Deadpool 2 Deadpool 2 Spoilers Thread

[-JKR-]

You look at other movies where the protagonists are a couple who don’t need some kind of drama to further the story, like the old Thin Man films for example. I get they wanted to give Wade some tragedy for the beginning but was it worth it ultimately? The plot could’ve still went through well without the death. I’m no screenwriter so take my word with a grain of salt:

Have Vanessa reveal she is a mutant early in the film. Have a debate whether Wade should allow her to help him on his missions, so you can do something with the character at least.

It’s already established Wade likes kids so going to the orphanage without it being an X-Men job while Colossus shows up at the same time, make joke about coincidence. He still goes to the ICEbox regardless. Sure, you lose the X-Men jokes but what are you gonna do?

Have him deny Vanessa joining the X-Force but she disobeys him and enters the truck chase. Have him accept she can handle herself and have her in the climax.

Again, I’m not sure this is even good. It’s certainky nothing original but at least she’d do something and develop rather than what happened. What do you think? Anything to improve/add to it?

As for Cable, having Russell destroy the city he failed to protect should be enough for him to want his blood. Kinda feels selfish for him to do this for his family exclusively.

I'm just glad you write on a forum, and not screenplays. As for the last paragraph re:Cable, I think you missed the entire point of his plot. And I actually think you missed what the entire movie is about. The point is that we meet the characters in a moment in which they ARE selfish, and are driven by their loss and pain.

A debate about whether or not a superpowered Vanessa should join him on his missions is simply NOT what the entire movie is about.

 

[HBarnill]

I'm just glad you write on a forum, and not screenplays.

Damn. I have third degree burns all over me.

 

[FaceItTiger74]

MidnightsEdge made a very good point about the movie having too many Family Guy-style cutaway gags like Wade and Yukio's "Hi/Bye" thing and the overly long gag about Wade's fake dying before he actually passes on. Plus, I feel as if the film should have focused more on the conflict between Wade and Cable rather than his desire to protect Russell. 1) He is doing it for selfish reasons. He wants to perform a good deed so that he can join his beloved Vanessa in the afterlife. I honestly do not believe for one second that Wade would have gone out of his way to change Russell's ways if it wasn't for Vanessa's advice. Yeah, it's mitigated by the fact that she ends up persuading him to return to the land of the living because now he has something else to live for, but it still looks bad. 2) As many reviewers noted, we really did not see enough of Cable despite arguably being the deuteragonist of the film. As a result, Cable felt underdeveloped. 3) As MidnightsEdge and Double Toasted noted, Russell is not a likable character. At all. Yeah, you might think that that is the point because Wade is trying to prevent him from going down a destructive path, but the writers should still give us a reason to root for the kid. I'm blaming this on the writers/director because as MidnightsEdge pointed out, Logan had a very similar character in Laura. However, she was handled way better than Russell which is why the audience cared for her. This is what makes me think that the writers should have gone with the original plan of Wade and Vanessa splitting up. It would have given Wade a different conflict and probably a better film overall.

 

[FaceItTiger74]

Did anyone notice that Wade's goal of joining Vanessa in the afterlife bears some similarities to the plot of RIPD, another Ryan Reynolds comic book film? In that film, Reynolds plays a cop who dies and wants to return to the land of living to be reunited with his wife. Towards the end of the film, his wife dies but he persuades her to go back to the land of living and begs TPTB to give her another shot at life. This is almost identical to the conflict of Deadpool 2 but in this case it is reversed: Ryan Reynolds's character is still in the land of the living and he keeps committing suicide so that he can join his wife in the afterlife. However, when he actually does die, she persuades him to go back to the land of the living. Then Cable undoes Wade's death. Just thought that was something interesting to note.

 

[HBarnill]

Did anyone notice that Wade's goal of joining Vanessa in the afterlife bears some similarities to the plot of RIPD, another Ryan Reynolds comic book film? In that film, Reynolds plays a cop who dies and wants to return to the land of living to be reunited with his wife. Towards the end of the film, his wife dies but he persuades her to go back to the land of living and begs TPTB to give her another shot at life. This is almost identical to the conflict of Deadpool 2 but in this case it is reversed: Ryan Reynolds's character is still in the land of the living and he keeps committing suicide so that he can join his wife in the afterlife. However, when he actually does die, she persuades him to go back to the land of the living. Just thought that something interesting to note.

Yeah but Deadpool kills Reynolds before he could be in that movie, making this plot original by default.

