Marvel Movie Madness! Part 28: Daredevil

Even though I dislike any "cut" of this movie, I can vouch for the Director's Cut. It definitely improves the film.

Jul 11 - 04:03 PM

Matthew Younker

Really glad that the first post points out this fact. I also enjoyed the theatrical version when I was in my teens but now can clearly see it's flaws. The Director's Cut is a significant improvement and anyone who even remotely enjoyed Daredevil should check it out.

Jul 12 - 09:24 AM

zinc alloy

spot on...the director's cut version is a really decent film....

Jul 12 - 09:53 AM

Sean Strickland

I agree about the DIRECTOR'S CUT... Definitely a better film and the way it should've been presented in the cinema. I'm a fan of this film, and at 45% positive, I'd say nearly 1 out of every 2 critics finding the film decent is a sign that the film, though flawed, did have its good merits and worthwhile moments.

I agree that the multiple cliches in the film take away from the overall quality of the film and separate it from the truly better comic book adaptations. If only director Johnson had done a better job.. He was faithful to the material: check! But a good director can mix things up and avoid the repetitious traps of cliche-film-making...

I didn't like all the CGI which was unnecessary in many parts.. But overall, the effects were good. The costume was fit-for-purpose & with a great look imo..

The actors did a great job and I actually love Affleck as Daredevil/Matt. I think the reason why he seemed "bland" is that the character is, for all intents and purposes, at the end of his rope... Thus the reason his sense of right & wrong is blurred by his over the top vigilantism... Better storytelling & direction would've brought that out more obviously.

Jul 13 - 12:19 PM

xiao qmaku

welcometo: http://www.fullmalls.com
The website wholesale for many kinds of fashion shoes, like the nike,jordan,prada,****, also including the jeans,shirts,bags,hat and the decorations. All the products are free shipping, and the the price is competitive, and also can accept the paypal payment.,after the payment, can ship within short time.
free shippingcompetitive priceany size availableaccept the paypal
===== http://www.fullmalls.com =====

jordan shoes $32nike shox $32Christan Audigier bikini $23
Ed Hardy Bikini $23Smful short_t-shirt_woman $15ed hardy short_tank_woman $16Sandal $32christian loubo utin $80
Sunglass $15
COACH_Necklace $27handbag $33AF tank woman
$17puma slipper woman $30

===== http://www.fullmalls.com =====

===== http://www.fullmalls.com =====

===== http://www.fullmalls.com =====

===== http://www.fullmalls.com =====

===== http://www.fullmalls.com =====

Jul 15 - 06:36 AM

xiao qmahy

Jul 15 - 07:49 PM

Matthew Bertram

Dialing back the camp (or just bad directing, however you want to phrase it), and focusing on a grittier-noir mentality, DD could be a pretty badass film. It could be that perfect ground of more-adult grit that they've tried a few times with Punisher (but only succeeded in making it an oppressive violence). This was the unfortunate era where big-name actors all tried to find their Superhero ticket. Unlike a lot of failed film attempts *cough* Ghostrider *cough*, DD is one I wouldn't mind seeing Marvel take another crack at. Ben Foster for DD and Abbie Cornish for Elektra.

Jul 11 - 01:44 PM

Matanuki .

AGREED!!

Jul 12 - 05:10 AM

Joshua Dinsmore

I haven't seen this film before but I'm not so sure I will. Feel free to convince me otherwise if you think I'm missing out. I doubt it. :/

Jul 11 - 01:46 PM

DON'T see the theatrical, but I DO recommend you watch the Director's Cut. It won't change your view of life, and you might never own it or even watch it again - but it's worth seeing that version.

Jul 11 - 02:02 PM

Joshua Dinsmore

Thanks Noah. I will check out the director's cut. Hope I like it. :)

Jul 11 - 10:38 PM

Let me know what you thought of it.

Jul 11 - 11:44 PM

Josh Quarles

Well, that didn't take that much convincing.
;)

Jul 12 - 07:13 AM

RT Tim - I've found that when it comes to acting, Ben Affleck's appeal is pretty polarizing. If you love the guy, you tend to like most of his movies - especially the ones he carries.

