Dark Knight Returns: Looking Back

[kpenguin]

So, I re-read Dark Knight Returns after finishing Batman: Year One for the first time and I must say... I'm not impressed. I used to be, but not any longer.

The first thing is that the artwork is just... blech. I realize that visual appearance should be one of the last things you should rate a story on, but when it comes to comics, the art is key. DKR just falls flat in that department.

Its not that the writing is a whole lot better either. Miller did a great job of bringing back Batman's street cred, I'm sure, but the darker and edgier thing just doesn't resonate with me like it did the first time I read it. This Batman just seems so... over-the-top, like Adam West Batman but in the opposite direction. I especially hate the line "Rubber Bullets. Honest." Geez, does it really matter? My vision of Batman hesistates when pick up futuristic laser gun, much less a more realistic gun that happens to shooting rounds that are *maybe* harmless.

Also: Superman. I like Superman. I've always liked Superman. I understand why its "cool" to hate him, but I've always disagreed with that sentiment. Whatever failings Supes has, however, they're totally blown out of proportion here. I cannot, for the life of me, see Supes as being a lackey of the US government. If anything, I can see Supes swinging the other way, overthrowing the establishment to make his own, more enlighntened reign. I realize this is a Batman story, but why assassinate Superman's character so? Kingdom Come does much better at depicting a Superman gone wrong.

There's more, but I'm tired. What do you guys think?

[MeklorIlavator]

If I remember correctly, Supes is(spoilers) a lackey because Luther/Braniac managed to steal Kandor, and if Superman disobey's they will destroy it. Makes a bit more sense, but I understand your grievance.

[kpenguin]

If I remember correctly, Supes is(spoilers) a lackey because Luther/Braniac managed to steal Kandor, and if Superman disobey's they will destroy it. Makes a bit more sense, but I understand your grievance.

Wow... I assume that occurs in the Dark Knight Strikes Back, which I have been warned against reading. If that is true.... wow.... just... wow.

[Starscream]

Ah, DKR. Back before the testosterone fumes from the set of 300 made Miller's brain go soft and he created All Star Batman and Robin. Back when you could describe him as a writer without using quotation fingers. Back before The Spirit. I miss those days.

In all seriousness, DKR is overrated, but anything rated that highly is bound to be. So many people have praised it over the years that nothing could live up to the hype.

But yeah, the art is ugly, Superman is a twit, Batman is a jerk, and Robin is...let's not even talk about Carrie Kelly. People tend to credit DKR with returning Batman to his darker roots, but the real credit there should go to O'Neil and Adams, who started the trend over a decade previously. Miller just cranked their style up to eleven.

Still, it was the phenomenal success of this book that convinced the editors that comics could stand to grow up a bit. Series like Sandman would never have happened without it. Miller would never have gone on to write Sin City or Batman Year One (which does stand up to the hype, and created the definitive interpretation of the character). Sure, it also led to the "Grim and Gritty 90s", and its poster boy Rob Liefeld, but you have to take the good with the bad.

I don't think it's a masterpiece, but it opened to door for a lot of real masterpieces. Sort of how the Blade movie can be credited with starting the current superhero film craze, which has included both some great films and some total garbage. I don't love it but I'm glad it exists.

And yes, the sequel is just plain silliness (though it's intended to be. Miller considered it a satire of Kingdom Come).

[kpenguin]

Did Miller have something against Kingdom Come for rebutting the Dark Age he helped create or was it more of an affectionate parody?

[Starscream]

I don't think he had anything against it, exactly, but he didn't really agree with it.

Kingdom Come features aged versions of the DC heroes facing off against a younger generation which is much more violent and grim than they are. Although it is satirical, it is also very optimistic and bright.

Dark Knight Strikes Again is much more cynical. The heroes themselves have all become darker and more violent, and the feel of the series is much more depressing. It's sort of the opposite extreme.

Then again, DK2 is pretty obviously intended to be funny. I don't think it succeeded very often, but I doubt Miller intended it to be taken seriously as a rebuttal.

