Rating- * * * * (4/5)
Ah, my very first review for 2003 (and it’s only the middle of February). Why so late, you might ask? No, it’s not because I’m lazy, it’s because I’ve been too busy seeing all the great 2002 releases that have finally made it to theaters. Also, there haven’t been any 2003 releases worth seeing until now, since January is the dumping ground for the movie industry’s worst. Before I get to the review, I feel it should be noted that at the time I saw this film, it was the fifth new film I had seen in three days. Normally, these circumstances would affect my ability to focus and concentrate but I had no problems separating myself from the world and jumping right in. Could this be a sign that I am truly becoming a critic in my own right? We’ll see as the year unfolds. As I watched Daredevil, the latest film incarnation of a Marvel comic book, two realizations suddenly dawned on me. First, the superhero film has now officially become its own genre. You have the tragic back-story in which the hero loses a family member and/or loved one and vows their revenge, the catastrophic event in which the hero is exposed to some kind of radioactive and/or toxic substance which gives the hero superhuman powers, the ruthless villain who proves how ruthless he is by killing one of his henchmen at some point in the film, the love interest who inevitably gets kidnapped, and the big battle scene between the hero and the villain. With franchises like Spider-Man, and X-Men already underway and The Hulk and The Iron Man on their way the superhero film is quickly becoming both the newest and most popular major genre of our time. Now, I could sit here and analyze why the superhero film has become so popular all of a sudden, but I will probably save that for The Hulk or X-Men 2. My second realization was that, as entertaining as these superhero movies have been thus far, they are all waiting for something: sequels. The superhero genre could bear the unique, and profitable, distinction of being the only kind of film in which the sequels are much better than their original. The joys of a superhero movie lie in the ongoing plot points and action scenes. Unfortunately in these first films, a lot of time has to be spent introducing the characters and their backgrounds. After all, you read comic books for new adventures, not for the hero’s origin story. Once all this work is done however, the sequels will be freed up to focus more on action, new villains and new plot points. I predict that moviegoers will have a lot more fun at the sequels to these superhero movies than they did at the originals. After all that, I come to the subject of this particular review, Daredevil, based on a relatively little-known comic book hero from Spider-Man creator Stan Lee. There is the usual setup for the main character, Matt Murdock (played by Ben Affleck), but basically his story is that he was exposed to a toxic chemical as a child that made him blind but enhanced the rest of his senses to a superhuman level. When his father is killed by the Kingpin, a ruthless mob boss (Michael Clarke Duncan), Murdock vows to bring justice to his neighborhood of Hell’s Kitchen in any way that he can. By day, Murdock is a charitable, working-man’s lawyer defending the innocent. But by night, Murdock dons a red leather suit and becomes the violent vigilante Daredevil, serving as a “guardian devil” for Hell’s Kitchen. Daredevil is a much darker and more violent hero than Spider-Man and rather than neatly tie up the criminals so that the cops can get them, Daredevil will much sooner kill the criminals. Murdock is also a much more interesting and conflicted character than Spider-Man’s Peter Parker; Murdock is a Catholic and struggles with the morality of his vigilante vengeance. There are several other interesting characters in the film, including Elektra (Jennifer Garner), a knife wielding, leather-clad huntress looking for revenge on the man who killed her father, and Bullseye (Colin Farrell), an ill-tempered Irishman with an aim so deadly he can kill you with a paperclip from across the room. The most fun part of Daredevil is the fighting. The fight scenes are very energetic and hectic and although some moves are a little too Matrix-like to be believable, I don’t suppose we go to a superhero movie for believability. The fighting is much more violent in Daredevil than in other superhero movies, often including bloody cuts, impalements and other nasty injuries, including a couple of deaths. Also, the flirtation of violence with the Catholic imagery is a little unnerving and it’s pretty daring for a mainstream action movie to deal with ideas as complex as that (hell, that’s daring stuff when Scorsese does it). Daredevil has distinguished itself in the superhero genre as the dark and brooding cousin of Spider-Man and if it turns into a franchise, which is likely, then it will have a smaller, but much more mature audience than Spidey, giving it some license to take things a bit farther than other superhero films. Ultimately, this is a very entertaining film with some great special effects that enhance the film but don’t fly in your face. It also has some very good performances by Garner, Duncan and Farrell and a return to form for Affleck after a long string of sell-out, brainless roles. There are also several bit parts filled by smart, funny actors like Jon Favreau (as Affleck’s ultra-capitalist partner), Kevin Smith (as an ultra-nerdy medical examiner), and Joe Pantoliano (as an ultra-moral New York Post reporter, there’s a novelty!). All in all, Daredevil is a lot of fun and has a lot of potential as a franchise. Thumbs up from me.