Hi everybody. I just got back from a sneak peek of Daredevil.

The movie was good and the action scenes were great. DD's "sight" was incredible.

There were a lot of fun comic book references that most people didn't seem to understand, but I'm sure you will catch them when you see the movie.

The disturbing thing about DD is that it is a remake of the 1989 classic Batman. Don't get me wrong, I loved the 1st Batman movie. Unfortunately, DD steals plot points and visual references from the DC predecessor. There is also a healthy dose of Spider-Man thrown in.

Bullseye was well-done from start to finish.

All in all, Daredevil was a bit of a let down. The story was weak and the movie had been done before. Hopefully the casual superhero/action/movie fans will be more forgiving than me.

Your review was rather confusing...first you praise then film, then you proceed to dog it. Classic example of how things get built up enough in your head and it "lets you down". This very same thing applies to Heroclix with all the people craving a character for FOREVER and then only to start nagging it once they finally get it.

I saw this movie last night and thoroughly enjoyed myself. I didn't take anything in with me and I left satisfied....which is exactly how watching a movie should be.

I plan to watch that tomorrow.... so... is it good or what?

What do you mean kinda like the Batman movie?

(Saw a sneak peek earlier tonight, it's excellent Teletran; even if it blew. I'd go see it again for Kevin Smith's cameo)

thjimmy:

visuals - hmm, takes place in a large city's rooftops at night. kinda hard not to end up with some overlap :D However A LOT of visuals were taken straight from DD covers, something not done by Burton . . .

plot points - again a few similarities, but Batman wasn't physically altered by his origin; Murdock was. Also Bats never duked it out with Vicki Vale

I thought it was pretty faithful to the comic book. People who aren't fans of DD probably will make a lot of comparisons to the Batman film. That's because there are a lot of parallells between the characters' origins and methods. Let's see:

1) Both have psychotic archenemies
2) Both have dorky sidekicks (Robin and Foggy)
3) Both have highly specialized weapons
4) Both started running around in tights because their parents were killed by crooks
5) Both are big on vigilante justice
6) Both are willing to kill when faced with no other option
7) Both are excellent detectives; Batman through training; Daredevil because he's a human crime lab

It may not be a hit because DD is not an iconic character like Spiderman, but I think it defnitely warrants a DVD purchase.

I dont know how u guys can compare DD & Batman!
DD is obviously better jus b/c he's marvel!!
(i know ur talkin 'bout the movie kay?)

Sure. DD is better. Ri-i-ight.

Don't get me wrong. I like both characters. But, Daredevil often is an obvious rip off of Batman ... for example, Batman has the Penguin, who is a crime lord with bird-like qualities, DD has the Owl who is, surprise, a crime lord with bird-like qualities.

The difference is, Batman came out 30 years before DD.

At my comic store, they don't call people who so religiously follow Marvel 'zombies', they call them 'twitchers' because when you challenge them with the idea that Marvel is not all powerful, they get 'twitchy'.

That, I have a hard time taking anyone who writes in '1337 5p34k' seriously.

Thanks for your feedback, everyone. (And since this is my 1st thread, I really appreciate you taking the time to post.)

I should make it clear I did Like the movie.

I just felt that the movie was too much like the Batman movie. I understand that the characters are similar, but the movies could be different.

For instance:

Bad guy kills dad/ parents in front of son which turns him into vengeful hero.

Leaving the flower on the pavement near/at where parents/dad died.

Psychotic villain being disposed of in a very similar manner.

Standing on a roof with a woman, realizing that evil is afoot, and saying, "I've got to go to work," or "I've got to go now."

There were too many similarities to a very popular movie with the same theme.

Evil is a foot?! I've got two of those! That doesn't make me evil, does it?!

The Tick would say you are twice as evil since you have 2 feet. You're afoot times 2...

Drat! Someone get me a hatchet!

No, wait ... mathmatically and in English class, we learned that a double negative would be a positive.

Thus, two feet would make someone good. Or in this case, two wrongs do make a right!

And, thus, amputees are evil!

Assuming you mean bullseye being dropped off a building (I haven't seen the film yet), didn't Daredevil do it in the comics seven years before the original Batman movie?

Hack-n-slash has a valid point, but I think thjimmy is arguing against the lack of originality of Daredevil as a movie that should stand alone as a film.

I and a lot of others it seems look at it as someone who loves the character in the comics would watch the movie.

I think people who don't know Daredevil (not necessarily thjimmy) are going to see it as a Batman ripoff. There are a lot of similarities between the two but I don't think you can stay true to the character in this case without using the same elements the Batman movie used. Several lines and scenes were straight out of Daredevil comics: Before he kills Elektra, Bullseye says, "You're pretty good, but I'm magic". The scene with DD hugging the Church steeple was straight out of the Kevin Smith run. The religious imagery was one thing Batman didn't have; maybe playing up on that even more would have made the film stand out as compared to Batman.

BullseyeView correctly noted:

Hack-n-slash has a valid point, but I think thjimmy is arguing against the lack of originality of Daredevil as a movie that should stand alone as a film.

You hit it on the head. A lot of non-comic book folks need to see this movie to make it a success. I am concerned that it will be seen as a "rip-off" by the casual observer and hurt the future of other comic book movies.

He also said:

I don't think you can stay true to the character in this case without using the same elements the Batman movie used. Several lines and scenes were straight out of Daredevil comics: Before he kills Elektra, Bullseye says, "You're pretty good, but I'm magic".

Another excellent point. I was never a Daredevil follower, but who hasn't read DD #181 and the Frank Miller books around it? The Kevin Smith stuff is just as important to those of us that follow the comic lore.

Those direct references (along with the fun insertion of famous contributors) help keep the faithful paying to go see it a second (or third or fourth) time.

I'm just not so sure my wife will go with me to see it the second time.

I like both Daredevil and Batman characters and right now they are very similiar.

JacinB - yes Batman was around 30 years before Daredevil, but both were very different when they were created. Batman was first created as a dark character, but no where near as dark as he now. Then from the late 50's though to the mid 80's the Batman comics were basically the same as the 60's t.v show. When Daredevil was created he wore yellow and wasn't as a dark character as he now.

The same thing happened to both characters - Frank Miller, and he did make Daredevil a darker character between he gave Batman the same treatment. Daredevil is NOT a rip off of Batman.

"6) Both are willing to kill when faced with no other option" - thats really not true of either character. Daredevil killed ONCE when Bullseye killed Elektra but both characters would rather risk their life to save a villian then let the villian die. Thats one thing I didn't like about both movies. Batman would never kill Jack Napier, Joker or that henchman. And daredevil wouldn't just stand there and let someone be cut in half, then mark the scene with a DD, basically saying hes proud of it.