Deadpool Deadpool News and Discussion - Part 4

[Darepool]

I just don't find CW as entertaining without watching some of the MCU movies beforehand at least. Before my cinema viewing I did a MCU marathon and absolutely adored CW. That was the last time I watched any of them though so I find my enjoyment lessened when watching it in isolation. It's still a great movie of course, but I find Deadpool slowly but surely over taking it as my number 1 CBM of 2016.

I'm the exact opposite. Deadpool was my #1 for the year but having watched both now multiple times I feel that Civil War is better. Saying that they are both 9/10 for me and in my top 5 ever for CBM's. On the other hand I always thought CW had the superior action but I now prefer DP's action, which is actually closer to the level in Winter Soldier then CW is. Go figure.

 

[Big Baws]

I loved Deadpool, it's one of the best theater experiences I ever had.

Seen it like four times.

 

[Flint Marko]

Great article on Cracked about how Fox tried to screw up Deadpool. I'd link to it but it has profanity - the title of the article is "8 Absurdly Bad Ideas Studios Almost Forced Into Great Movies".

With how much Fox has supposedly "changed" in the last few years, it appears that their most successful Marvel movie yet happened completely in spite of themselves.

 

[Nathan]

And after the huge success I bet they're still trying to **** with it.

 

[-JKR-]

Great article on Cracked about how Fox tried to screw up Deadpool. I'd link to it but it has profanity - the title of the article is "8 Absurdly Bad Ideas Studios Almost Forced Into Great Movies".

With how much Fox has supposedly "changed" in the last few years, it appears that their most successful Marvel movie yet happened completely in spite of themselves.

The people from the article got their facts wrong. Most of that belongs to the old regime. The idea to make it PG-13 floated around before the test footage leaked and the studio greenlit the movie.

 

[Flint Marko]

The people from the article got their facts wrong. Most of that belongs to the old regime. The idea to make it PG-13 floated around before the test footage leaked and the studio greenlit the movie.

Not according to this article:

http://www.complex.com/pop-culture/2016/02/how-deadpool-fought-for-its-hard-r-rating

 

[Zant]

Not according to this article:

http://www.complex.com/pop-culture/2016/02/how-deadpool-fought-for-its-hard-r-rating

LOl so it was the much maligned Simon Kinberg that decided that it should be rated R. I'm glad they had the guts to go with the R- rating.

 

[-JKR-]

Not according to this article:

http://www.complex.com/pop-culture/2016/02/how-deadpool-fought-for-its-hard-r-rating

Umm, that post of mine refered to that article.

That's why I said that the authors of the article got their facts wrong.

The long development history of Deadpool was covered in so many articles and interviews, and that's a superficial and flawed sum-up of it all.

Before the movie was greenlit the filmmakers tried to pitch a PG-13 version of the movie to the studio, to try to convince them to make it. But it still wasn't enough for them to get the green light.

And in the end, except for the budget cut before filming, they did support Tim Miller & Co. after all! Suicide Squad is a perfect example of what they could've done. So, even if the studio threw around the idea to cut the movie in a linear way, in the end they backed off and let Miller to their thing. And Miller also mentions that the idea (that I love) to show the evolution of Deadpool's suit, by having him put together some prototypes first (including a white one), originally came from one of the Fox executives.

So, I think we should put out forks down on this one. Fox deserves credit for Deadpool. They let Tim Miller & Co. make a mid-budget R-rated version of Deadpool, did not mess with their vision, and supported them with a kick-ass marketing campaign, which most $50 million dollar movies can only dream of nowadays - especially when it comes to the 'classic' major studios, which are mostly in love with micro-budgeted flicks and massive $200+ million dollar productions.

This movie would've NEVER been made this way if Tom Rothman was still in charge. Even if the fans started protesting in masses in front of the Fox tower.

I know 20th Century Fox is another studio it's cool to hate. But could we at least be somewhat objective?

 

[Flint Marko]

Umm, that post of mine refered to that article.

That's why I said that the authors of the article got their facts wrong.

