The character of Daredevil is a favorite among Marvel fans worldwide. Currently, much of that love is driven by the version of the character played by Charlie Cox. While that take on the character first debuted in the standalone Daredevil series on Netflix in 2015, he has gone on to appear in a number of other projects, including The Defenders, Spider-Man: No Way Home and She-Hulk. He will finally be returning in his own series with Daredevil: Born Again, which is set to start streaming on Disney+ in the Spring of 2024. However, long before Cox began his run with the character, there was already an attempt to bring the Devil of Hell’s Kitchen to life on the big screen.

The Daredevil movie, directed by Mark Steven Johnson, was released in February 2003. It starred Ben Affleck in the lead role, with the supporting cast consisting of Jennifer Garner as Elektra, Michael Clarke Duncan as Kingpin, Colin Farrell as Bullseye, Jon Favreau as Foggy Nelson and Joe Pantoliano as Ben Urich. The film was an attempt to capitalize on the blossoming genre of comic-book movies. While the way was being led by the likes of Blade, the X-Men films, and Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man, there were all sorts of superhero movies being released with immensely varying results. The Affleck-led Daredevil film is a movie that fans have not been kind to over the years, but is all that hate actually warranted? Here’s how the film holds up nearly 20 years after its release.

The Reputation It Has

Daredevil with Ben Affleck
20th Century Fox

The early 2000s was an… interesting time for comic-book movies. The genre was just beginning to really explode in popularity, but there was still only a basic idea of what superhero movies could be. This was before the time of the Marvel Cinematic Universe and the widespread fusion of other tones and genres into the realm of superheroes. Looking back on the comic-book movies of that time, most of them were pretty straightforward action movies with fantastical characters at their centers. Daredevil is frequently considered to be one of the worst examples of this. It’s a film that is very much of its time.

Even with Ang Lee’s Hulk releasing the same year and Halle Berry’s Catwoman the next, 2003’s Daredevil has a reputation as one of the worst superhero movies of the 2000s (and potentially ever). This is for a number of reasons. One of the most apparent is the overall tone that the movie strikes. It’s very self-serious, which isn’t inherently a bad thing, but it’s a strange decision for a movie that features a fight-dance sequence in a park and Farrell’s Bullseye making bad puns and quips every chance he gets. While the movie does occasionally nail the kind of tone that Daredevil should have, with a brooding atmosphere and striking rain-soaked visuals, especially early on, as a whole, it’s considered to be a mixture of about every bad aspect of 2000s superhero cinema.

One of the most debated aspects of the film is the casting. The decision to cast Affleck as Daredevil is one that people are still torn on today. While he does shine in a few moments, there’s also a lot of poor dialogue that doesn’t really give him much to work with. At the time, he wasn’t known as the best dramatic actor around, and the release of Gigli in the same year didn’t help. Looking back on his performance now, it is somewhat interesting to see him play a character so similar to Batman, knowing that his career would eventually lead him to that caped crusader. As for the rest of the cast, Farrell is a cheese ball from start to finish and Garner is perfectly passable as Elektra. The one major positive standout, though, is Duncan as Kingpin. Though the film he’s in isn’t the best, that casting is one of the best comic-book castings of the last few decades.

Related: Ben Affleck's Appearances as Batman, Ranked

How It Has Aged

Colin Farrell as Bullseye in 2003's Daredevil
20th Century Fox

To say that Daredevil has aged poorly would be an understatement. Just about every aspect of this film is thoroughly a product of its time. Though the action sequences were praised at the time, most of them really do not hold up today. While the wirework is impressive in terms of how elaborate it is, it’s also very noticeable. When all of these characters are fighting and flipping and jumping all over the place, it’s not believable in the slightest. With the exception of Daredevil and Bullseye's fight on a church organ, there are really not any great or standout action sequences. It's mainly just a lot of punching, dodging and jumping without any real direction or momentum to the sequence.

As for the CGI, the same can be said. It's not good. While some of the poor effects can be forgiven simply because they are 20 years old at this point, there are other films of the same time in which the visual effects have held up very well. It’s clear why they needed so many digital effects for Daredevil, as many of the stunts were plainly too dangerous to actually attempt. However, it is incredibly distracting how lifeless the CGI doubles are when they get swapped in. With that said, one digital aspect of the movie that does hold up as a well-executed creative choice was the visualization of Daredevil’s sonar-hearing, especially during the sequences with rain. Those sequences, of which there are many, are consistently some of the best the film has to offer, whether it be the final fight with Kingpin or Daredevil seeing Elektra’s face for the first time.

Moving beyond that, there’s one part of this movie that has clearly aged the worst. That’s the soundtrack. The music in Daredevil is full to the brim of the kind of early 2000s alt-rock, hard rock, and nu-metal that is best left in the past. The soundtrack features music from the likes of Nickelback, Seether, Hoobastank, Paloalto, Finger Eleven and more. All the songs featured were debuting in the movie for the first time, though a few went on to be included on future records from the artists. The one real standout here, though, as a song that is still incredible, even though the 2003 vibes are overwhelming, is Evanescence’s “Bring Me to Life.” That’s right. The quintessential edgy teen song of the 2000s was first unleashed into the world through the Daredevil film. If that doesn’t earn the film a place in the history books, nothing will.

Related: MCU Daredevil: 10 Key Things to Know If You Haven't Seen the Netflix Series

Is It Worth Watching?

Ben Affleck's Daredevil fighting Michael Clarke Duncan's Kingpin / Wilson Fisk in 2003's Daredevil
20th Century Fox

Is the Daredevil movie from 2003 good? No. It is not. It was barely even passable at the time it was released, and it has only gotten worse with age. The performances are hard to watch; the fight sequences are cartoony, the soundtrack is atrocious, and the CGI is pretty bad (even for the early 2000s). When you wrap all of that up in a film with a tone as serious as this, the result is a movie that is just not going to impress anyone these days. However, that doesn’t necessarily mean you shouldn’t watch it. In fact, it could be argued that fans of the superhero and comic-book movie genre should watch this movie precisely because of all those reasons.

Seeing where the genre was only 20 years ago really puts a lot into perspective. It can really help you to appreciate the leaps and strides that have been made in the field over the last few decades. Even if Marvel’s 2022 output wasn’t the strongest, it’s still a long way away from the kind of superhero movies that were coming out in the early 2000s. Though Daredevil wasn't particularly well-received at the time it was released either, the movie did manage to do a lot to shape the genre for the rest of the decade as well. This is because, even though Daredevil never got a sequel, it did get a Garner-starring Elektra spin-off in 2005, also directed by Johnson. From there, Johnson also went on to direct both of the Nicolas Cage Ghost Rider films, released in 2007 and 2011. So while Daredevil never really spawned a series itself, it did have some long-standing effect on the superhero genre.

On top of all of that, it would be a lie to say that watching Daredevil isn’t fun. Yeah, it’s bad, but it’s the kind of bad that is consistently entertaining to watch. It’s certainly not a forgettable movie, and it deserves points for that. Nearly all the actors in it have gone on to much better and higher esteemed careers, which makes watching Daredevil a pretty wild ride in retrospect. Daredevil is certainly worth a watch at least once if you’re typically a fan of superhero fanfare. Buckle up, get the greasiest food you can, and prepare to revisit your edgy and emo teenage lifestyle.