ROTTEN TOMATOES: "Daredevil" Director (and Villain) Want to Do a Sequel

"Daredevil" Director (and Villain) Want to Do a Sequel

by Scott Weinberg | November 14, 2006

Director Mark Steven Johnson recently opined that, yeah, he'd like to do a "Daredevil" sequel, provided anyone at Sony actually wanted to. And then big ol' Michael Clarke Duncan spoke up and said "Me too! I'd do a sequel!"

From Moviehole: "At the Wizard World Convention Last Week, “Ghost Rider” helmer Mark Steven Johnson said he’d be keen to not only do a sequel to the Nicolas Cage starrer, but also his earlier superhero effort, “Daredevil”.

According to Aint it Cool, Johnson said he’d like to do a sequel that uses the ‘Born Again’ storyline as its template.

"Daredevil: Born Again" is a story arc in Marvel Comics' series. The story details Daredevil's fall to insanity and destitution at the hands of The Kingpin, as well as his subsequent struggle to build a new life for himself. It is considered by many fans to be the definitive Frank Miller written Daredevil story.

Michael Clarke Duncan ... would be keen to return for a sequel. The actor who played the villain Kingpin in the first film said he’s got some great ideas for a follow-up. "I had thought what would be kind of cool that we see him in jail, we see him in prison, we see him...you start from the end of 'Daredevil', before the sirens and Daredevil is gone and you see the Kingpin in shackles you see him going to prison you see him getting locked up and you see his boys sitting there saying 'Well what are you going to do now?' And he just starts to think 'I need to train, I need to get better, I need to get quicker'."
---

Guys, let it go. There's higher aspirations out there than "Daredevil 2."

Related Items

Celeb:	Mark Steven Johnson
	Nicolas Cage
	Michael Clarke Duncan
	Frank Miller
Movie:	Daredevil
	Ghost Rider

(1-20 of 31 posts) | Reply

GreenBastard writes:
on Nov 14 2006 01:53 AM

I must be the only person on the planet that thought Daredevil was kickass?
It kicked Superman's ass that's for sure, at least I didn't fall asleep in it!

(Reply to this)

RexLaboro writes:
on Nov 14 2006 03:04 AM

[b]AFFLECK HATERS SUCK[/b]
DareDevil was a GOOD flick. It was gritty and on point. I been waiting for a sequel!!!! Oh, youcan sue me too because, I liked thePUNISHER also. Its ELEKTRA that chaps my hide.

(Reply to this)

agentjames007 writes:
on Nov 14 2006 05:43 AM

An Affleck-less sequel would maybe be cool, especially if it's being based around a Frank Miller story. Just don't bring back Elektra, and get someone good to play Daredevil. I guess Duncan was an ok villain, in fact the villains were the best part of DD 1.

(Reply to this)

BUCK69 writes:
on Nov 14 2006 05:48 AM

In reply to this comment (#848812)
I thought it was good, too. So you're not alone. I've watched it several times, and I don't see what the problem was, and I consider myself an amatuer critic. Although I don't think it was better than "Superman Returns," it was good in its own right. I've wasted money on a hell of lot worse.

(Reply to this)

adml_shake writes:
on Nov 14 2006 06:15 AM

I didn't think it was that bad. The biggest thing that annoyed the hell out of me was that they seemed to write it to find ways to put shitty ass music in it ever five seconds. I like Michael Clarke Duncan, but I don't think he made a good king pin, or they didn't write him very well. Try another evil doer.

(Reply to this)

aconline writes:
on Nov 14 2006 07:15 AM

Daredevil was a rehash of the original Batman movie. I did enjoy it. After multiple viewings, I like it more. It was actually the first date that my now wife and I went to. If we survived that movie, we can survive anything. We watch it every year on Valentine's Day. We even saw Elektra. And we would definitely see a sequel. I am all for it.

(Reply to this)

Matanuki writes:
on Nov 14 2006 07:47 AM

No one else could have pulled off the kingpin role. (I challenge you to offer names if you think otherwise) but I have to disagree with you guys, I hated DD. And that's coming from a die hard Marvel comics fan. Ghost Rider is looking like it might be half decent, at least better than the atrocities (Batman & Robin, Catwoman, DD, Spawn...).

(Reply to this)

sir_mcchris_the_pirate writes:
on Nov 14 2006 07:50 AM

daredevil did kick ass and yes affleck haters can burn in hell....

(Reply to this)

gsundt writes:
on Nov 14 2006 08:45 AM

[b]See the DIRECTOR'S CUT!!!!!![/b]
If you watch the Director's Cut, you realize that this flick was actually awesome. If the sequel is in the same league as the director's cut, then bring it on!