The long development history of Deadpool was covered in so many articles and interviews, and that's a superficial and flawed sum-up of it all.

Can you point me to any source that would corroborate this?

Before the movie was greenlit the filmmakers tried to pitch a PG-13 version of the movie to the studio, to try to convince them to make it. But it still wasn't enough for them to get the green light.

And in the end, except for the budget cut before filming, they did support Tim Miller & Co. after all! Suicide Squad is a perfect example of what they could've done. So, even if the studio threw around the idea to cut the movie in a linear way, in the end they backed off and let Miller to their thing. And Miller also mentions that the idea (that I love) to show the evolution of Deadpool's suit, by having him put together some prototypes first (including a white one), originally came from one of the Fox executives.

So, I think we should put out forks down on this one. Fox deserves credit for Deadpool. They let Tim Miller & Co. make a mid-budget R-rated version of Deadpool, did not mess with their vision, and supported them with a kick-ass marketing campaign, which most $50 million dollar movies can only dream of nowadays - especially when it comes to the 'classic' major studios, which are mostly in love with micro-budgeted flicks and massive $200+ million dollar productions.

This movie would've NEVER been made this way if Tom Rothman was still in charge. Even if the fans started protesting in masses in front of the Fox tower.

I know 20th Century Fox is another studio it's cool to hate. But could we at least be somewhat objective?

My original point was that Deadpool's success happened in spite of themselves. They didn't want to make the movie until the internet had to grab them by the collar and scream in their faces, and they responded by giving it a shoe-string budget that they cut before filming kicked off. How is my original point not objectively true?

 

[-JKR-]

The movie would've had a smaller budget anyway. That was always the intention. To make a smaller, R-rated movie.

They still ended up supporting Tim Miller's vision for Deadpool (and not messing with it during post-production), and brought their A-game to promote it. Which, in the current cinematic climate, is not a given.

And before that, they are still the ones who (thanks also to producer Simon Kinberg) greenlit Deadpool as an R-rated movie. Any other studio would've probably asked them to do it PG-13, especially on such a juicy property.

Can you point me to any source that would corroborate this?

http://www.ew.com/article/2016/02/15/deadpool-tim-miller-fox-rejection

 

[Flint Marko]

The movie would've had a smaller budget anyway. That was always the intention. To make a smaller, R-rated movie.

They still ended up supporting Tim Miller's vision for Deadpool (and not messing with it during post-production), and brought their A-game to promote it. Which, in the current cinematic climate, is not a given.

The small budget was always the intention because they never believed in the project even after the internet went into hysterics over the leaked footage. Again: the movie was only green lit because of fan fervor. They cut this budget again right before filming. Seems like an odd way to support Miller's vision.

You're right about the marketing campaign, they deserve credit for that and not fatally harming the final product. But that Cracked article outlines pretty clearly that they tried to. That was my original point.

And before that, they are still the ones who (thanks also to producer Simon Kinberg) greenlit Deadpool as an R-rated movie. Any other studio would've probably asked them to do it PG-13, especially on such a juicy property.

http://www.ew.com/article/2016/02/15/deadpool-tim-miller-fox-rejection

But they did ask them to do it PG-13. This article you posted mentions Miller proposing a PG-13 version before production even commenced, but unless I'm missing something, it doesn't say anything that disproves the claim presented in the Complex article.

 

[-JKR-]

Ugh, God.

Could you please re-read the article? Tim Miller clearly states that they tried to make a PG-13 version BEFORE the studio finally agreed to make the movie. And if you need something else to back that up just look for one of the many interviews or podcasts with the filmmakers. The making of Deadpool has been covered SO much during the movie's release. The Complex switched a few things around.

The small budget was always the intention because studios stopped making R-rated blockbusters, let alone an R-rated comic book adaptation.

The filmmakers knew that, so instead of trying to get an R-rated $100-150 million dollar production, which they would've never made, they went for a smaller and grittier story, in order to keep their desired rating and take on the character.

Moviemaking is a serious of decision, and unless we're talking about indipendent productions, studios have the last word.

