JIC: DAREDEVIL REVIEW [Archive]

MattBrady

02-12-2003, 07:09 AM

<img src="http://www.newsarama.com/movies/DD.jpg" width="175" height="219" align="right" border="0">by Michael Sangiacomo

It’s clear from the opening moments of Daredevil that this is going to be the comics film project that sets the standard.

Okay, Spider-Man was good, but remember the few scenes where Willem Dafoe overacted and it came off a little silly? And remember those couple scenes where, while good, came off a bit unbelievable? The ones where you thought it could have been done a little better?

Daredevil does ‘em better.

Everything clicks.

Ben Affleck is inspired as Daredevil, a perfect fit. He even allowed director Mark Steven Johnson to milk over his eyes and make them off center. Affleck’s eyes looks like those of a blind person, unlike most sighted actors whose approximation of blindness is a 100-yard stare. Johnson’s screenplay is the true star of this vehicle. It’s clear that he knows and loves comics, something that can rarely be said for writers of other film writers working of comic projects. The Batman and Superman films being the best example of writers who lacked such love for the medium.

Johnson took more than 30 years of continuity and delivered the essence of Daredevil in 104 minutes. He took liberties with the myth, but that’s fine.

I’m sure there are Daredevil writers out there slapping themselves in the head saying, “Of course Daredevil would sometimes use a sensory deprivation tank to block out the noise of New York City so he could sleep.”

The story is rock solid and believable, radiating from the Kingpin’s desire to control everything in the city. The events flow smoothly from that core and viewers will be swept right along.

<img src="http://www.newsarama.com/movies/bullseye.jpg" width="175" height="242" align="left" border="0">The action and special effects are amazing, particularly those involving Bullseye which include several nods to Frank Miller. Jennifer Garner seems equally comfortable as Elektra, good thing since she signed on for one or two sequels. And speaking of sequels, Affleck has to reprise his role to give Kingpin his rematch. The love scene between Affleck and Garner is real, very adult, as opposed to the adolescent smooching in the Spider-Man flick. It’s clear that Daredevil and Elektra have been around the love block a few times. Garner is naked in bed, but it’s strictly PG, no more than you see of her on Alias. Sorry guys.

Marvel’s Avi Arad called it right when he predicted that the breakout star of the film was Colin Farrell as Bullseye. The villain with unerring aim is such an odd character that it could have been a disaster. Farrell plays him as a likable psychotic and somewhere manages to make it work. His character drips with charisma and confidence, a man without morals who is obsessed with his own skill. Don’t miss his final appearance in the movie that comes after the film appears to have ended.

Another standout in a movie of standouts is Joe Pantoliano (who played the monstrous Ralphie in The Sopranos) as a bald Ben Urich, a newspaper reporter with a smoldering sense of outrage and justice. He has one of the best lines of the movie in the closing moments, one that will make the audience cheer.

<img src="http://www.newsarama.com/movies/kingpin.jpg" width="175" height="242" align="right" border="0">Michael Clarke Duncan has a sinister presence as Kingpin, but he really shines in his fight sequence with an injured Daredevil that ends with a startling finality.

Jon Favreau provides the occasional light moments as Foggy Nelson, Matt Murdock’s law partner. “Can’t we get a client who can pay us in actual money,” he whines? “The last guy paid us off in fluke. That’s a fish, Matt, he gave us fish.”

Kevin Smith has a brief role as a coroner. Stan Lee shows up as an old man that Matt stops from walking into traffic, an homage to Daredevil’s origin as conceived by Lee.

Comics fans will get many of the “in” jokes that will cause other theater-goers to wonder what those weirdoes are laughing at. Watch and listen for the nods to John Romita, Brian Bendis, David Mack and Frank Miller. Joe Quesada gets a whole character named after him.

What are you waiting for? Go see for yourself.

Michael Sangiacomo is a statewide news reporter for the Plain Dealer newspaper in Cleveland, Ohio. His syndicated "Journey Into Comics" weekly column on the state of the comic book business, can be found in newspapers and at the Newsarama website. His monthly comic book column appears the first Saturday of each month in the Plain Dealer Arts page and is syndicated through Newhouse Newspapers. He also writes a twice-monthly audiobooks review column covering crime thrillers and mysteries that can be seen at <a href="http://www.audiobookstoday.com" target="_blank">www.audiobookstoday.com</a>

jawaplumber

02-12-2003, 07:30 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by MattBrady:
Okay, Spider-Man was good, but remember the few scenes where Willem Dafoe overacted and it came off a little silly? And remember those couple scenes where, while good, came off a bit unbelievable? The ones where you thought it could have been done a little better?

The love scene between Affleck and Garner is real, very adult, as opposed to the adolescent smooching in the Spider-Man flick. <hr /></blockquote>Well, I think it's a little unfair to make the comparison to Spider-Man because a) much of that film was meant to be "over-the-top" in a classic comic book sense, and b) I personally think the "adolescent smooching", the upside down kiss, was one of the most romantic scenes in ANY movie I've ever seen. Also, I forgot to leave it in my quoting of the feature above, but I don't agree with the assessment that the writers of the Superman films lacking love of the medium, not in every case, at least. I felt the first two Superman films really showed a love and understanding of the medium as it stood at the time. Superman 2, particularly, was very Silver Age Superman-esque.

But hey, this is just my opinion vs. Mike's, and it has nothing to do with Daredevil. I'm happy to hear SOME positive buzz about it, I hope I come out of the theatre feeling good about the movie, too. A good comic book movie is a good comic book movie, no matter what :)

WebHobbit

02-12-2003, 08:20 AM

Woo-Hoo!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's about time Marvel gets properly represented on film!

:) :) :) :) :)

I loved Spider-Man and this sounds just as good (if not better).

My whole life (over 30 years folks) the only comics represented in movies were DC. I've just never cared much for DC (except for the occasional Batman). The non-comic reading Joe Public thinks "SuperMan" when they think comicbook. Maybe this is finally gonna be set right?

:D

Warren V. Wind

02-12-2003, 08:44 AM

Daredevil has alot to live up to.
I am hoping that it will be as good as this review.
I usually don't care about reviews, I like to make my own judgement when it comes to movies.
Hell, I loved Star Trek X Nemesis but it got terrible reviews.

With the cast that they assembled for Daredevil the only thing that could go wrong is the writing. This director really seems to have a love for Daredevil and comics.
Sam Raimi has that same love and it showed in Spiderman.

Marcus Ferrell

02-12-2003, 09:05 AM

I saw Daredevil last night. I thought it was good, although it was hokey at times.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />The action and special effects are amazing, particularly those involving Bullseye which include several nods to Frank Miller. <hr /></blockquote>Personally, I thought the special FX weren't terrible, but not good either. You can often tell right away whether an action scene is CG or real stunt work. It was a bit sad.

This is a movie people will probably love or hate. Some of you fanboys are going to hate it because DD lets a guy die in the first twenty minutes and another time he ignores a crime and he also kisses Elektra. While I don't condone these changes, I understand them. They serve for dramatic effect and are mostly put to good use.

Colin Farrell and Jon Favreau were great. Jennifer Garner...eh. Could have done better. This is my favorite role for Affleck - he wasn't his usual cheeseball self.

I give the film 4/5 stars.

Simo

02-12-2003, 09:09 AM

quote ++ I’m sure there are Daredevil writers out there slapping themselves in the head saying, Of course Daredevil would sometimes use a sensory deprivation tank to block out the noise of New York City so he could sleep. ++
Frank Miller gave him a sensory deprivation tank in about DD #188,though he didn't need it for sleeping.
Regards the review,I didn't like the early trailers and stills(and hated the naff trendy dance music) so how much better was the film than what the early trailers promised(I do like the current UK TV trailer though)?
SW

Paul Hamilton

02-12-2003, 09:19 AM

Originally posted by Mike Sangiacomo
I’m sure there are Daredevil writers out there slapping themselves in the head saying, “Of course Daredevil would sometimes use a sensory deprivation tank to block out the noise of New York City so he could sleep.”

It's not an original idea though. There is a character with similar powers in Alan Davis' Clan Destine who does the same thing.
Glad to see this getting a good review though, I had a few reservations about it. Especially Bullseye, who looks like someone pressed the bottom off an ashtray onto his head.

Looney As A Toon

02-12-2003, 09:25 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by MattBrady:
It’s clear that he knows and loves comics, something that can rarely be said for writers of other film writers working of comic projects. The Batman and Superman films being the best example of writers who lacked such love for the medium.
<hr /></blockquote>Well Michael, aren't we the Marvel zombie today! Since when did you take a job with their public relations department?

Listen up, boy: After 25 years, the first Superman movie is still the best written, best directed and best acted movie based on a comic character ever to come out. The writers had a perfect understanding of what it is that makes Superman the premeire superhero... the first of its kind and still the best of all INCLUDING those characters of your employers.

I went with some friends - some who are dedicated Marvel and Daredevil readers - to go to a preview of this movie and it was horrible... pure dreck that screwed with Daredevil's continuity. Affleck had the acting range of a mannequin. This movie will bomb badly

DF831

02-12-2003, 09:25 AM

Saw it. Loved it. Absolutely loved it. Dark entertainment with complex characterization and a reward for any die-hard Daredevil fan.

Pros: Affleck. The biggest reservations were about him and his performance. Those vanished. The smug, cocky performance he gives in seemingly every film was gone. In its place was much more nuance, respect and charm. A lot of charm. All the talk about him being physically right for the role were correct. He has stature and demanor.

Garner. She was awesome. Those accustomed to her "Alias" role will find a much more hardened performance that grows bitter by the end. Great moment after a funeral scene that is pure, cold, classic Elektra. It works. She looks great, kicks ass and inhabits her character with pathos and affection. An "Elektra" spin off would be most welcome.

Favreau. Now that was a surprise. Really funny. "Mexican Appetizer." Broke up the dark moments well.

The opening. The flashback/origin was one of the most impressive parts of the film. Moving. David Keith was dead on. The kid actually made you feel sorry for the young Matt. Better than I thought it would be and not a throwaway at all.

The fights. Dirty. Really dirty. Well done visually. The intensity was also impressive. Not a lot of holding back.

One of the most impressive qualities about the movie was the toughness it exuded. Very tough. People get beaten, stabbed, impaled. The fights are for keeps. Emotionally very brutal. No Spider-Man glee. The look is very urban and dark, which helps a great deal. Daredevil is a back-alley hero and the film doesn't forget that.

Faults: A score would have been better than the blaring soundtrack songs, but this was obviously something forced for marketing purposes. Add a score and remove the tunes and it would have added a lot more class.

Could Daredevil and Elektra's relationship been explored more? Yes. But time constraints surely lessened it. Still more effective than I thought. A little more Elektra ass-whipping would have also been welcome.

