Imagine my surprise, given the recent somewhat antagonistic atmosphere, to have received an invite to a preview screening of “Daredevil.” Now I gotta say, every pro I know came out of the advance screenings during the Creation Con with absolutely nothing positive to say about it. So I went in preparing to be underwhelmed.
Guys: It’s a good film. Darker, more disturbing than Spider-Man. Certainly edgier. Overall, I thought it was great. Action, a brooding Matt Murdock (only finding relief when sleeping in a sensory deprivation tank), cool radar sense effects, plus snappy performances from Farrell as Bullseye and Duncan as the Kingpin (who looked just like the Kingpin except black), and enough comic book in-jokes for me to say, “See! See! I’m not the only one who does it!”
Minuses are that Elektra is underutilized, existing mostly to be Matt Murdock’s girlfriend with not much identity beyond that. And I could have done without the voice over. General rule of thumb: Unless a VO narrative is done by Bogart, leave it out. The CGI has the same “weightless” feel as Spider-Man, and one wishes the producers hadn’t felt they needed to compete, since one can buy it more easily when dealing with the superhuman Spidey. Here it looks even more fake.
The big area of dispute, I can already tell you, is going to be that Daredevil kills/allows bad guys to die. At least to start. I fully understand why. They wanted him to have a character arc. Think about his arc in the Miller stories: He begins as a pure crusader who doesn’t kill, and ends up allowing Bullseye to fall…to his death, for all DD cares. Does that *really* sound like a character arc for a superhero movie? Writer Johnson chooses to go the other direction: DD starts out hard, cold, soulless. Will he find redemption? *That’s* a movie character arc. Anyone who goes in and can’t separate comic book requirements from movie necessities is going to have problems. Anyone who can judge a movie on its own will, overall, have a good time.
PAD
• 
>>Anyone who goes in and can’t separate comic book requirements from movie necessities is going to have problems. Anyone who can judge a movie on its own will, overall, have a good time.<<
Hey, Peter, count me in the latter camp, come Friday!!
Congrats, by the way, on snagging the invite!! Grr-r-r-r, me jealous!!
Hooper
SPOILER WARNING: Now that Bullseye has killed Elektra just as he did in the comic book, I wonder if someone will bring her back to life in the next movie.
Nah, NO ONE would ever do anything like that, right? 🙂
END SPOILER WARNING
Hey Peter!
Remember that guy who criticized you for using too many in-jokes, and then did that horrible comic about Ted Turner or something?
God, that still gives me nightmares…
I got the chance to see a sneak preview as well and found the film to be a LOT better than I thought it was going to be. I was pretty jazzed when the first trailer came out but when the third one hit with the narration by Affleck I started getting that sinking feeling inside. Imagine my surprise that DAREDEVIL actually turned out to be a really decent movie, more of a movie in places than SPIDER-MAN and also manages to effectively transfer comic book images to the screen and still have them look good.
I had three problems with the film, one of which is easily forgiven. That problem was that the plot seemed very rushed. A lot happened in a short amount of time and some development that could have happened (such as the already mentioned light use of Electra, but also the uses of Kingpin and Ben Urich) was kind of lost. BUT, this is a movie and certain things can be forgiven. A lot to do and little time to do it and such.
My second problem is going to make me sound like a raving fan boy, but this is something that really irked me. Just about anyone who made a major mark on Daredevil got a nod in this film but some were left out. Miller, Mack, Bendis, Quesada, Romita Lee and others are mentioned. Kevin Smith is in the film. If you strain your eyes during the boxing scene with Matt’s Dad you can even spot John Romita JR. in the audience after the bad guys get up to leave. (If you can’t spot Stan Lee you are not paying attention.) However I don’t think Gene Colan’s name was mentioned. Also, Kevin Smith plays a character called Kirby. Why not Everett? I know a lot of people have this whole cult of Kirby thing, but as far as I know Kirby had little to nothing to do with Daredevil. Bill Everett was the first man to draw the character and isn’t even mentioned once. As I said this may sound silly, but if you are going to go to the trouble of mentioning the men (and women, no character named Nocenti either) who worked on the character it seems that one of the co-creators should at least get a nod.
My final problem was the
SPOILER WARNING
park scene. A little silly and while it could be said that the two characters fighting like this was a way for them to realize that they finally found someone who was on their level. Still and all I really thought that the scene was a bit gratuitous. But that’s just me.
