Rating: 
Summary: One of the better "comic-to-film" movies
Review: "Daredevil" is AWESOME if you like the comic, but it doesn't shut out those that just want to see the newest Affleck, J. Garner, or Farrell pic, either. The film does a decent enough job of showing DD's origin without dwelling on it (i.e. EVERY Batman film), though adding training by Stick would have been a nice touch. Affleck is very convincing as a blind man. Farrell does a great job with Bullseye, really playing him over the top. Jennifer Garner holds her own in the fight scenes, and looks AMAZING from start to finish. DRAWBACKS: too many people know Matt Murdock is DD by the end of the film, the Affleck-Garner relationship develops too quickly, Kingpin's character is thrown at us and not introduced or developed enough, and some of the DD/Bullseye sequences are too obvious in the use of computer generation (climbing the organ pipes looks like a playstation game). ON THE PLUS SIDE: Affleck, Farrell, Jon Favreau, KEVIN SMITH!!, and Joey P. straight outta the Sopranos into a great reporter role. Loyal readers of the DD comic will recognize several shots right out of the comic book which added to the movie's appeal for my friends & me. Overall, you will enjoy this movie if you like the genre, but you'll love it if you read the comic. GREAT DIRECTION!!!! I just want to know how they'll pull off the sequel since all of Hell's Kitchen knows who DD is now????
Rating:
Summary: The darker side works
Review: I really enjoyed Spiderman and all but after seeing Daredevil I have to say I liked it better. I was a real fan of it in the comics and loved the dark side of the character. Like I hear they are going to do with The Hulk later in 2003, the film-makers are bringing out the darker sides of these superheroes, which is where their hearts really are. Daredevil is a great movie for a comics fan, buy it!
Rating:
Summary: Good Marvel Film
Review: This movie wasnt the best but it wasnt bad either it had its ups and downs Ben Affleck had a great performance why does everyone bash on him hes a good actor....daredevil mainly came out in febuary because it wasnt really convinceing to be a summer movie since daredevil never really one of marvel's most popular characters all in all it was good i will se the sequel if it comes out for sure
Rating: 
Summary: True to the spirit of "DD"
Review: Good. Fun. Low on campiness. The film is true to the spirit of the comic, and interpreted very well to suit live-action. The effects are cool and convey the hero's world well. It's a good choice if you like action movies with a bit of humor. Some have complained that it is too dark. What do you expect from a movie about a blind vigilante working in Hell's Kitchen and motivated by vengeance? It is a little dark...and amen. If there is a weak point, it would probably be in the performances. Although all of the characters are portrayed fairly well there was room for improvement for each of the actors in the film. It seemed fairly obvious that Ben Affleck was a tad uncomfortable with an action role, and Jennifer Garner's action/drama boundaries weren't really pushed--after all she does action scenes weekly. Colin Ferrell played his character a little over the top, but he wasn't really given enough screen-time to properly develop his character, so... If you like comic/action movies you might get a real kick out of Daredevil. If you want absolute realism and high-drama, buy the Pianist.
Rating: 
Summary: I feel tricked!!!
Review: The commercials were better than the movie because most save 1 thing that was good was in the commercials. Jennifer Garner got hustled. All the kicking butt in the commercials, was just in the commercials. She didn't really do ANYTHING and was a waste of a good charachter. and the bossman...1 word. Why? Okay he's strong, how'd he get so strong? DareDevil has developed other senses ok cool, but he's a regular guy so now he's suddenly a great gymnast with super-strength??? Now I know you're not supposed to look for much plot in these movies but you gotta have some better action than that to distract me. Last thing, Nobody's going to bother to explain why Bullseye has a Bullseye on his head huh? More effort people,... Batman pulled it off.
Rating:
Summary: Daredevil
Review: Daredevil was an awesome Marvel film. I was never a huge fan of the comic although I am a big Spider-Man and Hulk fan. I'm not even a Ben Afleck fan. However, the movie Daredevil exceeded expectations for the simple reasons that others have cited - namely, it was a bit darker than most superhero movies and kept the cutsey-wootsey dialogue to a minimum. The action sequences were very impressive too. Those who complain about Daredevil beging able to jump need to realize that the *comic book* was deficient in that respect. I could never believe in Daredevil because without any enhanced strength, he shouldn't be able to roam around the city. The movie corrected that.