 

[-JKR-]

Did anyone notice that Wade's goal of joining Vanessa in the afterlife bears some similarities to the plot of RIPD, another Ryan Reynolds comic book film? In that film, Reynolds plays a cop who dies and wants to return to the land of living to be reunited with his wife. Towards the end of the film, his wife dies but he persuades her to go back to the land of living and begs TPTB to give her another shot at life. This is almost identical to the conflict of Deadpool 2 but in this case it is reversed: Ryan Reynolds's character is still in the land of the living and he keeps committing suicide so that he can join his wife in the afterlife. However, when he actually does die, she persuades him to go back to the land of the living. Then Cable undoes Wade's death. Just thought that something interesting to note.

It's actually way more similar to the Deadpool comic in which Wade dies and f:alls in love with Lady Death.

@FaceItTiger:

First of all... who the hell is MidnightsEdge?

The entire point of the movie is that the three main characters, Deadpool, Russell and Cable start doing what they're doing because of selfish reasons.

But Wade does care about the kid. When he shoots the Essex guards he does so because he's genuinely angry about Russell being abused.

The kid NOT being likeable is clearly intentional and pretty much the point of the story: outsiders and tormented kids often tend to be avoided because of their poor social skills, which in result leads them to be lonlier and angrier as the time goes by. The point is that Wade sees something good in him (Russell probably reminds him of himself) and decides to give him a chance anyway - DESPITE HIM NOT BEING LIKEABLE. The reason to root for him is that he's a kid, and deserves a friend, and a chance to become a good and likeable person, instead of leading a life led by anger.

The writers made some ballsy and poignant choices, which are actually a very realistic depiction of tortured and abandoned kids. More often than not they need someone to blindly believe in them, despite not having any likeable traits, because no one has ever given them the chance to develop such characteristics.

 

[FaceItTiger74]

JKR, I understand your point, I really do. The point I am trying to make is that just because Russell was written to have anger issues and poor social skills does not excuse the writers from making him a two-dimensional character. Again, Logan had a very similar kid character. But guess why Laura is a fan favorite and Russell isn't? Because the writers wrote her to be more than a plot device. She showed more emotions than just being angry. There were points where she was curious, furious, relaxed, thoughtful, afraid and sad. We didn't really see that same range of emotions with Russell. Maybe Dafne Keen is a better actor than Julian Dennison in that regard. I don't know. But regardless, that's why audiences sympathized with her but not with Russell. I know it sounds like I am being hard on the film but I am not. Overall, I really enjoyed the film. I came into the film with high expectations. But I'm not gonna ignore the obvious flaws.

 

[Deck Rickard]

One thing that’s bugging me about this film is the ending with Cable. Earlier in the film, we saw his time travel device send him back in time like traditional movie time travel (Marty McFly, HG Wells, etc). But when he uses it at the end, he appears to send himself back into his own body in the past to save Deadpool’s life by pinning the token on him. But if he was in his own body from there on out, then why didn’t he just NOT shoot him?

Not sure if I explained that right but none of that made any sense to me.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

JKR, I understand your point, I really do. The point I am trying to make is that just because Russell was written to have anger issues and poor social skills does not excuse the writers from making him a two-dimensional character. Again, Logan had a very similar kid character. But guess why Laura is a fan favorite and Russell isn't? Because the writers wrote her to be more than a plot device. She showed more emotions than just being angry. There were points where she was curious, furious, relaxed, thoughtful, afraid and sad. We didn't really see that same range of emotions with Russell. Maybe Dafne Keen is a better actor than Julian Dennison in that regard. I don't know. But regardless, that's why audiences sympathized with her but not with Russell. I know it sounds like I am being hard on the film but I am not. Overall, I really enjoyed the film. I came into the film with high expectations. But I'm not gonna ignore the obvious flaws.

This. So much this.

The kid is merely a plot device/walking gag. I never once felt he was a real person and that is key in hooking me into caring about him and any connection he has to Wade. Not to mention I didn't feel an ounce of chemistry between DP and Russell. They didn't even gel on a comedic level.

 

[HBarnill]

That’s the consequence of introducing so many characters and only developing your main. We get to focus on Laura a lot because she’s one of the main characters. Deadpool 2 only has one lead and that’s Wade. Everyone’s along for the ride. Whether that is a problem is up to the viewer but if they do want to play up Deadpool’s relationship with Russell, more time should’ve been focus on him as well. Not to mention Cable and Domino.

