Is The Punisher in "Spider-Man 2"? An Investigation

Описание: A persistent yet specious factoid holds that the Punisher (either Thomas Jane or his stunt double) can be seen in the finale of "Spider-Man 2". But is this really the case? I take a look and find – probably not!

______________________________________
Notes and comments:

0:00 INCONSISTENT DETAILS
I initially grew suspect because nobody could agree on the details - "Raimi wanted it", "Sony wanted it", "they were filming nearby and Jane wandered over", "contract disputes meant they couldn't credit him", "it was just his stunt double". You can see in the few examples I pulled that who/what/why are constantly in flux.
Also "the commentary" as a source is suspect - it's hard to verify if you don't have the movie handy, and the commentaries stretch on for hours. There were never any quotes offered which made me more suspicious.

0:40 COMMENTARIES
Avi Arad produced both "Spider-Man 2" and "The Punisher", even casting Jane himself, but makes no reference to the Punisher in his commentary.
As I mentioned, Raimi is only on one commentary and he barely speaks during the scene of Mary Jane running.
More than one commentary points out that the priest is played by producer Joe Caracciolo - if you're calling out a cameo, why not point out another one that happens less than a minute later? Also, all the notable cameos (Lee, friends and family, etc) are clearly in focus even if they are brief split-second appearances. The man in the park is never in focus.
The commentary also mentions that Raimi considered cutting or even not filming the park scene altogether, making it unlikely that a special cross-production cameo would be set up in such a scene.

A shortened version of this video that only covers the commentaries is available here:    • Is a "Punisher" cameo mentioned in the Spi...  

4:24 SCHEDULING
Although Jane's casting on April 3 leaves several weeks of overlap with SM2's Apr 12-May 13 New York shooting, I find it hard to believe that a movie beginning pre-production would cut their star (who was training for a physically demanding role) loose to appear in a blurry uncredited cameo on the other end of the eastern seaboard. A low-budgeted, tighly-scheduled movie like "The Punisher" would be unlikely to offer such a favor to a rival production.

5:29 STUNT DOUBLE
Though multiple sources list McComas as appearing in "The Punisher", only IMDB lists him as Jane's double so you may want to take that with a grain of salt. Note that nowhere is he credited for appearing in "Spider-Man 2".
To my eyes, he is obviously not the man in the park - even accounting for blurriness and McComas being older in the comparison images, the shape of his head and his facial features are noticeably different. If you want to do more comparisons, McComas can also be seen in Damien Chazelle’s “The Stunt Double” short film, or as a prison guard in the opening of "Men in Black 3".

6:36 THOMAS JANE
I purchased the "Wizard" issue in question to verify that the letter appears there and not elsewhere (e.g. in an April Fool's issue). The rest of the letters page includes answers from many actors and producers (Thomas Jane also responds to a question about "Punisher 2") so there is no reason to suspect that it's not legitimately the actor responding.

I realize that Jane's response can be a "smoking gun" for many. But his flippant, noncommittal tone that doesn't even convince the editor makes me doubt that he's being serious. As the editor says, you can visually compare the two men: the park guy has a squarer head, wider jaw, different nose, different profile, and doesn't seem to have the "trained with Navy SEALs for months" build that Jane displays in "The Punisher". When coupled with a total lack of evidence from anyone involved in "Spider-Man 2" I'm even more likely to think he was just kidding.

______________________________________
My theory as to why this caught on is what's known in editing as "eye trace". The shot just before has MJ running from the left to the right of the screen, so viewers are already looking to the right of the frame. Then a man pops in from the right of the frame, looking at MJ but also towards the camera - so people are more likely to notice this one guy. You can see the effect of this accidental emphasis in the letter to "Wizard" - he claims that "this [man] is the only person in the scene who takes special notice of her" even though it's quite apparent that several other extras are staring at MJ (one even stopping mid-stride to turn around and gawk). Since the movie was first available on VHS and DVD, the lower picture quality probably also added to the plausibility of this being Jane; on Blu-Ray and 4K the differences become more apparent.
______________________________________
Sources:
https://pastebin.com/2MNjpPZP

Music:
"Hitman" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/b...