Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Ian J. Ball" <ijball@mac.invalid>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: What Did You Watch? 2024-11-14 (Thursday)
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2024 10:26:47 -0800
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 62
Message-ID: <vh83p7$3hge7$1@dont-email.me>
References: <UBI20241114@dont-email.me> <vh7sau$3fcmr$1@dont-email.me>
 <1408668526.753386247.879909.anim8rfsk-cox.net@news.easynews.com>
 <vh82rn$3h35m$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2024 19:26:49 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="679b099cd4e974e8bdce56c6b353e85a";
	logging-data="3719623"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+gWj/9ZTY0az3OLFBzTnFA"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:LNF8O8eTGFT043MQcGcp6dXn1wU=
In-Reply-To: <vh82rn$3h35m$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 4367

On 11/15/24 10:11 AM, BTR1701 wrote:

> On Nov 15, 2024 at 10:09:52 AM PST, "anim8rfsk" <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote:
>> Ian J. Ball <ijball@mac.invalid> wrote:
>>>   On 11/15/24 1:30 AM, Ubiquitous wrote:
>>>   
>>>>   What did you watch?
>>>   
>>>   On the day I woke up at 3:30am and couldn't get back to sleep, I finally
>>>   managed to get through "Deadpool & Wolverine", and also a Lifetime flick.
>>>   
>>>   So I watched:
>>>   
>>>   Deadpool & Wolverine (Disney+) - Going in, I expected this - but this
>>>   was definitely less funny than the first two "Deadpool" flicks,
>>>   especially "2" (which is my favorite).
>>>      And the recurring characters from the first two flicks, even Morena
>>>   Baccarin, get little more than cameos here (and T.J. Miller's character
>>>   is completely memory-holed without reference; Brad Pitt's "character"
>>>   from "2" is also inexplicably absent, though this one may have gotten an
>>>   oblique reference!).
>>>      In short, this flick suffered a lot of the same problems as "Ant-Man
>>>   3" - generally ignoring cast/characters from the first two films; being
>>>   less funny (pretty much *un*funny in the case of "Ant-Man 3"!);
>>>   launching into a new "quest" with a new "big bad" that we don't
>>>   particularly care about - though this one is admittedly a lot better
>>>   than "Ant-Man 3"!
>>>      The other problem I had with this one was its deliberately much
>>>   closer integration with the rest of the "MCU" (and especially in the
>>>   recent "Multiverse" stuff) - the first two films worked as well as they
>>>   did, I believe, exactly *because* they were nowhere near the MCU, and
>>>   only had ties to 20th Century Fox's "X-Men" flicks. This one explicitly
>>>   *forces* both Deadpool, and Wolverine, into the MCU, and the film wasn't
>>>   the better for it, IMO.
>>>      What does work here are the cameos. I don't want to spoil it, but
>>>   some of the cameos actually wowed me, because I didn't see them coming,
>>>   and they tie this film in with some earlier franchise stuff that was
>>>   pre-MCU as well.
>>>      That said, I was disappointed that Channing Tatum was playing Gambit
>>>   here (yes, I know he's wanted the role for years!), and that poor Taylor
>>>   Kitsch was once again ignored.
>>>      Sidenote: I had totally - I mean totally! - forgotten that Chris
>>>   Evans was in the original "Fantastic Four" flicks!
>>
>> Oh, I did. And he was just as miscast in that as he was as Captain America,
>> and as every other actor in the same role in the fantastic, four flicks has
>> been.
>>
>>>      Anyway, some of this does work - I really like the montage where
>>>   Deadpool tries to find himself a "Wolverine" in the Multiverse and keeps
>>>   getting brutally beaten by various versions (including by "The
>>>   Cavillrine"! Ha!!). And the creepy looking dog with the mutant tongue
>>>   ("Dogpool") is a great bit too.
>>
>> Apparently, one of those was Reynold’s daughter and one was his kid.
> 
> Wouldn't daughter and kid be the same thing?

I take this to mean one was Reynold's daughter, and another was 
Jackman's kid.