Was the Dark Knight Returns ever actually good?

[Fox12]

We all know that BvS has had a mixed reception. While I personally thought it was okay, one of the biggest complaints has been that Batman was too violent. While I personally agree with this, there can be no denying that it's faithful to the source material. It may not be a faithful batman story, but it's a very faithful Frank Miller story. Yet, despite being critically panned, it's largely based on one of the most famous comic books ever.

And this raises the question: was The Dark Knight Returns ever actually good? Or was it simply a byproduct of comics awkward, angst ridden teen years? Reading it again, the book is filled with cringe worthy slang and dialogue, boorish humor, and silly, over the top violence. The batmobile is a literal tank, and batman fires of missiles and bullets with glee (they're rubber, I swear). It even features an evil Superman. Compared to this, BvS seems tame. A lot of people say that Frank Miller lost his mojo a few years ago. I wonder, now, if he ever even had it to begin with.

 

[Redryhno]

Ehh...if you think it portrays an evil Supes, then I don't know what you read since it's largely more an anti-establishment story. Superman is never portrayed as evil, just overly idealistic and essentially a sorta angsty psuedo-shounen hero in that the only reason he agreed to being the world's protector was everyone else in the JLA was going to be hunted down and killed if he didn't do what the government wanted. I mean, the guy did facetank a nuke to save a huge amount of people still. If he was evil I don't think he would've done those things.

And I will agree that it does have some "product of its time" things in it, but you've got to remember that it could just as easily be making fun of it. Despite what people think of Miller, he is very much capable of poking fun at himself and his writing. I mean, he goes out of his way to say "they're all rubber, I SWEAR", while he's got a smirk on his face. And pretty much everything involving the new Robin?

And you remember all the TV spots that I personally think made the comic as well-remembered as it is since it gave alot of different points of view with pretty much every character in them changing some part of their opinion on what was going on in regards to the story.

So, do I think it was ever actually good? Yeah, I still think it's on a "need to read" list for Bat-fans. And sure, it's got cringe-worthy stuff in it, but then again, that hasn't changed in thirty years. We still have writers that reach for meanings and humor in their writing these days. I'd argue it's more prevalent honestly especially with alot of the "diversity" comics than most. But again, that could just be me.

 

[Silvanus]

SPOILER ALERT!

The Dark Knight Returns is an absolutely spectacular comic, in my view. It captures the tone of Batman perfectly for me, and portrays a very believable schism between the two heroes and how they operate. Superman isn't evil at all; he's driven by circumstance and duty to fight Batman, and is instrumental in helping him fake his death.

The only slightly sour note for me is the art style, which isn't my cup of tea, but may be for others. Too rough.

 

[Godzillarich(aka tf2godz)]

I hate Frank Miller but I think the story still holds up. I will admit a lot of the more questionable things in the story but only really becomes cringe worthy when you know Frank Miller's later works. Like when you read holy terror(AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH) or the dark Knight returns back to back you can see similar ailments. Although one scene I think separates them. after Superman assumedly dies and a plane crashes into a building, Gotham goes insane and people start to riot and attack random people. During this a priest got caught under some rubble and a mutant of all people( who have been shown throughout the story in not a positive light) save him. It's a very heartwarming scene, showing there's good people everywhere. now compare that to holy terror and you can see how much is changed.

one thing I will agree with you one is the artwork. at best I've always found his artwork tolerable but not really that great. It also makes the story really hard to follow sometimes to the point I have to reread something multiple times. other than that I still think it holds up


ps. Sorry for spelling

 

[Fox12]

SPOILER ALERT!

The Dark Knight Returns is an absolutely spectacular comic, in my view. It captures the tone of Batman perfectly for me, and portrays a very believable schism between the two heroes and how they operate. Superman isn't evil at all; he's driven by circumstance and duty to fight Batman, and is instrumental in helping him fake his death.

The only slightly sour note for me is the art style, which isn't my cup of tea, but may be for others. Too rough.

