| Error creating thumbnail: File missing Join our Discord! |
| If you have been locked out of your account you can request a password reset here. |
Talk:Punisher: War Zone: Difference between revisions
(→So? M4 or not?: new section) |
Excalibur01 (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 110: | Line 110: | ||
Reading the comments, I never found a streight answer. Everyone seems to call it an 'Ak47' when it may be a chinese copy. So, when the armourer says 'M4' I doubt he means it. It's definatly an HK416. Please change it. I beg of you. | Reading the comments, I never found a streight answer. Everyone seems to call it an 'Ak47' when it may be a chinese copy. So, when the armourer says 'M4' I doubt he means it. It's definatly an HK416. Please change it. I beg of you. | ||
:Tell me your evidence that it is an HK416. Unfortunately none of the screen caps on the page gives us the lower receiver. It could be a Colt M933, the shorter barrel version of the M4 with a flat top. So point out please how you've come to the conclusion that it's a 416. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] | |||
Revision as of 07:09, 26 April 2010
This is a quote from an interview with the military advisor of the film about how he outfitted Frank
"We used weapons based on need and back-story and nothing made up. All of the Punisher’s weapons currently exist and are being used in modern combat! The Punisher originated out of Vietnam, so his primary weapon in the film is an M-4 which he would feel the most comfortable with. To that I mounted a mini grenade launcher using thermo baric grenades for point detonations. I followed that up with the most powerful revolver on the planet, a Knight’s Armament/Smith&Wesson custom Model 500 .50 cal, in a breakaway leg holster as his back-up! We created two fully automatic Beretta 92f handguns for close quarter combat. In the opening of the film he uses ultra reliable H&K custom MP5’s in fully automatic that he carries in the small of his back, and for speed draws a H&K USP compact .45. I also had a custom mini 13” Bolo machete combat knife created that he carries on a leg holster for hand to hand. The result was modern weapons used in the modern time, but in full Punisher style!"
- Not a very good advisor, is he? The Smith & Wesson 500 is the most powerful production revolver, certainly not the most powerful on the planet. The .600 Nitro Revolver made by some guy that weighs about 12 pounds is the most powerful. Sounds like he's a little too excited about his decisions. Personally, this movie looks like it will suck, but I'll give it a chance. -GM
- The Pfeifer Zeliska .600 Nitro Express revolver is more powerful but it IS NOT a "production revolver" so sorry to break to you chief and your expertise.. but SW 500 "most powerful production revolver in the world today" so the Military Advisor is right.-D
- You are aware I'm the one who said it's athe most powerful production revolver right? He said it was the most powerful in the world, but it isn't. I said the Pfeifer Zeliska was, but it isn't a production gun. Read more carefully next time. - Gunmaster45
- The Pfeifer Zeliska .600 Nitro Express revolver is more powerful but it IS NOT a "production revolver" so sorry to break to you chief and your expertise.. but SW 500 "most powerful production revolver in the world today" so the Military Advisor is right.-D
- Actually, in the comics Frank Castle states he hates the M16 and M4 rifles. He also always carries a m1911 and a pump gun in his coat and has a M249 on the backseat of his Hummer.-S&Wshooter 22:31, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
- For me, I might not watch this movie really because Thomas Jane isn't in it and it looks like a bad generic action movie. I like how the first one showed how the Punisher really can do things we believe, but the moment I saw the trailer of the Punisher dropping from the ceiling, and spinning around with double MP5Ks...it makes it look like the action style is trying to be John Woo, but even that is over the top. The weapon of choices they give the Punisher movie, in my opinion, doesn't fit for how the Punisher should be. I understand the M4 with the grenade launcher and even the USP as the backup, but apparently, he carries all that in one action sequence. Seems a little too much stuff to carry, but hey, I'll give this movie a chance to JUST because I have to really see it to really critize it. -Ex
