Right. Well first I was talking more so about the character.
Then make a different point, and do so clearly, don't tell me I'm wrong about him sitting there and doing what I said he did just because you come up with a different idea about what "sitting there" means.
I said "Thomas Jane". I referenced something outside the character, about the actor and the shooting of the scene itself, and pretty clearly made it about the actor. That should have clued you into the fact that I was talking about the actor, not the character.
While I understand the point you made, for you to then come back and say "No he didn't" makes you look like you simply don't understand what I said, or what was going on in the first place.
He didn't just "sit there". He was showing he was in obvious pain. We've seen the Punisher sown up dozens of times and he never acted the way Jane did.
That's partially because the people conceiving the character clearly have no idea how people react, and simply think it's a badass Clint Eastwood thing to do, and because The Punisher in those instances tends to be a drawing, not a flesh and blood actor who probably wants the character to seem...you know...human and real.
Is it cool Jane finished the scene even though she went through the prosthetic a bit? Sure. But it wasn't as bad as you make it sound. There was a prosthetic in place she went through a bit. It's cool he finished the scene, but he was showing obvious signs of pain. Which is fine for an actor, but not for the Punisher.
I don't recall saying it was badass because he showed no signs of pain. I recall saying it was badass that he did it.
And I didn't put a value judgement on how bad it was, so I'm iffy on your "it wasn't as bad as you make it sound" statement. I didn't make it sound good OR bad. I said "He sat there while someone sewed into his skin."
You ever read Marvel Knights Punisher issue I wanna say 17 or 18 by Ennis? The issue he runs into Joan the mouse now living in the middle of no-where after Frank gave her all that money? He stitches himself up without batting an eye.
he has stitched himself up in the comics before without making a sound. I just gave an issue
He's also worn white boots, and been an actual angel of death, and done god knows what else over the years.
What's your point?
Had I said "No, you're wrong, he never got sewed up without making expressions of pain in the comics", there might be a point to your telling me which issues it happened in. As I did not, I'm unsure why you bothered with that.
Now you seem to think you can prove something by showing one example, despite the other examples out there in the mythology, or that you need to point out an element I never debated to begin with.
That said, when it comes to a movie and an actor's performance, I could really care less what you found in one issue, or even in several issues, or a dozen, or what have you. Because what I care about, in the context of a movie, is what is realistic and compelling. The Punisher is a human, and humans show pain, especially when their skin and muscle is torn. It's a natural reaction.
Ennis, whose Punisher, by the way, has been The Punisher for decades (this is fairly relevant), and is therefore more used to things like getting sewn up, stabbed, shot, etc, also shows this more experienced, veteran Punisher in a lot of pain when he has bullets dug out of him and such. So yeah...Garth shows The Punisher in pain sometimes as well. His Punisher doesn't exactly have no emotions or sensitivity to pain.
And yes. Ennis's Punisher is what the Punisher is now. He made the Punisher what he is even more so than Miller on Batman, or David on the HULK . The fact you don't know that makes me wonder how much about the Punisher you actually know.
At least in terms of Miller on Batman...untrue. Frank Miller did a ton to help redefine Batman and his world for an entire generation of fans and creators, and his work has had far more impact on the character than Ennis's work on Punisher has had on The Punisher as a character. Miller basically created a number of major elements of the mythos that have since become part of Batman lore, and expanded on other existing elements and enriched them. Ennis basically just went back to what writers have always done with The Punisher, and he made it work yet again, by using what had always worked best. He also took a few elements of the mythos in a new direction. But no, Ennis's impact on The Punisher is nowhere near what Miller's was on Batman. Had The Punisher been some sort of wisecracking happy go lucky superhero, maybe. But he never was. Ennis just make an already dark character's world slightly weirder, and was allowed, via the MAX line, to make it more intense.
As for your "makes me wonder how much Punisher you know" nonsense?
Good lord, you're the one who is so far, limiting what makes The Punisher work to Ennis and his work apparently.