Parker Question

[Jim3k]

Just saw the trailer for Parker. The film will be released at the end of January. Parker is a character created by Donald Westlake writing as Richard Stark. There must be ten or twelve novels with Parker as the protagonist. Hardly any have ever been made into films, though one is a classic: Point Blank (1967), starring Lee Marvin. For the film, Parker was renamed Walker because Westlake wanted the entire series filmed if the character was Parker.

Anyway, having looked at Parker's IMDB squib, this looks like a Point Blank remake. Does anyone know if that assessment is accurate? The PR stuff doesn't seem to say so.

Point Blank is a film noire done in color. It's certainly worth renting the DVD, though it would be better on the big screen in order to get the full force of Marvin's vengeful attitude. Directed by Boorman, the female lead is a scrumptious Angie Dickinson. Not a great film, but if you like gritty crime stores, this is right up there with the best of the genre. (And, no...Walker/Parker is not an admirable sort of guy.)

If Parker is the remake, will it be as good? And if it's not the remake, the other Parker novels are just as gritty, so it might satisfy my curiosity jones no matter what. I do like the novels.

[bjornolf]

The premise on imdb sounds a lot like Mel Gibson's Payback. Are they related?

[Jim3k]

The premise on imdb sounds a lot like Mel Gibson's Payback. Are they related?

I never saw Payback, so looked it up on IMDB and learned that Payback is indeed a Westlake based film. Wow, did it sound the same!

So, "Heh!" Decided to go to the research authority--Wikipedia. Looked up Westlake's bio. It says that Payback (1999) is based on Westlake's The Hunter, which is the first Parker novel and--Heavens to Betsy!--is the same story as Point Blank. Apparently the book was released three times under different titles--the first as The Hunter, the second as Point Blank, and the third as Payback. So now it seems likely that Parker is indeed the same story, third version--probably with some Hollywood emending to ensure they are all a little different.

No one ever accused Westlake of being anything but a commercial author. He was very interested in turning his works into income. Art for art's sake? Of course not! But he was good at it.