Who will love this movie most? Die-hard Daredevil readers. The tone hit the right pitch. The characterization was more than expected. The Bullseye/Elektra fight carries dialogue and imagery ripped right from Frank Miller's #181. Yes, a lot of the story — which took years to tell on the page — is compressed into this movie. But it surprisingly works. Telling the entire Elektra saga verbatim would require an HBO series. Many moments recalled "The Man Without Fear" mini series. In these regards, it's possibly the most faithful adaptation from comic page to screen ever seen. After the years of bastard comic translations it deserves reverence for that alone. It tears any Batman movie to shreds.
Closing: I'll be paying to see this again this weekend. It was that good. All the quibbles and complaints I've heard thus far are just that. Trifle and pithy. Tearing apart a movie is so easy. One person walking out actually said how much he hated the movie before he walked in and how it proved him right. Gee, I wonder why? Nearly laughed at how worried I was after reading all the online bitching beforehand. Great personal lesson learned here: ignore the dissecting Internet rants, the weird agandas people bring to a film, watch a movie and judge it on its own merits.

pickard

02-12-2003, 09:36 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by jawaplumber:
Also, I forgot to leave it in my quoting of the feature above, but I don't agree with the assessment that the writers of the Superman films lacking love of the medium, not in every case, at least. I felt the first two Superman films really showed a love and understanding of the medium as it stood at the time. Superman 2, particularly, was very Silver Age Superman-esque. :) <hr /></blockquote>Agreed.

Bosskmr

02-12-2003, 09:40 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> pure dreck that screwed with Daredevil's continuity. <hr /></blockquote>Who f#$%ing cares

Cann't you people get it thru your friggin thick heads!!!! You need to start looking at comicbook movies as a movie that is BASED ON A COMIC not about the comic word for word.

Loved both Blade movies, X-men, I though Spider-man was OK and Daredevil was incredible

Burke 0011

02-12-2003, 09:51 AM

Well, I'll reserve my opinion till Saturday when I see it but so far, it doesn't look all that great - I really do HOPE that I'm proven wrong cause the last thing needed right now is a terrible comic movie ($80 million) that is a stinker and derails all the good progress made over the past few years in terms of movies based on comics.

samnoir

02-12-2003, 10:00 AM

I got to attend the Canadian premiere and party on Monday and I've got a slightly differing opinion.

I liked it well enough, but having watched it with "regular" folks, there are times when the film does stay a bit too close to it's comic book roots, which comes off as cheesy.

I thought the origin sequences were wonderfully handled. The ending with the Kingpin is a bit botched and confused.

Some great performces, hopefully John Favreau and Joe Pantalione will get more screentime if this one is succesful enough to warrent a sequel.

Is it me or are they telegraphing the Born Again storyline as a sequel?

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by MattBrady:

It’s clear from the opening moments of Daredevil that this is going to be the comics film project that sets the standard.
<hr /></blockquote>I agree with the poster who stated that the first Superman film is still at the top of the list. Spiderman and X-Men were better films than this one.

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> I’m sure there are Daredevil writers out there slapping themselves in the head saying, “Of course Daredevil would sometimes use a sensory deprivation tank to block out the noise of New York City so he could sleep.”
<hr /></blockquote>Comic writers have used the sensory deprivation tank a number of times, including Frank Miller's original run.

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> Michael Clarke Duncan has a sinister presence as Kingpin, but he really shines in his fight sequence with an injured Daredevil that ends with a startling finality.
<hr /></blockquote>I liked Michael Clarke Duncan's performance. I don't think the finality of the ending was quite there (other than the physical aspect). It was shouting SEQUEL! I didn't quite buy the Daredevil character arc 100% at the end.

How does one denote spoilers around here if we wish to discuss the film?

_____________________________
<a href="http://cgi6.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewSellersOtherItems&userid=samurainoir&completed=0&sort=3&since=-1&include=0&page=1&rows=25" target="_blank">LORD OF THE RINGS Collector's Guide To Tolkien for sale on eBay. Full colour illustrated guide to rare LOTR collectibles!</a>

<a href="http://cgi6.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewSellersOtherItems&userid=samurainoir&completed=0&sort=3&since=-1&include=0&page=1&rows=25" target="_blank">THE MATRIX Trinity and Neo 12" action figures for sale on eBay. Only $11.99!</a>

gOgIver

02-12-2003, 11:03 AM

I can't comment on the film because I have not watched it yet but I will say, from the previews, Affleck looks like a total tool in that costume.

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> I’m sure there are Daredevil writers out there slapping themselves in the head saying, “Of course Daredevil would sometimes use a sensory deprivation tank to block out the noise of New York City so he could sleep <hr /></blockquote>samnoir is correct. I too remember this from Frank Miller's original run. Perhaps done in a different manner in the film but done none the less.

Robin MacNeil

02-12-2003, 11:05 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />
<img src="http://www.newsarama.com/movies/DD.jpg" width="175" height="219" align="right" border="0">
What are you waiting for? Go see for yourself.
<hr /></blockquote>Well, um, Mike, the only thing I'm waiting for... is for the movie to open! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

RM.

Nick Borelli

02-12-2003, 11:08 AM

How did everyone like X-Men 1.5 that came out yesturday?
With the X-Men DVD, Daredevil vs. Spiderman DVD, Daredevil the movie, and my comics this week, gees...

saiyanspider

02-12-2003, 11:12 AM

I saw it last night with some friends. WE LOVED IT. I can't wait to see it again when it opens. This movie was incredible!!!! To qoute my friend, on a scale from 1-5 I give it a 12!!

Hdefined

02-12-2003, 11:13 AM

In regards to the whole "directors had no love for the Superman and Batman films", I might have to agree. I mean, I watched Superman (I'm pretty sure it was the first one) a few years ago, and I was like "wtf . . ." No offense, it just came off as very cornball, more superish than manish, and the whole fly-around-the-world-to-turn-back-time bit was extremely lame. Extremely.

As for Batman, I love Tim Burton and I really liked MIchael Keaton in the role, and Jack as always, but it really wasn't a film about Batman. They obviously took what they thought was the most interesting aspect about Batman, that is, the Joker, and went with that. It's a pretty good film as is, but it's not really about Batman.

With Daredevil, I'm poised to see it Saturday, despite the very lame preview trailers. I don't have much love for the character, so I'm hoping this will do it for me.

malshnut

02-12-2003, 11:31 AM

.
[/qb][/QUOTE]Well Michael, aren't we the Marvel zombie today! Listen up, boy: After 25 years, the first Superman movie is still the best written, best directed and best acted movie based on a comic character ever to come out.
I went with some friends - some who are dedicated Marvel and Daredevil readers - to go to a preview of this movie and it was horrible... pure dreck that screwed with Daredevil's continuity. Affleck had the acting range of a mannequin. This movie will bomb badly[/QB][/QUOTE]

Umm, maybe we just liked the movie, and would not try to do something as absurd as comparing a Daredevil movie to a Superman movie(which was a good movie) Maybe we just wanna enjoy this movie on it's own merits, and realize that Daredevil is a totally different character than Superman or Batman? Nah, I guess you're right we're just a bunch of Marvel Zombies.
I have a few friends who've made up thier minds about this movie already, and thier reviews sound a little bit like yours. I don't think you and your imaginary friends actually saw the movie quite frankly.

RWNeal

02-12-2003, 11:49 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Hdefined:
and the whole fly-around-the-world-to-turn-back-time bit was extremely lame. Extremely.
<hr /></blockquote>I always thought that as well until I read an interview with Donner last year where he stated that that was supposed to be Supes flying back in time, not turning the world around. It just didn't come off well.

gwangung

02-12-2003, 11:51 AM

Um, guys....perhaps the Superman and Batman project Mike is talking about are the ones that are in preproduction right now, and not the ones that were done a few years ago....

DrDoom

02-12-2003, 11:57 AM

why is Kingpin so different?

<a href="http://www.marveldirectory.com/individuals/k/kingpin.htm" target="_blank">Kingpin</a>

Simon DelMonte

02-12-2003, 12:06 PM

Well, this is the second positive review I've seen today - the other being that of Peter David - so my expectations have jumped. That said, I think that I still don't expect much from Ben Affleck and don't think I ever will.

Odd thought: Michael mentions that we won't see any more of Ms. Garner's body than we do on Alias. And immediately, I think, "what's he talking about? Just because Bendis writes both?" Talk to anyone but a fanboy, and you won't get this response. And I don't even read Alias (or watch it, either).

I'm looking forward to this for two things: A Michael Duncan Clarke whose swagger, even in the unimpressive trailers, says "Kingpin," and Joe Pantolino playing a good guy for once.

MichaelCoughlin

02-12-2003, 12:08 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Looney As A Toon:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by MattBrady:
It’s clear that he knows and loves comics, something that can rarely be said for writers of other film writers working of comic projects. The Batman and Superman films being the best example of writers who lacked such love for the medium.
<hr /></blockquote>Well Michael, aren't we the Marvel zombie today! Since when did you take a job with their public relations department?

Listen up, boy: After 25 years, the first Superman movie is still the best written, best directed and best acted movie based on a comic character ever to come out. The writers had a perfect understanding of what it is that makes Superman the premeire superhero... the first of its kind and still the best of all INCLUDING those characters of your employers.

I went with some friends - some who are dedicated Marvel and Daredevil readers - to go to a preview of this movie and it was horrible... pure dreck that screwed with Daredevil's continuity. Affleck had the acting range of a mannequin. This movie will bomb badly<hr /></blockquote>Go get a life, seriously. I hope you're banned from posting here. Just because he likes the movie, doesn't make him a "Marvel Zombie", you're an asshole! Because his opinion is different, it's wrong? People like you are pathetic.

pmpknface

02-12-2003, 12:23 PM

I saw it on Monday as well. Visit my blog (link is below) for my take (overall I thought it was a 3 out of 5 stars) and I have warnings over the spoilers. I would totally see it again though!

FYI - Make sure you stay for the credits! Trust me...

Dood Lee

02-12-2003, 12:32 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Simon DelMonte:

Odd thought: Michael mentions that we won't see any more of Ms. Garner's body than we do on Alias. And immediately, I think, "what's he talking about? Just because Bendis writes both?" Talk to anyone but a fanboy, and you won't get this response. And I don't even read Alias (or watch it, either).
<hr /></blockquote>The Alias comic has nothing to do with the show Alias. They are totally different. The comic is written by Bendis. The show that Jennifer Garner stars in is written by J.J. Abrams.

jerkyboy

02-12-2003, 12:32 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by DrDoom:
why is Kingpin so different?<hr /></blockquote>Yeah....y'know, the mob isn't exactly an equal opportunity employer. They would never let a black man lead them. I don't understand why they didn't just correct this by digitally making Duncan white in the film.

mike sangiacomo

02-12-2003, 12:34 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Looney As A Toon:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by MattBrady:
[qb]It’s clear that he knows and loves comics, something that can rarely be said for writers of other film writers working of comic projects. The Batman and Superman films being the best example of writers who lacked such love for the medium.
<hr /></blockquote>Well Michael, aren't we the Marvel zombie today! Since when did you take a job with their public relations department?

