The Dark Knight Returns

[hippie_hunter]

Spoiler

"Alberto Falcone is Holiday. He faked his own death on New Year's Eve to throw us off." I actually rolled my eyes at this point. "To throw us off?!" WTF? How cliche is that? That reason is probably on every mystery soap opera.

Spoiler

Actually Alberto isn't the only Holiday killer. There were multiple Holidays. Gilda and Harvey Dent were also Holiday killers.

 

[BubbaGump]

Spoiler

Actually Alberto isn't the only Holiday killer. There were multiple Holidays. Gilda and Harvey Dent were also Holiday killers.

I know but the reason

Spoiler

"to throw us off"

was pretty lame.

 

[dkamphaus43]

[/QUOTE]

Batman was dark before Frank Miller went onboard. You can thank Denny O'Neil and Neal Adams for that.

Exactly, and unlike Miller, O'Neil and Adams managed to do it in a way that didn't resort to turning Batman into a borderline psychotic. I mean seriously, why is everybody always saying that The Dark Knight Returns returned Batman to his dark, pulpy roots? It didn't, Denny O'Neil and Steve Englehart did!

 

[Punch]

Right, Miller just did it better.
All anyone needs to do to know why Miller gets the credit for returning Batman to his darker roots is read the introduction by Alan Moore. or the countless other things written about it.
Not about Denny O'Neil
Not about The Long Halloween.
Why is that? Why, if O'Neil was already doing dark stories did DKR touch such a nerve?

 

[BubbaGump]

Why, if O'Neil was already doing dark stories did DKR touch such a nerve?

As good and Gothic O'Neil's/Adam was in the 70's, it needed a dramatic example like DKR to get Batman (and comics altogether) back in the open. DKR touched a nerve because no one made Batman a 55 year old borderline psychotic driving a tank and beating the es aych eye tea out of Mutants before. Miller knew he couldn't just write another O'Neil based Batman story. He wanted to do something grand, epic, and most of all original. O'Neil and Adams were already doing it right, but DKR was the icing on the cake and everyone likes icing.

 

[Infinity9999x]

The thing is, Miller didn't return Batman to his dark roots for the general public. B89 did that. Heck, most of the general public doesn't even know of TDKR, so trying to say that Miller is responsible for the general public recognizing Batman as a dark character is a bit silly.

And in terms of showing that comics could be literature and not just "kid stuff" I think Watchmen and V for Vendetta did that better then DKR. Not to mention Neil Gaimam's sandman which won a literary prize if I'm not mistaken. (only to have it taken away by pompus idiots who thought comics weren't "adult" enough to get that kind of recognition) But I still think those did more then DKR.

 

[BubbaGump]

The thing is, Miller didn't return Batman to his dark roots for the general public. B89 did that. Heck, most of the general public doesn't even know of TDKR, so trying to say that Miller is responsible for the general public recognizing Batman as a dark character is a bit silly.

And in terms of showing that comics could be literature and not just "kid stuff" I think Watchmen and V for Vendetta did that better then DKR. Not to mention Neil Gaimam's sandman which won a literary prize if I'm not mistaken. (only to have it taken away by pompus idiots who thought comics weren't "adult" enough to get that kind of recognition) But I still think those did more then DKR.

I shouldn't have said "back in the open." Maybe just for comics (though I agree B89 had a big impact too). And I agree Watchmen and V for Vendetta are deeper than DKR. But people are failing to mention Maus. Maus is the first and only comic book ever to win a Pullitzer Prize. It probably had a bigger effect than Watchmen or V for Vendetta combined--due the fact that Maus made people "outside" aware of the potential for comic books.

Alan Moore had this to say: "I have been convinced that Art Spiegelman is perhaps the single most important comic creator working within the field and in my opinion Maus represents his most accomplished work to date…"

 

[Infinity9999x]

I said for "comics" not the general public. And I agree Watchmen and V for Vendetta are deeper than DKR. But people are failing to mention Maus. Maus is the first and only comic book ever to win a Pullitzer Prize. It probably had a bigger effect than Watchmen and V for Vendetta combined--due the fact that Maus made people "outside" aware of the potential for comic books.

Alan Moore had this to say: "I have been convinced that Art Spiegelman is perhaps the single most important comic creator working within the field and in my opinion Maus represents his most accomplished work to date…"

I read that quote a while back, I still need to read Maus. Is it really better then Watchmen and V?

 

[BubbaGump]

I read that quote a while back, I still need to read Maus. Is it really better then Watchmen and V?

I wouldn't say better, but for me, I prefer Maus (personal preference). Btw, I edited my previous post.

 

[Infinity9999x]

I wouldn't say better, but for me, I prefer Maus (personal preference). Btw, I edited my previous post.

