Batman is the “hero” of DKR in the classical sense, but that does not make him the “good guy.” Even as a kid, I understood this. Batman in DKR is a morally/ethically compromised person. He isn’t someone to look up to. He’s a character study, and that made the book interesting.
True, notice how he tries to convince himself that he didn't kill Joker by simply imagining him snapping his own neck like for god's sake Joker was paralyzed to the point he couldn't move a finger, but he apparently could move his broken neck to break it more. Add to that the amount of chaos on display after Batman's appearance where he attracts the worst kind of mad people like Joker to come out and kill many innocents and cause chaos because that's what Batman's presence brings. In the story, we get a second commissioner, one who isn't buddy buddy with Batman and one who won't give him a pass for his actions and it's shown when she sees him with Carrie Kelly (which in normal Batman story would be justified and given a pass as ''Robin is the light to Batman's darkness''), but here she adds to his list of crimes child endangerment which would be the normal and logical thing to do if Gordon wasn't so easy on Batman. Batman got some fascistic elements to his story with the influence of younger people, with Carrie and the Mutants and it goes wrong with the mutants where they start killing in the name of Batman. Many people bring up Batman breaking the gun panel as proof that TDKR's version of Batman was the righteous hero but fail to realize that Batman himself used the enemy's gun in the story before that point and that this panel was him realizing the negative influence he had as a symbol on those young kids and trying to get them away from what they are doing. Batman had to die as a symbol by the end because Bruce realized that he as Batman has a negative effect on Gotham, that the young generation better be inspired by a leader who helps them rebuild instead of going around murdering or inflicting violence on other people and he could do that as Bruce, that's his newfound purpose and why he lets Batman go. Both Batman and Superman weren't right in this comic, but both of them started realizing their mistakes, Batman isn't someone to look up to through that story, but like you nicely said...He is the hero of the story in a classical sense, and that's where people don't get the distinction and think that Cool/brooding means right.
@@LP1ToTheEndOfTime Why would it matter so much that Batman paralyzed the Joker when Joker was randomly going around killing children and adults at the fair?
It’s great that you also acknowledge the contribution of Adams and O’Neil in cementing the new tone for Batman prior to TDK. Both of those writers are integral in the modern incarnation of multiple DC characters from Hal Jordan to the Question and Batman.
What separates TDKR from other "mythic" superhero stories is it actually functions as myth. I think someone could read it hundreds of years from now and get a fairy accurate depiction of late 20th early 21st century American life. Miller's master stroke was recognizing Batman is a more quintessentially American character than say Captain America and of course superman, now we take that for granted.
Hmm, i disagree with that. Both Batman and Superman are broad, universal characters. Captain America is way more specific to a period and place in american culture, that beign WW2 and is an allegory of the people who experienced it. The Marvel characters of the 60's, then, represent the Counter-culture movements. Both Batman and Superman embody diferent aspects of the american experience as well, but they tend to reflect changes in the way people relate to what they themselves are meant to represent -the ideals that they stand for- rather than beign alegories for the "spirit of the time".
@@brunfranc you can disagree but the latest "the batman" trailer proves that batman has been and continues to be more popular in the american psyche longer than either one of those characters. i think you're confusing my statement with batman being the "most american" with the overt symbolism of said characters. Of course captain america was intended to be the embodiment of the american spirit, he wears the flag, but batman has proven to be for better or worse a more american entity based on the fact that his mythos have permeated american culture far more than captain america's (batmobile, joker, robin, batcave etc.) my point is batman somehow reveals things about america that transcends his or any other character's original intention.(i like superman more btw, there's no bias on my part, just a straightforward reading of american tastes.)
@@lefthandedsophiethepop-wit503 Wait, i dont see how that makes him more american, though. Like, i get that there's something about him that really draws the american crowd, but at the same time, Superman has not been portrayed faithfully (as far as im aware), what if this is just a result of the favoritism that batman received from DC and WB? If more characters got their time on the limelight, who is to say how popular they whould be today?
@@brunfranc it's american because americans respond to it the most, culture doesn't have to make sense, that's my point. maybe it's the character's cynical urban violent worldview, or the theme of wealth bruce wayne/batman represents ("chicks dig the car."), these are all earmarks of american culture. Superman for whatever reason doesn't reflect the american collective consciousness like batman does, it's practically an anthropological fact at this point.