Listen up, boy: After 25 years, the first Superman movie is still the best written, best directed and best acted movie based on a comic character ever to come out. The writers had a perfect understanding of what it is that makes Superman the premeire superhero... the first of its kind and still the best of all INCLUDING those characters of your employers.

MIKE HERE:
The first Superman movie was perfect? Oh please. Sure, the first half was excellent but as soon as Luthor is introduced it falls to crap. "Mr. Loo-Tor, Mr. Loo-Tor." It was part serious and part slapstick. And credibility? Sure, Superman flies backwards and turns back time.
If that's your idea of a perfect movie, stick to cartoons.
M

fistofkhonshu

02-12-2003, 12:43 PM

I had an early screening of Daredevil after the theater closed and it sucked!! :( I'm also extremely full of shit :D
I can't wait to see it. Well actually I can. There's a showing here Thursday, but I'll wait till Saturday. Affleck is the question factor to me. Everyone else has proven themselves capable. Affleck has been the same guy in every movie I've seen, I just hope that guy is Matt Murdock

fistofkhonshu

02-12-2003, 12:50 PM

Superman is the crappiest character ever invented. No motivation. NONE AT ALL. Batman should always question his loyalty to the human race. Unless... its discovered in the future that all Kryptonians have an over bearing sense of responsibility. And that they just simply must be everyone's savior. He also has a power to counteract any situation he's put in. How can you write a good story without changing some of that?

The Fucking Glasses?!?!?! You have got to be a total dipshit to not notice. Watch me change to superman... :cool: :rolleyes: See you don't recognize me now do you?

J Wyatt

02-12-2003, 01:10 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Paul Hamilton:
Well that quote didn't quite work out. No edit function here?<hr /></blockquote>The can click the little picture of the pencil and paper to edit your posts.

J Wyatt

02-12-2003, 01:15 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by fistofkhonshu:
Superman is the crappiest character ever invented. No motivation. NONE AT ALL. Batman should always question his loyalty to the human race. Unless... its discovered in the future that all Kryptonians have an over bearing sense of responsibility. And that they just simply must be everyone's savior. He also has a power to counteract any situation he's put in. How can you write a good story without changing some of that?
<hr /></blockquote>It's true. Superman has been a complete failure for about 65 years.

Salt_Gravy_Hates_U

02-12-2003, 01:32 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Dood Lee:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Simon DelMonte:

And I don't even read Alias (or watch it, either).
<hr /></blockquote>The Alias comic has nothing to do with the show Alias. <hr /></blockquote>1. I cant understand why people read Marvel superhero comics and don't read Alias. It's easily one of, if not the best written title in the entire Marvel stable. It's odd that Marvel and old JQ will push Marville and all that U-Decide bullshit down people's throats but wont promote the great books they already have that people may not know about. When was the last time you saw a full page Black Panther ad? Probably not as recent as a U-Decide ad eh?

2. The show Alias, the comic Alias. WTF!? Two series, one comic one not, both with women as the main characters, in crime/law professions. How the hell could this not be confusing?! And how the hell does this happen? Does that mean I can make my own hilarious half hour tv sitcom about 7 wacky mutants who live in Jersey and all work at a pizza place and call it X-Men? As a matter of fact . . . . (calls FOX Network) Sweet we just got picked up for 12 episodes!

MJ Norton

02-12-2003, 01:53 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Looney As A Toon:

Listen up, boy: After 25 years, the first Superman movie is still the best written, best directed and best acted movie based on a comic character ever to come out. The writers had a perfect understanding of what it is that makes Superman the premeire superhero... the first of its kind and still the best of all INCLUDING those characters of your employers.
badly[/QB]<hr /></blockquote>You've certainly chosen an apt board identity. To each his own, and I wouldn't have bothered chiming in on that point had your comments not been so polarized and stentorian. As a comics reader since the late 60's my highest marks go to the first Superman movie only in the category of "Most Effective Sleeping Pill." Reeves did a nice enough job, and Hackman did his best to keep the film afloat, but I'm unable to watch the movie without keeping the remote in hand for frequent skips through scenes. The interminable "Can you read my mind?" scene lurches horribly to mind. Then there's the big ending scene... No, I'm not going to be watching that again anytime soon.

Still, isn't this thread supposed to be about Daredevil?

It's good to see a positive review of this, but I'm still going in with low expectations. For all the hype that the drive behind it was rooted in Daredevil comics, too many references - including ones from the director on a recent promo piece aired on HBO, tell me the man's locked on the Kevin Smith version of DD, which is IMHO about as wrong as one can go.

Additionally, I wasn/t thrilled with what I saw of many of the effects, from somewhat embarassing wire work (a fight scene between DD and Kingpin in an office looked as if it would be particularly hilarious as DD wobbles through the air after being thrown) to CGI acrobatics which belie the fact that physically DD's just supposed to be a highly trained acrobat/martial artist, not someone capable of walking away from landings that would give any human being compound leg fractures and/or fractured vertebrae.

I will go see it and take it on its own merits, but while I won't hold it manically to comics continuity (whatever that even means in this context anymore) I'll still be expecting to see the essence of the character(s) translated in order for me to really call it a success.

MJN

MJ Norton

02-12-2003, 02:12 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Salt_Gravy_Hates_U:1. I cant understand why people read Marvel superhero comics and don't read Alias. It's easily one of, if not the best written title in the entire Marvel stable. It's odd that Marvel and old JQ will push Marville and all that U-Decide bullshit down people's throats but wont promote the great books they already have that people may not know about. When was the last time you saw a full page Black Panther ad? Probably not as recent as a U-Decide ad eh?[/QB]<hr /></blockquote>Absolute agreement. Aliasis something I look forward to each month, and I'm a Marvel fan from way, way back. Priest's work on Black Panther has also been largely ignored. In the case of the former the unfortunate buzz has focused on what constitutes "explicit" content, and how Luke Cage was represented. If I have any problem with Cage's appearances there it isn't his first time through, it's the way he seemed more subtly changed more recently, to unfortunately reflect the mistake that was the Azzarello/Corben Cage. In the case of Black Panther the word that Priest's actually a writer who has done his homework on the characters and their histories apparently scared away newcomers who mistakenly thought they'd be at sea among the details.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Salt_Gravy_Hates_U:
2. The show Alias, the comic Alias. WTF!? Two series, one comic one not, both with women as the main characters, in crime/law professions. How the hell could this not be confusing?! And how the hell does this happen? Does that mean I can make my own hilarious half hour tv sitcom about 7 wacky mutants who live in Jersey and all work at a pizza place and call it X-Men? As a matter of fact . . . . (calls FOX Network) Sweet we just got picked up for 12 episodes![/QB]<hr /></blockquote>It's only going to become more confusing now that a comics version of the tv show is on the way. The duplication of titles was one of those bits of creative coincidence, and unfortunately it's the (frankly superior) Marvel version that's suffering by being buried even deeper than usual in the larger popular culture.

===MJN

KACH

02-12-2003, 02:15 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by mike sangiacomo:

MIKE HERE:
The first Superman movie was perfect? Oh please. Sure, the first half was excellent but as soon as Luthor is introduced it falls to crap. "Mr. Loo-Tor, Mr. Loo-Tor." It was part serious and part slapstick. And credibility? Sure, Superman flies backwards and turns back time.
If that's your idea of a perfect movie, stick to cartoons.
M<hr /></blockquote>Well said, Mike. I hate it when people praise Superman & knock everything else. Superman had just as much hokiness & cheez, if not more, than many comic films. We just don't remember those parts. Turn the world backwards to go back in time . . . come ON!

--J.

MattBrady

02-12-2003, 02:19 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by MJ Norton:
[QUOTE]The duplication of titles was one of those bits of creative coincidence, and unfortunately it's the (frankly superior) Marvel version that's suffering by being buried even deeper than usual in the larger popular culture.<hr /></blockquote>Not to slam Alias, but how is it being hurt or bring caused to be ignored by a larger audience by the television show?

MattB

brett

02-12-2003, 02:22 PM

While I haven't seen the movie yet, I am kind of looking forward to it though I am COMPLETELY turned off by Elektra's costume. She looks like an S & M queen and while many are stating that it's not very believable for an assassin to dress in bright red, it isn't reality when a man comes from another planet, dresses in a towel and red underwear with a big red S and flies in the sky to fight crime either. My point, these aren't real anyway. Spider Man's costume is pretty hokey when you think about it too.

My other disappointment is the way Elektra is portrayed. And while I'm only going on what I've seen in the trailers, they have her smiling way too much.

Elektra isn't a very happy, peppy character.

But my main disgust is that Frank Miller wasn't given enough credit. I mean c'mon, Kevin Smith is given a cameo (and I wasn't all to impressed with his run on the book anyway) and more kudos. But without Frank Miller's work on the book, there would BE NO DAREDEVIL movie. He created Elektra and the entire story is taken from HIS work. He deserved a bit more than a nod in my opinion...

MJ Norton

02-12-2003, 02:40 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by MattBrady:Not to slam Alias, but how is it being hurt or bring caused to be ignored by a larger audience by the television show? <hr /></blockquote>Simply because even in this age of cable a network tv show, complete with advertising (and a boost from having the star receive larger critical acclaim) means that an overwhelming percentage of the people who will show any recognition upon hearing "Alias" will be thinking of the tv show. Television's such a huge medium, especially compared to comics, and a largely isolated Max title is a relatively small backwater in the pool of comics.

===MJN

MattBrady

02-12-2003, 03:19 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by MJ Norton:
[QUOTE]Television's such a huge medium, especially compared to comics, and a largely isolated Max title is a relatively small backwater in the pool of comics.<hr /></blockquote>Agreed, but was it ever going to compete, head to head against such large numbers as those that watch the television series? The names were a creative coincidence, but I don't think the existance of the television series has hurt, or really could hurt the MAX series.

MattB

jpritchett

02-12-2003, 03:23 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by brett:
My other disappointment is the way Elektra is portrayed. And while I'm only going on what I've seen in the trailers, they have her smiling way too much.

Elektra isn't a very happy, peppy character. <hr /></blockquote>See the movie. Trust me, she's not "happy" or "peppy" after certain events occur. In the last 1/3 or so of the movie, she's bitter, angry, and vengeful.