Hmm, I'll have to pick that up sometime. And yeah, I wasn't really addresing my post to you specifically, but to all the comments of people claiming DKR showed everyone that Batman could be a dark character. Like I said, the general public don't even know of DKR, B89 was really the big culture shock for them. Though they were about 10 to 15 years behind comic fans.

 

[silentflute]

I mean seriously, why is everybody always saying that The Dark Knight Returns returned Batman to his dark, pulpy roots? It didn't, Denny O'Neil and Steve Englehart did!

As stated numerous times- O'Neil originally returned Batman to his dark roots.However,by the mid 80's this all seemed to have been forgotten.Miller reinvigorated the character, and did so on a much more meaningful scale than O'Neil.The proof?Look at any comic post DKR.His presence is still felt to this day.Problem is,all the writers are just doing bad Miller impressions.

 

[BubbaGump]

Problem is,all the writers are just doing bad Miller impressions.

Hear, hear.

Not to worry--All Star B&R is here to address the situation!

 

[silentflute]

For the first Batman movie, it felt like it was Batman and I loved how Jack Nicholson portrayed the Joker. And I'm a sucker for the Prince soundtrack

Again,just because he was dolled up in black rubber and in a gothic setting does not make it Batman.there are numerous problems with how Batman/Bruce wayne are depicted in that movie.Jack Nicholson was not the Joker.He was playing Jack Nicholson with with white make up.As for Prince- he had no business being anywhere near Batman's world.



I know, it just feels wierd without the "The"

No it doesn't.You're a product of you're time Hippie.


I don't think it would be redundant. I would like to see another Frank Miller Batman story that doesn't have Batman acting like a psychopath and in a serious tone.

It's already been done.Why try to do a duplicate?

Now that I think about it, Year Two by Miller would be a bad idea. With Year One, The Man Who Laughs, Batman and the Monster Men, Batman and the Mad Monk, The Long Halloween, Dark Victory, Robin: Year One, and Batgirl: Year One, the adventures of Batman's early days can get cluttered up quickly.

See?Good point.There are so many versions of Year Two out there as it is.Which illustrates the message of my signature:there comes a time when a reader has to pick and choose what works for them as opposed to trying to keep track of a continuity.

I don't see Year One as a one note story.

That's beacuse it's not.Without the humour, it would have been,though.


I just don't find any humor in it. Enlighten me, where's the humor?

It's the little things:Loeb's office.batman hiding behind Dent's desk untill Gordon leaves.Alfred's sarcasm towards Bruce. Holly.The humor is subtle,but it's there.


Dude, no comic has even been as big as the way you describe the Dark Knight Returns.

If you had been around in '86 you'd know differently.Because in fact it really was that big, in terms of comics transcending it's own medium.

 

[silentflute]

Hear, hear.

Not to worry--All Star B&R is here to address the situation!

Amen.

 

[Cobblepot]

I'll say it again...

If it wasn't for DKR and TKJ, we wouldn't have Batman 1989.
If it wasn't for Batman 1989, we wouldn't have BTAS (and Prince's OST!)
If it wasn't for the succes of Batman Returns and BTAS, we wouldn't have gotten BF & B&R.
If it wasn't for B&R we wouldn't have BB and TDK...

SO I guess we owe Miller a bit of gratidude after all.

 

[gadgetfusion]

I'll say it again...

If it wasn't for DKR and TKJ, we wouldn't have Batman 1989.
If it wasn't for Batman 1989, we wouldn't have BTAS (and Prince's OST!)
If it wasn't for the succes of Batman Returns and BTAS, we wouldn't have gotten BF & B&R.
If it wasn't for B&R we wouldn't have BB and TDK...

SO I guess we owe Miller a bit of gratidude after all.

Amen.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

Yeah it was. But Superman isn't a tool. Nor a government puppet.

I think you are failing to look at it in context.

In Superman's normal world, he has free reign to be Superman and to stop his badguys and save people and be out there in the public. He is accepted, and doesn't have to work for the goverment.

In the world of DKR, he doesn't have that freedom. The goverment came down HARD on superheros and basically forced them to retire, just like in Watchmen. He had to become an agent of the goverment in order to be allowed to operate at all.

Nor would he get beaten by Batman.

He didn't get beat by him. In fact, it was Superman who was OWNING Bats, even with his power levels reduced, until Green Arrow brought Green K into it and interfered.

It's basically the equvilent of a pro wrestling match, when someone runs into the ring with a steel chair and helps his buddy win the match while the referee's back is turned.

 

[Keyser Soze]

I'm ashamed to admit it, but I've never read The Dark Knight Returns.

I've came close to buying it on several occasions. But I don't know what it is - the Elseworlds-style story, the art, the small panels - but I've always been discouraged from buying it, or found something else to get instead.

Does it really live up to the hype? How highly recommended is "The Dark Knight Returns", really? And seeing that I'm a big-time Joker fan, how significant is his role in proceedings?

 

[BubbaGump]

I'm ashamed to admit it, but I've never read The Dark Knight Returns.

