War Zone Box Office Thread

[S. Grundy]

Fighting them with what? A kickass script he wrote?

Complaining constantly?

Because all I keep hearing is that he tried to bring people in to take over the project and not one of them had actually completed a script.

So what I'm asking...is...does anyone have any remote proof that anything "better" existed for Lionsgate to use?

He's not a writer, he wasn't getting paid to write a script. But he was trying work closley with the writers that had been hired, having meetings and talking to them about the story for it. Lionsgate had other ideas (they were paying for the movie after all, so they had final say), they didn't mesh and once he realized the type of movie they were adament about making he left.

And that's the thing I don't think anything really all that good existed during it's development hell, well maybe those few pages Stuart Beattie wrote.

How is that any smarter?

Frank, knowing full well he can jump through the boards, does so, and finds himself in a fantastic tactical position because of his location in relation to the gunmen inside.

You're suggesting he approach at the front, toss a flashbang or grenade and just wade right into where all the gunmen are. How is that all that tactically sound?

Throwing yourself through a boarded up window is not really tactically sound, what if he didn't break through? He would have fallen 4 stories, or he could have gotten a shard of glass stuck somewhere.

Well enough of the Russians and Asians would have been killed, and tossing in a flash bang would have kept them from shotting so that killing who ever was still standing wouldn't have been a problem. A frag grenade would have helped thin out who ever was standing and then shoot the rest.

How do you know?

You just can't do that in one blow like that, just like you can't punch a nail into a wall with your fist in one blow.

Didn't get that impression myself. Which specific dialogue did you think was horrible, hamfisted, etc, in those serious scenes?

Just about most of the dialogue was horrible.

And here's the thing about the whole "what Jane wanted" angle of our discussion.
Originally, I said:

(Jane) then walked off the sequel project just before it began to trend in the direction of the things that he professed to want that differed from the first film?

I never said the film was everything he wanted it to be.

To which you said:

What ended up on the screen is nothing like what Jane said he wanted out of a sequel.

Now when you say "nothing", I assume you mean that the film had none of the elements Jane stated that he wanted.

That is simply not the case.

What ended up on screen was a ******ed action movie, a "Steven Seagal rip-off". So I'd say that was pretty far away from what he has said he wanted out of the movie.

It's difficult to take you seriously when you state an opinion as fact like that. I am not judging the man because he has not done more recent work. I am pointing out why a studio might not be inclined to trust a man who has not directed in ten years with this film.

It's also difficult to take you seriously when you say this was a good film.

One director has a proven track record of films and the other only had done one and PWZ was considered a big budget for her. Hill hasn't worked in ten years? The last time he was behind a camera was in 2006, it was a miniseries for television, but it was pretty good nonetheless.

It's also difficult to take you seriously when you say things like FORREST GUMP and CRASH are "crappy movies".

Well, they do kinda suck.

I will repeat my earlier question. Have you ever read a comic book with Jigsaw as the villain?

Yes, and that's why they should have tried to not make him like a comedic character. They could have played him more sinister and not for comedy. He was as threatening as Howard Saint.

Then the movie apparently succeeded, because many of the deaths were supposed to be funny on some level. Especially when criminals died.

Jigsaw killed about 3 people, ans should I have laughed when he killed Micro? Bedsides that the only other death I laughed was the parkour one, and that was mainly because the guy just disappears in a puff of smoke and how ****** it looked.

So what you're saying, essentially, and correct me if I'm wrong...is that no one knows squat about any of these drafts.

Other than DeKnight's stuff was considered a little too dark by the studio, Beattie left after a few pages, Santora's was rejected and once Sutter came on board and handed his draft in Jane left. Alecxander came back and rewrote Santoras' and than Marcum & Holloway came on and finally Alexander did one last pass at it.

Like I said above maybe all the drafts were just crap. The movie was doomed from the beginning apparently.

Obviously they weren't, because he didn't make the film.

Yes, because he didn't want to do it because he thought it sucked.

Wait a second...so the man didn't even have a script, wanted the project...and Lionsgate said no...and people are wondering why?