Jason

Paul Hamilton

02-12-2003, 03:35 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by brett:
But my main disgust is that Frank Miller wasn't given enough credit. I mean c'mon, Kevin Smith is given a cameo (and I wasn't all to impressed with his run on the book anyway) and more kudos. But without Frank Miller's work on the book, there would BE NO DAREDEVIL movie. He created Elektra and the entire story is taken from HIS work. He deserved a bit more than a nod in my opinion...<hr /></blockquote>I did read somewhere that there was a cameo shot with Miller as a Bullseye victim, I think it was a pen that got speared into his forehead.
I think I also remember reading that it was cut for certification purposes, though. We'll just have to wait for the DVD if that's the case.

burntredwaffle

02-12-2003, 03:36 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by MattBrady:
by Michael Sangiacomo

Okay, Spider-Man was good, but remember the few scenes where Willem Dafoe overacted and it came off a little silly? And remember those couple scenes where, while good, came off a bit unbelievable? The ones where you thought it could have been done a little better?
<hr /></blockquote>Since I've seen Spider-Man about 50 times now I can answer all of those questions as NO, NO, and NO.

MindTricked

02-12-2003, 03:39 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by brett:
But my main disgust is that Frank Miller wasn't given enough credit. I mean c'mon, Kevin Smith is given a cameo (and I wasn't all to impressed with his run on the book anyway) and more kudos. But without Frank Miller's work on the book, there would BE NO DAREDEVIL movie. He created Elektra and the entire story is taken from HIS work. He deserved a bit more than a nod in my opinion...<hr /></blockquote>Well, I read that Frank Miller actually appears as a Bullseye victim in one of those "blink-and-you-miss-'em" cameos. I'm sure he's pretty cool with the whole thing.

I-Ching

02-12-2003, 03:41 PM

Well I've very excited to see this movie. Will it be "amazing"? Probably not but it looks like they got most of it if not all of it "right". I am Jennifer Garner fan BIG TIME, but I don't know if she's right for Elektra, she seems to sweet, hope I'm wrong.

As for the Superman movie "debate"...umm, what does that movie have to do with this one? NOTHING. They can both be great films and as far as Superman being the best one, I have to disagree. I just recently bought/watched the DVD and the ending just RUINS it and lets not even discuss how un-sinister and corny Lex Luthor was.

I didn't hear about this Donner interview but if Supes is supposed to fly back in time why would they should the earth's rotation stop and then reverse itself? Perhaps Supes flying back in time is what Donner wished or wanted either way both ideas hurt the plot and movie.

Daredevil will most definitely NOT bomb. Why? Because there's not a whole lot out there to see. There are far too many people not interested in seeing "How To Lose A Guy In Ten Days" for this movie to flop. This time for movies is slow and when most studios release their weaker films and even if Daredevil isn't as big as Spider-Man it's still the biggest movie to see until X2. Look for it to open with $30+ million.

Kabukiman

02-12-2003, 03:59 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by MJ Norton:
Simply because even in this age of cable a network tv show, complete with advertising (and a boost from having the star receive larger critical acclaim) means that an overwhelming percentage of the people who will show any recognition upon hearing "Alias" will be thinking of the tv show. Television's such a huge medium, especially compared to comics, and a largely isolated Max title is a relatively small backwater in the pool of comics.<hr /></blockquote>Maybe I'm missing the point that you're trying to make...

If there was no Alias TV show, then how would that impact the amount of people who are familiar with the Alias comic?

DrDoom

02-12-2003, 04:14 PM

Even Stan Lee is playing a small roll as normal john do reading a newspaper :)

swol

02-12-2003, 04:45 PM

OK.
Something about the movies...
Strictly my opinions.

Superman - The best at the time, but the times required a cheesy take somewhat in the flavor of the old TV show. A straight, serious Superman movie could not have been made at that time in Hollywood. Parts were great, parts sucked. Still over all pretty good if you have a tolerance for the cheese factor.

Batman - Original film (Burton/Keaton) was about as close as I have seen to an acccurate comic portrayal on screen. Later films decided to, for some twisted reason, channel the old TV show silliness.

X-Men - These guys deserve an award just for being able to come up with a coherent story out of the years of exteremely convoluted subplots that have nearly crippled the comic. (Yes, I know it's still sells big, but how many people can just pick it up and follow it?). Took the comic seriously and ran with it. Very good.

Spider-Man - Fun. Decent story which, while changing some plot points (biological webbing), did a good job of condensing about 40 years with of character development into a coupe hours. Special Effects were impressive, if not always convincing. Like it or not, this set the stage for serious comic based films.

Daredevil - Have not seen it yet so I can't comment more than on the commercials and trailers. Looks pretty good. Moves almost too well considering this is a, basically, normal guy. Interesting glimpses of the Radar Sense. Have not seen enough of the Elektra character to see how she compares to the original. Overall ,I am optimistic.

Hulk - If there is going to be a tough sell for serious comic based movies it's going to be this one. Having the main character entirely CGI based could be a problem. not so optimistic here, but hopeful.

Yes, there were lots more comic based movies out there, mostly bad, but these are the main stars as I see them. Will DD be a hit, I hope so. There are decades worth of stories and characters that could be turned into film properties and I woud love to see them all. So I really hope it does well.

DrDoom

02-12-2003, 04:50 PM

remember one lately: "Road to predition" is also based on a graphic novel or not?

gon

02-12-2003, 05:16 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Looney As A Toon:

Listen up, boy: After 25 years, the first Superman movie is still the best written, best directed and best acted movie based on a comic character ever to come out. <hr /></blockquote>aw, i don´t know, mr. Looney, maybe you meant "to me", as in "personally, after 25 years, i still think that the first superman movie... yadda, yadda, yadda".
me, personally, i think the first superman movie is rubbish. boring, boring, boring, and i am not talking of wayne.
if you're entitled to your opinion, the rest of us are as well, aren't we?

but i agree on the part about the acting capacity of mr. affleck, though.

fistofkhonshu

02-12-2003, 05:30 PM

Is the sequel going to be Bullseye: The Man Without Hair ?

I hate this! I'm going to see a Ben Affleck movie on purpose! Its a sign of the apocalypse I tell you! Its all coming to an end :confused:

MJ Norton

02-12-2003, 05:31 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Kabukiman:Maybe I'm missing the point that you're trying to make...

If there was no Alias TV show, then how would that impact the amount of people who are familiar with the Alias comic?[/QB]<hr /></blockquote>If there were no Alias tv show someone who came across a copy of the comic, or a reference to it online or in some paper of magazine's "fringe" review section, might wonder what it was about. With ABC having a well-advertized show, though, people see "Alias" as a title and they automatically think they know (to their level of interest) what's being advertised. This could easily also apply to the average comics fan, given the glut of information about upcoming and current series, many tend to look for the quickest paths to tune out as much of it as they can.

The result, it at least seems to me, is that those who aren't interested in the show - who perhaps have just seen the commercials and made a snap judgement - would see "Alias", think "Oh, it's that junior superspy/fashion model college student show" and move along. Those who are interested in the show might look into it and likely come away with a negative reaction to finding out that there's some "fake" being pushed on the public.

===MJN

Cyko

02-12-2003, 05:37 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by mike sangiacomo:

MIKE HERE:
The first Superman movie was perfect? Oh please. Sure, the first half was excellent but as soon as Luthor is introduced it falls to crap. "Mr. Loo-Tor, Mr. Loo-Tor." It was part serious and part slapstick. And credibility? Sure, Superman flies backwards and turns back time.
If that's your idea of a perfect movie, stick to cartoons.
M[/QB]<hr /></blockquote>Have you forgotten that movie was made in the '70s, waaaay before Crisis, when Superman could pretty much do anything?

El Toro Rojo

02-12-2003, 05:42 PM

Mike S. wrote:
"The love scene between Affleck and Garner is real, very adult, as opposed to the adolescent smooching in the Spider-Man flick."

This line confuses me. Aren't Peter and Mary Jane adolescents? Wouldn't it make sense for adolescents to have "adolescent smooching"? :confused:

fistofkhonshu

02-12-2003, 05:51 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> MIKE HERE:
The first Superman movie was perfect? Oh please. Sure, the first half was excellent but as soon as Luthor is introduced it falls to crap. "Mr. Loo-Tor, Mr. Loo-Tor." It was part serious and part slapstick. And credibility? Sure, Superman flies backwards and turns back time. If that's your idea of a perfect movie, stick to cartoons.
M[/QB]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Have you forgotten that movie was made in the '70s, waaaay before Crisis, when Superman could pretty much do anything? <hr /></blockquote>That has nothing to do with the cornball antics. Ned Beatty is the least of it, though he did have his own theme music which is pretty stupid for a character who's not important at all. A flying poetry session..ooohh aaaahhh. Lame even to my sister who was nine at the time it came out. The phone booth scene was funny but campy. THAT IS A BAD OUTFIT? The beginning with the comic? Don't get me wrong liked the movie. But watching it now isn't like watching Horror of Dracula now. There are campy scenes in Superman that were made campy for no other reason than to do so. Much like the Batman Express card BULLSHIT from the dynamic Nippled Duo films. Warner Brothers has never given DC's characters any respect. And never will.

swol

02-12-2003, 06:08 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by fistofkhonshu:
[QUOTE] Warner Brothers has never given DC's characters any respect. And never will.<hr /></blockquote>And because of this we all lose.
I suspect the first Batman movie was a wild gamble by WB with a "strange" director and a guy who was previously only known as a comic in the starring role. Honestly, could you have come up with a more unlikely hit?

After that movie they started getting goofier and goofier. Until, finally, Batman & Robin are air boarding down the sides of buildings.

They seem to think that Comic Books = Comic Writing (as in comedy).

Oddly, the most mature Batman film I've seen is Mask Of The Phantasm - an animated film. It still had more adult themes than about all the rest of the WB films. This was relegated away as "kid stuff". I'll never understand some decisions.

As most comic shop owners will tell them, we, (the comic readers), are NOT a bunch of 12 year olds.

Maybe they have learned something from the recent Marvel successes and the coming Batman & Superman movies will do straight-on stories.

DrDoom

02-12-2003, 06:25 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by fistofkhonshu:
Is the sequel going to be Bullseye: The Man Without Hair ?

I hate this! I'm going to see a Ben Affleck movie on purpose! Its a sign of the apocalypse I tell you! Its all coming to an end :confused: <hr /></blockquote>or "Without makeup"? Where is the bullseye he is so famous for?