(Reply to this)

the-russian writes:
on Nov 14 2006 09:20 AM

In reply to this comment (#848815)
For one, the fight scene between Daredevil and Bullseye in the church, where they're both jumping around like gymnists, that was goofy and lame. Also the first encounter between Matt and Elektra, when they're sparring in front of the group of kids on the playground, yeah, that was dumb too. And the fact that they fall in love and have sex within a couple of days (days was it? haven't seen it for a while). And Joe Pantoliano's character, the stereotypical "won't take no for an answer" detective who gets in too deep. And the scenes where Matt was a kid, the "training sequences" and the scenes with him and the bullies, all were pretty lackluster.

That's not to say there weren't things done right in the movie. I actually think there were more good things than bad things. I thought the film was perfectly cast (from Affleck as Daredevil/Matt to M.C. Duncan as the Kingpin to Foggy Nelson, Karen Page, and even Colin Farrell was great as Bullseye). They all fit perfectly (though of course Kingpin was white, but they made a great argument in that the movie took place in New York, and there weren't any black characters? RIGHT). The enemies were great and the plot was generally good too.

There were both a lot of things RIGHT AND WRONG with Daredevil. Hopefully, for the second, they'll be able to cut all the really lame stuff out (they already got the origin out of the way, for one) and we'll have a good flick.

(Reply to this)

ShopS-Mart writes:
on Nov 14 2006 09:48 AM

In reply to this comment (#848819)
if you think daredevil is a good movie then read this please

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=dare_devil

(Reply to this)

Kid_Ikarus writes:
on Nov 14 2006 10:35 AM

In reply to this comment (#848822)
AWESOME!!

PS. The Easter Bunny hired Lobo to kill Santa... jus a lil FYI.

(Reply to this)

Matanuki writes:
on Nov 14 2006 11:19 AM

In reply to this comment (#848821)
Hey russian, you make some good points. But you damage your credibility when you say the film was perfectly cast. First off, the titler character was disgraced by Ben Affleck (and that's coming from an Affleck fain!!). And Elektra was another major misfire only made worse by the film that followed DD. We all love Daredevil, but let us love him enough to agree that the "film" did him zero justice.

(Reply to this)

FireflyFan4evr writes:
on Nov 14 2006 11:30 AM

Daredevil is definitely one of my favourite comicbook films out there, up there with V for Vendetta, X2, X-Men, and Batman Begins. The director's cut is even better, and I have no idea i hell on why it is considered the "Restricted" cut. How pathetic has the overly-conservative MPAA gotten?

Affleck was awesome (and he should be nominated for Best Supporting Actor for Hollywoodland), Duncan was perfect, Jon Favreau was hilarious, and Colin Farrell was a psycho. The only real bad point to it was Jennifer Garner and the whole Elektra storyline. She's a good actress, but the character wasn't written well and she was practically just eye candy.

The director's cut cuts out much of that storyline of the Daredevil/Elektra relationship and makes the movie more down to earth and not a film about "you killed my girlfriend who I only knew for a few weeks, but was the love of my life" stuff. Besides, didn't it earn over $100 million? Shouldn't that constitute a sequel in this day and age, where every shitty horror film gets a sequel if it earns $30 million and drops out of the theatre in 3 weeks?

(Reply to this)

Praz writes:
on Nov 14 2006 12:58 PM

Yes, I'm sure that a discerning writer like Frank Miller would allow Mark Steven Johnson to butcher one of his stories. In completely unrelated news, I will most likely not be watching Ghost Rider.

(Reply to this)

timov writes:
on Nov 14 2006 01:10 PM

what on earth?! i can't believe so many people thought DD was a good film. you're all on crack!! the movie was CRAP and does not warrant a sequel. Affleck ruined it. He's the worst freaking actor of our generation. cardboard cutout. i loved the comic book when i read it back in the 80's and 90's. it could've been so much better. oh well, what the hell.

(Reply to this)

liono86 writes:
on Nov 14 2006 01:23 PM

I'm not an Affleck fan, but, he didn't do too shabby as Daredevil. I, for one, enjoyed the flick. If they do another Daredevil, though, I don't think Ben will be back, so, they'll probably have to look for a replacement.

(Reply to this)

liono86 writes:
on Nov 14 2006 01:24 PM

I'm not an Affleck fan, but, he didn't do too shabby as Daredevil. I, for one, enjoyed the flick. If they do another Daredevil, though, I don't think Ben will be back, so, they'll probably have to look for a replacement.

(Reply to this)

mizzoucritic writes:
on Nov 14 2006 02:16 PM

Granted that Affleck's out, who should play Daredevil if there is a sequel?

(Reply to this)

dagreenman18 writes:
on Nov 14 2006 03:27 PM

if Frank Miller consults on the sequel, then im all for it. after all, it's his story. Miller pratically made Daredevil.

(Reply to this)

Related Links

Mark Steven Johnson

Related Articles

Most Discussed

Latest News

Latest Interviews

Latest Features

Sponsored Links