Then you must like seeing Superman beaten, immoral, a sellout, and humiliated. How could you get any enjoyment from that?
Except that that DKR wasn't an elseworld tale (because they didn't exist back then) and was seen as a legit future of the DC universe which they were building toward to. It didn't happen but there was the intention.
I've actually never read DKR because I'm aware of Superman's portrayal and can't bring myself to see him that way.
That being said, I don't think that if you like it that you are not a Superman fan -- that's just ridiculous much like every "you're not a fan" arguments.
Is one of those comics that is a MUST. So please do, and give us your opinion!
Personally I'm more a Batman fan, and must admit that I enjoyed reading TDKR. Set the groundbase of what I believe Batman really is. Flawed.
In the other hand, i liked this kind of Superman not invulnerable, but capable of handing a nuclear missile and survive, but not SUPER GODLIKE.
And I don't see Superman as a puppet (although he is in the TDKSA), but a really tired messiah, becoming something like... "unpersonal", getting detached from humankind. Reminds me a lil' bit to Dr. Manhattan.
It has poisoned the mind of thousand of fanboys and dozens of comic book writers so you can hardly pretend it doesn't exist, especially when for many people it was the first introduction to Superman and Batman.
You're missing out on some awesome stories thinking that way. I guess you also skipped on reading Superman: Red Son?
TDKR and DK2 aren't disrespectful to Superman. He has a daughter in it with Wonder Woman named Lara. I always wished Lara made it to canon somehow
You're missing out on some awesome stories thinking that way. I guess you also skipped on reading Superman: Red Son?
TDKR and DK2 aren't disrespectful to Superman. He has a daughter in it with Wonder Woman named Lara. I always wished Lara made it to canon somehow
You haven't read it because you might not like it? C'mone, Krumm.
I have a buddy who loves DKR and would tease me to no end about how lame Superman was and how he is just a tool. Chalk up my not reading it to a traumatic experience
But like I said, I may be checking it out soon.
Why is him having a daughter with Wonder Woman so great? I
Anyone who thinks Superman is not massively disrespected in DKR is reading it wrong. he's a government stooge, a sellout, and Batman makes him his personal *****. Why is him having a daughter with Wonder Woman so great? It's not like he hasn't had children in other Imaginary Stories/Elseworlds. It doesn't matter-DKR is what started it all. It's where Superman went from being the patriarch of the superhero fraternity to being Batman's personal ***** and a loser. For the next 25 years, variations of Miller's Superman permeated DC's comics as Superman was a whiner, an establishment stooge, and of course Batman's eternal inferior. Superman went from being the greatest superhero of all time to DC's designated jobber. And that, along with the abandonment as Superman as the real persona and Clark as the disguise, is exactly why Superman sales went in the toilet. DKR started Batman's ascension to the top spot in DC, and began Superman's fall from grace.
Every Superman fan should read it, so as to see what we are up against with people who either hate, dislike, or don't understand the character. And it's also a great example of how one ******* who becomes a popular artist can ruin a character that has been around since 1938, reducing them to a point of ridicule and near-irrelevance. Because that is what DKR started.
Miller's hatred of Superman comes from his Randian personal beliefs-it is simply part of the core of who he is and what he believes in to hate Superman. Superman stands for what Miller is against. Any hardcore objectivist (which Miller is) will find a pure altruist like Superman appalling. Superman lives his life for others; what things he does for himself are mostly only to allow him to better serve others; and the one thing he DOES do for himself (Clark Kent) is not exactly a high indulgence. His Batman follows Ayn Rand's philosophy to the letter, so Batman is him. Superman is his foil and of course in his series he uses Superman to show how his beliefs are superior and how he is right. Miller is incapable of portraying Superman in any sort of favorable light-it literally goes against his personal philosophy.
This is why the responsible thing for DC to do would have been to never let him touch the character. Frank Miller should never be allowed to write Superman under any circumstances. Not if they give a damn about Superman, that is.