- Full auto Beretta Inoxs are very tactically stupid. A S&W 500 is not a back up gun, it's a primary. You don't carry an ankle gun that can down a bear. Personally, I thought the original Punisher comics sucked ass, too "comics" like. Have you ever read a seventies comic? They are terrible. Like a bad '50s safety video. Personally I liked the "Welcome Back, Frank" story which the 2004 film was based on. Thomas Jane was going for the "descent into madness" sort of look like DeNiro in Taxi Driver, which is an interesting idea (although the punisher should not be a physchopath, that's bad). Castle's attachment to 1911s was one of my favorite elements of the story. And my LEAST favorite part of the old comics was the costume. The new story made it a sweet T-shirt, this one brings out the lame ass tights. I just don't have much faith in it. - Gunmaster45
- Are they INOXs or 92FS? I tried to distinguish what I thought was right on the page, but why would they switch Beretta models like that?-UW
- I want to know who this military adviser for the film is and tell him that most of his suggestions for a modern day Punisher arsenal is very stupid. Except the M4 with the GL. The S&W 500 and auto Berettas dual wielding and dual wielding MP5ks while spinning from a chandelier is very stupid and he's watched too many John Woo movies and even John Woo never had his actors spin around a chandelier like that... Excalibur01 06:52, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
I followed a lot of the details about this movie for a while before it came out. I think the military advisor was mostly responsible for teaching the handling of the weapons. While it's definitely possible he advised some of these weapon choices, it's more likely director Lexi Alexander made the final calls. I can't say I agree with her vision, but I enjoyed the film for its action and cheesy performances. The 04 version was a serious film that was marred by a lot of stupid stuff and a lack of action. The 08 version was a campy attempt that didn't even try to be serious but had the brutality that the 04 movie lacked. It's sad that a film hasn't yet been made that's done the Punisher justice. I don't know how to post pictures, but put Punisher revolver into a search engine and it will bring up the sweet Knight's Armament custom piece that was made for the final fight, no matter how impractical it may be. A lot of stuff in War Zone was done simply for the sake of theatrics. -- ZG
- (I followed a lot of the details about this movie for a while before it came out. I think the military advisor was mostly responsible for teaching the handling of the weapons. While it's definitely possible he advised some of these weapon choices, it's more likely director Lexi Alexander made the final calls.)
- Well said, and not to burst anyone else's bubble but the ARMORER or Military Advisor doesn't make the final call on weapons ... EVER. It's the director. Period. I've had to bite my tongue several times (as the other armorers here can attest as well) when a Director picks a weapon that I would not have. But it's their decision to make. So stop blaming the advisors or armorers, when it's probably the director you need to yell at. Just a note! :) MoviePropMaster2008 07:04, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
- The Punisher '04 was plenty bloody and brutal, better constructed and better acted. Tom Jane's Frank Castle, quite frankly, would stomp mudholes right into the Jason Voorhees wannabe that Ray Stevenson either chose to portray or HAD to portray. And frankly, no amount of theatrics can act as an excuse for the absolute tripe that went down in this movie. Seemed like the man was holstering and drawing his pistols every other kill; I'm sorry, isn't he supposed to be former frickin' Special Forces? And for all of the whole "We're more faithful to the comics" crap, I'm not seeing it. I can't remember a single one of the MAX comics being as horrible as this movie ended up being. Total dreck. And I've got a few choice words for the military advisor on the movie, but I'm afraid that they're not suitable for even this little corner of the Internet. --Clutch 09:48, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
The theatrics, I think, were just another one of the films downfalls. I agree the 04 version was better acted. As for the construction of the films...eh, I've got too many thoughts to list. I'm glad you liked the 04 movie. The fact that both films have so many fans AND detractors just means there's so much territory still to cover, though I think the fans have been part of what tears these movies apart. I'm much more lenient on the film because I have no definitive view of the Punisher and I really have no particular need for material to come directly from the comics. I think we need to step away from the comics and focus on what makes a good movie, instead. Though I was just thinking earlier that War Zone was so goofy and flamboyant, if they were going to drop the Punisher into the Marvel Universe with the likes of Spiderman and Iron Man, this would pretty much be the Punisher I would expect them to use.