RT Ryan - I was going to say the EXACT same thing about the playground fight scene, both the stupidity of it and how she didn't seem shocked a blind guy could throw down. It just isn't likely that kind of fight would EVER break out in that situation. Hell, of all of the women in the past who turned down my advances, I've only had ONE outright blackbelt-caliber judo fight in a daycare center!

RT Jeff- I agree that a noir approach would be the BEST take for the character. However, I don't have a lot of hope that the reboot won't be more of the same; in other words, attempting to appeal to the masses without a stylish take. Hell, even a Sin City-esque treatment would be fitting.

I wish the CGI for Daredevil matched the interesting effects they used to portray the way he "saw" things.

I will say, the theatrical was just meh for me - but it got a bad wrap because people had just been exposed to Spider-Man, so their expectation level going in was pretty high.

I would recommend - whether you liked this version or hated it - to check out the Director's Cut. It's incredibly different. Not only is a whole C plot added, but some things from the theatrical were removed.

The biggest change is in the Director's Cut, Daredevil and Elektra don't romantically bang. So when she dies (or does she?), it's more of the angst that he found someone he COULD have a connection with, only to have her taken away - leaving him alone again.

Also, Colin's "Bullseye" lines in the theatrical drove me nuts how lame they were - but in the Director's Cut, he's given more time to flesh out his character so it didn't feel like his ONLY line in the movie was that.

Jul 11 - 02:00 PM

Ryan Fujitani

Seems like we should give the Director's Cut a fair shake. I'd be curious to see how it changes the tone of the film.

Jul 11 - 02:08 PM

I'm not saying it's an amazing film or that it would go up to a first-tier Marvel movie, but the tone is completely different - for the better.

Jul 11 - 02:28 PM

King Crunk

Funny you mention a Sin City style Daredevil movie, since Frank Miller wrote Sin City as well as the stories that reinvented Daredevil.

Jul 11 - 02:25 PM

Jason B

I'm glad you posted this comment because I swear I was planning to post the same thing. I had no idea what I was getting when I purchased the Director's Cut of this film, but it really is a night and day difference from the theatrical cut which is borderline unwatchable. I recommend anyone that hasn't seen it and has a remote interest in the character check it out. Like Noah said, don't expect "The Dark Knight" in quality, but it is a very different and enjoyable film, I rank it much higher than most of the comic based movies.

Jul 11 - 02:57 PM

Michael Towle

I plan on looking for the directors cut of this movie. I didn't hate this movie but the beginning half was much better than the 2nd half.

Jul 11 - 03:50 PM

The Watcher

This movie was terrible. The only thing I like about it is Bullseye - Colin plays him with so much cheese that it's a joy to watch.

Jul 11 - 02:02 PM

Justin D.

To be honest, I don't hate this movie. Granted it was pretty bad, and there's a lot to pick apart, but for whatever reason I cannot bring myself to loath it like others do. Maybe it's because I didn't have any hopes for it walking in. From the moment I saw the trailer I knew it was going to be a stinker, so my expectations were already scraping the bottom. Did the final product raise them any after I finished watching it? Kind of. I mean I still thought it sucked but at least I got some mild entertainment out of it.

I thought casting Michael Clark Duncan as Kingpin was an interesting choice. We all know Kingpin is white in the comics but he's a character who didn't need to be any particular race (like a lot of Marvel characters) and Duncan did an adequate job considering the script he had to work with. I was never a fan of Colin Farrell but he was a good Bullseye. The character in the comics was insane so I didn't mind the way he was scripted in the movie. What else did I like? Um...Jennifer Garner was pretty in it, I guess.

Aside from those points though, this movie blew chunks. I am not a fan of any of the fight choreography, wire-fu or CG. The fight in the park was particularly stupid, but the winner of Lamest Movie Battle went to the final, rather ho hum battle between Daredevil and Kingpin. Ben Affleck gets a bad rap and I think he's a decent actor but this movie isn't going to be the one that convinces folks. I just couldn't buy him as Matt Murdock. Jennifer Garner I am not much of a fan of so I didn't expect much from her to begin with. The CG was simply atrocious. Did anyone else roll their eyes when those computer generated rats scurried across the screen at the beginning of the movie? Could they not afford real rats? Other, badder movies could at least afford real rats.

