Deadpool 2 reviews cool film

Deadpool 2 Movie Review: Why I Love Wade

Like this article? Share it!

Deadpool 2 Movie Review: Wade Wilson is not just the best superhero, he’s the only superhero everyone should admire. Find out why.

I am no comic book superhero fan. Nor do I ever put their movie franchises on a pedestal. I even criticize them, to the point of finding the unexpected pleasure of watching them just a few days short of their premiere. I find it really fulfilling that I could detect their political agendas–which all adhere to Neoliberalism, the political movement I (hypocritically) denounce.

I highly regret not blogging about Marvel’s first movie of this year, Black Panther, which I commend for being such a politically-motivated and complex feature. However, again, I had so much objection against the film, and I think it’s very dangerous to watch. Now I won’t let time pass before I get to post my Deadpool 2 Movie Review.

Despite my antithesis on superhero movies, I have grown to like Deadpool or Wade Wilson, more than any other superhero, not just because he’s Badass (my friends know that I am fond of making badass/cool people a lot less more relaxed than they are). I love it that our idiosyncratic hero, like in DP1, never runs out of his pop-culture mockery, but in DP2, he dwells deeper than that.

Deadpool 2 Movie Review Spoiler Alert: While DP2 focused mostly on Wade’s pun against films (i.e., Wade wanted to mimic Logan’s ending), our superhero addressed it, but we seem very oblivious to it. After being dropped by the team X-men with his loyal pal Colossus and my favorite Negasonic Teenage Warhead, Wade formed a new group and called it X-force because (this production seemed to be the first-ever entity to acknowledge that) despite the heterogeneity of X-men’s heroes, the creator was very sexist, whether or not it was intended. Thank you, Wade, and to the writers of DP2 for bringing this up. Cheers to human equality!

While there is still a Neoliberal approach to the film, I think it delved more on Humanitarian and Existential issues rather than Political ones. Much like Nobuhiro Watsuki’s Rurouni Kenshin, *Spoiler alert* Wade started killing humanity’s villains: warlords, people engaging in prostitution, etc. which aggravated after the sudden death of his wife, Copycat. It wasn’t until Wade met fellow mutant, 14-yr-old Russell Collins, a.k.a. Firefist that changed his perspective. Russell was an orphan that was heavily ridiculed and bullied by the head of their orphanage and grew to be full of angst and driven by revenge. Despite their short bond, Wade regretted to have rejected Russell and realized that Russell was to become his redemption, after somehow blaming himself for his wife’s death.

*Spoiler alert* Wade decided to protect Russell from mystery mutant from the future named Cable, who time-traveled to kill Russell in advance because Russell was to kill Cable’s wife and daughter in the future.
Wade was determined that he can change Russell that he actually caught a bullet for the kid.

RELATED: The Pop Blog’s Film and TV articles

The grave sacrifice was very Neoliberal in the sense that Wade put an emphasis on the concept that everyone should be given a chance to change their lives for the better. While I was watching Rurouni Kenshin way back in 2012 and 2014, and just currently DP2 with almost the same theme, I thought that it was the exact opposite of the politics that I am under, i.e., our current president, Rodrigo Duterte, who chooses to kill the so-called plagues of society, especially the ones involved in drugs. This makes him very infamous to the global Neoliberal powers such as the USA and the United Nations.

In a religious sense, it is under the ten commandments that thou shall not kill and it is profoundly embedded in our society that it is wrong to kill and that we have no right to take someone’s life despite her/his sordidness. Hence, most people might see DP2 as an excellent exemplar to humanity as it focuses on the basic universal rules of karma. I appreciate it that the film dwelled more on this and less on the political because USA comic writers tend to have their political biases and mediation blatantly shown (in Geopolitics) when it comes to their stories.

I also love it that the movie, despite its non-apologetic jokes on the marginalized, still glorifies them. Wade Wilson, for one, if I’m not mistaken, is one of the least educated and least wealthy superheroes. Yes, he, in my opinion, is still the coolest, most rebellious, and wittiest one, but despite his quirks and mania, I think this film pushed his humanity to a deeper level. He is still our atypical superhero, but with a heart. Most of all, he is the most real one and the least hypocrite among all the superheroes I’ve known so far. That’s the reason why he has become my favorite one. Thanks for reading my Deadpool 2 Movie Review!

