Darkman (1990)

Sam Raimi, at a definite cross-roads in his career, takes on his first kind of 'major' project (err, bigger than the other films he made in the 80's) and by evidence here he was up to the challenge. But those who come from the Evil Dead films expecting a dark side crossed with some very sick, amazing gags and over-the-top jokes might wonder where the latter is at. It's a kind of realized vision of what was both portrayed on radio in the 40's (the Shadow, Darkman, similar as well as the side villains) as well as graphic novels of the 80's. It's violent, and in a Hollywood 'action' mode most of the time with big explosions, a fairly high body count, and suspense as a man seeks revenge when not completely whole. It also is the kind of pre-film, which may be dumb to say as 'pre' gets overused, but one can see the relation to comics like Spawn, V for Vendetta, and of course the future filmmaker of the solid Spiderman features. At times though he does really walk the line of doing something different with the revenge tale of having it over-done not work. He has the style knacked for it, but as a first time going at it here and there it does get a bit too much.

That being said, those who are coming to this film after having seen most of Raimi's other work get a convincingly B-story to go along with his wild techniques. Liam Neeson stars as a on-the-brink-of-something-big scientist who gets about as horribly close to death as possible after ruthless (rather ruthless in as much comic-book as 80's action-movie) gangsters do "a number" on him and his lab. Assumed dead, he puts his equipment back together, puts on masks of his enemies, and little by little gets back at them while trying to have a connection with his old love (Frances McDormand) connected to all of this as well. With this as the groundwork, and with the two main actors up for the roles- Neeson is very good here in a performance that's got him as tortured leading man ala 30's horror/murder mystery movie- the set pieces allow for Raimi to be creative in his own ways with the camera. I loved one scene where Neeson and McDormand are at the carnival, with the imagery hitting harsh (other freak), and then his frustration over a game. This is a scene emblematic of what Raimi is doing, and does more often than not, with his material.

Darkman is ambitious on that level of the visual, of trying to make a picture that in other hands would be very standard and possibly wretched in dramatic presentation, because it is both original and homage, typical in some ways and notable in others. These two sides may frustrate viewers; I'm inclined almost to say that this is even more 'cult' than Raimi's Evil Dead films. Moments of hilarity do come up sometimes, and it is with some relief when it does come along, though sometimes too the subtle black-comic approach doesn't hit. It's worth a watch though if you're a comic book fan or even just into thrillers that don't kid themselves too much. Up to par with the rest of the director's work? It's close enough, if not really great, but then in its sort of B-movie status, it doesn't need to be as a good time.

Fmovies: I liked this movie because it showed the consequences of being vengeful. Peyton Westlake was a scientist who experimented with artificial skin and hoped to perfect it to help burn victims. When he was mutilated and burned beyond recognition by Robert Durant. He turned his experiment into a weapon of revenge. He would disguise himself as his enemies and turn Durant's criminal organization against itself.

As he goes through this Westlake becomes Darkman. He no longer cares about helping humanity, but only about getting revenge. His soul loses everything that made him a man, and in the end he's a killing machine. He's just as bad as those who made him that in the first place.

But that's why I liked the movie. It doesn't glorify vengeance seeking, instead it shows the reality and consequences. Seeking revenge doesn't just hurt your enemy, it hurts you as well.

"Darkman" is one of those action films that succeeds because the characters remain the primary focus throughout. Scientist Liam Neeson has been disfigured in an explosion. However, he returns with the ability to produce 99-minute masks. Now he is going out and eliminating those who almost killed him. Frances McDormand is excellent as Neeson's love-interest and Larry Drake makes a great bad guy. The direction is solid and the screenplay is surprisingly smart. 4 stars out of 5.

Darkman fmovies. The parallels to Paul Verhoeven's RoboCop films, the original at least, are so prevalent that I like to think that they're deliberate homage. This would not be at all surprising coming from an equally over-the-top director like Sam Raimi, a cult God for the Evil Dead movies. Which leads me to wonder why one reviewer on the IMDb thought it would be cool to rent Darkman as a good date movie. So's you know, Darkman is NOT a date movie. Not in ANY WAY. It is, you might say, about as much a date movie as RoboCop is a date movie.