Rating:
Summary: Not a Classic but....
Review: I agree with the loyal Daredevil comic book fans who say this movie is only a commercial tribute to the blind Superhero. The Daredevil character on film is only slightly related to the powerful comic book hero. This is unfortunate because the non-comic book fans would think the two characters are the same. I admit it is difficult to create the complexity of comic book heroes in only two hours. For the film maker, what needs to be done in two hours is make a profit. If the profits are good then a sequel will follow. To do this there is nothing like exploiting a successful Marvel comic book action hero like Daredevil. If the movie Daredevil is compared independently of the comic book Daredevil character then I would have to admit that the movie was worth it. Jennifer Garner made this movie worthwhile with a look, which can only be described as "dangerously sexy." I am not surprised that her character, Electra, is being given her own starring role in an upcoming movie. The movie is visually dark but still stunning at times. In some cases the scenes were a bit too dark and some might even say depressing. The darkness is in keeping with the comic book feel but certainly not the depression. This movie is worth a look and even a DVD purchase but it is not the classic that I hoped it would have been.
Rating:
Summary: Daredevil is a work of Genius
Review: I thought Daredevil was a work of genius. I have never read a comic book in my life. Never understood them. But I understand this movie. And after seeing critics divided, and audiences divided, I have come to believe that this is one misunderstood film. I think that many came to it thinking it was going to be like Spider-man (blame Fox marketing). But, thankfully, the filmmakers clearly had a lot more on their mind. Instead, Daredevil gives us the world of the superhero. What it would really be like to devote your life to fighting crime. It's dark and unflinching. And in time, I think this film will come to be considered a classic.
Rating:
Summary: Refreshing.
Review: I recommend this movie to anyone who liked the first batman(myself included). That being said, The dark tone taken in this film was refreshing, it wasnt campy and it didnt become silly. (Anyone else remember The CAPT.America and Punisher movie?I know i'm still trying to repress it).It tackled with the core of what makes a hero and when a Hero loses his faith, in himself and his ideals, and to also regain them. To redeem himself. I enjoyed the subtle winks the director took by mentioning former(John romita) and current(Michael Bendis) artists and writers of DareDevil.I liked the the fact that Johnson added scene's from The marvel knights relaunching Cover's into the film, From issue 1 and issue 3.An the subtle Miller story archs that were put into motion. All in all, I liked this film. Anyone who liked DareDevil as a child or adult, An can appreciate liberties taken to put this on screen for the fans.Plus, it's also kind of awesome to see a childhood hero come to life.
Rating: 
Summary: Crowd Pleasing adaption of classic Marvel comic
Review: While compared to Spiderman in many reviews, Daredevil has more in comic with The Dark Knight, Batman. Both lack the extraordinatry powers of the topline sellers (although admittedly Daredevil's bat-like ability to "see" via soundwaves is something of a special ability)and relay as much on their physicial agility as well as their cunning. Both are also characters devoted to avenging those poor folks taken advantage of by really nasty criminals. Ben Affleck does a credible job as Daredevil/ Matt Murdoch. Despite criticism to the contrary, he brings a humanity and warmth to this emotionally crippled vigilante.While the script isn't as well structured or written as Spiderman or X-Men, it does capture the essence of the original comic book fairly well. The bad guys included in this first film are certainly interesting. Colin Farrell chews enough scenery to require additional sets. His take on Bullseye is so over the top as to be comparable only to Jack Nicholson's Joker. The story is fairly routine. The Man With No Fear certainly would have benefited from a less standard t.v. storyline. Still, the opticals and fight sequences are well choregraphed. Don't get me wrong I liked Daredevil but I found the film to be style than substance. That approach can work in the right hands but Daredevil's writer/director lacks the skill to pull this off with any fresh insight into the characters. Daredevil is an enjoyable romp but lacks both the sophistication that drove Spiderman (Sam Raimi is a much more accomplished film director whose films live and breathe the essence of comic book storytelling)and the dark vision that overcame many of the narrative weaknesses of Tim Burton's Batman films. It's a pity, really, that someone like Bryan Singer or Raimi didn't tackle Daredevil--those director's managed to invest their films with a rich backstory and texture missing from Daredevil.
| 