@@lefthandedsophiethepop-wit503 i dont buy that for a second(about Superman), i completely agree that Batman is a very american character, but i wont believe that the version of Superman thatw as shown to the public recently is the one that really reflects the character faithfully. Wonder Woman was portrayed well, just as she was in the tv series, but she never got as much exposure as Batman. If she had, who's to say she whould be just as popular as him now?
I like to think that Morrison's All-Star was to Superman what TDK was to Batman, at least in terms of what it was trying to accomplish: A thesis statement on what the character is at its core, bringing them back to their roots but juxtaposing them with the contemporary cultural landscape and how they could evolve to fit in it, althewhile delivering a conclusion to their mythology. Of course, we know Batman was met with more popularity than Superman, mostly, in my opinion, because Superman's rogues gallery still needs to be rewritten to make it on par with Batman's.
@@richardsreviews8820 I would say that as mentioned above all star speaks more into who superman is at his core. He gave up in kingdom come & the outcome being seen in the story.which if you are talking about the character of superman isn't a great trait to look at. All star sees superman make the most of his time & not give in negatively to his fate.
Tre Hubb all star may speak more to Superman’s core, but kingdom come is closer to dark knight returns in how it shows the hero come out of retirement, face new threats of a newer generation, and fight other superheroes.
"Bruce Wayne doesn't accept Batman -- he becomes Batman." One of my favorite moments of the "Batman Beyond" animated series -- which you *really* need to do a video about, seeing how you've analyzed the Frank Miller Batman so thoroughly here :) -- is the one where elderly Bruce Wayne is hospitalized because he hears voices in his head. He's convinced the voices are not real, and it's a plot by his enemies to drive him insane -- and he turns out to be right. The voices were artificially generated, and he wasn't crazy. Terry, the new Batman, asks him how he knew the voices weren't real. Bruce's reply was "I knew because the voices kept calling me Bruce." The *real* voices in his head don't use that name. Also, the Dennis O'Neil-Neal Adams Batman was indeed the "definitive" Batman, but until "Dark Knight" there was one other story arc considered to be the "definitive" Batman: the brief but still well-remembered eight-issue arc by Steve Englehart, most famously remembered for the "Laughing Fish" Joker story.
@dfctomm remember the "Superman" monologue in Kill Bill? Refresher if you need it here: th-cam.com/video/Vzfy9Cl8md0/w-d-xo.html I remember thinking at the time that QT has COMPLETELY missed the point of Superman. He IS Clark Kent. Clark is not a costume, Superman is. I remember there was an arc in the 70s when he wanted to re-claim his Kryptonian heritage and even his Justice League teammates (like WW) start calling him Kal-El (or "Kal"), but after a while he realizes that he didn't LIVE that heritage and he is, at heart, a Kansas farm boy. That monologue better fits Batman. Bruce Wayne is an absolute facade. Bruce Wayne died in crime alley. There is only Batman. I think this was the main factor in his decision to not go through with marrying Selina Kyle. There is no real Bruce to be married to.
For years I've been blathering to anyone who'd listen that DKR is the best superhero comic ever written and Watchmen is the best comic book about superheroes ever written.
I also realized how Miller's interest in Objectivism could factor in his dislike for psychology. That he would believe that sanity and insanity are two separate things and that the lines between the two can never be blurry. That someone can't be crazy and functional at a task or crazy and not be violent or delusional. As well as how our decisions aren't as logical as we'd like to think. This would infuriate an objectivist to hear that man's decisions are more emotional than rational. We aren't as logical as they'd like to think.
@@MutantsInDisguise plus I figured he would dislike the idea that we all have anxiety or that we get depressed. That we can have feelings that keep is from doing anything and makes us question ourselves. When the view of objectivism is with willpower, one can overcome these emotions. Being told that willpower can't overcome anxiety/depression and that we have to live with these things is likely annoying to them.
Considering the glut of analytical and deconstructionist material on DKR, I was interested in your take. Not for lack of faith in an ability to deliver something new, but anticipation of what that new look may be. This was a lot more satisfying than such a succinct look at a well-trodden critical subject ought to be. I’m not much of a slow clapper, but picture a 16 panel grid of my hands parting and colliding.