Leave a comment. ❤️

Art by Jim Morada


Like this article? Share it!

9 thoughts on “Deadpool 2 Movie Review: Why I Love Wade

  1. I’m glad that you liked the movie despite being not into superhero and superhero movies. I like DP 2 a lot and I thought Black Panther was overrated.

    I’m interested and somewhat confused when you said Deadpool 2 and Rurouni Kenshin movies espouse Neoliberal ideas, like the ’emphasis on the concept that everyone should be given a chance to change their lives for the better.’ I’m not really sure (and correct me if I’m wrong), if you meant that in Deadpool 2, Cable is the anti-Neoliberal since he wanted to kill the kid? And (I’m guessing) that you connected this to Rurouni Kenshin because of Himura’s vow not to use his sword to kill people?

    I’m also interested of what you think of Black Panther. Is Black Panther/Wakanda the Neoliberal power and Killmonger the opposite of it?

    1. Hi! Thanks for reading some of my blog posts.😊

      Re: your 2nd paragraph — yes, that’s what I meant.

      Black Panther is full of agenda. I believe that it’s a dangerous film to watch, especially for the countries in which the USA tends to abuse. While I agree that Wakanda should share their resources to the less privileged, the UN and the FBI agent (Martin Freeman’s character) represent what the USA is doing to other countries. They’re always the “mediator,” with secret bad intentions. And that’s commonplace, based on some Geopolitics ideas, but these liberals in the USA perpetuate hypocrisy, and that’s pure evil. Then they go around spreading lies that they care about equality and all those other righteousness they spread that proliferate political correctness. In the end, they’re just really good at PR. They’re still sordid at best.

      The film would’ve been great had it not been spreading those lies and propaganda. Now, a lot of fans think that the USA is such a great entity. Tsk.

      1. Re: your 2nd paragraph — yes, that’s what I meant.

        ’emphasis on the concept that everyone should be given a chance to change their lives for the better.’ – This being a Neoliberal idea is what actually confused me. I haven’t read the book you linked on your post or any book about neoliberalism (ok, I was reading one book but haven’t finished yet), so I know that I might be wrong. My understanding of neoliberalism is that it has more to do with economic policies, and in that sense, the Philippines also employ neoliberal policies, just like the US.

        “While there is still a Neoliberal approach to the film, I think it delved more on Humanitarian and Existential issues rather than Political ones.” – Again, since I’m not sure I totally understand the concept of neoliberalism, I probably read the movie on more Humanitarian and Existential level as you did. That DP’s stance is, it’s not right to kill the kid (Russel), and that maybe he deserves a chance, while Cable’s is that of killing the criminal before he gets to do the crime (kind of connects it to Philip K. Dick’s pre-crime in Dick’s or Steven Spielberg’s Minority Report).

        But if you’re point is that the movie (DP2) is forwarding an agenda, well I’d say that comic book movies are basically a mess, hypocritical (that’s why I don’t usually engage them at this level). I mean, it’s saying that killing the kid is wrong, that we should give him a chance to change, but to be able to do that, Deadpool had to kill a lot of people too (those guys in the orphanage). Don’t you think they also deserve a chance? They’re just basically employees in the orphanage. We’re not sure whether they or all of them abused the kids. It’s basically saying “we need to DO the right thing, by DOING very bad things.” But I think all (or almost all) action movies are like that. Otherwise, there won’t be action setpieces.

        1. Oh, yes. Maybe instead of “Neoliberalism,” we can use individualism instead? Since the USA’s culture as a whole is based on that principle. Yes, the Philippines is the most Americanized country in Asia. Haha

          Yes, I agree. These kinds of films are really a mess. Well, given that there will always be evil in this world, and we can’t control everything, I just have to be pragmatic about it, ‘coz everything just goes round and round. But sometimes, being pragmatic is just boring. haha

          It’s like those politically correct people these days. At some point, I understand them ‘coz they might really care, and they get affected by it. But they lose grip and tend to side with perpetrators instead (but yeah, who cares? Like in reality, most people in power just lise their empathy, so we still start from scratch). LOL

          The “kill to save” situation always happens, but these impostors show that they’re always on the good side. Sadly, many people don’t realize it.

