Deadpool Deadpool Box Office Prediction Thread

[MurkeNyou]

^ Agreed on every single damn point. Deadpool's a certified star now, the same star Wolverine was supposed to be. Except now he's ten times bigger & a true worldwide sensation.

It's crazy when you really stop and think about it all....if you had told me this movie would be this massive back when the footage leaked I'd have laughed my ass off & called you crazy.

This movie blew away even everyone's best expectations. Just goes to show there's a huge benefit to providing something new to the general audience that's also true to it's source material 100%.

Yup, I see people still trying to diminish the draw of the character by saying the films success is because of the marketing. I don't care how good the marketing is, the character had pull to draw in a huge opening weekend, it wasn't JUST because of the marketing campaign. It's that it looked, sounded, and played like the source material.

 

[-JKR-]

The movie wouldn't have made more than $150m on the 4-day weekend just thanks to Deadpool fans alone.

People liked and embraced how the character and the movie were represented during the marketing campaign and in trailers. That was the main draw which led to such a numbers, not people flipping out about how faithful it looks to the comics (the general audience doesn't even know about that).

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Showing the public the reasons a character became popular doesn't just bring fanboys to the theater.

If you sew Deadpool's mouth shut and give him heat vision and arm swords, you don't only lose the fanboys, you lose the reasons people love the character.

This isn't rocket science.

 

[-JKR-]

Showing the public the reasons a character became popular doesn't just bring fanboys to the theater.

If you sew Deadpool's mouth shut and give him heat vision and arm swords, you don't only lose the fanboys, you lose the reasons people love the character.

This isn't rocket science.

I think you misinterpreted my post.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Marketing does matter. It's not downplaying the popularity of the character to talk about the great marketing campaign.

 

[-JKR-]

Marketing does matter. It's not downplaying the popularity of the character to talk about the great marketing campaign.

Yeah, that's pretty much what I meant to say but got caught up in my own, weird wording.

And also, being faithful is just the first (important) step towards a good movie and success.

EDIT: And I'd like to add that Punisher: War Zone was quite faithful (to the point where they would try to copy the comic panels), but I still think it was a pretty poor and uneven movie, and can see why it flopped. Dredd was faithful and great, but the marketing was so poor many weren't even aware of its release. I was, and I still wasn't very interested, because the trailers didn't do much for me. And then I watched the movie and was blown away.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

When a Hollywood screenwriter and studio producer who never read a comic book thinks they can improve a beloved comic character better than hundreds of professional comic book writers and artist who have listened to decades of hardcore fan input and comic book history, it's extremely laughable.

Stop trying to put your comic novice, amatuer stamp on something that has been refined by experts for decades just show the public why the source material stands out and became popular.

 

[-JKR-]

When a Hollywood screenwriter and studio producer who never read a comic book thinks they can improve a beloved comic character better than hundreds of professional comic book writers and artist who have listened to decades of hardcore fan input and comic book history, it's extremely laughable.

Stop trying to put your comic novice, amatuer stamp on something that has been refined by experts for decades just show the public why the source material stands out and became popular.

Aren't you a bit extreme? There's a fine middle ground to that. You don't wanna be a slave to the source material.

You still gotta make the material your own, otherwise it can pretty easily become a soulless rip-off of the comics.

Even Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick talked about that. You get to know and respect the source material, but you still try to put your own stamp on it. Just like a new writer in the comics puts his stamp on a title and breathes some new life and perspective into it.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Lots of stuff is heavily marketed and flops.

Lots of things are true to the source material and flop.

Lots of movies with great storytelling underperform.

But if you do strong, inventive marketing and show the public why people love the material in a great movie you increase your chances of success substantially than if you only did one or two of those things.

Just make a simple check list:

- show why the source material is popular
- good storytelling
- inventive marketing

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Aren't you a bit extreme? There's a fine middle ground to that. You don't wanna be a slave to the source material.

You still gotta make the material your own, otherwise it can pretty easily become a soulless rip-off of the comics.

Even Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick talked about that. You get to know and respect the source material, but you still try to put your own stamp on it. Just like a new writer in the comics puts his stamp on a title and breathes some new life and perspective into it.

Deadpool is considered by many to be the most character accurate comics adaptation of all time?

Are you calling Deadpool a soulless movie?

 

[-JKR-]

Deadpool is considered by many to be the most character accurate comics adaptation of all time?

Are you calling Deadpool a soulless movie?

Duh. Man. Not at all (I have yet to see it, but have been a strong supporter of the movie and the creative team). Reread my posts and maybe we'll be able to talk about it.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Duh. Man. Not at all (I have yet to see it, and have been a supporter of the movie and the creative team for years). Reread my posts and maybe we'll be able to talk about it.

I don't think Deadpool is middle ground.

It's first and foremost purist.

