Page 1 of 2

Daredevil

Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2003 7:29 am
by Eternal Padawan
So I was watching it again, and I got to thinking...director Mark Steven Johnson is a complete tool. He took the greatest Daredevil Story in the comics entire 40 year run and boiled it down to two hours and turned it into the first film. How will they top it with a sequel? Or even come up with a remotely interesting original idea? Way to blow your load all at once, you big dick. They even screwed a possible Fall from Grace movie since he revealed Matt's identity to Kingpin already. Poser.

Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2003 6:32 am
by jjreason
Ben Affleck was terrible. Where the hell was Eric Stoltz? That's the role he was born to play in my opinion. How shallow of Marvel to hire "fan favourite" Affleck and wreck this entire franchise. One shot wonder, and it should have been great. Most disappointing movie for me since Star Trek - and I was 8 for Star Trek.

Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2003 7:39 am
by Eternal Padawan
My daughter is on a comic book movie kick, so we watch Daredevil, Superman and Batman Forever on a regular basis. Spider-Man, the TV Hulk films etc, not so much but those too. Anyway, it is starting to annoy me that "blind" Matt Murdock is constantly making eye contact when he talks to people and he actually LOOKS around corners and stuff when he's DD. Here's a way to method act, Ben...CLOSE YOUR EYES WHEN YOU'RE DOING THE SCENE. You big Himbo.

Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 11:36 pm
by Eternal Padawan
You know, I bought the Extrended Cut of this and never got around to watching it.

They can totally recast this for the sequel. They did it for Hulk, after all. And recast Elektra while you're at it.

Fuck it, recast Spider-Man and Mary Jane, too. Those two are getting a little too pompous for their roles. Dunst actually had the nerve to say that noone would come to a 4th Spider-Man movie if she and Toby and Raimi weren't doing it. I hate to break it to you, dumb bitch, but anybody with tits could play MJ as well as you did. People come to a superhero film to see the superhero, not the fugly corncob toothed bitch playing the superhero's girlfriend.

Daredevil Reboot

Posted: Sat Feb 06, 2010 11:23 am
by Newsbot
Fox Developing Daredevil Reboot

In order to keep the movie rights to Marvel Comics' "Daredevil" under their belt, 20th Century Fox and New Regency are looking to develop a reboot of the sightless superhero with News Corp VP Peter Chernin producing and David Scarpa (The Day the Earth Stood Still) writing a script, according to Mike Fleming at Deadline Hollywood.

The original movie directed by Mark Steven Johnson and starring Ben Affleck in the title role (and his current wife Jennifer Garner as Elektra) was released almost exactly seven years ago and grossed $179.2 million worldwide.

This probably shouldn't come as too big a surprise as there has been talk of some sort of reboot ever since Disney bought Marvel last year, but this is the first confirmation that one is being actively developed.

Are they inferring that someone saw The Day the Earth Stood Still?

Re: Daredevil Reboot

Posted: Sat Feb 06, 2010 12:37 pm
by Sleazer
ENOUGH WITH THESE GODDAMN REBOOTS ALREADY.

Re: Daredevil Reboot

Posted: Sat Feb 06, 2010 1:03 pm
by anarky
The only good thing about reboots is they might actually make a good GIJoe movie in our lifetimes.

Re: Daredevil Reboot

Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 11:59 am
by Sleazer
Ok, that's a fair point.

But overall, I feel they are way too reboot happy.

Re: Daredevil Reboot

Posted: Sat Apr 17, 2010 1:13 pm
by kidhuman
I kind of like this idea. Ben Affleck sucked.

Re: Daredevil Reboot

Posted: Sat May 08, 2010 5:18 pm
by Rollo Tomassi
Newsbot wrote:
Are they inferring that someone saw The Day the Earth Stood Still?

Are they inferring someone wrote DTESS?

I don't blame Affleck for Daredevil being borderline mediocrity/suck. I blame the director for taking essentially the best story arc DD has ever had and making the cinematic equivelent of edible cardboard.

Mark Steven Johnson shouldn't be allowed near ANY comic franchise ever again.

I hope this doesn't get off the ground and the rights revert back to Marvel.

Re: Daredevil

Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2012 12:54 pm
by RoIIo Tomassi
Daredevil reboot loses its director. They are literally a few months away from losing the license back to Marvel. And then his happens. I'm doing a Snoopy dance.

They'll probably find some shitty hack to turn in a crap film that will tank at the Bix Office and lose them millions. Then we'll have to wait another 8 years.

Re: Daredevil

Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2012 12:58 pm
by anarky
It'd be awesome if these big studios could engage in more friendly competition than full-on warfare. Like if Disney approached Fox and said, "Yo, we're thinking maybe we could make some movies together, since you own some of the right to some of the choice characters. We'll split the profits 50/50, and 50% of 'a shit-ton' is still a shit-ton. Whaddya say?"

Seriously, this minor squabble bullshit is why we don't have Batman on DVD, among other things. What does Fox think they're going to do with it without Warner's cooperation? And why would either prevent its release? 50% of zero is zero.

We will never get Muppet Babies on DVD or Blu-Ray or whatever comes next. Frankly, I'm shocked that Roger Rabbit has been made available in the 21st century (and, hey, big fucking surprise, it looks like it's out of print).

Re: Daredevil

Posted: Mon Aug 06, 2012 6:22 pm
by RoIIo Tomassi
Fox goes to Marvel, hat in hand.

Fox wants to give Galactus and Silver Surfer back to Marvel, in exchange for an extension on their Daredevil license.
If I were Marvel/Disney, I'd see this as a primo opportunity to play hardball and rewrite the contracts for ALL their Fox-owned franchises. At the very least, make it so the X-Men, FF, and Daredevil films are "in" the Marvel Universe. Fox can still pony up the dough, and keep the distribution rights, but Marvel Studios calls the shots on integrating the films in with theirs. Which would make more money for everybody involved. Win/Win.

And if Fox balks, then Marvel gets DD back. Win/Win.

Re: Daredevil

Posted: Mon Aug 06, 2012 6:27 pm
by anarky
The 1960s Batman show proves the studios don't always do what makes the most financial sense in the long run. :(

Re: Daredevil

Posted: Mon Aug 06, 2012 9:07 pm
by RoIIo Tomassi
Fox has really pooched its presence at the Box Office lately. Its biggest "hit" movie this year is Prometheus and that's had a measly $125M so far. and looking at their schedule for the rest of the year, I'm not seeing anything spectacular. It's biggest recent hit was Avatar, but c'mon, that was pretty much gift wrapped by Cameron and not the result of savvy Studio Exec choices. And if you look at their All Time B.O. list, after discarding Avatar, and Star Wars, their main successes of the last decade have been kiddie films. Ice Age, Chipmunks, and Night at the Museum franchises. And the X-Men films. So, considering their major non-kiddie franchise is a Marvel license, it's downright obtuse they let their other two Marvel franchises lie dormant until the very last minute.

And holy crap! Fox's Releases for the year have earned less than The Avengers...combined!!!