Daredevil Movie SPOILERS Thread (for those who've seen the movie)

[delekkerste]

I hereby start this thread for those of us who have seen the Daredevil movie and want to be able to discuss specifics without ruining it for those who haven't seen it yet.

 

IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE MOVIE YET AND INTEND TO, TURN BACK NOW!!!

[delekkerste]

SPOILERS TO COME...IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE MOVIE, THIS IS YOUR LAST WARNING TO NOT READ THIS THREAD!!!

[delekkerste]

I couldn't wait until this evening, so I slipped out and just saw the DD movie.

 

My overall rating: 5.5 out of 10. I was disappointed, especially after reading the reasonably favorable review from the Wall Street Journal's tough film critic this morning.

 

Pros:

 

- Colin Farrell as Bullseye. Who would've thunk it? He looks like an insufficiently_thoughtful_person but does a great job with his scenes.

 

- Jennifer Garner as Elektra. I thought she nailed the role, especially after she turns to the dark side, so to speak.

 

- Jon Favreau as Foggy Nelson. What a stitch!

 

Cons:

 

- Too dark, grim & gritty - in the first 40 minutes, I didn't know whether I was watching "Daredevil" or "The Punisher". It took a lot for DD to reach his breaking point in the comics and yet he's literally playing God with criminals' lives in the first 20 minutes of the movie.

 

- Too short - by the time the backstory was in place, there were 3 quick fight scenes and the movie was over.

 

- Michael Clarke Duncan as Kingpin. His character just wasn't developed enough. Didn't really get much of a sense of what drives this guy or how he became what he became.

 

- Ben Affleck as Daredevil. Was way too dark, intense and wound up compared to the comics character and suffered from having to deliver cliched lines like "And I'll be waiting for you" at the end. Pure cheese! Showed flashes of potential, but was inconsistent overall.

 

- Deja vu - a lot of the movement and fight scenes looked suspiciously similar to "Spider-Man", and the revised version of the death of Matt's father was stolen straight from the 1989 Batman movie.

 

The movie does set itself up nicely for a better-made sequel, with the backstory now in place and with the "Return of Elektra" (DD #189-190), "Return of Bullseye" (DD #197-200) and "Born Again" (DD #227-233) storylines to draw on for inspiration. But, will this movie do big enough numbers to justify a sequel? I think this weekend will likely be big, but I just don't see there being great word of mouth on this one to sustain its popularity. We'll see, though.

 

Gene

[joe_collector]

Pretty fair synopsis, but I only thought Farrell/Bullseye and Foggy were watchable, while Garner will be up there with Affleck in Oscar contention.

 

Where was the story and character arcs? I didn't see any, and I looked hard....

 

Daredevil: Movie-making for the Brain Dead.

[fantastic_four]

I mostly agree with your points, except I thought the movie was much better than 5.5 out of 10. A few retorts:

 

- Too dark, grim & gritty - in the first 40 minutes, I didn't know whether I was watching "Daredevil" or "The Punisher". It took a lot for DD to reach his breaking point in the comics and yet he's literally playing God with criminals' lives in the first 20 minutes of the movie.

The same could be said for the Batman film, I guess...in fact DD was quite similar to Batman in that both directors skipped straight to Miller's vision of each character. I kind of agree that it skipped ahead quite a lot, and I noticed they were doing it when the director made a point of showing how scarred Matt Murdock's body was near the beginning when he was showering. It was a bit disconcerting for a second to speed ahead from boyhood to a hardened veteran, but once I accepted that the director wanted to fast-forward on to a particular point in Matt's life, I forgave it rather quickly to give it a chance.

 

- Too short - by the time the backstory was in place, there were 3 quick fight scenes and the movie was over.

Movie was 110 minutes...that's a long flick for the INCREDIBLY rapid pace it upheld. Twenty minutes longer than X-Men and only a few minutes shorter than Spider-Man. It looks like you were engaged pretty well if you thought it was too short...

 

- Ben Affleck as Daredevil. Was way too dark, intense and wound up compared to the comics character and suffered from having to deliver cliched lines like "And I'll be waiting for you" at the end. Pure cheese! Showed flashes of potential, but was inconsistent overall.

Affleck is not at all a dark, intense, or wound up actor. But Matt Murdock is that kind of character!! I was fully expecting this, because that's what the comic hero is like...where is the upbeat Matt you had in mind in the comic?

 

- Deja vu - a lot of the movement and fight scenes looked suspiciously similar to "Spider-Man", and the revised version of the death of Matt's father was stolen straight from the 1989 Batman movie.

Which elements of his father's death were so similar to the death of Wayne's parents? They seemed rather different--and the movie was rather true to the way he died in the comic. Are you referring to the facts of the death, or something about the lighting or mood of the scene?

 

As a long-time Daredevil fan, I thought it was absolutely incredible. Of course I'm a little biased since I've been reading DD since the 80s. The DD appearance in the Hulk movie about a decade ago was decent, and compared to that, this film was an absolute DREAM.