The main problem I had w/ the movie was how seriously it took itself. It was campy, cliched, and melodramatic all at the same time, while seemingly oblivious to any of it. It honestly carried itself as though moments like the fight in the park were genuinely interesting and exciting, not hokey and nonsensical. I was expecting a wink at the audience at least once (like when Elektra is training to Evanescence's Bring Me to Life), to show that Johnson knew what he was making but one never came. When it all ended I didn't feel angry, I felt pity, because someone thought they were making a good movie. It's shame because Daredevil is a cool character. It'd be nice to see a movie that does the character justice, along the lines of Batman Begins, because lord knows this wasn't it.

Jul 11 - 02:03 PM

The answer to your last paragraph's confusion comes from the director and the studio fighting on cut/tone/everything. It's similar to the problems with Green Lantern (studio chopping up director's project). Even in the special features of the Director's Cut, Kevin (from Marvel) deadpans and says that the theatrical version is the REAL version - that this was an alternate version, but not the official one. He was surprisingly blunt and purposeful with that statement.

Jul 11 - 02:08 PM

Ryan Nolan

It's so true that Mark Steven Johnson thought he was making a good movie as it was way too serious considering the thin plot and poor script. The villains were good and kept things interesting for me while Affleck wasn't bad, but Garner was a part of 2 of the worst scenes in comic book movie history; the Playground Fight and the Evenessence Training Montage. Watchable for me but I hope the David Slade version coming out in 2012/2013 is a huge improvement.

Jul 13 - 01:03 PM

Brian Barreto

It's not one of the worst movies I've ever seen, but its one of the worst superhero films that have ever been released, period. The story is generic, the acting is bland for the most part(i.e. Ben Affleck) and over-the-top on the other(i.e. Colin Ferrell), the editing and CGI were shoddy, and the pacing was very uneven. The Director's Cut was more pleasing, but its still a disappoiting film, considering the talent involved. If you haven't seen it, and you're slightly intrigued into watching it, I suggest you rent the Director's Cut. It's the best version of the film, even though that's not saying much.

Jul 11 - 02:04 PM

karl anderson

Totally agree mate....sometimes just because these Hollywood characters think they can make a film, doesnt mean they should....Complete and utter garbage...they all mailed this one in.....ugh

Jul 13 - 04:01 PM

King Crunk

I agree with Jeff; Daredevil is a really great character when in the right hands. Frank Miller and Brian Michael Bendis both delivered incredible runs with him, and I would much rather see a film adaptation more in line with those works.

Jul 11 - 02:21 PM

Not quite as bad as Fantastic Four, Ghost Rider, or Elektra, but Daredevil is definitely one of the worst Marvel movies.

Jul 11 - 02:43 PM

noel noel

This actually warrants a reboot.

Jul 11 - 02:44 PM

Markus Arbutina

The park fighting scene with Jennifer Gardner and Ben Affleck is one of the worst scenes in the history of film. Everybody in this movie was miscast.

Jul 11 - 03:13 PM

Everyone except Colin Farrell I think.

Jul 11 - 03:56 PM

I would have said just the opposite, of all the cheese Farrells Bullseye was really the only thing I couldn't stomach. Id take a thousand park fight scenes before id watch Farrells O face again everytime someone looked at him. Seriously watch the movie again and imagine he's got on vibrating undies it's the only way I can watch him in that role.

Jul 11 - 04:12 PM

Daniel Raimondi

yeah colin farrel was to campy in this

Jul 12 - 08:30 AM

Frisby 2007

This movie is CORNY. No other words can describe it but that one. It sucks ass, but it's way better than Ghost Rider for sure. And also, can I pleaese know why & how this movie has a higher Tmeter than The Punisher? (The one with Thomas Jane) And another question, why do some people positively review this movie better, & Ang Lee's Hulk get's trash talked? (Not that Hulk was a bad movie)

Jul 11 - 03:17 PM

Frisby 2007

And am I the only person who feels that Elektra (Jennifer Garner) was an unnecessary character in here?

Jul 11 - 03:27 PM

Brian Barreto

I thought Ghost Rider was worse than Daredevil, in my opinion. As for The Punisher with Thomas Jane, its actually one of my favorite superhero films from either Marvel or DC, so I've always been puzzled by its very low Tomatometer.

