Review: Daredevil

I am always apprehensive about going into a comic-to-film adaptation. It seems as though, in comic books, an author can manipulate his characters and bend a story to where it goes far beyond probability. In a movie, though, screenwriters must simplify these plots. This is to make sure that the films aren’t too cheesy looking, and keep the audience captive. The writing in Daredevil lacks persistence, and never takes chances with the concept of originality. Every visual in this film looks like a cheap rip-off of one from this summer’s surprise hit, Spider-Man. On the whole, Daredevil is a far from average, big-budget, and forgettable film. On rare occasion, it is deeply rich in color. The problem is that this stylishness only shows through the poor filmmaking once in a while. The film improves as it moves, but despite the comeback, it still doesn’t offer anything special.

Ben Affleck is just dreadful, as the somewhat incomprehensible character, Daredevil. He is stark and unsettling in his performance, and each of his lines seem pretentious. Not only does he play one of the most stupidly inane characters ever created in comic-history, but performs badly as well. The film’s only action is brought forth by the sexy Jennifer Garner, who plays the wildly entertaining Elektra. The stunts that this character performs are the few interesting ones in the entire movie. I might be bias, but bias or not, she definitely outdoes everyone else in the film. Colin Farrell is almost as bad as Affleck. He plays Bullseye, a man with too many piercings, as well as anger. With so many terrible performances, I wasn’t sure whether to root for the protagonists or the antagonists. Even though I have enjoyed Affleck films in past, I don’t think he has ever been good in one of them. He should have his buddy, Matt Damon, teach him a thing or two about acting.

The visuals are cheesy, tacky, and most predominately, dumb. As Daredevil flew through the air, jumped from building to building, and fought all of the evil in the city, I felt as though it was an insult to my intelligence. When examining the special effects, I found that almost all of them looked incredibly airy and underdone. When watching them, one question deeply annoyed me. Just because this “Daredevil” character has incredibly strong senses, why does that mean that he can fight better than Jackie Chan and jump off of skyscrapers without breaking a bone? The material is just plain boring for most of them time. It lacks the spunk and daringness that most adaptations have. There was another inquiry that popped into my mind, as well. What is the purpose of Daredevil? During the film, this isn’t made clear. He isn’t saving the world, or helping people. All he ever does is fight off villains who have no motive to be evil.

Daredevil is just another mindlessly forgettable, trashy picture that will survive on the wealth of the demographic teenage audience. Don’t go expecting Affleck’s best, even though his best is just about as satisfying as a bad case of the chicken pocks. This isn’t a good movie, nor is it a very bad one. Jennifer Garner outdoes everyone else, and I’m glad to see so. Daredevil just isn’t as exciting as other comic adaptations. The special effects are not pleasurable to view, and even though I can appreciate a distinct cheesiness in certain films, this one overdoes almost everything. As this superhero walks the streets of New York with his enhanced senses, we are never sympathetic for him. Much of the dialogue is stupid and overblown. This is a film that will, without a doubt, satisfy its target audience. My physical appearance shows that I fit into this group. But, judging by my reaction, I obviously don’t fall for the cheap material that most die for.

-Danny, Bucket Reviews