By Wil Forbis
March 2, 2003
Some years ago, I wrote a
humorous article entitled “Spider-Man, We hardly
Knew Ye,” which examined the difficulty Hollywood seemed to have
adapting comic book superheroes to film. After viewing the newest comic
book movie, "Daredevil," I feel the time is right to again
tackle this important issue. Will this, too, be a humorous article?
Probably not. With everything I’ve been through in the past year – the
syphilis breakout and my divorce from the high profile rapper/actress
Eve, (caused, in many ways, by the syphilis) I feel that any lighthearted
attempts at comedy are beyond my abilities.
Let’s get to the meat of
the lasagna: Did I like “Daredevil”? Well, it’s a splendid action film,
with a compelling sense of aesthetics. Scenes of Ben Affleck’s Daredevil
acrobatically leaping across the New York landscape are equal to Toby
Maguire’s Spider-Man swinging across the New York landscape. Sequences
showing Colin Farrell’s Bullseye using paper clips, playing cards and
Daredevil’s own truncheon as deadly missiles are akin to “The Matrix.”
And Michael Clarke Duncan, playing a racially altered representation
of Marvel Comic’s “Kingpin” character is a sight to behold – a dark-skinned
Sumo with sinewy musculature.
But when you got down to
matters of plot, dialogue and characterization, I can only quote numerous
comic book heroes who have found themselves on the receiving end of
a laser blast or electrified bullwhip: “Aaaaarrrghhhhhh!” Every phrase
spoken by every character in the film will make you cringe with its
banality and triteness. Observe this stirring tête-à-tête
between Daredevil and Elektra
Daredevil: “I didn’t kill
your father!”
Elektra: “Liar!”
(Unable to resolve this issue
through discourse, the two commence fighting, much the chagrin of the
French.)
Of course, a lot of people
will say, “Gee, that doesn’t sound much different from your average
comic book dialogue.” And they’re right. The average comic book is pretty
stupid, promoting a world of black and white morality occupied by colorfully
clad defenders who scream out clichés like “I want justice!!!” or “You
can run from the law, but you cannot escape the evil in your soul!”
before pummeling a bad guy into submission. But
you gotta understand… “Daredevil” was never your average comic book.
It started out in the early sixties, and was clearly a kid brother to
more successful Marvel Comics titles like “Spider-Man” and “The Fantastic
Four.” While the character was based on an interesting premise – a blind
superhero whose other senses had become so powerful he was able to become
a dangerous foe of evil – Daredevil never seemed to find his role in
the Marvel Universe. Was he truly a “devil” who worked outside the law
as a punishing vigilante, or was he more of a goody-two-shoes square
in the Superman vein? In the seventies, Daredevil was passed between
a string of writers and artists, none of whom seemed to have a consistent
vision for what to do with the character. This changed in 1981, when
both the writing and artwork were taken over but the now legendary Frank
Miller. It was in Miller’s hands that Daredevil departed from the average,
causing the world of comic books to undergo a fundamental change. Miller,
while acknowledging the essential silliness of men in tights, treated
the comic book art form seriously, and started scripting epic adventures
that dealt with grandiose themes of religion, spiritual failure, inner
city violence, politics and redemption. With Miller’s prodding, comic
books moved one step away from their roots as pre-teen fodder towards
a form of storytelling that could be enjoyed by adults. Soon other characters
were following suit. Iron Man became an alcoholic. Thor sported a beard
and reverted to his Viking roots. The X-Men’s Wolverine, a principled
but unapologetic killer, became one of comic’s most popular characters.
In a move that attracted the most attention, DC Comic’s Bat-Man was
reinvented (again by Miller) as a dark knight willing to use a savagery
surpassing that of his enemies to fight injustice.
So where did the movie “Daredevil”
go wrong? After all, it was obviously influenced by Miller’s classic
“Daredevil” issues, as the film’s three antagonists, Elektra, Bullseye
and the Kingpin, were major players during Miller’s run on the book.
I think there’s a couple points to consider. One, Miller himself had
a hard time transferring his ideas to film, as was shown when he wrote
the second in the series of RoboCop films.
(A dismal failure.) Miller also had several years to play out his ideas
and concepts in the Daredevil comic, whereas the creative forces behind
the movie had to present it all in a few hours. The impression I got
while watching the film was that it was trying to cram too much mythos
into too small a timeframe. The film had to unravel the story of Daredevil’s
origin, detail his love affair with Elektra, introduce the character
of Bullseye and make clear that the Kingpin is the mastermind of New
York’s criminal underground – while still leaving room for the required
scenes of violence and death. Instead of trying to succeed splendidly
in one area, the film fails equally in all. This is a movie that simply
bit off more than it could chew.
I also question that choice
of Ben Affleck as the lead character. For years I’ve seen the guy on
film and been rather ambivalent towards his abilities. After seeing
“Daredevil,” I have to ask: Can this guy really act? Daredevil himself
may be blind as a vigilante, but Affleck seems blind as a thespian,
and never really convinces the viewer of his passion for defending the
weak against the strong. I almost expected him to start uttering pronouncements
like, “I want justice…. Dude!” (I assume Affleck’s friendship with movie
director and occasional Daredevil comic scribe, Kevin Smith, has something
to do with why he was chosen for the role.)
The other actors fare better.
Jennifer Garner, who plays Elektra could have simply gotten by on that
fact that she’s a such hot piece of ass, but does a pretty commendable
job. Michael Clark Duncan is definitely the best actor of the group,
and gives the The Kingpin a menacing varnish. I don’t see the homicidal
Bullseye as a particularly difficult part to play, but I can say that
Colin Farrell doesn’t screw it up.
In general, I think things
have gotten better in the world or comic book films. Last year’s “Spider-Man”
was flawed, but still very enjoyable. I had no qualms with the first
“X-Men.”
The Blade series, featuring a little known comic book hero, is pretty
damned good. But I can’t help feel that Daredevil's visually stunning
introduction to celluloid is a step backwards.
