https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzJk47N2ZIw
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=E3FKYqDLg3g
New stills.
1/5.
Is the buzz on this that it's actually a serious, dark, emotion and character driven movie or is that just the marketing campaign?
Can I expect a climax fight against a CGI robot?
>>89707731
>Can I expect a climax fight against a CGI robot?
probably I mean it's still a superhero/comic book movie
>>89707288
best /co/ film of 2017
>>89708173
>Fox
No. Deadpool worked because it was Ryan Reynolds being a buffoon in the screen. Logan will be soap opera tier.
>>89707731
Cant you have a serious dark movie and also a fight against a cgi robot?
>>89708557
Examples?
>>89708557
The trailers and TV spots look good, but it's the job of the guys who make them to polish even the worst turd until it glows shiney and chrome.
I'm pleased with the general feel of "Logan" -- it's desperate and street level, Logan and Charles are on their last legs, we have an X-23 that looks good, and a mission that isn't "Save The World!!!".
Interestingly, if you look at the other Wolverine film that James Mangold (the director) did, it held together fairly well until a weak ending with a CGI-heavy fight against the Silver Samurai. In other words, it was good when Logan was killing Yakuza, but Mangold couldn't quite deal with cinema-style superheroics. It will be interesting to see what lessons Mangold has learned. Will he do a better job with superheroics -- or will he decide to avoid them?
And finally, the main reason I'm so hopeful. In the previous movie, Mangold just didn't seem to "get" Wolverine. What we've seen so far is a vast improvement.