The Dark Knight Returns

[souloffire]

I respectfully disagree 100% and believe that to have Batman (and later Superman on the last panel of Strikes Again) give in to killing makes him just like all the others and it is the laziest possible thing to do. Miller wrote an absolutely ridiculously unrealistic and lopsided world where no matter what, Joker would get out and murder again no matter how many times he was brought to Justice. He backed the reader into a corner, forcing them to accept that killing the Joker was finally necessary and you'd be a naive moron not to agree with it. It's extremely forceful of Miller to shove his view down the reader's throat and openly spit on the "no-kill" rule of the two biggest icons in comic history. Life isn't as cut and dry as murderer goes to jail, breaks out, murders again, goes to jail, is released on technicality, murders again, forever and ever. How is it all that different from Marv killing the evil priest because he's sick and needs to be killed and there is no justice system that will hold him because of technicalities? It's just Frank Miller taking an iconic character, removing the ideals that he personally doesn't agree with, and forcing his own onto the character in their place.

The Joker was killing, escaping, killing, escaping, killing, escaping long before Miller. The Joker did this before Miller and the Joker does it till this day. Not sure why you're giving him grief over this. And from what I recall Batman didn't kill Joker, he almost did than stopped, then a disappointed Joker finished the job.

 

[silentflute]

Exactly, and that is a matter of opinion.


That was a misinterpretation of what was said. I believe the poster was saying that superheros have taken the place of gods in our culture, not that Batman should be written as a god.

Punch, thank you, that was my point exactly.

The fact that there are people here saying "but...Batman isn't a God, he's a normal man" goes to show the level of intelligence we are dealing with.

 

[Punch]

Yeah these arguments are pointless because Batman didn't kill the Joker, That was the whole point of the scene.

 

[silentflute]

The Joker was killing, escaping, killing, escaping, killing, escaping long before Miller. The Joker did this before Miller and the Joker does it till this day. Not sure why you're giving him grief over this. And from what I recall Batman didn't kill Joker, he almost did than stopped, then a disappointed Joker finished the job.

Don'tcha just love it when these twerps don't even comprehend what they're reading.It 's a license to erase all their previous posts.t:

 

[silentflute]

I can go out now, buy a Bat costume, wear it and beat up thugs. Doesn't mean I am a god.

Quick word of advice: Do yourself a favor - just stay out of this conversation - you're statement proves you obviously don't have even the basic skills to discuss this .You'll do yourself a lot of harm.Stop embarrassing yourself.

 

[Agentsands77]

I've never had a problem with Batman attempting to kill Joker - in fact, I think that was one of the best scenes in THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS. Especially since Batman couldn't bring himself to finish it. In HUSH, Batman very nearly did the same thing, and I don't see anybody getting up in arms about that.

I'm not a fan of the instances where Batman kills elsewhere in DKR, though.

The fact that there are people here saying "but...Batman isn't a God, he's a normal man" goes to show the level of intelligence we are dealing with.

This whole conversation only began because Punch took issue with the idea that Batman was meant to be a human among gods. Yes, the initial quote didn't have anything to do with that, but the conversation was taken there.

But anyway, just because these comics are very mythological doesn't give license for Miller to allow things to get ridiculous. Mythology should be written carefully with great subtlety - otherwise, it does all seem quite silly.

 

[Sub-Zero]

who thinks batman killed the joker? he broke his neck a little, but couldn't go through with it. the joker keeps twisting his neck until he kills himself. miller made people think batman was doing unbatmanlike stuff like with his guns that never fired bullets but grappling hooks and other things.

 

[larryfilmmaker]

Flute, take it easy. Dubbing others as unintelligent because they disagree with your opinions on comic books isn't even worth making fun of. Besides, "Simpsons already did it".

I hold my ground. DKR = FUN BUT OVERRATED BY THE "DARK IS COOL" CROWD

I was wrong. Batman did not kill Joker, he just started breaking his neck... but he DID MURDER in DKR. That's not Batman, to me anyways. Superman is ready to murder at the end of the second book. That's not Superman either. It's character rape.

 

[souloffire]

He does kill the mutant holding a gun to a kids head. I wouldn't call it murder.

 

[hippie_hunter]

BATMAN DOESN'T KILL. PERIOD. :

 

[Infinity9999x]

He does kill the mutant holding a gun to a kids head. I wouldn't call it murder.

That was left ambiguos purposely. If he did kill him though, it would certainly be murder. Sure, he would be saving a baby, but it would still be murder.

 

[MaskedManJRK]

Yes, you SHATTERED my argument with your amazing debate on why Frank Miller's lead characters aren't all the same cliche stereotype. No but seriously Daredevil is a good point and I haven't read 300... tho I very much want to before I see the movie. Batman kills the Joker and the Mutant Leader.


