|
|
Post by adamwarlock2099 on May 20, 2014 21:40:09 GMT -5
Welcome Back ... because I enjoyed the movie so well I wanted to read the story the movie was based on. Movie's quite different though, there's no Ma Gnucci  Did you see the fan made Punisher short film with Thomas Jane. I'm still a bit uneasy about the movie Frank Castle only being one inch taller than me  Rated R - violence and profanity. I have watched it before. Someone else at one point gave me a heads up when I mentioned my liking of the movie. But I think the Punisher movie was good on all ends. Not just Thomas Jane but all the actresses and actors and the story the filming. It and Iron Man tend to be my favorite Marvel movies and neither characters comics have I refs much. |
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on May 20, 2014 23:52:44 GMT -5
One of my favorite moments is when he slowly kills a sex trafficker by throwing her f into a shatterproof window face first. The window doesn't break but the repeated blows damage the frame. She screams at him and begs him to stop and he just tells her that by her own logic he is stronger than she is so he can do whatever he wants. Then he throws her, the frame breaks and she falls from the skyscraper to her death. It gives me chills everytime, it makes me so happy to see a pile of crap like that get exactly whats coming to her without liberals casting a safety net. Yeah, darn those liberals and their "due process" and their anti-"cruel and unusual punishment" stance. |
|
|
|
Post by Jasoomian on May 20, 2014 23:56:29 GMT -5
As long as Frank gets due process and a jury trial, it should work out okay.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on May 21, 2014 1:33:48 GMT -5
After awhile, Ennis schitck just wasn't interesting anymore. We get it; you think superheroes are silly. It's a critique that has been done to death. Just don't do superhero comics if you don't like them. How hard is that? I have much more respect for creators (and there are many of them) that don't like superheroes comics, don't do them, and never talk about it. Personally, I dislike Archie comics and never saw the appeal, but I've never spent one second of my life bitching about Archie comics...until now. As I said, I think the impetus for Ennis' superhero work is commercial. Fans are going to be more likely to try -and hopefully stay with - your product if they see familiar characters, and if you're a writer only working in the corporate factory system, that's money you want in your pocket. I don't blame Ennis I blame the bizarre second-childhood superhero-above-everything fixation of American corporate comics. I have no doubt that his superhero work was commercial. I don't blame him for doing them, I just feel that when you're doing Hitman and the Punisher, who more or less exist in their own little worlds, you don't need to even touch on superheroes. I wouldn't have a problem with his critique if it were a bit more nuanced; I'd be much more interested in seeing a writer poking fun at reader's that ONLY cared about superhero comics (particularly the depressing modern incarnations) as opposed to pointing out how silly they are as a blanket statement. |
|
|
|
Post by Ish Kabbible on May 21, 2014 1:36:31 GMT -5
I like the fact that villians who return in The Punisher are very,very,very rare.That's why The Batman,who's constantly hounded by The Joker, is a pussy compared to Frank Castle and his done-in-one appearance attitude.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazyoldhermit on May 21, 2014 1:36:55 GMT -5
One of my favorite moments is when he slowly kills a sex trafficker by throwing her f into a shatterproof window face first. The window doesn't break but the repeated blows damage the frame. She screams at him and begs him to stop and he just tells her that by her own logic he is stronger than she is so he can do whatever he wants. Then he throws her, the frame breaks and she falls from the skyscraper to her death. It gives me chills everytime, it makes me so happy to see a pile of crap like that get exactly whats coming to her without liberals casting a safety net. Yeah, darn those liberals and their "due process" and their anti-"cruel and unusual punishment" stance. In the case of scum like this those things just get in the way. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2014 2:05:35 GMT -5
Yeah, darn those liberals and their "due process" and their anti-"cruel and unusual punishment" stance. In the case of scum like this those things just get in the way. So since Castle tortures people, victimizes them, is a mass murderer, uses stolen property for his personal agenda, has likely funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars into terrorist accounts buying armaments on the black market, and generally breaks the law all the time simply because he can, does he qualify as "scum" who should be put down by someone who has he power to do so? Good for the goose good for the gander kind of thing.... -M |
|
|
|
Post by foxley on May 21, 2014 2:44:16 GMT -5
