Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

*** Official "DAREDEVIL" Discussion Thread


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
176 replies to this topic

#1 of 177 OFFLINE   Lou Sytsma

Lou Sytsma

    Producer



  • 5,362 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 01 1998

Posted February 11 2003 - 10:18 AM

Don't be shy Hector you did a good job! Glad to hear the emphasis is on character and not SFX.

Gee ya think filmmakers might have been reading internet posts where we have been moaning about this for years and are finally paying attention!!!
Every man is my superior, in that I may learn from him.

#2 of 177 OFFLINE   Robert Crawford

Robert Crawford

    Studio Mogul



  • 25,098 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 09 1998
  • Real Name:Robert
  • LocationMichigan

Posted February 11 2003 - 10:35 AM

This thread is now designated the Official Discussion Thread for "Daredevil" please, post all comments, links to outside reviews, film and box office discussion items to this thread.

All HTF member film reviews of "Daredevil" should be posted to the Official Review Thread.

Thank you for your consideration in this matter.


Crawdaddy

Crawdaddy

 

Blu-ray Preorder Listing

 


#3 of 177 OFFLINE   Norm

Norm

    Screenwriter



  • 2,015 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 01 1998
  • Real Name:Norm

Posted February 11 2003 - 01:40 PM

As a former big time Comic Book collector, the fact that they changed the look of the characters so much, I sadly have no real desire to see this movie! Posted Image

#4 of 177 OFFLINE   Hector de leon

Hector de leon

    Agent



  • 39 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 24 2002

Posted February 12 2003 - 12:43 AM

One thing I should mention is to stay 5 minutes into the credits to see the outcome of one of the characters. Oh, and watch out for cameo's from Kevin Smith and Stan Lee.

#5 of 177 OFFLINE   Jack Briggs

Jack Briggs

    Executive Producer



  • 16,725 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 03 1999

Posted February 12 2003 - 07:42 AM

Isn't Daredevil's costume identical in look to the comic book's? I understand that originally the studio opted for a really bad design, one that the Los Angeles Times likened to the FBI "wanted"-poster rendering of the Unabomber. The studio thought originally that non-comic book fans wouldn't go for a super hero dressed in a red-devil outfit.

#6 of 177 OFFLINE   Norm

Norm

    Screenwriter



  • 2,015 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 01 1998
  • Real Name:Norm

Posted February 12 2003 - 07:46 AM

Bullseye has me bummed the most, but also Kingpin. They should have put Clark in a fat suit like Myers used in Austin Powers. Daredevil's costume I'm not wild about either.

#7 of 177 OFFLINE   Andy Sheets

Andy Sheets

    Screenwriter



  • 2,371 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 06 2000

Posted February 12 2003 - 10:01 AM

Quote:
Isn't Daredevil's costume identical in look to the comic book's?

It looks close but it's not identical. The comic book version has the DD logo centered on his chest and it's larger. It's also simpler in general, looking more like a superhero costume but entirely red, while the movie version looks like a leather biker outfit.

Quote:
Bullseye has me bummed the most, but also Kingpin. They should have put Clark in a fat suit like Myers used in Austin Powers. Daredevil's costume I'm not wild about either.

I think Duncan looks great as Kingpin, and Farrell looks ridiculous but I think he's a good actor for the part. The character I'm most worried about is Elektra. Jennifer Garner might look cute but I don't like her acting.

#8 of 177 OFFLINE   Patrick Sun

Patrick Sun

    Studio Mogul



  • 37,895 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 30 1999

Posted February 12 2003 - 10:55 AM

Woo hoo! I just picked up these free mini-posters from my local comic book shop. I got mini-posters of Elektra, Daredevil, Bullseye, and Kingpin. I think I'll frame the Elektra one.
"Jee-sus, it's like Iwo Jima out there" - Roger Sterling on "Mad Men"
Patcave | 2006 Films | 2007 Films | Flickr | Comic-Con 2012 | Dragon*Con 2012

#9 of 177 OFFLINE   Nick Cerretti

Nick Cerretti

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 108 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 07 2002

Posted February 12 2003 - 11:32 AM

To not have any desire to see this because they changed the way the characters looked is a little mind-boggling. I mean, if this movie was an exact copy of an actual issue of the comic, I'd pass. I like to see people's interpretations of original sources; probably why you'll never hear me complain about changes in LOTR. If I wanted to have the movie=book, I'd read the book!