Excellent video. In my own head canon, I can see two separate through lines in Miller's Batman: 1)Year One to DKR: I could see that young Bruce becoming that old Bruce, and 2) All-Star Batman to DK2. It's the only way I could make sense of SPOILER ALERT FOR OLD COMICS Bruce not being able to kill the joker in one but being able to behead Robin in the other. One Batman still has his moral compass, the other is just a monomaniacal lunatic. One thing I did like in DK2: The idea of Capt. Mar-I mean Shazam living on past Billy Batson's death. Powers did something similar in a storyline, but I'm not sure which came first.
Brilliant video that looks at the Dark Knight Returns. I think calling the story “operatic” is a perfect description of a book that is so larger than life by design. That’s always why I loved it. This really was the story that turned Batman into a legend.
i love the mirroring of the thematic beats of the story in the script instead of just following them "this isn't a fight its a live action recruitment poster" in discussing one of the most impactful moments in the book and to me its most memorable line for example.
I dug Alan Moore's intro in the DKR trade. DK2 is super interesting too as Miller's last Batman story as writer artist and how 9/11 made him totally rework his original direction into Dubya nationalism - that 'Holy Terror' was supposed to be his take on making a War on Terror equivalent to those early Captain America comics - wartime propaganda. I find that super-interesting. Lynn Varley's experimental digital colours where instead of replicating paint she intentionally leaned on the synthetic quality of computer colours - giving us something that can only of been done digitally . From the Miller/Eisner conversation book - Miller trying out a bold cartooning that was ugly but I enjoyed it becuz of that. Even The Atom fake-out opening was cool. Very underrated sequel in my opinion.
Pale skin, green hair, Red liptick and heeled boots are the first things that come to my mind when I think of joker, "darling" Is the word that comes up when I imagine his voice.
Yes, it took me a year and a second reading to even begin to appreciate the subtle cleverness of the story. And how Batman sets up Luthor in the story is pure genius.
I appreciate the due diligence in acknowledging the sequels, and certainly understand why you glossed over them! I find Andy Kuberts art in DK3 Master Race to be some of the best of his career, and that’s probably the only reason I would recommend that book to anyone. Anyways, great analysis as always! I love your videos.
Excellent coverage. Batman is my first and greatest love in comics (even if I hate it sometimes... %$#@ing DC), and TDKR was the second Batman comic I read, right after The Killing Joke and right before Morrison's Arkham Asylum. My previous knowledge of Batman came mostly from cartoons. I think this is a fairly typical path to comics enlightenment. I still marvel at the ingenuity of the graphic aspects of this graphic novel--things like the US flag morphing into Superman's "S." I've run into people who dislike the art, calling it crude. Madness. It's one of the visually smartest mainstream comics out there.
@@slothbaby2104 well... if it's completely true or not, i would say that he managed to write all that material before arriving at his current disdain for the medium, and for the past decade at least.
QUESTION: Any chance you could do a piece on the MARVELS sequel called RUINS? It was INCREDIBLY dark and maybe you could find out why they dramatically switched artists at the end. Also a piece on THE QUESTION would be great!
Great, fascinating, I can appreciate this classic story at a subsurface level I wasn't ever really informed about (the bits of Miller quotes and the Alan Moore snippet), having missed creator interviews in fanzines and such.
All Star, him meeting Spawn, Superman Year One, The Golden Child and Batman Year One are also part of this canon with Batman: Year One belling over into Post Crisis and Rebirth canon. And am actually a big fan of The Last Crusade and Batman: Year One of course. The only total duds are DKR III and Spawn but most of the other work is more interesting than good.
Great commentary, but absolutely impressive "cinematography" (or whatever the term is for plotting and manipulating static images for a video). Nice work!
Thank you for acknowledging Dennis O'Neil's contributions to Batman. Frank Miller's Dark Knight might not be one of my favorite Batman stories of all time, but it helped show superheroes as mythic heroes, and has a a lot of layers that encourages re-reads. Never has a comic book done that prior to Miller's Dark Knight. I loved the final issue, where not only does Batman become a symbol of hope to Gotham City when she suffered a blackout, but also the fight between Batman and Superman (even though I completely disagree with Miller's hatred of Superman), two men whose fight is based purely on resentment and opposite politics.
