Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns Animated - Part 1

[Franny]

Thank you' BH/HHH. Just wanted to know how closely they have followed the Batman/Joker confrontation? Do we get that brutality, that final sickening twist from the Joker? When I originally read Miller's story' thought that was so perfectly Joker.

[Franny]

Hey' just noticed I'm a first class Newbie! PROUD!

[BH/HHH]

Originally Posted by Franny

Thank you' BH/HHH. Just wanted to know how closely they have followed the Batman/Joker confrontation? Do we get that brutality, that final sickening twist from the Joker? When I originally read Miller's story' thought that was so perfectly Joker.

Welcome to the hype!

Spoiler!!! Click to Read!:

well it's been a while since I read the book but I actually think it was more fleshed out, then again I suppose it would be been animated lol but yep it's brutal lots if blood and that twisted sickening ending is there, Joker had to have the last laugh .

[FCEEVIPER]

Originally Posted by Franny

Hey' just noticed I'm a first class Newbie! PROUD!

Welcome aboard!

[DeGenerate10]

Holy hell Part 2 was absolutely amazing

[Crazymaverick]

I liked it much better than part 1 that's for sure!

Then again, I liked that part of the graphic novel better too. Maybe it was the more epic scope of the story or the fact that it had Superman in it.

Or maybe both!

[theMan-Bat]

Originally Posted by hellblazer103

just to continue on this line of thought : i decided to skim through TDKR and re-read some of joker's scenes just now and between that and all star batman , i'm convinced that frank miller either doesn't know how to write the joker or he just enjoys writing him to act the EXACT opposite of how the joker usually acts for the sake of irony.

frank miller's joker , however : good lord i have never seen a more depressed joker in my life. particularly in that intro in all star. no jokes, no wisecracks, no sense of manic behavior, just constantly moping around for no real reason, rather melancholy. a perfect example of the "sad clown " if i ever did see one. lol

this is all just a matter of opinion , though.

Sad and depressed? No. Cold and calculating? Yes. Frank Miller explained, "The Joker doesn't smile - not for a while anyway. And he's anything but a prankster - he's a purely evil figure."
"As I see it, there shouldn’t be anything funny about him. His name should be irony. The thing is, the Joker is a sociopath and psychopath, but I would rather play up his evilness rather than his craziness. The Joker that I’ve always tried to portray, he’s satanic. He’s not laughing all the time." - Frank Miller.
http://imbatman.tribe.net/thread/b55...1-3952af150226

The Joker as a more serious and coldly calculating evil killer who isn't laughing all the time goes back to the original Batman comics by Batman creators Bill Finger and Bob Kane. Frank Miller was actually going back to the Joker as Bill Finger and Bob Kane created the character. And the Joker actually had a sculpture of Satan in his home, as seen in Batman #4 (1940) "The Case of the Joker's Crime Circus."

As Bob Kane explained in Comics Interview #31 (1986): "This photograph of Veidt was the spiting image of the Joker. Not the caricature you see today that looks like a buffoon, like a clown -- that's not how I created the Joker. He was more serious when I created him and he didn't always laugh."

[Binker]

Part 2 was great, and I can't wait to finally buy both parts (I was holding off Part 1 until Part 2 comes out) and have the complete story. I should also point out that it's great they told this in two parts to adapt the entire story, but there is one other reason. If you think about it, and only readers would probably see this, DKR is a epic story, but it is in fact two stories of a larger epic narrative. You can see that when the first two issues tell one story, and the last two tell a different story with only certain plot elements shared between the major two. So yeah, there is another reason why it had to be, and why I'm happy it was, a two part adaptation.

BTW, one other thing Part 2 reminded me of was that we never knew and never will find out what events occured that led to the superheroes retiring 10 years prior to DKR. We have hints, sure, and the comic version adds more detail, but it's still vague. Was it a Watchmen-related reason, like the Keene Act, only not a bill but a forced retirement? Is the reason another Frank Miller "using his writing as criticism against [insert name here]"? What? And please, please, please, Please, PLEASE, Do Not Bring Up Reasons Why As Said in Dark Knight Strikes Again. Which, I hope they DO NOT adapt.

Anyway, Dark Knight Returns! Can't wait for Superman: Unbound, coming up next.

