The Dark Knight Returns

[The Leaguer]

Looks like a murderer to me.

 

[Cobblepot]

Don't look at it, read it!

 

[The Leaguer]

Reads like a murderer to me.

 

[Cobblepot]

Sure, my little Monkeywrench...

 

[Tojo]

Damn, Batman was a harsh guy back in the day.

He doesn't really give a damn neither lol.

 

[Tojo]

Reads like a murderer to me.

No, no he doesn't.

 

[hippie_hunter]

He doesn't read like a murderer in that scene. He contemplates killing the mutant, just like he has contemplated on killing the Joker. But he decides against it. Though Alfred suggesting that Batman should use the weapons is a little unnerving.

 

[Cobblepot]

Alfred has always been wiser than Bruce...

 

[silentflute]

Reads like a murderer to me.

That's cuz you're 'special'.

 

[The Leaguer]

No, you're the special one, because you couldn't tell I was kidding. Poor silentflute. You try so hard and you keep kicking your own ass.

 

[silentflute]

Finger and Kane's Batman did not do it all the time and they dropped that angle right away.

And where has Miller done it all the time ?At least with Miller, it was a last resort as opposed to "oh well"


Loeb's Batman was going to kill the Joker after all the evil he has done, but decided not to and realised that he was wrong. He was not going to let Superman kill Luthor, he was manipulating Superman into not doing it and scaring Lex.

Yeah you go on and believe that.Don't forget the faeries and elves.

 

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

Grant Morrison has elements of Son of the Demon in continuity. But to what extent isn't known yet. The story is bound to get redone to solve the issue of how much of Son of the Demon is back into continuity.

True...but G.Morrison brought it back into continuity so that his Son of Batman character Damion had a leg to stand as far as continuity go's........however his Damion could not be the same son that Batman concieved in Son of the demon...if we are going to beleave Talia's story of when it happend.The two storys dont match up.
I also hate it when they take elements from a story and bring it into continuity and not the hole story.

 

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

Don't look at it, read it!

I think the real issue hear is that what was writen in these's panels contradict's what was written in just a few panel's before when Batman opens fire on the gang of mutant's.....he say's and I quote........
Rubber Bullet's....Honest.

 

[silentflute]

They dropped the killing angle in Finger's and Kane's stories right away and are no longer in continuity (even in the New Earth that pretty much put everything in continuity). Batman did not kill in the only story that Miller did in-continuity (Year One).

Miller doesn't do stories in "in continuity".He works within the realm of HIS own Batman universe.

You need to be slapped for being so damn stupid.

Aww did I hurt you're feelings?



The Long Halloween, the Killing Joke, Dark Victory, No Man's Land, etc. are often considered to be the best and/or biggest Batman stories.

Not by me.And not by others either....so wake up and realize that just beacuse they are you're favorites, doesn't mean they are anyway near the best.


No they are not. Starting fresh is a complete do over where nothing in the past has ever taken place. Like Batman Begins. A revamp is fixing a few things here and there.

Same difference at the end of the day.They did the same thing with YEAR ONE.Just beacuse they didn't start Batman at #1 again doesn't mean it's not the same thing.


Like how Frank Miller doesn't get Batman

Without Frank Miller's Batman none of the crap writers and artists you like would have done those stories you love.


Pathetic now that you're using my parents to insult me. Are you really that desperate?

No, I'm just pointing out what you need to know.

Run, that's all I got to say. Nightwing is a very popular character.

I don't run unless I'm exercising.Nightwing is a crap character.No need for him.


No, you're just acting like a fanboy.

No, that would be you.


Yes.

Figures.

 

[silentflute]

You don't give a **** about continuity because it doesn't agree on your version of Batman.

I don't give a **** about continuity cuz it's pointless.Especially after 60 years.A good writer will always be more important than continuity.

That's because you can't find any.

I can find plenty.


Kane and Finger dropped that angle very quickly in Batman's development as a character and it was completely forgotten about.

Oh so it's ok for you to dismiss that continyuity according to what you prefer?Pathetic.

And New Earth's continuity does not include the Golden Age Batman. Golden Age Batman's continuity is in Earth-2, where they too pretty much forgotten about the killing angle.

I don't care about the Earth 1 -2 bull****. Bottom line:in the history of the character he HAS killed.And in a much more ruthless mannner then in Miller's stories.

 

[Infinity9999x]

You don't give a **** about continuity because it doesn't agree on your version of Batman.

I don't give a **** about continuity cuz it's pointless.Especially after 60 years.A good writer will always be more important than continuity.

That's because you can't find any.

I can find plenty.


Kane and Finger dropped that angle very quickly in Batman's development as a character and it was completely forgotten about.

Oh so it's ok for you to dismiss that continyuity according to what you prefer?Pathetic.

And New Earth's continuity does not include the Golden Age Batman. Golden Age Batman's continuity is in Earth-2, where they too pretty much forgotten about the killing angle.

