How to use this Page

[…] Beat – Deadpool artist Reilly Brown and his new family relocating from a fire and could use a hand – Please help […]

Holy cow! Could you possibly be more anal in picking out points of a several decade series crammed into a time and budget constricted movie? The Vanessa part was a bit drawn out but it certainly was more than just two panels. She was a prostitute, they did love each other and he did leave her because he had cancer. How much time and money do you think they had to explain that clusterfuck of a relationship? (I will NEVER forgive Sabertooth no matter how they try to rewrite him.)

Wade was in the reject, semi illicit weapons x program spinoff and Ajax was there trying to break Wades spirit. Wade did have a sense of humor and kept the spirits of the other program members up. I can understand why Killbrew was cut because time/money limitations. (Not to mention a boss fight against a old man…) The part of the movie that was not faithful to the movie the most was he got his name here and not in the Hellhouse.

And how much time did you want them to use to set up the Hellhouse? They even showed its original name as a old girls school. I mean really, complain about it if the movie was ten hours long, but for the time allocated they did a fantastic job.

And for Deadpools “friends” they nailed Blind Al, Weasel and Hydra Bob perfectly. Deadpool is a serious dick to all of them but he does have a moment here and there. Yes Blind Al is a prisoner of sorts and he does torture her once in a while but they do sort of like each other in a Deadpool kind of way. Unfortunately the movie could only be so long.

Dude really. Clickbait title if you really know Deadpool. Either that or you are just a google expert with a little bit of info trying to show off.

@Cruz chill man, this is not clickbait.
I felt this article made the case in favour of what the movies did change not against. He is the merc with a mouth, people care little about historical accuracy and more about character portrayal. As such there is no nit picking because it is clear the convoluted history of Deadpool as a character had to be changed. Moreover, the detail at explaining exactly what had changed is the key to making this point of the article clear.

Cruz: Pointing out fascinating differences is not “complaining.” Did you miss the sentences where I said the movie did it better than the comics? Did you miss the part in the “clickbait” headline that says I approve of the changes?

Let’s not argue well all love deadpool. The movie gave us all a tear of joy so fuck the debates and all I got to say is Fucking chimichangas
Love to all deadpool fans.

“Could you possibly be more anal in picking out points of a several decade series crammed into a time and budget constricted movie?”

Welcome to: the entire point of the article.

[…] Beat – The Deadpool Movie Isn’t Faithful To The Comics, And I Approve – Do you think it […]

DEADPOOL appears to be a 15-year-old boy’s idea of a mature, adult movie: graphic bloodshed, hot naked chicks, nonstop profanity, and nihilism depicted as really hip and cool.

The last adult movies I watched were both from 1933: JENNIE GERHARDT, starring Sylvia Sidney, and LILY TURNER, starring Ruth Chatterton. Watched ’em on YouTube the other night. They were definitely movies for adults, even though nobody in them cursed, got naked, or blew anyone’s head off with a shotgun.

“The last adult movies I watched were both from 1933”

You’re right, all movies should be like movies from 1933. Very relevant comparison.

Don’t worry, Skottie, someday you’ll grow up and start watching movies that don’t have fireballs and explosions every 3 minutes.

Sorry a bit of fan boy rage (even thought I am a old man) because the internet and all… I am a ass, you are cool. I am not smart enough to figure out how to edit my first comment, but there is no reason for me to ever talk to anyone like that. You even wrote a good article which gives me less reason.

the international marketing campaign has also been genius. I live in Peru and last week they launched a tv ad mocking one of the candidates running for office in this year’s national elections. deadpool’s been all over the place.

How is it Liefeld’s name has been in the media more for one movie than Kirby has for over a dozen?

prolly because Liefeld is still alive. He can like, be interviewed and stuff.

Maybe this will convince studios that superhero movies don’t have to be PG-13 to be hits. I can’t think of an R-rated movie based on a Marvel or DC property since WATCHMEN in 2009.

Kingsman, george

Liefeld is correct that R-rated action movies used to be common. The early Die Hard and Terminator movies were rated R. And the first Conan movie. So were the Robocop movies, the Rambo movies, the Dirty Harry movies, etc. This continued into the late ’90s with big-budget movies like Face/Off, Air Force One, and The Matrix, all rated R.

But at some point, studios decided that these movies were so expensive, they had to be PG-13 so “everyone” could see them. So we get the ridiculous MAN OF STEEL, where a heavily populated city is devastated but we see no mangled corpses. Because corpses might result in an R.

AGAIN with the Jack Kirby whining??? FFS. There’s always some random idiot complaining that Jack Kirby isn’t getting his due each and every time a Marvel movie comes out. It’s just plain tiresome… Give it a rest already… HE’S DEAD. STOP BEATING ON HIM.

George you hit the nail on the head. I was lamenting the very same thing earlier tonight. Happy to see something tongue in cheek and over the top has injected life into an increasingly tired genre.

More importantly, I’d be interested in seeing more of these films adopt a mid-level budget approach. The need for extravagant productions are why so many of these outings have such similar, world-shaking endings.

This movie strives to be a comic book brought to life. And it mostly succeeds. They have done a lot with such a low budget. More than expected!

“That’s a nice improvement over the previous floppy sales level of this TPB juggernaut, and better than its previous volume #2 sales level ! I will not wait any longer and make it a win !”

