The Punisher (2004) Thomas Jane question?
09-09-04, 05:41 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 565
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Punisher (2004) Thomas Jane question?
I just saw The Punisher (2004) and boy did it suck. I actually preferred Dolph Lundgren's version, but that besides the point. My question is: What is the deal with Thomas Janes left thumbnail? Did anyone notice it?
You can especially notice it in scenes:
&
Check it out
You can especially notice it in scenes:
Spoiler:
&
Spoiler:
Check it out
09-09-04, 06:25 PM
#5
DVD Talk Godfather
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: City of the lakers.. riots.. and drug dealing cops.. los(t) Angel(e)s. ca.
Posts: 54,199
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
For something that sucked so badly, you sure paid a lot of attention to the real small unimportant details.
09-09-04, 07:47 PM
#6
Senior Member
Re: The Punisher (2004) Thomas Jane question?
Originally posted by Chip718
I just saw The Punisher (2004) and boy did it suck. I actually preferred Dolph Lundgren's version, but that besides the point.
I just saw The Punisher (2004) and boy did it suck. I actually preferred Dolph Lundgren's version, but that besides the point.
09-10-04, 12:18 PM
#7
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 565
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I noticed it even before I suffered through the actually movie. You can see the scene on the first teaser trailer.
I guess you have be a true fan of the comic book to appreciate how awful this film was. Come on the thing was set in Tampa. It wasn't as violent as it should have been. Does anyone actually think he "punished" anyone. What Quentin Glass did to Spaker Dave was more "Punisher-ish"
The Lundgren version was a cheesy B nothing more, nothing less No one expected it to be any good. The 2004 had some big names behind it and fell flat.
I guess you have be a true fan of the comic book to appreciate how awful this film was. Come on the thing was set in Tampa. It wasn't as violent as it should have been. Does anyone actually think he "punished" anyone. What Quentin Glass did to Spaker Dave was more "Punisher-ish"
The Lundgren version was a cheesy B nothing more, nothing less No one expected it to be any good. The 2004 had some big names behind it and fell flat.
09-10-04, 01:24 PM
#9
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: NYC * See da name? Go get me some coffee...
Posts: 4,665
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally posted by Chip718
Does anyone actually think he "punished" anyone. What Quentin Glass did to Spaker Dave was more "Punisher-ish"
Does anyone actually think he "punished" anyone. What Quentin Glass did to Spaker Dave was more "Punisher-ish"
He didn't punish Saint? You got to be joking with such a statement. He made Saint
Spoiler:
Spoiler:
Last edited by Get Me Coffee; 09-11-04 at 02:23 AM.
09-10-04, 10:13 PM
#13
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: vancouver, WA, USA, Earth, Sol, Milkyway
Posts: 1,028
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am a huge Punisher comic book fan and I considered the 2004 flick to be about 1000x more faithful to the character than the crappy lundgren 80s flick was. Ok, so he starts out in Tampa in this one... so what. Its clear that the series is moving to another metropolis in the sequel and you can bet dollars to donuts its the big apple. IMO, the key was in the details... he had the skull-clad armor... he used cool gimzos and weapons to kick ass... he was more interested in winning than "playing fair" and his need for revenge is what makes him almost un-killable and yet the guy maintains a sense of humor.
those kinds of things were what was key to the comic character and IMO the film used (some of) them and is therefore is a decent foundation for another Punisher flick or even a series of them.
IMO, if they move Jane to NYC... make it a lil bloodier... and add in a good actor as Micro the sequel has a great chance of success.
j
those kinds of things were what was key to the comic character and IMO the film used (some of) them and is therefore is a decent foundation for another Punisher flick or even a series of them.
IMO, if they move Jane to NYC... make it a lil bloodier... and add in a good actor as Micro the sequel has a great chance of success.
j
09-10-04, 10:56 PM
#15
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Pittsburgh, PA GO PENS!
Posts: 4,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with Jek...
I've been a Punisher fan since I was 12, and this movie was more Punisher than anything I've seen.
In fact, I don't know why everyone bashes this movie - it never pretends to be anything other than an action movie. It doesn't masquerade as a buddy flick or whatever the hell else is out there these days.
