• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Marvel/Netflix Daredevil Season 1


I explain it as later writers misunderstanding what the original writer intended. Like the way Spider-Man's spider-sense, which was originally just a heightened physical awareness of Spidey's environment letting him detect nearby movement, sense unstable surfaces, and the like, has been reinterpreted by later writers as an effectively psychic awareness of danger. Or like all the ways DD's radar sense has been interpreted, as discussed in that blog linked above. (In fact, reading those posts, I was struck by how much Lee's original description of the radar sense had in common with his original description of the spider-sense. Lee seemed to repeat himself a lot between Spidey and DD.)


If I'm not mistaken the "explanation" is that he can feel which light waves are being absorbed by the material and which ones are being reflected and is able to get the color from that. Which, yeah, sure.

Well, he might be able to detect a thermal difference between light and dark colors; a darker surface would absorb more light and thus be warmer. I doubt that would translate to color awareness, though.
 
I like to think his senses are more like heightened proprioception. All of the input he's getting end from sound waves, vibrations, air, etc. gives him an detailed "internal image" of his surroundings and perhaps beyond. It's not vision in the strictest sense in that he's not "seeing" anything but his awareness of everything around gives him a very accurate and detailed mental picture.

The "fiery glow" we see of "Night Nurse" is just an "artist's interpretation" of what he "sees." Because it's all but impossible to show an empty void where he's just aware of everything in and what's going on without any real visual clues.

Hopefully the show will avoid such silliness like being able to "feel" colors. Though, as Christopher said, one could make a slight argument of him having very, very acute sense of temperature to tell what the color is, colors higher on the spectrum being "hotter." (One of the ways ultraviolet light was discovered.) Simple knowledge of the visible-light end of the spectrum may allow for him to just "know" where the color lies.

He'd need to have a very, very, incredibly good sense of temperature as I doubt the temp difference from, say, red to orange is anything meaningful -tenths of a degree?- as well as a very, very good grasp of the temperature ranges of the visible light spectrum but I guess one could argue that it is "possible" in a very abstract sense where we accept that he can smell something several floors away without the air from the source having reached him yet.
 
I like to think his senses are more like heightened proprioception. All of the input he's getting end from sound waves, vibrations, air, etc. gives him an detailed "internal image" of his surroundings and perhaps beyond. It's not vision in the strictest sense in that he's not "seeing" anything but his awareness of everything around gives him a very accurate and detailed mental picture.

I'm not sure you're using that term correctly. Proprioception literally means "sensing oneself." It's your awareness of your own body's position and movement, how you know where your hands and feet are without looking. It's not about sensing your surroundings, it's about just the opposite.

Unless you're suggesting it as a variation on the Frank Miller description that it's "like touching everything at once." I.e. he's sensing his surroundings without looking in the same way we sense our bodies without looking, as though he feels the world around him as an extension of his body.
 
I like to think his senses are more like heightened proprioception. All of the input he's getting end from sound waves, vibrations, air, etc. gives him an detailed "internal image" of his surroundings and perhaps beyond. It's not vision in the strictest sense in that he's not "seeing" anything but his awareness of everything around gives him a very accurate and detailed mental picture.

I'm not sure you're using that term correctly. Proprioception literally means "sensing oneself." It's your awareness of your own body's position and movement, how you know where your hands and feet are without looking. It's not about sensing your surroundings, it's about just the opposite.

Unless you're suggesting it as a variation on the Frank Miller description that it's "like touching everything at once." I.e. he's sensing his surroundings without looking in the same way we sense our bodies without looking, as though he feels the world around him as an extension of his body.

Yeah, that's more or less what I was going for.
 
I finished the show yesterday, and it was great. It had a few rough spots, especially in the middle (and it took me a long time to warm up to Foggy, which wasn't helped when he became a emo jerk in in the last few episodes), but overall I think it was a great addition to the MCU. Kingpin might be the best villain in the3 MCU (or at least tied with Loki). I found myself, not exactly cheering for him, but still kind of wanting him to at least get away with Vanessa.

I do think that Daredevil got his butt kicked too often (it became almost a running joke that almost anyone more skilled than a random street thug would beat Matt half to death), but I still think the action was handled well. My only big complaint is the lighting. I know he's a blind guy who likes to fight at night, but as someone who isn't blind I'd have preferred to actually see what was going on. It wasn't usually a huge issue, but a few scenes (especially action scenes) got annoying because they were so in shadow it was hard to tell what was going on, and it wasn't dark because he turned the lights off or anything. I think they got a bit too excited to use fancy lighting, and didn't think about how it would work for a viewer. Still, al that said, I enjoyed Daredevil a lot, and I'm sure Season 2 will be great.
 
