Eric and I are in St. Pete this weekend for some fun and frolic (mostly frolic).  We just got back from the gay beach, which again, makes me worried about getting old.

I don't want to be one of those flabby old men with too much jewelry and not enough swim suit.

Eric and I are in St. Pete this weekend for some fun and frolic (mostly frolic).  We just got back from the gay beach, which again, makes me worried about getting old.

You'll have to post some pictures, but I am touched you thought of us, when I saw from Facebook you were going, I thought, wow I'm going to miss his posts this weekend.  

I don't want to be one of those flabby old men with too much jewelry and not enough swim suit.

From the pictures I saw , this sould not be a worry of yours.

Which version did you see, Moyer? Because that seems to be a somewhat crucial point.  Everything I saw related to the theatrical release had me totally (and I do mean TOTALLY) put off from that movie. I figured it'd probably be good to see it at some point as critical reference, but even after I had taped it from telly I just couldn't be bothered to actually view the darn thing.  Then some people in here (I do believe Zaki was among them) started making a fuss about there being a significant difference between the (not very good according to most opinions) theatrical cut and the (actually quite good) director's cut. The debate ran in a manner which made me interested and when I spotted the director's cut available cheaply, I jumped at the opportunity... and I did (a few complaints aside) think it was a good DD movie. BUT, I was equally convinced by the behind the scenes material concerning the differences between the cut, that I'd certainly NOT made a mistake in not viewing the theatrical cut, which reading between the lines (and some of the lines, actually) I realised I would have most likely detested as much as I had initially thought from the promotional material.  So... That's what I'd offer as an answer (and for some further discussions on it check out: http://www.byrnerobotics.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=26051 &KW=zaki )   :)

Don wrote:
"Now if they are only Smart enough to go for the gold and have a real Captain America..in costume...Fighting WWII...go for it...Everyone hates the Natzis."

Well, I think some left over Nazi villain like Red Skull, Zemo or Strucker would work very well as well... start it off in WWII, bring it up to date, and give us the remnants of the old threat coming back to haunt us (and be beaten back again, of course). That'd be a winner in my book.
Oh, and seeing Tim Roth (well not really, but still) move in his up front battle with the Hulk really made me soooo psyched about a Cap movie... I mean that's how Cap should eb moving.

Moyer wrote:
"I'm not sure which version I have here Joakim! But like I said, I've never been
a huge Daredevil fan, so I can't be as upset over changes that were made
than other movies."

I think it should say on the box if it's a purchased DVD (at least I haven't seen the director's cut without it being neatly marked on the box). And I guess you could also check for length, etc.  From what I learned from the behind the scenes stuff, the narrative flows much smoother in the director's cut and sets things up better, both filmically and in terms of being faithful to the material.  But do check the link to that other thread for more indepth comments.
My biggest problem was early on in the movie when DD basically executes a guy, which is VERY much off character, seeing as the character at least used to be portrayed as someone who held the law in high esteem (though "saw" that it was sometimes necessary to move slightly outside its bounds). A cold-blooded execution rather than handing over to the police is Punisher territory, and if DD was into it makes you wonder why he'd have a problem with the Punisher.