Earlier today, director Joe Carnahan tweeted out that things were going south on his Daredevil reboot for Fox. The studio is about to lose the rights to Daredevil when the deadline runs out for them in October and the rights go back to Marvel Studios.
From what Carnahan has been saying, the people over at Fox loved his ideas for the reboot, stating that his Daredevil “pitch was tremendous and everyone flipped for it,” but that “the clock ticked down at Fox, that’s why it went tits up.”
Understandably, Carnahan is disappointed that his vision for The Man Without Fear won’t be making it to the big screen, so for his Twitter followers, he debuted two videos tonight that he referred to as “sizzle pieces” that he created to capture the essense of what he had planned for his Daredevil film. You can watch them both here below.
Initially, reports were that Fox was trying hard to keep the rights for Daredevil and was even willing to give up The Silver Surfer and Galactus characters to Marvel for Daredevil, but soon after it came to light that Fox would sacrifice Daredevil to keep The Silver Surfer and Galactus.
These sizzle pieces are a pastiche of pop culture offerings, with scenes from New York-centric films like The Warriors played over the sounds of native son Robert De Niro, along with news reels, sports footage, and panels from the comic book, all of which blend perfectly to give the vibe of a 1970’s crime-ridden New York City, including Daredevil’s stomping grounds, Hell’s Kitchen. One video is PG-13 rated, while the other NC-17 and hence a bit more graphic.
Seeing this sizzle piece makes me – and many others I’m sure – really wish that Carnahan, who’s proven he knows how to do action with films like Smokin’ Aces, The A-Team, and The Grey, had been able to see his vision through with Daredevil.
Video
[Source: Joe Carnahan]
The Grey was awesome and Smokin’ Aces lived up to what the trailer promised. I would’ve loved to see his version of Daredevil hi the screen.
Comment by Jason Prugar — August 15, 2012 @ 9:38 am
Not really keen on Daredevil (overall, as a character) but these videos show some promise! Too bad Fox appears to be sacrificing Daredevil to keep Silver Surfer and Galactus though. Some of the better superhero movies started with lesser characters and low expectations but went on to become hugely popular! To me, between the two properties, Daredevil has the most upside from a solid sequel. Besides that, I feel like Fantastic Four 2 did all it could with Silver Surfer and would much rather see them reboot (or continue!) that franchise with better a villain than Galactus (same with Green Lantern…enough with these planet devouring masses of evil). Those are my 2 cents…
Comment by PAUL — August 15, 2012 @ 9:39 am
good that FOX is letting DD go otherwise they’d make a kiddie movie out of DD. let Marvel have DD back then let’s see if J.C can get his hands on it
Comment by Ej Liwag — August 15, 2012 @ 7:26 pm
As sizzle reels go very nice. Daredevil is by far my favorite Marvel character and looks like Carahan would have treated to source material with tons of respect, but very happy Marvel will now be getting it’s rights back, just hope they don’t bog it down to much in the shared universe, which is what made Ironman 2 just so so at best.
Comment by Ronald — August 19, 2012 @ 4:27 am
if he was going to shit on dare devil like he did A-team Im glad Fox is not making anymore DareDevil movies the last one still leaves a bad taste in my mouth
Comment by Foggy Nelson — August 23, 2012 @ 11:02 pm
Ryan goslin will make a good daredevil /Mart murdock
Comment by roberrt — August 25, 2012 @ 3:55 pm
You understan everything wrong, The Rights of Daredevil are returning to Dinsey, and Dinsey is trading Daredevil to Fox for Galactus and Silver Surfer, So they can use them in “Guardians of the Galaxy” upcoming film.
Comment by Alexander — August 27, 2012 @ 4:39 pm
How did I understand everything wrong? Fox decided to keep Silver Surfer and Galactus and Marvel denied Fox’s request for an extension on Daredevil license. Fourth paragraph in this article even says that Fox was going to sacrifice Daredevil to keep rights to the other two properties (“Fox would sacrifice Daredevil to keep The Silver Surfer and Galactus”) and a few articles on this site and around the Internet later confirmed the same thing. The rest of my comment was pure opinion. I am not a huge fan of Daredevil but still think these sizzle videos do show promise. Director definitely showed a unique perspective and sense of style. I still think a well produced Daredevil sequel has more potential (financial risk vs financial reward) than another Fantastic Four movie starring Silver Surfer or Galactus. I still think planet devouring masses of evil are stupid. Difficult to imagine a means of conquering something as insurmountable as a cosmic entity that eats planets. Kind of removes the human element from the story. Whether or not Marvel (Disney) trades Daredevil to Fox in order to get Galactus and Silver Surfer for the “Guardians of the Galaxy” movie remains to be seen. Those cosmic characters are a huge bargaining chip and I could understand why Disney would be compelled to push for Silver Surfer and Galactus but with Disney doing so well with feature film adaptions of the Marvel Universe, it’s hard to picture a scenario where they’d give up any additional characters to another studio at this point. Unless Fox really really wants Daredevil back, it’s hard to imagine why
they’d give up Silver Surfer in light of their pending reboot of
Fantastic Four.
