Daredevil

I have to admit when I saw Daredevil in its theatrical release, I found myself underwhelmed by it. I loved the visuals, but I found the love story soppy and couldn't always make sense of the story. However, hearing so much about the Director's Cut being superior I got the DVD off my brother, and actually I really liked it. Daredevil is not what I call a perfect movie, I still did find the love story soppy and becoming dangerously close to flagging down the film and the soundtrack is rather dated and heavy for my liking. On the other hand, I loved the stylish visuals, the fresh, funny dialogue, that I could make much more sense of the story and could be more entertained by it and the characterisation of the titular character with him being vulnerable and flawed I found him very interesting. The other characters are not as well developed, but are enthusiastically performed. Colin Farrell especially is lots of fun, Jennifer Garner is decent and Michael Clarke Duncan is great as is Joe Pantoliano. The editing is good if occasionally rushed, and the action sequences are clear if not always very subtle. Overall, a good movie that fared much better on re-watch. 7.5/10 Bethany Cox

First off, this was a more complete version of the DVD which came out earlier. In this edition, about a half-hour of new material was added to the disc (and what was shown at the theaters.) All reviews I read said it elevated this film from "fair at best" to "good." I agree. It made the movie much, much better.

Yeah, it's more far-fetched than the other superhero movies because here, the hero is a blind guy who, because of his blindness, has extraordinary hearing powers along with the rest of the usual Batman/Spiderman-type athletic skills.

As in most of the Batman films, this is a dark film. I think it would have been better had it lightened up a bit with a few jokes and a more wholesome female lead. Jennifer Garner is another one of these latter-day skinny chicks who is made to be tough-looking, tough-talking and tough-fighting. In other words: ridiculous. However, I will say she comes across a little more likable on the extended version. One more negative: the fight scenes go on a tad too long and are outlandish.

On the positive side, this may be the best-sounding DVD I own, at least up to ones I had heard up until this came out in January of 2005. Since the hero (Ben Affleck) has super hearing, this is emphasized in this movie and so you, if you have a 5.1 surround system, hear sounds from all speakers at almost times. It's awesome!

Affleck, meanwhile, is likable as the superhero and I liked the message he gives at the end about shunning revenge. Wow, you don't hear that much in movies. Kudos, too, to villains' Colin Farrell and Michael Clarke Duncan. They are fun to watch, especially Farrell.

So, if this superhero film interests you, make sure you get the "Director's Cut" edition. It's far better than the original, and, I believe, the same price.

That's why I think most critics hated this thing. It's not lighthearted fun like "Spider-Man" was, it's more adult-themed. I actually found it a bit more effective than Sam Raimi's superhero epic. Why? Because it wasn't campy and it didn't have cartoony special effects. The CGI in "Daredevil" is more photorealistic. I also loved the "Matrix"-like martial-arts incorporated throughout the film.

In fact, as far as darker-themed comic book movies go, I think "Daredevil" is a much better film than either of the first two "Batman" pictures were. I recently watched "Spider-Man" again on DVD and I've always had mixed reactions of it. I do think it works on the level of campy fun and for that I gave it a B Minus. But I think "Daredevil" is a more solid picture and I'd grade it with a B.

I like the look of the film, the washed-out colors make the movie look very 70's in certain scenes. Like "The Crow", the movie has an MTV mentality with rock and rap songs, but also has a love story as well. The sound design is awesome, if you have a good theatre sound system, "Daredevil" will take full advantage of it. I don't think Ben Affleck got credit when it was deserved. Along with Jennifer Garner, Colin Farrell and Michael Clarke Duncan, Affleck was perfect cast.

Anyhow, as much as I believe "Daredevil" is a much better film than "Spider-Man" was. I actually think "Spider-Man 2" is better than "Daredevil". The best comic book movie ever placed on film. It shows that a director can really improve on his work. I highly recommend that film to anyone. Well, the bottom line is: "Spider-Man" (B-), "Daredevil" (B) and "Spider-Man 2" (A). I hope you enjoyed my review.

Where Spiderman was colorful and almost cartoonish, Daredevil is gritty and merciless. Whatever you thought couldn't happen in Peter Parker's world will more than likely happen in Matt Murdock's neck of the woods. Because people die here. Sometimes they die slowly and painfully. The superheroes go home with scars on their backs, broken teeth, and more than a few gruesome images that need to be repressed. For all of these reasons I liked Daredevil, because it takes chances by offering a hero that is by no means invincible or conventional.

The origin story of the character Daredevil is pretty complicated, but, as the helpful gentleman in the theater so aptly put it, "He's blind, but he can see stuff blind." Let's just leave it at this: As a kid, Matt Murdock was blinded by radioactive material in a freak accident. This caused his other senses to become phenomenally acute, to the point where Matt can track criminals by their scent and use sound waves as a sort of radar. He uses his newfound abilities to protect those who will not be protected by the justice system, all the while hoping that one day he will find the person who killed his father.

If you're a fan of the first two Batman movies, you'll find a lot to love in Daredevil. There are still some comic book elements that require some suspension of disbelief, like the fact that Matt could construct an entire high-tech lair beneath a church while working as a pro-bono lawyer, but the movie is not fantasy-driven. The fight scenes will make you wince at their realism, the love story is not corny or forced (as opposed to a certain flick called Just Married), and the characters are complex, uncertain people who just happen to don masks and fight on rooftops.

Do you remember the parts in the old Christopher Reeve Superman movies where Clark would hear someone crying for help in the distance? He would always be having dinner with Lois Lane at the time, and had to make up some dumb excuse for ditching the scene like, "Oh! I just forgot. I have a book due at the library." Then he would dash off to save the day, leaving Lois high and dry. Well, in today's feature, Matt hears someone crying for help, but when his love interest, Elektra, asks him to stay, he actually does. With out-of-left-field scenes like this, I couldn't help but enjoy Daredevil.

Some might be surprised at how little screen time the villains get in this movie. Kingpin, a Don Giovini mobster type, and Bullseye, an Irish nut with a couple of loose screws, are important parts of our story, but they don't steal the show. Going back to the Batman comparison, many movie buffs think that Jack Nicholson's role as the joker actually become more interesting than the winged knight himself. Not so in this movie, as Daredevil is the guy whom the role shebang revolves around. By deciding to focus on the hero more than the villain, the audience can get into his head and root for him to the last battle. Matt is a cool guy because he's not a wealthy playboy or Kryptonian who can smash through walls. Other than his heightened senses and combat skills, he's just a regular guy who happens to like read leather.

After X-Men and Spiderman became huge hits, it was expected that Hollywood would start churning out more superhero flicks as fast as they could make them. Thankfully, Daredevil doesn't seem recycled or rushed and actually brings something new to the table.

When I heard about a directors cut to this movie I never imagined it would be so much better than the original release. Why must movie studios always feel they know better than the director. This film would have been much more successful had they left it alone, but by insisting on so many cuts and changes they shot themselves in the foot. All because they wanted a family friendly spider-man type film instead of the much more dark and violent world of daredevil. Every scene added to the film makes you wonder why they cut it in the first place. It isn't just about adding scenes though they have taken a couple out too. I can't imagine anyone who would miss the fireside love scene. I urge everyone who saw the theatrical cut to watch the directors cut. It isn't a perfect film but it's a more complete and enjoyable one. Also watch the documentary on the directors cut DVD and see one of the producers trying to defend the original release and then actually saying he thinks it is the better cut. I think he must be more blind than Matt Murdock!!!