Yeah, lighting is an issue with this show. If you have a newer, flat-screen, TV the picture setting needs to be a more balanced or "standard" one. Older "tube" TVs, lighter brightness setting or something. It's a pain, but I had to do it as well to make the picture less dark. The "cinema" setting on my TV offers real good black-levels and vibrant colors. But the show was pretty damn dark in numerous scenes. There's an early scene in the office with Foggy and... damn, still can't remember her name? Jules? Heather? Fuck, I'm terrible with names. She's unpacking books or something and the room is DARK. She has a desk lamp on and it's barely doing anything. It's barely lighting her desk! And I'm just like, "They realzie *they* can see and need light, right?!"

So I adjusted the picture to more neutral/lighter setting and the scene looked more normal. The lighting was more consistent with an office, at night, with a dim desk lamps providing the light. But it just washes out the colors. :(

So I hope for S2 they don't make it so dark. I get that's sort of the aim of the character and tone of the show. I'm fine with neutral and dark colors as opposed to brighter or vibrant ones. That's just the tone/look of the show and the area of the city they're in. But dammit! They can still LIGHT the scenes!
 
Last edited:
There's an early scene in the office with Foggy and... damn, still can't remember her name? Jules? Heather? Fuck, I'm terrible with names. She's unpacking books or something and the room is DARK. She has a desk lamp on and it's barely doing anything. It's barely lighting her desk! And I'm just like, "They realzie *they* can see and need light, right?!"

:lol: I actually noticed the exact same thing during that scene, and I remember thinking "Why does she only have one small lamp on?". I do hope they improve it a bit in Season 2. I don't think it really ruined anything, but it was definitely noticeable enough to be a problem at times.
 
There's an early scene in the office with Foggy and... damn, still can't remember her name? Jules? Heather? Fuck, I'm terrible with names. She's unpacking books or something and the room is DARK. She has a desk lamp on and it's barely doing anything. It's barely lighting her desk! And I'm just like, "They realzie *they* can see and need light, right?!"

:lol: I actually noticed the exact same thing during that scene, and I remember thinking "Why does she only have one small lamp on?". I do hope they improve it a bit in Season 2. I don't think it really ruined anything, but it was definitely noticeable enough to be a problem at times.

I think it's to emphasize that they don't have a lot of money to go buy things like lamps.

I hope they get carpeting second season as well.
 
There's an early scene in the office with Foggy and... damn, still can't remember her name? Jules? Heather? Fuck, I'm terrible with names. She's unpacking books or something and the room is DARK. She has a desk lamp on and it's barely doing anything. It's barely lighting her desk! And I'm just like, "They realzie *they* can see and need light, right?!"

:lol: I actually noticed the exact same thing during that scene, and I remember thinking "Why does she only have one small lamp on?". I do hope they improve it a bit in Season 2. I don't think it really ruined anything, but it was definitely noticeable enough to be a problem at times.

I think it's to emphasize that they don't have a lot of money to go buy things like lamps.

I hope they get carpeting second season as well.

Maybe some drapes? Drapes help liven up any room.

Also, I could see the lighting being improved as both Fisk and Murdock emerge from the shadows to embrace their identities.
 
^ Faxes are really common in criminal law. I probably use one several times a week with faxing over continuance orders and the like.

I like their sparse little start-up office...it's got character.

Oh, I think it fit perfectly for this season, but I'd love to see them a bit more established next season and have the office evolve to reflect that.
 
^ Faxes are really common in criminal law. I probably use one several times a week with faxing over continuance orders and the like.

^The banks still use them quite heavily too, especially when it comes to exchanging day-to day paperwork with credit card companies, card terminal manufacturers and the like. There's a general sense that certain things will only get actioned or filed if there's a piece of paper saying so and that the same message as an email would disappear in an inbox.
 
It's frankly more work for me to scan something. Granted, it's better for me to scan it. It guarantees there's a record (as opposed to a fax where I have to remember to stick a piece of paper in a file) and there's less paper overall, but faxes are still pretty easy to do when the machine decides it wants to work properly.
 
I work in a bank and we fax stuff all the time. It is easier than scanning and emailing something.
 
Oh, I think it fit perfectly for this season, but I'd love to see them a bit more established next season and have the office evolve to reflect that.
I'd only like to see them grow in baby steps. Keep it a hand-in-mouth, nickel-and-dime, friendly neighborhood mom-and-pop law firm down on the corner.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top