by Jox on 28 Apr 2015, 15:33
The movie has been misunderstood and dismissed as "cheap" too easily, not only in terms of the comic book but in terms of everybody expecting a more spectacular "Hollywood" film, whereas Goldblatt set out to make a film noir with the exploitation tones of Mario Bava and even Dario Argento to some extent. The cinematographer Ian Baker is one of the best out there but certainly didn't lit it like a Hollywood film, hence people thinking it's cheap and ugly, whereas the contrast between the night exterior scenes and the red, bright and minimalist final showdown sequence shows his range.
Fact-wise, they got it wrong in saying that Marvel didn't authorize them to use the skull or that they didn't suppor the movie: actually even though at that time they didn't care as much as they would today but they were involved and supported the production of the film even though Marvel actually was bought a couple years prior by the production company, New World Pictures. Stan Lee himself (credited on the film) and Marvel editors Tom DeFalco and Carl Potts were all consulted. DeFalco even just recently told me how there was a meeting about the matter of the skull and he came up with a story point solution to explain and validate the Punisher wearing skull t-shirt: they all aplauded and approved but ultimately Robert Kamen and Mark Goldblatt still went against it when they shot it: at the time they really thought even though they were making a comic book film they better had to go in a more grounded direction, overall being more influenced by Mad Max (and Rambo as the action authority figure). It also shows that unlike BATMAN, the studio didn't know what they had on their hands (which they really didn't according to writer Boaz Yakin who's the one who pushed to launch the movie) and what they could so merchandising-wise with the skull... Godblatt now admits he regrets that decision.