Deadpool Going PG-13

[Star_Jammer]

You keep speaking as if the phrase "Spidey fans" speaks for all Spider-Man fans.

Yes, you are correct: there are some "Spidey fans" that didn't like MCU Spider-Man. There are also some "Spidey fans" that did like MCU Spider-Man. You, fortunately or not, don't have a full break-down on what side of the fence all "Spidey fans" lie, and any assumption on your part is merely that.

You're entirely presumptuous in your opinions, and it's a really immature way to make arguments.

[XPac]

The very disney themed Spiderman damaged the character, took more from him. Any Disney themed xmen movie would have the same effect.




But at what expense? Spidey fans didn't think it was worth it to make spiderman iron boy just to get a larger audience. I would not appreciate anything in those lines either.

There's a difference between damaging the IP and you not liking it. A billion dollar movie never hurt anyone. If they can replicate that success with the X-Men, it'll just prove exactly why marvel should be making their own stuff in the first place.

As for Spider-Man man fans, some liked it and some didn't. Can't make everyone happy. But the success of the movie indicates they made a LOT of people happy, so they're good.

[Frobisher]

Didn’t this thread get locked already?

[Arsenal]

Didn’t this thread get locked already?

The original one did. This is the remix.

[Midvillian1322]

The original one did. This is the remix.

Lol this And the Spidey out of the MCU thread are basically that thread now.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

There's a difference between damaging the IP and you not liking it. A billion dollar movie never hurt anyone. If they can replicate that success with the X-Men, it'll just prove exactly why marvel should be making their own stuff in the first place.

As for Spider-Man man fans, some liked it and some didn't. Can't make everyone happy. But the success of the movie indicates they made a LOT of people happy, so they're good.

There's literally another thread on this board right now that spent the better part of the last two days arguing that a film that made 890 million and was a top 10 of all time film at the time and was the highest grossing Super Hero film ever ended up damaging the OP and hurting the franchise.

[XPac]

There's literally another thread on this board right now that spent the better part of the last two days arguing that a film that made 890 million and was a top 10 of all time film at the time and was the highest grossing Super Hero film ever ended up damaging the OP and hurting the franchise.

Okay, let's be more speciic then ... beyond simply not liking the film what damage did the mcu movies do to the IP? As far as I can tell, its both crirically and commercially a sucess. Its making over a billion dollars in licensing. What exactly is rhe downside here that I am not seeing?

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

Okay, let's be more speciic then ... beyond simply not liking the film what damage did the mcu movies do to the IP? As far as I can tell, its both crirically and commercially a sucess. Its making over a billion dollars in licensing. What exactly is rhe downside here that I am not seeing?

I don't think it did damage. I think tangentially you can argue that it's possible Marvel leaned too much on the existing MCU (specifically Iron Man) as an easier way to build up that property and now there are going to be some issues in a divorce getting the character in this specific version to stand on his own the way previous versions have. That's the only real problem I see. But I can also see avenues to get around that, which would be completely realistic and viable.

Damage no. Caused some issues, yeah. But I could make that case about any version of any hero that's been onscreen.

[XPac]

I don't think it did damage. I think tangentially you can argue that it's possible Marvel leaned too much on the existing MCU (specifically Iron Man) as an easier way to build up that property and now there are going to be some issues in a divorce getting the character in this specific version to stand on his own the way previous versions have. That's the only real problem I see. But I can also see avenues to get around that, which would be completely realistic and viable.

Damage no. Caused some issues, yeah. But I could make that case about any version of any hero that's been onscreen.

Given the character he was allegedly leaning on is dead, that's somewhat of a self correcting problem. It obviously wasn't going to be an issue moving forward.

[WebLurker]

You keep speaking as if the phrase "Spidey fans" speaks for all Spider-Man fans.

Yeah, I'm a Spider-Man fan, and we don't seem to share much of the same opinions on these movies.

...Deadpool would be the most damaged since he only succeeded with R movies.

The comics suggest otherwise.

[Beaddle]

Yeah, I'm a Spider-Man fan, and we don't seem to share much of the same opinions on these movies.



The comics suggest otherwise.

I thought the comics were the biggest evidence it would get the most damage since the comics is the most vulgar of all the xmen comics, astonishing xmen was at least usually tasteful in the adult content. Deadpool is well, Deadpool.

