Customer Reviews

The Punisher (Widescreen) (1989)

5 star:		(14)
4 star:		(26)
3 star:		(18)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(16)

 

 

i found this version of The Punisher much different than the 2004 version.i think it is darker and probably more faithful to the comic book.the pacing is very deliberate,which creates more atmosphere.there are some very good fight scenes in the movie.to me,the biggest difference is the villain which is much more deadly and a worthy adversary for The Punisher.in this version,Dolph Lundgren plays the role and i think he is much more imposing,with better physical presence.of course he's bigger,so that helps.he is very suitable for the role in my mind.overall,this is a pretty good movie,more subdued than the 2004 version.there is some physical action,but very little of things blowing up,which i think work in this movies' favour.for me,The Punisher(1989) is a 3.5/5

Let's face it, before Blade (1998), X-Men (2000) and Spider-Man (2002), Marvel Comics really didn't have much luck in getting successful films made based on their characters. The reason? Because they would often sell the movie rights to anyone who had two coins to rub together, releasing cinematic flops like Dr. Strange (1978), Howard the Duck (1986), Captain America (1989), and even a Fantastic Four movie that was so bad it never saw the light of day, as it was too bad to even release on video. And then there was The Punisher (1989), a character introduced in the 70's within the pages of The Amazing Spider-Man, issue 129, circa February 1974, a former police detective, now vigilante, taking revenge on criminals, motivated by the death of his family. Most people I know who've seen the film have pretty distinctive feelings about it, ranging from dislike to severe hate, but I always thought it was pretty good, considering...

The film, directed by Mark Goldblatt, whose primary credits include editing films like The Howling (1981), The Terminator (1984), and True Lies (1994), stars Dolph Lundgren, Louis Gossett, Jr., and Jerome Krabbé. Yeah, I know what you're thinking...Dolph Lundgren? I think a number of people had instant reservations when hearing Dolph, certainly an interminable dweller of the B movie circuit, pre-judging the film unfairly. Lou Gossett, Jr. brings a little star power to the table, but he also is no stranger to B movie fans appearing in films like Jaws 3-D (1983), Firewalker (1986), and any of the four or so Iron Eagle films.

The film opens with a television news report, giving us some expository background with regards to a mafia type recently acquitted of the crime of killing detective Frank Castle (Lungren) and his family five years prior. The report also speaks of an elusive character named the Punisher, who has been busy killing members of the mafia over the last five years, racking up an impressive body count. Any connection? Probably...anyway, the mafia guy, returns home to celebrate, and guess who crashes the party? Killing and explosions ensue. Enter Detective Jake Berkowitz (Gossett). Seems Detective Berkowitz has been leading the investigation of the Punisher for the last five years, and believes the Punisher is actually Frank Castle, despite his superior's beliefs that Castle is dead, as the thought of a rogue cop going around killing people would be unpopular. With the recent death of this mafia boss, there's a void of real leadership in the organization, one filled with the return of Gianni Franco (Krabbé) from Europe, who intends to unite the remains of the various mob families whose ranks have been severely depleted by you know who...

Turns out the decimation of the mafia families hasn't gone unnoticed, as the Yakuza (Japanese mafia) has decided to move in and take a controlling interest in criminal activities within the city, a hostile takeover, to say the least. Sounds pretty to the Punisher, as if the criminals are killing themselves off, less work for him...until the Yakuza kidnaps children of the remaining mafia families in an effort to extort control and pressure them under the Yakuza's thumb. So Castle, feeling somewhat responsible as his five-year vendetta has left the families unable to protect even their own children, begins dealing with the Yakuza, which eventually leads to an unlikely alliance with Franco, who's son is one of the kidnapped children.