New sub here, GREAT video essay.. Not to be pedantic, but there are 4 prequels (Batman: Year One/Superman: Year One/All-Star Batman, and Robin the Boy Wonder/The Dark Knight Returns: The Last Crusade and 4 sequels The Dark Knight Strikes Again/DK III: The Master Race/The Dark Knight Universe Presents...(the 9 different connected one - shots inserted into the main books of DK III)/The Dark Knight Returns: The Golden Child. I may be a Miller 'fanboy' but I honestly like all of the books
I'm now curious on your take on Terminal City and it's sequel by Dean Motter and Michael Lark. I myself loved it and found the loose end thematically appropriate.
When I was in my late teens I had read this multiple times. Batman was a badass who did what was needed and superman was a chump and political tool. I thought Frank Miller was hitting the nail on the head about how vapid media had become and how taking it easy on people led society down to degradation. I also really liked Starship Troopers(the novel). Then I grew up and realized there is a lot more to a good society than strong men and violent punishment. Its hard to read Miller's stuff any more without thinking, "you sad, angry, and deluded man"
what a terrific video (although there is some disquieting political analysis missing, but I get it). The problem with Dark Knight is that there was a sequel
Regarding the sequels to Dark Knight -- *and* Watchmen -- my favorite statement on this was a piece in the New York Times. "The American novelist James M. Cain once remarked that he had rarely gone to see the screen version of one of his novels. 'People tell me, don’t you care what they’ve done to your book? I tell them, they haven’t done anything to my book. It’s right there on the shelf. They paid me and that’s the end of it.'" Then there's a story I heard about Isaac Asimov's reaction when he first saw "2001: A Space Odyssey." During the movie's intermission, he supposedly grasped the labels of his friend's jacket and exclaimed, "They're violating the Three Laws of Robotics!" His friend allegedly replied, "Well then, Isaac, why don't you strike them dead with a bolt of lightning?" At which point, again allegedly, Isaac got the point, sat down, and thoroughly enjoyed the rest of the movie." I heard that story but can't find a written reference to back it up.
Frank Miller and too a lesser extent Ridley Scott are proof. If you'rer going to do a wequel wait no more than 10 years at the longest to do it. I think Frank's mind is "different" now ?😉
I dont know about the joker and batman "hate that they love each other" stabbing means that its implied "thrusting" (LOL) I mean I like that interpretation but it isn't mine. I saw the battle as the end of a twisted codependency. One can't fully function without the other in a dysfunctional way. Codependency is usually misinterpreted as love hence the tunnel of love. Plus, the burning of jokers body and the brutality of the fight, I saw it as the batman letting go, and leaving that behind. The fire is usually a symbol of purification, and I saw the brutality of the fight as how brutal an end to a "relationship" especially a codependent toxic relationship can be. I do agree on Joker's fluidity though.
I don't remember precisely, but it was from an early part of his Miracleman run. I do believe it was a phrase used when Miracleman and Bates fought the first time. So, roughly issue #2. I think.
The other way around. Due to the publication of the controversial book "Seduction of the Innocent" in 1954, comic books in general were forced to undergo severe tonal changes to avoid censorship. In Batman's case, his stories during the 50's and 60's were far more light-hearted, campy, science-fiction-oriented. This era was the inspiration for the 1966 show
Unfortunately, you are wrong about the camp TV series influencing the comic character. I hated the TV series because of its ridiculous camp approach. However, I have been reading Batman comics since the 50s and you can clearly see that the TV series took its lead from the comics
Batman Year One and All-Star Batman and Robin are prequels to Dark Knight Returns. Then you have Dark Knight Strikes Again, Dark Knight 3: The Master Race, and Dark Knight 4: The Golden Child.
What do you think comic book writers and artists would've written and drawn their comics if stuff like the SCP Foundation, The Backrooms and more types of internet creepypasta horror came a bit earlier into the mainstream comic book fandom? Do you think that they would've been much more cautious about how to write and draw more mature topics or do you think they would've been ignored or do you think that they would've only further justified the stuff that they were writing? Do you also think that indie stuff like Undertale, Pizza Tower, Team Fortress 2 or more would've changed the comic book landscape as we knew it?