[joe_collector]

>>As a long-time Daredevil fan, I thought it was absolutely incredible. Of course >>I'm a little biased since I've been reading DD since the 80s.

 

Hey that's cool, and I fully understand it. I like some incredibly cheesy movies and characters, mostly because they represent something to me, and are just about the best depiction I can expect.

 

Daredevil is certainly not a great movie by any stretch, but in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

[ninanina]

The movie had 110 minutes to introduce 4 major characters and touch on DD's origins. In that time Elektra battles Bullseye, Bullseye battles DD, DD fights Elektra, Kingpin fights DD. There's your story. I sat back and enjoyed the show as did my wife and kid. I was too busy enjoying myself to look for what you were looking for. This was an action movie based on a comic book character pure and simple. This was never meant to be a Titanic or a Gone With the Wind.

 

I don't take these movies too seriously. Any comic adaptation I watch makes me feel like that 12 year old kid I used to be. Watching a comic book happening in front of me instead of reading it is fascinating, especially a character I've known most of my life. If you feel you have to pick apart a movie like this in terms of "story arcs or character development", I feel you're not only missing the point, your missing the fun.

 

The movie for the first time allowed us to get a feel for what Matt Murdock's life is like. Comics are very visual, so how to you show a reader what Matt senses or "sees". You can't. But, in the movie they were able to. And everytime I read a DD story that imagery will help me better understand what it's like for Matt Murdock to exist in a world he can't see, but sense or feel to such a powerful degree, he doesn't need to see it. For the first time, a movie was able to do something a comic book couldn't. Wow...

 

How's that for character developement.

 

[PovertyRow]

IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE MOVIE YET AND INTEND TO, TURN BACK NOW!!!

 

Mighty good of you to say that! . Gonna see it but not sure when. I oncfess the trailers I have seen - the acting and especially the dialogue - looks horrid - but I used to own a DD #1 back in my SA collec6ting days and really loved the story - bought a lot of DD from one jup and know my brain cells will remember. So perhaps this will be a case of the whole is greater than the sum of its parts! I go in with an open mind - and probably will ge6t it on DVD - one of my collecting foibles is that - no matter how bad a movie is - if it is comic book based I will own it.

[delekkerste]

Movie was 110 minutes...that's a long flick for the INCREDIBLY rapid pace it upheld.

 

Actually, it was 110 minutes including the previews. The actual running time of the movie is only 96 minutes (check Moviefone.com). I caught the 12:10pm showing and was out of the theater just before 2:00pm.

 

 

I was fully expecting this, because that's what the comic hero is like...where is the upbeat Matt you had in mind in the comic?

 

Not saying that Matt skips to work daily in the comics, but neither is he wound tighter than Frank Castle, either. What was with all the "Justice is served" nonsense and "That light at the end of the tunnel...it's the C train"? DD could never find it in himself to kill even Bullseye after all he did, and he's throwing criminals onto train tracks and watching dispassionately as they are dismembered/disemboweled? Nowhere in the comics, not even in "Born Again", was Matt Murdock ever this callous. While this would have been a great scene in the Punisher movie, I was nearly sickened to see it in the DD movie.

 

 

Which elements of his father's death were so similar to the death of Wayne's parents?

 

Like in the Batman movie, where the Joker was revealed to kill Bruce's parents, now the Kingpin is the guy who did in Jack Murdock and leaves his calling card behind in a scene which looks suspiciously like the flashback sequence in Batman.

 

 

Of course I'm a little biased since I've been reading DD since the 80s.

 

I've been a hardcore DD collector and reader as well since the early 1980s...I just don't think Mark Steven Johnson "got" the character in his -script and I don't think he directed Affleck the way he should have.

 

Gene

[ninanina]

Your right about Daredevil being out of character when he allowed the rapist to get halved, but the movie wasn't only for long time comic readers.

There's a whole "other" audience out there that doesn't read comics; this was for them as well.

 

I am also a long time Daredevil reader, (since the late 70's) and I've come to accept this as a way for a writer to write a story for the masses, not just us readers. Daredevil realized that although he wanted Justice first and foremost in the beginning, he realized later that he wouldn't be an executioner.

 

Sure, it's not like it's supposed to be, neither was Spiderman. (ie. his origin in the movie) Way back when the first Superman was made, he didn't all of a sudden appear one day in Metropolis, unless of course Superboy was an altenate reality. As far as Batman goes, Joker (in the comics) did not kill his parents and Robin started up with Batman a lot younger than the movie showed. Everything changes.

 

Even when Hollywood makes a "true story" they always change a things to make it interesting. Sure, for us readers, we could have done away with the subway scene, but for the story on how DD's outlook changed,I feel it was an important

scene.

[ninanina]

Here's some things we could enjoy. (As long time readers)

 

Elektra's (death?) scene - right out of DD 181.

Bullseye scene after the credits start - also right out of DD 181. (Although I didn't know it until I picked up the comic again after the movie.)

Fight scenes - right out of the comic books.

Names referenced to artists (Romita, Lee and a few more I can't remember)

Stan's scene.

The way he looked at the kid, what was he thinking?

