The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
This thread has been linked to the game 'Top Gear Dare Devil'.
Dare Devil, quite possibly the most eagerly anticipated film of the year has hit the big screen like few others have in the past. I’m not saying it’s as good as the stunning Lord Of The Rings movies but not far from it. Many of you may be thinking this is just another Spider-Man movie brought to you by Marvel but you could not be farther from the truth.
As usual we have the two lives of a super hero, by day Ben Affleck plays “Matt Murdock” an attorney for the poorer yet innocent members of society however if the courts fail to do justice at night Matt Murdock becomes Dare Devil. This masked vigilante swoops over the city falling from buildings and jumping from rooftops he speeds to the guilty to deal out justice.
Now you may be thinking this is all well and good however what makes Matt so special that he thinks he can take down the criminal world? Well I’ll tell you. When Matt was a child a freak accident lead to bio hazardous chemicals flooding into his eyes. Although this took Matt’s sight he gained a lot in return. The chemicals sharpened his other four senses to perfection and although he could no longer see, he also gains a kind of radar through his now bat like ears.
Like every film worth seeing this film has a girl, Elektra (Brilliantly played by Jennifer Garner) is the woman of Dare Devil’s dreams however this damsel is not in distress. Jennifer rivals Dare Devil himself as a fighter so needless to say the fight scenes are nothing short of spectacular.
This is were the film gets interesting, now we have identified the good guys lets talk about the villains. The Kingpin of NY (Poorly played by Michael Clarke Duncan) may be wealthy and powerful like most villains in the world but he calls upon the help of his Irish assassin Bullseye (Expertly played by Collin Farrell) to murder all the people he can’t.
This is when Dare Devil truly saves the day, using his radar and other super human senses he defeats Bullseye and the Kingpin himself in two (slightly long-winded) intense fights. The best aspects of these spectacular fights are the originality, fighting to the death inside a cathedral then inside a flooding office with no way out except the window.
In conclusion this film has the tremendous aspects of originality, a superb cast (mainly), an excellent story line and scenes of true passion and intensity that will keep you on the edge of your seat the entire time. This is an experience you may never find at the cinema again (if you don’t go to Lord Of The Rings – Return Of The King) so go today or as soon as possible and enjoy the movie event you’ll be talking about for weeks.
As usual we have the two lives of a super hero, by day Ben Affleck plays “Matt Murdock” an attorney for the poorer yet innocent members of society however if the courts fail to do justice at night Matt Murdock becomes Dare Devil. This masked vigilante swoops over the city falling from buildings and jumping from rooftops he speeds to the guilty to deal out justice.
Now you may be thinking this is all well and good however what makes Matt so special that he thinks he can take down the criminal world? Well I’ll tell you. When Matt was a child a freak accident lead to bio hazardous chemicals flooding into his eyes. Although this took Matt’s sight he gained a lot in return. The chemicals sharpened his other four senses to perfection and although he could no longer see, he also gains a kind of radar through his now bat like ears.
Like every film worth seeing this film has a girl, Elektra (Brilliantly played by Jennifer Garner) is the woman of Dare Devil’s dreams however this damsel is not in distress. Jennifer rivals Dare Devil himself as a fighter so needless to say the fight scenes are nothing short of spectacular.
This is were the film gets interesting, now we have identified the good guys lets talk about the villains. The Kingpin of NY (Poorly played by Michael Clarke Duncan) may be wealthy and powerful like most villains in the world but he calls upon the help of his Irish assassin Bullseye (Expertly played by Collin Farrell) to murder all the people he can’t.
This is when Dare Devil truly saves the day, using his radar and other super human senses he defeats Bullseye and the Kingpin himself in two (slightly long-winded) intense fights. The best aspects of these spectacular fights are the originality, fighting to the death inside a cathedral then inside a flooding office with no way out except the window.
In conclusion this film has the tremendous aspects of originality, a superb cast (mainly), an excellent story line and scenes of true passion and intensity that will keep you on the edge of your seat the entire time. This is an experience you may never find at the cinema again (if you don’t go to Lord Of The Rings – Return Of The King) so go today or as soon as possible and enjoy the movie event you’ll be talking about for weeks.
Page:
El Blokey wrote:
> Sfone wrote:
> But its a fair attempt. We see al sorts of crap in the forums, at
> least this is a genuine view of a film not some irrational
> excrement.