Out of curiosity, why do you think this worked for most people in Dark Knight Returns, and not in Batman v Superman? Assuming you've seen the second one, of course. I thought they were quite similar. I mean, the only time I remember batman killing anyone in the film was during the batmobile chase scene, and I have a hard time believing no one died during this exchange in the comic:

Spoiler

 

[Silvanus]

Out of curiosity, why do you think this worked for most people in Dark Knight Returns, and not in Batman v Superman? Assuming you've seen the second one, of course. I thought they were quite similar. I mean, the only time I remember batman killing anyone in the film was during the batmobile chase scene, and I have a hard time believing no one died during this exchange in the comic:

Spoiler

I haven't actually seen BvS yet, though I do intend to. Most of the criticisms I've heard, though, don't tend to focus on Batman (or Affleck), but rather on writing and direction. I don't know how representative that is of most criticism.

In that image, the text seems to indicate that its the Mutants' own armaments that are causing the explosions and doing most of the damage. I think a lot of people would be fine with a Batman who let people die, rather than one who killed; look at the climax of Batman Begins, for example, in which he does just that. Went down fine as far as I know.

I prefer a Batman who does all he can to prevent death in his adversaries, but I can see others draw the line a little further back, at doing the killing himself. Frank Miller would be one of them, undoubtedly (the author of TDKR).

 

[Sixcess]

I have a hard time believing no one died during this exchange in the comic:

Quoting the last caption, with a slight change of emphasis...

They do each other a lot of damage.

I daresay TvTropes would call that Technical Pacifism but I think... close enough.

If The Dark Knight Returns has lost some of its impact in the last... jeez, thirty years give or take... it's more to do with so many of the things it invented being revisited, reworked and rehashed over and over again. This wasn't a byproduct of comics awkward, angst ridden teen years - this, along with The Killing Joke and Watchmen ushered in the entire dark 'n gritty modern age of comic books, for better and for worse.

It's not perfect by any means, and there are elements than, reading it now, lean a bit too close to some of Miller's later, dodgier work, but I think it's still damn good and one of the best things Miller ever did, alongside his early Daredevil work.

Aside from anything else, the slow reveal of Batman on his first night back is one of the best sequences I have ever read in a comic book.

 

[Ogoid]

Eeeehh... a couple of years ago I would have told you, with no hesitation whatsoever, that yes, it most definitely was.

But Frank Miller has since, in my opinion, descended into something I think could only be described as self-parody, both in his works and in his personal views; and while I honestly think that shouldn't have any effect on his past work, it's become very hard for me to go back to TDKR (or Sin City, or 300, etc) and not find the seeds, so to speak, of pretty much all I dislike about current Miller sitting right there.

I don't know, honestly. I haven't read it in a while, and for the sake of the esteem I've once held that book in, I'm not in much of a hurry to do so again.

 

[Fox12]

I have a hard time believing no one died during this exchange in the comic:

Quoting the last caption, with a slight change of emphasis...

They do each other a lot of damage.

I daresay TvTropes would call that Technical Pacifism but I think... close enough.

If The Dark Knight Returns has lost some of its impact in the last... jeez, thirty years give or take... it's more to do with so many of the things it invented being revisited, reworked and rehashed over and over again. This wasn't a byproduct of comics awkward, angst ridden teen years - this, along with The Killing Joke and Watchmen ushered in the entire dark 'n gritty modern age of comic books, for better and for worse.

It's not perfect by any means, and there are elements than, reading it now, lean a bit too close to some of Miller's later, dodgier work, but I think it's still damn good and one of the best things Miller ever did, alongside his early Daredevil work.

Aside from anything else, the slow reveal of Batman on his first night back is one of the best sequences I have ever read in a comic book.

I think it's an interesting question, though.

Spoiler

I've heard people call batman a killer in BvS for branding pedophiles, who he knows are going to be killed in prison. He isn't doing it himself, but does it really count as non-murder if he knows someone else is going to do the killing for him? And is he really innocent of killing if he knows that the mutants are going to blow themselves apart?