- ^Do we have comments from a film maker here? Please comment more. - Gunmaster45
They destroyed The Punisher
The advisor said that the guns are full punisher style! Bullshit! they ruined the whole thing like the dropping from the ceiling with to SMGs part. And the real punisher doesn't use extremely modern looking weapons and dress up like that! This movie might have lots of action and all that but the style of the punisher is gone. The 1911s are a trademark of Frank Castle, so to Lionsgate, bring Thomas Jane back or the next Punisher suffers!-GunnutHk
- Thomas Jane was completely onboard for the second Punisher movie, but when the producers took too long getting a script up and changing actors, he decided to drop out. I think this movie would have been better if Thomas Jane was in it. And speaking of the 1911, we do see in the movie the Punisher taking a 1911, disasemebling it and cleaning it, but never use it. Excalibur01 10:37, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- Agreed, Thomas Jane's take on Castle was far superior to Ray Stevenson's (no diss to Ray, though, as he's one of my favorite actors). And I also agree that the weapon selections (save for the M4A1, the SL8, and the MP5Ks) sucked. They should have given him 1911s instead of Beretta 92s or that 500 and put an M203 on the M4 instead of that AGX. Spartan198 17:20, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi everybody i was just wonering wher did he keep his usp compact?
the Punisher seems like a Vigilante slowly going down hill then a action hero rex095
Better than the Thomas Jane one there reason is Castle has no super powers but he has one that could be a super power his incredible pain tolerance he just doesn't care about pain he is a pure killing machine no regrets whatsoever and that's why this movie nailed it, Jane was a pussy with his t shirt and getting beaten all the time in this movie even though he got the shit kicked out of him by Jigsaws brother he didn't even flinch he didn't hesitate to kill micro cause that was what he had to do Punisher doesn't care about life if it can't be saved he wont try
- The Jane Punisher getting the shit kicked out of him by the Russian was straight out of the comics and very faithful to how it played on film. The fight with LBJ was frankly anemic, and boring. Also, if he doesn't care about a life that he knows can not be saved, then why the hell did he tell the ex-gangbanger who was missing limbs and had an axe in his chest not to die on him? That is a very un-Punisher thing to say.
- And that one shot in the 2004 film of Jane shooting a thug lying wounded on the ground without given him any notice or care, says a lot more about the character than killing 50 criminals in one scene.173.88.129.35
- My weigh in on the Russian fight is that I just wasn't a big fan of Castle getting beat up. I didn't like how it was done in the comic and the movie recreation was just so-so. If you've ever played the PS2 or Xbox Punisher game, that scenario plays out with Frank kicking the crap out of the Russian and tossing him out a window. I'd have liked that better. As for the injured ex-gangbanger, to me that showed a bit of character development from Frank, who had previously shown his distaste for the man, but after working with him had come to view him as an ally. This is something we'd probably never see in the comic, and I liked it. I did really like the shootout in the 04 Punisher, especially when he finished off the wounded guy, but I also felt we got the same type of brutal Punisher mindset when Stevenson threw McGinty onto an iron fence before jumping down on his neck. What I liked the most about the Dolph Lundgren and Ray Stevenson films is that they showed that the Punisher can viciously murder criminals and still be a GOOD GUY without dealing with all that anti-hero moral conundrum bullcrap. -- ZG
- Regarding the gangbanger thing, you may have liked but it was a completely out of character thing for him to say, even to an ally. They went for a cliched moment that was out of character.173.88.129.35
Also, scenes being constantly neonlighted got pretty annoying fast. I'm sure the idea sounds cool in paper, but is quite the opposite in practice. -AlkoTanko
Ok, tho i might not be the biggest military buff, i did a few years in the royal marines, but i do know comics and i know the punisher, bitch all you like about the stupid MP5 cieling deal , cus that was retarded, but this is garthe ennis's marvel max punisher, the punisher comics every tru punisher fan swears by. The 2004 tom jane job was based loosely on welcome back frank and punisher year one. Garth ennis wrote welcome back frank as a tester to get punisher made into a serious adult title and he self proclaimed hating the stupid bits in the comic such as the russian. Now you can say that tom janes version was any less tactially aware than stevensons, i mean he took a 40mm lancher into a nightclub and didnt even cover up his arms. Im not sayin i dont like the 2004 version, but it wasnt the punisher. Just angry op the movie, wrong actor, wrong location and a shity villain. So im gonna defend stevensons monosyallabic rough house, and dont forget kiddies, this is based on a comic book movie --Captain Snikt 03:44, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
