The Punisher (2004)

I watched this on TV about three nights ago, and until I saw it on my list of films to review just now, I'd forgotten I'd seen it. So, totally forgettable, I guess. Points: 16 out of 100

300

I like comic books as much as the next guy who used to work in a comic-book store, and I have enjoyed some comic-book movies in my time. The movie 300 is based on a graphic novel (read: comic book for grown-ups) by the legendary Frank Miller (responsible for reviving the comic-book fortunes of Batman and Daredevil among others), which in turn was based on an old movie called 300 Spartans, which in turn was based on a 2,500-year-old battle between the Ancient Greeks and the Persians. So, we're talking historical re-enactment or re-telling.

First up, 300 is so full of close-ups that it was obviously designed with Blu-ray Disc in mind. And on that level the faux reality looks quite amazing.

But. And it's a big but.

The script is fucking appalling. Also, the acting is by and large very bad (none of the actors are good enough to single out by name here), and the direction (of the actors at least) would appear to be average. What is good, though -- indeed, very good -- is the fight choreography.

And that's about all.

And another thing: the CGI blood spatters were soooo ripped off of Takeshi Kitano's Zatoichi (2003)... Grr. And the CGI wolf was really bad.

I wasn't disappointed as such, because I expected nothing. This is not a patch on Sin City, also based on a Miller graphic novel. I'll give 300 52 points out of 100.

Constantine

Back in the day, when I was a comic-store worker, I used to read Hellblazer. It was one of very few DC titles that I read, being more of a Marvel and Dark Horse fan. So when I first heard that a film was being made based on Hellblazer, I was mildly interested.

Despite this interest, it has taken me from then to now to actually get around to watching the film, which came to be known as Constantine and stars Keanu Reeves as the grouchy, chain-smoking eponymous John C.

First up, let me start by saying it's a long time since I last read any of JC's adventures, but the film didn't seem much like I remember from the books. (That might be just me, though, and my poor and fading memory. Old age comes to us all.) As such, I felt like I spent a good chunk of the film trying to work out what was wrong with the film.

The truth is, as a film in its own right, there's not that much wrong with it, per se. But I don't know how much it would work for people who don't know the comics. And you gotta feel for the filmmakers: you tackle a fairly unknown comic-book character (it's not Spider-Man or The Hulk, y'know?) and you have years of source material, but you want to make a fast action movie that will appeal to non-readers, ideally without alienating long-term fans...

The story was okay. The effects were okay. I dunno what to tell you. It was okay overall.

The most interesting performance came from Tilda Swinton as Archangel Gabriel. She is a great actress and always good in androgynous roles. I really enjoyed watching her. Peter Stormare makes an appearance as the Devil himself, and he was fun in that hammy way that he is fun. (Having seen Ray Wise in Reaper, though, I can't help wondering why he hasn't played the Devil more often!) Keanu was Keanu: you know what you're gonna get, more or less. And Rachel Weisz (who shares my birthday) was good and watchable, as ever ("I'm a librarian!", anyone?). Oh yeah, Shia LaBeouf was in it too.

So, all in all, it was okay. But okay just don't cut it in my house, and ultimately I wished I could have back the time I spent watching it. I give Constantine 60 points out of 100.