Ben Affleck Shares Regrets Over Daredevil

Published 4 years ago by , Updated August 16th, 2013 at 12:45 am,

When you think of awesome comic book movies, what comes to mind? The Dark Knight? Iron Man, perhaps? Whatever movie pops into your head, the odds are good that it’s not Daredevil. That film, which came out in 2003 and starred Ben Affleck as the “Man Without Fear,” received mostly mixed reviews from critics and never really hit it off with hardcore comic fans. (I’ve heard that the director’s cut of the film is significantly better, though I’ve never seen it myself.)

Considering the public’s general dissatisfaction with Daredevil, as well as the fact that Fox was in danger of losing their rights to the character, it’s no surprise that they decided to move ahead with a reboot of the franchise. If they don’t learn any lessons from what didn’t work in the first film, however, a reboot may be a moot point.

Of course, no one can speak to the failures of Daredevil better than Mr. Matt Murdock himself, Ben Affleck. In a recent interview with MTV, Josh Horowitz asked Affleck if he thought Daredevil missed out on the new “Golden Age” of comic book films. Affleck responded with disarming honesty saying, “We missed a lot in that movie.” He went on to explain how Hollywood has embraced the comic book movie and began putting major resources behind creating A-level films.

Check out Affleck’s comments below.

I certainly agree with Affleck’s assessment of comic book films post-Batman Begins. While there are still plenty of duds, I think studios have seen how much value there is in not just throwing out a generic action movie, but crafting a genuinely unique story that both celebrates the source material and brings something new to the character.

What do you think? Did Daredevil miss out on the “Golden Age” of comic book movies? What would you do if you were writing the film to make sure that the reboot surpasses the original?

Source: MTV

TAGS: daredevil

31 Comments

Post a Comment

  1. the true is… batman saga lose much ranting and popularity! I say a resounding nooooooo if someone important to read this review, reflect for this 8-)pleaaaaaseeeee!

  2. The theatrical cut was mediocre. The director’s cut was much better, and should have been the version that they released in the theater.

Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.


If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.

Be Social, Follow Us!!