[XPac]

I thought the comics were the biggest evidence it would get the most damage since the comics is the most vulgar of all the xmen comics, astonishing xmen was at least usually tasteful in the adult content. Deadpool is well, Deadpool.

Again, any 11 year old can pick up a Deadpool comic. The source material isn't age restricted.

[The Negative Zone]

I wouldn't mind a PG-13 Deadpool. The character didn't start out as an R-rated character and Deadpool can still be funny when toned down without feeling unfamiliar. Look at his various guest star appearances in comics and video games.

[WebLurker]

I thought the comics were the biggest evidence it would get the most damage since the comics is the most vulgar of all the xmen comics, astonishing xmen was at least usually tasteful in the adult content. Deadpool is well, Deadpool.

As others have pointed out, Deadpool in comics is hardly R-rated material, certainly not all the time (heck, even in other-wise "R-rated-if-adapted-as-is-to-a-movie" stuff -- like Kyle/Yost X-Force, Deadpool operated as PG-13 level in terms of his content). Where's the hard-core profanity the movies used, for one? We got PG-13 Deadpool in the first Wolverine movie and the complaints were all on the Weapon XI stuff, not what Ryan Reynolds was doing in the opening act.

While some of the Deadpool comic violence might be R if adapted literally, we've seen the Fox movies, the MCU, DCEU, and Sony translate that kind of stuff to PG-13 all the time. Wolverine being a case in point; Logan may've taken advantage of a stabby healer in a R movie, but he was well-liked in the others, too. The assault on the mansion in X2 is hardly dull because the bad guys don't bleed and the camera shows less.

So, if Deadpool can be PG-13 in the source material, why the heck is is a problem if some of the future movies do that, too? You're the one telling me how important it is to keep to the comics.

(Besides, not all of us like bloody, crass movies in the first place.)

[Beaddle]

As others have pointed out, Deadpool in comics is hardly R-rated material, certainly not all the time (heck, even in other-wise "R-rated-if-adapted-as-is-to-a-movie" stuff -- like Kyle/Yost X-Force, Deadpool operated as PG-13 level in terms of his content). Where's the hard-core profanity the movies used, for one? We got PG-13 Deadpool in the first Wolverine movie and the complaints were all on the Weapon XI stuff, not what Ryan Reynolds was doing in the opening act.

While some of the Deadpool comic violence might be R if adapted literally, we've seen the Fox movies, the MCU, DCEU, and Sony translate that kind of stuff to PG-13 all the time. Wolverine being a case in point; Logan may've taken advantage of a stabby healer in a R movie, but he was well-liked in the others, too. The assault on the mansion in X2 is hardly dull because the bad guys don't bleed and the camera shows less.

So, if Deadpool can be PG-13 in the source material, why the heck is is a problem if some of the future movies do that, too? You're the one telling me how important it is to keep to the comics.

X2 was originally Rated R but was quietly trimmed down to met pg 13. If X2 was a MCU movie, there would have been more heavy trimming, as heavy as changing the cinematography of the film.

The best way to describe this situation is , A disney pg 13 are still very kid friendly compared to other movies. DOFP is pg 13 but Disney would see it more as R by their own standard. Does that make sense?

R feels more like a word now for shallowness on this thread. I rather expand more to content since its the content that gives the ratings. Why did Disney not use the oringal iron man 3 screenplay? it could still have been a pg 13 movie? Why is Holland's Spiderman fighting style very different compared to the older Spiderman movies that was pg 13?

Fat Thor has become more of a punch bag for jokes but I want to use it now in a serious content. DOFP is a pg 13 film, so why couldn't Disney have just written a similar story for Thor to the one that was written for Xavier in DOFP since both characters were in similar situations? Many fans would have definitely appreciated it more for Thor.

Blood, gore, swearing, I have said already they are perks for movies with a more adult appeal. Hugh Jackman did a nude scene in DOFP, does that prove DOFP was a more mature comic movie to the MCU, yes it does but I think you get more proof of that with the overall content of the film not because the movie had violence, swearing or nakedness. Come on, we already know this. We all watched Game of Thrones.

(Besides, not all of us like bloody, crass movies in the first place.)

This is not really about all of us. This is about Deadpool and the xmen universe that don't need an unnecessary Disney kid-friendly make over. The make over was already rejected as back as 1992.