Confirmed: Daredevil Revival Series For Disney + In The Works

[Albert1981]

Wow. What a surprisingly passionate and respectful debate this has turned out to be. So much fun with all these opinions. As I've said previously, the essence of Murdoch's stories are a passion for the law, helping mentally and physically disabled people, and his Catholicism (which acts as his moral compass). I don't enjoy brooding and moody superheroes. I don't want Matt to be like that. I would hate to have DD appear on screen 90 percent of the time at night (and often while it's raining). I just don't think the MCU (Feige's) is a suitable place for vigilantes to be a part of. And I think we're gonna see DD participate in massive CGI battles because that's kind of the MCU's "thing". I have already accepted that. Marvel Studios has made it REALLY clear that they prefer over-the-top action and I think Daredevil will be a part of that. And I don't actually believe anybody on this thread will "boycott" against Feige's Daredevil because the desire to see Murdock interact with other Marvel characters is simply too great!

[phonogram12]

Wow. What a surprisingly passionate and respectful debate this has turned out to be. So much fun with all these opinions. As I've said previously, the essence of Murdoch's stories are a passion for the law, helping mentally and physically disabled people, and his Catholicism (which acts as his moral compass). I don't enjoy brooding and moody superheroes. I don't want Matt to be like that. I would hate to have DD appear on screen 90 percent of the time at night (and often while it's raining). I just don't think the MCU (Feige's) is a suitable place for vigilantes to be a part of. And I think we're gonna see DD participate in massive CGI battles because that's kind of the MCU's "thing". I have already accepted that. Marvel Studios has made it REALLY clear that they prefer over-the-top action and I think Daredevil will be a part of that. And I don't actually believe anybody on this thread will "boycott" against Feige's Daredevil because the desire to see Murdock interact with other Marvel characters is simply too great!

I never said boycott. I just won't watch. It's like skipping a run on one of your favorite characters until a creative team comes aboard that you really like.

But like someone else said, it just sounds like you'd prefer they adapt someone else and you're trying to shoehorn what you like into DD, who clearly doesn't fit into the mold of something you enjoy so you're trying to turn him into something he isn't.

[the illustrious mr. kenway]

Luckily, they already have a built in Owl, they just have to introduce him. I gotta say, I've been impressed with how they've portrayed Stilt Man at least since Bendis. I'm dying for The Matador, personally.

Matador would be fun.

[Albert1981]

I never said boycott. I just won't watch. It's like skipping a run on one of your favorite characters until a creative team comes aboard that you really like.

But like someone else said, it just sounds like you'd prefer they adapt someone else and you're trying to shoehorn what you like into DD, who clearly doesn't fit into the mold of something you enjoy so you're trying to turn him into something he isn't.

I'll freely admit that I would like to see DD portrayed in a different and new way that fits into the overall tone of the broader MCU. There are some things that are important to maintain, which I listed before. But I'm more interested in DD interacting with other characters in the MCU. Magical, mythological, cosmic and tech-based characters. And I don't want Murdock battling just "gangs" and "criminals". And I definitely don't want him getting involved in NYC politics. I don't think Marvel Studios handled "street-level" stuff well in Hawkeye. I never felt Fisk, Echo, Eleanor Bishop, Kazi and the Tracksuit Mafia were threatening at all. A lot of them were just clowns to me. And they had to be because Disney Marvel makes family-friendly content. So that's why I think a new approach is needed. And a sound approach, to me, would be to tie Murdock more closely to Foggy and Stark Industries.

