Rating: 
Summary: Daredevil can go to ... heck.
Review: A friend of mine loaned me his copy of "Daredevil" a little while back, and I was actually quite excited to watch it. I knew next to nothing about Daredevil, save that he was blind and that his other senses worked extra-well to compensate for that fact ... beyond that, I was totally in the dark. I had recently come off of seeing a pair of comic book adaptations not too long before trying out this one: the excellent "X2: X-Men United" and the pretty good-but-not-quite-as-much-fun "Hulk", so I was pretty sure I would enjoy this one too. I was sadly mistaken.To be fair, this film did have a couple things going for it, though one of them is admittedly entirely subjective. First off, I was interested immediately by the use of Roman Catholicism in relation to the main character. To be clear, this both interested me and set me on edge ... while I appreciated seeing a character in a movie have the Faith play a notable role in his life, just as it does with mine, it also set me on edge ... I didn't want the church to be portrayed in the wrong way, as it tends to be in movies that I have seen (not in the fact that the Church is insulted, but that the writers' understanding of the Church is sometimes mistaken on a particular point or attitude, which leads to the Church not being properly represented. I felt the same way when I saw Nightcrawler praying the rosary in "X2". Gladly, I had nothing to worry about from him, and Nightcrawler definitely came out as my favorite character of that film). I felt the Church itself to be well represented in this film ... Daredevil's actions contrary to her teachings, such as the things he does motivated by revenge, were his own choices. Good enough for me. There were two more things I liked about this film, which helps to merit it two stars rather than just one. First, the whole childhood of Matt Murdock/origin story episode of the film was enjoyable. Second, I have to say that Colin Ferrell stole the show as the villainous Bullseye, hamming it up to a most entertaining degree and becoming a true bright spot amid the mindless chaos which surrounded him. If he had been the star, I would never have considered the movie to be a perfect one, but it would have still been incredibly fun to watch ... like seeing a movie just about the Kurgan from "Highlander"! Now that I've got the good things out of the way, let's take a look at the stuff I remembered most: the bad. First off, there's our main characters. Murdock and Elektra have got to have the worst possible scenes together out of any cinematic couple I've seen in recent history. Their meeting in the coffee shop or wherever it is is just awful (and he comes off looking like a major creep, if you ask me), and their little fight on the playground was downright embarrassing (made even worse by the awful one-liners they were forced to spout). Things don't get any better, and there was certainly no sympathy to be found from me when Elektra ... well, let's not spoil it for those who have not yet seen the movie (though I should still tell you not to bother). I was majorly bewildered and frustrated by Murdock's confession scene after he had 'a bit of fun' with Elektra. It's one thing not to confess something you aren't sorry for, but if you aren't ... well, shouldn't you be telling the priest about that? I find it truly distressing that he could be such good friends with a priest and so familiar with the Church and all her practices/disciplines/beliefs and not mention or even think twice about that little detail. If he had been a non-religious character I wouldn't have given this matter a second thought. What else is wrong with this movie? There's the awful music (I eagerly await the day when the world realizes that rap is cra ... crud and stop subjecting us to it), hearing the phrase "lawyer by day ..." repeated over and over ad nauseum, the incredible stunts that Daredevil is able to pull off (I actually had to double-check and make sure that he didn't have other superpowers besides his hyperactive senses) ... If that's really true, I'd like to be able to jump off of buildings the same way he does, and a heck of a lot more. "Daredevil" was a complete waste of time, and has soured me from seeing any more comic book adaptations until the third "X-Men" film comes out in a year or two. You know it's a bad sign when you find yourself rooting for the bad guy, which we all know will only result in disappointment if we do. If you haven't seen this yet, give it a miss and do something else, like go to the library or clean your bathroom sink. You'll have a better time of it, and if you knew what you were missing you would thank me. Carry on Carry on, MN
Rating: 
Summary: Almost as good as Spiderman. But not quite...
Review: Daredevil is yet another brilliant creation from the bulging brains of Stan Lee. As a kid, Matt Murdock witnesses his father beating up a shopkeeper, and runs away in horror. However an accident leaves radioactive waste covering Matts eyes, turning him bling but boosting the power of his remaining senses. He becomes more agile, more stronger but the most amazing of all is his radar sight, the ability to 'see' by using soundwaves. But that's a long story. Daredevil is a good movie. Ben Affleck plays a brilliant superhero, and the performance Colin Farrel gives as bullseye is truly amazing. Even Stan Lee makes a very brief appearence. But despite it's promising story, Daredevil does have it's flaws. There are certain parts of the film which make you think to yourself...
"Hey, that's just like spider-man" and other similar thoughts. It just feels like some peaces weredeliberatley ripped from Spider-man. Daredevil is a good film.
But a Spider-man beater it ain't...
