elämän merimies
Super Freak
Wasn't there talks during SDCC, that the Punisher movie rights have returned to Marvel and they are infact developing a movie reboot to the character as we speak. Anyone else remember this?
Art-Figures: AF-003 "Saves" (Punisher)
- Thread starter Cheungkinmen
- Start date
Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:
Wasn't there talks during SDCC, that the Punisher movie rights have returned to Marvel and they are infact developing a movie reboot to the character as we speak. Anyone else remember this?
EVILFACE
Super Freak
Marvel with another reboot lol. Punisher with 4 unrelated movies . .
elämän merimies
Super Freak
I guess in terms of making money, every single one of these (Punisher) movies have flopped in the boxoffice department. So, my guess is that Marvel is still trying to make a successful movie franchise out of it.
Seems simple enough, though. All they really need is a real director and a real budget.
elämän merimies
Super Freak
Come on guys!! Punisher:War Zone was a good ACTION HERO MOVIE!!, look the other ones Wolverine,FF and DD...they are not the best but and least they are enjoyable COMIC HERO MOVIES, I think we ask for too much!!
Dont you think it's actually Marvel and the movie studios who are asking for too much with all of these reboots?
Now I basicly like both films (2004 & 2008), but lets face it, there were many marks missed in both films. I think both Hensleigh and Alexander were just too unexperienced directors for this type of action film, to make it successful in the eyes of the studio. And Studios problem was that they were just expecting profits without any real investment to the films.
Action movies have been out of fashion from the late 90's, so the Budgets were just too tight.
I mean most of the best action movies have been made with small budgets, but the world has changed. Imagine let's say... TDK without a proper budget from Warner?
In case of the Punisher, a "real" A-list director would have gotten a bigger budget in the first place. + people usually tend to (even unintentionally) save money when they know what they are doing. Though that in mind, I guess I would've hated seeing, for example "A Tony Scott film, The Punisher" also
And if you look at The Punisher (2004) Travolta was totally unnecessary, but I guess mandatory from the studio's point of view. I felt like he wasn't anything special and presumably most of the budget went directly to his pocket?
As cheezy as the 1989 Punisher flick is, I think it's probably still the best effort of all three films.
And in many ways the most loyal portrait of the character (minus the skull ofcourse).
And yeah you're right about DD, FF & Wolverine. But I guess they are trying to make an effort in that department too.
Aronofsky Wolverine might just be what we needed in the first place.
Last edited:
eighthsamurai
Super Freak
problem is, while the other marvel characters themselves with all their powers and costumes and stuff make most comic book movies unique (and therefore interesting to watch despite other flaws), there've been a lot of "punisher" style movies done before. maybe they weren't frank castle, but the 80s saw a ton of one-man-army pissed off mafia-killing badasses. and some of those movies were just made a lot better than the recent punisher movies.
for a punisher film to work, they have to come up with a better story and make the punisher character himself more appealling and interesting. bring him straight out of the garth ennis stories. a bit of sick dark humour and unrelenting craziness. i think each of the 3 so far had elements of a complete punisher for the screen but none of them had it all. don't think it needs a bigger budget, just a bit of thought into making the punisher not just another action movie.
for a punisher film to work, they have to come up with a better story and make the punisher character himself more appealling and interesting. bring him straight out of the garth ennis stories. a bit of sick dark humour and unrelenting craziness. i think each of the 3 so far had elements of a complete punisher for the screen but none of them had it all. don't think it needs a bigger budget, just a bit of thought into making the punisher not just another action movie.
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2008
- Messages
- 2,407
- Reaction score
- 9
And that was it's problem. It was all action, when the MAX comics had great crime drama and story, and in some issues little to no action at all, to set up the story. It felt to me like the producers and director just looked at all the pretty pictures in the comic, and didn't bother to read them.
A couple of other issues I had with the movie were the annoying and cheesy squishy blood sound effects, a kind of out of character Castle (in case anyone hasn't seen it yet, all I'll say is Mistake in the movie would never happen. He does his Homework), and his accent. Needed some work.
I remember a week before the movie came out, an interview with the director was releases, were she stated she found the Skull childish! and cartoony, and didn't want to use it. But she compromised because of fans. That right there told me it was going to have major problems.
I just don't think Punisher is a character that is gonna create a box office smash. In fact, I'm not sure why Marvel keeps coming back to him. I guess the special effects budget is relatively small since he's just a normal guy who shoots and blows stuff up (as opposed to being a guy who flies around or has mutant tentacles or something)?
Anyway, yeah, why try to continue any of the existing stories? It isn't like these are Chris Nolan- or Tolkien-level epics that require 20 hours for some lavish, complicated story to unfold.
