|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 3, 2021 23:42:09 GMT -6
www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/deadpool-2-made-wade-wilson-162900360.htmlPretty sure I can call bullshit on this. Both Deadpool movies already out would not be in MCU continuity, so their (mis)handling of time travel won't count for anything when the Merc with the Mouth breaks the Fourth Wall and lands in the MCU. Maybe they could even resurrect Touchstone Pictures for Wade's movies. If I misremember, that was the company they used for the movies they would produce and distribute that were not G and PG usually.
|
|
|
|
Post by vitugglan on Jan 4, 2021 8:41:02 GMT -6
Dumb. Deadpool is Deadpool in either movie 1 or 2. How does one negate him while the other doesn't? Yeah, Deadpool isn't really family friendly, is he? Just the mouth alone, and some of the limb-growing, puts him squarely outside of the House of Mouse. Yeah, revive Touchstone. I think that was the one. Flying horse with triangle, right?
ETA: I can has spelling.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 4, 2021 13:58:54 GMT -6
Pegasus with the triangle was Tri-Star. And, they're going to have to do something along those lines. Especially considering, I think they also absorbed the Alien franchise among others.
|
|
|
|
Post by vitugglan on Jan 5, 2021 7:23:38 GMT -6
I was thinking about this later and Deadpool 1 would have negated him just because of the meeting scene between him and Vanessa. They talk about being abused by uncle/uncles, have a passionate encounter against a van, and there are scenes with nekkid backsides. Why on earth did the article pick on Deadpool 2? The woodchipper scene?
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 6, 2021 7:29:48 GMT -6
The Deadpool movies and comic title(s) are rated a hard R. Somehow, I think this factoid might have slipped past the writer(s) of this piece so they focused on the second movie.
|
|
|
|
Post by vitugglan on Jan 7, 2021 6:48:48 GMT -6
They must have missed the first hour or so of movie 1.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 7, 2021 21:17:37 GMT -6
Some times, I really think that "movie reviewers" just trawl for clips on YouTube (or watch it from a pirate site with shitty audio/video and subtitles not in English) rather than actually watch the entire thing. I really miss Siskell & Ebert's movie reviews. They didn't act like anything that wasn't a foreign art house indy film (shot in grainy black and white) was beneath them. And, even though it was their opinion, there was usable information there was well. Especially if they did not like the film. It wasn't just "This movie sucks worse than a 20 year old vacuum cleaner!" It was a clear "I don't think this is a good movie and this is why."
|
|
|
|
Post by vitugglan on Jan 10, 2021 11:41:08 GMT -6
Yeah, old-time movie reviews are on the way out. Lots of spoilers, lots of synopses of the plot, etc., but no old-time reviews. It's an art.
|
|