Rating: 
Summary: I liked it changes and all
Review: Im an avid reader of Daredevil and enjoyed the film. The writers got a great deal straight from the comics. They also changed the character and his mythos, but that's par for the course. It has changed in various ways in the comics. DD went from a happy "devil may care" character (check out the 1964 origin issue and read from there) to a darker brooding character filled with rage and self pity. DD didn't just develop into a darker person, but his new traits were "retro-fitted" into his history. In other words, Daredevil has various "true" pasts and incarnations. The character of Stick was a later addition to the DD mythos. Look at the first issue of DD. There was no Stick. DD developed his skills on his own. Stick isn't in the movie, but then it took something like 15 years for Stick to show up in the comics. Elektra was another later addition to the comic. DD's intense rage and insanity weren't there at the start either. Matt's brother has been long forgotten. There are other things that aren't there in the original comics, and ideas from the older comics that aren't in later ones. Many of the retro-fitted ideas into DD's history don't match the original character, but they've kept DD alive. The changes in the film serve the same purpose as those which have taken place in the comics. DD in the film is much darker at the start. He's more Punisher than Daredevil, but what makes him ultimately not like the Punisher is demonstrated as the film plays out. I think it's a good explanation for why DD is who he is. Given a character that has changed a great deal since 1964, the makers of this movie did very well. There isn't just one way to tell his story or one story to tell. I'm happy with the results and can't wait for more.
Rating: 
Summary: Not recommended for anybody
Review: I've seen many reviews of this story, and there seems to be a common trend to them. Based on this trend, and on my own experience, I can say the following: If you are a fan of DD comics (like myself), you will be disgusted with this movie.
If you are not a fan of DD comics, and just want to see a favorite actor in action, you will be confused by this movie. This is for a number of reasons. First, the characters don't behave in character - in the comics, Matt has a temper and frequent periods of temporary insanity, and he can get kind of violent - but he always stops short of doing permanent harm. And he would NEVER stand by while a person gets run over by a train, let alone taunt him while doing so. He wouldn't even do that *now*, with the current storyline, and right now he's going through one of his temporary-insanity periods! This action, the first DD action we see, leaves comic fans wondering whatever happened to the man who stands for justice, and frequently talks down the Punisher (or fights him, when talking doesn't work). And it leaves non-comic fans wondering why they should ever care about a man who basically acts like the sadistic prison guard in "The Green Mile." The rest of the time, we are treated, again and again, to showcases of Matt's blindness and super senses. As if that were all there was to this very complex character. Never mind character development, we're only interested in the fact that *gasp* he's blind but can still fight! Aside from the lack of character development and disregard for DD's strong sense of justice, the biggest other problem with the movie is Stick. Or rather, the complete lack of Stick. Who is Stick, you ask? That's a very good question. Stick is the blind martial artist who shaped Matt Murdock into Daredevil. Stick is the man the writers saw fit to omit from the movie entirely. This would not have been so bad, if the writers had bothered to fill in the gaping holes in plot and character development that Stick's absence left. As it was, the comics-uneducated viewer is left to wonder how a canister in the eyes evidently left Matt not only with blindness and super senses, but also with a sudden knowledge of gymnastics and martial arts that he didn't have to earn. Not to mention the fact that, in the comics, Stick helped Matt learn to deal with his sudden loss of sight and the chaotic onslaught brought on by his other senses, but according to the movie, this is apparently something a child can learn to deal with, alone, over the course of 2 minutes. Instead of devoting much-needed time to character development, the writers fill in the movie with a number of completely pointless and unrealistic fights. Witness young Matt who, evidently about 3 months after being blinded, performs a series of impressive athletic feats to show off to kids who are taunting him. Never mind that a)Matt would never have been able to do those feats at that stage in his development, and especially not without Stick's help, and b)Matt would never have shown off to those kids, period. He'd promised the woman in the hospital he wouldn't. Then there's the scene when Matt fights Elektra, in public, out of costume. We're left to wonder why he would ever do something so stupid, because the writers don't see fit to tell us. The movie would have been considerably better if they hadn't tried to do everything at once. If, for example, they'd decided to skip everything between the canister and Jack's death, a few years later, that would have been ok. Or, if they'd just decided to do a movie adaptation of Miller's "Daredevil: The Man Without Fear," that would have been good too. As it was, the movie was pointless, the story made no sense, and the characters were undeveloped and just wrong. I really wish I hadn't seen it.
Rating:
Summary: glad I bought it
Review: Daredevil has some very memorable moments. I won't give too much away, but Matt Murdock's medicine cabinet will make it clear that Daredevil isn't the typical superhero. Scenes involving his deep soul searching are striking and memorable. There's plenty that made this movie a must have. The DVD extras are top notch too.