Amazon with Superman's power? She was a cool character. I think the point of his daughter, Lara, was to remind Superman that there's still hope and a future to fight for. Having that personal connection brought his purpose back.
TDKR and DK2 was a story set in the future to explore certain ideas behind the characters. It's not meant to be canon anyway.
Anyone who thinks Superman is not massively disrespected in DKR is reading it wrong. he's a government stooge, a sellout, and Batman makes him his personal *****. Why is him having a daughter with Wonder Woman so great? It's not like he hasn't had children in other Imaginary Stories/Elseworlds. It doesn't matter-DKR is what started it all. It's where Superman went from being the patriarch of the superhero fraternity to being Batman's personal ***** and a loser. For the next 25 years, variations of Miller's Superman permeated DC's comics as Superman was a whiner, an establishment stooge, and of course Batman's eternal inferior. Superman went from being the greatest superhero of all time to DC's designated jobber. And that, along with the abandonment as Superman as the real persona and Clark as the disguise, is exactly why Superman sales went in the toilet. DKR started Batman's ascension to the top spot in DC, and began Superman's fall from grace.
Every Superman fan should read it, so as to see what we are up against with people who either hate, dislike, or don't understand the character. And it's also a great example of how one ******* who becomes a popular artist can ruin a character that has been around since 1938, reducing them to a point of ridicule and near-irrelevance. Because that is what DKR started.
Miller's hatred of Superman comes from his Randian personal beliefs-it is simply part of the core of who he is and what he believes in to hate Superman. Superman stands for what Miller is against. Any hardcore objectivist (which Miller is) will find a pure altruist like Superman appalling. Superman lives his life for others; what things he does for himself are mostly only to allow him to better serve others; and the one thing he DOES do for himself (Clark Kent) is not exactly a high indulgence. His Batman follows Ayn Rand's philosophy to the letter, so Batman is him. Superman is his foil and of course in his series he uses Superman to show how his beliefs are superior and how he is right. Miller is incapable of portraying Superman in any sort of favorable light-it literally goes against his personal philosophy.
This is why the responsible thing for DC to do would have been to never let him touch the character. Frank Miller should never be allowed to write Superman under any circumstances. Not if they give a damn about Superman, that is.
Frank Miller doesn't hate Superman, Batman and Superman are just not friends.
As seen in Miller's All-Star Batman & Robin, Dark Knight Returns and DK2, Batman thinks Superman is a thick headed idiot just repeating whatever Ma and Pa Kent told him about "truth, justice and the American way", following this conservative patriotic 1950s moral code without giving it a damn thought, and things are not that simple and black and white.
And Superman, as Miller puts it, "is a little scared of Batman." Batman doesn't follow the rules and obey the law. He feels heroes have a responsibility to obey the law and set a positive example to others. Heroes are suppose act in a certain way, he thinks, and Batman acts more like an insane villain. But he tries to talk sense into him and reason with him, as he did in Dark Knight and DK2, and he sent Hal to talk sense into him and reason with him in All-Star Batman and Robin.
Frank Miller obviously likes the Superman character, however Batman doesn't. I especially love the Fleischer-esque Superman look Miller gave him in DK2. Darwyn Cooke later gave Superman this look in New Frontier.
In Comics Interview #31,
Miller explained: "I stress that Superman and Batman are enemies, and that Superman and Batman have been enemies for decades. They've never liked each other. Batman has tremendous contempt for Superman because he's such a "good boy," because he takes orders, from the President, among other people. Superman is something of a federal agent. And Superman, frankly, is scared of Batman. Because Batman represents to a certain extent, his own dark side. Which Superman doesn't want to look at. They imply completely different points of view. Superman implies a benevolent world - Batman implies a malevolent world. I cannot see two personalities like that getting along, acting friendly."
