Daredevil reboot: official discussion thread

Should Fox reboot Daredevil or make a sequel???

  • Reboot

  • Sequel

  • Who gives a F***

  • Reboot

  • Sequel

  • Who gives a F***

  • Reboot

  • Sequel

  • Who gives a F***

  • Reboot

  • Sequel

  • Who gives a F***

  • Reboot

  • Sequel

  • Who gives a F***


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I'd say, keep Garner and give her the material she could have had in DD but cast some other actor as MD/DD...

Not sure who... hmm.

Any ideas? Besides Matt Damon??
 
I'm pretty sure if you actually read through the rest of this thread (and the other D/D threads) that you'll see what seems to be the general consensus is for who should play Matt.

;)
 

Just imagine the small bit with Fox is actually Fox playing Daredevil. Oh yeah and the ninja dude could be like the Hand or something.

Works for me.:csad:

Wow. That looks ******ed. Why did he even bother with the bed sheet/mask thing? Did the ninja not know who he was supposed to kill? And I couldn't watch after the ninja stood there doing nothing while the kid was obviously going to take off the blindfold thing and see him.

But that dude could make a good DD.
 
Really I mean come on! They need to go young and start all over completely!
 
Start over completely? So like 5 year old for matt murdock.

Daredevil is an adult. Should be an accomplished lawyer not some fresh faced college intern
 
Start over completely? So like 5 year old for matt murdock.

Daredevil is an adult. Should be an accomplished lawyer not some fresh faced college intern

No you're right cereal! I just meant he shouldn't be 40 years old you know.

More like 25 to 35.

You think>
 
25! How longs law school? After four years of college, the average age is what 21-22 (i was 21). 30-40 sounds much better.
 
Wow. That looks ******ed. Why did he even bother with the bed sheet/mask thing? Did the ninja not know who he was supposed to kill? And I couldn't watch after the ninja stood there doing nothing while the kid was obviously going to take off the blindfold thing and see him.

But that dude could make a good DD.
You've obviously not seen this movie. It makes more sense in context.

A) Dude w/ the mask wears a mask for the whole movie, so they just know where he's staying, not exactly who he is.
B) Kid's movie. It's funnier when ninjas yell in surprise.



Oh, God. I'm defending story for Speed Racer. That's it, I'm done.

Anyway, yeah. Fox would be a cool Daredevil. I never even thought of that.
 
25! How longs law school? After four years of college, the average age is what 21-22 (i was 21). 30-40 sounds much better.


You could be done way before that. I have a criminal justice degree and if I would have went into UC's Law Academy, which I might, it could take 6 to 8 years so I could be 28 or 30.

But if DareDevil has some years under his belt he should be 35 or 33. Depends on if they do an origin thing or not. Which I think they will.
 
i want an incredible hulk type reboot where the intro/credits can show the origins really quick but if they must show it all again i have no problem we need Michael c. hall as daredevil and a good director I'd say someone like Doug Liman/Marc Forster/Paul Greengrass/
 
Reboot. Though I still think the costume kicks ass...

DD_splash_rev_01.jpg
 
Practicality wise it sucks, seems constricting, but look-wise it definitely looked good. I dont really know which one I care more about. Obviously not enough for one option to be pissed off that they use the other option.
 
Am I the only one who loves DD - director's cut?? :(

I just watched it again today... I still dig it.
 
I think it's far superior to the theatrical release but still falls short in my estimation;

After all, it still has that bloody wire-fu playground flirt/fight scene. ;)
 
i dont love it but its certainly an improvement.

True... it could have been a tad better in some areas, but still...

I think it's far superior to the theatrical release but still falls short in my estimation;

After all, it still has that bloody wire-fu playground flirt/fight scene. ;)

I like that bit... I thought JG was cute...and she still is. heh. However, everytime I watch the fight between Elektra and DD... and then Elektra and Bullseye, I can't help but feel sorry for her. I wish she hadn't died.
 
Watching the DD: DC tonight it really is a very good movie and the only one I have liked Affleck in for a long time. It was wonderfully dark considering dark SH movies were somewhat taboo after Spiderman came out and it had a great atmosphere with a great cast and 2 very good villains.

Personally, I think a sequel would be the way to go, but I wouldnt mind if they re-did it either.
 