People typically have meetings before writing scripts or directing films. Jane met with him and wanted to work with him. He met with Lionsgate and they passed on him.

Hold on...

So Lionsgate fired him? Or he quit because they wouldn't give WAR ZONE a bigger budget, or because he didn't think he could handle the pressures of shooting it on a timeframe?

No, he was talks with Lionsgate and passed on doing it. He thought the script sucked as well as the time frame to shoot the thing in addition to the budget being small. 40 days or so for an action film is considered really short, hell the 2004 film had like 55 days and that was still considered too short of a time frame.

 

[daywalker2007]

an easier way to have done this movie would have been not to have called it Punisher.
give it a title like TDK did, and do not put Punisher in the title.

maybe more casual viewers would be interested then.

 

[dft-313]

Guard is just delusional about the quality and history of this film. Let's be clear: Jane is not the pickiest of his projects. He likes making cult films, low budget, obscure titles. He's a solid actor, probably one of the guys I like most.

Yet, the material presented to him was so dreadful that he finally walked out. He, in his script, had right of veto on both the director and the script. But every time he brought someone in Lionsgate rejected them. Lionsgate are hardly concerned about quality movies as their budgets and distribution history attest.

They are of the make em cheap, stack em high school of film-making. Jane had the bizarre concept of making a good, dark genre movie based on a character who was iconic enough to have three films made about him.

Jane identified what most people thought: the light tone of parts of the 2004 film turned critics and viewers off. The character is dark and serious. The Ennis reboot was not successful because it "made The Punisher funny", it was successful because Ennis and Dillon had come off Preacher and it was a non-adult title alongside the revamped Daredevil.

Lionsgate were under the impression they could make a profitable, gross-out action movie (ala Saw style) cheap by firing it out. Unfortunately, the star and the potential directors looked at the MAX run and thought those were much better stories and much more suited to a feature (either The Slavers or Up Is Down could easily be adapted into a film).

Whether Hill was infrequent in his career is moot - he's a name. he has a reputation for making cheap, hard action movies. The cult fans like him because of The Warriors and action fans like him for things like 48 Hours.

Last Man Standing was a good film (serious in tone, well-paced and the action was fantastic), his TV work has been respectable and he has a reputation for working on budget and on schedule.

Lionsgate clearly didn't like his ideas for the film being in line with Jane's. Basically, they never wanted to make a good Punisher movie. As the hiring of Alexander attested.

And for the record, i liked Crash, but Forrest Gump didn't deserve the Oscar over Pulp Fiction.

 

[The Guard]

He's not a writer, he wasn't getting paid to write a script. But he was trying work closley with the writers that had been hired, having meetings and talking to them about the story for it. Lionsgate had other ideas (they were paying for the movie after all, so they had final say), they didn't mesh and once he realized the type of movie they were adament about making he left.

And you're basing this on what?

He talks about having trouble finding a script.
He talks about having trouble finding a director.
He talks about how they didn't want to make Taxi Driver, and wanted a Punisher movie to be a bit more fun.

And he walks over that?

Fair enough.

Throwing yourself through a boarded up window is not really tactically sound, what if he didn't break through? He would have fallen 4 stories, or he could have gotten a shard of glass stuck somewhere.

I kind of think Castle would not have leapt from the roof if he didn't think he could make it. It's not played as a "spur of the moment" thing. He clearly intended to gain access to the Bradstreet Hotel that way. He sure does it as if he's done it before.

I also have a hard time believing a leaping 200 pounds of pure muscle who knows what it will take to get through some boards...not getting through the boards.

A shard of glass from what? The window?

Even if there's glass left, the man is heavily armored, isn't he?

Well enough of the Russians and Asians would have been killed, and tossing in a flash bang would have kept them from shotting so that killing who ever was still standing wouldn't have been a problem. A frag grenade would have helped thin out who ever was standing and then shoot the rest.

Stay with me here. Russians and Asians are EVERYWHERE.

What's Castle going to do?

Open the front door, toss in a grenade, and hope no one shoots him in the face?

This is your "tactically sound"?