Back in the 80's and early 90's you could have an all out action flick with little or no plot, and it was a good movie. I enjoy them for what they are - fun action flicks. Shit blows up, people die horribly, and the hero gets a hot bitch. It's supposed to be that way. If I want substance, I'll watch Les Trois Coleurs or a Vinterberg film.
Really, I think there's this elitist bug that's crawling up many a member ass both here and on other movie forums. Everyone thinks their some fucking film snob, and it's sickening me.
People can call this film shit, but at least it was straight forward with what it was - ass-kicking revenge. Christ, it was no worse than Alien Vs. Predator or fucking Daredevil, which neither was great, but neither was a total piece of shit either. What the hell does everyone expect? Even the recent James Bond movies pale in comparison to the Punisher. And the Punisher was mediocre at best.
If you want to see a REAL piece of shit, check out "I shot Andy Warhol".
I've been a Punisher fan since I was 12, and this movie was more Punisher than anything I've seen.
In fact, I don't know why everyone bashes this movie - it never pretends to be anything other than an action movie. It doesn't masquerade as a buddy flick or whatever the hell else is out there these days.
Back in the 80's and early 90's you could have an all out action flick with little or no plot, and it was a good movie. I enjoy them for what they are - fun action flicks. Shit blows up, people die horribly, and the hero gets a hot bitch. It's supposed to be that way. If I want substance, I'll watch Les Trois Coleurs or a Vinterberg film.
Really, I think there's this elitist bug that's crawling up many a member ass both here and on other movie forums. Everyone thinks their some fucking film snob, and it's sickening me.
People can call this film shit, but at least it was straight forward with what it was - ass-kicking revenge. Christ, it was no worse than Alien Vs. Predator or fucking Daredevil, which neither was great, but neither was a total piece of shit either. What the hell does everyone expect? Even the recent James Bond movies pale in comparison to the Punisher. And the Punisher was mediocre at best.
If you want to see a REAL piece of shit, check out "I shot Andy Warhol".
10-18-04, 12:41 AM
#17
DVD Talk Legend
I liked this movie a lot. It was just a fun action flick.
10-18-04, 06:35 AM
#18
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Originally posted by chowchris13
Anybody find the action sequence in this film quite cheap and unimpressive.....I thought this movie was pretty horrible
Anybody find the action sequence in this film quite cheap and unimpressive.....I thought this movie was pretty horrible
10-18-04, 11:23 AM
#19
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by flashburn
If you realistic and not chock full of CG, yes.
If you realistic and not chock full of CG, yes.
10-18-04, 10:27 PM
#20
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Originally posted by lordzeppelin
In fact, I don't know why everyone bashes this movie - it never pretends to be anything other than an action movie. It doesn't masquerade as a buddy flick or whatever the hell else is out there these days.
Back in the 80's and early 90's you could have an all out action flick with little or no plot, and it was a good movie. I enjoy them for what they are - fun action flicks. Shit blows up, people die horribly, and the hero gets a hot bitch. It's supposed to be that way. If I want substance, I'll watch Les Trois Coleurs or a Vinterberg film.
Really, I think there's this elitist bug that's crawling up many a member ass both here and on other movie forums. Everyone thinks their some fucking film snob, and it's sickening me.
In fact, I don't know why everyone bashes this movie - it never pretends to be anything other than an action movie. It doesn't masquerade as a buddy flick or whatever the hell else is out there these days.
Back in the 80's and early 90's you could have an all out action flick with little or no plot, and it was a good movie. I enjoy them for what they are - fun action flicks. Shit blows up, people die horribly, and the hero gets a hot bitch. It's supposed to be that way. If I want substance, I'll watch Les Trois Coleurs or a Vinterberg film.
Really, I think there's this elitist bug that's crawling up many a member ass both here and on other movie forums. Everyone thinks their some fucking film snob, and it's sickening me.
10-19-04, 02:47 PM
#21
DVD Talk Legend
The Punisher was 35 shades of awful. Weak acting, weak pacing, a paper-thin revenge plot, and even as a B-movie it sucked. I preferred the 1989 Dolph Lundgren version, to be honest, and while that particular monostrosity had elements of suckiness it was still better structured than the 2004 crapfest.