 

[-JKR-]

JKR, I understand your point, I really do. The point I am trying to make is that just because Russell was written to have anger issues and poor social skills does not excuse the writers from making him a two-dimensional character. Again, Logan had a very similar kid character. But guess why Laura is a fan favorite and Russell isn't? Because the writers wrote her to be more than a plot device. She showed more emotions than just being angry. There were points where she was curious, furious, relaxed, thoughtful, afraid and sad. We didn't really see that same range of emotions with Russell. Maybe Dafne Keen is a better actor than Julian Dennison in that regard. I don't know. But regardless, that's why audiences sympathized with her but not with Russell. I know it sounds like I am being hard on the film but I am not. Overall, I really enjoyed the film. I came into the film with high expectations. But I'm not gonna ignore the obvious flaws.

I didn.t find Russell to be merely a plot device. A little *******, yeah, but not merely a plot device.

The comparison between Laura and Russell doesn't make any sense. And consider that Laura has already had someone who loved her and acted as a mother figure to her.

 

[GuestStar2004]

One thing that’s bugging me about this film is the ending with Cable. Earlier in the film, we saw his time travel device send him back in time like traditional movie time travel (Marty McFly, HG Wells, etc). But when he uses it at the end, he appears to send himself back into his own body in the past to save Deadpool’s life by pinning the token on him. But if he was in his own body from there on out, then why didn’t he just NOT shoot him?

Not sure if I explained that right but none of that made any sense to me.

Presumbaly everything had to go the way it did just to stop the kid from being bad, so deadpool had to sacrifice himself for the kid.

Its questionable whether any of that really needed to happen though.

And really why let Deadpool die if you are just gonna save him at the end? they could just have taken the collar off but he didn't want them to do that so cable decided to go back in time to save him anyway?

 

[FaceItTiger74]

Yeah, Laura had a parental substitute in Gabriela, yet she wasn't treated as important to Laura's development. She only had one simple role in the story: get Laura into Logan's custody. Plus, we never see Laura react to her death nor even wonder about her whereabouts. Not to mention Laura was tortured just like Russell was and possessed anger issues and poor social skills. So not quite sure what you are getting at with "they aren't that much alike." Logan wasn't a perfect film either. I agree with several reviewers that it had third act problems. But at least it took the time to give character development to its supporting cast unlike this film.

 

[FaceItTiger74]

I don't think that making anything interesting with her was the problem. It's just that Deadpool is a tragic character, and Ryan Reynolds ain't wrong, he works better when everything is taken from him.

It happens constantly to him in the comics. His love interests have all either died or dumped him. He's the ultimate underdog, constantly looking for happiness.

Honestly, I didn't have any problems with Vanessa dying in the first act. It wasn't gratitious, it made sense from a narrative point of view, and it was handled beautifully with Wade trying to get back to her in the afterlife. They definitely didn't get rid of her for the sake of it, but kept her as a constant and very important element throughout the movie.

Ryan Reynolds's comment about Deadpool could apply to many well-known characters in comics. I mean, look at Spiderman, Wolverine, Batman or Iron Man. The real reason none of Wade's relationships have lasted is due to comic book logic. Comic book writers don't know how to write a stable, long-lasting romantic relationship/marriage because when things become too hunky-dory, the writers becone bored because they feel as if nothing is changing. So the writers always feel as if they either have to break up the couple or kill off the romantic interest in order to shake things up or keep things fresh. Keep in mind that comics are meant to be ongoing whereas a film/TV series has a definitive end.

Peter and MJ before OMD is a good example of a couple where only one of them is superpowered yet they still manage to maintain a strong, loving and supportive marriage while still having to deal with the stresses of one of them having to save the world on a daily basis on top of dealing with typical marital issues.

Splitting Wade and Vanessa up would have been a better conflict for the film because Wade would have to choose between the two things he loves: Vanessa or his career. That would be quite realistic because things like that happen all the time in real life. Many cops and doctors are divorced because they prioritized their careers over their spouses.

 

[-JKR-]

Yeah, Laura had a parental substitute in Gabriela, yet she wasn't treated as important to Laura's development. She only had one simple role in the story: get Laura into Logan's custody. Plus, we never see Laura react to her death nor even wonder about her whereabouts. Not to mention Laura was tortured just like Russell was and possessed anger issues and poor social skills. So not quite sure what you are getting at with "they aren't that much alike." Logan wasn't a perfect film either. I agree with several reviewers that it had third act problems. But at least it took the time to give character development to its supporting cast unlike this film.

Still doesn't change the fact that Laura HAD a parental substitute in Gabriela, and has already discovered what it feels like to have people love and care about her. Russell didn't.