Are you just imagining this scenario where Castle steps into a room full of people, no one shoots him, and he just calmly tosses a frag grenade, then leaves?

He does that.
1. Much riskier.
2. Hell of a lot less stealthy.
3. He alerts them of his presence in a big, big way.
4. He's still not in the building.

You just can't do that in one blow like that, just like you can't punch a nail into a wall with your fist in one blow.

No. I can't do that. But how do you know no one can?

And what does crushing someone's skull have to do with punching a nail into a wall?

Just about most of the dialogue was horrible.

That's funny. I could have sworn you indicated that the dialogue in the serious scenes was hamfisted, and I asked you for a specific example.

If most of it is bad, wouldn't you have a specific example readily available? Do you have a specific example?

What ended up on screen was a ******ed action movie, a "Steven Seagal rip-off". So I'd say that was pretty far away from what he has said he wanted out of the movie.

Ah, but as I've previously pointed out, it wasn't "nothing like" what he wanted.

It's also difficult to take you seriously when you say this was a good film.

Where'd I say that?

One director has a proven track record of films and the other only had done one and PWZ was considered a big budget for her. Hill hasn't worked in ten years? The last time he was behind a camera was in 2006, it was a miniseries for television, but it was pretty good nonetheless.

Are you just determined to go "But...but...he directed some pretty good stuff" and ignore why a major studio would not just hand their project to him without a tangible project alternative?

Fair enough.

Well, they do kinda suck.

O...k.

Maybe you don't like them...

FORREST GUMP has a 72 percent on RT.
CRASH has a 75 percent.

It's hard to describe them as "sucking" in any realistic way. You can dislike it all you want. But "they suck"? Eh.

Yes, and that's why they should have tried to not make him like a comedic character. They could have played him more sinister and not for comedy. He was as threatening as Howard Saint.

Stay with me here. What is, in your opinion, the definitive portrayal of Jigsaw in the comics?

Jigsaw killed about 3 people, ans should I have laughed when he killed Micro? Bedsides that the only other death I laughed was the parkour one, and that was mainly because the guy just disappears in a puff of smoke and how ****** it looked.

Gosh, I'm sorry Jigsaw didn't kill more people for you. I suppose that made the murders he did carry out somehow less threatening?

There's nothing particularly "cheesy" or "funny" about Micro's death as it was filmed and executed. No, you probably shouldn't have laughed when he killed Micro.

The parkour death is meant to be funny.

Other than DeKnight's stuff was considered a little too dark by the studio, Beattie left after a few pages, Santora's was rejected and once Sutter came on board and handed his draft in Jane left. Alecxander came back and rewrote Santoras' and than Marcum & Holloway came on and finally Alexander did one last pass at it.

So...once again...you have no solid information about anything "better" existing? No one knows any actual, concrete details about any of these other "attempts"?

Yes, because he didn't want to do it because he thought it sucked.

So...he was unable to come with anything on his own...again, why would I care that this person passed on a Punisher project?

People typically have meetings before writing scripts or directing films. Jane met with him and wanted to work with him. He met with Lionsgate and they passed on him.

This is true.

You know what else people do, if they want to be put in charge of a big project? They show said studio something tangible.

Almost anyone can go "I want to make a gritty, realistic and dark Punisher film that pays homage to the MAX comics written by Garth Ennis as well as the Punisher's overall mythology." These are basically just buzz words.

Is that what they had to try to sway Lionsgate?

Buzz words?

I never heard a single word from any of these writers that makes it sound like they "get" Punisher any better or any more thoroughly than Lexi Alexander did, or that they came up with anything tangibly better.

Did anyone else?

No, he was talks with Lionsgate and passed on doing it. He thought the script sucked as well as the time frame to shoot the thing in addition to the budget being small. 40 days or so for an action film is considered really short, hell the 2004 film had like 55 days and that was still considered too short of a time frame.

So this guy thought the script sucked, and was unable to handle a short shooting schedule (which clearly wasn't completely undoable).

Did he write his own script? Did he even pitch his own movie concept?
If not, why in the blue hell should I care that he was not handed this franchise?