[Smallville13]

Originally Posted by theMan-Bat

Sad and depressed? No. Cold and calculating? Yes. Frank Miller explained, "The Joker doesn't smile - not for a while anyway. And he's anything but a prankster - he's a purely evil figure."
"As I see it, there shouldn’t be anything funny about him. His name should be irony. The thing is, the Joker is a sociopath and psychopath, but I would rather play up his evilness rather than his craziness. The Joker that I’ve always tried to portray, he’s satanic. He’s not laughing all the time." - Frank Miller.
http://imbatman.tribe.net/thread/b55...1-3952af150226

The Joker as a more serious and coldly calculating evil killer who isn't laughing all the time goes back to the original Batman comics by Batman creators Bill Finger and Bob Kane. Frank Miller was actually going back to the Joker as Bill Finger and Bob Kane created the character. And the Joker actually had a sculpture of Satan in his home, as seen in Batman #4 (1940) "The Case of the Joker's Crime Circus."

Spoiler!!! Click to Read!:

As Bob Kane explained in Comics Interview #31 (1986): "This photograph of Veidt was the spiting image of the Joker. Not the caricature you see today that looks like a buffoon, like a clown -- that's not how I created the Joker. He was more serious when I created him and he didn't always laugh."

That was a really great read. Thanks for that. Even Kane seems to give Bill Finger his due, why do we not see 'Batman created by Bill Finger & Bob Kane' again?

Oh and as for TDKSA I must admit there was a few times watching Part 2 of this where I started hoping they would do the sequel too. I say go for it! I'd love to see the free-form colors and layouts in that adapted to animation.

[Kane52630]

Saw it last night and holy crap it was incredible. I saw part I again before I saw II and it made the experience even more awesome. The carnival part was almost more horrifying than the book.

[hellblazer103]

Originally Posted by theMan-Bat

Sad and depressed? No. Cold and calculating? Yes. Frank Miller explained, "The Joker doesn't smile - not for a while anyway. And he's anything but a prankster - he's a purely evil figure."
"As I see it, there shouldn’t be anything funny about him. His name should be irony. The thing is, the Joker is a sociopath and psychopath, but I would rather play up his evilness rather than his craziness. The Joker that I’ve always tried to portray, he’s satanic. He’s not laughing all the time." - Frank Miller.
http://imbatman.tribe.net/thread/b55...1-3952af150226

The Joker as a more serious and coldly calculating evil killer who isn't laughing all the time goes back to the original Batman comics by Batman creators Bill Finger and Bob Kane. Frank Miller was actually going back to the Joker as Bill Finger and Bob Kane created the character. And the Joker actually had a sculpture of Satan in his home, as seen in Batman #4 (1940) "The Case of the Joker's Crime Circus."

As Bob Kane explained in Comics Interview #31 (1986): "This photograph of Veidt was the spiting image of the Joker. Not the caricature you see today that looks like a buffoon, like a clown -- that's not how I created the Joker. He was more serious when I created him and he didn't always laugh."

mkay, you win. lol


i tend to forget about how serious kane and finger's joker originally was. it's just that the character's evolved so much over the years you tend to forget how he was conceived originally. almost like how it's almost a sin to have batman kill anyone nowadays, when back in kane/finger days he'd be killing someone off at the end of every issue ( until, funny enough, joker came along )

so looking at it from that perspective, i guess i can have a bit more appreciation for how miller writes the joker.

[Number 6]

*SPOILERS MAYBE>>>*

Watched Part 1 and 2 back to back early today. Pretty good. I haven't read the comic in a long time, so I'm sure on the little details, but it seems pretty accurate from what I remember. Got a bit bored in the first part, but the second part picked it all up. I was surprised when Reagan and the Russian stuff showed up. I don't remember their being any indication this was set in that time period in Part 1, and I figured they'd alter that in some way to make it more relevant. That was probably an instant when I thought painstaking detail to the source probably wasn't a particularly good thing. The stuff with the Joker was fantastic. The stuff with Superman...eh. I was never a particular fan of that part of the comic myself. Never cared much for Superman's role. I get what Miller was going for, and it was effective in execution, I just personally don't care for it.

It was fun enough. I'll have to go back and read the comic. It's been a long time.

[TheCaptain22555]

I never quite knew Joker's origins, but loved how Miller depicted him in TDKR...thanks for the attached article though. Great read! Very chilling.