During the course of the development and the production the studio could've decided to make it PG-13, they could've decided to go through with the idea of the linear narrative structure, they could've forced Miller to put in stuff he didn't want (like Marvel Studios did with the Thor subplot on Avengers: Age of Ultron, threatening him to delete Hawkeye's subplot if he didn't), they could've have taken the movie from director Tim Miller and hire the trailer company to edit it (like Warner Bros. did with Suicide Squad), they could've done many more things - they do have the power to do so... and guess what? They didn't. In the end, despite the bumps, the studio ended up making the right decisions. On an R-rated action comedy based on a comic book, which was seen as a huge gamble in the industry (Watchmen and Kick-Ass weren't exactly smash hits at the box office).

And for that they deserve credit.

 

[Zant]

An extra action and some unnecessary characters were cut from the film because of the budget cut. I think the budget cut actually worked out for the best.

Now that Fox are ready to give them a big budget, the director and writers are now saying that they don't even need a big budget for the sequel. A bit of irony there.

 

[-JKR-]

An extra action and some unnecessary characters were cut from the film because of the budget cut. I think the budget cut actually worked out for the best.

Now that Fox are ready to give them a big budget, the director and writers are now saying that they don't even need a big budget for the sequel. A bit of irony there.

This is a slight misinterpretation. What they've said doesn't mean that the sequel will cost $50 million dollars, just that they're not aiming for a $200 million dollar mega-budget, as they like the freedom that comes with a smaller budget, and they think that Deadpool lends himself to gritter, more urban stories anyway.

Tim Miller has also said that the budget will be whatever they need to tell the story for the sequel.

Deadpool 2 will most likely cost more than the original. And if I had to guess, I'd say that it will cross $100 mil., which will still be less than most of today's tentpoles cost.

And I agree. Some of the changes due to the budget cut were for the best. As much as I would've loved to see Patch on the big screen, I like that Weasel's role got bigger because of it. And turning all of Ajax's henchmen into Angel Dust was a good choice.

 

[Iceman]

This is a slight misinterpretation. What they've said doesn't mean that the sequel will cost $50 million dollars, just that they're not aiming for a $200 million dollar mega-budget, as they like the freedom that comes with a smaller budget, and they think that Deadpool lends himself to gritter, more urban stories anyway.

Tim Miller has also said that the budget will be whatever they need to tell the story for the sequel.

If true then that's all i want to hear anyway.

Deadpool 2 will most likely cost more than the original. And if I had to guess, I'd say that it will cross $100 mil., which will still be less than most of today's tentpoles cost.

Sounds about right. Sounds like a safe investment at that price too.

 

[def28]

A lot of the cast and crew here took budget cuts, so thats definitely not gonna happen again. That will make the budget increase quite a bit on it's own.

But yeah, in-between the 100m-125m range seems about right to me. Nothing Avenger, BvS or X-Men level. But a good increase.

 

[Smilodon]

http://bit.ly/2emky2P

Shortlist for actresses testing for Domino are up from Collider. Collider also assumes that with Domino casting beginning, Cable casting might be close to being done.

EDIT: Justin Kroll from Variety also backs up this scoop as well.

 

[Iceman]

Damn, I can't wait to see those two.

 

[Web-Head]

Sofia Boutella, please.

 

[LoganGambit87]

easily Winstead

 

[Web-Head]

easily Winstead

She'd be good too

 

[kevork89]

Winstead for sure. She's so amazing and needs her due in a movie like this.

 

[Smilodon]

Prefer Davis over all of these candidates, but can't go wrong with MEW in any film.

 

[SuperT]

MEW is such an obvious choice - hope they go with Boutella instead. She kicks a**!

 

[Loki882]

-My first instinct is to pick MEW just because I immediately go "yeah I can picture that."

-Lizzy Caplan would be a good choice to.

-Sophia Boutella would be interesting. She's really athletic, has proven that she can handle action scenes before, is charismatic, and given that these films have little problem changing the nationality of the characters, her accent wouldn't even necessarily be an issue either.