[Piedmon_Sama]

Honestly there's no "mode" I prefer.... Brian Michael Bendis' Avengers series are pretty gritty, focusing on the less powerful heroes and their struggles, working politics into the plot and stuff. Then if you look back at Buziek and Perez's run, it's all a love-letter to the Silver Age-era madness from the Avengers' back-closet. One isn't "better" than the other, they're both quite entertaining and generally keep true to the characters (well, I could go on all day about how Bendis doesn't "get" Wolverine but I won't. >> )

[Closet_Skeleton]

Comic books? I just thank Darkhorse for publishing stuff that doesn't involve men in tights.

I didn't like Dark Knight Returns much but at least I found it finishable unlike Watchmen. At least stuff happens in it.

I think my favourite part of DKR was the two-face bit. Commisioner Gordon and Green Arrow were cool in it as well.

[Hzurr]

I agree that DKR is not as good on subsequent readings (as opposed to Watchmen, which gets better every time I read it @Closet_Skeleton
Watchmen is tough to get through the first time. I think I was halfway forcing myself the first time I read it all the way through, but then I got to the ending, and I was completely blown away with how amazing it was. When I re-read it, the parts I had previously thought to be boring, I suddenly understood, and I started recognizing some of the symbolism and foreshadowing and character development that I had completely missed the first time through

There are a few good parts in DKR which really makes it fantastic, but a lot of the stuff in the middle is a bit crap. The more of Frank Miller's version of Batman I read, the more I realize how much I hate it (seriously, go read all-star batman and robin. It's horrible, and it makes Batman a horrible person). The moment where I finally got fed up with DKR was the part in the 3rd chapter, I believe where Batman shoots someone. He's trying to rescue a kid who got kidnapped by some mutants, and after he takes out a few of them, one pulls out a gun and points it at the child, and keeps threatening to shoot it, so Batman kills the mutant. With a gun. SO STUPID! It completely ruins the entire mythos, and destroys the significance of what the Joker did at the end of book 4.

That being said, the final confrontation between Batman and the joker is pretty good, because I can completely see the Joker doing what he did. (Although I hear that they ruined this in DKSA (which I haven't read). The Superman issue is kind of neat, and It's always fun to see Batman trash Superman, but at this point it's happened so many times, that it's not as significant as it was the first time I read it.

And...those are my thoughts.

Other thoughts on Frank Miller:
He is definitely over-rated. His work on Daredevil wasn't as groundbreaking as everyone says; 300 was...ok, but the movie version was better; He is unable to write a strong female character who is not also a prostitute (that one really bugs me); Batman Year One is...not bad, but it still suffers from the previously mentioned "Strong Women" issue; All-Star Batman and Robin is... a joke, and an insult to every character who appears in it.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Why exactly does Miller do that with female characters? You can have strong women without having them be ladies of the evening. Just because a woman doesn't dress trashy and sell herself on the street doesn't mean she's weak!

[Southern Cross]

Perhaps Miller can't write any other female character type?

[Closet_Skeleton]

Perhaps Miller can't write any other female character type?

I liked girl!robin and she was just a normal kid.

[Starscream]

This Shortpacked strip pretty much says it all:

http://www.shortpacked.com/comics/20060207whores.png

The guy has woman issues, that's for certain. He even made Catwoman a hooker. The canonocity of that is hotly debated to this day.

If you are looking for a writer who portrayed the early years of Batman well, I'd recommend Jeph Loeb. Both The Long Halloween and its sequel Dark Victory are awesome (and had a big impact on the current movie series). The art by Time Sale may not be for everyone (it's highly stylized) but I think it complements the noirish feel of the stories.

[WitchSlayer]

I read DKR recently, I say I enjoyed it due to some of the over-the-topness. Superman didn't seem THAT bad in DKR as he did in the later things Frank Miller wrote, and Frank sure did know how to draw a manly Clark. Also I feel that in DKR, Clark and Bruce are still friends, but there's some things ahead of their friendship that they just have to do. However, with DKSA and, even worse, ASBAR, Superman seems to catch a lot of Frank's hate.