And I disagree with Gardner. Well, not the fact about her being cute, but I think she'll do a good job with Elektra.

Patrick,

Good idea Posted Image

#10 of 177 OFFLINE   Rex Bachmann

Rex Bachmann

    Screenwriter



  • 1,975 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 10 2001
  • Real Name:Rex Bachmann

Posted February 13 2003 - 07:04 AM

Nick Cerretti wrote (post #9):

Quote:
To not have any desire to see this because they changed the way the characters looked is a little mind-boggling. I mean, if this movie was an exact copy of an actual issue of the comic, I'd pass. I like to see people's interpretations of original sources. . . . If I wanted to have the movie=book, I'd read the book!


Yes, and Daredevil, like all the superhero films, is an adaptation of the comic book. It can't be the comic book itself, which is two-dimensional, static, and silent.

Part of the price of filmic adaptation has always been re-interpretation, especially in Hollywood. (Gone with the Wind anyone?) Comic-book source material won't be any different.

Note, for example, the controversies on the characters' costumes/uniforms which always pop up with any serious prospect of filming.

Andy Sheets wrote (post #7):

Quote:
The comic book version [of Daredevil's costume] has the DD logo centered on his chest and it's larger. It's also simpler in general, looking more like a superhero costume but entirely red, while the movie version looks like a leather biker outfit.


Daredevil's costume when I was a kid always looked like red velvet, not red leather. Has that changed since the old days? Velvet would have looked better, I think.


Norm wrote (post #6):

Quote:
Bullseye has me bummed the most, . . .



Quote:
I think . . . Farrell looks ridiculous but I think he's a good actor for the part.


On one of these late-night talk-show interviews, Mr. Farrell expressed relief at not having to wear a costume like the one in the comic book (whatever that looks like). He seemed to like the idea of the (implied?) body piercings and the forehead tatoo. (But wouldn't having a bull's eye in the middle of one's forehead be like inviting a bullet to the brain ("Com'on and get me!")?)


Speaking of the appropriateness of the casting---and this may have been brought up in earlier threads on that subject---, among the trivia on the biography page dedicated to the lead actor is the report of his height at "6 foot 2 inches". I don't know what the comic-book character's height is supposed to be, but it dawned on me that, basically, Daredevil is a gymnast with fighting ability. Ever watched gymnasts? Male and female alike, they're seldom taller than 5-foot 10' or so. The average height of even male gymnasts is low for a very good reason. I don't know what, if anything, the comic book has had to say about this, but, just from outtakes I've seen with the lead character in action, I'd say he's too tall to be doing a lot of that curling himself up into a ball and rolling around.

Gymnasts and high-wire artists tend to be small and, for the latter at least, wiry, as well. Know why? Because tall people who try do all that tucking and curling of their bodies end up with a whole lot of back problems, that's why. There are just some things tall people can't do well. I should think this would be one of them. And it's not just my opinion. I've seen reports of studies that found that tall people tend to be more---how shall I put this?---"klutzy" and physically awkward---the opposite of a "daredevil". I can't remember the purported explanation(s) for this, and we're talking AVERAGES here, so don't write back naming the NBA's historic "all-star" lists, please. There have also been reports from studies of gymnastics and its attendant physical ailments. In short, tall people and gymnastics do not mix well.