 

And not to mention this whole story line (except maybe for the subway scene) is very much based on a Daredevil story.

 

[wolvergeek]

I went into this expecting a bad movie (Ben Affleck as Daredevil?) but walked away utterly pleased. The movie seemed to take off after Bullseye entered the fray and everytime he uttered his lines, he stole the show. For having to cram in 4 major characters in less than 2 hours, I feel the director did the best he could. He also set it up perfectly for a sequel with all 4 characters possibly returning. Just like X-men, this story had to layout origins and character development so if there is a sequel, the director can have fun with the characters and story as it appears will happen in X2. I felt Garner played Elektra well (a little shaky on her fighting), Farrell stole the show as Bullseye, Duncan played Kingpin probably better than any other actor could (who wants to see a CGI Kingpin anyway?) and if you can get over the problem of seeing Affleck in an action film (I started to towards the end), it overall seemed to be just as good as X-men was.

[ninanina]

Always nice to read a positive.

 

Your right for this movie setting up a nice sequel, if there is one. All the characters are in place now and we could actually see a sequel that surpasses the original. It's happened before.

 

A little worried about the crowds. My buddy Doug from Comic World went to see it Friday night and the theatre was half empty.

 

How are the crowds out there? Any sell outs?

[joe_collector]

>>This was an action movie based on a comic book character pure and simple. This was never meant to be a Titanic or a Gone With the Wind.

 

Hey, I'm not disagreeing, only stating that the reason Spider-man was such a success is due to the writer and director inserting a well-honed story, plot and character arc within the confines of the comic book adaptation.

 

If the Daredevil writer/director doesn't want to work that hard and achieve something great, then don't expect the brass ring.

[wolvergeek]

Spider-Man was such a success because of his name recognition. Everyone and their mother knows who Spidey is. Not the same with DD. I went on Friday around 2:30 and it was somewhat full (do kids go to school anymore?).

[joe_collector]

Spider-man was a success because the writer and director took a popular character and translated his story near-perfect to the screen. There are many reasons why Spider-man succeeded, and it doesn't take a deep look to understand why.

 

Story, character and action in a nice balance.

 

Barring a perfect story translation for Daredevil, the film version would have a hard time matching Spidey's success, but this limp noodle of a comic translation falls far, far, far short of that.

[ninanina]

I feel that Spiderman's success was more to the fact it was Spiderman. Kinda like Batman and Superman - well known. Superman's new thing was flying. Batman had the Batmobile. X-Men had mutant powers. Spiderman had web-slinging. Aside from the popularity angle, each hero had something new to add to the screen. Fight scenes in Daredevil? All "been there, done that". His billy club, well Batman did have all those "wonderful toys" and Blade has his knives. So, that's kinda been done to.

 

So, before even getting started, Daredevil has huge disadvantages not only from lack of popularity, but also from a lack of something new to add to the screen.

 

Also, in another post you mentioned that you didn't have any scene you would remember the rest of your life in the movie. I had two.

 

First, near the beginning I was amazed at how the movie was able to portray Daredevil's world in how he exists using his four remaining senses. This couldn't be done in the comic book. So, from here on in I will have a better understanding of the world Daredevil exists in whenever I read his comic. Also, when I read and saw Elektra's "death" in Daredevil 181, it was a drawing I'd never forget, and didn't when I saw it played out again in the movie. My words to my wife when I saw it were "Just like the comic". And also his words when he did it, "and now for my next trick"

 

Obviously my remarks convey the fact that I was too busy enjoying the spectable to worry about story arcs and character developement.

 

DD did change from a badguy vigilante/executioner to a good guy vigilante, Elektra from a loner to a lover, Kingpin from a powerful Crimelord to his defeat, and Bullseye from a psychotic psyco with a sense of humor to a psychotic psycho with a sense of humor. Ok, 3 out of 4?.

 

Other than that, I suppose there was no character developement at all.

[fantastic_four]

Also, when I read and saw Elektra's "death" in Daredevil 181, it was a drawing I'd never forget, and didn't when I saw it played out again in the movie. My words to my wife when I saw it were "Just like the comic". And also his words when he did it, "and now for my next trick"

I noticed Gene pointed out which comics the next movie could draw ideas from...which comics did the current movie borrow most heavily from? The ones I noticed the most similarities to were 181 as you said, and maybe a little of 190 thrown in as well. It's been a while since I've read the run though, so I've been trying to look back at the issues to see where some of the key parts came from.

[ninanina]

Well, I'm certainly going to have a look at 190, thanks for the tip. I recently purchased a set of DD from 2 on up to 157. (Already had all the rest). So I'm going to be reading the Silver Age run on up over the next few months. Maybe I'll catch a few things along the way.

[delekkerste]

which comics did the current movie borrow most heavily from?

 

DD 1 (origin)

DD 168 (intro Elektra, death of her father)

DD 169-172 (re-intro Bullseye/Kingpin)

DD 181 (death of Elektra, paralysis of Bullseye)

DD 230/DD v. 2 #5 (not directly, but the extensive use of religious/church imagery was inspired no doubt by these issues)

 

Gene