MovieChat Forums > Darkman (1990) Discussion > Still holds up 18 years later

Still holds up 18 years later

posted 16 years ago by stonecoldmark
33 replies | jump to latest

I haven't seen this film since it was in the theatres. "Darkman" still hold up to me. In many ways I liked it more than the overly cg'd superhero films of today.

Darkman came out in 1990, before computer effects really became used a whole lot. There are some very brief scenes that used computer effects, but it was mostly for the skin creation scenes.

"Darkman" is a great comic-book style movie, at a time when Hollywood still wasn't getting it right. Sam Rami appears to have created his own comic style film, and it plays like some of the classic horror films by universal, most notably The Mummy" I also sense the invisible man was greatly paid homage to.

Darkman holds up 18 years later, it's silly in parts, but I think that's why I like it. The make-up is cool and of course Danny Elfman hits the soundtrack out of the park. This is a film that I wish the studio would treat to a special edition, especially with Rami's fame now that he's forever linked with Spider-Man.

For those would have not seen it in a long time, I saw go back and have some fun, if you have never seen it, and like what is going on with the comic book movies from the past 8-10 years, this would be a good one to watch. Even if it's just to see what a movie looks like when digital effects are not the focus.

[–] Kareiyasu 14 years ago

Just because you say it holds up, doesn't mean it holds up by today's standards. It could just means OP, that you accept bad story, bad acting, and a subpar cast. Which is fine, it just isn't on the highest part of the totem. You have to understand that this and many like this movie came right after giants like Batman and Superman. To me that means that the movie has to try and compete for attention, and it has to take itself seriously.

The truth is that Sam Raimi has always been a cult director. He never directed anything serious, even Spiderman had Parker dancing around like an idiot with the symbiote suit. He doesn't take his films seriously, and while this might be seen as "good" for the few that keep it cult, it says nothing for the movie by itself.

If we are to compare, this movie does not hold up. The story is bland, the characters are one dimensional, and the only saving grace is Liam Neeson, which doesn't say much since he's running around over acting in nearly every other scene. Darkman might hold up compared to other Raimi cult films, but when held side to side with giants like Ironman, Batman Begins, The Ring, etc, its just another B movie.

"One gay beer for my friend, because he's gay, and one normal beer for me, because I'm normal."

[–] brendanfoy 13 years ago

Oh give me a break, I remember when the movie came out and it did in fact stand out from the others. Darkman was praised by most critics and it performed well at the box office given its budget and limited marketing. You just have something against Raimi's style and wouldn't have been a fan back then, let alone today.

There is NOTHING deep about Ironman compared to Darkman, it just has a fresh coat of polish due to it being newer. Raimi set out to make a pulp comic style movie and he succeeded, especially when you take into account this was his first Hollywood Studio film. Disney pumped $100 million into Dick Tracy the same year and Darkman is comparable in quality and is just more fun to watch.

The Spiderman movie you referenced was the third one, easily the weakest of the three and not what Raimi originally had in mind. Sony forced Venom into the film hoping for a new Venom spinoff franchise which lead to script re-write, it was a mess. The first movie was a great Spiderman film and the second is one of the best Super Hero films ever made; The Dark Knight is the best with Superman and Spiderman 2 tied for second in my eyes. Major cheap shot on your part to slam Raimi for the third film when he made two excellent movies prior that rejuvenated the superhero genre. So don't give me any of that "Raimi doesn't take his films seriously" nonsense, especially when Ironman is full of typical Favreau and Downey Jr. humor. I love Ironman, but you just have a preference for one movie's humor over the other, neither is more serious than the other and Spiderman 2 is a superior sequel in every way to Ironman 2.

Oh, and A Simple Plan is one of the most depressing and unnerving films I have ever seen. I felt physically ill after watching it, cynical of all humanity. That was the intended effect, a fantastic and very serious film by Sam Raimi.

Simply put, if you don't like the personality or tone of Darkman today, then you wouldn't have liked it back in 1990 either. You also wouldn't have liked Robocop or Dick Tracey, 2 more good movies (with much higher budgets) with a quirky sense of humor. There is nothing "cult" about the first two Spiderman movies which are wildly popular and both are Raimi flicks.

What are "today's standards" exactly? Ironman is good fun, but incredibly formulaic. The first 2 X-men were good, the next two sucked and so did that awful Wolverine movie. The two recent Punisher movies sucked. Daredevil sucked. Catwoman sucked. Elektra sucked. The Green Lantern sucks. Thor is by the books formulaic. Ghost Rider was mediocre. The Hulk movies are good but have had mixed reception, the same with The Watchmen. Superman Returns was god awful. The only thing Darkman has going against it when competing with today's movies is that it is old and the kiddies are biased against anything considered old (this includes Burton's Batman as it is too 80s and Donner's Superman as it is too 70s). Aside from Raimi's Spiderman movies and Christopher Nolan's Batman movies (The Dark Knight in particular), today's superhero movies are just as bland and one dimensional as Darkman.

[–] cloudslide 12 years ago

"Holding up" doesn't imply that a movie is as good or better than movies that are currently coming out. It only means that it's just as enjoyable to watch today as it was when it came out. Which is true.

Did you even like it when it came out? Because you would then be less qualified to comment on how well it holds up since you never liked it in the first place. I just watched it again for the first time in over a decade (my girlfriend's first time seeing it) and we had a good time. It IS a silly dark movie, but that's part of what makes it great.

