• Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.

Fixing Punisher:War Zone

I couldn't dissagree more. This is one of the highlights of the film.

Yeah, the violence is pretty much the only thing the movie has going for it. You get rid of that and your left with a cliched script and a bunch of actors either acting broad, hammy or in the case of Colin Salmon coming off as kinda forced.
 
^I guess it depends on how elite-minded someone is. If you take the violence away from Planet Terror, Army of Darkness, Dead Alive, From Dusk Till Dawn, and Death Race 2000, they loose something vital of what makes them very fun to watch.
 
Last edited:
It doesn't have anything to do with being elite minded, I like violent schlock as much as the next guy, but when it comes to the Punisher I personally want/ed something more than just violence, for a character I enjoy a good story and performances trump the violence.

I know I'm repeating myself, so iy just needs to be left at an agree to disagree place.
 
Last edited:
When I said remove the gore, I didn't mean remove the violence, there's just some of it that felt unnecessary, like the punch to the face that went through the guys head. The action was the least of that films problems however. ****** directing is what's wrong with P:WZ
 
Personally, without the violence in Punisher: War Zone, the film has nothing at all going for it. Which is again why i prefer the 2004 film. It doesn't feel dependent on excessive violence.
 
They should have either hired ennis to write a script or interpretated a real story from the comic maybe Slavers which is one which has a sympathetic edge to it and a good level of violence but typical of punisher MAX no really happy ending.

Keeping out Ennis is crazy he reinvented the character for a modern readership.
 
For what it was, yes, fairly. It's an over the top role, and he acted it over the top. There's not much you can do with such a character beyond that. He didn't many quiet moments, and when he did, he did well while still keeping his "crazy" going. It is what it is, and Hutchinson knew it, so he played it up. It's interesting to me...Heath Ledger's Joker gets praised for slightly altering his voice and adding tics, and Hutchinson got condemned for it.
 
Last edited:
As much as I love this movie, Doug Hutchinson is the only character that I could do without. I respect and understand what he was trying to do with the role, but I think he failed miserably in most cases. Some of it is the fault of the edit I'm sure, but most of it lies on him. And Lexi for being okay with it.
 
Just because something is what they were going for with regards to performances and tone, doesn't mean that it was the right choice. It's like I'm sure most of the things in the Schumacher Batman films was intentional, still didn't make them right.

As for comparing Hutchison and Ledger, Joker came off more natural (while slighty over the top)* while LBJ came off more broad, forced and cheesy.

*Just to be clear I'm no fanboy regarding The Dark Knight, it was a good movie but fell pretty short of great, and I liked Iron Man and Hellboy II better than it.
 
For what it was, yes, fairly. It's an over the top role, and he acted it over the top. There's not much you can do with such a character beyond that. He didn't many quiet moments, and when he did, he did well while still keeping his "crazy" going. It is what it is, and Hutchinson knew it, so he played it up. It's interesting to me...Heath Ledger's Joker gets praised for slightly altering his voice and adding tics, and Hutchinson got condemned for it.

But IMO, Ledger's Joker didnt seem forced, or to OTT crazy, he was crazed for sure, but it seemed a lot more natural to me, and he didnt spout lines like "Yummy, yummy, yummy, in my tummy, tummy, tummy." Now, that is the fault of the script as well, but IMO, the acting to go along with those lines just wasnt convincing to me. West did a lot better with just as much of a hammy role IMO.
 
But IMO, Ledger's Joker didnt seem forced, or to OTT crazy, he was crazed for sure, but it seemed a lot more natural to me, and he didnt spout lines like "Yummy, yummy, yummy, in my tummy, tummy, tummy." Now, that is the fault of the script as well, but IMO, the acting to go along with those lines just wasnt convincing to me.

Actually that line was improvised haha...
 
Of course LBJ came across as more broad. The part was written very broadly. And of course he was cheesy...he was supposed to be. But you cannot go into a broad, cheesy movie, look at a broad, cheesy performance, and go "Well, he wasn't subtle enough". That's just beyond silly.

There's really nothing inherently "natural" about Ledger's Joker compared to LBJ. They're both over the top, and obviously so, though they're written slightly differently. The Joker in TDK is portrayed saner, if anything, than LBJ was ever meant to be. I think people just don't like Hutchinson's tone of voice more than anything.
 
And again I'll bring the Schumacher Batman movies, it was clear that Tommy Lee Jones, Jimmy Carey, etc... performances were intentional, doens't mean it was the right direction to go with the characters. Same applies to PWZ.
 
Jim Carrey's take on the Riddler may not have been a definitive one, but it was a very valid one. Same applies to LBJ and Jigsaw on PWZ.
 
And again I'll bring the Schumacher Batman movies, it was clear that Tommy Lee Jones, Jimmy Carey, etc... performances were intentional, doens't mean it was the right direction to go with the characters. Same applies to PWZ.

The actual performance and the overall approach to the character are two different elements of the film. I'm separating them to discuss the quality of the performance, not my dislike of the approach to the material.

