For all its self-deprecating quippery, the crossover superhero smash represents corporate brand synergy at its most ruthless
This article reads like kicking a puppy because it’s purebred. It’s not Reynold’s or Jackman’s fault that every other movie sucks butt right now. They earned their franchise moment. Don’t blame them because Hollywood can’t come up with an original idea, they’ve been working towards this film since 2016, Jackman said as much in an interview. Now, if they drop Deadpool & Wolverine 2: The Search For More Money in 8 months, then we can lump them in with the rest.
I’ve been banging this drum for years, but there are a significant number of movie critics who just hate comic book movies. They hate them. It won’t matter if the movies are good or not. They will never have as much fun watching them as they do picking them apart to declare the genre worthless. They come out of the woodwork to dance on the failures at the box office, and they write pithy counter-culture shit like this when they are successful.
I mean if movie critics weren’t critical of movies then they would be out of a job.
What I need though is like a movie critic critic, as someone who will look at all the people whose job it is to be critical of movies and filter out the ones who are doing it because it’s their job to be critical and the ones who are actually critical of the movies.
This person’s basically complaining about Deadpool breaking the 4th wall, not taking the Marvel franchises seriously, and having a cavalier attitude towards storytelling. Has he never heard of Deadpool before? That’s, like, the core of his personality. This movie was the most Deadpool that a Deadpool movie could be. I mean, I get it if you don’t much care for Deadpool, but if that’s the case, why go to see a Deadpool movie in the first place? This entire article just makes it sound like this guy loves the smell of his own farts.
I think the real shade should be thrown at all of the other terrible sequels and spinoffs that we keep seeing. This one was lucky because it was two beloved characters acted by two people who basically got to make the movie they wanted and were actually given the money to do so.
Give the unique stories a shot, the risky ones, and we’d probably be seeing much better movies, but they’re too terrified of doing that
Can you imagine if a studio made twenty films costing 30 million dollars each, instead of one film costing 600 million…
They might even get lucky and start a new IP franchise, they could take creative risks!
Vince Vaughn shared an interesting take related to this in his Interview on Hot Ones today. He mentioned how creative directors like John Hughes made movies about people and life events that were universally relatable, instead of worrying about making movies based on IPs or that would launch a franchise. I’ve heard and read many ppl talk about Hollywood’s current reluctance to make smaller budget movies, instead preferring mega blockbusters, but it was refreshing to think back to beloved movies like The Breakfast Club or Pretty In Pink and to realize movies like them can be successful because they have compelling characters and emotionally-evocative storytelling.
Interesting take, especially considering the movies he’s chosen to make.
Hard to say no to a paycheck. And it’s not his fault that the only comedies getting greenlit these days seem to be scraping the bottom of the barrel. To be fair he was in Rudy and Swingers. So he has been in some respectable movies in the past when Hollywood was willing to take risks. When you’re beholden to your shareholders you have to continue to demonstrate growth and why risk it on a $5m movie that people may not care about when you can mass market an already successful IP that you know people will go see, because they say the first 3.