<a href="http://www.marveldirectory.com/individuals/b/bullseye.htm" target="_blank">look here : please correct me if i am wrong</a>

fistofkhonshu

02-12-2003, 06:47 PM

Oddly, the most mature Batman film I've seen is Mask Of The Phantasm - an animated film. It still had more adult themes than about all the rest of the WB films.

Yeah

This was relegated away as "kid stuff". As most comic shop owners will tell them, we, (the comic readers), are NOT a bunch of 12 year olds.

YEAH
Maybe they have learned something from the recent Marvel successes and the coming Batman & Superman movies will do straight-on stories.

I hope so but I'm not holding my breath. You see what the new Lone Ranger looks like? Rawhide Kid pops to mind, the new one.

Justin M. Campbell

02-12-2003, 07:40 PM

I haven't seen the movie, but based on reviews and previews I really don't have anything bad to say about it. Just a casting thought. I like joey pants as much as anybody else, but . . . look at ben urich. All of miller's stuff, Born Again especially, he doesn't look like joe pantaliano. Marvels pretty much nails it, look wise. James Spader. I would have cast James Spader as Ben Urich. But that's me.

P.S. Just read superherohype. Joe Millionaire will not be superman. Thank you God.

SuperColossal

02-12-2003, 08:53 PM

Loved it, loved it, loved it. :)
I saw a sneak preview of the movie and as a hyper-critical comic-book reading, movie lover, all I can say is the complaints I have are not worth mentioning. I thought this was THE best comic to film adaptation I have ever seen. It was even better than Spiderman in my opinion.

WB should take some notes for their upcoming Superman, Batman, WW, and Catwoman projects. Get people on the project who care about the characters/property and you will have a better chance of putting out a winner. This doesn't mean the material has to be directly lifted from the books. Things will have to be changed because comics and film are 2 distinctly different mediums but a director who loves the source can only help IMO.

Affleck was great. Garner was great. They were great together. Fav (Foggy) was great. MCD was great and Farrell was great. It was a fun entertaining ride. I recommend going in with a low but hopeful expectation. That way you will be pleasantly surprised. If you hype yourself up too much, you can only let yourself down. Don't wait for naysayers to brainwash you into thinking negatively. Bring a friend and enjoy it this weekend. If it wins the top spot this weekend, the buzz will only help it get the attention it deserves.

Like I said, I saw it but I am bringing all my pals (especially the non comic readers) to see it with me again this weekend.

Peace

jawaplumber

02-12-2003, 08:55 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by J Wyatt:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by fistofkhonshu:
Superman is the crappiest character ever invented. No motivation. NONE AT ALL. Batman should always question his loyalty to the human race. Unless... its discovered in the future that all Kryptonians have an over bearing sense of responsibility. And that they just simply must be everyone's savior. He also has a power to counteract any situation he's put in. How can you write a good story without changing some of that?
<hr /></blockquote>It's true. Superman has been a complete failure for about 65 years.<hr /></blockquote>I absolutely love posts like this. Makes me feel better than a heaping bowl of Cocoa Pebbles <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> Seriously, come join us on Earth. The air is quite nice down here. And we aren't as close-minded as your alien culture apparently is.

jawaplumber

02-12-2003, 09:15 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Looney As A Toon:
Well Michael, aren't we the Marvel zombie today! Since when did you take a job with their public relations department?

Listen up, boy: After 25 years, the first Superman movie is still the best written, best directed and best acted movie based on a comic character ever to come out. The writers had a perfect understanding of what it is that makes Superman the premeire superhero... the first of its kind and still the best of all INCLUDING those characters of your employers.
<hr /></blockquote>Dude, do you realize that by putting on your "holier-than-thou" shoes, you make it tougher for those of us who try to logically argue for the creative credibility of the first Superman movie?

And while I'm on the subject, that infamous scene was NOT about Superman physically spinning the Earth backwards, it was just a visual stunt, much like the old Time Tunnel of the TV series of the same name. I mean, does anyone really think a giant Marlon Brando head-shaped diamond appeared to Clark from outer space and is now just floating around amongst the stars? No one complains about how silly that looked, right? It was merely a visual stylization/representation of what was going on in the story. People are sometimes so desperate to find something negative, they will just overlook simple logic and/or creative film-making and not realize you can't always take something for face value. Sometimes you're SUPPOSED to think a little deeper, and the Earth-spinning sequence was certainly in tune with what had been previously established in the film. Sure, there was also the camp of the Luthor sequences, but hey, couldn't the same diversity be found in a comic book? That's kinda funny when you think about it, too...since the source material of Superman The Movie just happened to be comic books <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

DocSamson27572

02-12-2003, 11:12 PM

I'm waiting to see Daredevil, eventhough all the way down here in Australia we have to wait an extra month!! That is, unless some generous soul puts it up at Kazaa or somewhere similar. Is that a hint?

As for the "Superman" controversy. I liked the film, and rate it as one of my all time favourites. As for the corn factor, I suggest you go back and read some of the Superman and Action Comics books from 1978. Afterwards you will see that the film is a very accurate depiction of the character at that time. Pre-Crisis Supes, flew thru time, used superbreath to do a lot of dopey things (anyone remember the regular putting a train back on the tracks use of superbreath etc), and the villains gave a lot of long winded, corny speeches. Geez, even look at the names of some of the villains at that time!! It was a corny, innocent era for Supes, and is reflected in the movie. And that harmless, dopey, innocent, corny approach is what made it so charming to me. I mean, do you really think Superman would advise Lois on the statistical danger, or lack of, in relation to flying, just after he's saved her from the helicopter if the film was made now?

beta-ray

02-13-2003, 12:25 AM

Haven't seen the movie yet.

I am a bit of a sketptic of the Daredevil movie... But I do want to see it. It looks... okay. Looks like it contains some corniness and some fun too. I haven't agreed with much of anything Michael Sangiacomo has said so it makes me even more skeptical... Oh well.

I never cared much for Affleck or Garner and they look kind of silly fighting in the preview. BUT again, I haven't seen it so I will reserve judgement until I do... and unless something really bad happens, I will likely see it soon...

Regarding superman and the time turning schtick... it is not so much that it looks funny onscreen as that I would ask myself "would Superman do that?" Til this day I don't know if I think he would. *shrug*

mayhem

02-13-2003, 01:11 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by jerkyboy:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by DrDoom:
why is Kingpin so different?<hr /></blockquote>Yeah....y'know, the mob isn't exactly an equal opportunity employer. They would never let a black man lead them. I don't understand why they didn't just correct this by digitally making Duncan white in the film.<hr /></blockquote>This was my main thought on the matter also. The mob, being comprised mainly of Italian-Americans, are a very racist lot, or they used to be and I can't imagine them being much different now. See Tony Soprano's reaction when his daughter is dating a black guy for an example of this. Thus they wouldn't let a black guy be capo-di-tutti-capo(boss of bosses), at least as he is portrayed in the comics, I don't know exactly how he'll be in the movie.
Except the fact is, in real life, they also wouldn't let any body be boss of bosses really, because there isn't such a position in reality. I would assume Fisk became Kingpin by pure force and sheer willpower, not to mention physical power. This is done of course by the use of violenece, threats and intimidation, and the mobs only reluctantly allow him to rule because they can't beat him, he is too powerful for them and as such they concede power to him enabling him to be kingpin, but not because they agree to it. In this sense a black man could easily have the position as much as any one else.
Also I too initially thought they should make Fisk white somehow, but I don't think this a very practical idea in reality.

Peter David

02-13-2003, 03:11 AM

posted by PAD:
No, that would be "The Phantom" (although Spider-Man is right up there)

Hey - you usually mention The Rocketeer in this breath too...

But I'm with you on The Phantom - worth it for Catherine Zeta-Jones alone.

MattB

swol

02-13-2003, 09:30 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Peter David:


No, that would be "The Phantom" (although Spider-Man is right up there). "Superman" goes completely off track the moment Ned Beatty's Otis hits the screen and the sensibilitilies of the epic Puzo half of the script collide with the Newman's ultra-campy, it's-comics-it's-stupid take.

I liked "Daredevil" as well, and thought it far superior to the flawed "Superman" and the wildly uneven story of "Batman" as well. Does that make me a Marvel zombie too?

PAD<hr /></blockquote>Heh...
PAD, I don't think anybody will consider you a Marvel-Zombie.

Yes Superman was flawed but as I said earlier, I don't think the Hollywood of that time would have allowed a serious comic based film.

As for The Phantom, I'm with you up until he starts up with that mystical ring stuff. Lose the magic ring and you've got a pretty spot on adaptation.

Jackie Chan's Pants

02-13-2003, 10:54 AM

Hey there SuperColossal

Glad to hear you had a great time. I am doing the 'comic book film litmus test'.

The experiment involves me, a big DD fan who has devoured the comic for years.

The 'control' part of the experiment is my friend Lynda, who doesn't read comics, and really knows nothing about the comic and its past and characters.

I always try to take a 'non comic reader' to movies like this as a way of trying to gauge how the general public who have never heard of these characters find the film.

Will let you know how it works out. We are going tonight at nine. (I was feeling optimistic, and also got tickets to Tomorrow's opening day show)

Falkner

02-13-2003, 11:44 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />
Originally posted by Peter David:

"Superman" goes completely off track the moment Ned Beatty's Otis hits the screen and the sensibilitilies of the epic Puzo half of the script collide with the Newman's ultra-campy, it's-comics-it's-stupid take. <hr /></blockquote>SUPERMAN is a movie of it's time, just like BATMAN is. Is SUPERMAN hokey? Hell, yes. So was every James Bond movie in the 70s. "Camp" was popular. I don't feel it's fair to hold that against it any more than saying it had bad special effects. Regardless NO ONE will ever be more perfect for a comic book role than Christopher Reeve was for Supes. And another way the SUPERMAN movie will never be beaten: It will always be the ONLY comic based movie that is better than the comic books that preceded it.

DrDoom

02-13-2003, 12:32 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Falkner:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />
Originally posted by Peter David:

"Superman" goes completely off track the moment Ned Beatty's Otis hits the screen and the sensibilitilies of the epic Puzo half of the script collide with the Newman's ultra-campy, it's-comics-it's-stupid take. <hr /></blockquote>SUPERMAN is a movie of it's time, just like BATMAN is. Is SUPERMAN hokey? Hell, yes. So was every James Bond movie in the 70s. "Camp" was popular. I don't feel it's fair to hold that against it any more than saying it had bad special effects. Regardless NO ONE will ever be more perfect for a comic book role than Christopher Reeve was for Supes. And another way the SUPERMAN movie will never be beaten: It will always be the ONLY comic based movie that is better than the comic books that preceded it.<hr /></blockquote>but Batman has also a number of movies as Superman has; Hulk had also a series of movies;

morbidmarwik

02-13-2003, 01:48 PM

:confused: i haven't read daredevil for years so please forgive my ignorance but is it just me or was kingpin a white guy in the comics?? I can't remember. i picked up the 10cent issue and apparently kingpin isnt out of town or something. is this so new readers who saw the movie don't pick up the comic and go "who the heck is this big white guy calling himself kingpin?".

oh yeh, and i always thought the superman movies were really average hey. spiderman was near perfect and this looks it too. yay!

swol

02-13-2003, 03:23 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by morbidmarwik:
 :confused: i haven't read daredevil for years so please forgive my ignorance but is it just me or was kingpin a white guy in the comics?? I can't remember. <hr /></blockquote>OK. In the comics the Kingpin is indeed a really big white guy.

