Deadpool

tunguska

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Crossed the $500m mark today at the box office.

Global right? Cant be domestic, or is it?

Agent Coulson

tunguska wrote: »

Global right? Cant be domestic, or is it?

Worldwide.

On 50mil budget. Damn

JP Liz V1

Was Stan Lee the only cameo, can't stop singing or trying to sing Shoop now

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

On 50mil budget. Damn

But what of the marketing budget, for Deadpool it much have been massive and could be well into the hundreds of millions mark.

Snake Plisken

[Deleted User] wrote: »

But what of the marketing budget, for Deadpool it much have been massive and could be well into the hundreds of millions mark.

Even if they pumped $100M into its marketing budget which I doubt as Fox estimated it to make $65M! They are making a hell of a lot of money on a great movie!

The marketing was viral and Youtube for the most part though

Frisbee

It was everything I hoped it would be. Perfectly loyal to the comics. You could see a lot of work went into it and thank God they didn't PG13 it as it wouldn't have resembled Deadpool in the slightest then.

Loads of 4th wall breaking but think my favourite had to be the

Professor X joke - "Stewart or McEvoy I'm getting confused with the timelines". Also the nods to **** Deadpool from Wolverine & Green Lantern addressed the **** elephant in the room well.

Hopefully it will show that non-PG13 movies can work. As much as I loved Guardians of the Galaxy, the source material gets dark in places so seeing that with the same rating for the second movie would be brilliant. Will never happen, but would love to see it.

Favourite line:

It's such a big house and it's funny I only see the two of you.. it's almost like the studio couldn't afford another X-Man!"

Mr Freeze

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Crossed the $500m mark today at the box office.

With a budget of $58 million and a take so far of $513 million, does this make it one of the most profitable film ever?

Or are there loads like this already?

Either way, Fox weren't expecting this.

Crossblade

Superhero movies were getting really stale and samey until Deadpool turned up, glad it's such a huge success.

Fingers crossed that Batman vs Superman and Suicide Squad can deliver too.

Stone Deaf 4evr

Mr Freeze wrote: »

With a budget of $58 million and a take so far of $513 million, does this make it one of the most profitable film ever?

Or are there loads like this already?

Either way, Fox weren't expecting this.

I think that might belong to the blair witch project, but Im not sure.

Just wondering if WB are kicking themselves for a PG13 Suicide Squad now.
Im stoked for that film but would have loved to see 18s Joker and Killer Croc, never mind a truly mental Quinn.

Hell Enchantress going full on would have been great and Deadshot actually shooting someone with correct effects would have been nice

ps3lover

I think the marketing for Deadpool was more creative rather than expensive. A lot of it was just Ryan Reynolds in a single room talking to a camera.

AnonoBoy

ps3lover wrote: »

I think the marketing for Deadpool was more creative rather than expensive. A lot of it was just Ryan Reynolds in a single room talking to a camera.

The expense in marketing isn't making the promo spot or cutting the trailer, it's buying the TV time to run the spot, paying for promoted posts on social media and renting billboards/sides of buses.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Just wondering if WB are kicking themselves for a PG13 Suicide Squad now.
Im stoked for that film but would have loved to see 18s Joker and Killer Croc, never mind a truly mental Quinn.

Hell Enchantress going full on would have been great and Deadshot actually shooting someone with correct effects would have been nice

Interesting commentary on that here. The Dark Knight was also PG-13, but Heath Ledger's performance of The Joker was magnificent nonetheless.

http://www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/suicide-squad-why-the-pg-13-rating-isnt-a-big-deal.html/?a=viewall

Bacchus

AnonoBoy wrote: »

The expense in marketing isn't making the promo spot or cutting the trailer, it's buying the TV time to run the spot, paying for promoted posts on social media and renting billboards/sides of buses.

I think I saw 2 ads for Deadpool on TV in total. Everything else has been YouTube viral stuff. Has Deadpool had any significant billboard/signage marketing? Moreso than any other action/Marvel movie? I'm not doubting there was a marketing budget in the millions of dollars but I'd be surprised if it was anything above average.