I like the fact that villians who return in The Punisher are very,very,very rare.That's why The Batman,who's constantly hounded by The Joker, is a pussy compared to Frank Castle and his done-in-one appearance attitude. And yet he can't kill a loser like Jigsaw. Go figure. To my mind, this lack of a rogues gallery is a strike against the Punisher. Why would the writers bother coming up with interesting villains if they're just going to be dead at the end of the issue (or panel 2 or whatever). So you get an never-ending run of interchangeable mobsters, muggers, drug dealers, whatever. (Spoken, of course, as someone with only a casual knowledge of the character.) |
|
|
|
Post by Ish Kabbible on May 21, 2014 2:58:33 GMT -5
In the case of scum like this those things just get in the way. So since Castle tortures people, victimizes them, is a mass murderer, uses stolen property for his personal agenda, has likely funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars into terrorist accounts buying armaments on the black market, and generally breaks the law all the time simply because he can, does he qualify as "scum" who should be put down by someone who has he power to do so? Good for the goose good for the gander kind of thing.... -M I would compare Frank to Jack Baur of the TV show 24. Does he torture terribly evil people to get info to prevent further evil.Definitely Yes Does he victimize them? Frank targets cold-blooded killers.There getting what they already dished out to innocents Use stolen property for his persionel agenda? Yes he uses captured armament on his war on crime.Thats a good thing Has funneled money into terrorist accounts to buy weapons.He wouldn't do that knowingly and that was never shown to happen Breaks the law because he can? Doesn't the ordinary super-hero do the same thing with illegal search-and seizure,illegal surrveillance,breaking and entering and assaults.I see no difference except Frank disposes of the criminals while superheroes leave them for the police where they get released because any evidence the superhero provided (if they do provide) was obtained illegally.And superheroes don't testify in court So since we're talking wish-fulfillment fantasy here for the bad guys to get what they deserve,I'll take a well-written Punisher tale any day of the week over some pantywaist superhero.At least the Punisher is human,no unbelievable powers,easier to identify with. And he gets the job done Superheroes-they destroy the neighborhood when they fight,untold millions in property damage,innocent civilians killed (comic book editors always cover that up saying it was abandoned property-Ha)and the villian just winds up returning in a few issues anyway |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2014 3:38:24 GMT -5
So since Castle tortures people, victimizes them, is a mass murderer, uses stolen property for his personal agenda, has likely funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars into terrorist accounts buying armaments on the black market, and generally breaks the law all the time simply because he can, does he qualify as "scum" who should be put down by someone who has he power to do so? Good for the goose good for the gander kind of thing.... -M I would compare Frank to Jack Baur of the TV show 24. Does he torture terribly evil people to get info to prevent further evil.Definitely Yes Does he victimize them? Frank targets cold-blooded killers.There getting what they already dished out to innocents Use stolen property for his persionel agenda? Yes he uses captured armament on his war on crime.Thats a good thing Has funneled money into terrorist accounts to buy weapons.He wouldn't do that knowingly and that was never shown to happen Breaks the law because he can? Doesn't the ordinary super-hero do the same thing with illegal search-and seizure,illegal surrveillance,breaking and entering and assaults.I see no difference except Frank disposes of the criminals while superheroes leave them for the police where they get released because any evidence the superhero provided (if they do provide) was obtained illegally.And superheroes don't testify in court So since we're talking wish-fulfillment fantasy here for the bad guys to get what they deserve,I'll take a well-written Punisher tale any day of the week over some pantywaist superhero.At least the Punisher is human,no unbelievable powers,easier to identify with. And he gets the job done Superheroes-they destroy the neighborhood when they fight,untold millions in property damage,innocent civilians killed (comic book editors always cover that up saying it was abandoned property-Ha)and the villian just winds up returning in a few issues anyway See I see Frank as essentially a sociopath. He is not a grim and emotionless executioner delivering sentence, he is a cold-blooded killer who terrorizes those he targets and takes some level of joy and satisfaction in it. Starting firefights in big cities gets innocents killed, no matter who you are targeting. Blowing up property puts bystanders and rescue workers in jeopardy, and will lead to a lot of collateral damage in property owned by innocent law abiding citizens and in lives of innocents as well, bystanders, fire fighters and other first responders, etc.. Not to mention the monetary cost to honest law abiding tax payers who have to foot the clean up bills (unlike say the Avengers who have Tony Stark to foot the bill or Batman who has the Wayne fortune at his disposal to do so). If he's not buying all his armaments above the board-and he can't-then his is knowingly trafficking in in black market armaments and if he is as knowledgeable about how the crime networks work as he is portrayed, then he knows where that money ends up. If you are going to have a level of realism with street crime, then the reality is a good chunk of money in gun running winds up in the accounts of terrorist groups both domestic and foreign. Frank can try to be willfully ignorant, but he has to know where that money ends up. He has no compunction about doing what he does, even if the consequences spread misery to the innocent, as long as his campaign of retribution continues. It's pure selfishness, not nobility, not justice, but a personal vendetta writ large and damn the consequences. -M |
|
|
|
Post by Ish Kabbible on May 21, 2014 4:16:50 GMT -5
See I see Frank as essentially a sociopath. He is not a grim and emotionless executioner delivering sentence, he is a cold-blooded killer who terrorizes those he targets and takes some level of joy and satisfaction in it. Starting firefights in big cities gets innocents killed, no matter who you are targeting. Blowing up property puts bystanders and rescue workers in jeopardy, and will lead to a lot of collateral damage in property owned by innocent law abiding citizens and in lives of innocents as well, bystanders, fire fighters and other first responders, etc.. Not to mention the monetary cost to honest law abiding tax payers who have to foot the clean up bills (unlike say the Avengers who have Tony Stark to foot the bill or Batman who has the Wayne fortune at his disposal to do so). If he's not buying all his armaments above the board-and he can't-then his is knowingly trafficking in in black market armaments and if he is as knowledgeable about how the crime networks work as he is portrayed, then he knows where that money ends up. If you are going to have a level of realism with street crime, then the reality is a good chunk of money in gun running winds up in the accounts of terrorist groups both domestic and foreign. Frank can try to be willfully ignorant, but he has to know where that money ends up. He has no compunction about doing what he does, even if the consequences spread misery to the innocent, as long as his campaign of retribution continues. It's pure selfishness, not nobility, not justice, but a personal vendetta writ large and damn the consequences. -M I could be wrong but I don't recall Frank buying armament from shady arms dealers.Show me if he ever did.He's used what he's confiscated from his opponents,he's built his own or had others build it for him.If you're saying its implied or had been done in some round-about way,then Batman,Tony Stark,Reed Richards and many others are probably guilty of the same thing.Somewhere some of their spare parts came from the black market. But do you bemoan the fact that everytime you buy some sneakers,you're supporting illegal child-labor from a third world country.Do you check the tags of every item you buy for the country of origin and wonder what the working conditions might be. Or every time you eat some meat you're supporting the destruction of innocent animals. Or when you start up your car you might be speeding up global warming by the burning of additional fossil fuels.So no I can't get worked up over the possibility Frank's weapons might be helping Wilson Fisk or Madame Hydra. And after his vendetta that has lasted all these years,is Frank a sociopath? Could be .But he's still shown to have a code of ethics in not allowing innocents be hurt.Its been shown many times him taking a bullet or letting himself be harmed or captured to prevent an innocent's harm.Does a sociopath operate in that fashion?I don't know Foxley-you're comments a riot.Quote"To my mind, this lack of a rogues gallery is a strike against the Punisher. Why would the writers bother coming up with interesting villains if they're just going to be dead at the end of the issue (or panel 2 or whatever). So you get an never-ending run of interchangeable mobsters, muggers, drug dealers, whatever."Unquote.Seriously.You make this sound like an innocent writer creates a villian and at the last moment the big bad editor says YOU MUST KILL HIM. If you're more comfortable having The Joker return every 6 months or Lex Luthor fighting Superman for 70 years there are plenty of comics that will fill that requirement. I'll take The Punisher.It requires the writer to do a bit of work in coming up with new characters.I could even write the 215th return of The Penguin |
|
|
|
Post by foxley on May 21, 2014 4:56:56 GMT -5
Different strokes for different folks, I guess. To me, the rogues gallery is a large part of what makes a hero interesting. If watching Frank shoot Joe the drug dealer this month, and Bob the drug dealer next month floats the boat, more power to you. As for me, I'd rather see what new twists a writer can put on another joust between, say, Batman and the Riddler. And knowing that if I find new villain interesting, then there's a good chance I'll see them again.