Let's go extreme, and use BATMAN & ROBIN as an example. Arnold Freeze gave a pretty forgettable performance. Uma Thurman did not. Both were campy, over the top versions of the characters. But I don't think too many people would deny that Uma Thurman, given the approach to the character of Ivy, pretty much nailed it in her performance.
 
PWZ was a decent popcorn flick. The acting was suberb but the storyline/plot was decent and so was the fighting scenes. Plus i think that was the best Punisher movie so far and should get a sequel.
 
Actually that line was improvised haha...

Well there you go.

Of course LBJ came across as more broad. The part was written very broadly. And of course he was cheesy...he was supposed to be. But you cannot go into a broad, cheesy movie, look at a broad, cheesy performance, and go "Well, he wasn't subtle enough". That's just beyond silly.

There's really nothing inherently "natural" about Ledger's Joker compared to LBJ. They're both over the top, and obviously so, though they're written slightly differently. The Joker in TDK is portrayed saner, if anything, than LBJ was ever meant to be. I think people just don't like Hutchinson's tone of voice more than anything.

The tone of voice didnt bother me, I'm not American, so dont know whether little things in the accent were correct or not. It was the performance that was the problem, the character was just stupid, and didnt come accross as a threat at all when he was meant to.
 
But IMO, Ledger's Joker didnt seem forced, or to OTT crazy, he was crazed for sure, but it seemed a lot more natural to me, and he didnt spout lines like "Yummy, yummy, yummy, in my tummy, tummy, tummy." Now, that is the fault of the script as well, but IMO, the acting to go along with those lines just wasnt convincing to me. West did a lot better with just as much of a hammy role IMO.



I didn't like that line either. I would've found LBJ more menacing if he just kept it at "I'm gonna get my apple sauce back". The guy's a good actor and plays psycho killers very well. He was probably just following the directors instructions on making LBJ more over the top.
 
Yeah it sucks that they killed Micro. I'd argue he's come back from the dead before in the comics but he full out got his brains blown out in PWZ so...



The Punisher shot him in the face with a 12 guage shot gun at point blank range and he came back. Only thing that would keep him from coming back in the movies is that there's no mention of the existance of superheroes in the films. If superheroes don't exist, neither does the technology that can create them (cloning technology for example).
 
The Punisher shot him in the face with a 12 guage shot gun at point blank range and he came back. Only thing that would keep him from coming back in the movies is that there's no mention of the existance of superheroes in the films. If superheroes don't exist, neither does the technology that can create them (cloning technology for example).

Ummm, no he didn't. That happened in the MAX universe which means dead is dead.
 
The Punisher shot him in the face with a 12 guage shot gun at point blank range and he came back. Only thing that would keep him from coming back in the movies is that there's no mention of the existance of superheroes in the films. If superheroes don't exist, neither does the technology that can create them (cloning technology for example).

Like Grundy said, he didn't come back in MAX. So...
 
All I would have done is make it a little longer and give Frank and Mirco more time together, he seemed more of a cameo than an actual part of the film.

Ray did a brilliant job and I do hope that maybe in a year or 2 they can come back and do another one.

Their is so much of the Max stories that would make an awesome films.

Barracuda would be a good one to follow this up.
 
Ray did a brilliant job and I do hope that maybe in a year or 2 they can come back and do another one.

Their is so much of the Max stories that would make an awesome films.

Please no. One butchering was enough.
 
PWZ was basically one thing and one thing only, it was a mindless action flick. There is a market for those films, hell Hollywood is still making Transporter movies for god's sake. Punisher is a very easy character to bring to the big screen. Everyone knows it, even Hollywood and in my opinion there lies the problem. To them easy means, do whatever you want, make your improvements how you like, when you like, and toss it out to the masses without any style or care.

For all the crap Superman Returns got, as well as Ang Lee's Hulk you can't deny that those films were actually worked on with time and care as opposed to made to just be made. Sure Superman Returns has it's faults, but it has good/decent acting, an actual story, great set designs, and was made with care. Hulk had good/decent acting, alot of story, good action scenes, and good sets. Now, you could argue that those films had too much story and too much character development, and not enough wham & bam!

However, I would rather have a movie with people I care about what happens to and a story that draws me in, as opposed to a movie that I just wasted time & money on. Punisher was a film where Lions Gate went he's not spiderman, he's not captain america, he's just a man with guns. Lets get blood, alot of stereotyped villians, and rock music. There's no way in hell Iron Man can be done right the first time so easily as complex a character as he is, but little old Frank Castle can't catch a break. The only way a good punisher movie can get made is apparently to give the rights back to Marvel.

Let them make their own Punisher. Sure it won't be uber violent, but it'll be well casted, have a good script, and who knows maybe when another punisher movie comes after the Marvel studios version, it'll have the same actor for once playing Punisher, and it can be a different movie that's a continuation as opposed to a different movie that's an attempt to be the first one again.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
201,589
Messages
21,994,109
Members
45,792
Latest member
khoirulbasri
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"