Now name all of the really big white guys who could portray the character without looking silly or having to be prosthetically built up to the point that they couldn't move.

Now you see the problem.

Along comes Michael Clarke Duncan who is pretty damn big already AND can act.

It was a no brainer.

The changes are strictly skin deep. (Ouch. I think I just hurt myself with that last comment. Sorry.)

Irish Cream

02-14-2003, 01:44 AM

Saw the movie a few hours ago. Let me begin on a positive note: the new X2 trailer at the beginning was OFF THE MUTHA EFFIN' HOOK!!! I had to change my pants after that. Now, moving away from that lovely little bit of imagery, let me say that I liked Daredevil. It was okay. But that's all I really felt about it: okay. The fight scenes were cool, and Colin Farrell was all kinds of awesome, but the rest of the movie just came off as "underdeveloped". That's the best word I can use to describe the movie. Too many characters given too little time. You're telling me you're gonna have DD, Elektra, Kingpin, AND Bullseye, and give them all ample time within a time frame of a little over an hour and a half? Right, uh huh.

Duncan is a great Kingpin, but he's not really in there much. Sure he has a few scenes, but they all seem fleeting and rushed. In fact, most scenes in the movie seemed rushed, except for the parts that portrayed DD's senses (which was well done, btw). Other than DD, the only other character that I felt had enough screen time to fully establish theirself was Bullseye, but that's mainly because you don't really have to say or show much about him other than he's a cold-blooded BMF. Elektra is built-up, but then her development is quickly rushed when she becomes vengeful. I felt with more time, this movie could've been 10 times better. They tried to jam up waaaaaaaaaay too much in too little time.

Yes, I am a huge DD comic fan. I have the Visionary Miller TPB's (the 2nd and 3rd ones, when he was the writer), and the Born Again stuff. I have the Smith run, the current Bendis run, etc. I'm not typing this as a fanboy, because being a fanboy usually helps me to enjoy a movie, and sometimes helps me to bypass nitpicky flaws. For instance, I'm a huge Wolverine and Spider-Man fan (way before I was a DD one), and I thought X-Men was a damn good movie and Spider-Man...well, the fact that some people can even knock Spider-Man nearly gives me a heart-attack. If you really know Spider-Man and the comics, you know that movie nailed everything it should've, and then some! That movie was almost perfect in conveying the feel of the comic (some more Spidey humor could've been used, heh). Daredevil was alright, but things seemed a bit forced and unbelieveable, even for a comicbook movie. Where the hell does he get this tank from? His secret room for hiding all his DD shit? This also goes for Batman and the X-Men: who do you call to get this crap done at your place? I seriously want an estimate here!

On some positive notes, I thought the fight scenes were awesome! Especially the barfight...wow! I don't care if it looks a little CGI, it still was cool! I thoroughly enjoyed them. Plus the Foggy Nelson stuff: hilarious stuff. But overall, the movie itself was a rushed juggling act between characters that never had the adequate amount of time to shine. Too bad. Hopefully, if they make a second movie, they'll get Bendis to script it <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

As for those who enjoyed the movie more than I...hey, I'm glad you did. It just didn't feel right to me, but they put forth a good effort to make the movie and had great intentions, so I applaud them for the passion of the movie's creators. I wish I could've liked it more than I did.

cannon

02-14-2003, 02:14 AM

Just saw a sneak preview.

Really frustrated. Somewhere out there, there's a good story to be told about Daredevil. Bendis is doing phenomenal things with the hypocrisy at the core of the character -- that stuff would have made a great flick.

Instead... well, it looks like the director took the Tim Burton BATMAN film, added some MATRIX-inspired fight scenes, and then shat out DAREDEVIL.

People who like Kid Rock will enjoy this film. The plot is paper thin, it's loud and fast and Jennifer Garner's cleavage is prominently displayed. If you enjoy the movie, more power to you. Me, I think it was two hours of my life I'll never get back.

That X-men 2 trailer though... almost made up for it.

Jim Cannon

danzo

02-14-2003, 06:21 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Looney As A Toon:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by MattBrady:
It’s clear that he knows and loves comics, something that can rarely be said for writers of other film writers working of comic projects. The Batman and Superman films being the best example of writers who lacked such love for the medium.
<hr /></blockquote>Well Michael, aren't we the Marvel zombie today! Since when did you take a job with their public relations department?

Listen up, boy: After 25 years, the first Superman movie is still the best written, best directed and best acted movie based on a comic character ever to come out. The writers had a perfect understanding of what it is that makes Superman the premeire superhero... the first of its kind and still the best of all INCLUDING those characters of your employers.

I went with some friends - some who are dedicated Marvel and Daredevil readers - to go to a preview of this movie and it was horrible... pure dreck that screwed with Daredevil's continuity. Affleck had the acting range of a mannequin. This movie will bomb badly<hr /></blockquote>o.k. this needs comment.
are you flipping nuts? all of the Superman movies outright suck, the acting being fairly good overall is the only thing they have going for them. the Batman movies are mediocre at best, and everything else based on a major superhero, has, until Spiderman, been absolute crap.
Spiderman finally got it right: a comic brought to the big screen in all it's proper glory! sucks that it wasn't Supes or Bats (or better yet, Wonder Woman!) but it was really nice to see someone actually bring the hero to the screen rather than some inane "what-if" type creation of their own personal so-called "vision" as happened with the Supes and Bat-films....
if Mike says this pic does Spidey one better, i'll take his (usually very agreeable to me anyways) word for it, and eagerly look forward to seeing this flick....all the while hoping that this will make Warner get their ass in gear and do the Worlds' Finest Heroes like they should be done. Then we'll really see the best "from the comics" movie ever....

benror

02-14-2003, 06:35 AM

Hi,
Thought you all might like to follow this link a read up on this head line."Malaysia bans Affleck's Daredevil"

<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/film/2760429.stm" target="_blank">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/film/2760429.stm</a>
You just have to laugh. :D

danzo

02-14-2003, 06:48 AM

ooops, i forgot about "X-Men" somehow.... not bad, but still riddled with flaws; about at the Batman level of so-so....
and no, i'm not talking about films like the Phantom, or Rocketeer, or even Dick Tracy; as i said in my earlier post, films about the MAJOR superheroes, all of which outside of the Bat-flicks and X-men, which are merely o.k., have sucked until Spiderman....which rocked. most of those "second-tier" type flicks have been much better than those created for the "big-guns"
(and the stuff from "unknown" comics tends to rock- the first ""M.I.B." and Road to Perdition for example)
curious, eh?

danzo

02-14-2003, 07:07 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Dude, do you realize that by putting on your "holier-than-thou" shoes, you make it tougher for those of us who try to logically argue for the creative credibility of the first Superman movie?

And while I'm on the subject, that infamous scene was NOT about Superman physically spinning the Earth backwards, it was just a visual stunt, much like the old Time Tunnel of the TV series of the same name. I mean, does anyone really think a giant Marlon Brando head-shaped diamond appeared to Clark from outer space and is now just floating around amongst the stars? No one complains about how silly that looked, right? It was merely a visual stylization/representation of what was going on in the story. People are sometimes so desperate to find something negative, they will just overlook simple logic and/or creative film-making and not realize you can't always take something for face value. Sometimes you're SUPPOSED to think a little deeper, and the Earth-spinning sequence was certainly in tune with what had been previously established in the film..... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> <hr /></blockquote>hee-hee-hee....think a little deeper indeed. nope, i'm sorry but the infamous world&time in reverse scene stands as utter crap. sorry, Jawa, but your rather generous rationale could only work if the visuals of said scene were not so explicit in showing a moving world come to a stop then move in reverse/"backwards". this is no visual allegory, this is literal representation. if, by some impossible chance it was honestly conceived as the sort of abstract you suggest, then it's easilly the worst such exercise in modern cinema. doubly so when one considers far more effective evocations of time-travel had been achieved decades before.
and that's actually one of the less sucky things about the film...... :D

MattBrady

02-14-2003, 09:11 AM

Ironic that your sig line talks about respecting creators, yet you advocate stealing from them in your post by telling people not to pay for the movie you bash.

MattB

crackrockcandy

02-14-2003, 09:34 AM

This movie was just average, it didn't suck, but it was nowhere near Spidey or X-Men. The whole movie was shown in the trailer-the only action sequence, DD vs. Kingpin, Bullseye falling out the window, comedic banter between Foggy & Matt, etc....If you're a comic fan, you can get your jollies off the Marvel references (the boxers Miller, Mack, and Bendis lol ) and cameos (Frank Miller & Kevin Smith), but if I knew nothing about the character I would be horribly confused about several things...

1) Why the hell is this girl "Elektra" such a bad-ass? A tiny mention of her training, but that was it. Just one line from Kingpin would have solved this-"That's Elektra, the world's greatest assassin. She once killed 30 men in two minutes" or something like that.

2) When Matt goes to sleep in his chamber, sure the reason why he sleeps in such a contraption is implied but a simple voiceover by Affleck would have alleviated any confusion. As it stood, the person I saw it with who does not read the comics thought it was a healing device, and when I in my dorky allegiance explained what it was, he was like wow, that's cool but I never would have guessed.

3) Why does DD like to hang out in the church? Alot of scenes that imply he has ties to the church, but no mention of his upbringing by the Catholic Clergy once his father passed.

4) In the end, it was just waaaay too convenient for Kingpin to send the guards home and wait for DD. What was the build-up to this? How did he know he would be coming for him at that precise moment? If I was not a comic fan with knowledge of their history I would be like WTF.

On an acting note, Colin Farrell was INCREDIBLE and Ben Affleck, whom I am not a big fan of, played the part perfect. I actually did like the costume. However, there was only one major action sequence in the movie, most of which was seen in the trailer. And saying the love story was a little forced would be a bigger understatement than "I think this Matrix franchise has potential to make some bank".

So, not a terrible movie, but it could have been much better. If you are a Daredevil fan, you will not be disappointed (but not blown away either). On another note, the new trailer for X-2 was tres cool, and that movie looks awesome. As for Daredevil, the string of great comic book movies has ended.