Also, Superman at the end of Strikes Again, is more or less about to murder Batman on the last panel. He decides that it's time to make it "his world" just like Batman. It does not fit characters AT ALL.

Sorry if I sounded like a little s**t for that--just wanted to keep going on this discussion.

As for Batman...uh...that never happened, dude. Batman nearly snapped Joker's neck, paralysing him, Joker chastizes Batman on it, and finishes the job himself. And as for the Mutant Leader, there is absolutely no reason to think that Batman did more than just break his leg and continue punching unless, quite frankly, unless you want to stretch the truth to keep your point alive.

Yeah, DKSA I will admit isn't Miller's best work--though to be fair, I remember reading that a lot of his stuff was taken out or changed because of 9/11. I'll admit, the revelation with Dick pissed me off to know end.

BUT, I know one thing about DKSA that no one, and I mean NO ONE can say sucked--The Question. You can never go wrong with The Question in your story.

 

[Punch]

I'm not a fan of the instances where Batman kills elsewhere in DKR, though.

There is not one instance in DKR where Batman unambiguously kills someone. The only part is with the mutant holding the baby, and that scene(if the mutant was killed) is justified immediately when Batman says "I believe you"
Why isn't Batman ever wanted for murder if he kills in DKR? What was the whole point of the Joker scene then?

This whole conversation only began because Punch took issue with the idea that Batman was meant to be a human among gods. Yes, the initial quote didn't have anything to do with that, but the conversation was taken there.

No. All I have a problem with is the idea that there is one correct way to write a fictional character. I don't think batman should be written as a god. The whole problem was that Silentflute's post was misunderstood.

 

[Agentsands77]

The only part is with the mutant holding the baby, and that scene(if the mutant was killed) is justified immediately when Batman says "I believe you"

I don't think it's justified. And it seems almost 100% clear to me that the man is dead - the man is riddled with bullets. Even if the chap miraculously pulled through, Batman had no way of knowing that he would.

Why isn't Batman ever wanted for murder if he kills in DKR?

Good question. I don't know.

What was the whole point of the Joker scene then?

I've always seen it as undermining the Joker scene.

All I have a problem with is the idea that there is one correct way to write a fictional character.

But nobody was suggesting that. People were suggesting that there are wrong ways to write a character, though. But it was never suggested by anyone there was only one right way - just that some things are outside of the boundaries of the character.

 

[Punch]

I don't think it's justified. And it seems almost 100% clear to me that the man is dead - the man is riddled with bullets. Even if the chap miraculously pulled through, Batman had no way of knowing that he would.

Good question. I don't know.

I've always seen it as undermining the Joker scene.

In my mind the mutant is dead.

In no part of the book is that death stated as fact, so it's ambiguous. But to me he's dead, and it's ok, and it's not murder.

Batman had to kill him. The mutant says "Believe me, man, I will..!" Batman shoots him, killing him, and says "I believe you." Batman is saying that he believed the mutant would kill the child, and at that point made the choice that the child's life is worth more that the mutant's.
What should Batman have done?

It's "a world plagued by worse than thieves and murderers." Batman is more violent only because the world around him had become more violent. Is it an accident that as the story progresses and the world gets more out of hand Batman's costume gets darker? But he doesn't kill. In contrast to Batman, the SOBs kill, showing that Batman's way is not really the right way for everyone (at least not without some Bat-Training), and that he does ultimately have some negative effects as well. Much like the long run of DKR imitators that followed, The SOBs just took the superficial aspects of what they perceived to be Batman. As a matter of fact at some point Dr. Wolper says that Batman should be held accountable for all the murders the SOBs commit.

The Joker scene and the SOBs do not make sense if Batman was killing people through out the book.

 

[Agentsands77]

What should Batman have done?

Batman has an entire arsenal of gadgets on his belt. I'm sure he could have figured something out.

The Joker scene and the SOBs do not make sense if Batman was killing people through out the book.

I agree, and I never said that he was killing people all throughout. I said I wasn't a fan of the scenes (which is really just a *scene*, unless you interpret the mutant leader as being killed... which I wouldn't say is entirely out of the question) where he killed.

 

[Punch]

Batman has an entire arsenal of gadgets on his belt. I'm sure he could have figured something out.


I agree, and I never said that he was killing people all throughout. I said I wasn't a fan of the scenes (which is really just a *scene*, unless you interpret the mutant leader as being killed... which I wouldn't say is entirely out of the question) where he killed.

He didn't have time to figure it out. Once again, the rules had changed. In the old days, he would have threw a batarang that ricocheted off of everything in the room before it hit the mutant in the head knocking him unconscious. Batman couldn't take that chance like he once could have.

What scenes did Batman kill other than the mutant with the child?

 

[Agentsands77]

He didn't have time to figure it out.

Sure he did. The mutant was using the moment for leverage, he wasn't just about to blow the kid away.

