Yes, that’s right. I did not enjoy “Logan.” It’s actually not that terrible of a movie. The action sequences are well executed and Hugh Jackman did an excellent job portraying a mentally-wounded warrior with many scars, as did Patrick Stewart with Professor X. Newcomer Dafne Keen impresses as the young blood X-23, and Boyd Holbrook embodies the psychopathic evil of Pierce.

However, while the film is respectable, it isn’t worth the praise in which critics and audiences are showering it. I am suggesting that “Logan” was misdirected, directed more at creating a unique style in which the superhero genre has rarely been filmed to give a legendary actor, Hugh Jackman, a proper sendoff, as it is his final X-Men movie.

The movie takes place in the near future, where mutants are nearly extinct. A group of dark government-esque forces hunts a young mutant whose gifts are similar to that of Logan, a now older, grittier, more bitter alcoholic limo driver, living on the Mexican-American border with a withering Charles Xavier and mutant Caliban whose gift is tracking. One day, along comes a gifted youngster whose name is “Laura,” also known as the X-23 mutant whose powers bear a resemblance to that of Logan’s.

There’s a reason why the film began so fiery and ended so heavily. “Logan” tells its story through methods that I like to call “plot hops,” which are essentially conflicts within a story that arise and are then immediately resolved.

A film based on plot hops is basically just a series of mini story points that collectively tell a greater story, made up of the underlying subplots. This style isn’t always reliable because the audience can quickly get tired of the rapid-firing of climaxes, then lose attention when the movie’s climax occurs, dulling the impact of the final act.

By plot hopping, “Logan” loses a lot of the momentum and ends without an explosive finale. Instead, the best action is presented towards the beginning, when nothing has occurred prior to dull the explosiveness of action.

In essence, critics are raving about “Logan” not because of its quality, but rather its distinctive style and emotional value. A movie isn’t good because it’s different, neither is a movie good because it’s just like every other one. Films must make sense and must instill thought into the audience, not send an iconic actor goodbye. 6.5/10