Originally Posted by The Guard
I don't think it really matters if it were literature in their eyes or not. By definition...it was literature.
I also don't think that treating it like literature was what made the films special.
Well, we're talking about Oscar eligibility, and I was speaking to the argument of LOTR being a greater achievement because it was an adaptation of a beloved epic fantasy novel. My point was these films were adaptations too, but there was no specific rode map, there's an endless number of ways you can adapt Batman because there's so much variety in the comics and no way to pack 70 years of stories into a movie. And Batman himself is arguably one of the most beloved characters in all of fiction. So on that merit alone, it's a more creative endeavor than LOTR from a writing standpoint because the author is much more free to use artistic license and let their original ideas mingle with existing ones. The way these films were made (particularly TDK and TDKR) brought the inherent literary themes of Batman and to the forefront and got many people who had never taken Batman seriously to take it very
seriously. It presented the story in a way that both fans and non-fans could invest in and believe in. It got people discussing the films in a way that is unparalleled for the genre.
I wish The Dark Knight Returns
were required High School reading, but that's not the world we live in...yet. That's what I mean when I say literature, I'm talking classic literature.