ROTTEN TOMATOES: Lexi Alexander Talks Punisher: War Zone

Lexi Alexander Talks Punisher: War Zone

"It's all dark and cold."

by Jeff Giles | December 07, 2007

Dying for the inside scoop on the upcoming Punisher: War Zone? Today's your lucky day!

Director Lexi Alexander took a break from filming to talk with IGN Movies about the latest attempt to bring Marvel's preeminent urban vigilante successfully to the screen, answering questions about the storyline, her feelings about following up The Punisher, and -- perhaps most importantly -- just what kind of an R-rated flick Lionsgate is giving her room to create.

(The answer is "hard R." You can exhale now, Punisher fans.)

Referring to Punisher: War Zone as "a complete reboot," Alexander tells IGN that her version of Frank Castle is "a dirty brawler," and that the film will be set in a "surreal" version of New York City. Predicting a 70/30 split between gunfights and hand-to-hand combat, the director says:

The last Punisher movie really wasn't relevant to us -- like there's a lot of comparison to it, but none of us or any of the people on the team ever looked at it and said, "OK, how can we be different or better?" We just kind of made our own film, and the one thing I concentrated on was to really make it as close to the Marvel Max series as possible. I think we really achieved it in terms of the look as well as the tone. When I look at the dailies I'm getting, seriously I think I'm looking at a Max comic book in front of me because it's the same tone.

I get this question a lot and it really wasn't relevant. I think the feeling of it is going to be much darker and I think that one thing the comic fans will realize immediately is that the world we create feels like the comic book world in terms of the look as well. The reason that I've been sick all week is because I've been shooting in minus-degrees all night for eight weeks; I literally haven't seen daylight. I'm like a vampire [laughs]. So you can imagine how this movie's going to look. It's all dark and cold.

To read more about Punisher: War Zone -- including just how "freaky, dark and violent" Alexander intends to get -- click on the link below!

Source: IGN Movies

Related Items

Movie:	The Punisher
Celeb:	Lexi Alexander

(1-20 of 21 posts) | Reply

Shatter24 writes:
on Dec 07 2007 07:19 AM

It sounds promising, but I'm still not sure the series needed a re-boot. Couldn't this have just been the darker, slightly related sequel; rather than trying to re-create an origin story. I'm still going to go see it, mostly because I liked the Thomas Jane Punisher and hope this film improves on that (whether intentionally or not).

Hulk needed a re-boot but the Punisher did not.

(Reply to this)

xenogears writes:
on Dec 07 2007 07:51 AM

I loved the Dolph Lundgren Punisher (Yes I know all the hate saying that will bring) but I am definitely looking forward to this one. The Guilty will be Punished!

(Reply to this)

podge-15 writes:
on Dec 07 2007 08:26 AM

In reply to this comment (#1335152)
xenogears, I might regret saying this but I agree. Dolph Lundgren's Punisher was one of the first action movies I remember seeing as a kid so I'll always have a place in my heart for it. Hope this one sticks to the violent and gritty source material of the MAX series. Heres hoping its a good movie.

(Reply to this)

Phobiabuzz writes:
on Dec 07 2007 09:40 AM

Yep sounds good to me, That Green Street Hooligans she made was a pretty sick movie, she looks like shes staying true to the comic book too

(Reply to this)

TombstoneLawDog writes:
on Dec 07 2007 09:52 AM

I was a young teenager when Dolph's Punisher came out ('89) but I have to say the more recent version was, generally superior, mostly because of corny-as#, low-budget sets and props on the first one. Also, Dolph couldn't QUITE get rid of the accent, back then, more like "The guilty will be puneeshed."
Quite frankly, I'm just intrigued by the idea of a woman director on a movie that basically is about the violent extreme of testosterone-driven anger. Dunno what it means for the movie, but it's a --pardon the pun-- ballsy move for her to try.

I hope she still puts gratuitous or at least semi-nude hot chicks in it...