It's starting to irk me how the answer to all movie problems now seems to be, "Let's reboot it and make it darker." They don't all need it. 'Batman' and 'James Bond' were franchises that did need a fresh start, but Batman already had four movies under his belt and James Bond had 20 (if I remember correctly). Have moviemakers lost their creativity? Is it so much to ask to try to fix any problems the first movie had in the sequel? 'Daredevil', which I do love (but admit has its faults), is not a movie that needs a reboot. I might give it to a different director, but keep the cast. They were all fine, even Affleck.

Things to fix in the sequel:
- More focus on Matt as a person/lawyer (which the Director's Cut did improve A LOT ON.
- Less wire-fu fights.
- There's probably a few more that I can't think of....

That being said, if they're gonna recast one person, they should just recast them all. I hate when one person changes and we're supposed to accept that they have been there for each movie just because they are with the original cast (ie. Maggie Gyllenhaal and now Don Cheadle).

Overall, I guess it wouldn't be horrible if they pulled an Incredible Hulk (after all, THAT movie was light years better than Ang Lee's attempt), but I think that there is a lot of untapped potential in the Daredevil franchise that has already been set in place. With the right director and writers, a sequel could be great. I think, ideally, it would great to see the rights gfo back to Marvel and have them produce the sequel, but the likelihood of that happening is pretty much zero.
 
Am I the only one who loves DD - director's cut?? :(

I just watched it again today... I still dig it.

No, I love it too. I can definately see where the original would have sucked (never seen it, but I'm aware of the differences) and I think that a sequel to the DC would be a great thing.

If they could re-release DD's director's cut along with that, and make it seem like the original version never happened a la Once Upon a Time in America, and then go on to make a sequel. That'd be MY best case scenario.
 
Things to fix in the sequel:
- Less wire-fu fights.

Can't have DD fights without wire. His style of fighting is acrobatics, and Hong Kong martial arts stuntmen can do so much below what DD can perform in the comics.
 
It's starting to irk me how the answer to all movie problems now seems to be, "Let's reboot it and make it darker." They don't all need it. 'Batman' and 'James Bond' were franchises that did need a fresh start, but Batman already had four movies under his belt and James Bond had 20 (if I remember correctly). Have moviemakers lost their creativity? Is it so much to ask to try to fix any problems the first movie had in the sequel? 'Daredevil', which I do love (but admit has its faults), is not a movie that needs a reboot. I might give it to a different director, but keep the cast. They were all fine, even Affleck.

Things to fix in the sequel:
- More focus on Matt as a person/lawyer (which the Director's Cut did improve A LOT ON.
- Less wire-fu fights.
- There's probably a few more that I can't think of....

That being said, if they're gonna recast one person, they should just recast them all. I hate when one person changes and we're supposed to accept that they have been there for each movie just because they are with the original cast (ie. Maggie Gyllenhaal and now Don Cheadle).

Overall, I guess it wouldn't be horrible if they pulled an Incredible Hulk (after all, THAT movie was light years better than Ang Lee's attempt), but I think that there is a lot of untapped potential in the Daredevil franchise that has already been set in place. With the right director and writers, a sequel could be great. I think, ideally, it would great to see the rights gfo back to Marvel and have them produce the sequel, but the likelihood of that happening is pretty much zero.

The lighting and tone in the DD film was far to bright for my tastes.

Compare them to the comics. It's night and day.

DD needs to be darker, visually and story wise, to work. Making him a Spider-man rip-off was a bad idea.

The casting was good but Garner was wasted, Bullseye was to comedic to be taken seriously and Affleck wasn't a perfect DD he was a mediocre one.
 
Last edited:
Damon wouldn't take the role. I'm kind of sick of hearing his name every time some one opens a casting thread.

I think a Daredevil lends himself to more of a cable type series. Sell it to Showtime or HBO. All new casting. I like Spidey-dude's idea of filming in the Renaissance style but they definitely visually stunning. It should be a gritty and contain adult content. Don't pull any punches.

It should be dark and gritty. They should do a noir type story and really focus on DD's skills as a detective and as a lawyer. I felt that was a huge hole in the first movie. They didn't delve into the scope of his powers and how assist him in solving crimes and tracking criminals.
Yeah they went into his sonar sense but they barely touched on his other senses.

It's high time cable took the steps to get into the hero game.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"