Whats the appeal of Daredevil ??(2/3)

I'm curious what the appeal of Daredevil is that the character would be adapted to big screen.

He doesn't have a big following like Spider-Man, Hulk, the FF, and Avengers does, or am I wrong?

The following is irrelevant - the audiences for comics are far too small to bother making a film simply to cash in on them. The point of licensing a comic book character is the belief that it'll appeal to a wider mainstream audience who don't read the comics. The success of the comic itself is irrelevant. Blade and Men In Black both did well as films, despite having very little success as comics.

Read some of Miller's Daredevil, and you will find your answer. Haven't really read much non-Miller Daredevil, so I wouldn't know.

Well I think firstly, and I may be really off base, he was probably relatively cheap to acquire. I also think that the idea of solo characters is a less work intensive endeavor. You have spiderman DD Hulk Black Panther Punisher and I think iron Man, in the works. And only one group comic Xmen. So I think it just is easier to control the continuity and flow of the movie.

He's got a respectable following. I'd say it might be bigger than the FF, and maybe the Avengers, but not Spider-Man, Hulk, or X-Men.

The main reason is that Mark Steven Johnson really, really wanted to make the movie. He'd been hounding Marvel so much for so long that they used a restraining order to keep him out of their offices. Then X-Men and Spider-Man hit, so they decided to allow him to make his movie.

Well, I'm not a big fan of DD, but I can see why he'd be considered a natural for film adaptation. It's because his adventures are much closer to what's considered 'mainstream' than, say, those of the Fantasic Four. Dark, tight action on the mean streets, martial arts, intrigue, crimebusting; this kinda stuff has a broader audience than overblown Kirbyesque sci-fi adventures. Not that a well-done FF movie wouldn't find an audience, but Daredevil's sort of story is closer to what non-comic-fan moviegoers know and like. Also, a DD movie has *got* to be cheaper(and thus more likely to at least break even) than an FF one. Like I say, I'm not a Daredevil fan, but everything I hear about the movie piques my curiousity. I'll probably get out to it and I'll keep an open mind...

I just read the interview with him in Jan's Wizard and I have to say that it sounded like he really has respect for the character and the story. Of course he did say that Ben Affleck can act, but such things are subjective.

His reason for Bullseye's scar makes sense, I'm not sure if I like it, but it makes sense. Oh yeah and the reason for the DD burning on the ground is that he loves The Crow and wanted to pay homage to it. I'll also be keen to see how many of the Easter Eggs I can pick up, you know like the last Bond movie.

I hear Frank Miller appears as a corpse. Have to keep an eye out for that.

Daredevil has had excellent writers at various points, including Miller, Smith, and Bendis, and I think has become one of their upper tier properties, but certainly not on the level of Spider-Man and the X-Men. They don't really care so much about how popular the comic is, anyway, they're more interested in recognizable characters in action settings, and Marvel properties are hot now that they are available.

Everything you say here is correct. Unfortunately, it seems, from all appearances, as though Hollywood has turned DD into one of its huge-budget low-quality blockbuster 'oooh-and-aaah' flicks anyway (which sort of chucks all of its natural advantages right out the window, and for no apparent reason).