>
> The point is, if you actually READ the review, it ISN'T good at all.
A review is meant to be someones obsevations and views upon a subject, these i can see clearly. Petty is something that you are where you seem to nit-pick at whatever you can to make Cubist look bad, like 'Oh the name is Daredevil not Dare Devil' It's just sad
> Sfone wrote:
> But its a fair attempt. We see al sorts of crap in the forums, at
> least this is a genuine view of a film not some irrational
> excrement.
>
> The point is, if you actually READ the review, it ISN'T good at all.
A review is meant to be someones obsevations and views upon a subject, these i can see clearly. Petty is something that you are where you seem to nit-pick at whatever you can to make Cubist look bad, like 'Oh the name is Daredevil not Dare Devil' It's just sad
El Blokey wrote:
> So we're down to name calling now?
Wouldn't I have to call you a name for it to be name calling?
> So because I didn't get your (undetectable) sarcasm I'm stupid? Right
> then.
Frankly, yes everyone else understood it except you so clearly it wasn't "undetectable"
> So I've been upgraded from < a five year old to < a 13 year old?
> Great!
That's a real achievement no really...
> Strictly from memory, then, your replies have been based around:
>
> 1) Nobody ever goes in there, and lots of rubbish goes on in here
> anyway.
>
> I refuted it with my analogy that you seem to have just ignored.
You didn't refute it you said that FOG was full of "Crap"
> 2) No it's not.
>
> That is your genuine reply. Look back. You won't admit to one
> mistake.
When that's all that's needed to answer a simple question then why say more?
> 3) Any good story will be made a film eventually.
>
> Wishful thinking. John Simpson's autobiography was great, but I don't
> see his life story being made into a film any time soon. Ditto Project
> Eden.
If it's as good as you say then eventually it will as I've said.
> 4) Again, you gave no reason, just said she put emotion into the role.
> No examples, no nothing.
Ok for example when she was at the funeral and all Matt wanted to do was keep her safe and love her she was so conflicted with emotions of revenge and mourning. You could practically feel what she was feeling in every scene she played. Do you want another example? I'll give you one just for fun - When she was training to kill Dare Devil you could see how much commitment and training came into her being able to do that and then you could see from her facial expressions that she was on a mission of revenge and nothing was going to stop her.
> 5) You blamed the cigar stuff on him when it clearly isn't his choice.
I said it wasn't entirely his fault but you've conveniantly ignored that. However the fact remains he could have worked around it and his acting skills paled in comparrison to Jennifer Garner.
> So we're down to name calling now?
Wouldn't I have to call you a name for it to be name calling?
> So because I didn't get your (undetectable) sarcasm I'm stupid? Right
> then.
Frankly, yes everyone else understood it except you so clearly it wasn't "undetectable"
> So I've been upgraded from < a five year old to < a 13 year old?
> Great!
That's a real achievement no really...
> Strictly from memory, then, your replies have been based around:
>
> 1) Nobody ever goes in there, and lots of rubbish goes on in here
> anyway.
>
> I refuted it with my analogy that you seem to have just ignored.
You didn't refute it you said that FOG was full of "Crap"
> 2) No it's not.
>
> That is your genuine reply. Look back. You won't admit to one
> mistake.
When that's all that's needed to answer a simple question then why say more?
> 3) Any good story will be made a film eventually.
>
> Wishful thinking. John Simpson's autobiography was great, but I don't
> see his life story being made into a film any time soon. Ditto Project
> Eden.
If it's as good as you say then eventually it will as I've said.
> 4) Again, you gave no reason, just said she put emotion into the role.
> No examples, no nothing.
Ok for example when she was at the funeral and all Matt wanted to do was keep her safe and love her she was so conflicted with emotions of revenge and mourning. You could practically feel what she was feeling in every scene she played. Do you want another example? I'll give you one just for fun - When she was training to kill Dare Devil you could see how much commitment and training came into her being able to do that and then you could see from her facial expressions that she was on a mission of revenge and nothing was going to stop her.
> 5) You blamed the cigar stuff on him when it clearly isn't his choice.
I said it wasn't entirely his fault but you've conveniantly ignored that. However the fact remains he could have worked around it and his acting skills paled in comparrison to Jennifer Garner.