Anyone who thinks Superman is not massively disrespected in DKR is reading it wrong. he's a government stooge, a sellout, and Batman makes him his personal *****. Why is him having a daughter with Wonder Woman so great? It's not like he hasn't had children in other Imaginary Stories/Elseworlds. It doesn't matter-DKR is what started it all. It's where Superman went from being the patriarch of the superhero fraternity to being Batman's personal ***** and a loser. For the next 25 years, variations of Miller's Superman permeated DC's comics as Superman was a whiner, an establishment stooge, and of course Batman's eternal inferior. Superman went from being the greatest superhero of all time to DC's designated jobber. And that, along with the abandonment as Superman as the real persona and Clark as the disguise, is exactly why Superman sales went in the toilet. DKR started Batman's ascension to the top spot in DC, and began Superman's fall from grace.
Every Superman fan should read it, so as to see what we are up against with people who either hate, dislike, or don't understand the character. And it's also a great example of how one ******* who becomes a popular artist can ruin a character that has been around since 1938, reducing them to a point of ridicule and near-irrelevance. Because that is what DKR started.
Miller's hatred of Superman comes from his Randian personal beliefs-it is simply part of the core of who he is and what he believes in to hate Superman. Superman stands for what Miller is against. Any hardcore objectivist (which Miller is) will find a pure altruist like Superman appalling. Superman lives his life for others; what things he does for himself are mostly only to allow him to better serve others; and the one thing he DOES do for himself (Clark Kent) is not exactly a high indulgence. His Batman follows Ayn Rand's philosophy to the letter, so Batman is him. Superman is his foil and of course in his series he uses Superman to show how his beliefs are superior and how he is right. Miller is incapable of portraying Superman in any sort of favorable light-it literally goes against his personal philosophy.
This is why the responsible thing for DC to do would have been to never let him touch the character. Frank Miller should never be allowed to write Superman under any circumstances. Not if they give a damn about Superman, that is.
Superman had children in those sort of stories before, like in Superman-Red and Superman-Blue, plus the super-sons. My point is, Miller was breaking no new ground by giving Superman a child. And I find the Superman/Wonder Woman coupling pretty lame.
Even though DKR/DK2 were not canon, it started the trope of Superman being a weak boy scout who took orders and was Batman's inferior, morally, mentally and when it came down to it, in a physical confrontation. Miller's point was that if someone embraced his philosophies like his Batman did, then they could become even greater than a god, which is what Superman is. That's why the philosophy of his Batman (not the real Batman) clashes with the philosophy of Superman, which is "Do good for others and every man can be a Superman"-transcendence through altruism. Superman engages in violence only when necessary but he still does, but besides that (although that is a huge besides), he has a Gandhi type philosophy. "The best way to find yourself is to lose yourself in the service of others."- Superman's credo is pretty similar to that saying of Gandhi's.
Miller explained: "I stress that Superman and Batman are enemies, and that Superman and Batman have been enemies for decades. They've never liked each other. Batman has tremendous contempt for Superman because he's such a "good boy," because he takes orders, from the President, among other people. Superman is something of a federal agent. And Superman, frankly, is scared of Batman. Because Batman represents to a certain extent, his own dark side. Which Superman doesn't want to look at. They imply completely different points of view. Superman implies a benevolent world - Batman implies a malevolent world. I cannot see two personalities like that getting along, acting friendly."
http://www.comicscube.com/2010/05/clearing-up-misconception-about-frank.htmlOriginally Posted by Frank Miller
The most questionable thing I did was make Superman a government agent. If this had been a Superman story, I'd never have done that - and I know that, because I have a Superman story I want to tell someday. In this story, Batman was the hero, so the world was built around him."
What Frank Miller says about Superman in Comics Interview #31 makes it clear that Frank Miller does not hate Superman.
"Superman is such a great character. Superman was created during the Depression in response to a feeling of powerlessness, as a statement by the boys who made him up, that we do have power! Superman was the common man, he fought battles for the rights of people. Many of his stories are anti-war statements. They make the very strong point that in war, men are murdered by their own government! Superman would drag generals to the front line of battlefields so that they'd be in danger and realize that their men were. Superman fought corrupt employers, robber barons, he actually represented something -- the common man. What I discovered is that when you're working on a character like Superman -- that legend is really what's in control. The essential things that makes Superman had to be in John Byrne's version and in mine.