Jul 12 - 10:40 AM

J H

Daredevil and Bullseye are two of my favorite comic book characters of all-time, for various reasons. Bullseye is so underrated. A guy who can turn anything into a weapon, and has razorsharp aim. I remember in the comics he spat a tooth out of his mouth and killed a guy. A fucking tooth. He could take a paper airplane and murder you with it. He and Daredevil are almost like Marvel's Joker and Batman. Not only counterparts in abilities but both pairs also share complex histories and rivalries.

So needless to say the movie was disappointing. I don't find Ben Affleck as obnoxious as a lot of people seem to, but his role basically amounted to nothing. Everything was so damn generic. The only good thing about the movie was Colin Farrell as Bullseye. Sure a lot more could have been done with him, but I thought Farrell played him with finesse and humor. I think he killed an old lady on the plane who wouldn't shut up and then asked for more peanuts. Classic.

Anyway, so yeah, it was generic. Actually, it was just forgettable. Wasn't built up properly. For instance, the murder of Elektra was a big fucking deal in the comics. In the movie, I could care less because there seemed to be zero emotional depth at all. I'm pretty sure I laughed actually, but I can't remember, so I won't make shit up. You have maybe an hour and a half or so to build up the drama and tension. This movie built up to nothing. Wait, maybe that fight with Bullseye was pretty cool. And then the fight with Kingpin in the rain. Or was it the sprinklers? Honestly, I don't give a shit.

This is a film that actually could use a remake. Reboot. Whatever.

Jul 11 - 03:17 PM

I would agree with The Rapist (that's a hell of a name, bro.)--Reboot Daredevil AND SPEEDRACER.// my son and I LOVED Speedracer and the people in front of us totally were angry at Speedracer--literally huffing and puffing their disgust. Both Daredevil and speedracer can be really/incredibly Sleek-Noir films.

Jul 11 - 05:51 PM

Speaking of THE RAPIST as a screen-name (Nom De Plum, Pseudonym, handle); I know a chick who had been raped a lot of times by her step-father . . . MEAN AS A SNAKE she is . . . Rape must really tear-up a victim, huh. Maybe they can have a Superhero villain called The Rapist in a potential DAREDEVIL 2. looking at THE CHICK who was RAPED--and how mean and angry she could be (like a devil is inside of her), you can say that the worst villains in the world are indeed RAPISTS.

Jul 11 - 05:56 PM

I like Jeff's assessment:

Taken out of context, the idea of a blind lawyer who fights crime with the heightened sense perception he gained after being doused with radioactive chemicals is pretty ridiculous.

--

The Best Comic Book adaptions celebrate characters overcoming disabilities and/or having those disabilities turned into Super-Powers.

Maybe the secret to Super-Hero-comic-book appeal IS that the plot involves a character becoming disabled and then having his/or her remaining abilities enhanced.

--- having a blind attorney suddenly "enhanced" by radio-active chemicals makes the movie sound like a comedy: imagining the little-fella stumbling around a courtroom and suddenly transforming into a human Mighty-Mouse to save the day sounds hokey.

Figure Abraham Lincoln:

List of Lincoln's failures

1831 - Lost his job
1832 - Defeated in run for Illinois State Legislature
1833 - Failed in business
1834 - Elected to Illinois State Legislature (success)
1835 - Sweetheart died
1836 - Had nervous breakdown
1838 - Defeated in run for Illinois House Speaker
1843 - Defeated in run for nomination for U.S. Congress
1846 - Elected to Congress (success)
1848 - Lost re-nomination
1849 - Rejected for land officer position
1854 - Defeated in run for U.S. Senate
1856 - Defeated in run for nomination for Vice President
1858 - Again defeated in run for U.S. Senate
1860 - Elected President (success)

now, suppose Abraham Lincoln had GIVEN-UP when he lost his job, suffered a political defeat, and failed in business within 3 years of each other, Lincoln would have never been instrumental in passing the Emancipation Proclamation over THIRTY YEARS later.

HEROES OVERCOME FAILURE . . .

and comic book heroes do the same, they OVERCOME adversity (nay-sayers, scoffers, detractors) . . . .

BEYOND THE SPECIAL EFFECTS the essence of the comic-book adaptation is the sense that the central character can overcome hardship.