Overall, though, I recommend the film highly. (They even showed a new X2 trailer at the screening I attended (in Atlanta) and that looks to be pretty kick ášš in it’s own right.) I wasn’t expecting much, but I really thought that this was one of the better comic adaptations done, even better in certain areas than SPIDER-MAN. The cast was excellent, the special effects were neat and while some of the fight scenes seem to have been edited with a chainsaw the action was pretty good too. Bullseye is worth the price of admition alone.
In the end the highest praise comes from the fact that my fiance liked it. Like Mikey she doesn’t like a lot of things but even she thought the movie was good.
And so the first seal is broken.
Unfortunately, your positive review of STAR TREK: NEMESIS shows that you’ve lost all of your ability to judge a movie’s quality.
>>Anyone who goes in and can’t separate comic book requirements from movie necessities is going to have problems. Anyone who can judge a movie on its own will, overall, have a good time.<<
That’s a very good point, and I agree. I used to yell and scream and be upset at movie adaptions that didn’t stay true to the book or story or comic they were derived from. But now that I’ve adapted a couple of short stories into plays (and one failed attempt at a short film screenplay) I understand that *some* things have to bend a little in order to work in different mediums.
Well, over on the DC boards, I encountered people complaining (pre-screening, of course) that Kingpin was black, Bullseye was Irish, Elektra wasn’t Greek (either that or played by an actress they didn’t like) and that Murdock was played by an actor they didn’t like (I don’t know why — Affleck was the bomb in Phantoms, yo)(well, actually he wasn’t, but that was such a great line). My only complaint is Bullseye’s look. The scar looks ridiculous. I don’t need to see the movie to know it, that scar looks ridiculous. I know his costume has a bullseye in the same position on his cowl, and that’s not my actual complaint (although I haven’t heard whether the movie Bullseye’s skeleton is laced with Adamantium — the only thing that makes wearing a bullseye on one’s forehead acceptable), it just looks like someone was trying too hard to find a cool way to make him a supervillain. Or something. I don’t know. It just looks stupid.
Just like watching Spiderman, with an Comic-Based Moive, I can expect to enjoy it more a second time, after “Continuty” Shocks have worn off. Spidey looked like a darn fine movie after that!
I’m really looking forward to this movie.
I was also able to attend a Sneak Preview in Atlanta last night. I really enjoyed the film. I went in expecting to be underwhelmed, but imagine my surprise when the film turned out to be pretty darn good.
I was really worried about Affleck portraying Matt/DD but he did a good job with the role.
There are a couple of problems with the film, but they are minor.
The special effects: there are parts, as PAD mentioned, where DD looks like he is floating. However, those parts do not detract from the whole film.
Also, the story feels a little rushed. It’s almost as if they cut too much out of the film to make a lean running time. I am looking forward to an expanded edition DVD ala Lord of the Rings:FOTR to flesh out some of the characters and story.
Overall it is a good film, but it could have been great.
IMO
Stay for the end credits. There is a special treat for those people that don’t leave as soon as the screen fades to black.
I have not seen the movie yet but all this talk about DD allowing someone to die makes me think of Smallville. I know that Clark doesn’t “let people die” on purpose, but in the comics Superman always goes out of his way to make sure even the bad guys survive. In Smallville, he manages to save everyone….except the bad guys who learn his secret I.D. every couple of weeks. They all get Accidently killed off. He’s faster than a speeding bullet. One or two people getting killed is expected. 10 or more you gotta start thinking sub-conciously Clark isn’t really trying.
Why is this kind of bad writing more overlooked by fans than on DD?
SPOILER SPOILER
DD’s character arc didn’t really ring true to me. Probably a half hour before he leaves Kingpin for the cops, he throws Bullseye out the window, allowing him “to fall…to his death, for all DD cares.” So what changes for him in the time it takes him to swing over to the Kingpin’s penthouse? Beats me. As you predicted, Peter, the movie pretty much lost me when DD kills the rapist. I didn’t really buy his redemption, and I felt like the scene with Kingpin at the end would’ve been much more powerful if it was a test of a guy who DOESN’T kill when given the opportunity to have his revenge on the man responsible for the death of his dad and his great love. But, what the heck, I can always reread the comics.
That said, I thought the movie looked great (save for the SFX glitches you mention), and Jon Favreau and Michael Clarke Duncan were terrific as Foggy and the Kingpin, respectively, and I also enjoyed Colin Farrell as Bullseye. (But the cigarette burn — or whatever it was — on his head puzzled me. If you aren’t going to put him in costume, I’m OK with that. But why give him a bullseye on his forehead that looks even goofier than a costume would?)