Rating:
Summary: Fluff
Review: Have never read one single Daredevil comic book in my life I guess my review is kind of unbiased. Okay, I am certainly NOT a fan of Ben Affleck but his presence in this film was an indifferent one rather than an aggravating one. For those of you who are unfamiliar Daredevil is also known as Matt Murdock, the blind lawyer. But though his eyes do not work his other 4 sense do to a superhuman degree. Sounds, smells, touches and tastes go together to form a bizarre sight that has pros and cons over normal vision. It's pretty cool concept and it's reasonably well done. But Daredevil has NO plot! It's a swift 90 minutes of practically nothing. The most involving part of the film is the romance between Affleck and Garner but it's cut short with the arrival of Colin Farrell who plays Bullseye, a paper-thin but funny character. Many have been annoyed at the fact that the Kingpin is played by a Black-American actor. But what does THAT matter? Who cares if he's white in the comic book? Michael Clarke Duncan brings some formidable integrity to the role but does come off as a bit too cuddly at the same time. A tiny bit of story is set up but it's over very soon. I guess the best you could say is that Daredevil doesn't outstay its welcome. But you'll not remember it 5 minutes after seeing it. And I don't like the fact they chose to separate all Daredevil and Spiderman links just because they were licensed to different studios. The DVD is in 2.35:1 anamorphic widescreen with a very powerful DTS 5.1 track. Plus a bunch of extras I don't care about.
Rating:
Summary: could have been a little longer, but it's still fun
Review: Daredevil is over-the-top comic book fun. Many of the people who slam this movie need to lighten up. Some are concerned that the movie will offend the blind! Give me a break! Others are not fans of superheroes so they paid money to see a superhero movie and then complained because they didn't like it because they aren't into superheroes! Others wanted Spider-man 2 and some, who are not fans of the Daredevil character, paid to see it and didn't like many of the elements that make Daredevil Daredevil. If you don't like Daredevil you shouldn't see Daredevil. Then there are those who just wanted to see their particular favorite version of the character, but the film didn't give them just the version that they wanted. It pays homage to the wide history of the character. To some that's a bad thing. The origin of the character from the animated version is even given a nod, but that just made some folks real unhappy. They wanted their version of Daredevil and nothing else. Then there are those who don't like Jen Garner or Ben Affleck, but paid to see them so they could complain. Would you watch a movie with these kind of people? Could you listen to the gripes about how the superhero movie they just saw was a "waste" because it had superheroes in it? Are you that kind of person? Not me. I enjoyed Daredevil. It's a good movie. It has a great cast. There is plenty of Daredevil stuff in the film. My only complaint is that it could have been longer. It seems really trimmed down, but it's not too off the mark and entertained me all they way through. I GIVE DAREDEVIL: B+. The directors cut is possibly in the works and should be even more fun.
Rating: 
Summary: super
Review: Don't let negative critics fool you. The Daredevil movie IS based on the comic and Kingpin IS a Daredevil villain. Some people just don't know what they are talking about. You can buy great graphic novels and collections of Daredevil back issues from Amazon and see that Kingpin IS in the pages of Daredevil. There are many many moments inspired by the books and that's impressive. Give it a look and don't believe just what the ignorant have to say.
Rating:
Summary: 5 stars for Bullseye--3 for Daredevil!
Review: When I first saw this back in the Winter of 2002, it sucked the BIG ONE! Never have I seen such a worst comic-book adaptation of a movie! Sure the special effects were good, but it doesn't make up for it. The acting was also piss poor and nowhere near as good as any of the other Marvel predeccessors, "X-Men" & "Spider-Man". And the plot? Well, there really is no plot except for some guy who looses his vision from a barrel of goo and for no apparent reason gets super-powers! So he becomes Daredevil, a COMPLETE jerk of a hero! Oh wait, he ain't no hero. Now for his girlfriend. Yeah, Elektra is pretty cute but her character was REALLY a B*TCH! I'm actually glad Bullseye took her out! Speaking of which, he's pretty much the only good thing I liked about this whole movie! He kicked so much arse I was almost starting to route for HIM! Michael Clarke Duncan as the Kingpin was also pretty god, but Kingpin is the villain in Spider-Man, NOT Daredevil! If they make a sequel though, I'm hoping Bullseye's character will return to kick more arse than ever! LONG LIVE THE BULLSEYE!
Rating:
Summary: As bad as Hollywood gets
Review: If you thought Hulk and Spiderman were bad movies, then you ain't seen this one. To say it clear and soon: This is the worst super-hero movie ever made. Even Lou Ferrigno's Hulk tv series is better. And it's not a small feat. The movie is based (or so it seems) on probably the best comic ever published by Marvel, Daredevil as written and drawn by young Frank Miller and Klaus Janson in the early 80s. But the only thing they kept is the character's names (Daredevil, Elektra, Kingpin, Bullseye, etc). Their aspect, personalities, relationships, and the whole plot itself bears no similarity with its source (so I doubt it was ever the source), and the changes are only for the worse. The movie is just too bad to waste time going into depths about how they transformed a great, dark, violent, ambiguous comic into a floppy, puerile, idiot film. It's just the modern hollywood formula: make everything as simplistic, senseless, edgeless, and infantile as possible. And with this flick they reached bottomless depths of derision. Really, it's THAT bad. It's hard to believe that the same industry (well, but not the same studio) spawned the excellent X-Men movies. I rated it one star because it was the lowest available. But five stars below zero is more like it.
| 
