Why is Deadpool a Mutant?

Kabl

Did he receive his mutation when he was born? I think he got his powers from the Weapon X program so he's a mutate?

Captain_Montica

I think he was a mercenary that got cancer and went to a secret weapon program then he got ugly and can heal himself

Zeraphan

I believe his accelerated healing is a mutation he always had that different things (according to writers/etc) triggered in life. Lore wise he is basically the best version of Wolverine's mutant power.

naikavon

The comic version is not technically a mutant, though he is often granted honorary mutant status due to his X-Men affiliation. In other words, folks think of him as a mutant even though he's not.

The movie version, is a bit more, complicated. There is of course the Deadpool movies which file fairly accurately his comic origin and he is not a mutant. However, the wolverine movie kinda throws a wrench in this while thing. In this movie, wade Wilson has a low level pre-existing regen that was later amped up in experiments conducted by the weapon x program.

I think it's safe to say when marvel brings him in officially, they won't use the last mentioned above though. So I go back to the honorary status.

For a character that routinely breaks the 4th wall, can you expect any less?

te_dua_shum

naikavon said:

There is of course the Deadpool movies which file fairly accurately his comic origin and he is not a mutant.

Isn't deadpool a mutant in his films? The program that he entered creates mutants by stimulating their latent mutant genes as said by the "doctor", who received the same treatment as Wilson and is also called "mutant" by a random gangster, so shouldn't deadpool be considered a mutant too? ^_^

YoMoves

te_dua_shum said:

naikavon said:

There is of course the Deadpool movies which file fairly accurately his comic origin and he is not a mutant.

Isn't deadpool a mutant in his films? The program that he entered creates mutants by stimulating their latent mutant genes as said by the "doctor", who received the same treatment as Wilson and is also called "mutant" by a random gangster, so shouldn't deadpool be considered a mutant too? ^_^

Francis moment

naikavon

te_dua_shum said:

naikavon said:

There is of course the Deadpool movies which file fairly accurately his comic origin and he is not a mutant.

Isn't deadpool a mutant in his films? The program that he entered creates mutants by stimulating their latent mutant genes as said by the "doctor", who received the same treatment as Wilson and is also called "mutant" by a random gangster, so shouldn't deadpool be considered a mutant too? ^_^

I used to think so too but Deadpool #6 kinda threw a wrench into that thought process. It can be argued the movie version is technically a mutate. To be honest, it's all so convoluted, I just go with 4th wall breaking meshing he can do whatever and be whatever lol.

Sundance_2099

The comics version isn't a mutant. The version seen in his solo movies isn't really either. The version in XMOW is apparently a mutant, since he's in Team X who are all mutants, except Stryker. That version is extremely agile and capable of physical feats beyond normal humans (slicing a bullet in half with a katana?) although what his mutant powers are exactly is unclear, like Agent Zero's.

However, there's a simple reason the MCOC version is a mutant: Marvel said so.

WayWorn2525

Deadpool is not a mutant as he was not born with his powers – they were experimentally created. Still, he is considered to be one by a lot of people and even we could describe him as a sort of “transmutant”, a mutant who was created, rather than being born like that.

Reference

If you define mutant as only those born with mutant DNA, then Deadpool is not a mutant. Juggernaut is another example. Even those they were all appeared in x-men storyline.

Terra

Reference said:

If you define mutant as only those born with mutant DNA, then Deadpool is not a mutant. Juggernaut is another example. Even those they were all appeared in x-men storyline.

Juggernaut is technically a Warlock, not a mutant

DNA3000

Marvel over the years has kind of made a mess of this via shifting stories and retcons and the typical way comic books stories borrow just enough science to be wrong.

My best understanding of the current canon is that a "mutant" in the Marvel sense of the word is someone who is born with the X-gene enabled in their DNA, which generally gets fully expressed as the person enters puberty (but sometimes is triggered by stress or other factors). Mutants aren't always born with their powers active, although the presumption is that all mutants are born mutants: they just don't have their powers developed enough to do anything until later in life.

Because of this, it is difficult to know who's a mutant. If you experiment on someone and they gain superpowers, that could be because the experiments somehow conveyed those powers to them (i.e. the Hulk) or those experiments could somehow activate the X-gene in that individual (i.e Rogue). The only way to know if someone is or is not a mutant in the Marvel universe is for someone to study their genes and find out in a way the readers of the story can also know authoritatively. If no one explicitly tests somehow, there's no way to know just by knowing when and how they gained their powers.

It has never been explained what the difference is between the X-gene mutation and all other genetic mutations that grant super powers. This is kept deliberately fuzzy and ambiguous by Marvel for story telling flexibility. For example, Inhuman terrigenesis and Mutant activation sound very similar, and both are canonically the result of Celestial manipulation (at least, last I checked). What makes them different? It has never been stated.

odishika123

DNA3000 said:

Marvel over the years has kind of made a mess of this via shifting stories and retcons and the typical way comic books stories borrow just enough science to be wrong.

My best understanding of the current canon is that a "mutant" in the Marvel sense of the word is someone who is born with the X-gene enabled in their DNA, which generally gets fully expressed as the person enters puberty (but sometimes is triggered by stress or other factors). Mutants aren't always born with their powers active, although the presumption is that all mutants are born mutants: they just don't have their powers developed enough to do anything until later in life.

Because of this, it is difficult to know who's a mutant. If you experiment on someone and they gain superpowers, that could be because the experiments somehow conveyed those powers to them (i.e. the Hulk) or those experiments could somehow activate the X-gene in that individual (i.e Rogue). The only way to know if someone is or is not a mutant in the Marvel universe is for someone to study their genes and find out in a way the readers of the story can also know authoritatively. If no one explicitly tests somehow, there's no way to know just by knowing when and how they gained their powers.

It has never been explained what the difference is between the X-gene mutation and all other genetic mutations that grant super powers. This is kept deliberately fuzzy and ambiguous by Marvel for story telling flexibility. For example, Inhuman terrigenesis and Mutant activation sound very similar, and both are canonically the result of Celestial manipulation (at least, last I checked). What makes them different? It has never been stated.

And for some reason the terrigene mist is like poison for mutants

knupdiputs

In the game, the Collector said he’s a mutant because it’s his contest and he said so.

Jh_Dez

Deadpool is a mutate (granted abilities via experimentation)
He never had the xgene so isn’t a mutant

The xgene is what makes one a mutant.