Tell what you liked/disliked? How's the score? How's kingpin? Bullseyes...Matt Murdock (still blind at the end?)

I haven't seen it, but it looks like a total rip-off of Spider Man and The Matrix.

Also, while the cast is attractive, I think they were poorly chosen.

Lammastide said:

Agree for Ben afleck... But I didn't really like RAimi's Spider Man the secon dpart of it looks really lame to me... Although I'm a big fan of Raimi's work. In here I thought the guy was "playing at Sam RAIMI" and not being himself...

Wait to rent it. It has it's moments but it's realy not worth a trip to the theatre.

Universaluv said:

Yeah, I would have to agree.

Haven't seen it yet, but plan to soon. I'm not nearly as excited to see it as I was Spider-Man or as I am for the Hulk movies (and X-men 2 most of all!). It's more of an inbetweener between the big ones. But I'll do my duty as a Marvel/comic book fan and go see it, even though it seems nearly everyone in the film was miscast.

Daredevil completely rocked. I was sceptical of Affleck, but he totally won me over. He put in so many subtle character traits that just were Matt Murdock through and through. It was obvious that he knows the character, & that he loves the source material. The same can be said of the director, who put in so many references to the comic, it will take multiple viewings to catch them all.

Michael Clarke Duncan was perfect in the role of Kingpin. Oh sure, he's not white. Big deal. It was far more important that they got an actor with the right kind of physique, and Duncan definitely has it! Farrel's Bullseye was also dead-on. I've heard a few fans complain that he was too over the top, but I think that they need to go re-read the Frank Miller run. In Miller's stories, Bullseye was a meglomaniacal pychopath, who got off on his killings. In my opinion, Farrel nailed the part.

My only complaints about the film were A) the length. Way too short (I know this probably had to do with the fact that the director had to keep cutting the film to acheive the PG13 that Marvel insisted upon, so maybe we'll get to see it on the DVD), and B) Elektra didn't appear even slightly Greek (although I did think Garner did a fantastic job).

Lammastide, to call it a rip off of Spider-man is completely unfair. Sure there are a few similarities, since they are both based on characters co-created by the same man (Stan Lee), but that is really where any similarities end. Daredevil is much darker in tone, closer to the first two Batman films than Spidey (and a much better adaptation from the comic book than Burton's Bat-films). As for the Matrix, there really isn't any resemblance, unless you count martial arts (and if that's the case then you'd have to call anything with Jackie Chan or Jet Li a Matrix rip off).

The interesting thing is that this film seems to be getting a wide range of reponses. Some people love it, others hate it. It doesn't even seem to be divided down lines of fans vs non-fans (some fans loved it, others seemed to loathe it, and the same can be said for the non-fans). I personally cannot understand the people who disliked it, other than many seemed to have made up their mind before they saw it (many told me they hate Affleck, and that seems to have clouded their judgement). Personally, I thought ol' Benjy put in his best performance to date. I thought the film was near-perfect and I can't wait to see the sequel, as well as the Elektra spin-off movie.

AaronFantastic said:

I don't think you'll feel this way after you see the flick Aaron. See my previous post for how I felt about it. You seem to have a level head about the comic book geek stuff, so I have a feeling you'll agree. Let me know what you thought.

JediMaster said:

Interesting. He said he had to lose weight for the role. I'd think that if there was any character you'd need to stay big for (or even put on about 200 lbs) it would be Kingpin.

Jennifer Garner though... I just don't see her as Elektra. No way. Never. Even after I see it, I'll never buy that.

AaronFantastic said:

I think he had to lose weight in order to do the more physical stuff the role required. As for Garner, she doesn't fit the part ethnically at all, but I thought she did about as good a job as she possibly could. She certainly was able to do the martial arts required for Elektra, but she isn't who I would have cast either. I think they mainly wanted an actress who could perform most of her own stunts, so that's why they went with her (it probably doesn't hurt that she has a hit TV show right now as well).

JediMaster said:

Eh. It's not the ethnicity. Put a wig and an accent on her and she'd be fine. It's the whole attitude. I know they removed a lot of the character's backstory (and pretty much everything that makes her complicated), but still. I just don't see Garner having the sophistication/attitude to carry off the Elektra character.

Ben Afleck

AaronFantastic said:

Well, I think they are setting up the character's story with this film, with the sequel and spin-off to possibly flesh it out a bit more. We'll see if they amnage to pull it off when Elektra is the focus of the story, and not a supporting character.

I saw it last weekend. I went in there thinking it was going to be total tripe, but it was an average movie. Not great, but not terrible. It was better than Spiderman (which I personaly hate) but would say wait until this is on cable.

5/10

Just saw it tonight.


Hmmm. It was a decent flick. I still think it was horribly miscast. You can tell that Affleck needed to go into rehab. Garner was serviceable as Elektra, but I'm not convinced she can carry off the complexities and subtleties of the character beyond the first movie (it was interesting to see her "die" ... I wonder how they're going to believably work her resurrection into a movie plot). Duncan was better than these two, but I don't think he had the character down. He nailed it until the final scene. He played that a little too emotional, I think. And John Favraeu... I hate him anyway. So

Bullseye was absolutely the best. Farrel did an excellent job of translating the character to screen and adding his own thing to it. Perfect parts derangement and sexiness.

As for the plot... well, it did what it was supposed to do. It was short and sweet, and simple. Which is a good idea, because I was sitting there during it thinking "what do people who don't know the actual stories make of all of this?" I wasn't sure they were keeping it simple enough, but in retrospect, I think it was probably a good job of initating the newbies.

The very best part of the movie, though, was the way they conceptualized how he could "see" with his other senses. Appeared to be a fairly simple technique, but very very effective.

JediMaster said:

Really sensible argument, Jedi. Maybe I'll go check it out.

of the 3 Marvel movies we've seen so far, i rank it #3.