Anyway, they're still different characters from different movies with different intentions. So I see no point in comparing them.

As for the Wade/Vanessa storyline, them not choosing a storyline YOU would've prefered definitely ain't a flaw.

 

[FaceItTiger74]

Still doesn't change the fact that Laura HAD a parental substitute in Gabriela, and has already discovered what it feels like to have people love and care about her. Russell didn't.

Anyway, they're still different characters from different movies with different intentions. So I see no point in comparing them.

As for the Wade/Vanessa storyline, them not choosing a storyline YOU would've prefered definitely ain't a flaw.

Vanessa's death is not what bothers me. She was killed off in the comics as well, so contrary to popular belief, her death stuck to the source material. I was fine with that. What I didn't like was this redemption arc that felt contrived. Nothing about it felt organic because he was motivated by his own self-interest. It doesn't help that there was no chemistry between Wade and Russell as KryptonINC pointed out. What I feel the writers should have done was have Wade actually bond with Russell then vow to protect him in order to make up for the child that he and Vanessa never got to have. Have Wade tell Russell funny stories about his childhood or go out of his way to make Russell laugh when he isn't feeling all that great. Every time Russell tried to bond with Wade, it felt one-sided. Basically, they could have Wade bond with Rusell like he did with Vanessa in the opening of the first film. Hell, even have them take that piss taking contest of who had the ****tier childhood like Vanessa and Wade did when they first met. It really would have made for a heartwarming moment and would have been a sweet callback to the first film. They still could have kept all of Vanessa's scenes except probably the one where she repeats her line about how children give them a chance to be better than they used to be. That would be too on the nose. Anyway, that would have felt way more satisfying.

I don't understand why the writers didn't think of any of the above. Especially since it has been established in the comics that Wade LOVES children and already has a daughter. Hell, Russell could have been used as a substitute for Ellie. Again, I enjoyed the film as a whole. But what you fail to see, JKR, is that it had so much wasted potential.

 

[-JKR-]

Vanessa's death is not what bothers me. She was killed off in the comics as well, so contrary to popular belief, her death stuck to the source material. I was fine with that. What I didn't like was this redemption arc that felt contrived. Nothing about it felt organic because he was motivated by his own self-interest. It doesn't help that there was no chemistry between Wade and Russell as KryptonINC pointed out. What I feel the writers should have done was have Wade actually bond with Russell then vow to protect him in order to make up for the child that he and Vanessa never got to have. Have Wade tell Russell funny stories about his childhood or go out of his way to make Russell laugh when he isn't feeling all that great. Every time Russell tried to bond with Wade, it felt one-sided. Basically, they could have Wade bond with Rusell like he did with Vanessa in the opening of the first film. Hell, even have them take that piss taking contest of who had the ****tier childhood like Vanessa and Wade did when they first met. It really would have made for a heartwarming moment and would have been a sweet callback to the first film. They still could have kept all of Vanessa's scenes except probably the one where she repeats her line about how children give them a chance to be better than they used to be. That would be too on the nose. Anyway, that would have felt way more satisfying.

I don't understand why the writers didn't think of any of the above. Especially since it has been established in the comics that Wade LOVES children and already has a daughter. Hell, Russell could have been used as a substitute for Ellie. Again, I enjoyed the film as a whole. But what you fail to see, JKR, is that it had so much wasted potential.

I do not fail to see it. I just don't agree with your opinion. The reason why we don't see Wade crack jokes or make Russell laugh is explained in the movie and makes sense from a narrative point.

You're not pointing out flaws, but things in the movie that don't correspond to your thoughts about how it should have been.

 

[FaceItTiger74]

I do not fail to see it. I just don't agree with your opinion. The reason why we don't see Wade crack jokes or make Russell laugh is explained in the movie and makes sense from a narrative point.

You're not pointing out flaws, but things in the movie that don't correspond to your thoughts about how it should have been.

I guess we will agree to disagree. But I am not alone in my sentiments.

To add on to my previous post, Wade should have been the one to suggest returning to the land of the living for the same reasons Vanessa stated. That would have showed immense character development on Wade's part. There were so many possibilities to tell a compelling the story. The writers didn't consider any of them because they wanted to rush something out instead of taking the time to flesh out the story and characters.

 

[-JKR-]

I guess we will agree to disagree. But I am not alone in my sentiments.

To add on to my previous post, Wade should have been the one to suggest returning to the land of the living for the same reasons Vanessa stated. That would have showed immense character development on Wade's part. There were so many possibilities to tell a compelling the story. The writers didn't consider any of them because they wanted to rush something out instead of taking the time to flesh out the story and characters.