I despise Zach Snyder, but if he had made a film adaptation of The Dark Knight Returns instead of Watchmen he'd have committed one less sin in my eyes.
Sorry for English, but i find this interesting. The main difference of Miller superman from "normal" superman is that one consider USA to be HIS country and his main home and the other is cosmopolite and consider whole planet his home, never acting like weapon for government of any country. So we can see Miller superman being corrupted and become a weapon of US government in act of patriotism, probably his parents in this world was more about "being patriotic" than "being good man". Truth and justice disappeared and the only thing that left is "american way". Never thought about that.
Fascism has nothing to do with strict dissemination of morals or interpretation of justice. Fascism is a politcal movement that puts importance on group identity (not strictly based on any one characteristic), the groups authority of rule, and the states embodiment of that rule. Your interpretaition of this comic is ill informed from your lack of knowledge about the theme you superimpossed on it. Authoritarianism, endoctrination, and Self-rightiousness, yes. Fascism, not so much.
I was a teenager when this came out and I don't remember the word fascism being used in reference to it's content at all. (I may be mistaken. No internet and my political understanding was poor.) Only much later did this seem to be commonly used in reference to this book and I think it may have more to do with some kind revisionism due to the direction the author himself went. On the other hand most of the analysis of Watchmen from that period still remains intact to this day.
I think that it is common place that fascism is conflated with authoritarianism in general discussion, even if as a historical phenomenon, fascism is its own thing. It doesn't mean that it isn't useful to discuss violent authoritarianism in media as "fascism". Maybe there should be a disclaimer that fascism as an construction of Italian politics of the 20th Century is not the subject of this video essay. But even then, we can say that with the disappearance or corruption of the state and the morality of the group in the America of TDKR, Batman is a kind of talisman for said fascist values. In the absence of the dispenser of values of the group, Batman becomes the state. He’s Il Duce of Gotham.
To me, saying Miller is Fascist is what a lot of critics have said of Miller's work. That a fair amount of Miller's work has him come across as a fascist to various critics and fans, that his heroes are in a world run by corrupt, naive idiots and they're the only person around with any smarts and common sense. However Miller, like the late Steve Ditko is an objectivist. This makes the jabs against the liberals in TDK and the tone of his work make sense. That the heroes are in a world that is broken and corrupt and they must force those around them to adopt their views on right and wrong and appropriate behavior. For the jab against the liberals, it's similar to the first Mr. A comic by Ditko, saying that reforming criminals is a garbage dream by touchy feely hippy liberals who are incapable of processing the concept that the criminal is abusing their faith in them and will just go do the exact same crimes all over again. Both works state that criminals can't change their behavior and will forever be criminals. Overall an excellent analysis on how it's different than Watchmen and is great in it's own way.
@12:20 Batman + Superman are best friends for over 40 years, its literally hundreds of comics. So that decades-old success is the FAME and achievement that F.miller is latching himself to and like a parasite is riding on. So if he REALLY thought that the friendship of besties made no sense then he certainly wasnt qualified to handle the subject; if arithmetic makes no sense to me then I'm not qualified to handle arithmetic. Thats why IN the DKR comic F. Miller shows them together not fighting in an open peacful + beautiful country landscape, meeting each other in a friendly environment where you would have a picnic. So miller knew he's standing on the shoulders of giants; The legacy of Two Best friends, two of the most famous superheroes in the world....THE WORLDS FINEST. To give the climactic ending he had to make a mortal defeat a "god" and to do that by way of story of two best friends he had used them in opposite political positions that miller fabricated w/the BANNING of Superheroes in the plot. That's how he could arrange the legacy of two best friends to somehow fight. The law declared superheroes illegal in the country and kept Superman thier little secret to use, tho batman retired before that law was placed so had no conflict, but since he has....RETURNED, well the law isn't having any of that. So the two besties end up meeting together in the lovely open plains as old chums and go "well this is a hell of a thing bruce, whatta we do?" "May the best man win is what we do Clark". And what a battle! Of TWO BEST FRIENDS FOR LIFE.