Once again, the rules had changed. In the old days, he would have threw a batarang that ricocheted off of everything in the room before it hit the mutant in the head knocking him unconscious. Batman couldn't take that chance like he once could have.

He didn't have to use a batarang. Use a flash grenade, use a stun gun, use something. His belt has more options than a swiss army knife. He could have done any number of things. And it's not like he hasn't been in a similar situation in the past.

What scenes did Batman kill other than the mutant with the child?

He didn't have any other scenes, unless you count the very ambiguous fight with the mutant leader - and I said that in my post.

 

[Punch]

He didn't have any other scenes, unless you count the very ambiguous fight with the mutant leader - and I said that in my post.

I said I wasn't a fan of the scenes (which is really just a *scene*, unless you interpret the mutant leader as being killed... which I wouldn't say is entirely out of the question) where he killed.

So what are you not a fan of, if you're admitting the only scene is the one where you aren't sure that he killed?

Sure he did. The mutant was using the moment for leverage, he wasn't just about to blow the kid away.

Yes, he was going to blow the kid away. "I believe you." That's the whole point.

He didn't have to use a batarang. Use a flash grenade, use a stun gun, use something. His belt has more options than a swiss army knife. He could have done any number of things. And it's not like he hasn't been in a similar situation in the past.

Once again the whole point is that it's not like the past situations. Batman is not the same, he's different. He has to be to exist in that world. That's the whole point. Alan Moore said it best in his intro."It's all exactly the same, except for the fact that it's all totally different."

 

[Agentsands77]

So what are you not a fan of, if you're admitting the only scene is the one where you aren't sure that he killed?

I'm not a fan of that scene, as I said:

I said I wasn't a fan of the scenes (which is really just a *scene*, unless you interpret the mutant leader as being killed... which I wouldn't say is entirely out of the question) where he killed.

Yes, he was going to blow the kid away. "I believe you." That's the whole point.

It's a line that indicates Batman knew the mutant was capable of doing it. That's all.

Once again the whole point is that it's not like the past situations. Batman is not the same, he's different. He has to be to exist in that world. That's the whole point.

But the world *hasn't* changed that much. Sure, that's what Miller is trying to establish, but I don't buy it. These Mutants are vicious creeps, and there's a whole lot more of them than Batman's used to, but they're no worse than many of the villains he's fought through the years.

 

[larryfilmmaker]

But the world *hasn't* changed that much. Sure, that's what Miller is trying to establish, but I don't buy it. These Mutants are vicious creeps, and there's a whole lot more of them than Batman's used to, but they're no worse than many of the villains he's fought through the years.

Exactly what I've been trying to say. Croc, Joker, Al Ghul, Darkseid, and all the rest of the DC villains have always been ready and willing to murder and the heroes have founds ways to combat them without resorting to their same methods... but Miller LOVES to force the viewer into believing that the hero's only choice is to murder the villain.

 

[silentflute]

That was left ambiguos purposely. If he did kill him though, it would certainly be murder. Sure, he would be saving a baby, but it would still be murder.

Damn straight.And it would be deserved.Cops go through this on a daily basis.

It wouldn't be in Batman's character to NOT kill someone if a child's life was on the line.

 

[silentflute]

Batman has an entire arsenal of gadgets on his belt. I'm sure he could have figured something out.

Oh please, get a grip.

I agree, and I never said that he was killing people all throughout. I said I wasn't a fan of the scenes (which is really just a *scene*, unless you interpret the mutant leader as being killed... which I wouldn't say is entirely out of the question) where he killed.

Get over it.**** happens.

 

[silentflute]

Flute, take it easy. Dubbing others as unintelligent because they disagree with your opinions on comic books isn't even worth making fun of. Besides, "Simpsons already did it".

I wasn't dubbing anyone unintelligent for disagreeing with me.Clearly, they're idiots if they didn't understand what I meant by "gods".

I hold my ground. DKR = FUN BUT OVERRATED BY THE "DARK IS COOL" CROWD

It's not overrated.It kick started everything u see in Batman today, be it in the wanna be Miller clones who write the comics to the animated series to the movies.

I was wrong. Batman did not kill Joker, he just started breaking his neck... but he DID MURDER in DKR. That's not Batman, to me anyways.

Hmm tell that to Bob Kane, who had him kill in his earlier stories.

Superman is ready to murder at the end of the second book. That's not Superman either. It's character rape.

Character rape.You fanboys are funny.

 

[Agentsands77]

Batman has an entire arsenal of gadgets on his belt. I'm sure he could have figured something out.

Oh please, get a grip.

My argument was destroyed by that one.

I agree, and I never said that he was killing people all throughout. I said I wasn't a fan of the scenes (which is really just a *scene*, unless you interpret the mutant leader as being killed... which I wouldn't say is entirely out of the question) where he killed.

Get over it.**** happens.

Yet again, you have shown me the light.