And some of those great 80s action movies still paid attention to plot, pacing, characterization, story, etc., while still providing the thrills. Look at the original Terminator, which few remember was a low-budget B-movie quickie, that impressed, not so much because of its kewl explosions and atcion scenes, but because of its gripping story and mounting sense of doom and desperation. Die Hard was, at its heart, a story of a man completely out of his element, both with the terrorist threat and his own wife. Predator was a cautionary tale against Latin/South American interventionism. Red Dawn sucked, but sucked in a way that wasn't completely about blowing shit up. Conan The Barbarian is one of the most pinpoint critiques of the Northern Ireland situation ever constructed. Ghostbusters deconstructed the Madonna/Whore myth prevalent throughout Western culture, and Raiders of the Lost Ark was little more than thinly-veiled anti-Vatican propaganda.
Punisher was, in relation, a weak revenge tale that really didn't say anything. And the action wasn't even that impressive.
Now gay
And some of those great 80s action movies still paid attention to plot, pacing, characterization, story, etc., while still providing the thrills. Look at the original Terminator, which few remember was a low-budget B-movie quickie, that impressed, not so much because of its kewl explosions and atcion scenes, but because of its gripping story and mounting sense of doom and desperation. Die Hard was, at its heart, a story of a man completely out of his element, both with the terrorist threat and his own wife. Predator was a cautionary tale against Latin/South American interventionism. Red Dawn sucked, but sucked in a way that wasn't completely about blowing shit up. Conan The Barbarian is one of the most pinpoint critiques of the Northern Ireland situation ever constructed. Ghostbusters deconstructed the Madonna/Whore myth prevalent throughout Western culture, and Raiders of the Lost Ark was little more than thinly-veiled anti-Vatican propaganda.
Punisher was, in relation, a weak revenge tale that really didn't say anything. And the action wasn't even that impressive.
Now gay
10-19-04, 02:57 PM
#22
DVD Talk Godfather
Originally posted by Matt Millheiser
The Punisher was 35 shades of awful. Weak acting, weak pacing, a paper-thin revenge plot, and even as a B-movie it sucked. I preferred the 1989 Dolph Lundgren version, to be honest, and while that particular monostrosity had elements of suckiness it was still better structured than the 2004 crapfest.
And some of those great 80s action movies still paid attention to plot, pacing, characterization, story, etc., while still providing the thrills. Look at the original Terminator, which few remember was a low-budget B-movie quickie, that impressed, not so much because of its kewl explosions and atcion scenes, but because of its gripping story and mounting sense of doom and desperation. Die Hard was, at its heart, a story of a man completely out of his element, both with the terrorist threat and his own wife. Predator was a cautionary tale against Latin/South American interventionism. Red Dawn sucked, but sucked in a way that wasn't completely about blowing shit up. Conan The Barbarian is one of the most pinpoint critiques of the Northern Ireland situation ever constructed. Ghostbusters deconstructed the Madonna/Whore myth prevalent throughout Western culture, and Raiders of the Lost Ark was little more than thinly-veiled anti-Vatican propaganda.
Punisher was, in relation, a weak revenge tale that really didn't say anything. And the action wasn't even that impressive.
Now gay
The Punisher was 35 shades of awful. Weak acting, weak pacing, a paper-thin revenge plot, and even as a B-movie it sucked. I preferred the 1989 Dolph Lundgren version, to be honest, and while that particular monostrosity had elements of suckiness it was still better structured than the 2004 crapfest.
And some of those great 80s action movies still paid attention to plot, pacing, characterization, story, etc., while still providing the thrills. Look at the original Terminator, which few remember was a low-budget B-movie quickie, that impressed, not so much because of its kewl explosions and atcion scenes, but because of its gripping story and mounting sense of doom and desperation. Die Hard was, at its heart, a story of a man completely out of his element, both with the terrorist threat and his own wife. Predator was a cautionary tale against Latin/South American interventionism. Red Dawn sucked, but sucked in a way that wasn't completely about blowing shit up. Conan The Barbarian is one of the most pinpoint critiques of the Northern Ireland situation ever constructed. Ghostbusters deconstructed the Madonna/Whore myth prevalent throughout Western culture, and Raiders of the Lost Ark was little more than thinly-veiled anti-Vatican propaganda.
Punisher was, in relation, a weak revenge tale that really didn't say anything. And the action wasn't even that impressive.
Now gay