[phonogram12]

I'll freely admit that I would like to see DD portrayed in a different and new way that fits into the overall tone of the broader MCU. There are some things that are important to maintain, which I listed before. But I'm more interested in DD interacting with other characters in the MCU. Magical, mythological, cosmic and tech-based characters. And I don't want Murdock battling just "gangs" and "criminals". And I definitely don't want him getting involved in NYC politics. I don't think Marvel Studios handled "street-level" stuff well in Hawkeye. I never felt Fisk, Echo, Eleanor Bishop, Kazi and the Tracksuit Mafia were threatening at all. A lot of them were just clowns to me. And they had to be because Disney Marvel makes family-friendly content. So that's why I think a new approach is needed. And a sound approach, to me, would be to tie Murdock more closely to Foggy and Stark Industries.

I'd rather they not use DD at all then if they just portray him as an entirely different character. I mean, they literally just introduced Moon Knight. I don't see the point in having two in the MCU.

[phonogram12]

Matador would be fun.

Right? Tombstone and Hammerhead would be cool, too. And I'd like to see Jessica's reaction if they ever introduced the Purple Children.

[Albert1981]

I'd rather they not use DD at all then if they just portray him as an entirely different character. I mean, they literally just introduced Moon Knight. I don't see the point in having two in the MCU.

I often have trouble in determining if MK is a "street-level" character or a "magical" one. Spector felt more "mystical" to me in his series. We'll have to see how the MCU handles DD. I am a bit concerned Netflix fans will be mad at his portrayal. I feel the same way about Fox fans who will be upset by Deadpool's portrayal. DD and Wade Wilson are popular despite not having Disney's backing (remarkable achievements). People will be bound to be disappointed. I don't envy the writers of Deadpool 3 and Daredevil Season One on Disney Plus. I'm just happy more classic Marvel characters are joining Feige's PG MCU. As I said earlier, I don't think Marvel Studios does "street-level" well. And that's why I'm okay with Murdock doing some other things in Feige's MCU. Legal stuff. And I'm also concerned Marvel Studios is gonna oversaturate DD in the MCU because, in my opinion, Phase Four has been a bit shaky. They are well-aware of Charlie's and D'Onofrio's popularity and I'm worried they might go overboard with cameos. Phase Four has been FULL of cameos and it's starting to feel gimmicky to me (I personally think Disney is introducing too many characters too quickly without retiring older ones).

[Frontier]

I mean, Moon Knight didn't really fight any actual street crime in his show.

[Albert1981]

I mean, Moon Knight didn't really fight any actual street crime in his show.

That's true. His mercenary days were far behind him by the time his series started. I thought Moon Knight was basically the MCU's answer to Indiana Jones. It wasn't raw or edgy to me. It was a little bit discombobulating, but I felt it was pretty light-hearted for the most part (which I liked). I still think Disney/Marvel is hesitant to do dark and gritty storytelling in the MCU. They would NEVER portray vigilantism in even the slightest positive light. So characters taking the law into their own hands is absolutely out of the question. That's why I believe the Punisher is unlikely to ever show up in Feige's MCU (Frank is probably considered quite a bit more vicious in that regard than Matt). If Murdock is to be part of the MCU and if Castle is ever to join it, there is no doubt in my mind things would HAVE to be diluted. Watered down considerably. In the MCU, "heroes don't torture people." I have no desire for Murdock and his friends to go after corrupt institutions in New York City. Disney's audiences don't wanna see that kind of thing. There are other FAR less controversial stories (involving DD) that should be given more prominence in my view.

[Frontier]

That's true. His mercenary days were far behind him by the time his series started. I thought Moon Knight was basically the MCU's answer to Indiana Jones. It wasn't raw or edgy to me. It was a little bit discombobulating, but I felt it was pretty light-hearted for the most part (which I liked). I still think Disney/Marvel is hesitant to do dark and gritty storytelling in the MCU. They would NEVER portray vigilantism in even the slightest positive light. So characters taking the law into their own hands is absolutely out of the question. That's why I believe the Punisher is unlikely to ever show up in Feige's MCU (Frank is probably considered quite a bit more vicious in that regard than Matt). If Murdock is to be part of the MCU and if Castle is ever to join it, there is no doubt in my mind things would HAVE to be diluted. Watered down considerably. In the MCU, "heroes don't torture people." I have no desire for Murdock and his friends to go after corrupt institutions in New York City. Disney's audiences don't wanna see that kind of thing. There are other FAR less controversial stories (involving DD) that should be given more prominence in my view.