I don't care about the Earth 1 -2 bull****. Bottom line:in the history of the character he HAS killed.And in a much more ruthless mannner then in Miller's stories.

For one, he's not dismissing the continuity of the Golden age. We all know Batman killed in the Golden age, but you know what? That's not the same Batman that we have now. The Batman that killed ended up marrying Catwoman, had a daughter who became the Huntress, and ended up dying while protecting the city. So the Batman that did kill has been dead for a while.

The Batman we have now does not kill, that is unless of course you can find an example of where he did so. The best is the Son of the Deamon one, but that one's sketchy because no one knows how much of continuity it is.

And, if you want to dismiss continuity, then not only has Batman killed, Batman has worn rainbow colored batsuits, was associated with the Bat-myte, and was tempted to go swimming with Robin and Superman in a spring full of young boys.

So yes, Batman has killed, in his past. Character's change, that's just how things work. Superman used to not be able to fly, but he flies now. Batman did kill, but he's been against it for a good many years now. Heck even in DKR, Batman says he drew a line against killing "thirty years ago." And at no point in DKR does it ever show Batman to clearly kill anybody.

You started out saying that Batman would kill, the fact is your wrong. Today's Batman will not kill. If you said yesterday's Batman will kill, well then, that would be fine, because he did.

And, like I stated in a post earlier, if you find an example of the recent Batman willing to kill someone, and actually do it, then I'll gracefully accept I was wrong.

 

[hippie_hunter]

And where has Miller done it all the time ?At least with Miller, it was a last resort as opposed to "oh well"

I wasn't debating on Miller's Batman killing. You said that Batman [in general] is willing to kill. Batman does not kill.

Yeah you go on and believe that.Don't forget the faeries and elves.

 

[hippie_hunter]

True...but G.Morrison brought it back into continuity so that his Son of Batman character Damion had a leg to stand as far as continuity go's........however his Damion could not be the same son that Batman concieved in Son of the demon...if we are going to beleave Talia's story of when it happend.The two storys dont match up.
I also hate it when they take elements from a story and bring it into continuity and not the hole story.

I know. Like I said, the story is bound to get redone again to fill in the holes.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Miller doesn't do stories in "in continuity".He works within the realm of HIS own Batman universe.

Year One is in both the New Earth continuity and Frank Miller's continuity. I was using Year One as proof that Batman doesn't kill. Even Miller's Batman in Year One respects life.

Aww did I hurt you're feelings?

For some reason I don't remember typing that

Not by me.And not by others either....so wake up and realize that just beacuse they are you're favorites, doesn't mean they are anyway near the best.

Ask most people who read Batman extensively on what their favorite stories are. They are most likely going to say The Long Halloween, Dark Victory, The Killing Joke, The Dark Knight Returns, etc. Hell, The Long Halloween is getting an Absolute Edition just like The Dark Knight Returns because it is so respected. Absolute Editions are often given to what are considered to be great stories like The Dark Knight Returns, Crisis on Infinite Earths, the Watchment, New Frontier, and Kingdom Come.

Same difference at the end of the day.They did the same thing with YEAR ONE.Just beacuse they didn't start Batman at #1 again doesn't mean it's not the same thing.

The Crisis of Infinite Earths did not completely restart the continuity of the DC Universe. It made it more streamlined and revamped it into a combination of the continuities of Earth-1, Earth-2, Earth-4, Earth-S, and Earth-X. Wonder Woman's, Superman's, Power Girl's, Donna Troy's, and others histories were basically restarted. Batman's, the Flash's, Green Arrow's histories from Earth-1 were pretty much the same. Year One was a mere update and revamp of Batman's origin.

Without Frank Miller's Batman none of the crap writers and artists you like would have done those stories you love.

You give Frank Miller way too much credit.

No, I'm just pointing out what you need to know.

No you're acting like a jackass little kid who's crying because he's losing an arguement.

I don't run unless I'm exercising.Nightwing is a crap character.No need for him.

Nightwing is not a crap character. He is a sign of character progression of someone who can move beyond Batman.

No, that would be you.

And just how am I acting like a fanboy? For having knowledge in DC continuity. That is not fanboyism, that's being a comic book nerd.

 

[hippie_hunter]

I don't give a **** about continuity cuz it's pointless.Especially after 60 years.A good writer will always be more important than continuity.

Just why is continuity pointless? Give me a reason. DC is doing a great job with it's continuity considering that their stories have been around for over 75 years.

I can find plenty.

Don't say that you can find plenty. Show me.

Oh so it's ok for you to dismiss that continyuity according to what you prefer?Pathetic.

I'm not dismissing that continuity, DC dismissed it. After the editorial mandate that got rid of Batman killing, it never happened again. It wasn't even brought up.

I don't care about the Earth 1 -2 bull****. Bottom line:in the history of the character he HAS killed.And in a much more ruthless mannner then in Miller's stories.