I would find a shorter actor as a high-wire artist-cum-gymnast-cum-fighting machine a little more believable in terms of real-world "mechanics", but it takes guts to buck the standard screen-hero type in Hollywood.
"Delenda est . . . . "

 


#11 of 177 OFFLINE   Norm

Norm

    Screenwriter



  • 2,015 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 01 1998
  • Real Name:Norm

Posted February 13 2003 - 08:31 AM

I hate anytime they change Comics in movies! If They are going disreguard Comic Book history, then change the name of the Character, Movie etc.! Affleck is not who I'd have choosen anyway. Bullseye in the movie looks like he came over from the Matrix set.

This is how Bullseye has looked for over 25 years. Don't worry Marvel the wusses they are, will change to the movie version at some point.
Posted Image

#12 of 177 OFFLINE   Luis S

Luis S

    Supporting Actor



  • 638 posts
  • Join Date: May 07 2000

Posted February 13 2003 - 11:45 PM

But Bullseye did ask for a costume. So maybe in the next movie along with a paticular surgery Posted Image

Luis S
Neo: "Its been an honor sir."

Morpheus: " No,the honor is still mine."

#13 of 177 OFFLINE   Scott Weinberg

Scott Weinberg

    Lead Actor



  • 7,482 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 03 2000

Posted February 14 2003 - 12:38 AM

Believe it or not, Affleck's better as the blind attorney than he is as the leather-clad wall-bouncer.

#14 of 177 OFFLINE   Seth Paxton

Seth Paxton

    Lead Actor



  • 7,588 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 05 1998

Posted February 14 2003 - 02:06 AM

I thought Farrell was almost able to steal the show. This may not be your father's Bullseye, but it's still a great character.

Favreau and Affleck as Matt and Foggy are great, one of the better things for the film.

The big problem is the actually story telling "this happens then this happens...". It's just not that well done much of the time. The things they want to show, the characters they want to introduce, those are fine. They just didn't do a good job of linking the stuff together.

I blame mostly direction and some of the script (though individual scenes have pretty good moments/dialog so it would seem like the script was at least on to something).

Go see it, just make it a matinee.


2 things about DD that they did do well. They brought a strong focus on his senses and how that affected his life in a variety of ways. And they kept a focus on his acrobatic approach. More so than Spidey, DD was always the type of hero to be overly acrobatic due to the nature of his powers/ability as a fighter. In those respects I thought they did capture DD pretty well.

#15 of 177 OFFLINE   Bill Griffith

Bill Griffith

    Supporting Actor



  • 581 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 08 2002

Posted February 14 2003 - 02:38 AM

I just don't see Affleck as a Brooding devil anything. He's more suited for a role as a romancer. My wife and I were actually discussing who would be a better DD. The guy that played the Mummy (Vosloo or whatever) would have been my first choice.

Anyway on to the point, the previews and the fact I haven't been to the movies in over a month will probably draw me to go see this movie. As I have the superhuman ability to enjoy most movies where most people would get up and leave in the middle I will be dragging my wife to see this potential disaster. I am willing to risk ruining my streak as the one that picks the good movies to go see, just to go to the theater and see this, or maybe The Recruit.

Post relocated by administrator from Review thread to Discussion thread, where it belongs.

#16 of 177 OFFLINE   Timothy Alexander

Timothy Alexander

    Second Unit



  • 381 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 15 1999

Posted February 14 2003 - 03:36 AM

I thought the movie was okay. The storyline was alright but my main beef was that it was really awkwardly paced, as if it used to be 2 hours long and they just did a horrible editing job to condense it down to 1 hour and 30 minutes. Which may have actually been the case.

I just felt they could've did more with every character involved. Especially Bullseye and Elektra. Those two were just screaming for more time. Colin Farrell was just f**king awesome and Jennifer Garner...my god...she is so sexy.

I left the theater just wishing they made it longer. I feel the story would've really benefitted from that easily.

OT: The X-Men 2 trailer...hands down, best trailer of the year so far. Great money shots everyhwere. Now that's a superhero movie with some promise.
TAlex 700

#17 of 177 OFFLINE   David Rogers

David Rogers

    Supporting Actor



  • 723 posts
  • Join Date: May 15 2000

Posted February 14 2003 - 09:05 AM

Re: trailers attached to Daredevil

LXG (League of Extraordinary Gentlemen). This is one of *the* *worst* teasers I think I've seen in a long time. I know about the movie, as it's been on my radar for a few years now. But most of the audience doesn't (I wager). This teaser doesn't offer anything *at all* about the movie, it doesn't even explain the League and what about it is clever. This is also the first time I've seen them plug the LXG tag, not sure if that's going to work like they clearly want it to. I hope the trailer is better than the teaser, because off this alone I don't think the movie will do well.

X-Men 2. (ngh ngh ngh ngh). Okay, fanboy spaz ove--- (ngh ngh) ... there over now, I hope. Posted Image Wow o wowwie! Awesome trailer. New shots of all the major characters and several of the lesser characters. First good looks at Nightcrawler, both in action and merely just looking at him. The makeup looks *good*, and his action looks to be even better. Rogue and Iceman's kiss, awesome. Action shots of Cyclops and Jean Gray, oh yes. A new shot of Colossus, already thinking we need more of him than I think we're going to get.

And, ...

Hugh Jackman back in the role that made me think he'd be a star. He *is* Wolverine. I still can't believe I was at one point disappointed Dougray Scott had left the project; he couldn't have possibly have done us so right as Jackman. New shots of Wolverine in this one, looking more scruffy and badder than ever. And we got a glimpse of Wolverine squaring off with Deathstryke (Kelly Hu from The Scorpion), very much a tease for good stuff to come.

Bryan singer is doing us right with X-Men 2. This year is going to be a fine year for films, I can feel it.

Re: Daredevil.

Okay, a few things I noticed.

One, extremely exceedingly *bad* wire fight moment when Daredevil fights Kingpin. When Kingpin heaves him into the ceiling, then picks him back up and tosses him across the room; the pick back up and toss is very poorly done. It looks like a wire move, period, not like a fight. You can easily see Duncan isn't anywhere close to having a supporting grip on Daredevil, and the toss is equally unconvincing. He just hangs in the air then floats across the room. Sigh.

Two, Elektra died or lived? It seemed mostly clear she'd died. Yet at the end of the movie Murdock finds her necklace on his rooftop, which my friend automatically took to mean she was alive and had left it for him there as an indicator. My response was she was shown to die on screen (we saw not only a fairly horrific wound a human, as she is, would have a very unlikely time surviving; but also were shown Murdock "seeing" her heart stop), and also that her death or survival would have been major news even if her father hadn't recently also died. She was a billionaire heiress; it would have made the local news circuits either way, and that means Murdock would know.

We're never shown her actually dying, there's no funeral (as one could also argue Murdock would have attended if she had died), but I really find this bit extremely unsatisfying. All I really would be after is a short little scene, even a minute, where Murdock vists her in the hospital or during recovery while healing from her wound, and they share a tender moment with promise for the future; or him at her grave or funeral. Instead we're left with some sort of ... whatever it is ... that might indicate Elektra could appear in a sequel.

Action stuff. My favorite action sequence in the whole film was the playground fun Murdock and Elektra had. Not only was it properly lit, but the cuts were longer so we could actually appreciate a bit of the choreography. Plus the abundant chemistry Affleck and Garner shared, adding a romantically playful element to their "fight".

One of the coolest moves I thought was Bullseye flipping back and over, through the stained glass. He broke contact away from Daredevil with it, then uses his reflexes to catch (most of/all) the glass shards and then hurls them in a blizzard of edges at Daredevil. Who slow-mo backflips to dodge each and every one, and comes up with a grim heroic set to his face. Awesome.

Most of the action was a little "huh?" though. I was actually a little torqued about it as I sat watching the credits, because there's a HUGE list of stunt and choreography performers credited; apparently their efforts were somewhat wasted. Posted Image The overall feel of the action is good, but the action itself is very hard to track. And I've literally grown up on fast cut stuff, so this isn't a matter of me being some "back in my day …" guy.

