ROTTEN TOMATOES: Thomas Jane Bails on "Punisher 2"

Thomas Jane Bails on "Punisher 2"

by Scott Weinberg | May 16, 2007

AICN's Quint recently spent some time chatting with actor Thomas Jane on the set of Frank Darabont's "The Mist," so when he got an email from T.J. with some bad news...

He just had to share it with the rest of us: Looks like after a few years of waiting for "The Punisher 2" to get off the ground, Tommy J. has given up on the project. Here's a section of Mr. Jane's email to Mr. Q.: "I am, sadly – no, make that heartbrokenly --- just rip out the heart and stomp it into the pavement a couple of times – pulling out. Punisher fans are already fighting an uphill battle as it is. And I’ve always felt a responsibility to fight that fight for them and with them so that Frank Castle gets the treatment he deserves."

Guess this means that if Lionsgate decides to go forward with a sequel, they'll be doing it with a different actor. (Hopefully they'll go a little damn darker, too. I've seen both versions of "The Punisher" and they both seem too darn goofy.) Or maybe we'll just be spared another sequel entirely. Yeah, right.

But don't worry about Tom. He's got "The Mist" brewing, "The Mutant Chronicles" on the horizon, and the long-delayed "Killshot" arriving ... sometime. Plus he once beat up a great white shark.

Check out Jane's full "Bye Bye Punisher" email right here.

Related Items

Celeb:	Thomas Jane
	Frank Darabont
Movie:	Punisher: War Zone
	Killshot
	The Punisher

(1-17 of 17 posts) | Reply

the-russian writes:
on May 16 2007 04:19 AM

Wow... gay (no offense to anyone).

(Reply to this)

Filmshark writes:
on May 16 2007 04:24 AM

95% of why I love the first Punisher is because of Jane. No, make that 100%. The sequel was one of my most anticipated movies. I am heartbroken :-(

(Reply to this)

neil.L.butler writes:
on May 16 2007 04:43 AM

Vhat ze hall?! He was so good as the Punisher....:'[

(Reply to this)

Gimy writes:
on May 16 2007 05:09 AM

jason...stathom. never read the comics so i have no idea the jist of the comic character but jane lacked the intensity to BELIEVE he was revengeful. i'd rather see stathom do this role and kick the crap out of it. gerard butler, after seeing 300, sounds about right as well...

(Reply to this)

RandomVirus writes:
on May 16 2007 06:56 AM

In reply to this comment (#865587)
Ugh... then you should really [i]really[/i] read the comics before you start throwing out choices.

Not that I don't like Statham, but Jane was almost dead on with Garth Ennis' Punisher Max series.

That he's leaving is pretty much a death knell for the franchise, not that it did really well to begin with, but now there's like, zero hope for it.

(Reply to this)

KnowsHisStuff writes:
on May 16 2007 07:29 AM

I like the Gerard Butler idea to replace Jane if he actually doesn't do the sequel. However, the Punisher is always going to suck until hey get a worthy villain. The last 2 movies he just kills a whole lot of random gangsters. Hardly worthy of a movie storyline.

(Reply to this)

FILMCZY writes:
on May 16 2007 07:55 AM

Sorry. I think he made a smart choice. I thought "The Puisher" was terrible.

(Reply to this)

the-russian writes:
on May 16 2007 08:19 AM

In reply to this comment (#865589)
...
That's what Punisher does, he kills a whole lot of random gansters.

(Reply to this)

Gimy writes:
on May 16 2007 08:27 AM

i'm sorry but, are they casting for a comic...or a movie? oh right, MOVIE. everytime a COMIC movie comes out...you comic people complain. if you want it EXACTLY like the comics...make it yourself. stop complaining about every little thing. i saw the movie, so therefore i have just as much say in opinion as you bud. OBVIOUSLY he didn't do THAT good of a job because the film wasn't exactly a blockbuster now was it? i liked him in it, i think he's a good actor...but he didn't blow the audience away with his performance. making movies is about 1 thing nowadays, MONEY. if its a good movie, it'll mostly likely make $. it didn't. he didn't pull in any huge crowds, so therefore they did it WRONG by sticking to a "dead on" impression of the character as you say. books are made to be read, movies are made to be seen and heard. they have to be different or else there's no point on making both.

(Reply to this)

aconline writes:
on May 16 2007 08:49 AM

Tommy wasn't bad. Better than Dolph. As far as the villian problem, that is the main problem with The Punisher. He doesn't have the villians that other heroes do. On that note, he really isn't a hero. He should make a play at being in Spider-Man 4, just like he was in the comics. The Punisher needs a villian worth fighting. Scientology was a good one in the first film. Maybe they should make Isaac Hayes a gangster in the sequel, and the Punisher can defeat Scientology again.

(Reply to this)

lpbreeze writes:
on May 16 2007 11:45 AM

hhahahhahah oh wait who CARES

(Reply to this)

Shatter24 writes:
on May 16 2007 02:07 PM

[b]Jane's leaving means film won't get made[/b]
I mean, what's the point now. At least the sequel would have had some continuity. The first film was good, but poorly marketed. Jane's Punisher was quite good, and with a worthy adversary the sequel could have been great. He must be as frustrated as the rest of us, about waiting for Lionsgate to get its head out of its butt and make the sequel, already.

God knows they've made enough of those freakin' Saw films, they could spare a year and put some money into a Punisher sequel.

Freakin' jerky studio heads.

(Reply to this)

bribios writes:
on May 16 2007 08:18 PM

In reply to this comment (#865592)
They're casting for a COMIC BOOK MOVIE. If they don't try to base their casting somewhat around the comic, then why even bother with the comic book license? I agree with you that ultimately what it comes down to for movies is money, but c'mon guy. Jason Stathem? That's a horrible choice for the Punisher. I don't care whether you like him or not for other action roles, but the punisher doesn't fit him at all. Hell, by that logic you might as well cast Tom Hanks as She-Hulk, since he's a bankable star.

(Reply to this)

Boss Fan writes:
on May 16 2007 08:49 PM

In reply to this comment (#865592)
I was with you until you said this bit of completely misguided bullshit: "if its a good movie, it'll mostly likely make $. it didn't. he didn't pull in any huge crowds, so therefore they did it WRONG..." Um, terrible movies make money all the time while great flicks are completely ignored by people, I guess, like you who take a film's box office as a sign of its quality.

(Reply to this)

MadmanCody writes:
on May 18 2007 06:37 AM

In reply to this comment (#865595)
shatter, i'm assuming you have no idea how low budget the saw movies are in comparison to a marvel comic book adaptation, so i'll pretend you didn't make such a stupid comment.

(Reply to this)

PlanBFromOuterSpace writes:
on May 18 2007 10:54 AM

[b]What about Henry Rollins?[/b]
I remember thinking way back when, when they were tossing around the idea of the first film, that Henry Rollins would be good in the Frank Castle role. He's in good shape, a little older, and he can be funny without trying to sound like he's telling a joke. He's got great delivery and could really deliver the cold, darkly comic stuff that Castle's saying in the books all the time. Oh, and he's a pretty decent actor in the films he's been in and his voice is AWESOME for Castle's inner monologue, which is very important, as he usually talks more to himself than he does to others.

(Reply to this)

smitty112485 writes:
on May 25 2007 12:23 AM

In reply to this comment (#865584)
Great... now I KNOW the movie's gonna suck.

(Reply to this)

RottenTomatoes.com