Guard is just delusional about the quality and history of this film. Let's be clear: Jane is not the pickiest of his projects. He likes making cult films, low budget, obscure titles. He's a solid actor, probably one of the guys I like most.

Since when did asking questions about a project or the people involved in it make someone "delusional"?

Yes, I'm sure Lionsgate wanted to make the worst movie possible. That must be the way they wanted things to go. Make the worst movie possible, and lose as much money as they could.

 

[S. Grundy]

And you're basing this on what?

He talks about having trouble finding a script.
He talks about having trouble finding a director.
He talks about how they didn't want to make Taxi Driver, and wanted a Punisher movie to be a bit more fun.

And he walks over that?

Fair enough.

Well after busting your ass for 4 years championing having a film and just about all the scripts that come are ******, and more or less in the same vein. And it doesn't look like that'll change, then yeah I'd say it's a good enough reason to walk from a film.

I kind of think Castle would not have leapt from the roof if he didn't think he could make it. It's not played as a "spur of the moment" thing. He clearly intended to gain access to the Bradstreet Hotel that way. He sure does it as if he's done it before.

I also have a hard time believing a leaping 200 pounds of pure muscle who knows what it will take to get through some boards...not getting through the boards.

Well, I just think it was a dumb way to gain access to the place.

A shard of glass from what? The window?

Even if there's glass left, the man is heavily armored, isn't he?

His legs and his sides aren't armored, so yeah some glass could get stuck somewhere..

Stay with me here. Russians and Asians are EVERYWHERE.

What's Castle going to do?

Open the front door, toss in a grenade, and hope no one shoots him in the face?

This is your "tactically sound"?

Are you just imagining this scenario where Castle steps into a room full of people, no one shoots him, and he just calmly tosses a frag grenade, then leaves?

He does that.
1. Much riskier.
2. Hell of a lot less stealthy.
3. He alerts them of his presence in a big, big way.
4. He's still not in the building.

Well, they seemed to have been holding up in the front, so they would have stayed shooting at each other. Enough of them would been killed off, so that it would be much of a problem for Castle.

Well there were a few instances where he got shot in the back once and the shooters just stood there doing nothing. I don't why I'm arguing this, logic clearly wasn't a big thing with the people behind this movie

No. I can't do that. But how do you know no one can?

And what does crushing someone's skull have to do with punching a nail into a wall?

Is it really that hard of a concept to get that a human fist can't go through a human skull in one blow? Because if it's that hard for to understand I'll stop now.

That's funny. I could have sworn you indicated that the dialogue in the serious scenes was hamfisted, and I asked you for a specific example.

If most of it is bad, wouldn't you have a specific example readily available? Do you have a specific example?

I don't know I saw the movie a month ago, I tend to not remember ****** dialogue in films.

Ah, but as I've previously pointed out, it wasn't "nothing like" what he wanted.

And I still believe it was nothing like what he wanted.

Where'd I say that?

Well, you wouldn't be arguing this much, if you didn't think it was good. Or are you just bored?

Are you just determined to go "But...but...he directed some pretty good stuff" and ignore why a major studio would not just hand their project to him without a tangible project alternative?

Fair enough.

And Lexi Alexander only had one movie, which wasn't all that good. And the reason why she probably got it was because she was 1. cheap and 2. John Dahl passed.

O...k.

Maybe you don't like them...

FORREST GUMP has a 72 percent on RT.
CRASH has a 75 percent.

It's hard to describe them as "sucking" in any realistic way. You can dislike it all you want. But "they suck"? Eh.

Well, if your going to pull out the RT card, what's PWZ's 21%? What does that say about the movie then. I guess that confirms that it was a really bad movie.

They stink.

Stay with me here. What is, in your opinion, the definitive portrayal of Jigsaw in the comics?

I always though Jigsaw was pretty lame, it being a movie I would have figured they would have not made him lame or a joke considering West was playing the character.

Gosh, I'm sorry Jigsaw didn't kill more people for you. I suppose that made the murders he did carry out somehow less threatening?