Jennifer Garner is seriously hot. She deserves her own paragraph on the matter. Everything she wore, she looked beautiful. She more than held her own, both in "regular" and action scenes. Hope she gets more shots to do big screen, because she's far too incredible to leave languishing on tv.
-----

Dave's World
-No matter where you go, there you are-

#18 of 177 OFFLINE   Patrick Sun

Patrick Sun

    Studio Mogul



  • 37,895 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 30 1999

Posted February 14 2003 - 11:12 AM

The name drops (of comic book creators who have worked on Daredevil in the comics):

Miller - Frank Miller, the guy who re-vitalized Daredevil in the 1980's and introduced us to Elektra.

Mack - David Mack, writer of the rebooted Daredevil comics after Kevin Smith did the 1st 8 issues.

Bendis - Brian Bendis, I think current writer on the Daredevil title for Marvel.

Quesada - Joe Quesada, now Editor-In-Chief at Marvel comics, but is also a good artist who did the art for Kevin Smith's run on Daredevil a few years ago.

Lee - Stan Lee, who had a hand in creating or writing most major Marvel super-hero comics.

Kirby - Jack Kirby, who had a hand in creating or drawing most of the major Marvel super-hero comics.

Kane - Gil Kane, another artist.

Kevin Smith makes a cameo named Kirby, the guy who shows Ben Ulrich Daredevil's billy club/walking cane.

Stan Lee is the old guy that young Matt Murdock prevents from going into the street too soon, lest he be run over by a vehicle.
"Jee-sus, it's like Iwo Jima out there" - Roger Sterling on "Mad Men"
Patcave | 2006 Films | 2007 Films | Flickr | Comic-Con 2012 | Dragon*Con 2012

#19 of 177 OFFLINE   Patrick Sun

Patrick Sun

    Studio Mogul



  • 37,895 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 30 1999

Posted February 14 2003 - 11:22 AM

I enjoyed the courtship of Matt and Elektra. The scene on the rooftop and Matt using the rain to show him Elektra's face was a very nice scene indeed.

The scene in the playground was okay, I was hoping for more, but the principals seemed not so sleek in their stuntwork to my eyes. But I did enjoy Ben and Jennifer's chemistry as Matt and Elektra.

Too bad there is very little in how the machination of the "Kingpin" motif involved Elektra's father, and how Fisk assumed so much power over crime. This is where the screenplay just does a poor job connecting the dots and leaves us with a very jumbled and fractured narrative. There's very little tension in the "what's going to happen next now that this happened" category.

I like a super-villian, but how does someone commit murder in a tavern and just walk away scott free? Lazy writing.

The action scene, like when DD has tracked down Quesada could have been really good, but it's just murky and uninvolving.

I think that's the biggest flaw in the film, it's uninvolving. The stakes aren't set high enough because there's little downtime, it's just go go go go (Matt's confessions notwithstanding).

And why does everyone know Matt's secret identity, it seems? And who deletes an typed up article one letter at a time? Good grief!

Did anyone care that Matt has a serious supply of pain-killers in his medicine cabinet (and why does he need a mirror on it?)

I think DD should have scarred up Kingpin's foreheard with "FEAR" before he left him to be picked up by the police and sent away to Riker's. Posted Image How did the police connect Fisk as the Kingpin? Again, sloppy writing.
"Jee-sus, it's like Iwo Jima out there" - Roger Sterling on "Mad Men"
Patcave | 2006 Films | 2007 Films | Flickr | Comic-Con 2012 | Dragon*Con 2012

#20 of 177 OFFLINE   Colin-H

Colin-H

    Second Unit



  • 391 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 25 2002

Posted February 14 2003 - 11:44 AM

My assumption is that Elektra is alive. Notice that it was a Braille necklace. (“Do these come in Braille?”)
"At least Kurosawa doesn't give his samurai hairstyles that make them look like drug dealers from some intergalactic trailer park, as Mr. Lucas did with Obi-Wan Kenobi and Anakin Skywalker."

DVD List | 2003 film list


Back to Movies (Theatrical)



Forum Nav Content I Follow