Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Okay, I saw an advertisement for this in my Game Informer and, well I'm sorry but I just had to laugh. It says there are thirty minutes of extra footage, and it's now rated R.

I liked Daredevil, all right, but trying to speculate on what they could put in to make it rated R, just freaks me out. Unless it's lots more violene (which I think would be cool), but more than likely it will be an extended love scene, and quite frankly I could live without that.
Anyway, it comes out in December.

What are your thoughts?

~Chimaera~

I know this is the DVD section but I do you know if it will be on video or not? I sure hope so because DD is one of the very few comicbook films that was a good comicbook film that they didnt screw up and FINALLY made a good comicbook film out of.

Yeah, that cardboard cutout Afleck really "added a lot to the character".

okay they took out love scene and added a whole bunch of fights and at the beginning alittle more of the court room scene and itis alot darker.

More violence doesn't make the movie any better.

Parker, all arguments about acting and plot aside: they made Electra a spoiled rich kid & DD a cold-blooded murderer a-la punisher.

Then compacted his career spanning antagonism with Bullseye which peaks with B killing Matts oldest love into two meetings after which B kills Matts new GF (who hes just met & barely knows.)

I'd say that was pretty well screwed up.

daredevil was such a BAD film so boring it was unbelievable i don't care how alike it was to the comic it didn't entertain me which is kinda what a film is supposed to do

Right on Mr Zero!

Daredevil was a piece of shit.

I could pull a better movie out of my mouth.

I hated Daredevil, I hope they wont make an awful, awful sequel.

Face it Parker, they screwed up Daredevil big time.

Batman, Superman, Hulk, and of course, the best of them all, Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2 were the only comic book movies done right.

Mr Parker thinks Sony's Spider-Man and Burton's Batman is crap...but he thinks Daredevil is...good?? A tad bit inconsistent.

There arent any spider man movie, only two crap movies about man spider. The batman movies sucked too. The hulk was so so and daredevil was good but not great. Afleck was the weakest part of the movie but the other actors were good. The x men movies were good, and the firt two superman movies were the best comic book movies of history.

With "Batman Returns", Burton was the first to really exploit the humanity in a comic book character. Batman was always a one sided, tragic character, with little or no emotion, and that's why we got to see Catwoman and The Penguin for what they really were. I still think that it's one, if not the most important comic book movie to date. Artistically speaking.

"Superman" didn't stand out, IMO. I'd rather watch the 1979 "Captain America" movie again.

daredevil is by no means a great movie........but to compare it to the comic book is assinine. A completely different medium targeted at a much larger audience. The movie lasted like an hour and a half.......not the 40 years or so the comic book has.

what next, we going to ***** about the xmen not wearing yellow spandex?.......hell......why not ***** about them wearing yellow spandex in the comic when originally they wore blue in the comic? (that's the extent of my knowledge on comic books.......I only know that because of the Stan Lee interview on the xmen dvds).

Bakerboy, I think it's time you grew up and starting calling him Spider-Man

They only person that betray the series was you.

When you man spider fans will encounter with reality and see that the man spider movies are a total betrayal to the comics? Those movies are about man spider, nothing to do with the spiderman that we know and love from the comics. You will kiss the asss of sony all the life, what sad.

with an attitude like that, you'll never touch a naked girl.

put down your comic books..........go outside..........talk to a girl, they don't bite.

actually the ONLY one that you mentioned out of that lot that they DIDNT screw up and that didnt suck was SUPERMAN. and the man-spider movies were the ones they screwed up royally more than any of the others.the two man-spider movies are the ones that are shit.Daredevil was far better than those 2 god awful films.

yeah well said Bakerboy.I dont understand how the hell this conversation got on the subject of those horrible movies in the first place.Geez this is about the daredevil movie.

that evil dead kid should be on drugs or something, he was talking about a naked girl, maybe is something from his sex dreams, poor kid.

Mr Parker and Bakerboy are right.Daredevil is much better than most comicbook films.Much better than those god awful batman films and those horrible, crappy man-spider movies.Its not a great film,but its much better than those horrible comicbook movies.

Let me make the connection for you:

Daredevil is a franchise of Marvel, Marvel published Spider-Man, got it now?

