Is there anything the Spider-Man guys can learn from the success of the Deadpool movie?

[Prof. Warren]

It shouldn't follow the Marvel formula. Marvel has used the same formula a couple of times and while a winning formula, it shouldn't be a crutch. Plus, Spider-Man is already a well established character in the audiences' minds so we don't need that formula for an already told story. Make Spider-Man feel fresh.

Also I really enjoyed the banter between Vanessa and Wade and made me glad for the first time for a superhero romance. It didn't feel like it was chucked in there to fufill the love interest quota. I think Peter could benefit whether it be MJ or Felicia to bounce off on in the movie. Gwen & Peter were too lovey dovey and boring with dialogue for my taste in Amazing.

Also the humor. While not Deadpool's humor, it would be great to see Peter be funny and not just be allocated one quip per hour.

Appropriate flashbacks. Nothing overdone. I wouldn't mind a cool opening sequence that establishes things so we can have it done and dusted.

I actually wouldn't mind narrating from Peter. It could fit his character.

I don't think Marvel has a formula per se - they've just always put the character first. I'm sure they'll do the same with Spidey.

I liked the relationship between Wade and Vanessa but it didn't feel that it was necessarily better than the love stories in the previous Spidey films - it just had the novelty of being an adult relationship in a comic book film. I actually really liked the Gwen/Peter relationship in Amazing Spider-Man. I think that their real life chemistry translated to the screen.

I thought the humor element improved in Amazing Spider-Man 2 with Garfield allowed to be much looser and funnier but they've still got a long way to go.

I don't think they're going to do much, if anything, with flashbacks - at least in relation to his origin. I think they know audiences know everything they need to know about Spidey's origin by now.

The original, Sam Raimi-directed Spidey used some narration but I have a feeling they're not going to go with it here. But if they did, it definitely would suit his character.

[jimishim12]

It needs to be more than just a superhero movie is what redqueen says, and considering this movie is about young peter, cool as hell and easy to enjoy.

[Agent Z]

Spidey's entire history has been about subverting superhero cliches. I mean, it's right there in the intro to Amazing Fantasy #15: "Like costumed heroes? Confidentially, we in the comic mag business refer to them as "long underwear characters"! And, as you know, they're a dime a dozen! But we think you may find our Spider-Man just a bit...different!"

As for what the makers of the new Spider-Man can learn from the DP movie, I would say...not much. I mean, DP was great but you know that Marvel's has had their own ideas of what they'd do with Spidey locked and loaded for ages. Given their track record in making difficult properties work, I think it's safe to assume they've got a good bead on Spidey, their crown jewel. One thing I did love about DP that could be carried over to Spidey was how they handled the mask. It looked real but had a hint of extra expressiveness thanks to subtle CGI work that I think would be perfect for Spidey.

He was a loser in his civilian life? So was Superman. Him being a teenage superhero was new, but these days it's pretty common. A lot pf these subversions became part of the genre.

Anyway, I think the makers should focus on this being a good film and not an ad fro the next MCU entry like someone said in the last page. The ASM movies failed in this regard.

[Prof. Warren]

He was a loser in his civilian life? So was Superman. Him being a teenage superhero was new, but these days it's pretty common. A lot pf these subversions became part of the genre.

Anyway, I think the makers should focus on this being a good film and not an ad fro the next MCU entry like someone said in the last page. The ASM movies failed in this regard.

Clark was never a loser in his civilian life. He was a successful, award-winning reporter for the largest newspaper in Metropolis. He pretended to be meek and mild-mannered, yes, but a loser? No.

Peter, on the other hand, really was an outcast. And being a teenage hero who wasn't a sidekick to an adult hero was a huge upending of convention. That it became more accepted due to Spider-Man's success doesn't mean it was any less a subversion of the norm to begin with.

[Phantom Roxas]

Clark was never a loser in his civilian life. He was a successful, award-winning reporter for the largest newspaper in Metropolis. He pretended to be meek and mild-mannered, yes, but a loser? No.

One of the trailers for Dawn of Justice showed Clark meeting up with Bruce in their civilian lives, and I'm pretty sure that's rather reflective of Clark. He's a star reporter. He has the level of success that Peter wishes he had at the Bugle.

Peter, on the other hand, really was an outcast. And being a teenage hero who wasn't a sidekick to an adult hero was a huge upending of convention. That it became more accepted due to Spider-Man's success doesn't mean it was any less a subversion of the norm to begin with.

If anything, Peter being older would be an upending, because people poke fun at how the Spider-Man movies have him young, as Spider-Man and Amazing Spider-Man 2 both have him graduating from high school, so now having him even younger seems a step too far to others, although we don't know if there would be a graduation.

For the question of this thread, while I've yet to see Deadpool, the big discussion I've seen coming out of it is how it subverts the superhero genre, and how other films might copy that. However, at least with anime like Neon Genesis Evangelion or Puella Magi Madoka Magica, there's a conversation there that I've seen similar with Deadpool. You have the genres (Anime featuring giant robots or magical girls, and superhero movies) already established, but then you get what subverts it. And while the subversion is praised, it starts an unfortunate trend where people then try to replicate the subversion. They think that because the original subversion was successful, if they just copy that, then they can copy the success as well. But it comes with a failure to understand why that original subversion works, and instead just risks creating a new norm of constant attempts to recreate that "subversion" to the point that it just stops being a subversion, to the point that a "classic" example of what was once being subverted would seem like a breath of fresh air. So, no, let's not copy Deadpool. Make a Spider-Man movie. Don't aim for a Deadpool moving in a Spider-Man costume.