In the history of the character, yes he has. Superman even killed in his early stories. But in modern continuity, BATMAN HAS NEVER KILLED. Batman is one of the few major heroes in the DC Universe that has not killed and is not willing to kill at all. You can't use something from 70 years ago that has been completely disregarded as proof that the modern Batman is willing to kill.

 

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

You give Frank Miller way too much credit.

I dont think its posible to give Miller enough credit for his work on TDKR or year 1.The rest of his work on Batman is an other story all together though.

 

[hippie_hunter]

I dont think its posible to give Miller enough credit for his work on TDKR or year 1.The rest of his work on Batman is an other story all together though.

He practically gives all credit to Miller on the development of the modern Batman. Loeb, Morrison, Rucka, Brubaker, Moore, and Meltzer deserve some credit also.

 

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

He practically gives all credit to Miller on the development of the modern Batman. Loeb, Morrison, Rucka, Brubaker, Moore, and Meltzer deserve some credit also.

Not to defend him.[silentflute] ....but I kind of see his point here.The fact is Miller pushed the character of Batman to new limits that had not been reached for a long time.For me[and a lot of other Batman readers]the Batman comic's were in a bit of a slump before TDKR came out.Even 20/20 did a story on their show back then on comic book's and their fanship.They spotlighted on how Marvel was at the time steeling the thunder of mainstays like Batman & Superman.
When Miller's TDKR was released it brought back long time fans back to Batman and to DC comic's myself included.The way I see it Batman has had a lot of up's and down's when it come's to his popularity and it go's a littlt somting like this.....1940's to 1950's golden age [earth 2] forgive us for the Adem West campy 196o's dreadfull years[if I'm right] The The O'Neil/Adams years starting in 1970 with great art and storys but things started to go flat for Batman again around 1979 and by the time that Crisses came almost every body I knew was saying that they didnt read Batman anymore.Then came TDKR and things changed for Batman again and comic's altogether.
Now dont get me wrong I'm sure if Miller hadent done it some one else would have brought Batman back to life...but we should give him what he deserves for the good he's done.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Yes, Miller does deserve a lot of credit. I think we can all agree to that. But he doesn't deserve ALL of it that silentflute is.

 

[silentflute]

For one, he's not dismissing the continuity of the Golden age. We all know Batman killed in the Golden age, but you know what? That's not the same Batman that we have now. The Batman that killed ended up marrying Catwoman, had a daughter who became the Huntress, and ended up dying while protecting the city. So the Batman that did kill has been dead for a while.

According to the Earth1-2 bull****.However, I'm not discussing these continuity symantics.We're talking about the character.Since he was born.He's a multi faceted jewel that can be interpreted in many different ways.Yes, within a particular framework(ie wayne manor, the batmobile , the batcave etc), but there is leeway there.Again, I'm not saying he's out to kill lia la the Punisher, but if given a choice between saving a child by killing a punk and not saving the child by not killing the punk, then the answer is obvious.And the whole "he could have done it without killing cuz he's Batman " argument doesn't hold up.

The Batman we have now does not kill, that is unless of course you can find an example of where he did so. The best is the Son of the Deamon one, but that one's sketchy because no one knows how much of continuity it is.

Continuity controls your life doesn't it?

And, if you want to dismiss continuity, then not only has Batman killed, Batman has worn rainbow colored batsuits, was associated with the Bat-myte, and was tempted to go swimming with Robin and Superman in a spring full of young boys.

Exactly my point.Many different interpretations.So how do you justify the Batman in HUSH having once worn a rainbow colored suit?Oh yeah, earth 1-2 . My point is, it happened once it'll happen again.Trying to keep track of continuity will end up making you nuts.Better to follow interpretations by a writer than a whole history.

So yes, Batman has killed, in his past. Character's change, that's just how things work.

Characters change based on WRITERS points of view.And if it sells, the n companies decide to keep it "in continuity".The Artists WILL ALWAYS BE MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE CORPORATION.


Superman used to not be able to fly, but he flies now. Batman did kill, but he's been against it for a good many years now. Heck even in DKR, Batman says he drew a line against killing "thirty years ago." And at no point in DKR does it ever show Batman to clearly kill anybody.

Yes he did.That mutant was toast and you know it.Again, he did draw the line about killing, but sometimes you do what you have to.

You started out saying that Batman would kill, the fact is your wrong.

No, I'm right.

Today's Batman will not kill. If you said yesterday's Batman will kill, well then, that would be fine, because he did.

Yesterday, today.Will you listen to yourself?You sound ridiculous.I'll say it for the last time: THE CHARACTER IS A MULTI FACETED JEWEL THAT CAN BE INTERPRETED MANY WAYS.PERIOD.

And, like I stated in a post earlier, if you find an example of the recent Batman willing to kill someone, and actually do it, then I'll gracefully accept I was wrong.

That would prove nothing except that the recent writers have not had him kill.Their word is not law.