Daredevil

User Score
8.0

Generally favorable reviews- based on 557 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 60 out of 557

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

  1. MichaelM.
    Oct 23, 2004
    4
    When I went to go see this movie I thought it was going to be horrible. All I heard were negative things about this movie. I thought to myself, "Ben Affleck as a superhero? Give me a break!". When I went to go saw it it actually wasn't bad! It wasn't good either. It was just an average movie. There was nothing special about it, and nothing to horrible about it either, except When I went to go see this movie I thought it was going to be horrible. All I heard were negative things about this movie. I thought to myself, "Ben Affleck as a superhero? Give me a break!". When I went to go saw it it actually wasn't bad! It wasn't good either. It was just an average movie. There was nothing special about it, and nothing to horrible about it either, except Jennifer Garner's atrocious acting. Ben Affleck is pretty bad actor, but not as bad as her. Other cast members were a delight to watch such as Colin Farrel, Jon Favreau, Joe Pantoliano and Kevin Smith in a tiny cameo as a person working at a morgue. The thing I really don't get though is, in the comic book the character of Kingpin is white. The man who plays him, Michael Clarke Duncan, is black. And another thing, the original Kingpin wasn't muscular and strong like Michael Clarke Duncan, he was morbidly obese. It has some cool special effects in the movie, but nothing too spectacular. I think the character of Bullseye, played by Colin Farrel was pretty interesting and kind of funny. In the beginning there is a cameo by Robert Iler who plays AJ Soprano on "The Sopranos" as a bully who beats up Daredevil as a boy. The movie is worth watching if you have nothing better to do, but don't go out of your way to see it. I know I wouldn't. (2/14/03) Expand
  2. Jan 29, 2015
    4
    Sem sombra de dúvidas um dos piores filmes já produzidos da Marvel,não são os atores Affleck,Farrell,Garner e Clarke Duncan estão excelentes,destaque ainda mais para performance de Colin Farrell,o problema é a idéia de colocarem na maioria cenas bestas sem ação e sem vida no filme,mas destaques as cenas do Demolidor Vs Elektra,chefão e Collin são as únicas que prestam.
  3. Sep 24, 2011
    4
    "Daredevil" is just the worst movie you can think of in Marvel Studios. It has crappy CGI, undeveloped romance between Affleck and Garner (in the movie), and a monotonous length that rushes towards the end.
  4. Nov 8, 2012
    4
    Excluding some impressive stunts, there's just not much here if you look at all the money and star power that went into making it.
  5. Aug 27, 2011
    4
    For a superhero that's supposed to be so dark and tortured by guilt (emotional and Catholic), Daredevil is a rather goofy movie. It's dialogue feels like it was written by someone who had never read a comic book trying to emulate one, and scene after scene of forced drama (and by drama, I mean play a ton of emo songs).
  6. Jan 18, 2012
    4
    I recently read Brian Michael Bendis' run on Daredevil and was blown away by how good it was. Out of curiosity (and my better judgement) I decided I had to watch this movie. Unfortunately, the quality of the comic book is lost to the film. Director Mark Steven Johnson got just about everything wrong. The casting was poor - the most obvious example is Michael Clarke Duncan as Kingpin. InI recently read Brian Michael Bendis' run on Daredevil and was blown away by how good it was. Out of curiosity (and my better judgement) I decided I had to watch this movie. Unfortunately, the quality of the comic book is lost to the film. Director Mark Steven Johnson got just about everything wrong. The casting was poor - the most obvious example is Michael Clarke Duncan as Kingpin. In the comics, he's a fat white guy. In the film, hes a black body builder. I could have lived with this if Michael Clarke Duncan could play the role of a villain - but he's just to damn charming. Ben Affleck was mis-cast, as was Jennifer Garner. Their combined acting was pretty poor - I just couldn't suspend my belief long enough to accept either of them as heroes. I think the director just tried to cram too much into this film. The film covers Matt Murdock gaining his powers (and disability) as a child, his fathers death, his career as a lawyer, his romantic relationship with Elektra, his friendship with Foggy Nelson and Ben Ulrich and his feud with both Bullseye and Kingpin. It was just too much - the movie was saturated and watered down with plot devices. Aesthetically speaking, the film was too dark. Many of the scenes were filmed at night or in dark interiors. I found it distracting during the action scenes; the sequences were hard to follow because of the dimly lit sets. Finally, I'd just like to point out that this movie is CHEESY. Good god. I actually laughed out loud a couple of times because of how bad the acting/dialogue was. The bottom line? Skip it, especially if you're a fan of the Daredevil comics. Expand
  7. Jul 1, 2013
    4
    It's not enough to make a regular popcorn superhero flick when films like Spider-Man as well as X-men has wit, character development and high-octane action sequences that makes them great movies all around.