Michael Bailey : Unfortunately, your positive review of STAR TREK: NEMESIS shows that you’ve lost all of your ability to judge a movie’s quality.
Luigi Novi: Nope. It just means his opinion of it is different from yours. Whether one gives a positive or negative review of any one particular movie is not a function of their overall “ability.”
It’s important to go into a movie with no prior judgments or expectations — let the movie stand on its own. (I’m convinced most people hated THE PHANTOM MENACE not because it was a bad movie, but because they were expecting it to be *the* greatest film since RETURN OF THE JEDI.)
Most of the complaints I’ve heard about the DD movie — by people who haven’t seen it — focus on the bad casting choice of Ben Affleck. He may do an awful job; then again, he could surprise people the way Michael Keaton did for BATMAN. (Before that movie, most people thought of him as Mister Mom. But no one complained about his portrayal of Bruce Wayne.)
I’ll be seeing DAREDEVIL on Friday for a matinee. If it’s good, I’ll write up a positive review, tell people why they should see it, and probably see it again (having seen CHICAGO twice). If it’s bad, I’ll write a negative review, tell people why they shouldn’t see it, and not contribute any more money to a movie I don’t like.
But I won’t make a decision until after I’ve seen it.
SPOILER SPOILER
DD’s character arc didn’t really ring true to me. Probably a half hour before he leaves Kingpin for the cops, he throws Bullseye out the window, allowing him “to fall…to his death, for all DD cares.” So what changes for him in the time it takes him to swing over to the Kingpin’s penthouse?<<
Nothing, except that in the case of Bullseye, it was still the heat of combat, and even though his hands were injured, Bullseye was still a threat, both to DD and to the cops who might come for him. He might even get away. Whereas the Kingpin was physically helpless.>>
As you predicted, Peter, the movie pretty much lost me when DD kills the rapist.<<
Technically, he didn’t. He just failed to help him off the tracks.
>>I didn’t really buy his redemption, and I felt like the scene with Kingpin at the end would’ve been much more powerful if it was a test of a guy who DOESN’T kill when given the opportunity to have his revenge on the man responsible for the death of his dad and his great love.<<
Except that’s not really a character arc. The character is fundamentally the same in that case as he was in the beginning. Then you’ve pretty much got a James Bond movie.
PAD
>>y second problem is going to make me sound like a raving fan boy, but this is something that really irked me. Just about anyone who made a major mark on Daredevil got a nod in this film but some were left out. Miller, Mack, Bendis, Quesada, Romita Lee and others are mentioned….Why not Everett?…..Bill Everett was the first man to draw the character and isn’t even mentioned once<<
There’s a nice article on ‘Daredevil’ in the current issue of ‘TV Guide’…..which has a cover featuring not a TV show, but some movie that’s opening this Friday….and included is a veritable laundry list of in-jokes and tributes. I quote:
BILL EVERETT In real life he’s…
remembered as a beloved figure from the Golden Age of Comics.On-screen persona A conflicted Matt talks with a priest named Father Everett. (boldface mine)Relationship to Daredevil He cocreated Daredevil with Stan Lee and pencilled the first issue.
`Hope I helped.
And I’m glad your girlfriend liked it, but, I’m sorry….I can’t resist…….
She likes it!! Hey, Mikey!!
Hooper
Glad you liked it PAD. I’ve been waiting for this movie for 12-13 years, when I first started reading DD.
Off topic a bit-
Are you a Jackie Chan fan? Have you seen Shanghai Knights? What did you think?
Thanks.
Anyone who goes in and can’t separate comic book requirements from movie necessities is going to have problems. Anyone who can judge a movie on its own will, overall, have a good time.
And that’s the key thing to keep in mind when going to see a movie based on a comic book.
Now, all i’ve heard, on msg boards and at the comic store, are the same comments i’ve heard when X-Men and/or Spidey came out.
When it was X-Men, it was the black leather costumes.
In Spidey, it was the organic webshooters…
Here’s the only fact about comic book movies:
Comic book fans will complain about them before seeing it and will rave about it coming out of the theater.
I don’t see why people would have any problem with DD killing people after all the people that Batman kill in his first movie, don’t most people realize that the reason the writers started that whole Hero’s don’t kill stuff was one part,toning it down for the comics code and the other so the could use the same villans over and over. This is one of the reasons i look forward to these movies, realisim
Here’s the only fact about comic book movies:
Comic book fans will complain about them before seeing it and will rave about it coming out of the theater
That’s true, until the movie has been fairly successful, financially, after which the same people who complained about said movie beforehand and raved about it afterwards will start noting that “it wasn’t THAT good”, and resume the nitpicking that preceded their seeing the movie in the first place.