[jimishim12]

One of the trailers for Dawn of Justice showed Clark meeting up with Bruce in their civilian lives, and I'm pretty sure that's rather reflective of Clark. He's a star reporter. He has the level of success that Peter wishes he had at the Bugle.



If anything, Peter being older would be an upending, because people poke fun at how the Spider-Man movies have him young, as Spider-Man and Amazing Spider-Man 2 both have him graduating from high school, so now having him even younger seems a step too far to others, although we don't know if there would be a graduation.

For the question of this thread, while I've yet to see Deadpool, the big discussion I've seen coming out of it is how it subverts the superhero genre, and how other films might copy that. However, at least with anime like Neon Genesis Evangelion or Puella Magi Madoka Magica, there's a conversation there that I've seen similar with Deadpool. You have the genres (Anime featuring giant robots or magical girls, and superhero movies) already established, but then you get what subverts it. And while the subversion is praised, it starts an unfortunate trend where people then try to replicate the subversion. They think that because the original subversion was successful, if they just copy that, then they can copy the success as well. But it comes with a failure to understand why that original subversion works, and instead just risks creating a new norm of constant attempts to recreate that "subversion" to the point that it just stops being a subversion, to the point that a "classic" example of what was once being subverted would seem like a breath of fresh air. So, no, let's not copy Deadpool. Make a Spider-Man movie. Don't aim for a Deadpool moving in a Spider-Man costume.

Deadpool is a Spider-Man costume flipped upside down(Really it's in a issue of his) plus more violence and and puns.

Spider-Man is a deconstruction of Superheroes, therefore he was Deadpool before Deadpool was a deconstruction of Spiderman.

[Agent Z]

Deadpool is a Spider-Man costume flipped upside down(Really it's in a issue of his) plus more violence and and puns.

Spider-Man is a deconstruction of Superheroes, therefore he was Deadpool before Deadpool was a deconstruction of Spiderman.

That doesn't make him Spider-Man.

[jimishim12]

That doesn't make him Spider-Man.

It makes it like him, really Spidey is Deadpools most recurring gag as a established take as a joke parody. Even his trailer uses Spider-Man's motto subverted. That is one of the reasons why he's so popular, he takes what Spider-Man introduced and made it more edgy and self aware.

[Agent Z]

It makes it like him, really Spidey is Deadpools most recurring gag as a established take as a joke parody. Even his trailer uses Spider-Man's motto subverted. That is one of the reasons why he's so popular, he takes what Spider-Man introduced and made it more edgy and self aware.

That doesn't make him anything like Spider-Man. His costume wasn't even inspired by Spider-Man it was inspired by Deathstroke from Teen Titans. SPider-Man is not the first character known for being humorous.

[jimishim12]

That doesn't make him anything like Spider-Man. His costume wasn't even inspired by Spider-Man it was inspired by Deathstroke from Teen Titans. SPider-Man is not the first character known for being humorous.

I said inspired by him. Both joe and liefeild confirm this.

Spiderman was the first solo hero who used banter and combating quips as a comicbook hero. Hes not the first humorous hero but he is the first one to take cheap shots at foes and use them to build confidence.

[JaggedFel]

An inventive Marketing Campaign?

[Zeitgeist]

For the question of this thread, while I've yet to see Deadpool, the big discussion I've seen coming out of it is how it subverts the superhero genre, and how other films might copy that.

It really doesn't, though. It'd like to think it does, but you strip away the self-referentialism, 4th wall breaks and R rated humour and it's a pretty standard conventional superhero film framework. Other studios of course will take away the wrong idea and run with it, but I think Marvel Studios are generally smarter than that. They went in the opposite direction when everyone else was going grimdark "realism", they took a punt on Guardians and Ant-Man... I really don't think there's anything for them to learn here. Maybe how to approach an R rated film, but I can't see that happening.

[Mister Mets]

Spider-Man has never made fun of superhero cliches. In fact, he's embraced them more than most.

In the first panel of Amazing Fantasy #15, the narrator said that people in the comics industry refer to them as "long underwear characters"

It really doesn't, though. It'd like to think it does, but you strip away the self-referentialism, 4th wall breaks and R rated humour and it's a pretty standard conventional superhero film framework. Other studios of course will take away the wrong idea and run with it, but I think Marvel Studios are generally smarter than that. They went in the opposite direction when everyone else was going grimdark "realism", they took a punt on Guardians and Ant-Man... I really don't think there's anything for them to learn here. Maybe how to approach an R rated film, but I can't see that happening.

Deadpool does seem to be the closest thing superhero movies have to an Airplane or Blazing Saddles. Although that aspect wouldn't necessarily work as well as for Spidey.

[Zeitgeist]

Deadpool does seem to be the closest thing superhero movies have to an Airplane or Blazing Saddles. Although that aspect wouldn't necessarily work as well as for Spidey.

I mean, kind of? Because it does joke at the expense of the genre. But Deadpool isn't a parody film.

[boots]

It really doesn't, though. It'd like to think it does, but you strip away the self-referentialism, 4th wall breaks and R rated humour and it's a pretty standard conventional superhero film framework. Other studios of course will take away the wrong idea and run with it, but I think Marvel Studios are generally smarter than that. They went in the opposite direction when everyone else was going grimdark "realism", they took a punt on Guardians and Ant-Man... I really don't think there's anything for them to learn here. Maybe how to approach an R rated film, but I can't see that happening.

actual genre subversions in film? unbreakable. kick ass. that one with woody harrelson maybe?

as for what spidey movie makers can learn....i'm going with marketing.