    Ben Affleck fits the role for Matt Murdock/Daredevil but the movie is, ultimately, too derivative to be on par with other superhero movies. It does have enough moments that, without
    It's not enough to make a regular popcorn superhero flick when films like Spider-Man as well as X-men has wit, character development and high-octane action sequences that makes them great movies all around.

    Ben Affleck fits the role for Matt Murdock/Daredevil but the movie is, ultimately, too derivative to be on par with other superhero movies. It does have enough moments that, without them, would've made the movie much worse than it already is but the rest of the characters don't get their showcase, especially Elektra.
    Expand
  8. Oct 15, 2011
    5
    This film isn't the scarring experience I was expecting (for that I watched Electra) but it didn't live up to what it could have been. It seemed that Daredevil took the middle ground and stayed there with it aspiring to be something more than average but never really putting in the effort. I normally don't appreciate super hero movies for the same reason in that they are way too upbeat andThis film isn't the scarring experience I was expecting (for that I watched Electra) but it didn't live up to what it could have been. It seemed that Daredevil took the middle ground and stayed there with it aspiring to be something more than average but never really putting in the effort. I normally don't appreciate super hero movies for the same reason in that they are way too upbeat and when a comic book film tries to show real darkness it usually fails quite miserably. However Daredevil actually does have a nice tone in its darkness, the mixture of colours actually provides for a pleasant viewing experience with there being some truly clever direction in places (rain face). I'm not saying its high art but it works with there being some incredibly visceral moments. If anything the movie annoys with the fact it embraces a little too much its comic book roots in its representation of Bullseye who (with the help of Colin Farrell) manages to drive the viewer up the wall. Daredevil made some moves to be unique but overall just didn't put in enough effort to pull it off. Also Jon Favreau needs to stop playing the jovial sidekick, if you've seen Swingers you know it is beneath him Expand
  9. Mar 7, 2012
    5
    Other good title. I meet the Daredevil story, and is beautiful, is same like the batman's story, but this adaptation is some regular, some performance are good, but others no much, the story of this film is regular, and a lot of boring. I think that is a correct film, special mention to the church scene, is fantastic. In no much words, a correct film.
  10. Sep 23, 2013
    5
    To be fair, I didn't hate this movie. There was allot I liked and I thought Affleck didn't do a bad job. He looked like Daredevil and his Matt Murdock was a little wimpy, but good enough. I really don't like how much he gets trashed, since it wasn't him that was wrong with the movie, but the writing and directing.

    How could Garner be cast as Elektra? This role was clearly design for
    To be fair, I didn't hate this movie. There was allot I liked and I thought Affleck didn't do a bad job. He looked like Daredevil and his Matt Murdock was a little wimpy, but good enough. I really don't like how much he gets trashed, since it wasn't him that was wrong with the movie, but the writing and directing.

    How could Garner be cast as Elektra? This role was clearly design for Michelle Rodriguez. Garner was terrible in the movie. Enough on this.

    Farrell is just fantastic as Bullseye. I do question the movies design for his character, but I guess it's fine. Michael Clarke Duncan is just phenomenal as Kingpin, granted the race change has a little odd at first, but he nails the character, both in delivery and in physically.