OK, anyone who has read Punisher knows he loses a lot of fights, it creates dramatic tension. If he won hands down every fight it would get boring, there needs to be a challenge. That's why every one of the Ennis stories had an epic fight with someone of Frank's aptitude. Second, Frank rarely gives a shit when people die, especially gangbangers reformed or not. The only one in recent memory was O'Brian. Third, they screwed up every villain from the comic. Pitsy was supposed to be an old tough bastard with a "Fuck you you fuckin fuck!" attitude, in this he was more a tag-along fuck-tard. McGinty was a torture loving psycho out for money, not a meth addict free-runner looking for a fun time. Tiberiu Bulat was an irredeemable rapist war criminal, not a kindly old man who had rules who you could make a deal wit. Where should i start with Jigsaw? That being said Stevenson was a pretty good Castle, and Wayne Knight was a pretty good Micro. the movie around them was what sucked, the over the top Jigsaw, the ceiling shooting, and Nicky Cavella the undercover cop instead of the maniac from the comic ruined this film. It talked a good game in the locker room but was shaky when it was time to put on the cleats.
What they should've done was just adapt some Punisher: Max stories, seriously, those're awesome. In fact, wouldn't it be great if directors could just get their head around the fact that they could simply take the comic DIRECTLY into a movie? Of course, then you have their egos to deal with, and then all hell breaks loose... I noticed someone said above that Frank doesn't like the M16/M4. This is true, but he actually does use it, because he likes the M203. And speaking of firearms, would a suppressor on a .50 cal revolver even do anything? I mean, don't revolvers have that gap between the barrel and cylinder, making supporessors useless besides hiding muzzle flash? And another thing; he puts a scope onto the smaller 500, but doesn't put one onto the longer 500, which has a picattiny rail built into it just for scopes? Holy shit, that's just sad. Will there ever be a movie that has a bunch of firearms, but doesn't screw them all up? Huh...you know, imagine that, if some director asks for advice from a site like this to make sure he knows what the hell he's doing. Now that I think about it, why don't the armorers ever tell them about that stuff? Whatever...--Zblayde 02:36, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Mini Crossbow
In the beginning of the movie, the Punisher uses a very small fold-out crossbow to take down a guard at the docks. Is this even a real weapon?
- Wade Wilson
unknowns
[moved from main page] --AdAstra2009 06:03, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Mircrochip's gun racks
Right side, very top is a (very) shorty G3. Spartan198 22:20, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Guns in this pic?
- m1911 pistol
- mp5
- beretta 92 two tone( maybe a elite II)
- m4a1
- rare.22 type suppresed pistol
Unknowns
I see the MP5Ks with removed foregrips, Springfield XDs, M1911s and a full size MP5.-GunnutHk
Actually I think the one on the bottom right is a Smith & Wesson M&P.
- probaly a Charter Arms Snub
i don't think charter makes a hammerless.
- Micro/Mini Uzi? That looks like an Uzi stock
- It's a Smith & Wesson M76. You can see the stock and the hand grip. If your smart.
- Ruger Mk II?
that is a 44 or 357 automag-Doomsayer64
Revenge or Punishment?
Okay, the Punisher punishes people right? He began punishing them as a form of revenge, but still, why would they write "Vengeance has a new name" on the dvd cover? That's kind of inaccurate...does anyone agree? --FirearmFanatic 14:21, 9 April 2010 (UTC) I think they meant that vengeance has a new name which is Frank Castle
So? M4 or not?
Reading the comments, I never found a streight answer. Everyone seems to call it an 'Ak47' when it may be a chinese copy. So, when the armourer says 'M4' I doubt he means it. It's definatly an HK416. Please change it. I beg of you.
- Tell me your evidence that it is an HK416. Unfortunately none of the screen caps on the page gives us the lower receiver. It could be a Colt M933, the shorter barrel version of the M4 with a flat top. So point out please how you've come to the conclusion that it's a 416. Excalibur01