Genres

Visitors Review

mwendel 2013-05-19 03:40:29

The Comic did not get the respect it deserved. (Possible Spoilers)

Ben Affleck may physically fit the mold of Matt Murdoch/DareDevil but onlywhen he keeps his mouth closed. They needed someone capable of being dark,foreboding and brooding. Jennifer Garner as Elektra wasn't bad, but Istillthink the Red Satin from the comic would have been the way to go versustheblack leather. The black leather just made Elektra too mundane. MichaelClarke Duncan actually made a decent Kingpin, even though you might havebeen expecting someone more along the lines of King Kong Bundy. ColinFarrell as Bullseye was great. He was totally insane and the character wassomething, to me, that was totally the opposite of the roles he usuallyhas.I felt the fights scenes, although well done, were too short (except fortheone at the bar in the beginning) for a movie of such length.It is my opinion that the movie left a lot to be desired, especially forcomic book fans, for a Marvel Entertainment production that did such aawesome jobs with the X-Men and Spider-Man. The movie was just blah, andnotworth the full price of admission. If you're going to go see this movie,make it the matinee.

deadsenator 2013-05-18 19:14:52

This is truly awful. - 2 of 10

There is so much wrong with this movie. Jennifer Garner is the only lightat the end of this tunnel. The rest is just plain terrible. The script isdreadfully...well, just plain dreadful. The soundtrack made me feel as if Iwere watching a bad MTV video. One can only hope that there is never aDaredevil 2. I'd give it a 1 if JG had not been in it. As it is, 2 of 10is stretching it.

2013-05-18 15:01:35

Awesome!

I appreciated the movie more because of the fact that they didn't rely too much on CG effects (like spiderman). I can feel the actors very well and not those effects. It would be like watching a Pixar movie if they will be all digitalized.

amishguy 2013-05-18 07:21:18

A disgrace to movies and comics alike. (Spoilers)

Ok, so I felt that this was the worst movie of the year and the wholetimewatching it I was thinking to my self...How could this be any better thanthe Roger Corman's F4 movie. This movie had the worst dialogue I haveeverheard in a movie. And that's including some of the movies I questionedevenhaving scripts. No doubt, Ben Aflec (Who was very unconvincing asDaredevil) ad-libbed 90% of his part, which camed out as a smug,smart-allecloser. The only good charicter was Bullsey, but the poor directing tookalot of his blood lust and made it lack any impact when he killedsomebody.And as for those who say this was a good adaption. The only scene welladapted was the Elektra death scene. The rest was crap. For oneDaredevilnever believes in the justice system. He wouldn't go around killingpeopleto exalt revenge. That's what the Punishers job was. And how about thatBullseye "Death scene." Must we forget that Bullseye has a skeleton ofAdamantium. That fall wouldn't have fased him. And my favorite, whatabouteveryone just figuring out Daredevil's Identity. No body took off hismask,one of Matt Murdock's girlfriend figured out his secret alterego and soldhis Identity to the kingpin. This movie was horrible and a disgrace toallcomic movies have been working towards.

Laura 2013-05-16 05:40:45

Very Dare, Very Devil, Very Good!

Ok so this isn't one of those comments that gives you the storyline, im noteven gonna give you a basic one. I say go to the movies and watch it, youwill certainly get your moneys worth. I thought this film rocked. The actionsequences, the graphics, the chemistry on screen between everyone wasfantastic. All I have to say if, give me a daredevil over a spiderman anyday! Rating: 8 and a half out of 10.

ThankGodImCute 2013-05-15 22:56:09

Surprisingly Good!

I didn't really want to see Daredevil that much....I mean I'd already seenSpider man but I thought maybe it just might be okay so I went ahead and sawit. Surprisingly it was good. The first few minutes admitedly sucked and Iwas like....okay whatever but it picked up once we got to meet Electra andturned into a very good movie. Exciting and fun. 8/10. The 8 is for theslightly slow beginning.

d-l-tutor 2013-05-13 21:37:32

Ms. Garner is HOT, the movie is NOT.

Lame, lame, lame. Ben Affleck should be named Ben No-Affect (see himgoingdown in flames in Pearl Harbor with little more concern registered on hisface than if he had bad gas). Since, as in every movie he does, he relieson (marginal) good looks and a smirk to carry his scenes, every othermemberof the cast acts rings around him. Where DID he get the idea he couldact?Brando, Newman, Pacino, Nicholson, et.al, he ain't.The movie itself has potential, but it gets so caught up in the specialeffects that it becomes cartoonish. I know, I know, it's based on a comicbook, but it ISN'T a comic strip, it's a movie.Is there anyone out there that can put together a movie of this genrewithout getting so buried in the special effects? It would be nice tohaveone action adventure flick that has a story line attached to it that isn'tso obvious. Please someone in Hollywood, start to get it right.Spielbergcan't direct every movie. He doesn't have the time. And Polanski isstillpersona non grata in the U.S.Jennifer Garner is the bee's knees, but nothing saves this film.

