Charlie Cox’s Brutal Breakdown of Ben Affleck’s ‘Daredevil’ Explains Why The Movie Flopped

The 2003 ‘Daredevil’ film, starring Ben Affleck in the title role, has faced persistent criticism from fans and critics alike since its theatrical release.

The superhero blockbuster arrived during an era when the comic-book adaptation landscape looked vastly different from today’s slick, interconnected storytelling. Directed by Mark Steven Johnson, the film attempted to bring Marvel’s blind vigilante to the big screen with stylized action and early-2000s visual effects that included groundbreaking sonar-sense sequences created through CGI. Yet despite these ambitions, the movie has remained a cultural touchstone for superhero cinema misfires, a lesson in overreach and miscalibration.

Now, more than two decades after its release, the film continues to draw scrutiny from unexpected sources. Charlie Cox, who would go on to define the character for a generation through the acclaimed Netflix series ‘Daredevil’ beginning in 2015, did not see Ben Affleck’s version until after he was cast in the role.

The timing mattered, as it allowed Cox to approach the character with fresh eyes and a different creative vision. When he finally watched the 2003 film, Cox admitted he had watched it only once before deciding to forge his own path with the material.

During a recent panel appearance, Cox offered a surprisingly candid assessment of Affleck’s film that went beyond polite professional courtesy. Cox acknowledged that while Affleck delivers “a really good Matt Murdock,” the movie tried to do too much.

“I think what happened with that movie is two things: CGI was invented and the next day they were like, ‘Let’s make a movie with it.’ They were a little premature with the CGI, and they tried to get the entire Daredevil anthology into a two-hour movie. But there are moments in it that are iconic.”

His feelings toward the overall film were decidedly mixed. He then pivoted to a more critical take on the project’s fundamental construction. According to Cox’s analysis, “the movie tried to do too much, and it was a little tonally confused,” with the villain roster, Kingpin, Bullseye, Elektra, Karen Page, and Foggy Nelson, creating a sense of narrative saturation in just two hours. The sheer density of plot threads and characters created structural problems that the film’s runtime simply could not accommodate.

During his previous comments about the movie, Cox directly critiqued the iconic red suit itself, declaring bluntly that “the suit sucks.” The observation cuts deeper than mere aesthetic preference; costume design plays a crucial role in superhero storytelling, and the 2003 film’s rubber-heavy take on the outfit has aged poorly in the collective memory of fans.

Notably, Affleck himself has never defended the film, saying in 2015 that the movie “didn’t work at all” and attributing the era’s superhero struggles to a cynical approach to filmmaking.

The contrast between Affleck’s iteration and Cox’s take is now impossible to ignore. Cox’s Netflix series ran for three seasons and earned widespread critical acclaim for its grounded, noir-influenced approach to the character.

The practical fight choreography, intimate character work, and commitment to the source material’s darker tone created a radically different experience from the bombastic 2003 film. Cox’s frank critique of Affleck’s ‘Daredevil’ ultimately reveals less about the earlier film and more about how far superhero storytelling has evolved since then. What’s your take on the 2003 ‘Daredevil’ film, do you agree with Cox’s assessment?