"Defendor"

[Karelia]

I'm kinda surprised their isn't a topic about this movie, but then again not really. t: I just watched it on DVD, and it's a really good movie. I was expecting a super hero comedy, but it was more of a drama than a comedy, though it did have some really funny moments.

"Arthur Poppington is a regular but delusional man who believes that he is a superhero named Defendor. He combs the city streets at night in search of his arch enemy, Captain Industry, befriending a young prostitute in his quest"

Woody Harrelson (Arthur Poppington/Defendor) did an amazing job in this movie. I really wasn't expecting it to be this great of a film, but it really was. When he's Defendor he's like Rorschach/Batman, it's just awesome.

If you haven't seen this movie I suggest you give it a shot and rent it.

 

[Rac]

http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=329108
http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=332285

It's not a comic book movie.

 

[Thundarr]

http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=329108
http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=332285

It's not a comic book movie.

In the sense of it not being based on any specific, pre-existing comic book character, you're right. But it is a movie about a guy who was inspired to become a superhero by the comics that he loved since he was a kid, so in that sense it is. I don't believe M. Night Shaymalan's Unbreakable was based on any specific comic book. But because Samuel L. Jackson's character believes that superhero comics are exagerations of actual people with actual gifts, it is considered a comic book movie. I'd put Defendor in the same category, a comic book movie that's not actually based on an existing comic book.

 

[david icke]

In the sense of it not being based on any specific, pre-existing comic book character, you're right. But it is a movie about a guy who was inspired to become a superhero by the comics that he loved since he was a kid, so in that sense it is. I don't believe M. Night Shaymalan's Unbreakable was based on any specific comic book. But because Samuel L. Jackson's character believes that superhero comics are exagerations of actual people with actual gifts, it is considered a comic book movie. I'd put Defendor in the same category, a comic book movie that's not actually based on an existing comic book.

I don't know if I would go so far to compare them like that in regards to the categorisation, but i get what you are saying.
I would say Unbreakable was a 'comic-book' movie as it explores and discusses the conventions of the medium in the way it tells it's story, in more than a superficial way, which is what the Defendor refs to comic books sounds like, I haven't seen it, but if it's just a guy who reads comics and decides to become/goes crazy thinking he is a superhero, that's not really enough to call it such imo.
I heard about this movie a while ago, and forgot about it, I doubt it is on dvd in the Uk, but i will get ahold of it when i can, my region 1 player's sound output is busted, so i can't order the US version....yet!
this sounds like an ideal role for Woody Harrelson.

 

[Thundarr]

I don't know if I would go so far to compare them like that in regards to the categorisation, but i get what you are saying.
I would say Unbreakable was a 'comic-book' movie as it explores and discusses the conventions of the medium in the way it tells it's story, in more than a superficial way, which is what the Defendor refs to comic books sounds like, I haven't seen it, but if it's just a guy who reads comics and decides to become/goes crazy thinking he is a superhero, that's not really enough to call it such imo.
I heard about this movie a while ago, and forgot about it, I doubt it is on dvd in the Uk, but i will get ahold of it when i can, my region 1 player's sound output is busted, so i can't order the US version....yet!
this sounds like an ideal role for Woody Harrelson.

Well I haven't seen it yet either, so I don't know if its referense to comic books could be called "superficial" or not. I would hold off on such comments until after I've seen it. But to me this sounds kinda like a Batman or Punisher movie, without actually being about either of those characters. So in that sense, I think it is a comic book movie.

 

[david icke]

Well I haven't seen it yet either, so I don't know if its referense to comic books could be called "superficial" or not. I would hold off on such comments until after I've seen it. But to me this sounds kinda like a Batman or Punisher movie, without actually being about either of those characters. So in that sense, I think it is a comic book movie.

Well, in that case, you'd have to call every superhero movie ever made a 'comicbook' movie, Hancock=Drunken Superman, Robocop = Cyborg Judge Dredd,...which kind of negates the meaning of comicbook movie, which usually means adapted from a comicbook. But, it's a bit of a weird category anyway, no-one calls movie adpated from novels, 'Novel-movies'. They all fall under the category superhero movie though.

 

[Thundarr]

Well, in that case, you'd have to call every superhero movie ever made a 'comicbook' movie, Hancock=Drunken Superman, Robocop = Cyborg Judge Dredd,...which kind of negates the meaning of comicbook movie, which usually means adapted from a comicbook. But, it's a bit of a weird category anyway, no-one calls movie adpated from novels, 'Novel-movies'. They all fall under the category superhero movie though.

You're right in that it is a weird category. LOTR is just referred to as a fantasy adventure movie, Misery is referred to as a suspense/horror movie, Stand By Me is simply referred to as a drama, yet these are all adaptations of books. Like you said, there is no Novel Movie category.

However the Hancock and Robocop movies did inspire superhero comics based on those movies, so it could be argued that they are comic book movies (just that the adaptations were done bass ackwards).

In the end I guess it all comes down to perceptions and opinions. From my perspective, Defendor is a comic book movie in much the same way Unbreakable is. From your perspective it's not. As they say, let's agree to disagree.

 

[echostation]

this was a fun yet depressing film... defn check it out... I thought it was highly underrated, and it deserves a pretty wide release in the US, sadly it hasn't but it's a solid film.

 

[BigSams50]

I enjoyed it. Woody was great.

 

[Homer J. Fong]

Well, in that case, you'd have to call every superhero movie ever made a 'comicbook' movie, Hancock=Drunken Superman, Robocop = Cyborg Judge Dredd,...which kind of negates the meaning of comicbook movie, which usually means adapted from a comicbook. But, it's a bit of a weird category anyway, no-one calls movie adpated from novels, 'Novel-movies'. They all fall under the category superhero movie though.

Exactly! I've used that exact comparison many times myself.

As for Defendor, I liked it well enough. It suffers by comparison to Kick-Ass, the other "ordinary guy tries to become a superhero" movie released this year, but they are different movies with different tones, and I thought Woody Harrelson and Kat Dennings were both quite good.

 

[That-Guy]

I saw this a few weeks back. Solid film, and Woody pulls off a character who is both hilarious and tragic. I highly recommend it to anyone who enjoys the superhero genre, as well as funny-but-heartbreaking indie dramadies like Lars & the Real Girl.

Also, Kat Dennings looks hot, even as a crackhead.