S. Grundy
Sidekick
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2007
- Messages
- 3,450
- Reaction score
- 4
- Points
- 33
Colin Salmon was pretty damn good to, IMO.
I thought he was trying too hard, but he's normally a good actor just not that good in PWZ.
Colin Salmon was pretty damn good to, IMO.
Sure some might say it was a badly written and acted film, but I think among Ray and Knight is West and Hutchison.D) It was just a badly written/acted movie, save for Stevenson and Knight they're the only two that seemed to give genuine performances.
West was dreadful in it
woah, I saw a total different movie..Liam Neeson deliveres the most brutal and efficient killings you will ever see on screen.
Taken and Punisher are two different films. Punisher doesn't have a family anymore. He hunts down crooks who haven't done anything to him. Also, Castle is already armed when he's doing his business.
'I'm not a millionaire but what i do have is a particular set of skills...'
LOVED this film
I keep hearing great things about this movie. I guess I have to get off my ass and go see it, finally.
I find that hard to apply. "Man on Fire" and "Taken" both involve heroes who have much more personal involvement with the abducted victims. Both Creasy and Mills were somewhat hurt by their past occupation. Then they find themselves fully embracing their deadly skills to accomplish their goal. Castle's military and police background doesn't haunt him. I've never read about Frank regretting his years in service. Also, fans wanted the Punisher set in New York. "Man on Fire" and "Taken" use the old 'American victim overseas' approach.
Not much is subtle about Punisher when he's on a mission. One day he'll hit organized crime. Then the next day he might be the guy hunting down Rusty Nail or the Hitcher.