Robert Denerstein 2013-05-13 14:25:33

A decent version of a comic book brought to the big screen with moments of gleaming intensity.

Clint Morris 2013-05-10 22:22:37

While it isn't quite on par with the 2002 hit Spider-Man, Daredevil is still a solid piece of cinema.

2013-05-10 02:49:05

What a cineastic nightmare

I saw this movie yesterday, never having read any of the "Daredevil"comics.What a disaster. You have bad special effects (people getting thrown in ahorizontal line for 30 feet, bad CGI), unnecessary gimmicks (bats comingoutof church organ pipes ?!), the complete lack of depth of the characters (Ionly say: Affleck), and a superhero who pretty much indiscriminantly hurtsinnocent people. At some point the Daredevil even realizes that (Quote:"AmI the bad guy?"), but don't wait for them to explore any of thatcontradiction, because they don't.Horrible.

John Beifuss 2013-05-10 10:23:34

An unlikable and pretentious film that probably ranks as the most disappointing would-be blockbuster in years.

Bruce Westbrook 2013-05-10 03:17:59

The best Marvel movie to date.

morras 2013-05-06 09:53:35

Director's cut - MUCH better!!

I am a long time Daredevil fun. I liked the movie when it hit thetheaters, although felt it could have been much better. Too many plotholes and little carachter development are key bad points. Still, itwas enjoyable to watch, gave it a 7/10. Now the DC's out...and it feelsso much better to watch. The side story adds depth and makes you caremore about the characters and their motivations. Ben Urich, King Pin,Bullseye, Foggy Nelson...they have a much better treatment on the DC.The funny sequences with Foggy help break the prevailing too darkatmosphere. Also, the wrap-up of the story has all the gaps filled.I gave the DC a 9/10. One of the best comic adaptations ever.

shortround8391 2013-05-05 19:49:58

Pretty Good

For some reason, critics everywhere HATE this film, let me guess is itbecause of Affleck? Ben actually did a decent job acting as the blindlawyer Matt Murdock who hunts down evildoers at night as the crimsonleather wearing Daredevil and also called "The Man Without Fear". Thefight scenes were really good and Jon Favreau who plays as Matt'sfriend Foggy Nelson can really act when it comes for comic relief whichis what every superhero film needs, especially the darker tone ones.Unlike Spiderman, Daredevil is definitely not all "rainbows andflowers" and DD is isolated, you'll see that he has all the horriblestuff going on with him, broken teeth, scars and constantly takingpainkillers, he is also shown to be poor since his clients are alsopoor and have to pay them with (in Foggy Nelson's words) "Fish, wheelsof cheese, and sports supplies", he also barely has anyone by his sideexcept for Foggy. Affleck clearly shows us what his character is goingthrough, which is why he is a talented actor.The villains were also cool, Bullseye and Kingpin were total BAD@$$.Bullseye is a maniac, and I mean a MANIAC. He is a also very unique badguy, he has the best aim and accuracy than anyone else and in the moviehe kills a smartmouth old man by throwing a paper clip to his throat(which was pretty cool). Kingpin is pretty much the "tough guy" hereand killed two of his bodyguards in cold blood (only seen in theDirectors Cut).Although Daredevil is good I highly recommend you seeing the DirectorsCut which is, like, ten times better than the original since the fightscenes are longer and has a subplot of which Matt defends a (notreally) innocent man played by Coolio which eventually leads to thediscovery that respected buisnessman Wilson Fisk is actually theruthless guy who runs all the crime in the town named the Kingpin.Later, Dudes

heather 2013-05-04 15:04:14

Kane Hodder only good point.

I only went to go see this movie because my favorite actor is in it(KaneHodder).He was excellent and looked amazing.But the movie flat outsucked.Igave this movie a 2 and thats only because of Kane.If he wasn't in it Iwould give that crap a 0.

Bendrago 2013-05-04 03:14:29

Dulldevil

Rather predictable and most of all illogigal and dull.Why is it that when hollywood tries to do a movie about asuperherothey end up with paper thin production with no values outside action /effects.Waste of time in my opinion.

David Nusair 2013-04-28 08:33:08

...if Charles Bronson's Death Wish character had been a superhero, he would've been Daredevil.

Lisa Leigh Connors 2013-04-28 00:16:49

Ten minutes into it, you won't need superhuman senses to realize it won't be a great movie.

2013-04-21 03:37:43

Sorry Ben, you're no superhero

Since "Blade" came out in 1999, Marvel Comics caught a big one with the super-hero movies. A year later, Bryan Singer proved with "X-Men" that comic book adaptations could be both ambitious and succesful, then... a monster was born. "Blade 2", "Spiderman", "X-Men 2" and "The Hulk", all hit (and smashed) the box office, and many more are on the way. Of all these flicks, only "Daredevil" was a financial disapointment, and I have to say that 10 minutes into the movie you can see why. First of all, and I think most people agree on this, the main problem of "Daredevil" is its lead star. Ben Affleck is an actor that just doesn't seem to make it . He is very good as Matt Murdock, the pro-bono lawyer, and you even like the guy when he talks to his buddy in the Seinfeld-like coffee shop. However, once he puts on his superhero costume, the magic runs out. Affleck just doesn't have the dark sex appeal necessary for the nocturnal vigilante (anyone who has seen Tim Burton's Batman knows how important this is), therefore his character fails to deliver the necessary empathy or connection between the audience and the hero. You would think that with such a problem, the supporting cast should make up for the rest, but you're wrong. The movie has some beloved Marvel characters like Elektra (Jennifer Garner), Bullseye (Colin Farrell) and Kingpin (Michael Clarke Duncan), but none of them is crucial to the story. NONE OF THEM! I swear to God that if you add up all the scenes in which they are, none of them is on the movie for more than 20 minutes. Or at least, it doesn't seem so. Elektra, especially, was thought to be the best thing in the movie. At least, in the trailers it looked like she was. She sort of is, but she only has two (I repeat, TWO) fight scenes, and her character is pretty much wasted. So is Bullseye, who is little more than a cartoon in Colin Farrell's hands. As for Kingpin, well, I don't mind that they changed his looks dramatically, but he's the least developed character. A stupid plot twist makes him Daredevil's archenemy, and the end is just silly and pathetic.Another problem is the plot. Or better yet, the "plots". A lot of things happen in the movie, but none of them are central. There comes a time when Elektra is out to kill Daredevil, believing he's her father's murdeder. THAT should've been the movie, but it is resolved quickly and without consequences. Anyway, in plot, character and performances, "Daredevil" takes the plunge big time.The edition is another story. It is by far one the best I've seen. It would be easier to say what doesn't have. Of all the documentaries, featurettes and other features, some are dedicated to the comic book, others to the movie. Both are great. It seems like this time New Line Cinema really went for the money, which makes me think that they hope "Daredevil" to be a hit on DVD more than it was on the theaters. If you're a fan of the comic book, then these features should be more satisfying that the movie itself.There isn't much more. I really can't say that I liked "Daredevil", but I've seen worse. However, of all these superhero fever, I advice you to stick with "The Hulk" or "X-Men 2". This goes to show you that for a comic-book adaptation to be good, it's not all about big budgets and special effects. There's something more, and this one doesn't have it. I've heard that they are preparing new superhero movies, including a second "Spiderman", a third "X-Men", "The Fantastic Four", "Elektra" and "Catwoman". Somehow, I don't think that Ben and his blind lawyer from Hell's Kitchen are making a comeback.

Darwinskid 2013-04-20 19:15:09

Pretty boring

Now, I'm yes, a comic book fan, but purist? Not that much really so Ican get used to changes made to an adaptation...But will see if I dolike how they are presented. Hey, why should I watch the same thingover and over? Daredevil, I don't mind the changes that much, or thethought of Ben Affleck playing Matt Murdock/Daredevil, but it wasjust...Dull. Lackluster story too. Won't waste too many words here I'mafraid, because this is like a one word review if you want a shortquick and to the point type of review-Dull. Not only that it doesn'tbalance things right, it's technical shots, it's humor, it's drama.Well, actually I liked the beginning of the film when we see how MattMurdock came to be, but after that it wen't sort of down hill.Daredevil isn't the best Marvel movie, it's probably apart of theaverage bunch I'd say. Yes, a love or hate type of film and one whichhad a lot of potential and never reached it. But in opinion it is alittle more watchable than the Hulk, which bored me to death even more.A possible spoiler for the director's cut- As for the director's cut,which a lot seem to praise. Yeah, it does improve something's and addsmore to some characters, like Joe Pantoliono's. It also has an extrastoryline with Matt, which could've really done well here.Ah well.