And, while we’re on the subject of killing, let’s not forget Superman’s body count in “Superman II,” which always seemed to me to be carried out rather glibly and in an oh-well fashion. When Superman killed essentially the same characters in the comics a couple of years later, it was an issue of massive fan outcry and still starts arguments to this day.
Between that and Batman’s killing, I’d say that ever since “X-Men,” film superhero characters are actually far closer to their four-color counterparts than they ever were in the Superman/Batman days.
I caught a Daredevil preview a couple of nights ago myself, and I have to say I liked it overall. I felt the last act was far too rushed, as if an hour was dedicated to setup and origin stories, and then they tried to stuff the entire Miller Elektra storyline into 35 minutes. All first entries in superhero film franchises suffer, to some extent, from having to combine a coherent origin story with a solid A-plot; “Daredevil” doesn’t quite balance it as well as “Spider-Man” did. It does, however, give me great hope for the inevitable sequel, as this pacing/editing issue was my biggest problem with the film.
Also, the sequel will almost certainly have ninjas, and everyone knows ninjas improve every movie they’re in :).
Paul F. P. Pogue
>>Here’s the only fact about comic book movies:
Comic book fans will complain about them before seeing it and will rave about it coming out of the theater<<
I’m going to say three words. Three words that will (a.) date me and (b.) provoke a knee-jerk reaction from most of you whom associate these words with ridicule and failure.
‘Howard The Duck’
There was no hotter comic book than Howard The Duck in the mid-70s. Sharply written by Steve Gerber and beautifully drawn by Frank Brunner for the first two issues, then Gene Colan, it was funny, insightful, witty, and intelligent. I was a HUGE fun of the comic!!
Then it was announced that George Lucas would be handling the movie version!! At the time of the announcement, “…Empire…” had just come out, and Lucas could do no wrong! How, my friends and I wondered, would Lucas and ILM handle a live-action Howard?? The most likely and preferable method would seem to be a very complex and expressive Muppet, with a midget in a suit for long shots….a la Yoda!!
Soon, the first ‘teaser’ trailer started hitting the theaters. In 1984, this was the trailer you snuck into other movies to see!! For about thirty seconds, a young, schmoking hot Lea Thompson….in character as Beverly Switzler…. .casually reclined as she waxed smittenly about the new ‘man’ in her life. How charming he is, how smart, etc. And she can’t wait to run her hands through his….feathers!!, as she puffs a feather out of her hand at the camera and slyly chuckles. The logo then zoomed upon the screen, and I was in Fanboy Heaven!!
Then another, longer, pseudo-‘making of’ trailer started appearing. While not fully showing the duck, there were lots of split-second glimpses and silhouette shots. The latter, especially, showed that Howard looked to be primarily a man in a suit…..a chunky, clumsy-looking one, at that! The dread started creeping. A one-sheet poster followed shortly after, and Lucasfilm, still keeping the final image of Howard under wraps, obscured Howard’s face and body by placing him behind a huge newspaper. But the image of the hands holding the paper were not the comic book Howard’s trademark, pseudo-Disney white gloves. The feathers were white, not the pale yellow we were so familiar with. And are those….orange fingernails??! The dread was now no longer creeping, but stomping, wearing hob-nailed boots!! Finally, a few days before the opening weekend, I caught a glimpse of ‘Movie’ Howard’s face on a souvenir magazine cover, and immediately wished I hadn’t!! White coloring, sure enough, that just looked all wrong!! Grotesque, human eyes, that were way too small for his head!! A blank, dull expression from the purported face of comicdom’s most rubber-faced curmudgeon looked back at me!! Expecting the absolute worst, I took my seat on the Friday night that ‘Howard The Duck’ opened.
Was it a good movie?? Hëll, no!! The duck’s voice was all wrong! Lea’s Thompson’s Beverly’s…and her all-girl band’s…music and outfits ensured that the film would date as badly as a carton of milk left out!! The many talents of Jeffrey Jones, one of the best character actors in the business, were wasted as the villian!! Howard’s basic character was no longer a cynical everyman (or duck,as the case may be)’trapped in a world he never made’, but merely a displaced yuppie!! The special effects were shockingly shoddy!! Instead of a fun monster for the climatic fight, like HellCow or the Space Turnip, the movie served up some amorphous….thing that defies description even to this day!! The only bright spot was Tim Robbins’s (!) likable and energetic performance as a character loosely based on the comic book’s Arthur Winslow.