Punisher is pretty unique in that he's been portrayed 3 times in 3 completely different ways. I say, more of that! Maybe the next one could be traditional 1970s-1980s, toned down comic version, where he actually wears the white gloves and boots or something. Then, they could do the really sick Garth Ennis stuff next. And they could follow that with a porno parody or something.
Anyway, yeah, why try to continue any of the existing stories? It isn't like these are Chris Nolan- or Tolkien-level epics that require 20 hours for some lavish, complicated story to unfold.
Punisher is pretty unique in that he's been portrayed 3 times in 3 completely different ways. I say, more of that! Maybe the next one could be traditional 1970s-1980s, toned down comic version, where he actually wears the white gloves and boots or something. Then, they could do the really sick Garth Ennis stuff next. And they could follow that with a porno parody or something.
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2008
- Messages
- 2,407
- Reaction score
- 9
I'd love a 70's-80's based Punisher movie, with Frank actually being a Vietnam vet.
What I don't get either is why Dolphs movie always gets a hardtime, but War Zone, which I thought was much cheesier, gets more of a pass? I mean yeah, WZ had more of the backstory details right (Marine Special Forces, Central Park), but Dolph's movie was serious (he was going against child slavery for crying out loud) and had just as much action, maybe even more so. And it didn't look like it was lit by Joel Schumacher
A 6'5 killing machine throwing around the Yakuza and Italian Mafia? Using 'The Sixty' ? Hell. YES. I sometimes feel the Dolph movie gets hated on just because thats always been the thing to do. I didn't need to see his greasy butt cheeks though. Maybe people have a point there.
What I don't get either is why Dolphs movie always gets a hardtime, but War Zone, which I thought was much cheesier, gets more of a pass? I mean yeah, WZ had more of the backstory details right (Marine Special Forces, Central Park), but Dolph's movie was serious (he was going against child slavery for crying out loud) and had just as much action, maybe even more so. And it didn't look like it was lit by Joel Schumacher
A 6'5 killing machine throwing around the Yakuza and Italian Mafia? Using 'The Sixty' ? Hell. YES. I sometimes feel the Dolph movie gets hated on just because thats always been the thing to do. I didn't need to see his greasy butt cheeks though. Maybe people have a point there.
I can't disagree with what you are saying, but the Lundgren movie just isn't entertaining to me. When War Zone was over, I thought--that was a fun movie.
One thing that does give the Lundgren film an extra edge was Louis Gossett, Jr. He was awesome in that movie.
One thing that does give the Lundgren film an extra edge was Louis Gossett, Jr. He was awesome in that movie.
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2008
- Messages
- 2,407
- Reaction score
- 9
Thats cool. I can understand having a preference for one over the other. I always found the Dolph movie more satisfying, even with the Jane movie (which I like for different reasons as well). Like the scene with the mute ninja girl at the end. The way he handled her was total, no BS Frank Castle. Oh and you called it, Gossett ruled.
Skiman
Super Freak
Come on guys!! Punisher:War Zone was a good ACTION HERO MOVIE!!, look the other ones Wolverine,FF and DD...they are not the best but and least they are enjoyable COMIC HERO MOVIES, I think we ask for too much!!
Skiman
Super Freak
elämän merimies
Super Freak
Yes, but the budget often determines what you can do storywise, even filming locations and other stuff...
eighthsamurai
Super Freak
i can imagine a good punisher film without the need for elaborate filming locations and special effects. the best of the ennis dillon / max books aren't filled with wall-to-wall explosions and fancy scenery. just typical NY buildings and streets. i bet for someone who respects the source material, understands the character, and knows how to tell a decent story, if they were given the SFX budget of war zone they could have come up with a true punisher movie. i really don't think for a character like him, you need a massive budget.
Skiman
Super Freak
I think lobo might have convince me to watch this, this week.
lobox42
Super Freak
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2008
- Messages
- 1,941
- Reaction score
- 0
elämän merimies
Super Freak
Yes, but distant/remote locations (due to the budget) often create many problems for the production. And no money means you cant film nearby?
Even Hensleigh himself has stated that the budget was a big problem during production. Had he had more experience I think he could've done a better job with the budget he had.
I was under the impression that he was set to do a very respectful and loyal portrait, but a lot of mistakes were made during production and money became an issue. Hence they had to cut (too) many corners. And isn't the 2004 film actually based on the Garth Ennis MAX story arc?
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2008
- Messages
- 2,407
- Reaction score
- 9
Nope, MAX just started the summer the movie came out. It's based more on Year One, with characters from the first Marvel Knights story Ennis did.
Similar threads