There's nothing particularly "cheesy" or "funny" about Micro's death as it was filmed and executed. No, you probably shouldn't have laughed when he killed Micro.

Gee whiz and if he wasn't just a ****ing joke, he might have been threatening, but he was a laughable villain.

The parkour death is meant to be funny.

Yeah, it's and I get it was meant to be a joke. I mostly laughed at how ****** it generally looked.

So...once again...you have no solid information about anything "better" existing? No one knows any actual, concrete details about any of these other "attempts"?

Well, if there was a good draft in all of those I don't think the movie would have taken this long to get made.

So...he was unable to come with anything on his own...again, why would I care that this person passed on a Punisher project?

Because he met with the studio and saw how much of a horrible experience it was going to be. I think Alexander can attest to how ****** it all was.

This is true.

You know what else people do, if they want to be put in charge of a big project? They show said studio something tangible.

Almost anyone can go "I want to make a gritty, realistic and dark Punisher film that pays homage to the MAX comics written by Garth Ennis as well as the Punisher's overall mythology." These are basically just buzz words.

Is that what they had to try to sway Lionsgate?

Buzz words?

No, they had a director with a solid filmography who wanted to make the movie. Plus the approval of the starring actor.

I never heard a single word from any of these writers that makes it sound like they "get" Punisher any better or any more thoroughly than Lexi Alexander did, or that they came up with anything tangibly better.

Did anyone else?

Clearly not, and Alexander didn't get the character.

So this guy thought the script sucked, and was unable to handle a short shooting schedule (which clearly wasn't completely undoable).

Did he write his own script? Did he even pitch his own movie concept?
If not, why in the blue hell should I care that he was not handed this franchise?

He's a director that's done some good stuff and would have been a **** ton better for this movie than Alexander. And realized how ****** it would all be and passed on it.

Yes, I'm sure Lionsgate wanted to make the worst movie possible. That must be the way they wanted things to go. Make the worst movie possible, and lose as much money as they could.

They don't how to deal with a genre movie that isn't named Saw. I mean they thought it was a good idea to release 2004's Punisher against Kill Bill Vol. 2.

 

[dft-313]

RIP The Punisher franchise. I've been reading the entire MAX run, beginning to end, and am amazed how clueless Lionsgate were in adapting such strong material. Complete failure.

 

[The Guard]

Well, I just think it was a dumb way to gain access to the place.

Fair enough. Given the circumstances, it was about as efficient as anything else he could have done. Half the things The Punisher does can be classified as "dumb". Isn't that half the point of the whole "death wish" element of the character?

His legs and his sides aren't armored, so yeah some glass could get stuck somewhere.

Right, but glass from what? It looked to me like the windows were devoid of glass, hence the boards over them.

Well, they seemed to have been holding up in the front, so they would have stayed shooting at each other.

At which point he's walking into a massive firefight, and risking being hit, or being hit with a richocheting bullet. It doesn't strike me as any less risky than what he's doing by leaping through a board up window.

Enough of them would been killed off, so that it would be much of a problem for Castle.

I would love to see how that plays out.

The Russians and Asians are shooting each other.

Castle quietly opens the door
Castle quietly enters, tosses a grenade inside
No one notices Castle, and he doesn't get shot or hit with a stray bullet.

Right.

Is it really that hard of a concept to get that a human fist can't go through a human skull in one blow? Because if it's that hard for to understand I'll stop now.

It's certainly not likely that it would take place. But it amuses me that people keep saying "That can't happen", and when I ask why, they come back with "I don't know, it just can't". No one has any solid reasons why not. No physics, etc.

I don't know I saw the movie a month ago, I tend to not remember ****** dialogue in films.

Then how, if you can't remember it, do you even know it was hamfisted?

How can you tell me now that it was hamfisted, and that it ruined the serious scenes?

Maybe your memory is faulty.

I haven't seen THE NEVERENDING STORY for about ten years now. I barely remember any of it, but I remember that some of it was silly, or cheesy. You know what I don't do? I don't go around saying "all the dialogue in the movie was silly and cheesy".