I've came close to buying it on several occasions. But I don't know what it is - the Elseworlds-style story, the art, the small panels - but I've always been discouraged from buying it, or found something else to get instead.

Does it really live up to the hype? How highly recommended is "The Dark Knight Returns", really? And seeing that I'm a big-time Joker fan, how significant is his role in proceedings?

Even though it is pretty out-there, I wouldn't call DKR Elseworlds. It could've fit in into continuity when it was released, but writers just tended to dismiss it as not being part of canon.

I'd reccomend it. It's your decision whether you like it or not, but before coming to conclusions, read the whole book first then form an opinion. Me--I like the book because it's cinematic, epic, and different (though there will be people who disagree).

And don't worry if you haven't read it yet--I haven't read Knightfall either, and have only recently purchased the Year One TPB a few days ago (but I had already read it before). Now the weird thing about it is, when I was at the bookstore (about to buy Year One), I overheard some guy talking to his friend, and he said, "You know, I've never actually read Dark Knight Returns."

Cowinkee-dink.

 

[hippie_hunter]

I'm ashamed to admit it, but I've never read The Dark Knight Returns.

I've came close to buying it on several occasions. But I don't know what it is - the Elseworlds-style story, the art, the small panels - but I've always been discouraged from buying it, or found something else to get instead.

Does it really live up to the hype? How highly recommended is "The Dark Knight Returns", really? And seeing that I'm a big-time Joker fan, how significant is his role in proceedings?

It's extremely overrated, but it's still a rather good read. It deserves to be checked out in the very least.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Again,just because he was dolled up in black rubber and in a gothic setting does not make it Batman.there are numerous problems with how Batman/Bruce wayne are depicted in that movie.Jack Nicholson was not the Joker.He was playing Jack Nicholson with with white make up.As for Prince- he had no business being anywhere near Batman's world.

A man who saw his parents get killed, dresses up as a bat, fights criminals, etc. It was Batman. Bruce Wayne was portrayed rather weakly though. Batman Forever did a better job at that.

The Joker felt like the Joker, a man who gets deformed due to an encounter with the Batman. A mass murderer. A psychotic. Likes theatrics. The problems with his depiction was that they gave him a full origin than a mysterious one and he was the murderer of the Waynes.

No it doesn't.You're a product of you're time Hippie.

It's already been done.Why try to do a duplicate?

Just because it's in the same tone doesn't mean it has to be a duplicate.

See?Good point.There are so many versions of Year Two out there as it is.Which illustrates the message of my signature:there comes a time when a reader has to pick and choose what works for them as opposed to trying to keep track of a continuity.

An incontinuity Frank Miller Batman story that takes place in the modern DCU (with Tim Drake, Nightwing, Oracle, etc) that is grim like the Dark Knight Returns, Daredevil, and Year One would kick ass.

I'm sorry but his so-called "parody" works are rather piss poor.

It's the little things:Loeb's office.batman hiding behind Dent's desk untill Gordon leaves.Alfred's sarcasm towards Bruce. Holly.The humor is subtle,but it's there.

Alfred is supposed to be sarcastic. Batman hid behind Dent's desk due to common sense, he would have been arrested on spot and Dent's career would have been ruined. I admit that I found Holly a bit annoying with her way of saying Selina.

 

[BubbaGump]

I'm sorry but his so-called "parody" works are rather piss poor.

Are you expecting his parody to be Year One quality? Parodies are not meant to win awards. Their use is to make fun of something. It doesn't have to be good--its purpose is to make a point.

 

[Hobodeluxe]

Reading TDKR the first time was like having sex. Miller had me with the opening. Bruce in the race car...trouble...thinking "this would be a spectacular death." Then pulling a great save ,recovering control of the vehicle.
"But not spectacular enough"

It was the little things. The reporters on t.v. The talking head pundits. Robin's stoner parents.

 

[The Empire Ape]

Are you expecting his parody to be Year One quality? Parodies are not meant to win awards. Their use is to make fun of something. It doesn't have to be good--its purpose is to make a point.

I don't think All Star Batman was intended as a "paradoy", it's just bad. Miller has realised this and now he's changed it.

 

[itsthebatman]

Are you expecting his parody to be Year One quality? Parodies are not meant to win awards. Their use is to make fun of something. It doesn't have to be good--its purpose is to make a point.

Course it has to begood, otherwise you end up with 'Dracula: Dead and Loving It' instead of 'Young Frankenstein.'

I'm ashamed to admit it, but I've never read The Dark Knight Returns.

I've came close to buying it on several occasions. But I don't know what it is - the Elseworlds-style story, the art, the small panels - but I've always been discouraged from buying it, or found something else to get instead.

Does it really live up to the hype? How highly recommended is "The Dark Knight Returns", really? And seeing that I'm a big-time Joker fan, how significant is his role in proceedings?

Get. Out.