Why the timing for the Daredevil reboot is just right.

Why the timing for the Daredevil reboot is just right.

The Man with out fear's last outing was not the sucess everyone hooped for it be. I think this film has the potential to be much better.

Editorial Opinion
By ironpool007 - Apr 03, 2011 05:04 PM EST
Filed Under: Daredevil

By now, everyone should know Daredevil is getting a reboot. While the rights are still held by FOX, David Slade has me optimistic about this new take the character.

I should say that Daredevil's first outing in 2003 was a film that I enjoyed at the time. At the time, I liked it better than Spider-Man. I recently bought it on blu ray and I still enjoyed it. However, I'm a few years older, and while I don't hate the movie, I think I'm a better judge of quality than i was back then.

Here is what the 2003 version had going against it. I think that releasing Daredevil so soon after Spider-Man was a mistake. People were still used to Superheroes being light hearted fun action movies, with crazy high concept characters. And Daredevil is not that kind of character. Whereas Spidey fights guys like Doc Ock, the Green Goblin, and Venom, Daredevil's foes are on much more of a street level like Bullseye and the Kingpin. I don't know if people who dont read comics were ready for such a dark superhero story. And as much as the film tried to be a dark noir story, it still had the feel of an action film.

The people involved too may have been part of the problem too. This was Mark Steven Johnson's 2nd film. 2nd. His first was Simon Burch. And while Ben Affleck seemed good in the costume as Daredevil, his line delivery as Matt Murdock felt forced at times.

Things are little different now. In the director's chair, we have David Slade, a director known for dark brutal themes. His handling of Eben, Josh Hartnett's character in 30 Days of Night has me feeling like he can handle Matt Murdock. Remember the scene towars the end of that film where Eben marched towards almost cetain death against the leader of the vampires after injecting himself with their blood? You could tell in that scene how reluctant he was going into that fight. But he did it save lives, all while hating what he wa becoming. That is how Matt Murdock needs to treated. He should not want to be Daredevil. It goes against his father's wishes telling Matt not to fight, and it just makes his life a living hell. I think Slade is the ideal kind of director to show Matt's life spinning out of control, even as he rights so many wrongs. This also going the 4th or 5th major film Slade has directd.

The film also needs a strong visual style. If it were to look like Alex Maleevs ultra gritty grainy pencils were coming to life, I'd be thrilled.

The film needs to handle it's selection of villains better too. If the 2003 film was trying to spawn a franchice, it went about it in the wrong way. Bullseye and Kingpin showed up, but were defeated by the film's end. Slades film can feature these 2 but focus more on Daredevil fighting Bullseye and smaller villains with Kingpin having a supporting role. He should not be a main villain until the 2nd or 3rd film.

And as flawed as Matt is, he still needs to be the hero. This can illustrated ina origin scene, where he pushes an old man out the way of the truck carrying the radioactive isotope, but is blinded himself. And have him be older than he was in the last film. Matt the blind boy wonder scenes in the last film were super cheesy. Have the accident happen after Matt graduates from law school. And please dont make the Kingpin the killer of Jack Murdock. Have the fixer and his partner kill him and let Matt Murdock catch them, only to see the fixer die of heart attack and later he watches his partner's execution in the electric chair like in Jeph Loeb's Daredevil: Yellow. That reminds me, the Purple Man could be a fun villain to see.

In the wake of Batman Begins, and The Dark Knight, there is no reason a dark super gritty Daredevil film can not work. I can not wait to see the results.

DAREDEVIL: BORN AGAIN & IRONHEART Trailers Screen At Disney Upfronts - Here's A Breakdown Of What Was Shown
Related:

DAREDEVIL: BORN AGAIN & IRONHEART Trailers Screen At Disney Upfronts - Here's A Breakdown Of What Was Shown

DAREDEVIL: BORN AGAIN And IRONHEART Get Official Premiere Dates And New Logos
Recommended For You:

DAREDEVIL: BORN AGAIN And IRONHEART Get Official Premiere Dates And New Logos

DISCLAIMER: ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and... [MORE]

ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

ARUD007
ARUD007 - 4/4/2011, 10:13 AM
If you have problems with the 2003 DD movie, watch the director's cut. It makes the movie 10 times better
marvelguy
marvelguy - 4/4/2011, 12:15 PM
Too many things strayed from the nature that is Daredevil. I like Michael Clark Duncan. However, the Kingpin is not flamboyant. In brief, Affleck looked goofy in and out of costume, was cold throughout. Jennifer Garner was rewarded for "Alias." She was terrible and didn't remotely look or emote the part. Bullseye: uh, there isn't anything good to be said of him.

You are right. It's been long enough, Daredevil won't be dismissed like Norton's Hulk.
ironpool007
ironpool007 - 4/4/2011, 2:24 PM
@TheWorldisYours: I would argue tht outside of comic book fans not many people knew that he was a Marvel character. You are rigth abot the dark gritty style, it was needed, but it was executed well in this film.
ironpool007
ironpool007 - 4/5/2011, 9:24 AM
@TheWorldisyours: I meant to say that the dark style was not executed well. Although, the blu ray I have is the director's cut and it is a much better cut if the film.
View Recorder