Guns, knives, throwing stars, explosions, it's all here (well, as far as the explosions, at one point the Punisher is firing a grenade launcher, and the explosions seem less than spectacular, more flashy than boom boomy). Not only that but there's a good amount of karate. Lundgren, a former karate champion himself, performs most all of his own stunts, and there is almost no choreography within the marital arts scenes, as real artists were used, and training in stunt techniques. Does the film stay true to the original character portrayed in the comics? For the most part...some minor changes, along with a few major ones (he never dons a shirt emblazoned with a white skull on it). I think one of the main reasons this film was ill received is because comic fans are a particular picky lot, as they spend a lot of time getting to know these characters, and tend to have high expectations when someone adapts one of their favorite characters to the silver screen. I read comics from the age of 9 until I was 23, so I have intimate knowledge, or at least I did, of many characters, and I thought this particular rendition of this character retained most of the important elements. The main element I didn't care for was his living in the sewers. I brought to mind teenage mutant ninja turtles, which is an altogether different film. I did think Lundgren face makeup was overdone. I understand why it was done the way it was, to present the visage of a skull when the light hit his face just right, and it succeeded, but other times he sort of looked like a drag queen. The most painful element of the film was the dialog. I rolled my eyes more than a few times as the delineation between Frank Castle and the Punisher was examined, unsuccessfully. Some of it was extremely corny, more so combined with Lundgren's deadpan delivery. The direction was pretty good in most areas, given that this was Goldblatt's second film, his first being the Joe Piscopo/Treat Williams cop flick Dead Heat (1988). Goldblatt has since returned to editing, which seems a much better fit for him. Gossett is fun to watch, but again, given the dialog, he is given some completely rotten lines, but he does seem to try to make the best of it, earning whatever he got for appearing in this film.

A nice wide screen anamorphic print here and good audio, with special features including production notes and a theatrical trailer.

Cookieman108

this dudes family gets wasted in front of him so he goes on a murderous rampage vs organized crime.the punisher is played by the russian dude from rocky 4.this ones more than the kids can handle.especialy the kidnapping parts.his enemy?the jap mob!the real deal is they could have done better but they didnt do bad!

The action in this movie is the best. The effects this movie uses for being from 1989 are awesome. And take this tip from someone who cares. DO NOT BUY A USED VIDEO FROM TSA VIDEO IF YOU VALUE YOUR MONEY.

this is an awesome dolph flick. the punisher punishes the guilty and the corpses pile up. having the punishers old partner involved is a good idea and the kidnapping of mobster's kids and the yazuka are good plot devices too. these all make for an interesting story. check it out.

Warning: this critique is not intended for clothes fetishists. If you have a "thing" for the Punisher's shirt, with or without the skull, this ain't for you.

The 2004 Punisher is an entertaining shoot-em-up. Like the 2004 movie, Dolph's 1989 flick is also lots of shoot-em-up fun. Ignore the complaints about the Punisher's shirt when you read reviews on here and you'll be fine. This version isn't as polished as a lot of today's movies, but its fun entertainment that you shouldn't think about too hard. There's a big guy in black, lots of action, and death. It's not rocket science.
Give this one a look and the 2004 Punisher too. It's all good.

At least this version had the sense to leave off the laughable "skull shirt" the destroys any sense of realism in the new version and makes it impossible to suspend disbelief and get into the movie.

Scriptwise, it's a little smarter than the dumbed down, "no plot just brainless, meaningless violence" comics that Marvel pust out, which makes it only slightly dumber than the typical B movie.

But as with anything superhero related, you're an idiot if you look for any kind of deeper meaning here.

This movie is great for what it is: an 80's Punisher movie. It's also the type of movie that seperates those who enjoy a great action movie from the more dogmatic and less fun. Take a look at the reviews on this site and you'll see what I mean. Action fans, who have read some Punsher comics and think it's a fun character, know an 80's action movie when they see one and can appreciate them for what they are: escapism. They enjoyed this movie.
You also have the flip side of the coin. These folks can't get past the Punisher's shirt, his having the wrong number or gender of kids, the wrong mobsters being the baddies, the wrong form of execution of his family (it's a car bomb in the movie), the wrong location of the execution (it's not in Central Park)...etc. and this is not a happy bunch. They aren't happy when Dolph is super-heroic and they aren't happy when he's more human and his shirt really bugs them.
Do any of these changes really get in the way of the movie being a great 80's action film. No. It's still a decent and entertaining movie, but they would disagree. "The Punisher has on the wrong shirt" is a major complaint, and "the new movie will be better" they hoped in vain. "Better" meant more true in every little detail to the book with no changes.
Now the '04 Punisher has arrived. Other than the shirt is the 2004 Punisher free of many of the "problems" that geekdom has with the '89 movie? Not really. Once again it seems the bad guy isn't exactly right in the new one, the Punisher's family isn't exactly right, and they are killed in Puerto Rico and not in Central Park...etc. and once again there will be folks that won't be happy. They are very "by the book" and the word escapism apparently is not in their book.
Is the 2004 Punisher a good movie? I think so. So is the 1989 Punisher. It is what it is: a great 80's action movie. Take it for what it is and have fun. Check out the '04 Punisher for additional fun BUT, if you demand that every single aspect of a movie be like the comic version then don't watch any movie with the title "The Punisher". Ever. The '89 version, as with the '04 version, are strictly for those of us who enjoy a little escapism in the form of a good action/adventure movie. The Punisher '89, like the '04 version, is a good action flick.

Not to be confused with its 2004 remake, Mark Goldblatt's dark and unapologeticly violent comic book adaption from 1989 takes onscreen brutality to a new level. Dolph Lundgren is a former cop, believed to have been murdered in a car bomb that ended his family's life, who exacts revenge on the crime syndicate that he believes is responsible. Louis Gossett, Jr. is a cop who believes that all of these murders are in fact being caused by his former partner. With the mafia bosses suffering such massive losses, the head of the Yakuza enters and violent assurts herself into the acquation, kidnapping the bosses' children and holding them for ransom. With nowhere else to turn, the bosses call on "The Punisher" for an unlikely alliance.

"Punisher" is excessively violent. There are torture scenes, bloody shoot-outs, and more than a few people getting kicked in the face with blade-tipped shoes. The story, courtesy of Boaz Yakin, does have a sense of humor though. Most of the film's big laughs come from Barry Otto's drunken out-of-work theatre peformer who doubles as Lundgren's unwilling sidekick. Lundgren himself gets to drop a few funny one-liners as well while Louis Gossett and Jeroen Krabbe give performances that prove worthy of their resume. The relatively-unknown Kim Myori is also great as the super evil Yakuza boss.

As far as full-length comic book movies go, this one is not quite on the level of Tim Burton's "Batman" or Sam Raimi's "Spider Man" but there have certainly been a lot worse.

Marvel's Punisher has long been one of my favorite comic book characters. Not really a superhero, the Punisher is a flesh & blood mortal possessed by an insatiable hunger for vengeance on the underworld which murdered his wife and children. Very much an anti-hero, the Punisher is the ultimate vigilante who brings retribution to those whom the law either will not or cannot, neither asking nor giving any quarter in his unending one-man war on criminals everywhere.

New World International's 1989 adaptation of the benighted comic book crusader is better than its usually given credit for. Starring the oft-maligned Dolph Lundgren, "The Punisher" largely succeeds in bringing the comic to life. Lundgren's raw, atheletic presence dominates the picture, and if Lundgren doesn't bring home any Oscars he proves once again to be a highly capable action hero, which is more than most people can lay claim to. While the script isn't exactly philosophical, Lundgren infuses his character with menace, nobility, and a certain tragic weariness that comes off just right, while the two brief opening and closing inner dialogues between the Punisher and God add great emotional depth to the story.

Lou Gossett Jr. is his usual excellent self as the cop out to crack the Punisher's case and also the vigilante's best friend, and Nancy Everhard is pleasant (if unnecessary) as Gossett's partner while Jerden Krabbe is tough and believable as a mobster that the Punisher must form an uneasy alliance with. A down-on-his-luck actor who becomes the Punisher's street informant, a ruthless female Yakuza and her high-kicking mute daughter round out the impressive cast of characters.

The sets are mean and dark, the action hard-hitting and well-staged, and the overall atmosphere gritty and exciting. Unlike some action flix, this one doesn't waste any time getting revved up, either. The body count starts almost as soon as the opening credits are over. Director Mark Goldblatt sets up one unflinching action shot after the other like ducks in a shooting gallery. The score is excellent, and fits both character and story perfectly.

Having said all that, there are some significant flaws. The plot itself is quite good (the Punisher's war on crime is interrupted by an invasion of the local mob by they Yakuza, who kidnap all the mobsters' children forcing the Punisher to become a rescuer of the innocent instead of an avenger of the guilty). However, the script has a lot of holes and the dialogue is sometimes silly. Moreover, like most modern comic book adaptations, the dialogue is often vulgar--ironic considering most of the Punisher's fans were and are probably quite young. But that says more about our culture and where it's at than it does this partular movie, and in any event it's a lot less raunchy or bloody than the likes of "Blade" (another comic book movie). I doubt that many modern teenagers would be even remotely offended. Further, one frequently gets the feeling more than one important scene ended up on the cutting room floor. I bet there is some potentially restored footage that might flesh things out a bit. Ultimately this is a low-budget movie with all the inevitable weaknesses--more money would have created more spectacular action and bigger thrills.

But if this is a B-movie it's still a good one. Now of course a big-budget Punisher is on the way and I'm looking forward to it. Hopefully it will be even bigger and better than this version, but right now that still remains to be seen. Regardless, if you were ever a fan of the Punisher comic book or just like a solid action flick, you could do a whole lot worse than this one.