Originally I intended to avoid the whole issue of Superman in the story (Batman: The Dark Knight Returns) because I thought his presence would dwarf Batman. I had originally planned on just simply coming up with some excuse that got him off the planet at the time the adventure takes place. However, as I thought about it I found ways to use Superman's history to make it conceivable that Superman could exist and yet the world could still be a lousy place to live in. As a matter of fact Superman is now a major force to the series - he permeates it."
Batman's methods can't be nice. Much of what he does to criminals is staged like a horror movie. He's the hero who acts like a villain - the epitome of the Dionysian hero, just as Superman - the Appollonian hero. In Christian terms, Batman commits evil to fight evil. And the whole problem with Batman is that he makes no compromises along the way. When he comes out of retirement he acts exactly as he did before. Except he's a bit less patient now because he's only got a certain amount of time left. The central conflict is the world versus Batman.
I stress that Superman and Batman are enemies, and that Superman and Batman have been enemies for decades. They've never liked each other. Batman has tremendous contempt for Superman because he's such a "good boy," because he takes orders, from the President, among other people. Superman is something of a federal agent. And Superman, frankly, is scared of Batman. Because Batman represents to a certain extent, his own dark side. Which Superman doesn't want to look at. They imply completely different points of view. Superman implies a benevolent world - Batman implies a malevolent world. I cannot see two personalities like that getting along, acting friendly.
Originally, my feeling was much like many other people's - I had always thought that Robin was a real pain-in-the-ass, but I now realize what a brilliant creation it was, because it really does give a human context to Batman's character. If Batman is done properly, he's such a powerhouse that he needs a restraining figure - and just a human being to be with him, especially a brightly-colored child, as perverse an idea as it is that a grown man would drag a child into the bullets!"
Originally Posted by Frank Miller
"The most questionable thing I did was make Superman a government agent. If this had been a Superman story, I'd never have done that - and I know that, because I have a Superman story I want to tell someday. In this story, Batman was the hero, so the world was built around him."
Originally Posted by Frank Miller
"The most questionable thing I did was make Superman a government agent. If this had been a Superman story, I'd never have done that - and I know that, because I have a Superman story I want to tell someday. In this story, Batman was the hero, so the world was built around him."
Originally Posted by Frank Miller
"The most questionable thing I did was make Superman a government agent. If this had been a Superman story, I'd never have done that - and I know that, because I have a Superman story I want to tell someday. In this story, Batman was the hero, so the world was built around him."
Originally Posted by ManBat
And Frank Miller's idea that these superheroes would be vilified by parents groups, the media, and be called in for questioning by a Senate Sub-Committee was modeled after the real-life vilifying of these characters and the U.S. government proceedings against them in the 1950s. In reality these superheroes Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman were vilified by parents groups, the media, a psychologist named Frederick Wertham and a Senate Sub-Committee on Juvenile Delinquency called the comic book publishers in for questioning and they eventually make a pact with the government that they would give them their obedience or disappear. It happened in 1954 and the original strict Comics Code was created, those that weren't code approved were forced out of publication because the threat of newsdealer boycotts were pressuring them into not selling what somebody had found offensive. DC editors had been censoring Batman comics since 1941 when they created an Editorial Advisory Board so by the 1950s it was actually the horror and crime comics Crime Suspenstories, Crime Does Not Pay, Tales of the Crypt, Vault of Fear, Haunt of Fear, that made comics all look like monsters and really soiled them in the public eye. Batman is at his core a horror-esque character dressing as a bat to frighten and had very brutal methods before DC editors censored the character, so Frank Miller puts Batman in the role that the horror and crime comics and their publisher Bill Gaines were in at the time that these things really happened.
Superman was MUCH more anti establishment in his early days and he stayed that way for a longer period of time than Batman did. And once editorial edicts made both characters become part of the establishment, Batman was every bit the smiling do-gooder that Superman was, if not more with his tweener sidekick and his elderly English butler, not to mention him constantly paling around with the police commissioner of Gotham City who literally had him on speed dial and a gigantic light to let him know when to come running.