 

[-JKR-]

"Making something your own" is very vague and can easily snowball into The Spirit or Catwoman.

That I'd just call a s***y take on something.

When I talk about making something your own I talk about the works of immensely talented people such as Richard Donner, Tim Burton, Bryan Singer, Sam Raimi, Guillermo Del Toro, Christopher Nolan, James Gunn, Jon Favreau, Matthew Vaughn, Shane Black, the Russo Bros. etc. - you know, the good stuff (of course some more faithful than others).

 

[-JKR-]

I don't think Deadpool is middle ground.

It's first and foremost purist.

Even the screenwriters have talked about how they still tried to put their own stamp on it, while remaining faithful to the source. JUST copying the comics doesn't automatically make a good movie. You need more than that. Talented people on board with good ideas on how to transport the source to the big screen, for example. And they did change some details (like Vanessa not being a shapeshifter in the story), so it's not like they were slaves to the source. They respected it, and made a movie out of it.

Which era of Deadpool comics did you take the bulk of your inspiration from?

RR: Actually we drew from all over. It was important to do that, to get an understanding of the different voices from different writers. We wanted to understand what different people had tried, and then we had to put them down, put the comics back in the draw and develop and cultivate our own slight spin on the character, which we did.

http://www.heyuguys.com/exclusive-interview-deadpool-writers/

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

That I'd just call a s***y take on something.

When I talk about making something your own I talk about the works of immensely talented people such as Richard Donner, Tim Burton, Bryan Singer, Sam Raimi, Christopher Nolan, James Gunn, Jon Favreau, Matthew Vaughn, Shane Black, the Russo Bros. etc. - you know, the good stuff (of course some more faithful than others).

Well then you can say all movies were from directors who "made something their own".

Like I said, vague.

 

[-JKR-]

Whatever. We're just not on the same page, I guess. All I was trying to say is that you can only get that far by only being faithful to the source. You need more than that to make a movie work. Time to move on.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Even the screenwriters have talked about how they still tried to put their own stamp on it, while remaining faithful to the source. JUST copying the comics doesn't automatically make a good movie. You need more than that. Talented people on board with good ideas on how to transport the source to the big screen, for example. And they did change some details (like Vanessa not being a shapeshifter in the story), so it's not like they were slaves to the source. They respected it, and made a movie out of it.


http://www.heyuguys.com/exclusive-interview-deadpool-writers/

99.999% of movies do this.

Deadpool is one of the most accurate CBMs though.

So maybe others should try to be closer to the comics as well.

 

[-JKR-]

99.999% of movies do this.

Deadpool is one of the most accurate CBMs though.

So maybe others should try to be closer to the comics as well.

There's no one way to make these movies. What's important is that they respect the core and heart of the story.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Whatever. We're just not on the same page, I guess. All I was trying to say is that you can only get that far by only being faithful to the source. You need more than that to make a movie work. Time to move on.

Being faithful should be one of the goals.

I'm not saying every comic book movie has to be translated word for word but there should be an attempt to expose the appeal of the character and stories to the audience.

That appeal is why the source material deserves to be adapted in the first place.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

There's no one way to make these movies. What's important is that they respect the core and heart of the story.

I agree.

I just think they should make a movie like Deadpool first then experiment with something less accurate/recognizable much further down the line.

 

[SomeOldGuy]

"That label takes itself so seriously, can you imagine them making fun of themselves in a movie? They’d rather stab themselves."

What moron WB exec said that?! The studio making the movies about the talking raccoon and the thief that can't hold a Baskin-Robbins job take themselves too seriously?! Uh...

Yeah, Gunn called BS on that line too.

https://www.facebook.com/jgunn/posts/10153162287591157

 

[Teelie]

$400 million is a low number at this point in the game. The only way this movie stops at that number is if it sees a record-breaking drop in attendance this weekend, but that is extremely doubtful.

Considering it had a $260 million WW gross as a start & has a full month to itself, this movie is definitely going pass $600 million, AT LEAST.

World wide? Definitely. I thought this was just domestic gross. Shows how well I read at 2:30 in the morning.

 

[SomeOldGuy]

Looks like the weekend actuals will come in a tad lower than estimated, $132.7 million (versus the estimate of 135). Still crazy good, and Fox is sticking to its $150 million four-day estimate even with the lower Sunday.

 

[Eddie]

Yeah, Gunn called BS on that line too.

https://www.facebook.com/jgunn/posts/10153162287591157

Yeah, that quote was an idiotic thing to run. Marvel people have openly supported Deadpool, so the weird anti-Marvel narrative shouldn't be coming up with this. Though the fact that there's a disgruntled marketing executive somewhere in Hollywood that thinks Ant-Man was some super serious film is hilarious.

 

[2kt09]

The last R rated comic book movies were SIN CITY 2 and DREDD.

The last one was Kingsman.