    Overall:
    Daredevil Is a badly written and poorly directed mess by someone who clearly lacks the experience for this kind of movie. Luckily the actors (not Garner) do save the film from being a total failure.
    Expand
  11. Aug 5, 2013
    4
    There are moments of undeniably zippy fun, but Daredevil suffers from indolent acting, incoherent pacing and a monotonous script that's weak compared to the average superhero movie standard.
  12. Mar 20, 2016
    4
    Daredevil was historically a Marvel Comics second-stringer, but in hindsight, it makes sense that writer and artist Frank Miller made him the starting point for the superhero renaissance of the 1980s, which looked deep into the psyches of the people beneath the tights, found heroes with scars and demons, and set the tone for comics and their film adaptations ever since. Who, after all, hadDaredevil was historically a Marvel Comics second-stringer, but in hindsight, it makes sense that writer and artist Frank Miller made him the starting point for the superhero renaissance of the 1980s, which looked deep into the psyches of the people beneath the tights, found heroes with scars and demons, and set the tone for comics and their film adaptations ever since. Who, after all, had a rougher time of it than Matt Murdock, a poor kid blinded, orphaned, and thrown to the tender mercies of New York's Hell's Kitchen? His powers come from a sense of loss (his four remaining senses are heightened by his blindness), and even his choice of profession spoke to the great divide within him. A lawyer by day, he acts as a one-man star chamber at night. Drawn from a grab-bag of characters and incidents taken mostly from Miller's run on the comics series, writer-director Mark Steven Johnson's version of Daredevil seems aware of the murky waters it sets out to explore. That makes its tendency to hug the shore all the more frustrating, even though Johnson starts off by making his hero even darker than expected. Ben Affleck steps into the cowl and fetish suit, and for his first adventure, Johnson has him cold-bloodedly murder a rapist who cheated justice. It's almost as if the writer-director had accidentally made a film about occasional Daredevil nemesis The Punisher instead of the Man Without Fear; the fact that the movie treats this as no big deal suggests that it comes from a more disturbing place than anyone in the Marvel universe could imagine. True, Daredevil at least partly deals with Affleck's decision to stop killing, but it's given all the gravity of a decision to stop smoking or eating fatty snacks. The film seems to want all the trappings of the Daredevil comic–the dripping rooftops, the suggestive brooding, the Catholic iconography, and the ever-present potential for damnation–without the attendant baggage. Suggesting a cross between Ving Rhames and Ed Wood stock-player Tor Johnson, Michael Clarke Duncan plays Daredevil's arch-foe The Kingpin, the pitiless source of most of New York's crime, and the man whose decision to assassinate the father of Affleck's new lover Elektra (Jennifer Garner) lends the film its late-in-arriving central conflict. Casting Affleck would have paid off had the conflicted, acerbic star of Boiler Room, Changing Lanes, or even Bounce shown up. Instead we're left with the cardboard hero of Armageddon and The Sum Of All Fears, a caretaker leading man wholly dependent on the quality of the movie around him. Sadly, there's not much of that. Johnson's reliance on optical effects and secondhand fight choreography strains Daredevil's personality through a Matrix filter, and it rarely succeeds on those derivative terms. (Anyone annoyed by shortcomings in Spider-Man's special effects can start working out the wording of their angry Internet posts now.) Thanks to Jon Favreau's turn as Affleck's schlubby partner, a funny cameo by Kevin Smith, and especially Colin Farrell's gleefully psychopathic interpretation of the villain Bullseye, at least there's good stuff in the margins. But on the heels of such successful comic-book adaptations as X-Men and Spider-Man, Johnson's film makes Daredevil look like the second-rate hero he never really was. Expand
  13. MitchH.
    Feb 16, 2003
    6
    A movie full of nothing but it is entertaining. It has some good fight scenes and shocking moments, but that just doesn't add up. I thought ben Afleck sleepwalked through the roll but the movie was saved my Jennifer Garner. I love her. I would recommend this movie to people because you will have fun, but there isn't a lot of substance.
  14. C.B.
    Feb 14, 2003
    4