I don't think Frank Miller understand Superman and Batman's friendship They are the same just on the different side of the same coin but no matter what, they understand each other
A more informed view of Joker would be genderfluid but Miller would not know that and go for Gay Panic instead.Nowadays, commodification has gone in the opposite direction.
Interesting you mention Jason Todd near the end. Miller said that he wrote the four-issue tale so adults could have a comic they could read on a flight without being embarrassed. To me, this meant that Miller was attempting to tell a ""classic" Batman tale that anyone with a passing knowledge of the character could appreciate. At this time -- and I still feel this is true for the most part -- is that "John Q. Public" doesn't know who Jason Todd is. Simply, he is not iconic. Ask a person on the street who Robin is (assuming they actually have an answer), and they will likely respond "Bruce Wayne's youthful ward, Dick Grayson." Ask yourself why doesn't Dick appear in this story? He's certainly more important to the Batman mythos than Green Arrow or even Superman! So why isn't Dick in the story? My theory has always been that's HIS costume on display, not the costume of some nobody not known to the general public. (This may not fit into the sequel stories, but I never read those, nor do I intend to.)
You completely misread the intent of Miller's Dark Knight work. This overly psycho-analytical reductivism is precisely what precipitated Miller's attempts to return the mythic to the Batman mythos. I would also point out that Bruce is an unreliable narrator of his own story, as are we all. Much the same, Miller is an unreliable guide to his own work. An artist creates largely subconsciously, unaware of the realities of objective hows and whys. That's the Miller way, and why Miller's work feels organic while Moore's work feels crafted (precisely). Your denigration of Miller's other Dark Knight works was completely unnecessary.
"Superman represents a compassionate world ... like America" - I dont think you have taken a good look at what america has done to the world in the past 30 years - but COMPASSION certainly doesnt enter into it !
Batman is the “hero” of DKR in the classical sense, but that does not make him the “good guy.” Even as a kid, I understood this. Batman in DKR is a morally/ethically compromised person. He isn’t someone to look up to. He’s a character study, and that made the book interesting.
Jacob DeCoursey well said!
For sure. He is more like rorsarsch
True, notice how he tries to convince himself that he didn't kill Joker by simply imagining him snapping his own neck like for god's sake Joker was paralyzed to the point he couldn't move a finger, but he apparently could move his broken neck to break it more.
Add to that the amount of chaos on display after Batman's appearance where he attracts the worst kind of mad people like Joker to come out and kill many innocents and cause chaos because that's what Batman's presence brings.
In the story, we get a second commissioner, one who isn't buddy buddy with Batman and one who won't give him a pass for his actions and it's shown when she sees him with Carrie Kelly (which in normal Batman story would be justified and given a pass as ''Robin is the light to Batman's darkness''), but here she adds to his list of crimes child endangerment which would be the normal and logical thing to do if Gordon wasn't so easy on Batman.
Batman got some fascistic elements to his story with the influence of younger people, with Carrie and the Mutants and it goes wrong with the mutants where they start killing in the name of Batman.
Many people bring up Batman breaking the gun panel as proof that TDKR's version of Batman was the righteous hero but fail to realize that Batman himself used the enemy's gun in the story before that point and that this panel was him realizing the negative influence he had as a symbol on those young kids and trying to get them away from what they are doing.
Batman had to die as a symbol by the end because Bruce realized that he as Batman has a negative effect on Gotham, that the young generation better be inspired by a leader who helps them rebuild instead of going around murdering or inflicting violence on other people and he could do that as Bruce, that's his newfound purpose and why he lets Batman go.
Both Batman and Superman weren't right in this comic, but both of them started realizing their mistakes, Batman isn't someone to look up to through that story, but like you nicely said...He is the hero of the story in a classical sense, and that's where people don't get the distinction and think that Cool/brooding means right.
@@LP1ToTheEndOfTime Why would it matter so much that Batman paralyzed the Joker when Joker was randomly going around killing children and adults at the fair?
Even the Punisher or Moon Knight looks more sane compared to him.
It’s great that you also acknowledge the contribution of Adams and O’Neil in cementing the new tone for Batman prior to TDK. Both of those writers are integral in the modern incarnation of multiple DC characters from Hal Jordan to the Question and Batman.