[BH/HHH]

Interesting stuff once again Man Bat. By the way you have a great Henry if the comic and is been a little while since I read it do tell me does Superman say to Batman "is not our world it's theirs"? I really can't remember

[Demon Hunter]

Guys what did you think of Michael Emerson's performance as the Joker? I thought he was super good... it reminded me how sick and creepy he was as Ben in Lost.

[BH/HHH]

Originally Posted by Demon Hunter

Guys what did you think of Michael Emerson's performance as the Joker? I thought he was super good... it reminded me how sick and creepy he was as Ben in Lost.

Yeah really really good

But I thought Mark Valley stole the film

[theMan-Bat]

Originally Posted by BH/HHH

Interesting stuff once again Man Bat. By the way you have a great Henry if the comic and is been a little while since I read it do tell me does Superman say to Batman "is not our world it's theirs"? I really can't remember

He doesn't say that during his talk with Bruce in the book, he's interrupted upon hearing the presidents' televised address with his super-hearing, and leaves, but that is Superman's basic philosophy that it's the superheroes responsibility to serve the people, work with them and abide by the laws of their world, rather than to rule above them. Superman wants to be trusted, not feared, unlike Bruce. In the book we learn Superman's point of view in Superman's inner monologues, "The rest of us learned to cope. The rest of us recognized the danger--of the endless envy of those not blessed. Diana went back to her people. Hal went to the stars. But you, Bruce--you, with your wild obsession. I gave them my obedience. Mother Earth--you're adopted son will honor you."

[TheWiseGuy487]

Concerning the Conrad Veidt inspiration for the Joker, if you look at illustrations of the Joker in The Dark Knight Returns, he looks almost like an exact illustration of Veidt, just with green hair and white skin.

Originally Posted by BH/HHH

Yeah really really good

But I thought Mark Valley stole the film

Mark Valley's performance really reminded me of Tim Daly and George Newbern. He had this softspoken quality to him that those two did. I suppose that's why he was chosen to voice Supes in the first place.

[Kane52630]

Does anyone know if they will release the soundtrack?

[jacobed]

I loved both these parts but at times they're hard to watch, they just reek of the eighties

[Visceral]

Originally Posted by jacobed

I loved both these parts but at times they're hard to watch, they just reek of the eighties

besides the mutant speak and reagan, I don't know what. I can see how much this inspired both TDK and TDKR and I find the book is still very relevant.

[flickchick85]

Originally Posted by Kane52630

Does anyone know if they will release the soundtrack?

Christopher Drake tweeted a couple months ago that he hadn't gotten a greenlight on a TDKR score release, but yesterday someone tweeted at him, "Please tell me Dark Knight Returns is getting a score released." And he tweeted back, "Sure... The Dark Knight Returns is getting a score released." Now, whether or not he was just being snarky is anyone's guess, but I have hope...hinging on however well Part 2 does.

Speaking of how well they do, I was just looking at the Wiki entry for these movies to see how they've been selling, and I noticed they're not documenting Blu-ray sales at all, which is a shame since the more recent releases have been much bigger on Blu-Ray than DVD. For example, it was reported that TDKR Part 1 grossed over $1.5 million in Blu-ray sales its first week, which is still more than its made its entire run in DVD sales. Anybody know if there's a place online to see the Blu-ray numbers?

[shauner111]

The score is friggin amazing.

At one point in Part 2 there was a theme that sounded like Magneto's theme in First Class (ill have to watch it again tho to make sure my ears werent playing tricks).

But i loved Part 2. I think i enjoyed Part 1 more overall, but that whole Joker-Batman bit was my favourite thing of the two parts. Chilling stuff. Michael Emerson was great.

[georgec]

I liked Part 2 more than Part 1. And for some reason I didn't mind Peter Weller as much in Part 2.

[BH/HHH]

Originally Posted by theMan-Bat

He doesn't say that during his talk with Bruce in the book, he's interrupted upon hearing the presidents' televised address with his super-hearing, and leaves, but that is Superman's basic philosophy that it's the superheroes responsibility to serve the people, work with them and abide by the laws of their world, rather than to rule above them. Superman wants to be trusted, not feared, unlike Bruce. In the book we learn Superman's point of view in Superman's inner monologues, "The rest of us learned to cope. The rest of us recognized the danger--of the endless envy of those not blessed. Diana went back to her people. Hal went to the stars. But you, Bruce--you, with your wild obsession. I gave them my obedience. Mother Earth--you're adopted son will honor you."

Thanks