Which makes no sense, because Wade could not have chosen to go back. He was dead, and came back to life thanks to Cable going back in time and saving him. And Vanessa was simply hinting at the fact that it was not time to die yet (thanks to Cable). Which, again, just proves to me that you simply have a different movie in mind, which this did not choose to be. But let's just agree to disagree.

 

[Confusion]

Vanessa's death is not what bothers me. She was killed off in the comics as well, so contrary to popular belief, her death stuck to the source material. I was fine with that. What I didn't like was this redemption arc that felt contrived. Nothing about it felt organic because he was motivated by his own self-interest. It doesn't help that there was no chemistry between Wade and Russell as KryptonINC pointed out. What I feel the writers should have done was have Wade actually bond with Russell then vow to protect him in order to make up for the child that he and Vanessa never got to have. Have Wade tell Russell funny stories about his childhood or go out of his way to make Russell laugh when he isn't feeling all that great. Every time Russell tried to bond with Wade, it felt one-sided. Basically, they could have Wade bond with Rusell like he did with Vanessa in the opening of the first film. Hell, even have them take that piss taking contest of who had the ****tier childhood like Vanessa and Wade did when they first met. It really would have made for a heartwarming moment and would have been a sweet callback to the first film. They still could have kept all of Vanessa's scenes except probably the one where she repeats her line about how children give them a chance to be better than they used to be. That would be too on the nose. Anyway, that would have felt way more satisfying.

I don't understand why the writers didn't think of any of the above. Especially since it has been established in the comics that Wade LOVES children and already has a daughter. Hell, Russell could have been used as a substitute for Ellie. Again, I enjoyed the film as a whole. But what you fail to see, JKR, is that it had so much wasted potential.

I am SO glad the writers didn't go that route! BLAH! What you're suggesting is a cookie cutter, dime a dozen story arch.

I think I threw up a little in my mouth after reading that. No offense. It's just the same old story over & over again.



I am so happy they went the route they took.

 

[FaceItTiger74]

I am SO glad the writers didn't go that route! BLAH! What you're suggesting is a cookie cutter, dime a dozen story arch.

I think I threw up a little in my mouth after reading that. No offense. It's just the same old story over & over again.



I am so happy they went the route they took.

Call it what you will. I am not suggesting all of my ideas are great or should have been used. I am just suggesting ways they could have improved the story. You think the film is good as is because "yay, we got a sequel!" But I look at everything with a critical eye. And how do you think this is "the same old story"? It seems as if you are shooting down my ideas without giving any reasons why they suck or how those ideas can be tweaked. At least JKR gave reasons why my ideas wouldn't work.

 

[Confusion]

Call it what you will. I am not suggesting all of my ideas are great or should have been used. I am just suggesting ways they could have improved the story. You think the film is good as is because "yay, we got a sequel!" But I look at everything with a critical eye. And how do you think this is "the same old story"? It seems as if you are shooting down my ideas without giving any reasons why they suck or how those ideas can be tweaked. At least JKR gave reasons why my ideas wouldn't work.

Where did I EVER anywhere say that?? lol Not even once.



I already said I was glad they didn't go that route because it's the same kind of story that gets beat to death. You need to open your "critical" eye a bit more to see how that story line is played out over & over again. The "safe" way to go. Blah.

To each their own.

I didn't give a point b point break down because I've read your other comments & it's noticeable that there would be no point.

I just had to reply to that one post because I am so grateful they stayed away from that tired snooze fest of a story arc. Read a Deadpool comic or 3. You described NOTHING close to him. But whatever lol.

 

[FaceItTiger74]

Where did I EVER anywhere say that?? lol Not even once.



I already said I was glad they didn't go that route because it's the same kind of story that gets beat to death. You need to open your "critical" eye a bit more to see how that story line is played out over & over again. The "safe" way to go. Blah.

To each their own.

I didn't give a point b point break down because I've read your other comments & it's noticeable that there would be no point.

I just had to reply to that one post because I am so grateful they stayed away from that tired snooze fest of a story arc. Read a Deadpool comic or 3. You described NOTHING close to him. But whatever lol.

What don't I know about the character? Please enlighten me as to what I have mistaken. Again, I am not totally defending all of my proposed ideas for the script, but I stand by the fact that the script lacked something that made the previous film the mega smash hit that it was. And I would suggest you brush up on your grammar skills if you are going to engage in a debate.

 

[HBarnill]

So, why didn’t Cable go back to the prison to finish off Russell while he was still there?