On the whole, a disappointment, to put it politely.
But y’know what…?? Leaving the theatre I was feeling….relieved. Because while ‘Howard The Duck’, the movie, didn’t acheive the heights I dreamt it would a few years earlier…..it didn’t exactly suck out loud as much as I was afraid it was gonna, either!!
Hooper
Saw DD at a monday preview with friends… none of whom knew much about DD. The women went for Afflck and the other guy went cause his woman was going for Affleck and he made a big deal about Garner to get even. All cam out having enjoyed the movie. I liked the main character arc of “I’m not the bad guy”. I was surrised to see him let the rapist die but then again, if you watch the bar fight, several die there too. Also by DD’s lack of stopping the deaths more than causing them. The Elektra stuff was a set up. We have all herad the stories of Garner signing for more than one movie and the possibility for a solo flick. I LOVED Farrell and Duncan. I was worried about them but they worked. Also, Colan is mentioned as another fighter though it was pronounced “Coal-Anne” which is not how I have always read it. All in all, I liked it. Not just because I saw it free but because it was fun. And, HEY!, wasn’t it wierd having a comic movie where the main bad guys aren’t killed?! What was the last one? Catwoman? Before that? Lex Luthor in the 70’s!!That’s my 3 1/2. Have a good holiday.
Only read the novelization myself, but anybody else find it interesting that the character they named “Quesada” is basically a piece of scum? Intentional or not?
“And, HEY!, wasn’t it wierd having a comic movie where the main bad guys aren’t killed?! What was the last one?”
Off the top of my head, I’d say “X-Men,” “Batman & Robin” and “Batman Forever”; between all those, the only bad guy to actually buy it was Two-Face in “Forever” (novelized, incidentally, by our own Padguy.)
Paul F. P. Pogue
“However I don’t think Gene Colan’s name was mentioned.”
It was. When Matt was putting the drunk Jack Murdock to bed, he mentioned that he fought Colan back in the day.
—KRAD
>>And, while we’re on the subject of killing, let’s not forget Superman’s body count in “Superman II,” which always seemed to me to be carried out rather glibly and in an oh-well fashion. When Superman killed essentially the same characters in the comics a couple of years later, it was an issue of massive fan outcry and still starts arguments to this day.<<
Yeah, I kind’a noticed that too, when I first saw ‘Superman 2’ in the theatre….as did the comics press at the time, most notably, the late, lamented ‘Comics Reader’.
However…! A few years later…’83 or 4, it must’ve been…’Superman 2′ was shown on network television with many heretofore edited-out scenes back in!! Among these…a shot of the three now-powerless Kryptonians being led away in handcuffs to waiting police cars just outside the Fortress!! Anybody else out there remember?? How about the scene from ‘Superman’, that was put back in upon it’s premiere network broadcast, of a whimpering Miss Teschmacher being slowly lowered…suspended by her wrists above her head…into a pit of….some ferocious beast(s)….as Lex Luthor played a keyboard instrument (I forget what) and crooned: ‘You Must Have Been A Beautiful Baby’??
I’m not making this up!! Who else remembers??
Hooper
Hooper!
About the Superman (& Superman II) sequences you mentioned: you’re not imagining it.
Yes, they really were put back into the film when it was broadcast for the first time on network television.
“Call Mr. Plow, that’s my name/ That name again is Mr. Plow!”
(Given the crappy weather outside, this quote seemed appropriate.)
I thought Shanghai Knights was a lot of fun; even better than the first one.
And I also remember the 3 zoners being led away in the TV-expanded version. I never actually thought he killed them. Just literally put them on ice. Nice to see I was right.
I remember disliking intently that he went back and, superpowered, tossed around the trucker. Yeah, he had it coming, and yeah, it was an audience pleasing moment, and I didn’t even have a problem with the guy hitting him and breaking his fist ’cause he brought it on himself. But all the other stuff…it just seemed beneath Clark, y’know?
PAD
Oh, I know I didn’t imagine those scenes! I was just implying that anyone who hasn’t seen ’em before….by the way, I don’t think those extra scenes have ever been in any airing if either movie since. Huh…..might think I was pulling their proverbial leg!
Thanks much for the corroboration!
Hooper
P.S. `Sorry to hear about the cold weather! Here in Florida, I actually had to put on a jacket today!!