---

CONVERSELY . . . suppose Adolph Hitler had "given-up" when he was gassed with mustard gas during The Great War?

6 Million Human Lives would have been saved.

--

so, there can be Abraham Lincoln comic books and Adolph Hitler Comic books both dudes overcame obstacles and shaped history.

My position is some COMIC BOOK MOVIES "drown-out" the core aspects of heroism. . . they resort to fast-action special EFX and cliches to push a flawed, picaresque story off on (largely male) audiences.

comic book movies resort to "The Ridiculous" too fast and totally screw-up dramatization what it means to be a hero or even, who can be a hero.

--

1. the "deal" with Hitler and The mustard Gas is that Hitler almost lost his voice and Hitler's voice was his POWER.

2. And Abraham Lincoln was a "determined soul" and a rapid-succession of failures could have weakened his morale and stopped him from becoming president 3 decades after his failures.

3. DAREDEVIL the movie . . . seems to totally lose its way in portraying an unlikely candidate for a hero overcoming a disabling physical condition.

---my thoughts.

Jul 11 - 03:27 PM

I think I figured out your real identity, Gordo. You are a search engine - holding massive amounts of random-ass information without being able to understand its true meanings - that has become self-aware. Shit, I guess Skynet isn't that far from happening.

Jul 11 - 04:00 PM

UUURRRRRRRRRR Right. Yes/No; I'm just thinking about the ingredients of a hero---the core essentials of heroism . . . Aye already know a little bit about "stuff and things" and then I verify and add things to what I know./ and then annoy people.

Jul 11 - 05:47 PM

Kathryne C

you remind me of those bing commercials.
you know, the ones where someone says a word and everyone around them starts saying random shit related to it.

Jul 11 - 04:10 PM

joseph o'leary

He reminds me of (what we English people) call a numpty.

Jul 12 - 03:18 AM

The Holy Rainbow of Awesomness

British . . . Red-Coats./SEX PISTOLS!!!!!!!God save the Queen
The fascist regime,
They made you a moron
A potential H-bomb.

God save the Queen
She ain't no human being.
There is no future
In England's dreamland

Don't be told what you want
Don't be told what you need.
There's no future
There's no future
There's no future for you

God save the Queen
We mean it man
We love our queen
God saves

God save the Queen
'cos tourists are money
And our figurehead
Is not what she seems

Oh God save history
God save your mad parade
Oh Lord God have mercy
All crimes are paid.

When there's no future
How can there be sin
We're the flowers
In the dustbin
We're the poison
In your human machine
We're the future
You're future

God save the Queen
We mean it man
We love our queen
God saves

God save the Queen
We mean it man
There is no future
In England's dreamland

Jul 12 - 06:43 AM

Gordo you're not helping your case.

Jul 12 - 01:57 PM

I also still to this day want to know why a black man was cast as The Kingpin. There isn't one ounce of racism in my body, but I just don't get it. The Kingpin is white, so why in the hell wasn't a white person cast for the role??? Even though Michael Clarke Duncan played the part decently, you can't just go and completely change the race of a character. Imagine if they cast a white guy to play Blade! It just doesn't make sense. Just keep the character the same damn race that they are in the comics.

Jul 11 - 04:01 PM

Because he was about the only person in Hollywood at the time with the size and acting ability to make it work. Seriously name one guy you can think of who could do it sans fat suit.

Jul 11 - 04:15 PM

Billy Bob from Varsity Blues :-)

Jul 11 - 04:29 PM

Too young and not enough muscle :)

Jul 11 - 05:07 PM

rizzy h

Also, lost a LOT of villain potential by playing a parody of himself as Reggie Ray in "Not another teen movie"

Jul 13 - 08:14 PM

You both win!!

Jul 13 - 09:55 PM

Jeff Scott

you cast the best actor to play the character - black or white, so if there isn't a racist bone in your body , why does it trouble you?

Jul 11 - 06:18 PM

Uhhh, ok. So going by your logic it would be ok to cast Brad Pitt as Martin Luther King Jr. in a movie because he plays the part well? I think not.

Jul 11 - 06:51 PM

Jason B

There is a difference. Martin Luther King's race is obviously important because his whole life was about the promotion of race relations. The kingpin is a thug. A powerful, influential thug, but a thug none the less. His race has all of zero to do with the character. And anyone who doesn't understand the difference or has to open a dialogue with "Now I'm not racist but..." is most likely a closet bigot.