    If you love the comic, the movie is tolerable; if you know nothing about the comic, don't bother. Some visual effects are quite neat, but a lot of the CG really falls flat. The acting is mostly flat and uninspired across the board. I felt no passion or hatred for any of the characters at any time in the movie. They should have selected Bullseye or Kingpin as the villain...., not If you love the comic, the movie is tolerable; if you know nothing about the comic, don't bother. Some visual effects are quite neat, but a lot of the CG really falls flat. The acting is mostly flat and uninspired across the board. I felt no passion or hatred for any of the characters at any time in the movie. They should have selected Bullseye or Kingpin as the villain...., not both, it left both feeling undeveloped and unscary. Expand
  15. BubbaFresh
    Feb 15, 2003
    5
    Satisfactory movie with improved special effects (compared to Spider-man). Shootout scenes are quite impressive special fx, but movement around buildings looks EXACTLY like spider-man, which sucks. Daredevil is also much darker film than Spider-man which makes it less of a movie for little kids.
  16. KentM.
    Feb 16, 2003
    4
    I didn't have very high expectations for this movie and I'm glad I didn't (I would have given it a 2). Weak characters, CG effects were too obvious, and the story was uninspiring. Too bad, because DD was a cool character and KingPin was a white guy!
  17. GregT.
    Aug 4, 2003
    6
    This is a mindless teen flick but I knew that when I rented it. Movies based on comic book characters are not Shakespeare. This movie is fine if you want action and more action and more action and not a lot of plot. There is always something slightly appealing about testosterone filled young men such as Ben Affleck and Colin Farrell who are full of piss and vinegar.
  18. PeterJ.
    Jan 24, 2005
    6
    I am an avid Daredevil comic book collector, and I must say I have mixed feelings on the film. The storyline was okay, and it had a good look and feel to it, but I just can't get over them casting Ben Affleck as Daredevil. If someone else had gotten the part this movie would have been much better.
  19. EthanS.
    Feb 14, 2003
    6
    A movie whose parts are far better than the sum. Affleck is fairly winning as Murdock/Daredevil, Garner lights up the screen whenever she is on it, and Farell and Duncan make convincing baddies. However, painfully wooden and obvious writing, and a lack of anything compelling in the direction of this film keep it from becoming something more unique. High point of the film is a playground A movie whose parts are far better than the sum. Affleck is fairly winning as Murdock/Daredevil, Garner lights up the screen whenever she is on it, and Farell and Duncan make convincing baddies. However, painfully wooden and obvious writing, and a lack of anything compelling in the direction of this film keep it from becoming something more unique. High point of the film is a playground flirtation/duel between Affleck and Garner -- the sparks are palpable and the wirework nifty and clean. From there on out, it's all downhill. However, it remains an intriguing set of characters and an interesting world -- let's hope that if there is a sequel, it will expand greatly the romantic/spiritual/physical areas just touched on here -- as well as being handed over to a more subtle writer and a director who can stage an action scene. Expand
  20. DerekW.
    Jun 23, 2003
    5
    I wasn't running to the theatres to catch this movie. Spider-man and X-men were great (ignoring the fact that they didn't follow the comic book storyline). Comic book movies are a fad like reality TV. All in all, Daredevil isn't all that bad, its fun, and has that comic book theme to it. See it if there's nothing else, but I wouldn't make it a first pick.
  21. PaulV.
    Mar 17, 2003
    5
    A so, so film. Don't get me wrong the action scenes and costumes are top-notch. The film just didn't have all the actors and story line to match.
  22. Dec 20, 2015
    5
    " Dardevil " was a means boring movie , because only about half of the movie was interesting , but a little disapproving , as the criticism of experts and spectators , I did not surprise me that a man is called a man without fear , if this blind.
  23. May 31, 2016
    6
    I actually find enjoyment in this movie, it is not as awful as most people say. It has great action and music, and an over the top villain that actually is fun to watch. Plus, Daredevil's "vision", come on, don't tell me that isn't still awesome.
Metascore
42

Mixed or average reviews - based on 35 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 5 out of 35
  2. Negative: 7 out of 35
  1. Not woeful, not wonderful, merely watchable.
  2. Brought to the screen with a mix of jaunty humor and jagged violence that should have worked more effectively than it does.
  3. 50
    Daredevil the movie strains itself trying to catch up with Sam Raimi's web-slinging megasmash. It's a faceless copy, right down to the muscle-rock groaning on the soundtrack.