Comparing it to Iron Man, Batman Begins, and The Ring is stupid because for one it's nothing like any of those in neither tone, nor theme (except MAYBE Batman, but the tones are completely different.)

Agreed it's a "B" movie, but that doesn't stop it from being great, or a joy to watch. They're not mutually exclusive.

...we got NUKES, knives... sharp sticks-

[–] vicky_lc2001-1 10 years ago

Came out right after Superman? Superman was from the 70s.

[–] Cobra2323 8 years ago

Oh shut up idiot. I watched it last night for like the 20th time and it was still very entertaining. You're just a mental midget. Moron.

[–] Koosh_King01 14 years ago

Chiming in to say I agree with you, and that I find it a little disheartening that your post praising the film has attracted so many blowhards who hate it. Yes, it's campy and everybody overacts, but that's just the kind of film Sam Raimi makes. He isn't Richard Donner or Tim Burton. He'd directed mostly cult movies, as has been pointed out, so he approached Darkman with this mindset, for better or worse. There even exist examples of him splurging; I read somewhere the helicopter scene was written in simply because they could afford to get them. The entire movie plays from beginning to end like a kid having fun with all the great new toys his parents gave him. "Wow, I get to play with helicopters?!" And I enjoy it all the way.

The movie's only real flaw for me (apart from Neeson's scenery-chewing) is that it is slow and short on action scenes, however, this is made up for by the helicopter chase and the fight on the building at the end. In fact, the relative lack of action up 'till then makes those sequences all the more welcome and thrusts the story into a whole new frantic level. The halfway-built skyscraper was a great setting for the final fight with Strack, and Raimi must've thought so, too, as he totally recycled it in Spider-Man 3, just with more "oomph" and better special effects.

But, to me, although it's a bit on the clunky side in terms of stunts and effects, Darkman's finale is infinitely superior to Spider-Man 3's. Kind of a shame that Darkman fistfighting the main villain and one random henchman is a more satisfying ending to me than Spider-Man fighting *two* main villains, one of whom is a giant freakin' sand monster. I guess Darkman's ending (and the movie as a whole) is a good example of "less is more" school of screenwriting, despite Raimi's aforementioned splurging with the helicopters.

If one were to say they don't make superhero movies like Darkman anymore they'd be right. Ever since the first X-Men, I think, superhero movies haven't been allowed to be "fun" anymore. They all now have to be serious and "mean" something. Which is why we have movies like Superman Returns, Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. Of those three, I could only really stomach Superman Returns. The Nolan Batman films just bore me to tears, though, in that same way Darkman does to many here.

Of course, superhero movies shouldn't be all comedy, either, which is what gave us crap like Batman & Robin. So, I think, superhero movies need to find that happy middle ground between deadly serious and goofy that the older ones like Darkman (and, yes, even Donner's Superman and Burton's Batman) found.

"I mean, really, how many times will you look under Jabba's manboobs?"

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] bigbadwolf666 14 years ago

They dont know what they are talking about. They are obviously from the teenybopper era. A Classic is always a Classic and this one is beyond that.

But don't change a hair for me
Not if you care for me

[–] the dancing freaks 13 years ago

So, I am rewatching this the same day I've rewatched Crank 2, and I've got to say, this is my favorite sort of film. Basically, it's nonstop montages with narrative. Like Crank 2, Shoot 'Em Up. and Torque, this film is so fast it's intoxicating. I remember when I saw it in theaters, my friend and I went back outside to wait for our bus in the snow, and he said, "Oh, God, we've got to return to reality?!" The young Liam Neeson-particularly in profile--is exactly like the young Clive Owen. So uber-cool!

[–] Rena_Mahone 12 years ago

Agreed, it's always very amusing and entertaining despite its age.

Boycott movies that involve real animal violence! (and their directors too)

[–] arkast 12 years ago

To be honest the only good part of the movie was its special effects.
The dialogue was bad the acting weird and exaggerated. Not a good mix of comedy-crime-superhero movie this time

[–] Mephisto1984 11 years ago

I watched this for the first time in well over 10 years last night, and I really enjoyed it! Someone said it was slow paced. I'm not sure what they were watching because I thought it was lightning fast!

I loved the cartoon bad guys and comic book styling of this film and I'm off to hunt down the sequels!

Death to Videodrome, long live the new flesh!

[–] Herreken 11 years ago

Agreed, Mephisto1984. I watched this movie a few years ago (I've seen it quite a few times and enjoyed it very much) and I don't think it's slow.

I think it holds up well if you don't try to take it too seriously. I'm not a fan of Raimi's stuff especially the Spider-Man movies but Darkman is one of my favorite movies.

DISPLAY thy breasts, my Julia!

[–] Chaosbender 11 years ago

watched the movie in the mid90s on german night TV... it was awesome. i was a teenager... and the movie blew me away. Watched it sometimes on TV again but happily, the movie is now available on BD in germany and its soooo awesome, as if 20 years didnt exist between my first watch and now =) feeling young again =)

I am a total fan of Raimis older camerawork, even in Xena you saw it (he was "only" the producer) :D

[–] tyrexden 11 years ago

I'd put this in the top 5 superhero movies ever made... probably at #2.

[–] vque 9 years ago

Yes it was great fun to see practical effects, mat paintings, models, with a bit of CGI, all combined to make a visually unique comic book movie. You could see what Raimi learned here brought into Spiderman.

Not sure what the issue is with this movie being so lowly considered in Raimi's portfolio.

Maybe audiences do not like dark hereo's with disfigured features.