;^)
Now, all i’ve heard, on msg boards and at the comic store, are the same comments i’ve heard when X-Men and/or Spidey came out.
When it was X-Men, it was the black leather costumes.
In Spidey, it was the organic webshooters…
Here’s the only fact about comic book movies:
Comic book fans will complain about them before seeing it and will rave about it coming out of the theater.
[spoilers]
Well, coming out of the screening of Spider-Man, which I’ve seen twice already, I was certainly raving about that movie. What can I say, it was by far one of the most entertaining comic adaptations in years. And the Goblin outfit actually worked! Willem Dafoe was excellent as the crook whose split personality overpowers him, and Maguire and Dunst were too as Peter and Mary Jane.
But coming out of the X-Men movie, I wasn’t. Here’s why (and as appalled as I myself am about the movie, I still don’t feel happy about saying this): For anyone who’s familiar with the issue of Spider-Man in which they dealt with the 9-11 tragedy, it is with sadness that I must say that sometime later, I realized that the X-Men movie does something similar with scenes in the concentration camp. Just like the issue of Spider-Man trivialized the tragedy of the WTC’s destruction by featuring superheros and villains in the story, the X-Men movie trivialized the Holocaust by showing the young Magneto using his powers inside the concentration camp, during 1944, when the horrors of the Holocaust/WW2 were still going on. And sadly, if we were to refer to the rest, even that, I subsequently concluded, was more like a hollow void than anything else: there were no genunine attempts to make a statement regarding racial tolerance, nobody in the public seemed to be menacing any identified mutants, and Senator Kelly was more like a hot air balloon than anything else.
Oh sure, there were a few good lines, such as where Mystique told Senator Kelly that people like him made her afraid to go to school when she was young. But other than that, it was forgettable, and it even threw away the part that was potentially winning with Wolverine and Rogue.
Think what you will about that movie, it’s your opinion. But mine has already changed, and not in a good way. As of today, I am feeling as let down as anything about the X-Men movie, and for better reasons than just some silly debate involving spandex. And upon realizing how phony and awkward it was, I was not only shocked, I felt simply miserable. I don’t ever want to bother about it again. I can’t even remember much of it now, nor do I wish to.
Do I feel happy saying this? No. I don’t even feel remotely happy. But I can’t help but feel so robbed and cheated. And it’s a real shame.
September 11, 2001 opened my eyes and helped me to understand why fiction and reality don’t intersect, and certainly not when dealing with incidents and periods in history like these. And upon realizing this, well, I just couldn’t keep silent about it. I had to speak out.
To address PAD’s thoughts on the new DD movie, hey, I’m glad you liked it, ol’ buddy.
I must admit that the part about DD’s becoming liberal to killing in this movie does sound disturbing, because while he has killed some crooks in the comics, it’s usually only been in the most extreme of circumstances, right? I myself haven’t read enough of Daredevil to really know about all this for sure, so I’ll have to really take to reading as much of it from the years gone by as possible to really know about what Matt’s exact approaches to crimefighting are.
If Bullseye’s been killed off in this movie, well then, if there’s to be a sequel, I do wonder who the next villain will be? The Silver Samurai, maybe?
In the movie’s defense, I’ll bring up the Miller/Romita “Man Without Fear” version of DD’s origin, in which young Matt quite liberally kills bad guys all over the place until things go horribly awry and he realizes that innocent people are endangered by his disregard for human life — a not dissimilar arc from the movie.
Oh, now I see! So indeed, the movie’s premise is very similar in some ways to what Miller and Romita worked on back in the 80’s. Hmmm, to say the least, it looks like the filmmakers wrote the screenplay better than I expected. I’ll certainly want to check this out and see how it goes. And I’ll enjoy seeing Garner in it too!
I just saw a preview of Daredevil tonight and thought it was a great movie. The most surprising thing was how closely the movie followed the comic. This is great for fans, but I can see people who don’t know anything about DD being absolutely shocked by the film.
SPOILER WARNING
Aside from the fight scenes, which were kind of hard to track because of the lack of lighting, the only problem I had with the movie was the Elektra/Bullseye battle. I was thinking that might be a scenario for a sequel, so I was unprepared for it. It’s also the part of the movie that is probably going to upset a lot of moviegoers, especially the people who saw Spider-Man and think that all superhero movies are in that mold.