(Reply to this)

PlanBFromOuterSpace writes:
on Dec 07 2007 11:00 AM

The Dolph Lundgren version actually got me interested in the character way back in my early teens, and the Punisher has gone on to become my favorite comic book character. That said, the movie is by no means an honest to God GOOD movie, but I've got a real soft spot for it, and having also been a fan of a lot of those low-budget action flicks of the time, I definitely think it's one of the better ones. I liked Dolph in it a lot, and I think his version of the character was quite a bit better in that he did seem to really snap when he became the Punisher. While we don't see any of the "before" Frank Castle, Louis Gossett does a decent enough job of giving an idea off how far off the rails he's gone.

As far as production values and the general overall quality over the 2004 film goes, it was better, but I really didn't care for the story and the surprising lack of action. The tone of the movie was all over the place, as they were trying to squeeze a grim origin story in with some stuff that came much later that, in the books anyway, was much more humorous. The stuff with the wacky neighbors, the Wile E. Coyote fight with the Russian, and some of the goofier elements of the film really belonged somewhere else. The "Welcome Back, Frank" storyline came after a period where the Punisher had become incredibly stale, and one of the things that's so great about the story is that anyone can pick it up and enjoy it (if ridiculous violence and dark humor is your thing), because all you have to know going in is that the Punisher has been around forever, that anyone responsbile for the death of his family is long gone, and that he can kill someone in 4.2 million ways. Instead, in the 2004 film, it becomes 2 completely different movies, like he's gone through this horrible ordeal one day and then he's cracking one-liners and hanging out with his goofy neighbors the next. I DO like the level of planning that went into his getting his revenge, but the action setpieces (which were fine) were a little too few and far between.

I don't understand why this next one needs to be a re-boot at all. I think the Dolph Lundgren version nailed it in that the movie, in the opening 2 minutes, tells you that this guy's been out there for years doing his thing, that he doesn't seem like he's ever going to stop, and that he's believed to be Frank Castle. No mention of the 2004 film needs to be made, but it doesn't mean that they have to ignore it. They could go through the "years ago, they killed my family...", and so on and so forth, to bring us up to speed, but that's all that really needs to be there. His family getting killed was a plot device, nothing more really, and not part of a bigger ongoing story. They can tell you everything you need to know in the first 30 seconds. This isn't the Bourne Identity or anything where he keeps getting deeper and deeper into a bigger overall plot.

If the first film is so irrelevant to them, I don't think the filmmakers need to bother explaining away why things are different. Even if they do feel the need to do so, I'm sure I won't mind too terribly, as I just want to see a new and improved film already.

(Reply to this)

Hamboner writes:
on Dec 07 2007 11:35 AM

They don't need to reboot the Punisher, but it needs to seriously escalate from the last movie because the scope of that film was decisively small. I though it made for a great introduction to the character, and there were no doubts about his resolve or his toughness, but he needs to go out really step it up in the new film.

Tiers of the recent comic book films (IMO):

I) X2, Batman Begins, Spider-Man 2

II) X1, THE PUNISHER (esp. extended cut), Spider-Man 1

III - Infinity) The rest of the Marvel/DC crap.

**I haven't seen 300, so I'm not sure where it'd go.

(Reply to this)

podge-15 writes:
on Dec 07 2007 11:44 AM

Hamboner, I have only one criticism. 1989 Tim Burtons Batman. That has to be in tier I. Its the movie that re-invigorated the comic book movie world.

I haven't seen 300 either. for some reason I just never watched it.

(Reply to this)

Hamboner writes:
on Dec 07 2007 12:45 PM

podge-15, good call. I have nothing against 300, I just haven't any the effort to see it. It strikes me as equal parts impressive and absurd, which isn't usually an issue for me. I guess I am turned off by how it can be that absurd and take itself so seriously. I'll see it eventually though.

I was focusing on the recent barrage of comic films that began after X-Men and Spider-Man restarted the trend. I am not sure I would immediately put Burton's Batman in with the top films I mentioned, but it is of course at least as good as the Punisher and X1.

Going back into less recent history, Batman and Batman Returns, Superman II (and maybe I.. I think the first was a bit overrated), and TMNT II would go up in there somewhere. I know a lot of people probably lost any respect when I dropped TMNT in that sentence, but I'll stand by it as being the TMNT made the best action and dialogue. I watched it again recently and feel strongly enough to stand by it, even if it is a goofy film.

