The reviews seem to agree that the experience is a fun one, if of little interest beyond its novelty. This makes sense considering that the idea supposedly came about after some of its black-and-white promotional stills were met with a large amount of fan interest. <\/span><\/p>\n There is nothing inherently offensive about Logan: Noir \u2014<\/i> nor, for that matter, Mad Max: Fury Road \u2014 Black and Chrome \u2014<\/i> but neither is there any substantive defense to be made for their existence. The problem isn\u2019t that the color adjustment is merely unnecessary, at least not any more so than 3D conversions for films shot in 2D are; it\u2019s simply that they don\u2019t suit the material. It\u2019s one thing to convert an in-your-face spectacle like Mad Max: Fury Road<\/i> to 3D, but it would be baffling to do the same for the films of, say, Jim Jarmusch. By that same standard, a version of Jarmusch\u2019s Paterson<\/i> converted to the same grainy black-and-white that most of his early efforts were shot in makes a certain kind of sense, improbable as it may seem; whereas the same can\u2019t be said for the eye-popping color palette of George Miller\u2019s magnum opus.<\/span><\/p>\n By contrast, not only is Logan<\/i>, despite its new subtitle, not a noir, but its thematic concerns all but demand that it be presented in color. Logan<\/i> is, in many ways, a modern Western, and for as much as it quotes George Stevens’s Shane<\/i> (shot in color), its true spiritual daddy is Unforgiven<\/i>. And while Logan<\/i> is no match for the powerhouse treatise on the myth vs. reality that is Eastwood\u2019s swan song to the Western (nor could it ever have hoped to be, considering that Logan<\/i> is based on pure fantasy to begin with), it is attempting to say something similar about its own particular genre. However nifty or cool-looking it may be in black-and-white, such a change undercuts its own purpose by placing it squarely in the realm of the mythic.<\/span><\/p>\n Beyond the necessity for any one movie to receive this kind of treatment, the question of artistic intent must also take precedent. Unfortunately, the precedent that has been set over the years is not one that many filmmakers would take comfort in. For all of the discussion revolving around these few recent examples of reverse colorization, little has been noted about the controversy that surrounded its opposite trend from the mid \u201880s to the early \u201890s.<\/p>\n The colorization of classic black-and-white movies was a crass commercial attempt to cater to modern audiences\u2019 worst and laziest sensibilities. No classic was safe from the vandalizing touch of crude corporate suits who thought first, last, and only of a bottom line that, as it turned out, wasn\u2019t even there to begin with. <\/span><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/crookedmarquee.com\/stage8\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/05\/Mad-Max-Fury-Road-Bluray-Black-and-White.jpg\")
<\/a>Logan<\/i> is not the first film in recent memory to receive the monochrome treatment: a \u201cBlack & Chrome\u201d version of Mad Max: Fury Road<\/i> became available to stream last year, and the 2008 dual-DVD release of Frank Darabont’s modern cult classic The Mist<\/i> included a B&W version as well. (Also of interest: in 2016 AMC re-aired the first season of The Walking Dead<\/i>, produced and created by Darabont, in black-and-white for a day-long marathon.) Logan<\/i> is, however, the biggest release of its kind to date, which gives it special significance.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/a>Likewise, The Mist\u2019s<\/i> supplemental B&W DVD release is easily justifiable: for all of its modern sensibilities, it is, at heart, an old-school giant monster movie, with a twist ending and moral lesson straight out of The Twilight Zone<\/i>. In terms of genre and thematics, it\u2019s well suited to black-and-white.<\/p>\n