Jackie Chan's Pants

02-14-2003, 10:57 AM

Daredevil was KICK-ASS!!
We went to a preview last night. We first saw the trailers for "The Core", "X-Men 2", "The Hulk", and "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen". I was in Heaven!!

The film started, and when it started, I was a little nervous. Would it be as good as I wanted it to be. Nope...It was BETTER.

Ben Affleck completely surprised me. He was a great Matt Murdock. Really.

Jon Favreau as Foggy was completely hilarious. Every time he opened his mouth, you couldn't help but laugh.

Jennifer Garner...I never watched Alias, and I had been staying spoiler free (for the most part), so she was one of my main concerns. I had nothing to worry about, apparently. She was pretty, she was tough, and I really could see the chemistry between the characters of Elektra and Matt.

Michael Clark Duncan as The Kinpin left me wanting more. He was a very powerful man. Huge and dangerous. Only wish we could have seen a bit more of him.

Colin Farell was great as Bullseys. One minute he would look somewhat normal, and then, his eyes would kind of un-focus and roll around in his head, and it was a nice subtle way of showing that he wasn't quite right in the head.

The fight scene in the bar had me worried, because it seemed kind of quick-cut editing that made it hard to see at times what was going on. (Especially when you factor in the flashing lights and dark bar setting...i must admit i thought the flaming pool tables were a bit much...but that is really my only quibble about the film)

David Keith as Jack Murdock. I always liked David Keith. First saw him in "The Rose" w/Bette Midler, and I've loved him since. IT was a nice surprise to see him in this movie.

The 'references for fan-boys' were particulary endearing. As well as the cameos (I won't spoil anything on these, I just found them amusing. My non-comic reading friend kept asking me about why I was giggling at certain scenes. I told her to read the comic for years, and then watch the movie again.)

As we were riding back on the train, I turned to my friend, Lynda and said "That was even better than Spider-Man". And even though people may call me crazy, it is true (in my case)

Lynda turned to me and said "I was gonna' say the same thing, but I thought you would smack me."

Go out and enjoy it.

Joe Kilmartin

02-14-2003, 11:32 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Looney As A Toon:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by MattBrady:
It’s clear that he knows and loves comics, something that can rarely be said for writers of other film writers working of comic projects. The Batman and Superman films being the best example of writers who lacked such love for the medium.
<hr /></blockquote>Well Michael, aren't we the Marvel zombie today! Since when did you take a job with their public relations department?

Listen up, boy: After 25 years, the first Superman movie is still the best written, best directed and best acted movie based on a comic character ever to come out. The writers had a perfect understanding of what it is that makes Superman the premeire superhero... the first of its kind and still the best of all INCLUDING those characters of your employers.

I went with some friends - some who are dedicated Marvel and Daredevil readers - to go to a preview of this movie and it was horrible... pure dreck that screwed with Daredevil's continuity. Affleck had the acting range of a mannequin. This movie will bomb badly<hr /></blockquote>Well, its nice to see you went in with an objective eye, having compared someone who liked it to a zombie -especially given what you compared it to...
Have you watched the first Superman movie *lately*?

Its really not that good a movie, in my opinion. It had the benefit of having nothing to compare it to at the time that it came out, and the shine was put on the apple by its truely *horrible* sequels (go ahead, say you liked the Lex & Eve sequences, or for that matter anything in the Superman movies after the fight in Metropolis in Superman 2 and try to keep your credibility) but people really aught to see the Daredevil movie for themselves before comparing it to their rose-tinted-I-saw-it-when-I-was-ten-years-old memories of something else, which now, when you look at it, isn't even a particularly good remake of EARTHQUAKE with a guy in tights in it.

Also, can a movie mess with a comic's continuity? I don't think so really, because the comics haven't changed at all... I don't seem to remember Krypto in a Superman movie...

I saw Daredevil last night. Apart from Jennifer Garner not being able to "sell" her wirework by "landing" as heavily as Ben Affleck does (the rest of you'll know what I mean in the rooftop fight scene), its really about as good as anyone has gotten in recreating a comic without making it look stupid,as was mentioned in Mike's review above.

If you really need something to compare it to, its as good as the BLADE movies, in my opinion, and maybe a better than that as well. Given that that was what I was expecting, I was happily surprised. The art design is particularly nice in it.

Frank Miller's cameo is a stitch too, as is his credit at the end of the movie.

Joe
(who edits things cause his typing is shit-poor)

Joe Kilmartin

02-14-2003, 12:00 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by jerkyboy:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by DrDoom:
why is Kingpin so different?<hr /></blockquote>Yeah....y'know, the mob isn't exactly an equal opportunity employer. They would never let a black man lead them. I don't understand why they didn't just correct this by digitally making Duncan white in the film.<hr /></blockquote>Its established in the movie that Wilson Fisk started out as a Bodyguard / Muscleman for a gangster and the person I saw the movie with last night said afterwards that he must have had to have been as tough an SOB as he's shown to be in teh movie for the Mafia boys to let him get as powerful as he did.

She doesn't read Daredevil comics, either.

Joe

Joe Kilmartin

02-14-2003, 12:12 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by brett:
While I haven't seen the movie yet, I am kind of looking forward to it though I am COMPLETELY turned off by Elektra's costume. She looks like an S & M queen and while many are stating that it's not very believable for an assassin to dress in bright red, it isn't reality when a man comes from another planet, dresses in a towel and red underwear with a big red S and flies in the sky to fight crime either. My point, these aren't real anyway. Spider Man's costume is pretty hokey when you think about it too...<hr /></blockquote>She actually only wears the leather on her first and last night out trying to beat up people who are way way better at killing people than she is...

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by brett:
My other disappointment is the way Elektra is portrayed. And while I'm only going on what I've seen in the trailers, they have her smiling way too much.

Elektra isn't a very happy, peppy character...<hr /></blockquote>Before her father dies, I'd disagree. After that, she doesn't smile at all.

The trailers aren't the movie, man. Go see the movie.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by brett:
 But my main disgust is that Frank Miller wasn't given enough credit. I mean c'mon, Kevin Smith is given a cameo (and I wasn't all to impressed with his run on the book anyway) and more kudos. But without Frank Miller's work on the book, there would BE NO DAREDEVIL movie. He created Elektra and the entire story is taken from HIS work. He deserved a bit more than a nod in my opinion...<hr /></blockquote>Um... Disgust is a little *strong* isn't it?

He gets as much "credit" as Kevin Smith and Stan Lee.

When you do get around to actually seeing the movie, take a close look at the guy lying on the floor with a pencil in his head when Bullseye is in the Kingpin's office.

Then watch the credits for the name of the guy who was "Man With Pencil In His Head".

You might want to look at what Bullseye says in his rooftop fight with Elektra and go back and re-read the really violent sequence in Daredevil 181.
This movie knows its roots and it knows when it couldn't do any better than what's already been done.

For that matter, yyou aught to go see the movie and stop reviewing the traillers.

Joe

malshnut

02-14-2003, 12:48 PM

Saw DD last night, and it was good!!!

Elayne Riggs

02-14-2003, 05:36 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by MattBrady:
What are you waiting for?<hr /></blockquote>The DVD, I'm thinking. Or at least time to read the Miller run...

- Elayne

jawaplumber

02-14-2003, 10:25 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by danzo:
hee-hee-hee....think a little deeper indeed. nope, i'm sorry but the infamous world&time in reverse scene stands as utter crap. sorry, Jawa, but your rather generous rationale could only work if the visuals of said scene were not so explicit in showing a moving world come to a stop then move in reverse/"backwards". this is no visual allegory, this is literal representation. if, by some impossible chance it was honestly conceived as the sort of abstract you suggest, then it's easilly the worst such exercise in modern cinema. doubly so when one considers far more effective evocations of time-travel had been achieved decades before.
and that's actually one of the less sucky things about the film...... :D <hr /></blockquote>Well, that's cool, its your opinion versus mine. I don't agree with you in the least, and it's your loss if you can't enjoy the movie. I know my life is all the better for the love I have for SUPERMAN THE MOVIE, and I know the same can be said of millions of other fans out there :)

Judge51144

02-15-2003, 04:39 AM

Man, I can't believe this. I saw the movie tonight and thought I'd check out how everyone felt about the film and it looks like I'm in the minority. I had a mad-on to really like this movie but it was a huge letdown.

The script was awful. I couldn't believe some of the lines. I'm watching and recalling, like, "McBain" from "The Simpsons", with how hokey it all got..."That light at the end of the tunnel? It's not heaven, it's the C train!", floored me. Hysterical.

Affleck is really wooden. He didn't look like he was having any fun with it all and delievered his lines with a deep "I'm a superhero" voice. Garner wasn't anything special aside from she's hot. Foggy gets a high-five. Farrell did a good job but had it easy and from the press I've read of him about it, he knows it. He hammed it up, played a cartoon character and got paid nicely for it. I'm curious if someone can spoil what happened after the credits for me. I didn't bother.

The direction was very jarring. All the MTV'd out camera work is nothing but annoying to me. Very "Spider-Man"-influenced too, which is more like ripping it off than homage. It's only been a year, guys (Every superhuman jump...A romantic kiss in the pouring rain...Dodging objects in slow motion). Every scene played out like a music video too. The crappy metal and power ballads are really going to make the movie even sillier in, what, five years?

Then, I remember the "X2" trailer I saw before the film and felt good about going to see "DD". The thing is going to rock.

JimHughs4

02-15-2003, 02:18 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by MattBrady:
Ironic that your sig line talks about respecting creators, yet you advocate stealing from them in your post by telling people not to pay for the movie you bash.

MattB<hr /></blockquote>What he said. JH

malshnut

02-15-2003, 06:36 PM

PS:Personally I don't even want to see Daredevil as a free KAZAA internet download,and they could not pay me enough money to even accept to see that CHEESY RED LATEX HORNY DEVIL film[/QB][/QUOTE]
sooo, now it sounds like you haven't even seen the film. hmmm, my respect for you is going down, down, down...

cannon

02-15-2003, 08:34 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Judge51144:
Very "Spider-Man"-influenced too, which is more like ripping it off than homage. It's only been a year, guys (Every superhuman jump...A romantic kiss in the pouring rain...Dodging objects in slow motion). <hr /></blockquote>More jarring for me were the chunks taken whole out of the 1989 BATMAN movie.

Is it so hard to come up with an original script these days?

Jim Cannon

Mr. Special ED

02-16-2003, 12:09 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by cannon:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Judge51144:
Very "Spider-Man"-influenced too, which is more like ripping it off than homage. It's only been a year, guys (Every superhuman jump...A romantic kiss in the pouring rain...Dodging objects in slow motion). <hr /></blockquote>More jarring for me were the chunks taken whole out of the 1989 BATMAN movie.