And I don’t know about anyone else, but in the final third of the movie I kept waiting to see if the filmmakers were going to cheat and have her appear somehow healed. Some people will see the good luck charm and think that she survived, until they realize that she could have placed it before she went looking for her father’s killer. After seeing the movie through to the end, I know I’ll have to see it again so I can enjoy the last third of the movie without that distraction.
END SPOILER WARNING
Basically, Daredevil is a good movie. The characters are strong and believable, and the plot, though a little rushed, works. I think anyone who is a fan of comics should go to see it.
Count me in the group that really liked this movie. Only Simpsons Comic Book Guy types will not dig this movie. Get a grip, just like X-Men and Spider-Man the continuity is going to be different, but the essentials are all still there. I think this is going to be more popular with mainstream audiences than it will be to the basement dwellers.
“General rule of thumb: Unless a VO narrative is done by Bogart, leave it out.”
Exception to said rule: Morgan Freeman in Shwashank. 😉
Well, after seeing the movie, i have to say, huzzah! It was cool! And Affleck did a good job.
I was happy to see 3 comic movie trailer in front of it too; Hulk, Bulletproof Monk and X2 (which looks insanely SWEET!)
Only bad thing? I had to sit through the trailer for Phone Booth. *in Jerry Seinfeld voice* Who are the movie geniuses who thought of that one?!
That will be the lamest movie ever! It’s like speed but only without the moving!
I really liked it! Though I thought the story was choppy. It was rough on them, sewing together a story from dozens of different issues, storylines, limited series. I totally agree with Peter that Elektra was under utilized. Jennifer did great though. I’ll go see it again next week.
I also saw Chicago tonight. If you were okay with DD’s morally ambiguous actions, then you’ll love the characters in Chicago. “A wretched hive of scum and villany…”
-Shawn
I saw the movie tonight with my friends. I loved it from beginning to end. Great movie. I especially liked the ending during the credits. Yes, anyone who hasn’t seen it yet, make sure to stay during the credits otherwise you’ll miss a really cool/funny scene.
I can’t wait to see X-Men 2 and The Hulk. I gotta tell you guys, as much controversy there’s been about certain scenes in the movie, it really didn’t bother me. I think it worked well and still told a good story. They weren’t something that really detracted from what you’ve read about Daredevil over the years, IMHO. I really wish though that a certain web-slinger would have showed up. Too bad he couldn’t since the rights to both characters are owned by two different movie studios (which effected where a certain character ended up working(check end of post for that little spoiler). If not for a few scenes than a short cameo.
Now for a few quick spoilers (The Marvel nods):
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
The rapist’s name being Quesada (Did artwork for Kevin Smith’s Daredevil run.).
The names of all the people Matt’s father fought were all writers who wrote Daredevil (in the order mentioned in the movie):
(Frank) Miller
(David) Mack
(Brian Michael) Bendis
The person Matt’s father fights (as you can see on the billboard outside the arena) is John Romita (an artist on Daredevil).
The person Matt stops from crossing the street as a young blind boy is Stan Lee.
Last but not least, Kevin Smith (Daredevil writer) as the coroner.
I was sad to see Ben Urich had to work for the Post instead of the Daily Bugle. Gotta love those copyright laws by other studios, right?
Of all the characters, I think they got Bullseye down perfect. Every line was dynamite, IMHO. Ben and Jennifer had some good lines and did a great job acting, but Colin got the best lines in the end and did an excellent job executing them!
All in all, I’d love to see a sequel. Even a spin-off for Elektra would be cool. I hope they make the next movie longer though. I think it would have been even better but all in all the points they wanted to bring across were brought across and that’s all you can really ask for, no?
SPOILER
I would like to know if Elektra really did die because at the end the braile charm was on top of the roof where only she would know where to put it for Matt. So please tell me whether she does die!! ASAP!!
Hey! I just saw the DD movie! I liked it. The only thing I did not like was how “rushed” the whole thing felt. Also, the above comments about the fight scenes being ill-lit (so much that it’s hard to see the moves) is dead right.
My review? Hmmm….how about 7 out of 10 stars. (***___)
Also, to go off-topic for a moment, a friend at work LOVES “Austin Powers in Goldmember”. He’ll recite a lot of the puns, gags and jokes in the movie. In fact, he does a decent impression of Goldmember.
But, I (we) have a question:
When Nigel Powers and Austin Powers are captured by Goldmember he offers them “A SSSHHMOKE AND A PAHHNNCAKE” and then different variations on the “smoke and a pancake” gag. When Austin declines, Goldmember says “I SEE THERE IS NO *PLEASING* YOU.” Now, this has got to be a sexual joke, but I’m not Dutch, neither is my friend… and I was really hoping that someone out there could explain this to me … ?