No one ever said that the Spider-Man movies' would be a complete clone of the comics. It says 'BASED on the Marvel comics' not 'Completely cloned from the Spider-Man comics.'

If you expected it to be a complete clone then, well, how very sad for you.

The organics are a hell of a lot better then the crappy webshooters. Without organics, he seemed like a kid playing dress-up with no powers what so ever...

posted by blackcat
*The organics are a hell of a lot better then the crappy webshooters. Without organics, he seemed like a kid playing dress-up with no powers what so ever...*


WAT!!!??? Did YOU EVEN LIKE THE ORIGINAL MAN-SPIDER??????

ONLY if you are a man-spider fan and the movie is titled man-spider are they a lot better. please point out to me where on earth I EVER said I wanted a complete clone of the comics. Daredevil was a hardly a complete clone of the comics and I enjoyed that movie.You are really crippling your arguments here big time.

Mr parker, this man spider fan girl is oviously as confused as the man spider fans usualy are. Please, black cat, could you post where the hell have mr parker or myself said that the movies have too be a clone of the comics? I liked superman and isnt a clone of the comics, or x men or daredevil. We are only saying that those changes in the man spider movies and in the batman movies are stupid and nonsense.

An opinion" can't be right. Just figured I'd throw that out there.





She never said you did, she said "if you were expecting one". Operative word being IF.

Well, she is still wrong in both cases, because i wasnt expecting any clone of the comics, but i wasnt expecting those horrible and stupid changes neither.

"horrible and stupid changes either"

1. No double negatives! nono
2. STFU! No one but your homo lover Mr Parker agrees with you.
3. Do, Re-do, and memorize #2.

Well Put.

Baker, you've got to realize that when a comic book, which is probably the most pure form of underground media, ends up going MAINSTREAM, it's going to be tweaked for mass consumerism! That's just life. Average movie goers aren't hardcore comic fans. These films drop in the summer, when everyone is out of school, and wants some mindless entertainment. It's got to be streamlined, and corners are going to get cut.

This Director's Cut of "Daredevil" may be what you're looking for, given the director is an actual Daredevil fan, and feels as if he's doing the book justice in "his" version.

^

I like the organics because it makes Spidey more super-human like. Also, if he got the rest of the spiders' powers, why not it's webbing?
Also, it's a great thing to use when he's losing his powers. "No web!? aaaahhhhhhh!!!"
I just find the organics a lot more better.

Also, calling him 'Man-Spider' doesn't change anything, it has nothing to say about him being more monster then human. The reason why he's called Spider-Man instead is just because it's following the genre.
I.e Batman, SuperMan, Aqua-Man, etc.

Also, you could say the movie did follow the comics. In 'Ultimate Spider-Man' his webbing is organic, and I remember reading in a magazine that they decided to base it upon this series of Spider-Man, around his teens to early twenties.

By the way Mane, that post was hilarious!

Okay, yup, always nice to see a thread staying at least relatively on track. Oh, well at least if we're going to bicker it will be about comic book movies.
It still doesn't really answer my questions though...What will be different in the Director's cut, and if anyone thinks it's worth buying. I realize that emotions run high when it comes to movies we love (or more often, hate) but in the words of David Duchovny 'Ladies...can we focus?'
Peace.

Chimaera

I think the things that will be different that we will see in the extended 30 minutes I believe is in it is probably about 15 minutes of scenes that were cut from the movie and interviews with the cast,that kind of thing.

Organics in Spider-Man, I see both ways. I'm a believer that a superhero must have super powers. That's why I don't care for Batman. Though I don't claim to be an expert, but spiders make webbing, don't they?

Daredevil is among the top of superhero movies for me. I loved the internal conflict. He claims to be a hero when he's going around killing people. I loved the part when the kid's crying and he assures him that he's "not the bad guy". Also at the end when he doesn't kill Kingpin. That was great, IMO. I think Daredevil beats the Spider-Man movies though those weren't bad.

I plan on getting the director's cut eventually. With the few features the DVD does have, I don't feel ripped off by buying the original DVD.

Mr Parker, the current dvd of daredevil special edition has interviews with the cast, making offs and that kind of things. The new directors cut dvd only has the extended version with new scenes added.

I disagree with that.



I already have the PG-13 version but Ill still by the R rated version

Dude leave mr parker alone hes intitled to his opion