Is it so hard to come up with an original script these days?

Jim Cannon<hr /></blockquote>Wanted to hate this film - but couldnt. How else are we going to exploit DD's abilities if we dont see him dodging items in slo-mo. Sorry kids but SPIDERMAN isnt the pioneer of this. Fact is, both heros abilities are pretty similar.

That being said, I do wish that the KINGPIN had been a little more true to form (dont think KINGPIN would ever show any kind of weakness to MATT, even when in defeat), and that the whole "fate of BULLSEYE" had him hallucenating DD's all over the place. Would have been perfect in setting up his return - possibly sullying MATTs name in the next film - cause theres no way this film isn't going to do good business.

morbidmarwik

02-16-2003, 02:48 AM

originally posted by swol:
Now name all of the really big white guys who could portray the character without looking silly or having to be prosthetically built up to the point that they couldn't move.

marlon brando maybe???????
i think he could do it some kinda justice even if he is crazy

beta-ray

02-16-2003, 03:00 AM

Finally saw this movie today and I PRETTY much agree with what Irish Cream and crackrockcandy said...

SPOILERS follow (just FYI)...

The movie was kind of a letdown. The romance, to me, while maybe not adolescent, was wooden and unconvincing... I guess not adolescent just means they consumated their feelings. *shrug*

Affleck's performance was so so... Garner didn't suck but it wasn't outstanding either. Clarke-Duncan didn't do as impressive a job as he could have. Part of it was the script I think. One disagreement I have with many of the previous posters is that I thought Colin Farrell's performance was weak and stereotypical. Oh well.

On the other hand, some of the fighting scenes were entertaining. Though I did think Daredevil's landings felt too heavy at times... thought he'd be more graceful (though I understand the force he is landing with). I also liked how they handled the "Daredevil senses"...

The thing that didn't change from the preview that I knew I wouldn't like is the overall look of the film. It was way too... shiny. I would have thought it could have used more grit than glitz. I also didn't like the "MTV" nature of the movie. Ugh.

Oh well, it was okay. Not great, not horrible. All my opinion of course.

jawaplumber

02-16-2003, 07:18 PM

Ok, now I can finally chime in on the movie itself, after just getting back home now from the theatre. And be warned, there are SPOILERS ahead....

SPOILERS, SPOILERS, SPOILERS...

For me personally, the film was a success because I had such low expectations going in. From the get-go, I found myself in a similiar situation as a lot of other fans were when Michael Keaton was cast as Batman. Ben Affleck, IMHO, is one of the most overrated actors in Hollywood today, and I was completely turned off by the news that he would play Daredevil. Nothing in the trailers, interviews, or any other form of pre-hype led me to believe Affleck would surprise me with a much-hoped for solid performance, either. However, that's exactly what took place. Ben Affleck was solid and believable as Daredevil/Matt Murdock. He did the best he could do with the part, and there were never any moments where I groaned or felt uncomfortable with the performace. He wasn't great and he wasn't amazing. He was, simply, solid. Could another actor have done a better job? Certainly. In an idea world, I would have gone with Matthew McConaughy as DD, but hey, we got Affleck instead, and it worked out just fine.

Then, there was the issue of Jennifer Garner as Elektra. The previews made her seem far too much of the girl next door type, but in the movie she has enough of an exoticness about her, including a passable slight accent, along with an explanation of her martial arts skills, that erases the stigma set by the previws. I rarely allow myself to be negatively persuaded by trailers, but I have to admit, this was one time when I was buffaloed and I'm glad I was proven wrong. Garner was perfectly cast as Elektra, to the point where I can't see anyone else having done as fine of a job with the character. I don't know if I'd get into an Elektra spin-off movie (unless it featured some other Marvel Universe characters as villains or in super-hero cameos), but I'd love to see her brought back for the DD sequel (I'll get to the possible sequel in a moment).

As for the other characters/actors, Kingpin may have been the stereotypical Hollywood crime boss, but wasn't he meant to be that way when he was initially created, anyways? Sure, there were a lot of great stories told with and about Kingpin later on, but for an introductory story, I thought Wilson Fisk was used quite properly and effectively. Maybe in the next movie, we'll get more into the meat-and-potatoes of the character. Ben Urich and Foggy Nelson were a hoot, supported by two fine actors in Joe Pantoliano and Jon Favreau. I hope we get to see more of a relationship between DD and Urich in the next movie, after the events of this film. And finally, Bullseye. What more can be said about Colin Farrell's performance? He was exceptional. However, I do hope that when/ if Bullseye returns for a sequel, we get him in a costume. I know it's so old school of me, but I love costumed super-villains and while I know Bullseye is supposed to be an assassin, I just dig that classic costume of his so much. I'd like to see a version of it used for the sequel. The seeds have already been planted for it, with Bullseye's comment to the Kingpin about wanting "a bloody costume" after his first encounter with Daredevil. I could see him logically wearing a costume the next time he and DD go face to face. It would be a way for Bullseye, in his crazy mind, to try and "one up" his adversary.

The film itself, I felt, was gorgeous. I loved the almost claustrophobic nature of Hell's Kitchen. There were hardly any scenes where you felt like there was a wide-open space to be found. Even the shots across the rooftops were kept tight to the top of the screen, and the dominant darkness and rain certainly added to the overall atmosphere. The origin sequence was classic. One of my favorite fascets of DD's character is his roots in boxing, via his father. I've loved boxing since I was a little kid and saw Rocky and Raging Bull. Boxing is perhaps the dirtiest, most thankless professional sport to be a part of (with the exception of cock fighting, of course), and how fitting an environment for young Matt to first be exposed to the "bad guys" of the world. David Keith was well-cast as Matt's father, and I loved the multiple references to vital DD comic book creators throughout the years. I enjoyed the soundtrack of the film, although I wish we could have had something of a memorable theme song or rock single to go along with the movie. Even though Spider-Man didn't have something like the classic film themes of Superman and Batman from John Williams or Danny Elfman, it at least had the "Hero" single by Chad Kroeger and Josey Scott. The camera work was excellent, and I loved the visual representation of Daredevil's radar sense. The brail-inspired opening credits were cool, although a bit too similiar to Spider-Man's opening webbing credits, but it still worked.

In the end, DAREDEVIL ranks as one of the finest comic book adaptations of all time. It may not have been as classic as SUPERMAN: THE MOVIE or SPIDER-MAN, but it certainly beats the pants off a lot of other comic book films (from a technical P.O.V., it's superior to any of the Batman films with the exception of BATMAN RETURNS). And from a personal stand point, after going in with plenty of doubts and being surprised by how well-crafted and entertaining of a film it was, DAREDEVIL was a knock-out. I can't wait for the DVD!!!

gwangung

02-16-2003, 10:13 PM

After reading all the reviews and suggested alternative casting, it's pretty apparent as movie producers, NEWSARAMA reades are pretty good....comic book readers.

[Marlon Brando as the Kingpin? Rigggghhhhttt.....]

jawaplumber

02-16-2003, 10:38 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by gwangung:
After reading all the reviews and suggested alternative casting, it's pretty apparent as movie producers, NEWSARAMA reades are pretty good....comic book readers.

[Marlon Brando as the Kingpin? Rigggghhhhttt.....]<hr /></blockquote>Yeah, what's Brando gonna go? Ask Bullseye to rub his feet, ala Larry King? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> He certainly isn't gonna move around at all. At this point, Carrot Top would make a better Kingpin than Brando...

arcee

02-16-2003, 11:57 PM

DD like many of Marvel's properties that have quite a few decades under their respective belts will ALWAYS suffer disadvantages since so many of us readers have our favorite runs, moments, etc.,

That and the fact that DD is a second tier character, that he's FREAKING BLIND which is so unattractive plus people's hatred towards Ben Affleck acting (Frankly, I don't understand it myself) and other casting choices that met with disapproval to downright ridicule and DD had a lot going against it.

I think the writer/director did a great job of trying to give everybody a little bit of what attracted them to DD and those outside the comic book readership a good action movie.

Was it more like a "DD Digest"? Yes. Were they several plot holes large enough to drive a mack truck through? Yep.

But did the Writer/Director show respect towards the material? HELL YES.

Considering how disrespectful Hollywood is towards live action adaptions of comic books before, the people working on DD deserve some credit.

If I were to rank it I'd give it three out of five stars. And I hope they make a sequel and fill in all the stuff they went over.

Matter of fact, I'm going to see it twice and God knows I haven't said that about a movie in a long time. :D

pickard

02-17-2003, 12:59 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by fistofkhonshu:
Superman is the crappiest character ever invented. No motivation. NONE AT ALL. Batman should always question his loyalty to the human race. Unless... its discovered in the future that all Kryptonians have an over bearing sense of responsibility. And that they just simply must be everyone's savior. He also has a power to counteract any situation he's put in. How can you write a good story without changing some of that?

The Fucking Glasses?!?!?! You have got to be a total dipshit to not notice. Watch me change to superman... :cool: :rolleyes: See you don't recognize me now do you?<hr /></blockquote>Yeah, but a guy who is too exhausted TO SIT UP can somehow have a fight to the death for 5 minutes against a world-class assassin where he manages to win only after getting the shit beaten out of him and then he can leap across town to have another fight to the death.

That's realism.

After the initial high of this movie wears off, you people might realize that it's the 3rd best Marvel movie. And by that time, it might only be the 4th.

Lord Julius

02-17-2003, 01:11 AM

yeah, I saw the movie this past thursday night and I didn't like it at all. I mean whats with Murdocks apartment? It's like he lives in the friggin bat cave...... Where'd he get the money for all of that shit? The whole movie all foggy talked about was him and matt's lack of money. And all of the pop/rock music in the movie just made me hate it all the more.

arcee

02-17-2003, 10:36 AM

As a person who saw the theatrical release of Superman: The Movie ELEVEN times I think it's fair to say that I enjoyed the movie.

Still, even I recognize -- my "emotional investment" aside - that by today's moviegoer tastes and standards it is quite juvenile and bland.

Superman The Movie and Superman II are products of their time, featuring a Superman that - yes! - was almost God-like in power with villains that - yes! - were evil but "this" close to being just a comic relief.

A feeling I have with all the grand DC hero movie franchises is -- as time goes by -- they don't stand up too well and are showing their mistakes.

Sure, when they were the only game in town, we couldn't wait to see them and forgave their obvious flaws - as Batman, which to me was always Joker - featuring the Batman.

But that time is past and the unforgiving ways of cinema goers today and with Marvel racking up a string of success should (hopefully) force TPTB to scrutinize how to do a better job adapting comic books to live action or else face a bonafide dud. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />