Deadpool

[Ghambit]

You know you wanted to turn around and tell them they shoulda wore their yellow pants.

[MahrinSkel]

Fucking awesome. I literally laughed myself to tears. And Gunn is right, Hollywood will take all the wrong lessons from this.

--Dave

[Jeff Kelly]

Morena Baccarin 

This was a really great experience. I laughed my ass off. Ryan Reynolds is really great, nearly all of the Jokes hit.

Will see it a second time.

Oh and the movie revels in its R-rating, it savours it and loves it and calls it George. They know exactly why this needed an R-rating and how to do it right.

[SurfD]

I think I felt especially dread when I saw one prognostication today that this would greenlight an R-rated Gambit movie. This is the worst possible thing ever. This is a thought worthy of having aliens nuke us from orbit.

----------

What would be good? An R-rated X-Force movie that mixed the sensibility of this film with Rick Remender's more serious X-Force comics. That's part of what made this work, in fact--just enough seriousness about Deadpool's sufferings, about his relationship, etc.

R Rated Gambit? Fuck no.  For that matter, we really dont even need a Gambit movie period.  Now, an R Rated modern Spawn reboot, that would be pretty awesome.

[Jeff Kelly]

'Conventional' wisdom said that R-rated movies won't work. That they are box office poison because the teen and pre-teen crowd won't be able to see them in theaters and that they subsequently won't be picked up by the large theater chains. Now we've had four very successful R-rated movies in a single year. 50 Shades of Gray, Kingsman, Mad Max: Fury Road and now Deadpool. I#d even count hateful 8 which currently stands on $53 m domestic/$78m foreign on a $45m budget.

The exception would be 50 Shades because it was pretty obvious that it would be rated R (if not NC-17) but the books were such a hype that it was apparent that this would make a lot of money.

The makers of the other movies literally had to fight tooth and nails to keep the production companies from dumbing it down to a PG-13. Mad Max didn't get the follow-up greenlit (as would be common witha 100 million dollar budget, to offset the budgetary risk) because they thought the movie would never recurr the production and marketing costs on an R-rating, it also very nearly didn't get made because of that. Kingsman and Deadpool almost wouldn't have been greenlit if it weren't for their initial marketing efforts. Also no one thought Deadpool would make any money, otherwise they wouldn't have scheduled it for a Valentine's day weekend release. The weekend bad movies are released to die silently.

The big sensation about Deadpool is not that it's successful despite the R-rating. It's successful on probably the worst weekend of the year for movie releases. So it invalidates almost all of the 'conventional' wisdom held by movie execs. It's almost as if people will go to the movies at any point during the year if there's something worthwile to watch. A probably surprising revelation for industry people. Also people with jobs have disposable income to spent on theater tickets.

So TL;DR: Of course no one in Hollywood has any clue why a movie like Deadpool is successful. Of course this will produce a lot of third rate knock-offs, almost anything does today. I don't care though if there's at least some movies out there that 'get it'.

[Jeff Kelly]

Revised estimate:

$150m domestic/$132m foreign/$264m total over the 4 day president's day weekend. This will easily break $500m worldwide by next week. On a $50m budget. It's now already breaking all of 50 Shades' records for february releases.

It also broke the "largest R rated opening" record previously held by The Matrix: Reloaded and it is also the largest opening ever for 20th Century Fox topping Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith.

Movie execs obviously have no fucking clue about anything.

[Ironwood]

This is not news.

[Margalis]

The famous William Goldman quote "nobody knows anything" is famous for a reason.

As a movie exec you greenlight a picture based on the script and maybe some attached directors / actors. It can be hard to tell how well a movie will do once a movie is finished, let alone before it's even started filming.

I don't want to defend movie execs here but it's a hard job. I don't think many analysts thought this would do this well either. Jurassic Park was the same. That said, movie conventional wisdom is basically "do what's been working in the last 6 months", which is on one hand very stupid, but on the other hand makes some sense on some level.

[HaemishM]

The bigger the budgets, the more risk averse movie execs get. Since most of them are basically business/numbers people, it's about following the numbers. By the numbers, this should have tanked as well as things like Mad Max: Fury Road. Because these are numbers guys making the decisions, those decisions are based on how big of a loss they can absorb without losing their job if the movie shits the bed. I don't think they actually factor in "if this is a success" to the equation at all. Successes are in the past, disasters are in the future. And all these creative types just want whatever they want and don't care about the budgets or losses or whatever.

It's a very myopic mindset and explains everything you need to know about why we get the movies we get these days. The next John Carter is waiting just around the corner for all these execs - a creative success that nevertheless lost a metric fuckton of money.

Movie execs haven't learned the lessons of the Robert Rodriguez and Kevin Smith's of the world, who found ways to make good movies on shoestring budgets. They sure as shit haven't learned the lessons of the Marvel success (see Warner Bros. DC movies and Fox's Fantastic Four follies). The only lessons they ever see from success are "copy that until it doesn't work anymore, then copy the next trend."

[MahrinSkel]

Yeah, directors and stars are made by hits, especially unexpected ones, but execs live or die by the bombs they gave the green light to. $58M is practically a chump-change flyer for Hollywood these days, nobody important was going to have their career tanked if it failed. Ryan Reynolds was bitching up a storm about how they had promised him a Deadpool solo movie when he did Wolverine Origins, and the teaser he and a few friends put together got huge buzz, so they dug through the couch cushions and found a few million for him and his friends to LARP with. The fact that they left it in the hands of such an untested director shows how *not* seriously they took the whole thing, they expected it to fail miserably (and even stacked the deck in that direction by giving it a Valentine's opening) and knew that would reduce Reynolds to taking whatever they offered for the *next* project.

That marketing that looked like 'an intern wrote it over a weekend'? Probably most of it was Reynolds mugging ad-lib for the camera because they wouldn't give the movie a real marketing budget. Hollywood expected it to fail and has absolutely no clue why it didn't, but will settle on some one-line explanation and run with it. Because the only way Hollywood execs are allowed to fail is by following the herd off a cliff.

--Dave

[Raph]

Now, now, you aren't being at all fair to Hollywood.

Many creatives do care about budgets. The ones that own their production companies do! Also, there's the ones whose budgets aren't big enough.

And of course execs can fail without following a trend. They can strike out in a unique direction and not make money! That gets them fired right quick.

(FWIW, my experience with Hollywood is that most of the creatives are quite nice and most of the suits are snakes. Names are only given out over beers, but are ones you would know).

[Mac]

Started a bit slow but soon became a roller coaster of fun and laughs. The obligatory after the credits bit was brilliant, but I can see the younger audience members not getting it.

[Trippy]

Ferris Bueller's came out (almost) 30 years ago

[MahrinSkel]

I can't track down the origin for the quote, but it runs something to the effect of "Hollywood doesn't make movies, Hollywood makes deals and sometimes those deals result in a movie." You can make a movie literally anywhere, nobody shoots a film on a studio backlot or the Topanga hills anymore and a lot of big stars and directors keep themselves and their families *anywhere* but Southern California.  If you're an aspiring actor, you're better off heading for Vancouver B.C. than Sunset Boulevard.

But if you want tens of millions of dollars to make a movie and access to wide theatrical release, Hollywood is where that deal gets made. This deal was set up to fail, an R-rated superhero movie with D-list characters releasing on Valentine's Day with virtually no marketing budget. Somewhere in Lala-Land, an executive is steaming pissed because his studio is going to make money on this and all his 11 dimensional chess has gotten fucked up.

--Dave

[Evildrider]

[Jeff Kelly]

That would implode the Internet just by the critical mass of whining fans complaining about the "SJWs" in Hollywood. Even if this is an actual Marvel character I'm unaware of.

[NowhereMan]

That is Domino I'm guessing sans make-up. Long time Deadpool love interest/murder assister and Cable/X-verse B lister.

[Ironwood]

It's Keira Knightly as Cable.  It was an after credits joke.

[Soulflame]

What General Zod said.  Someone ran with an after credits joke, and did a photoshop of Kiera Knightly as Cable.

[Johny Cee]

I can't track down the origin for the quote, but it runs something to the effect of "Hollywood doesn't make movies, Hollywood makes deals and sometimes those deals result in a movie." You can make a movie literally anywhere, nobody shoots a film on a studio backlot or the Topanga hills anymore and a lot of big stars and directors keep themselves and their families *anywhere* but Southern California.  If you're an aspiring actor, you're better off heading for Vancouver B.C. than Sunset Boulevard.

But if you want tens of millions of dollars to make a movie and access to wide theatrical release, Hollywood is where that deal gets made. This deal was set up to fail, an R-rated superhero movie with D-list characters releasing on Valentine's Day with virtually no marketing budget. Somewhere in Lala-Land, an executive is steaming pissed because his studio is going to make money on this and all his 11 dimensional chess has gotten fucked up.

--Dave

Source on that?  The production budget was modest ($58 million), but I can't find anything that says they skimped on marketing.  On the contrary, all you see are articles praising Deadpool's marketing strategy....  and anecdotally, there were shitloads of ads for Deadpool prior to its opening...  certain channels, they were impossible to avoid.

Also, the sequel was greenlight before the movie was released.

[HaemishM]

Yeah, that $58 million was just the movie, and was actually $7 million less than they were greenlit for. Marketing spent a shitton, though it does seem like it was very targeted.

[MahrinSkel]

Ahh.... Apparently, not watching live TV has removed me from the zeitgeist. I genuinely had not seen any marketing except the viral stuff that got dragged into my FB feed, and here.

Somehow, I think I can survive being out of touch with the consumer mainstream.

--Dave

[jgsugden]

I think somewhere around November there was a change in strategy when the studio started to get their feedback.  This was - from the beginning - being undercut, under budgeted and set up to be a fringe movie.  When preliminary data began to come back and indicated the movie might vastly exceed expectations, they started to step up. 

When it exceeded even those revised and raised expectations, they realized they screwed up: This should have been a huge summer release.  They should not have cut the characters they were forced to cut.  Jackman, Stewart/McAvoy, etc... should have been on screen for cameos.  They should have forced it to be PG13 so that... Hey, I didn't say they were smart, just that they had 'real'izations. 

I loved it.  Fox has done well with a total of 3 characters in their X-verse: Magneto, Wolverine and Deadpool.  Everything else was pretty poor (IMHO).  I'm just sad we had to wait so long to get it and Reynolds is getting to be a bit long in the tooth to continue the role for a prolonged period.  He is only 8 years behind Jackman.

[Velorath]

I'm just sad we had to wait so long to get it and Reynolds is getting to be a bit long in the tooth to continue the role for a prolonged period.  He is only 8 years behind Jackman.

Not sure why his age matters that much since his face is always going to be covered in makeup or he's going to be in his costume. Reynolds could probably just do voice-overs for 95% of the action scenes.

[jgsugden]

I'm just sad we had to wait so long to get it and Reynolds is getting to be a bit long in the tooth to continue the role for a prolonged period.  He is only 8 years behind Jackman.

Not sure why his age matters that much since his face is always going to be covered in makeup or he's going to be in his costume. Reynolds could probably just do voice-overs for 95% of the action scenes.

True.  Heck, they could do the same with Wolverine: Motion Capture by stuntmen, digital deaging, etc... could keep Jackman in the role forever if they wanted.

[Johny Cee]

Ahh.... Apparently, not watching live TV has removed me from the zeitgeist. I genuinely had not seen any marketing except the viral stuff that got dragged into my FB feed, and here.

Somehow, I think I can survive being out of touch with the consumer mainstream.

--Dave

Fucking reddit/movies had a million and one posts on whatever the latest Deadpool marketing stunt was...  whether it was viral videos or buying ad time during the Golden Girls (in comics, Deadpool loves the Golden Girls or some shit) or the outrageous billboards/posters or whatever.

Not being picky with you, just a pet peeve with "geek" culture is that they believe either the mainstream/studios are actively shitting on what they like or media companies are actively sabotaging projects they pump millions of dollars into just because lulz nerd tears. 

[HaemishM]

To be fair to geek culture, Fox was pretty much shitting on the Deadpool character for years starting with the horrible choices they made in Wolverine and even cutting money out of the budget after they'd greenlit the script. It took "geek culture" absolutely blowing up the Internet along with Ryan Reynolds continued evangelizing the character for Fox Studios to even make the movie, and good early testing results to make them put money into marketing it. Not because they love the salty taste of nerd tears, of course, but because they love money, hate risk and are myopic twats.

[Rendakor]

Saw it tonight in IMAX. Fantastic film, easily one of my favorite Marvel movies. Would watch again.

[Teleku]

How much input did Marvel actually have in this?  I assumed that it was entirely a Fox project that they had full control over, like all the other x-men stuff.

[jgsugden]

It depends upon how you define Marvel.  People that work in the comics, studio people, etc.... Last June they said Feige would have no involvement wIth Deadpool. I have heard nothing to contradict that yet.

[Mandella]

It depends upon how you define Marvel.  People that work in the comics, studio people, etc.... Last June they said Feige would have no involvement wIth Deadpool. I have heard nothing to contradict that yet.

He got a pizza place named after him -- Feige's Favorites!

Hey, that's more than he gets from Netflix...

Also, in with the "Loved It" crowd.

[HaemishM]

Marvel didn't have much to do with this at all other than providing source material.

[Margalis]

How much input did Marvel actually have in this?  I assumed that it was entirely a Fox project that they had full control over, like all the other x-men stuff.

I don't think Fox has "full control" over anything Marvel.

According to the writers they had to run the changes to Negasonic Teenage Warhead (in the comics she has totally different powers) past Marvel execs. So it seems like Marvel has veto power over how the characters are portrayed. I assume the contract has some sort of language about using "good faith" interpretations of the characters or something along those lines.

That said it doesn't sound like Marvel had any input as to the plot or script.

[Evildrider]

How much input did Marvel actually have in this?  I assumed that it was entirely a Fox project that they had full control over, like all the other x-men stuff.

I don't think Fox has "full control" over anything Marvel.

According to the writers they had to run the changes to Negasonic Teenage Warhead (in the comics she has totally different powers) past Marvel execs. So it seems like Marvel has veto power over how the characters are portrayed. I assume the contract has some sort of language about using "good faith" interpretations of the characters or something along those lines.

That said it doesn't sound like Marvel had any input as to the plot or script.

Plus the character is dead... and was in like 2 issues?

[Strazos]

This movie was fantastic.

That is all.