combination of things. It's more complicated in Japan than just rebates. You know, the culture [of filmmaking there] is not used to location shooting. We did shoot in Japan—we shot there for a little over a month. The trick is that most Japanese movies are made on a back lot or on a soundstage or in the [rural] country where you're not having to close down streets. And although there's a great neorealist tradition in Japan, it's kind of not happening now. So there are logistical challenges in Japan. There's a chase sequence [in The Wolverine] with [the ninja archer] Harada [Will Yun Lee] chasing [bad guys] from the rooftops and Logan and Mariko running on the streets, where a lot of that I shot pirate-style: We put Hugh and Tao in a van and we'd just jump out of that thing and start shooting on a crowded street. I would pinch myself and think, "I'm making a hundred-some-million-dollar movie and I'm shooting it the way I shot [the 1995 independent drama] Heavy!" But the other side was that it was this wonderful, magical thing that you were really out there—I think it even helped the sense of urgency and realism.

FJI: Fox didn't know it was getting guerrilla filmmaking!

JM: [chuckles] I have to take my hat off to them, because they gave me tremendous latitude on this film and were very brave in letting me release it very much as I had envisioned it. You could have a studio having a great deal of anxiety about the more adult and mature aspects of this movie. I don't mean things that would push the rating—I mean things that are complicated and intricate, issues of the human heart that I don't think find their way into films like this that often and are, frankly, the only things that keep me interested in the narrative.

[alma]

Aug 3, 2013 15:06:08 GMT -5 jo said:

Len Wein talks about the character he created on the pages of the comics and on the actor who personified his creation on film --

herocomplex.latimes.com/comics/wolverine-len-wein-on-hugh-jackman-comic-book-movies-getting-paid/#/0


At the bottom of this link Jo provided, don't miss a twelve and a half minute interview with Hugh.

Nice closeups. cool

Alma

[jo]

Is this a double feature...or did this cinema confuse the two movies - LOL! Two for the price of one


Jo

[mamaleh]

That made me smile. What a delish marquee. Love it!

Ellen

[JH4HJ]

IS IT TRUE WHAT THEY’RE SAYING ABOUT HUGH JACKMAN?!

HUGH JACKMAN has been offered an astronomical $100 million to sign on for four more Wolverine movies – but insiders say he may turn it down.

The rumor mill is grinding away!
Full article

[LOVE that theater marquee! What a double bill that would be.]

[carouselkathy]

THE NATIONAL ENQUIRER? Pleeease! They make things up.

[mamaleh]

I can imagine the Nat'l Inquirer's next revelation: "Hugh is Tri-Sexual!" Says Close Source!
LOL.

He ma indeed have that offer on the table. But I doubt he'd opt, especially if Deb objects.

Ellen