Before I watched Darkman yesterday, I hadn't seen it since I was about 12 years old, which was about 12 years ago, and the only thing that I remember from it are the bad guy cutting people's fingers off, the other bad guy getting stuck up through the manhole into traffic, and Darkman screaming 'JUUUUULIEEEEE!!!' Oh and I remember that my parents hated hated HATED it. In rewatching the movie, I was expecting to be confronted with an overly violent and gratuitously gory horror/action movie, but was surprised at how well made it really is. Then again, my mom is so scared of sex and violence that the only things she'll watch are Nightmare Before Christmas, Miracle on 34th Street and Finding Nemo.

It is now a little off-putting to see Liam Neeson in such a performance as he delivers in this movie, with so much screaming and moaning and face melting and close-ups of his face while watching a good friend shot in the head. Pretty rough, since he's now so well known as Oskar Schindler and Qui-Gon Jinn, both such serious and impressive characters that they're like philosophers.

So anyway, in Darkman he plays a doctor who is in the final stages of perfecting synthetic skin, which could either revolutionize cosmetic surgery or revolutionize special effects. Either way, it was a hell of a convenient thing to be working on for someone that was about to be dipped in toxic waste and come out of it much worse off than the Joker did, although not quite as bad off as Clarence from RoboCop. The problem is that he can't seem to get the skin to remain stable for more than 99 minutes, which is great for providing a time crisis for whenever he creates enough skin for himself to be able to go out in public.

Thankfully, Raimi does not spend too much time on the time limit of the skin that Peyton (Neeson) is able to create, focusing instead on such thrilling things as having Peyton disguise himself as other people in order to infiltrate the gang that attacked and disfigured him in the first place. It's a great scene when Peyton accepts a briefcase full of money as one of the gang members, while the real one is dead asleep, then the leader, Larry Drake as Durant in another great performance, comes to the room looking for the money. There's a whole series of things like that, one of my favorites being when he impersonates Durant himself. Let's just say that Durant ends up in jail for a crime that he didn't even have the fun of committing.

In a time when comic book movies are released almost constantly (at the time of Darkman's release as well as at the time of this writing), Raimi decides to invent his own character instead. The thing that I think the movie does especially well is that it doesn't all of a sudden turn a regular, albeit brilliant, doctor into a superhero, after all the villains on the street. Even Spiderman, probably the most normal of all superheroes, is turned from a regular guy ultimately into a superhero out to

For a Class-B type movie and feel to it, it's pretty good....better than I anticipated. I've seen it twice and enjoyed it more the second time. I had forgotten how stylish-looking it was and it was fun to see.

What I did remember were a couple of wild scenes, such as "Darkman" (Liam Neeson) being swung around in the sky on the end of a chain from a helicopter, and the big fire scene early on which turns Neeson's character into the masked hero.

The villains in the movie are over-the-top, leading with Larry Drake's character "Durant." There also is some outrageous Rambo action which stretches way past credibility, such as people shooting from five feet away and missing our hero!

Overall, not as good as the critics would have you believe, but still entertaining. At least it has two quality actors in Neeson and Frances McDormand. Drake went on to play the infamous "Dr. Giggles." If you liked this crazy film, you'll love that one.

I watched Darkman directly after 1999's The Boondock Saints so clearly, the latter was the better film. However, I had a lot of fun watching this one. It's a Superhero/Horror hybrid film with a lot going for it in the way of action and suspense. I don't think that many fans of either of those genres will be disappointed.

This is in no way Sam Raimi's best and how could it be when the man has directed such great films as The Evil series and Spider-Man. With that out of the way, Darkman has a decent story, great special effects, good acting from Liam Neeson, and some hilariously cheesy lines. Just don't pay too much for it.

At the end of the day, Darkman is in no way a masterpiece or a film that will go down in history but it is a popcorn eating good time. I challenge you to see what you think of this one.