That's right! O'Neill & Adams brought Batman back to his dark roots and Miller acknowledged their works when DKR was published.
What separates TDKR from other "mythic" superhero stories is it actually functions as myth. I think someone could read it hundreds of years from now and get a fairy accurate depiction of late 20th early 21st century American life. Miller's master stroke was recognizing Batman is a more quintessentially American character than say Captain America and of course superman, now we take that for granted.
Hmm, i disagree with that. Both Batman and Superman are broad, universal characters. Captain America is way more specific to a period and place in american culture, that beign WW2 and is an allegory of the people who experienced it. The Marvel characters of the 60's, then, represent the Counter-culture movements.
Both Batman and Superman embody diferent aspects of the american experience as well, but they tend to reflect changes in the way people relate to what they themselves are meant to represent -the ideals that they stand for- rather than beign alegories for the "spirit of the time".
@@brunfranc you can disagree but the latest "the batman" trailer proves that batman has been and continues to be more popular in the american psyche longer than either one of those characters. i think you're confusing my statement with batman being the "most american" with the overt symbolism of said characters. Of course captain america was intended to be the embodiment of the american spirit, he wears the flag, but batman has proven to be for better or worse a more american entity based on the fact that his mythos have permeated american culture far more than captain america's (batmobile, joker, robin, batcave etc.) my point is batman somehow reveals things about america that transcends his or any other character's original intention.(i like superman more btw, there's
no bias on my part, just a straightforward reading of american tastes.)
@@lefthandedsophiethepop-wit503 Wait, i dont see how that makes him more american, though. Like, i get that there's something about him that really draws the american crowd, but at the same time, Superman has not been portrayed faithfully (as far as im aware), what if this is just a result of the favoritism that batman received from DC and WB? If more characters got their time on the limelight, who is to say how popular they whould be today?
@@brunfranc it's american because americans respond to it the most, culture doesn't have to make sense, that's my point. maybe it's the character's cynical urban violent worldview, or the theme of wealth bruce wayne/batman represents ("chicks dig the car."), these are all earmarks of american culture. Superman for whatever reason doesn't reflect the american collective consciousness like batman does, it's practically an anthropological fact at this point.
@@lefthandedsophiethepop-wit503 i dont buy that for a second(about Superman), i completely agree that Batman is a very american character, but i wont believe that the version of Superman thatw as shown to the public recently is the one that really reflects the character faithfully. Wonder Woman was portrayed well, just as she was in the tv series, but she never got as much exposure as Batman. If she had, who's to say she whould be just as popular as him now?
I like to think that Morrison's All-Star was to Superman what TDK was to Batman, at least in terms of what it was trying to accomplish: A thesis statement on what the character is at its core, bringing them back to their roots but juxtaposing them with the contemporary cultural landscape and how they could evolve to fit in it, althewhile delivering a conclusion to their mythology. Of course, we know Batman was met with more popularity than Superman, mostly, in my opinion, because Superman's rogues gallery still needs to be rewritten to make it on par with Batman's.
I believe that All Star is the Best Superman story of all time
Greatly put
I would say kingdom come is Superman’s dark knight returns.
@@richardsreviews8820 I would say that as mentioned above all star speaks more into who superman is at his core. He gave up in kingdom come & the outcome being seen in the story.which if you are talking about the character of superman isn't a great trait to look at. All star sees superman make the most of his time & not give in negatively to his fate.
Tre Hubb all star may speak more to Superman’s core, but kingdom come is closer to dark knight returns in how it shows the hero come out of retirement, face new threats of a newer generation, and fight other superheroes.
"Bruce Wayne doesn't accept Batman -- he becomes Batman." One of my favorite moments of the "Batman Beyond" animated series -- which you *really* need to do a video about, seeing how you've analyzed the Frank Miller Batman so thoroughly here :) -- is the one where elderly Bruce Wayne is hospitalized because he hears voices in his head. He's convinced the voices are not real, and it's a plot by his enemies to drive him insane -- and he turns out to be right. The voices were artificially generated, and he wasn't crazy. Terry, the new Batman, asks him how he knew the voices weren't real. Bruce's reply was "I knew because the voices kept calling me Bruce." The *real* voices in his head don't use that name.
