Re-Evaluating Bad Movies

DAREDEVIL (2003)

Note: This is a sort of double review, since I watched both the theatrical and Director's Cut over the past two days.

Theatrical cut (re-watched on 1/23):

The theatrical version of Daredevil is often criticized as being one of the worst comic book movies ever, and while it's certainly not good, I'm not sure I'd go that far. This version is simply mediocre. It's never aggressively bad, and has a few decent aspects and scenes, but it never feels fully developed. The "origin" prologue takes up only twenty or so minutes of the film, but the thing about that is that only leaves roughly an hour and ten or so minutes for the main plot. Consequently, the story feels incredibly rushed, simply hopping from plot point to plot point fast enough so that it can clock in at under two hours. There's also little next to no character development as a result, which robs the film of any intended drama. Ben Affleck, though, is pretty decent even if, like I said, there's no real character arc here for him to sink his teeth into. The same goes for pretty much every other character. But mostly, the theatrical's central issue is a thin and rushed story. It's typical cookie-cutter superhero stuff, and it just fails to leave much of an impression.

**/****

Director's Cut (watched on 1/24)

Wow. Talk about an improvement over the theatrical. Watching the Director's Cut of Daredevil is almost like watching a completely different -- and better -- movie. Pretty much all of the problems with the theatrical cut are fixed in this version. Running half an hour longer, the Director's Cut of Daredevil features everything the theatrical was missing. A fuller story. Character development. Effective dramatic moments. Most of all, though, it has an entirely new storyline which was completely excised from the theatrical, but which serves to not only tie everything together in a more cohesive manner, but also changes the whole focus and tone of the film in the process. The theatrical cut would have you believe Mark Steven Johnson wrote a movie focused on a half-assed love story between Matt Murdock and Elektra, when in reality, he originally wrote a story about Daredevil's role as unofficial guardian of Hell's Kitchen and how his efforts are deeply entwined with and in opposition to the Kingpin's crime empire. Like I said, totally different movie.

The cut storyline, involving a murder case Matt takes on, serves to develop him as a character so much more. We get to see him use some detective skills, and learn much more about him and his friendship with Franklin (Jon Favereau), and it strengthens Affleck's performance. But this story also makes things that didn't make sense in the original have more clarity and context now. Some scenes from the theatrical are even replaced with completely new ones, and others rearranged. Also, Elektra is more of a secondary aspect here, which serves the movie better.

If the Director's Cut had been the original release of Daredevil, then reception would've been a lot better. What once was a mediocre superhero film is now a really good one. In fact, I liked it so much, that I think I'll pick it up on Blu Ray eventually. After you see this Director's Cut, it'll be the only version of the film you'll want to see from then on.

***1/2 /****

Basic (2003)

Basic doesn't have the best reputation, with the majority of critics complaining that the execution of its story is needlessly complicated and confusing. So, I suppose the first question to answer about this film is, does that criticism hold true? Is it needlessly complicated? I'm actually gonna go with no, because its Rashomon/Usual Suspects-inspired narrative is mostly the point of this movie. If screenwriter James Vanderbilt and director John McTiernan (who has yet to direct another film since this) had wanted to tell this movie in a straightforward fashion, they would have, but that's clearly not the type of movie they're going for. So, the next question to answer is, does the "he-said, she-said" style ultimately work? I'll say yes.

I remember first seeing this movie about a year after it first came out and being confused by it, so this time, I knew to pay close attention. And now, I can say that it all makes more sense. The barrage of different information ascertained from various characters' version of events is meant to leave your spinning, and in that regard, the movie is certainly effective. Not only does it keep you on your toes and interested throughout, but it also has a nice, brisk pacing to it that keeps things moving along. John Travolta and Samuel L. Jackson are both entertaining to watch, and the various conversations that Travolta's character (who's amusingly named Tom Hardy) and Connie Nielsen's character have with others throughout are all interesting to some degree. That, and John McTiernan creates a nice mysterious atmosphere. Now, you could also make the case that the film's twist after twist execution loses its impact after the second or third time, but again, I think it helps distinguish Basic from being just another simplistic mystery movie, and it deserves credit for that if you ask me.

***/****

Wow, I had no idea John McTiernan was in prison.