Two angles on "The Punisher," plus boxoffice analysis
"The Punisher," Marvel Films' big official stab at an R-rated "hard"-action franchise based on it's character stable ("Blade," based on a franchise that came and went with the 70s, doesn't really count,) opens this weekend. It's an R-rated revenge actioner, opening against "Kill Bill: Volume 2," ANOTHER revenge actioner. This is something you don't often see in Hollywood, especially this time of year: Two films aiming roughly at the same demographic (fans of violent action films over the minimum age of 17) opening against one another.
The films are more similar than all that: Both have a substantial "geek subculture" appeal outside their primary existence as revenge flicks: "Punisher" is based on a comic book, while "Bill" is a walking homage to 1970s grindhouse genre pics. Both are also betting on a semblance of cultural pre-film knowledge to bring in the curious: "Bill" is, of course, a sequel that will answer and end last year's cliffhanger while "Punisher" is a fairly well-known Marvel mainstay. Industry business pundits have for a good while assailed the "Punisher" producers for what they see as an obviously bad business move.
I happen to think the punditry is right on this one. "Bill" is opening with tons of publicity, a groundswell of terrific reviews and the built-in appeal of a sequel who's predecessor only debuted on DVD rental Tuesday. But I also think I understand what someone at Marvel is hedging their bets on: They're gambling, I think, that "Bill's" wacky-for-wacky's sake strangeness, geek-appeal film referencing and "arty" ultra-stylism will turn off that segment of the action movie fandom that demands a certain quotient of macho-posturing and gun-worship with it's cinematic diet.
Nevermind that Marvel and director Johnathan Heinsleigh's advance word on their film has been that it's a dark and serious-minded revenge tale in line with Garth Ennis' recent run on the "Punisher" comics, the trailers and ads are selling a solid message to the YAAM (Young Angry American Male) crowd: This film will slake your hunger for the loud-sweaty-guys-crashing-into-eachother fight scenes and psuedo-erotic-photography-of-firearms-and/or-cars that you've been missing since the days of Stallone and Van Damme ended and American action films assimilated the soaring drama and intricately-constructed/physics-defying action style of Hong Kong (aka "that sissy kung-fu stuff.") That "Punisher" probably ISN'T a Z-Grade frat-boy chestbeater in the Van Damme tradition is beside the point: Marvel and Artisan want us to THINK it is.
With that on the table, here's some links to two decidedly different "Punisher" review, the first a negative from "Aint-It-Cool-News'" own Harry Knowles:
use [link=]http://www.aintitcoolnews.com/display.cgi?id=17355[/link]
Ahem. Love him or loathe him, Knowles film reviews come straight from the gut (no pun intended.) He hated the flick. A lot of the "Talkback" comments on his site are being devoted to accusing him of slanting his review negative in order to improve "Bill's" boxoffice chances, but frankly I'm not buying it this time.
In Harry's review he keeps refering to "Moriarty's review" of the film. "Moriarty" (a psuedonym) is the "other" big wheel at AICN, who last month posted what was to become the first "rave" of the film from a solid figurehead of the internet Movie Geek Community. For continuity's sake, here's his take:
There ya go.
Now, from nearly the polar opposite of AICN's neck of the Web, I turn to Jeffery Wells, a film journalist who's bi-weekly column "Hollywood Elsewhere" runs on "Moviepoopshoot.com." The link is to the whole column, but the "Punisher" review is the lead item right up top:
http://www.moviepoopshoot.com/elsewhere/index.html
Wells made a dubious "name" for himself in the Geek Community three years back when he came out early as one of the slim minority of critics who openly loathed "Lord of The Rings." When the film failed to become the for-fans-only niche peice he'd predicted and instead turned into a juggernaut with Oscar buzz, Wells turned into the patron saint of anti-LOTR scorn, heaping so much scorn and derision on the film and it's fans that he became one of the most-despised critics to the Geek Community and remained there as he railed againt the trilogy and consistently wrote in praise of ANY effort to stave off Peter Jackson and the "fanboys" from taking over the biz.
That being said, his column is usually pretty interesting if heavily slanted to the "trendy/chic" aspects of non-mainstream filmmaking for the most part. I reccomend checking it out frequently.
MY TAKE THUS FAR:
I won't be seeing "Punisher" until it debuts on Friday, but my guy tells me this is no "Bill"-killer. It's a modestly-budgeted actioner that will probably open in #2 (the top spots will be wide open with "Alamo" continue it's slide and "Passion" now removed of it's Easter Weekend boost) with a respectable take. Whether or not it has legs depends on three distinct variables: Whether the fans of the comic embrace it, whether a fresh crop of fans embrace it, and whether or not it's any damn good in the first place.
However well either ends up doing, "Punisher" AND "Bill's" competition in the R-rated revenge drama market gets stiffer the following week when the very "Punisher"-like Denzel Washington badass-bodyguard-chases-kidnapped-moppet entry "Man On Fire" debuts.
|