Calm down. It was just a general observation. No need to get your pantyhose in a twist about it!
:p
:p
Sfone wrote:
> But its a fair attempt. We see al sorts of crap in the forums, at
> least this is a genuine view of a film not some irrational excrement.
The point is, if you actually READ the review, it ISN'T good at all.
> But its a fair attempt. We see al sorts of crap in the forums, at
> least this is a genuine view of a film not some irrational excrement.
The point is, if you actually READ the review, it ISN'T good at all.
Unbeliever wrote:
> Yeah, but it doesn't necessary mean you HAVE to post game related
> topics in chat. As far as I know, you can talk about anything.
No, but that's the general idea. Otherwise, why have separate folders? Why not have one big forum for everything?
> Or else you'd be attacking Sheepy for not putting his topic on his
> sore nipple in the life forum. And many others. You can't have one
> rule for one person and another rule for a different person. It just
> doesn't make sense.
I'm just one person. And in the past I've attacked SHEEPY amongst others for spamming.
> If it ilicits a higher response here than in other forums, that's
> because more people post on CHAT or read CHAT.
Yes. But there are enough posts in the MOVIES forum anyway (it's usually in the top few of the 24 hour 'chart'). If Cubist wanted replies to his review, putting it in Movies would have got them anyway. And I HAVE replied to his review, which is what he wanted. And I become a 'beast'.
> Yeah, but it doesn't necessary mean you HAVE to post game related
> topics in chat. As far as I know, you can talk about anything.
No, but that's the general idea. Otherwise, why have separate folders? Why not have one big forum for everything?
> Or else you'd be attacking Sheepy for not putting his topic on his
> sore nipple in the life forum. And many others. You can't have one
> rule for one person and another rule for a different person. It just
> doesn't make sense.
I'm just one person. And in the past I've attacked SHEEPY amongst others for spamming.
> If it ilicits a higher response here than in other forums, that's
> because more people post on CHAT or read CHAT.
Yes. But there are enough posts in the MOVIES forum anyway (it's usually in the top few of the 24 hour 'chart'). If Cubist wanted replies to his review, putting it in Movies would have got them anyway. And I HAVE replied to his review, which is what he wanted. And I become a 'beast'.
There are forums where this topic would fit better, I agree, but if Cubist felt the need to post it here, to reach the maximum number of readers, why does it matter to you? He has surely achieved his target, although that is thanks, in some part to you.
El Blokey wrote:
> Cubist wrote:
> Do you really want to argue with us El Blokey? We all think the same
> thing yet you seem to want to argue? We don't care what you think
> and
> don't even understand why you are caring or arguing.
>
> OK then, forget my whole 'wrong forum' argument. The rest is me
> critiquing your review.
But its a fair attempt. We see al sorts of crap in the forums, at least this is a genuine view of a film not some irrational excrement.
> Cubist wrote:
> Do you really want to argue with us El Blokey? We all think the same
> thing yet you seem to want to argue? We don't care what you think
> and
> don't even understand why you are caring or arguing.
>
> OK then, forget my whole 'wrong forum' argument. The rest is me
> critiquing your review.
But its a fair attempt. We see al sorts of crap in the forums, at least this is a genuine view of a film not some irrational excrement.
El Blokey wrote:
> OK then, forget my whole 'wrong forum' argument. The rest is me
> critiquing your review.
Ahh...sorry about that. I was actually writing the below when you posted that. Fair enough then!
> OK then, forget my whole 'wrong forum' argument. The rest is me
> critiquing your review.
Ahh...sorry about that. I was actually writing the below when you posted that. Fair enough then!
He is posting things as fact. Opinionated stuff like 'she acted well' Cubist refuses to back up in any way.
Yeah, but it doesn't necessary mean you HAVE to post game related topics in chat. As far as I know, you can talk about anything.
Or else you'd be attacking Sheepy for not putting his topic on his sore nipple in the life forum. And many others. You can't have one rule for one person and another rule for a different person. It just doesn't make sense.
If it ilicits a higher response here than in other forums, that's because more people post on CHAT or read CHAT.
Or else you'd be attacking Sheepy for not putting his topic on his sore nipple in the life forum. And many others. You can't have one rule for one person and another rule for a different person. It just doesn't make sense.
If it ilicits a higher response here than in other forums, that's because more people post on CHAT or read CHAT.
Page: