The key is to dehumanize him as much as possible. The Punisher works so well because he's almost more of a force of nature than a person. He is the very embodiment of vengeance. Don't make him some complicated semi-hero trying to do what he thinks is right. Make him a cold-blooded murderer who flat-out doesn't give a shit about right and wrong. Someone breaks the law, they die, that simple. He protects innocents not because he cares about them, but because he needs to do it to reinforce his belief that he's better than the people he hunts.
The problem is this makes for an unlikable protagonist. Which might be why the current Punisher series actually has different protagonists, with the Punisher himself serving more as an inciting force for the other characters to react to.
X-Men X-Pert, my blog where I talk about X-Men comics.True. I think the other reason why the last three Punisher films weren't that good was because they portrayed Frank as cliched Crusading Widower. The reason why Garth Ennis's take on the Punisher was so good was because he re-imagined Frank Castle as a war-addicted soldier who is using the deaths of his family as an excuse to continue his war. Using that angle of the Punisher is the first step towards making a decent Punisher film (it would also REALLY help if they got Garth Ennis himself on board as one of the writers)
The "force of nature" aspect is also good, but it risks turning Frank into a Boring Invincible Hero. One way around this would be pitting him up against a Chessmaster-type villain who is manipulating/taking advantage of Frank's Roaring Rampage of Revenge for his own ends via Xanatos Speed Chess (Barracuda
would be a good villain in this case). After all, The Villain Makes the Plot. Genre-wise, it should be an action film with some Dark Comedy and satire.
The Punisher is another one of those Spider-man characters I never thought should have gotten their own book. The guy's a product of the Clone Saga if you want a short summary. That said, the first Punisher movie really wasn't that bad. Okay, maybe if you're a Yakuza fan it was but otherwise I don't see what made it so horrible.
Modified Ura-nage, Torture RackA short and wildly inaccurate summary. He was a patsy of the Jackal, before anything was known about the Jackal, and before any clones had become involved.
X-Men X-Pert, my blog where I talk about X-Men comics.Yeah, you've seen it before, dad loses his family and goes and a murderous rampage, that could have been a decent comic but not a decent superhero comic. You've seen the argument before and it keeps getting made because it is true. This guy can't even beat Spider-man, we're supposed to believe he can take down the crime syndicates Spider-man can't. Why, because he shoots bullets Spider-man so easily dodges and wheres body armor that might as well be a wet towel against the first super being he encounters besides maybe Daredevil(who's more Charles Atlas than super.
It's telling Frank's much acclaimed Max series isn't in continuity, because he should have never been considered a major player in that continuity. At least Daredevil had legal power. Combine that with the revulsion that anything from the clone saga got a starring book and you can see why Frank spent so much time as a punchline. But I don't see what's wrong with the first movie at least. It's probably what the comic should have been(separated from the other Marvel silliness)
edited 5th May '12 9:28:11 AM by Cider
Modified Ura-nage, Torture RackThe Punisher takes down crime cartels by shooting them. Spider-Man webs them up and leaves them for the police, and they're probably back on the streets in a couple months. Punisher kills them. Much more final.
X-Men X-Pert, my blog where I talk about X-Men comics.
That's ridiculous. A story in the '70s is made bad because of something from the '90s? Nonsense. The original storyline is still cool.
It should also be noted that, as far as the writer was concerned, the story was settled. Peter, when he was close to death, thought of MJ instead of Gwen. That proved he was the original.
X-Men X-Pert, my blog where I talk about X-Men comics.Guys, can we please stay on topic here? We're talking about suggestions for a decent Punisher film, not Spider Man.
Specifically, anyone have any comments about Post 3?
It's not totally my cup of tea, but (basing this on the movie, haven't read the comics) Marv from Sin City and really, probably any of the protagonists, gives one good way to present the Punisher- someone who is really brutal in their Pay Evil unto Evil attitude but kind of gets away with it because the people they are harming are really evil, and it plays out in a Crosses the Line Twice manner. Come to think of it, the earlier "superhero" Darkman gives a good picture too.
Alternatively, the Punisher could work well as an antagonist to a hero or sympathetic villain, wherein the plot would involve them being hunted by the Punisher and trying to prove their innocence so he'll stop trying to kill them.
edited 6th May '12 3:01:38 AM by Jordan
HodorJust a couple of ideas, hear me out (then you can throw me out):
- Don't spend half the movie doing Frank's origin (AGAIN). Occasionally have flashback "bits", but use a majority of the film focused on Frank's crusade.
- Make sure you include the scene where he punches a polar bear in the face.
I suppose this'd be a bad thread to mention that I actually really liked the 2004 Punisher film, eh?
While I felt the 2004 movie was a faithful adaptation of that particular storyline...that scene was conspicuously absent. I really wish I could'a seen that moment on screen. At least we got the fight with the Russian.
edited 10th May '12 7:54:20 AM by DrFurball

The guy at this link makes a good point.
http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/754948/why_is_it_so_hard_to_make_a_good_punisher_movie.html
The Punisher is one of the most iconic Vigilante Man in comic history, anyone have any ideas for making a decent (if not great) Punisher film?