And Lexi Alexander only had one movie, which wasn't all that good. And the reason why she probably got it was because she was 1. cheap and 2. John Dahl passed.

I suspect she got it because she was the best choice out of the people who actually wanted to make the film.

Well, if your going to pull out the RT card, what's PWZ's 21%? What does that say about the movie then. I guess that confirms that it was a really bad movie.

It confirms that a lot of critics felt it was a worse movie than thought it was a good one. Notice that I never said "PUNISHER WAR ZONE is not critically acclaimed". I would never argue that it is.

You are sitting there decrying FORREST GUMP and CRASH, two Oscar winning films, as "sucking". I suppose you're entitled to your opinion (not that you backed it up with anything, ah, to be twelve again).

I always though Jigsaw was pretty lame, it being a movie I would have figured they would have not made him lame or a joke considering West was playing the character.

I also thought Jigsaw was always pretty lame. Tell me. Why, if Jigsaw was always lame, and always had some lame elements, would a movie version be expected to excise all these and make him entirely not lame? That would have resulted in a character who was not faithful to the source material. Part of Jigsaw's character is and always has been that he is something of a joke, albeit a dangerous one.

Gee whiz and if he wasn't just a ****ing joke, he might have been threatening, but he was a laughable villain.

I don't find someone who does the things Jigsaw does "laughable". I didn't find his silly accent laughable either, as it was an accent, and not, in itself, all that funny.

And I still believe it was nothing like what he wanted.

I suppose that depends on if you have your own personal definition of "nothing".

Yeah, it's and I get it was meant to be a joke. I mostly laughed at how ****** it generally looked.

You were supposed to.

Well, you wouldn't be arguing this much, if you didn't think it was good. Or are you just bored?

Bored.

It's entertaining enough, and there were several elements of Frank Castle that it nailed. "Good" is something else entirely. I have high standards for a "well made, good film".

Well, if there was a good draft in all of those I don't think the movie would have taken this long to get made.

So I shouldn't feel bad that someone other than Lexi Alexander didn't make this movie, since there likely wasn't a good draft in all the other attempts.

Because he met with the studio and saw how much of a horrible experience it was going to be. I think Alexander can attest to how ****** it all was.

So he didn't bother to attempt to improve it? Why should I care a fig about that man and his possible interpretation of The Punisher? Especially if he doesn't even care enough to try to come up with a better pitch.

Can you imagine if Chris Nolan came to WB, and was like "Oh no, that YEAR ONE concept isn't at all what I want to make", and just left without pitching his own idea?

No, they had a director with a solid filmography who wanted to make the movie. Plus the approval of the starring actor.

He's a director that's done some good stuff and would have been a **** ton better for this movie than Alexander. And realized how ****** it would all be and passed on it.

So again...he would have made a good movie, and we're supposed to think he would have been a ****ton better than Alexander, but he didn't care enough to make a concrete attempt to better the project? And I'm supposed to mourn the fact that this man didn't make the film?

 

[S. Grundy]

Right, but glass from what? It looked to me like the windows were devoid of glass, hence the boards over them.

I recall glass being in the window, maybe I was wrong.

At which point he's walking into a massive firefight, and risking being hit, or being hit with a richocheting bullet. It doesn't strike me as any less risky than what he's doing by leaping through a board up window.

I would love to see how that plays out.

The Russians and Asians are shooting each other.

Castle quietly opens the door
Castle quietly enters, tosses a grenade inside
No one notices Castle, and he doesn't get shot or hit with a stray bullet.

Right.

Well, him being a marine and probably having fought in the Gulf War or any other military skirmish in the last 10 or so years, he was most likely taught how to clear a room full of people with weapons.

It's certainly not likely that it would take place. But it amuses me that people keep saying "That can't happen", and when I ask why, they come back with "I don't know, it just can't". No one has any solid reasons why not. No physics, etc.

Again a human face just doesn't collapse in itself like that with one punch. Like I said it's not a hard concept to grasp. It's like this, people have been hit in the face baseball before, and saud balls are pretty hard and can have as much if not more force and speed behind them than a single punch, I'm hard pressed to find anything about someones face collapsing in on itself from getting hit with a baseball.

