Note that IMDb and the BBFC do not consider it a separate film and list it as an alternate name for Deadpool 2.

Not sure why this report has been totally ignored by admins?

Not sure why this report has been totally ignored by admins?

We discussed your report in the mods forums with Travis. There are good arguments for and against deleting it, but it is ultimately Travis' decision. Not sure if he had time to think about it some more.

Hello el_duderino81,

From the contribution bible:

Alternative versions?
We currently do not support alternative film versions—including extended editions, director cuts, 3D versions and fan cuts of previous films (e.g. a cut of all The Hobbit films as one film). Exceptions to this rule are very, very rare and DRASTIC changes are required. An example is The Return of Godzilla and Godzilla 1985. The former had extensive amounts of footage removed and added for localization. Another example is Nebo Zovyot and Battle Beyond the Sun. Any alternative version added without Travis' approval will be deleted.

Usually, alternative versions are not allowed in TMDB. Although, there are exceptions when alternative version is significantly different with exclusive footages.

I would be in favor of allowing "Once Upon a Deadpool" as it has a quite different subplot (as I understand it, I did not see it), additional actors and new scenes. It is also advertised as a movie on its own by Fox, not just an alternative cut.
Anyway, it will have to get other moderators feedback and as it is written in the contribution bible, Travis has the final decision.

Edit: @Banana answered while I was writing this answer. Let's wait for Travis decision.

Thanks for the responses. I wasn’t aware so much was going on behind the scenes! Having seen it, there’s only one additional actor (Fred Savage) and about 15 minutes of new footage, balanced out by some cuts to existing material. It’s no different to, say, the director’s cut of Daredevil (2003) restoring an entire subplot featuring Coolio that was excised for the theatrical release or, likewise, X-Men: Days of Future Past: The Rogue Cut (which also added an actor, got its own seperate release and re-added a subplot - yet doesn’t have its own listing on TMDb). The viewing experience of OUAD, to me, wasn’t significantly different to the theatrical cut or the extended home release cut. It was just a re-edit with Christmas branding. I would totally come down on the side of this being treated exactly the same as any other alternate cut of the same film (with the exception of something like Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut, which has significant structural changes and, indeed, a change in director). The problem I see with including this as its own entity is that it skews stats. It gives actors and crew an extra credit for the same film twice in the same year. The way it stands it would suggest that if I watched Deadpool 2 and Once Upon a Deadpool, I would have seen two different Josh Brolin films (as well as many, many other actors) despite him not contributing anything new to the OUAD version. Ryan Reynolds is the only actor to contribute to both cuts. The film has been a clever bit of marketing in making audiences think it’s a different film but ratings boards/IMDb/me (😉) don’t agree.

For the record, my opinion is that it should be deleted. However, I think a compromise solution suggested was to allow the entry to stay temporarily until the end of the theatrical run. For a special case that's something I could get behind and maybe that solution is already in play. Does anyone know how long this version is expected to stay in theaters?

I think this sounds like a fair compromise. I know its release was a ‘limited engagement’ and, from what I can see, it seems to end today: https://birthmoviesdeath.com/2018/11/05/its-a-christmas-miracle-once-upon-a-deadpool-hits-theaters-in-december

The Blu-ray release, the Fox website, and even the Blu-ray.com review rate this as a different entry, not just a different cut.

Into that fray steps the kind of curious Once Upon a Deadpool, a film which revisits Deadpool 2, now shorn of at least some of its potentially "objectionable" material, but now including a framing device that features Deadpool (Ryan Reynolds) reading the "story" of Deadpool 2 to hostage Fred Savage, all in a "recreation" of the iconic bedroom from The Princess Bride.

In my opinion, the fact that the MPAA rated both independently different, is cause enough for a separate entry. This isn't just a case of 'theatrical' and 'unrated' cuts, where no nudity is shown in theatrical, or perhaps some very crude remarks are saved for the unrated version. This was cut with the complete intention of having a coherent plot and film, while dropping the MPAA rating for younger audiences.

There should also be discussion about how this was played in theaters standalone, treatment that almost any film will not receive from a studio. Combined with the fact this release would have had it's own budget, crew, etc and I think you should arrive at the conclusion this is a separate film.