Well, I guess you’ll change your mind with the sales of number 3 in january that seems to have fallen to the 32.000 mark. If the fall don’t stop quickly, it’ll end with really lower numbers than the previous volume.

Indeed, that was one of the biggest shock of January top300! And I indeed changed my mind and took back my W vote, you are absolutly right – I wrote it yesterday :p

Hey, another excessively negative piece. Must be another month.

Proably something I ate. It’s still struck. Wait for January, it’s even worse.
Eh, 4 win, 15 Fail, that’s probably better than what DC did or will do :p

I think the issue here is the premise that books that had < 1 years runs, ended just a few months ago,and relaunched with the same creative team, should magically do better or deemed failures if they fall back to their previous numbers.

Marvel could also be perfectly happy with that :: they just sold more comics, period, of everyone (and I mean all of them) of there books at least for a month or two.

@Brian – seems like a pretty reasonable barometer for determining failure.

@David – I don’t know why Marvel would be perfectly happy with that. They sold a a few copies of a lot of books. That’s a rather resource-intensive way to “win” the sales charts. Takes burning through a lot of talent, promoting a ton of low-selling books, pissing off retail partners, etc.

In before Dan Slott shows up to argue how Spider-man’s sales are actually a success by means of copious amounts of spin.

@Zach “Pissing off retail partners” (and fans too I should add), is probably the baddest part of it, true.
But as long as the same fans and retail partners are still buying number ones like crazy, they just have (we just have) what they (we) deserve.

Like Xavier said – most of those new books are back the way they were before the relaunch, but in the meantime they sold X times more comics with a new number one, and still some more with a new number two, and even a bit left on a new number three. And that means a lot lot lot more money and comics sold at the end, much much more than if they would have kept the numbering going on.
It’s still the same book, the same heroes, sometimes the same artists than before, but for at least for three months, it sold like pancakes.

I know you will say “in the long term”. But honestly, let’s stop fooling ourselves : in the long term there will be still Spider-Man, Avengers and Deadpool comics, whereas a number 334 or a new number 1. It’s just that the new number 1 sells way better than 334. For how long will it work ? That is the question, but for now it’s still working, and working really well.

Crossovers and variants seems more of a problem, really.

(oh, and like Xavier, I’m french too, so I hope my english is ok !)

It’s pretty obvious to me from reading these columns that most fans, in spite of what the world thinks, generally want the characters they’ve been used to for years. Sam Wilson as Cap is bombing badly. It’s actually a pretty decent read, but you’d never know it by the sales numbers. Cue the return of Steve Rogers to the role just in time for the movie in May.

If you take away what makes a character popular, it takes away readers who were drawn to what made the character popular in the first place. Superior Iron Man didn’t sell very well. I really think part of the reason was the altered outfit and Tony’s even more arrogant and overbearing than usual personality. I’d say that’s one reason that the all new, all PC Avengers crashed between the first and second issue. To most people, the Avengers are Steve Rogers, Tony Stark, etc., not Jane Foster Thor, Kid Nova and “Ms. Marvel”. Such a title might get critical acclaim, but that doesn’t always translate to sales. Same premise of movies and tv shows that don’t translate into box office and ratings. “Steve Jobs” is an example of a recent film that was almost universally acclaimed, but bombed at the box office.

Too bad really, that people don’t want to try new things. I think the Howling Commandos, Squadron Supreme and especially Red Wolf are all good reads. I don’t expect any of them to make it past issue 12 at this rate.

If Marvel and DC want to right their ships, they probably need to wise up and go back to the tried and true. It’s been worse at DC: when they did the reboot that gave us Emo Superman, Amazon rape culture Wonder Woman and the like, it looked like it would work at first, given the sales numbers. However, five years on it just doesn’t have the lasting appeal of the original versions. Perhaps Rebirth will start to fix that.

Part of me is delighted to see the Crazy Gang turn up. The other part of me absolutely refuses to put down money for this because they’ll probably be killed off for yuks.

New X-Men #115 began in 2001., not 1964.

J C: They added those years without my noticing. I’ll try to get it fixed.

Thanks for calling it a superhero film and not a comic film. This needs to become a standard on all comic websites.

I’m not sure that a reviewer who begins by worrying about how the film fits in continuity with a scene in another film, is in touch with how most non-fans will approach it. I suspect that most moviegoers won’t remember (or if they do, they won’t care) that Reynolds played a “Deadpool” character in one of those X-films.

“Maybe the biggest issue facing the film is that it’s intended for diehards”

If that the case why are the mainstream press reviews good? (At least the ones I have read )

Peter Bradshaw who is pretty hard to please give it four stars in the guardian.

From the trailers, this looks utterly crass and cynical. Did Mark Millar write the screenplay? I ask because it looks like KICK-ASS 3.

Hello there! This post couldn’t be written any better! Looking at this article reminds me
of my previous roommate! He always kept talking about this.
I am going to send this post to him. Fairly certain he’s going to have a very good read.
I appreciate you for sharing!

Loooove. Now 2 reasons to be hyped for February!! ..the other is Toy Fair.

first we gonna
ROCK
then we gonna
ROLL
then we let it
POP
DON’T LET IT GO!

Thanks Matt! The Reilly interview starts at 45:10 of the episode http://wordballoon.blogspot.com/2015/12/word-balloon-podcast-playboys-1960s.html

Wanna bet this will be edited for a PG-13 before it’s released?

I can’t think of an R-rated superhero movie since WATCHMEN, in 2009.