Anyone who thinks Superman is not massively disrespected in DKR is reading it wrong. he's a government stooge, a sellout, and Batman makes him his personal *****. Why is him having a daughter with Wonder Woman so great? It's not like he hasn't had children in other Imaginary Stories/Elseworlds. It doesn't matter-DKR is what started it all. It's where Superman went from being the patriarch of the superhero fraternity to being Batman's personal ***** and a loser. For the next 25 years, variations of Miller's Superman permeated DC's comics as Superman was a whiner, an establishment stooge, and of course Batman's eternal inferior. Superman went from being the greatest superhero of all time to DC's designated jobber. And that, along with the abandonment as Superman as the real persona and Clark as the disguise, is exactly why Superman sales went in the toilet. DKR started Batman's ascension to the top spot in DC, and began Superman's fall from grace.
Every Superman fan should read it, so as to see what we are up against with people who either hate, dislike, or don't understand the character. And it's also a great example of how one ******* who becomes a popular artist can ruin a character that has been around since 1938, reducing them to a point of ridicule and near-irrelevance. Because that is what DKR started.
Miller's hatred of Superman comes from his Randian personal beliefs-it is simply part of the core of who he is and what he believes in to hate Superman. Superman stands for what Miller is against. Any hardcore objectivist (which Miller is) will find a pure altruist like Superman appalling. Superman lives his life for others; what things he does for himself are mostly only to allow him to better serve others; and the one thing he DOES do for himself (Clark Kent) is not exactly a high indulgence. His Batman follows Ayn Rand's philosophy to the letter, so Batman is him. Superman is his foil and of course in his series he uses Superman to show how his beliefs are superior and how he is right. Miller is incapable of portraying Superman in any sort of favorable light-it literally goes against his personal philosophy.
This is why the responsible thing for DC to do would have been to never let him touch the character. Frank Miller should never be allowed to write Superman under any circumstances. Not if they give a damn about Superman, that is.
Just last night found myself up against an arguement with two TDKR loving friends, who genuinely think it's an accurate portrayal of Superman, and think Batman would always kick Superman's ****.
I think people defend Miller because like them, Miller knows nothing about the characters he writes stories with...or ignores their history so as to make them fit whatever point he is trying to make. Miller either didn't know or ignored that it was Batman, not Superman, who first because a part of the legal establishment (The People VS. The Batman, BATMAN #7, October/November, 1941) while Superman was still being hunted and shot at by police as late as Action Comics #47, Apr 1942. He also either was ignorant or ignored the numerous early Superman stories where he bent or broke the law, treated government officials like they were idiots, and even was attacked by the US military. Superman was MUCH more anti establishment in his early days and he stayed that way for a longer period of time than Batman did. And once editorial edicts made both characters become part of the establishment, Batman was every bit the smiling do-gooder that Superman was, if not more with his tweener sidekick and his elderly English butler, not to mention him constantly paling around with the police commissioner of Gotham City who literally had him on speed dial and a gigantic light to let him know when to come running.
Miller warped all those characters to fit his story and his agenda. DKR and DK2 are reason #1 that I feel characters should be kept true to their creators intentions, not warped by some jackhole who is writing a bunch of self-indulgent Mary Sue ****.
I agree with all of that.
Just last night found myself up against an arguement with two TDKR loving friends, who genuinely think it's an accurate portrayal of Superman, and think Batman would always kick Superman's ****.
Doesn't matter that I try and point out what Superman should really be, or how he used to be portrayed.
They are just laughing and laughing, superman got beat the **** out of, it's great!
So why did DC allow that to happen. Why did they allow a story like this to even see the light of day? And why did they suddenly think that because the book was a success, that meant Superman would be more of a success if they kept showing him getting beaten...
Where they simply trying to appeal to people who hate Superman's sadistic side?!
*sigh*