So why doesn't badass Punisher just kill Jigsaw? Or the Kingpin or the Red Skull for that matter?
|
|
|
|
Post by Ish Kabbible on May 21, 2014 5:30:48 GMT -5
Different strokes for different folks, I guess. To me, the rogues gallery is a large part of what makes a hero interesting. If watching Frank shoot Joe the drug dealer this month, and Bob the drug dealer next month floats the boat, more power to you. As for me, I'd rather see what new twists a writer can put on another joust between, say, Batman and the Riddler. And knowing that if I find new villain interesting, then there's a good chance I'll see them again. So why doesn't badass Punisher just kill Jigsaw? Or the Kingpin or the Red Skull for that matter? The only power greater than the Punisher 's vengeance is the editor who prevents the Kingpin or Red Skull's death. But thats the thing.I don't like the Punisher in the marvel universe.Never did,the character doesn't work.The Jigsaw thing is the only villian out of hundreds that comes back,marvel universe style. (Well Ma Gnucci came back but she was missing her arms and legs). I prefer the Punisher in a setting without the super shnooks.And obviously you haven't read much if you think its Joe Dealer one month and Moe Dealer the next.What makes it work is you invest time and character build up in the protaginist.Make them worthy of being a villian.Most likely this will be their only appearance so go for broke,pull out all the stops.Make them 3 dimensional.Thats what Garth Ennis,Jason Aaron and the other ,better writers did and why the strip was able to last roughly 30 years Red Skull battle #476.This time his mind inhabits Forbush Man ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2014 5:54:37 GMT -5
So why doesn't badass Punisher just kill Jigsaw? Or the Kingpin or the Red Skull for that matter? In Aaron's fairly recent Punishermax...Punisher does kill Kingpin in their final confrontation and is also mowed down in the process. He's badass but not Rambo. Under MAX Aaron had the freedom to write a more realistic and hard-edged story that isn't seen in regular mainline Marvel Universe stories. Also unlike the previous Ennis MAX series, which focused mainly on Frank Castle's war against the mob, this series has Frank squaring off against MAX versions of popular Marvel villains. |
|
|
|
Post by fanboystranger on May 21, 2014 9:59:16 GMT -5
As I mentioned earler in the thread, I'm not the biggest Punisher fan, but I have to admit I get a perverse thrill out of the best of his stories because his view of the world and its social ills is so different from mine. Ultimately, any Punisher story is just cutting the Gordian Knot, the simplest solution to the complex social problems can create crime. Ennis' MAX run worked for me because the people he set Frank against were utterly irredeemable (for the most part), so that simplistic solution worked as a catharsis for everyday atrocity. Mike Baron, while not as extreme, got that, too-- his Punisher stories were mostly thoughtful and philosphically engaging as well as entertaining.
Setting aside that Frank is an outlaw and a murderer, I think Jack Bauer is a good comparison. Jack cuts through the bureaucratic appartatus (and ineptness) that hampers his effectiveness in order to get his job right. (Not this season as he's still on the run.) There's a certain release in characters that can cut through the bonds that hold society together in order to effect a solution. It actually helps hold those bonds together, people willing to live vicariously throught their fiction.
But I also don't think there's a lot of good Punisher stories because too many want to have their cake and eat it, too. Especially in the '90s, where Frank had gel bullets and the like to make him seem more heroic. |
|
