Darkman

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 a comic book inspired romp, directed by Sam Raimi (of EVIL DEAD fame). The main character was created by Raimi (as well as 5-6 other screen writers) after the rights to make THE SHADOW fell through.

The film THE SHADOW was eventually made, not by Raimi, and will be dealt with at a later time. Anyway, they secured Liam Neeson (who, keep in mind, was easier to get coming off of supporting roles in KRULL and NEXT OF KIN) to play the lead role; he would later go on to acclaim in SCHINDLER'S LIST. Frances McDormand, Colin Friels, and Larry "DR GIGGLES" Drake round out the cast.

OK, you've got Dr. Peyton Westlake who is in the process of inventing artificial skin, some bad guys blow him up good, and through a dubious operation he now feels no pain at all. This last fact is important because he is horribly burned all over his body, a fact that he attempts to hide by wearing a very cinematic trench-coat and fedora. He takes to dispatching the said bad guys who ruined his life one by one, etc. He also tries to rekindle the flame of his lost love and perfect the fake skin, all against the backdrop of a quasi-mystery involving corporate greed.

Is DARKMAN a great film?: No. Is it extremely fun to watch?: It is.

With all the goofy happenings, implausible situations, mustache twirling bad guys and the melodramatic inner conflict within the main character, the film has a sense of humor and a sly self awareness. DARKMAN charges headlong through the thin material with a wonderful visual style and camp sensibility. The performances are good and there are several clever scenes (ex: the two Drakes in the revolving door), to keep you watching. It is a tongue-in-cheek precursor to what Raimi & Co. would do down the road in ARMY OF DARKNESS, and should be of interest to film buffs at least.

Quick Trivia: When Liam Neeson stumbles out of the alley near the beginning of the film, he is splashed with water. The person who threw the bucket of water, was none other than Danny Elfman (who composed the score for DARKMAN). He was there visiting the set that day, and Sam Raimi felt he should be more "hands on" in the production. 7/10

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.

At the time Darkman was an oddity. It was an R rated film in the superhero genre (dominated at the time by Batman) which was for kids/families. Along comes Sam Rami to make an "adult" superhero movie with horror overtones. Those of us who knew Rami was involved checked it out and at the time, I wanted it to have MORE horror and less superhero. At this point I can appreciate it for what it is and its a solid superhero movie that would fit much better today than it did at the time bc the adult audience for this genre exists today. Its a very ambitious movie for the time. Still a solid watch. The fx are adequate and the characters are top notch. The bad guys are hissable and the humor is amusing. The plot is clever and the violence and fx are solid. This is a movie worthy of rediscovery.

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.