I mean, Ronin was basically the Punisher in all but name. They just had Clint move on and didn't really address the long-term consequences of it beyond Echo, but no one really took her grief against him seriously (Kate Bishop certainly didn't) and Clint got to go home to his family like it never happened.

I mean, even Kate Bishop seems like she's cool with killing people in the heat of the moment. She blew up a truck with people in it and just treated it like an awesome moment even though she probably just killed someone for the first time.

[Albert1981]

I mean, Ronin was basically the Punisher in all but name. They just had Clint move on and didn't really address the long-term consequences of it beyond Echo, but no one really took her grief against him seriously (Kate Bishop certainly didn't) and Clint got to go home to his family like it never happened.

I mean, even Kate Bishop seems like she's cool with killing people in the heat of the moment. She blew up a truck with people in it and just treated it like an awesome moment even though she probably just killed someone for the first time.

But Clint could use the good old "True Lies" justification. Ronin killed people, but "they were all bad." Echo's grief was very contrived and I think that actually is hurting her popularity a bit right now, unfortunately. Yelena and Nat were perfectly okay with causing an avalanche that killed probably dozens of Russian prison guards in Black Widow (and I don't think each of them were "all bad"). I think hurting/killing totally innocent civilians is different though. There are no long-term consequences in the MCU. I've come to accept that now.

[Frontier]

But Clint could use the good old "True Lies" justification. Ronin killed people, but "they were all bad." Echo's grief was very contrived and I think that actually is hurting her popularity a bit right now, unfortunately. Yelena and Nat were perfectly okay with causing an avalanche that killed probably dozens of Russian prison guards in Black Widow (and I don't think each of them were "all bad"). I think hurting/killing totally innocent civilians is different though. There are no long-term consequences in the MCU. I've come to accept that now.

"Bad" people have family too. like Echo's dad was a criminal but he loved and took care of his daughter. Is that invalidated because Clint felt like he was justified in playing judge, jury, and executioner because of his own loss? Causing that in someone else and never taking responsibility for it?

But the MCU has some messy and inconsistent moral ethics when you start to really think about it.

[Ultimate Captain America]

"Bad" people have family too. like Echo's dad was a criminal but he loved and took care of his daughter.

Oh, that reminds me of some other villain that was in the MCU recently

[Frontier]

Oh, that reminds me of some other villain that was in the MCU recently

Well, at least they take him to jail and don't unilaterally kill him .

[Albert1981]

"Bad" people have family too. like Echo's dad was a criminal but he loved and took care of his daughter. Is that invalidated because Clint felt like he was justified in playing judge, jury, and executioner because of his own loss? Causing that in someone else and never taking responsibility for it?

But the MCU has some messy and inconsistent moral ethics when you start to really think about it.

I think that's too much for the MCU to get into. Also reinforces my point about secret identities. "Bad guys" who have secret identities do not necessarily have their families protected by them. They engage in dangerous activities, so it's a given that the people they love will suffer if they are harmed.

Yes, I have a problem with DD hanging out in the "periphery" of the superhero community. I honestly don't understand why Batman, Spider-Man and Daredevil fans are so keen on distancing their faves from the rest of their universes. Interacting with people from outside of New York and Gotham makes them more interesting to me. I also think the MCU might tone down the "legal" aspect of Matt's character because She-Hulk is gonna be so involved in it. It's possible Disney might connect DD more with the mystical ninja stuff which is now pretty closely associated with Shang-Chi. That would be fun. And since Kingpin was so strong in Hawkeye, I think it might be necessary to provide Murdock with some Super Soldier Serum to make HIM stronger as well.