I’ll feel foolish when I hear it explained, I know, but I’m sure I’m not the only one who didn’t *get it*!
Thanks. – TAP
A story, I waited so long for this movie to tell a story and it never came. Okay the costume looked all right but the CGI effects looked like they were rushed through production, as did everything else in this movie. As I feared, they made DD look too much like Batman, they even had a Daredevil cave with costumes gathered in it.
Maybe they will do better with the sequal and make it right this time. And also have DD not act like the Punisher. Daredevil should never kill. Leave that to Frank Castle.
So yeah, why no character named Nocenti? In fact, I rarely hear her name mentioned in conjunction with the character, even though I always thought she made some significant contributions to the character. She and JRJR did some beautiful work together on that title.
Anyway, the movie. I agree, it was cool. Affleck’s portrayal had a suitable amount of pathos. I found Bullseye’s characterization a tad… odd, in parts, but still engaging. Duncan as the Kingpin was fabulous. Garner’s Elektra was a little more “good girl”-ish than I would have anticipated, though perhaps that will change in the sequel.
Also, wasn’t DD’s radar portrayed in a cool way?
Finally, one question for those who have seen the movie: where did Matt live? That chamber with the sensory-deprivation tank and the costumes…. was that in his apartment, or in some secret room in the church…? I was a little confused about all that? (And where did he get that tank, by the way? That doesn’t seem like something you can find at your local furniture store…)
Referring to PAD’s comment that the deal with Bullseye was in the heat of battle. Sorry, that just doesn’t wash. The guy was begging for mercy! That indicates surrender to me.
I saw the DD movie this weekend and enjoyed it. It was as stated before a much darker movie than Spider-Man, but that lead some symbolic resonance to the story. Matt’s life is about darkness in the film. He knows his father is a drunk, but doesn’t realize what he really does for a living. He doesn’t know why his father is killed, but tries to kill every criminal for it. Matt is both literally and figuratively in the dark.
My only complaint, I’m an old fan who actually at one time read the first issue of DD right off the stands, was with the origin. The movie script left out the single most important part of the origin–that Matt was blinded trying to save someone. Looking at the film, that is something that could have easily been added in.
Matt sees his father roughing up some one for whatever reason. He sees, in a biblical sense and to carry out the strong christian morality that has ben crafted on to the series, his father naked and it blinds him. Now, here is what I would change. When Matt runs so does the man his father has been roughing up. The man is hurt and can’t handle himself well, yet, and crosses in front of the forklift, Matt sees it and performs the rescue that blinds him. The father sees Matt rescuing the man he was beating up on, and, because of what Matt has done, (I know I’m being biblical again)–being willing to sacrifice himself for the good of others–has redeemed his father, but at a cost.
That’s my two-cents on an otherwise very good movie.
I saw it last night with my girlfriend and enjoyed it thoroughly.
Yes, I agree with all that it seemed rushed. I thought too much time was spent on the origin and not enough on the main story. I was very happy that they followed Miller ‘s story closely enough. I also wanted to see a longer battle between Elektra and Bullseye.
I usually sit in the cinema and wait for the crowd to leave and usually end up seeing the goodies that are sometimes at the end of the main credits, and enjoyed Bullseye in bodycast being annoyed by the fly.
By the way, I hated the CGI, leaping from buildings et.al. DD isnt Spidey and dont have superpowers, it could have been toned down a little.
My girlfriend liked it, and asked a few questions. I told her the real story is a lot more complex with Ninjas and Resurrection and a Blind Sensei, and she gave a weird blank stare like I was high on something.
Overall a wonderful movie, I think I’ll go see it again
I would love DD2 to have a resurrected Elektra complete with Stick and the Hand and a crap load of ninjas.
Frank Miller might cant write a good movie script (Robocop3 yuck) but someone else adapting his script just might work
Peter,
Saw the DD moved and loved it. I was recently talking to my students about Plagiarism and wanted to know if you (or anyone knows)…. in the DD movie, there were a couple instances, one for sure, where the dialogue was taken right out the the DD comic – specifically the line from Bullseye to Elektra “You’re good. But me, I’m magic.” Now I didn’t stick around for most of the end credits, but that line is taken right from DD #181 by Miller. I know many scripts are written by more than the writer who gets credit on screen. But, does this qualify as Plagiarism?
i liked it alot but i can’t blive she died soon after she found out who he was