Then how, if you can't remember it, do you even know it was hamfisted?

How can you tell me now that it was hamfisted, and that it ruined the serious scenes?

Maybe your memory is faulty.

It was just badly written and performed dialogue. It was so bad it was forgettable for the most part. Outside of the ******ed **** like "Yummy yummy in my tummy tummy" or "let me axe you a question" or "Billy is Dead...Call Me Jigsaw".

I suspect she got it because she was the best choice out of the people who actually wanted to make the film.

John Dahl was a better choice.

It confirms that a lot of critics felt it was a worse movie than thought it was a good one. Notice that I never said "PUNISHER WAR ZONE is not critically acclaimed". I would never argue that it is.

You are sitting there decrying FORREST GUMP and CRASH, two Oscar winning films, as "sucking". I suppose you're entitled to your opinion (not that you backed it up with anything, ah, to be twelve again).

Forrest Gump is sentimental schmaltzy crap, and Crash is just ham-fisted and lacks subtlety in what it's trying to say that it's just ridiculous.

I also thought Jigsaw was always pretty lame. Tell me. Why, if Jigsaw was always lame, and always had some lame elements, would a movie version be expected to excise all these and make him entirely not lame? That would have resulted in a character who was not faithful to the source material. Part of Jigsaw's character is and always has been that he is something of a joke, albeit a dangerous one.

I don't find someone who does the things Jigsaw does "laughable". I didn't find his silly accent laughable either, as it was an accent, and not, in itself, all that funny.

I don't know to make the character threatening/interesting in non comedic way.

It was just a horrible "New Yawk" accent.

So he didn't bother to attempt to improve it? Why should I care a fig about that man and his possible interpretation of The Punisher? Especially if he doesn't even care enough to try to come up with a better pitch.

Can you imagine if Chris Nolan came to WB, and was like "Oh no, that YEAR ONE concept isn't at all what I want to make", and just left without pitching his own idea?

So again...he would have made a good movie, and we're supposed to think he would have been a ****ton better than Alexander, but he didn't care enough to make a concrete attempt to better the project? And I'm supposed to mourn the fact that this man didn't make the film?

Lionsgate weren't going to have somebody come in a try to do a complete page one rewrite, as the writers strike was looming and they were going to lose the character rights around January or so of 2008. They just wanted a cheap and fast movie made.

Well, Lexi Alexander effectivly killed the character in regards to film for a good long while. And like I said she just didn't get the character, so yeah Dahl, Hill or even some unknown making his first feature film would have probably delivered a better movie than her.

 

[jebhdb]

It would have been cool to see what the next movie in the Punisher series would have been like had War Zone done better. Maybe with the feedback they received from the '04 film and War Zone they could have found a happy medium between the two films that pleased more fans.

 

[Heretic]

What atre you talking about? It should start breaking DVD records pretty soon, right?

 

[jebhdb]

I believe the movie will do well on dvd, but I think we all know that we have seen the last of the Punisher in theaters for the forseeable future.

 

[dft-313]

It will do better on DVD than in theatres, but whatever. It's still a complete bomb.

 

[Heretic]

This just in! A theater employee has found a $5 bill on the floor at a PWZ screening, quintupling the films box office for the week! The Punisher is back in business baby!!!

 

[Garth Ranzz]

Man, it's sad that this film did so horribly. As much as I loved the movie, I can't help but point fun at it's failing box office. With the economy the way it is, Lionsgate and Marvel are definitely uber pissed. We won't be seeing the Punisher in his own movie for quite a while.

 

[BigSams50]

This movie was definitly not deserving of a complete bomb at the box office

 

[dft-313]

This movie was definitly not deserving of a complete bomb at the box office

Why did it deserve better?

 

[BigSams50]

Because i believe it was a decent movie, and i thought there was a wider love for punisher, but obviously i was mistaken

 

[dft-313]

A low budget film, with no consistent tone, no name stars, a woefully bad trailer and coming off the heels of a 2004 film that hadn't done especially well. I don't see how anyone thinks it deserved to do better.