    2. Hello, again 😊

      With regards to Killmonger, I remember that there was a scene there where he said that he wanted to free black people, and that confused me (Care to explain?). A lot of fans have noticed that, so they think that Killmonger isn’t really the villain. Based on my basic geopolitical stance, that might also be the case. The real neoliberal there was Nakia (Lupita Nyong’o’s character), who, as a smart, strong, and gorgeous lady, has convinced T’Challa to open Wakanda.

      I also wanna add that Vibranium represents oil or other rich resources of nations. The USA has controlled many oil-rich nations, and sometimes, there’s always a need for military involvement. That’s just how it works. Hence, I believe that Black Panther was a film that was made to make the audiences understand that the USA is our friend (on the surface).🙄

    3. With regards to Killmonger, I remember that there was a scene there where he said that he wanted to free black people, and that confused me (Care to explain?). A lot of fans have noticed that, so they think that Killmonger isn’t really the villain. Based on my basic geopolitical stance, that might also be the case. The real neoliberal there was Nakia (Lupita Nyong’o’s character), who, as a smart, strong, and gorgeous lady, has convinced T’Challa to open Wakanda.

      I also wanna add that Vibranium represents oil or other rich resources of nations. The USA has controlled many oil-rich nations, and sometimes, there’s always a need for military involvement. That’s just how it works. Hence, I believe that Black Panther was a film that was made to make the audiences understand that the USA is our friend (on the surface).🙄

      1. Sorry, another long ass comment.

        While I agree with “They’re still sordid at best.” — US is still the biggest a-hole, esp. in terms of their foreign policy, there are two (or maybe more than two) sides to it. There’s the libs (liberals, democrats) with their political correctness, representation, (e.g., Black Panther), empowerment.. but don’t forget the GOP, republicans, with their military industrial complex, oil businesses, MAGA, climate change deniers, etc.

        I’m saying that, the humanitarian concerns of the libs (or the far left) isn’t just for PR, their support or fight for black lives isn’t just for PR either. Al Gore’s environmental concerns may be PR (he was running for Pres at the time and lost to Bush), but it’s also a concern that urgently needs to be addressed: global warming.

        It’s just that in the general scheme of things, most of the time, the bigger bad guys are able to win. I mean, there’s genuine concern. For example some politicians don’t want their soldiers in Iraq, opposed the war on terror, the war on drugs, or war in general (whether it was during Bush, Obama). It shall be noted though that Obama, a Democrat, didn’t mind dropping bombs in other countries. IIRC, Trump even said that US will withdraw their troops (not sure tho whether US really meant to do that). And that’s not what happened (maybe it was just PR). And despite that (i.e., the promise to withdraw their troops), Trump (or maybe Pompeo) almost succeeded in starting a war with Iran last year. If not for the pandemic.

        Well, of course if you’re saying that when the POTUS is condemning human rights violation in other countries while they themselves are commiting them in the name of peace (or as mediator) is hypocritical at the highest level, then I agree.

        With Black Panther, I don’t think I get that strong vibe of promoting the US as the good guys. (But I didn’t like the movie, so I wasn’t thinking much about it). In fact, they kind made fun of the white guy (Freeman) at some point. Though generally, most of these movies do. But I get more of that in the Avengers and Cap America movies. This idea that: it’s OK to have this powerful weapon (i.e., superheroes) as long as they’re with the good guys (Avengers). And who are the good guys? They’re mostly American of course.

        @Killmonger: He wanted to arm the oppressed African/Black peoples around the world, with Wakandan tech. His intention was OK, but his means may be too radical. Which makes T’challa, the conservative.

        With the recent BLM protests in the US and other countries, I think that idea resonated more with people. And there’s actually a real Black Panther group, which originated around the 70s I think. And they’re actually armed during those rallies.