Jul 11 - 07:20 PM

You are missing his point - which ISN'T a racist one. Kingpin has been portrayed the same way for DECADES very specifically. And one of the details was he was white. I personally loved Michael in this role, and dug his performance - but I CAN see how a loyalist would be rubbed the wrong way. From HIS point of view, I would argue that it might be similar if Wolverine was sporting long, golden hair. In the comic world, the visualization of a character from book to screen can - if altered - frustrate fans of the source material. So yea, not a race thing.

Jul 11 - 08:36 PM

@Jason B: Hey jackass, maybe before you call me a "closet bigot" you should actually read my post and understand my point. The Kingpin is white in the comics, so he should be white in the movie. Changing his race is basically changing the character. I would have been just as pissed if it were the other way around and the Kingpin was black in the comics and they made him white in the movie. It has nothing to do with me disliking black people. I merely dislike that they completely changed the character's race. And I started by claiming I'm not racist because I didn't want to unintentionally offend anyone, which clearly didn't work...

Jul 11 - 09:32 PM

Jason B

Not only I have read comics since I was old enough to read, I own a comic shop as part of my income. I could not be more of comic book loyalist if Stan Lee was my uncle. I could not disagree with you more. I agree that yes, someone could have an issue with the change, I just don't find it valid. The pigmentation of the Kingpin's skin has all of zero to do with who that character is. If your eyes see this, and then that information travels to your brain and makes you not be able to enjoy that character, even if he's portrayed properly, I find that bordering on insanity. One man's opinion.

Jul 11 - 09:35 PM

joseph o'leary

Anyone who uses "one man's opinion" to close an argument is most likely frantically back-peddling, after pulling out the race card a little too quickly.

Jul 12 - 03:45 AM

Brad Hadfield

Hey Jason B, you might also want to put down the comic books and pick up a history book. To state MLK Jrs "whole life was about the promotion of race relations" is very ignorant. Sure, that's the part of his life a 30-second PSA during Black History Month may focus on, but he did much more than that.

Jul 12 - 06:31 AM

Mister Vile

Eh... This is a tough one. The best comic book movies stick to the source material as much as possible. So i generally agree with keeping as many aspects as possible the same, race of major characters being one of them. But on the other hand, you can see why movie studios would feel pressure to include a black character in a film with all white main characters.

Unfortunately as a society studios are forced to think of diversity while casting films. If he was the best actor available by a mile, i support it. If he is just slightly better, the same, or slightly worse than another actor who was white and was lobbying for the role, well, that is when i have a problem with the casting.

Jul 12 - 07:25 AM

Just from my personal opinion I think it would have been worse if they just cast some random fat white guy because as I say I can't think of anyone in Hollywood at that time or now for that matter who could have convincingly played Kingpin and I tend to agree with Jason B that his size and power are more important character traits than his skin color. It's the whole Nick Fury debate all over again.

Jul 12 - 11:04 AM

Myron Kinsey

*Gasp* Could it be that Hollywood is "BLACK WASHING"??!!

Jul 13 - 12:10 AM

Sorry you feel this way; I had the EXACT problem with Will Smith playing Robert Neville in I Am Legend . . . (Robert Matheson even describes Neville as having Germanic features--six feet tall and slightly overweight at the beginning of the novel and then thinner towards the end). Will Smith actually gave a better performance than anyone I can think of. The Vampires were totally homogenized though . . .no Ben Cortman, booo.

Jul 12 - 06:40 AM

Frisby 2007

Surprising how you don't know that. He was the only actor out there who looked & acted the closest to the villain himself.

Jul 12 - 03:36 PM

Just to ease any tension here, I want to point out that I did like Michael Clarke Duncan's performance of the Kingpin. In many ways, it really doesn't matter too terribly much. I just can't help but feel they couldn't have found a big, bulky white guy with decent acting chops to play the role though. It's just kind of an interesting topic to discuss.

Jul 12 - 09:53 PM

Bentley Lyles

When a film shows a CGI rat five minutes into it, that does not signal that it would be a good superhero film.

Jul 11 - 04:23 PM