It was a bad idea from the get-go without Jane.

 

[Savage]

It was a grindhouse flick. That's all. I loved it for that. It didn't try to appease anyone but the comic book fans and violence nuts. The crew knew that this wasn't going to be anything award worthy from the get go so they went for broke and it was great. Nothing was held back and the movie was heaps of fun. Not everyone is into this kind of flick and the ticket sales show it. It's a niche film and probably going to be a cult classic in a few years. That's all there is to it.

 

[dft-313]

Alas, that's not what they went for. Even grindhouse movies (which most people assume that Tarantino and Rodriguez's film somehow epitomised) weren't quite as vapid and lacking in imagination.

Your point that it was made for the comic book fans and violence nuts have proven untrue - most of them seem to have ignored it.

Blade 2 was a better example of a grindhouse movie, in truth. With a good budget to boot. And a good director. And a good cast. And a decent script.

And look what was more successful.

 

[Nivek]

i hate it when people completely gloss over why referencing something like Punisher: War Zone as a Grindhouse Flick is actually a big slap in the face to fans. Grindhouse imply's that a studio "grinds out" cheap to produce, badly written, with unskilled production staff who's end product appeals to the lowest common denominator of movie goer. Which is exactly what P:WZ was to Lionsgate. By to fans who wanted an improvement in the quality of 2004, yeah it sucked. To those who think that is something admirable, well... No wonder you think the DVD is gonna be that big of a hit in Delusion-land.

 

[Savage]

Alas, that's not what they went for. Even grindhouse movies (which most people assume that Tarantino and Rodriguez's film somehow epitomised) weren't quite as vapid and lacking in imagination.

Your point that it was made for the comic book fans and violence nuts have proven untrue - most of them seem to have ignored it.

Blade 2 was a better example of a grindhouse movie, in truth. With a good budget to boot. And a good director. And a good cast. And a decent script.

And look what was more successful.

I wouldn't call Blade 2 a grindhouse flick since actual effort was put into it. Not to say that there was no effort put into Punisher: War Zone but that movie from marketing on through the flick itself had this general feeling of "We don't give a **** what you think of our movie. We're just having our fun."

 

[Savage]

i hate it when people completely gloss over why referencing something like Punisher: War Zone as a Grindhouse Flick is actually a big slap in the face to fans. Grindhouse imply's that a studio "grinds out" cheap to produce, badly written, with unskilled production staff who's end product appeals to the lowest common denominator of movie goer. Which is exactly what P:WZ was to Lionsgate. By to fans who wanted an improvement in the quality of 2004, yeah it sucked. To those who think that is something admirable, well... No wonder you think the DVD is gonna be that big of a hit in Delusion-land.

Are you kidding? This thing is gonna fail again. Hard. lol That won't stop me from buying a copy though. Gore hounds and action buffa will eat this thing up. It's just one of those flicks. Like Big Trouble In Little China or (someone's going to scream blasphemy here) Evil Dead.

And as a fan of the character I did not feel insulted at all. The fact of the matter is The Punisher HAS been written like this before so it's not exactly setting a precedent. Yes there have been better interpretations of the character and the writers and director could have taken more care to create something serious and rival The Dark Knight or Blade but for me the movie they did come up with left me entertained enough as a fan and as a gore hound. It was like "This is not the best version of Frank but I can't say that ISN'T Frank up there."

 

[dft-313]

The character could deal with the themes of The Dark Knight that much better because the hero has become a monster and he doesn't want to change.

 

[RogueDK]

Blade 2 was a better example of a grindhouse movie, in truth. With a good budget to boot. And a good director. And a good cast. And a decent script.

And look what was more successful.

Blade 2 was not a grindhouse movie. It was a well thought out sequel to its predecessor.
Unlike Punisher's disappointing '04 attempt, which played a huge part in PWZ bombing, at least Blade 2 rode off of the steam of it's successful 1998 film which was number 1 at the box office 2 weeks in a row.

I hate that PWZ couldn't have had a similiar success...