        But my gripe with BP is, aside from being a so-so movie, is the amount of praise it gets. Like people are saying: finally black kids have their own superhero. And then what? Those black poor kids who were able to watch it for free, were probably still poor. And only Disney is getting rich.

      2. It appears like I typed a wall of text. If not so, then just delete this comment or delete the wall of text. It’s the same as the previous one.

        Sorry, another long ass comment.

        While I agree with “They’re still sordid at best.” — US is still the biggest a-hole, esp. in terms of their foreign policy, there are two (or maybe more than two) sides to it. There’s the libs (liberals, democrats) with their political correctness, representation, (e.g., Black Panther), empowerment.. but don’t forget the GOP, republicans, with their military industrial complex, oil businesses, MAGA, climate change deniers, etc.

        I’m saying that, the humanitarian concerns of the libs (or the far left) isn’t just for PR, their support or fight for black lives isn’t just for PR either. Al Gore’s environmental concerns may be PR (he was running for Pres at the time and lost to Bush), but it’s also a concern that urgently needs to be addressed: global warming.

        It’s just that in the general scheme of things, most of the time, the bigger bad guys are able to win. I mean, there’s genuine concern. For example some politicians don’t want their soldiers in Iraq, opposed the war on terror, the war on drugs, or war in general (whether it was during Bush, Obama). IIRC, Trump even said that US will withdraw their troops (not sure tho whether US really meant to do that). And that’s not what happened (maybe it was just PR). And despite that (i.e., the promise to withdraw their troops), Trump (or maybe Pompeo) almost succeeded in starting a war with Iran last year. If not for the pandemic.

        Well, of course if you’re saying that when the POTUS is condemning human rights violation in other countries while they themselves are committing them in the name of peace (or as mediator) is hypocritical at the highest level, then I agree.

        With Black Panther, I don’t think I get that strong vibe of promoting the US as the good guys. (But I didn’t like the movie, so I wasn’t thinking much about it). In fact, they kind made fun of the white guy (Freeman) at some point. Though generally, most of these movies do. But I get more of that in the Avengers and Cap America movies. This idea that: it’s OK to have this powerful weapon (i.e., superheroes) as long as they’re with the good guys (Avengers). And who are the good guys? They’re mostly American of course.

        @Killmonger: He wanted to arm the oppressed African/Black peoples around the world, with Wakandan tech. His intention was OK, but his means may be too radical. Which makes T’challa, the conservative.

        With the recent BLM protests in the US and other countries, I think that idea resonated more with people. And there’s actually a real Black Panther group, which originated around the 70s I think. And they’re actually armed during those rallies.

        But my gripe with BP is, aside from being a so-so movie, is the amount of praise it gets. Like people are saying: finally black kids have their own superhero. And then what? Those black poor kids who were able to watch it for free, were probably still poor. And only Disney is getting rich.

  2. Hi, again.😄

    Yeah, I believe that some of them really care and certainly have concerns over BLM, LGBTQ+, and #MetooMovement (cases which we should support). It’s just that, like what you said in your final paragraph, only Disney is getting rich. These politicians use these for their benefit.

    Republicans: Don’t get me started with them. I grew up reading and watching liberal media, so I can’t believe some Republicans are stuck in their bubbles, especially when it comes to climate change or, for some, LGBTQ stuff. I just didn’t mention them ‘coz I’m more exposed to the Dems, haha!

    The US portrayed as a “good” mediator: I’ve also seen it in the film Tarzan (Alex Skarsgard, Christoph Waltz). Samuel L. Jackson’s character was another American mediator. I get triggered by these characters ‘coz I hate America’s foreign policy, and some people are clueless about it. My cousin was so proud of the humanitarian deeds that Nakia has done with the help of the UN. Yes, I’d be thankful for that, but as an ovethinker, I’d always go back to what they’re really after and the hypocrisy (spreading love while not-so-secretly bombing Syria). Ugh!

    I like how you think! Thank you for sharing these ideas. I was kind of afraid that you might be someone like my cousin who loves America and isn’t aware of their hypocrisy.LOL Well, I love America too, and if given a chance, I can relocate, haha! Such hypocrisy coming from me too!

What do you think? Leave a Comment.