Darkman

Of all the super-hero movies around, "Darkman" is my favourite. An original creation from Raimi, and not based on any comics, "Darkman" follows the story of Dr. Peyton Westlake, a scientist about to make a breakthrough in synthetic skin. Peyton's girlfriend, Julie Hastings is a hot-shot lawyer who gets on the wrong side of Robert G. Durant. Durant and his henchmen destroy Peyton's lab, and leave him for dead. Horribly burned and scarred beyond recognition, Peyton uses his uncompleted and synthetic skin to get revenge on those who wronged him - he becomes Darkman.

Darkman has no real super-powers - apart from some increased strength and his inability to feel pain - he uses the synthetic skin to assume the alternate identities, and fights his battles that way. Darkman is not a real super-hero. He makes no pledge to rid the world of evil-doers. He is just out for revenge, and every time Darkman acts, Darkman's dark-side claims just a little bit more of Peyton.

Others have mentioned the parallels to 'Robocop'. I'd like to mention the parallels to Sam Raimi's recent efforts with 'Spider-Man' - the two are very similar style-wise, but Peter Parker/Spider-Man is generally pretty happy and cheerful, where as Darkman finds sadistic pleasure in the way he toys with his enemies before finishing them off. 'Spider-Man' is family-friendly, 'Darkman' is not the sort of movie you would want to show to parents or younger-siblings.

'Darkman' is original, and yet another under-rated classic from Sam Raimi. Check it out if you like Sam Raimi, but avoid if you enjoy the family-friendly nature of 'Spider-Man'. Definitely my favourite super-hero movie, and nearly up there with Tim Burton's 'Batman' and 'Batman Returns', the best super-hero movies ever.

7/10

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

Sam Raimi's "Darkman" is a highly entertaining and energetic combination of science fiction,action and horror!The performances are good,especially Liam Neeson is really believable as a disfigured doctor Peyton Westlake/Darkman.It's nice to see also an underrated Larry Drake("Dr Giggles")as a main villain.There are some huge gaps in logic,but I don't care.The score by Danny Elfman is fantastic and there are some nice visual effects!So if you have enough time to waste-check it out.7 out of 10.

This movie might have joined the ranks of the utterly forgettable Z-movies of the genre had it not been for excellent direction, superb characterization, and outstanding acting on the part of Liam Neeson, who played Peyton Westlake/Darkman, and Larry Drake, who played his enemy, the arch-villain, Durant. The movie presents the destruction of a man by a psychopathic monster for utterly trivial reasons -- and makes it clear that however horrifying the physical damage perpetrated on Peyton Westlake by Durant's minions might be, the effect on his soul and spirit is far worse. At the same time, it showed that in spite of what happened to him, Westlake/Darkman was able to rise above it at least enough to choose the life of a giver of justice rather than one of evil, as the physically unscarred drug-lord Durant & Co., the _real_ monsters in this film, had. This film does _not_ glamorize psychopathic, criminal violence in any way, but rather shows it for what it really is: repellant, ugly, and contemptible, destroying life and everything that supports it without a qualm for no better reason than cheap thrills or a very minor profit. This is _not_ a typical Hollywood film, nor just a cheap garage-flick monster movie special. It shows with graphic realism exactly what is left when conscience, civilization, and the rest of the more delicate mechanisms that constitute our humanity are stripped away: pure beastliness, without glamour and without redemption of any sort. -- And it shows, as well, that even when everything is taken from a man, he can rise above it, choose to remain a man, however damaged, rather than sinking down to the level of the beast.