1 emoji billboard is all that I can think of

AnonoBoy

Bacchus wrote: »

I think I saw 2 ads for Deadpool on TV in total. Everything else has been YouTube viral stuff. Has Deadpool had any significant billboard/signage marketing? Moreso than any other action/Marvel movie? I'm not doubting there was a marketing budget in the millions of dollars but I'd be surprised if it was anything above average.

Huge bus coverage in Dublin at the moment. But yeah, no larger than any other one I'd say.

Oafley Jones

AnonoBoy wrote: »

The expense in marketing isn't making the promo spot or cutting the trailer, it's buying the TV time to run the spot, paying for promoted posts on social media and renting billboards/sides of buses.

Nobody is spending hundreds of millions on marketing on a 50 million dollar movie though. The extremely rough rule of thumb is double production. Deadpool seems to have run a very efficienct campaign as well utilising an awful lot of viral marketing.

dreamers75

Oafley Jones wrote: »

Nobody is spending hundreds of millions on marketing on a 50 million dollar movie though. The extremely rough rule of thumb is double production. Deadpool seems to have run a very efficienct campaign as well utilising an awful lot of viral marketing.

And it was better for it, my concern is they get 150 million and make an arse of the 2nd one.

Brief_Lives

I avoided this thread for weeks because I couldn´t see the movie...

I realise I am adding nothingto this thread..

but i loved it... cracked me up.. a little bit of pee came out..

ps3lover

It bypassed the $600 million mark this weekend.
I wonder if Terminator Genisys or Robocop would have done much better had they gone the R rated route.

FunLover18

ps3lover wrote:

It bypassed the $600 million mark this weekend. I wonder if Terminator Genisys or Robocop would have done much better had they gone the R rated route.

I haven't seen Robocop but Terminator did poorly because it was ****, I don't think more blood or cussing would've helped

Boo Radley

Bacchus wrote: »

Has Deadpool had any significant billboard/signage marketing?

I'm not sure as to the specifics but while sitting on a bus coming into London a few weeks ago there were 3 enormous LED billboards looping Deadpool promos.

limerickgirl16

I haven't seen it yet but heard that it ought to have been an 18?

pixelburp

ps3lover wrote: »

It bypassed the $600 million mark this weekend.
I wonder if Terminator Genisys or Robocop would have done much better had they gone the R rated route.

Terminator and Robocop were flaccid, cynical, soulless films; extra blood and cussing would not have solved their myriad of problems. They did poorly because they were poor films, and even the most casual cinemagoer isn't that big a mug.

pixelburp

pixelburp wrote: »

Terminator and Robocop were flaccid, cynical, soulless films; extra blood and cussing would not have solved their myriad of problems. They did poorly because they were poor films, and even the most casual cinemagoer isn't that big a mug.

Robocop was no where near as bad as Terminator. In fact I would say that it was not even a "bad" film.

TerrorFirmer

Deleted User wrote: »

Robocop was no where near as bad as Terminator. In fact I would say that it was not even a "bad" film.

I'm a massive Robocop fan and as much as I wanted to hate the reboot, upon actually seeing it I had to admit that it was a pretty good effort, despite the neutered rating it actually managed to be pretty dark and captured the agony of Murphy's situation very well.

I also enjoyed Genesis as a popcorn flick but it was nowhere near as good an actual film as Robocop was.

pixelburp

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Robocop was no where near as bad as Terminator. In fact I would say that it was not even a "bad" film.

Degrees of badness really, but no, Robocop wasn't as bad as terminator. Still found it utterly pointless, and commercially fairly cynical, trading on the name while paying lip service to the ideas. Could have been a great update of 1987 angst to 2014 era concerns, but it never followed through on any of them and just 'was'. 2 hour distraction, but then so is the ironing

Theboinkmaster

Crossblade wrote: »

Fingers crossed that Batman vs Superman and Suicide Squad can deliver too.

Batman v superman won't as the film looks like an absolute turd so I think after a strong opening it will dwindle and pretty much be a huge flop.