Comment by PAUL — August 28, 2012 @ 10:13 am
This is exactly the type of superhero movie we need. A period piece set in NYC at the height of it’s crime ridden glory. I can’t think of a more believable comic book hero that is better suited for this type of film. Hollywood execs should REALLY give this a green light, if only for the nostalgia of the 1970’s. MAKE IT HAPPEN PEOPLE!
Comment by Dorian Graye — September 3, 2012 @ 11:19 am
It is a very good thing that Marvel is getting the rights to this character back.
Comment by Matt Rowan — September 4, 2012 @ 10:38 pm
I’m glad this DD movie wasn’t made. It’s not the way I want it to go (even though I would be 17 by the time it came out)
Comment by Robert Woldt — September 18, 2012 @ 5:47 pm
A reboot would be nice to see, I think it would turn out pretty much a hundred percent better than it was originally made.
Comment by Jerome Thorpe — September 24, 2012 @ 12:04 pm
No FOX, just no. DD should go back to Marvel, where it would do more good. Maybe Marvel can tie in DD with the Avengers 2 or something. Even though DD isn’t an Avenger, he could still make a cameo appearance as an ally. DD would not be the same without Ben Affleck and the late Michael Clarke Duncan. I don’t really care too much for Jennifer Garner, her movie sucked anyways.
Comment by Arturo Eduardo Boston — September 25, 2012 @ 8:21 pm
good that it has been canceled,now fox wont be able to fck another marvel hero again.
glad marvel will take the rights back and make daredevil their nolan version
Comment by alba — September 27, 2012 @ 11:30 pm
This isn’t even a preview its a combination of different movie trailers and parts of different movies there was even ninja assassin parts in there
Comment by Amaurik — September 29, 2012 @ 3:46 am
Really…..? Amaurik said…this isn’t even a real trailer. This has clips from Daredevil from 2003 and a bunch of other movies. This is fan made and it should be taken down.
Comment by Chronuss — October 10, 2012 @ 2:37 pm
i probably wouldn’t have been nearly as disappointed had i not watched this “trailer”… this would have undoubtedly been the most inventive and possibly best comic book movie we’ve see thus far…
Comment by John Gallimore — November 1, 2012 @ 8:05 pm
Daredevil’s a shit superhearo anyway.
Comment by hatassa — November 25, 2012 @ 4:32 pm
That’s why it is called a “Sizzle Reel”. Directors often make sizzle reels from clips of different movies to show the general overall theme they want to employ when they make their version of the movie.
It is a method used to get a movie financed generally.
Comment by TyrantBossFilms — November 27, 2012 @ 5:41 pm
… oh,
Comment by AJ2449 — November 29, 2012 @ 12:46 am
i think it’s a character that won’t sell. i wouldn’t green light a movie about him.
Comment by DiamondDNice — November 30, 2012 @ 4:57 am
I want a Spider-Man/DD team up, make ’em pals & confide in each other’s secret identities, just like they did in the comics!
Comment by Philip James — December 14, 2012 @ 8:25 pm
Did nobody notice how effing fake that was?
Comment by Nick Loscalzo — December 16, 2012 @ 9:50 pm
I want to see Quentin Tarantino direct a Heroes for Hire movie as a 70’s era grindhouse blaxploitation flick complete with epic soundtrack.
Comment by VoudeauxChild — January 30, 2013 @ 10:51 pm
My friend was auditioning for the titular role. I hope he does again when/if the title gets picked up again. It would be awesome for him to be on the big screen!
Comment by Hannah S. Black — March 8, 2013 @ 1:16 am
ditto.Worse superhero movie ever. Ben Affleck. stunk. Aremake is definitely in orderand they need to leave spidey alone. if you going to remake keep it authentic. Not some fool with a costume and no mary jane
Comment by Ken Warren — March 8, 2013 @ 1:22 pm
So the new Daredevil movie proposal is to steal pieces from everyone else’s vision of Daredevil and stir them together into a Frankenstein like monstrosity?
No wonder even Fox to decided to pass.
Comment by Robyn — March 10, 2013 @ 6:53 pm
I’m a believer that one good 15 second original gag will get you more money than all of the spliced together leftovers in the world.
Doesn’t have to be high tech or high cost, but people want to see that you can demonstrate some kind of vision, -before- they start putting money in the game.
Comment by Robyn — March 10, 2013 @ 6:58 pm
You seem to misunderstand the point of a sizzle reel. It’s not Carnahan literally stealing pieces from other flicks and “stirring them together into a Frankenstein-like monstrosity”. Its point is to use existing clips to display the general theme and feel that he envisions for the movie; it’s something directors often use to get financing from the studio. Once that happened, he would’ve made his own film, not actually use clips from others.
Comment by Gonad The Ballbarian — March 12, 2013 @ 7:58 pm
i dont think that I’d want to see Tarantino do H4H because it wouldnt cross over well and I’d like for them to leave a path for the New Avengers 1 day (hopefully). However I’d love to see this based is the 70s but it wouldnt jive with that timeline. Should be interesting to see what way it goes.
Comment by Wylie Dodson — May 5, 2013 @ 11:53 am