(Reply to this)

TombstoneLawDog writes:
on Dec 07 2007 12:52 PM

Kudos to Hamboner. I gotta say I agree with your list-- modifying it by adding the original Brandon Lee CROW('94) to the first tier. I submit that as one of the best comic adaptations ever and one of the best movies of the decade-- for a *reasonably* big budget, they created the 'Blade Runner' of the Goth set; dark tone, always raining, gruesome violence, heavy philosophy, charismatic antihero... and it was, of course, based upon the James O'Barr graphic novel(s).

(Reply to this)

ManofStee1 writes:
on Dec 07 2007 01:20 PM

The first film was pretty good, not on par with Batman Begins or even X-Men but it was entertain. The franchise doesn't need a reboot at all.

(Reply to this)

Hamboner writes:
on Dec 07 2007 01:21 PM

TombstoneLawDog, good call on that.

It is amazing how deeply that movie has permeated wider culture. People who never saw The Crow still know the image of him. The sequels were forgettable, but stylistically the first film was a huge landmark (the Dark antihero... think of it as a percurser to Blade and the Matrix). I would easily put it in the second group, but I am reluctant about the first because... well, I guess I don't have an articulate reason. The villains and plot all lagged a bit to me. But then again, I just vouched for Secret of the Ooze, so what do I know?

Seperate issue altogether... PlanBFromOuterSpace raises a good point. The whole goofy neighbors thing should have been removed from an origin story, and the Punisher's tone was disjointed. But we're in the same boat I believe... why reboot when they successfully told the origin and already severed all ties from the first movie?

I think they're using "reboot" as a marketing hot term, in order to create a hint of legitimacy to a sequel of a film that underperformed financially. I smell corporate thinking by the approach they have taken so far, nothing more.

(Reply to this)

damvbat writes:
on Dec 07 2007 02:18 PM

whatever dude batman rules punisher drools

(Reply to this)

hollyw00t writes:
on Dec 08 2007 02:38 PM

Thomas Jane "Punisher" was not good. I'm happy to see that something grittier and hopefully more violent will be coming out. Hopefully there won't be any scenes where he has to make a spaghetti dinner with the people that live in his building.

(Reply to this)

South Texas Terror writes:
on Dec 08 2007 03:28 PM

This franchise needs a total reboot. Jane's Punisher wasn't bad, but it wasn't good enough to have people mad he's not in the next movie. It lacked alot of everything and wasn't better than the 80's version even though it came years later. This needs a better villian, more painful kills and less accidental. I enjoyed what planbfromouterspace had to say, you can always tell when someone is into a character.

I like my Frank Castle more bare-knuckle brawler than gunner. How do you like your Punisher?

(Reply to this)

walkingdead09 writes:
on Dec 09 2007 06:06 AM

i think they need to cast clint howard as the new punisher.

(Reply to this)

baz050 writes:
on Dec 09 2007 08:11 AM

the only good thing that came from the 2004 punisher was thomas jane. i think you should keep him and change evrything else.

(Reply to this)

Raziel5000 writes:
on Dec 10 2007 04:03 AM

Sounds like they may actually nail the character this time. I was initially skeptical but I'm looking forward to it now, especially since its going to be so close to the MAX series. Its about time they showed the Punisher for what he is - rather than someone who messes about with fire hydrants and parking tickets. What the hell was that about?

And I'm not sure this is going to be a re-boot as such. I know the term is used but from the sounds of it their not going back and re-establishing his origins with this, its just going to be different.

(Reply to this)

John Z. Delorean writes:
on Jan 24 2008 06:27 AM

Punisher Definitely needs a re-boot. The Thomas Jane flick was so corny and cartoony. The bow and arrow wannabe rambo. The guitar strumming hitman straight out of a robert rodriguez flick and The Russian straight out of..well the WWE and the punisher chilling in an apartment building bonding with his neighbors, yeah right so anti-punisher. They should look at the Garth Ennis penned books as inspiration, I don't even know why marvel doesn't let they're talented writers get in the action of the films.

(Reply to this)

bigbrother writes:
on Jan 24 2008 07:49 AM

Don't forget V for Vendetta in the top tier. It's so good people forget it's a graphic novel/comic book movie, might also add in Superman's 1 & 2 in either tier 1 or 2 depending on how much you value a movies datedness.

(Reply to this)

RottenTomatoes.com