Also, the Dennis O'Neil-Neal Adams Batman was indeed the "definitive" Batman, but until "Dark Knight" there was one other story arc considered to be the "definitive" Batman: the brief but still well-remembered eight-issue arc by Steve Englehart, most famously remembered for the "Laughing Fish" Joker story.
@dfctomm remember the "Superman" monologue in Kill Bill? Refresher if you need it here: th-cam.com/video/Vzfy9Cl8md0/w-d-xo.html
I remember thinking at the time that QT has COMPLETELY missed the point of Superman. He IS Clark Kent. Clark is not a costume, Superman is. I remember there was an arc in the 70s when he wanted to re-claim his Kryptonian heritage and even his Justice League teammates (like WW) start calling him Kal-El (or "Kal"), but after a while he realizes that he didn't LIVE that heritage and he is, at heart, a Kansas farm boy.
That monologue better fits Batman. Bruce Wayne is an absolute facade. Bruce Wayne died in crime alley. There is only Batman. I think this was the main factor in his decision to not go through with marrying Selina Kyle. There is no real Bruce to be married to.
Frank Miller is just so freaking good. The kind of artist that inspires & influences generations.
What do you think of his more recent artwork?
For years I've been blathering to anyone who'd listen that DKR is the best superhero comic ever written and Watchmen is the best comic book about superheroes ever written.
I also realized how Miller's interest in Objectivism could factor in his dislike for psychology. That he would believe that sanity and insanity are two separate things and that the lines between the two can never be blurry. That someone can't be crazy and functional at a task or crazy and not be violent or delusional.
As well as how our decisions aren't as logical as we'd like to think. This would infuriate an objectivist to hear that man's decisions are more emotional than rational. We aren't as logical as they'd like to think.
Humans have always been emotional.
@@MutantsInDisguise plus I figured he would dislike the idea that we all have anxiety or that we get depressed. That we can have feelings that keep is from doing anything and makes us question ourselves. When the view of objectivism is with willpower, one can overcome these emotions. Being told that willpower can't overcome anxiety/depression and that we have to live with these things is likely annoying to them.
Considering the glut of analytical and deconstructionist material on DKR, I was interested in your take. Not for lack of faith in an ability to deliver something new, but anticipation of what that new look may be.
This was a lot more satisfying than such a succinct look at a well-trodden critical subject ought to be. I’m not much of a slow clapper, but picture a 16 panel grid of my hands parting and colliding.
Excellent video.
In my own head canon, I can see two separate through lines in Miller's Batman: 1)Year One to DKR: I could see that young Bruce becoming that old Bruce, and 2) All-Star Batman to DK2. It's the only way I could make sense of
SPOILER ALERT FOR OLD COMICS
Bruce not being able to kill the joker in one but being able to behead Robin in the other. One Batman still has his moral compass, the other is just a monomaniacal lunatic.
One thing I did like in DK2: The idea of Capt. Mar-I mean Shazam living on past Billy Batson's death. Powers did something similar in a storyline, but I'm not sure which came first.
Brilliant video that looks at the Dark Knight Returns. I think calling the story “operatic” is a perfect description of a book that is so larger than life by design. That’s always why I loved it. This really was the story that turned Batman into a legend.
Frank Miller's work is pure testosterone, it drips from every page
i love the mirroring of the thematic beats of the story in the script instead of just following them "this isn't a fight its a live action recruitment poster" in discussing one of the most impactful moments in the book and to me its most memorable line for example.
1:31 thank you for crediting Dennis O’Neil and Neal Adams
I dug Alan Moore's intro in the DKR trade. DK2 is super interesting too as Miller's last Batman story as writer artist and how 9/11 made him totally rework his original direction into Dubya nationalism - that 'Holy Terror' was supposed to be his take on making a War on Terror equivalent to those early Captain America comics - wartime propaganda. I find that super-interesting. Lynn Varley's experimental digital colours where instead of replicating paint she intentionally leaned on the synthetic quality of computer colours - giving us something that can only of been done digitally . From the Miller/Eisner conversation book - Miller trying out a bold cartooning that was ugly but I enjoyed it becuz of that. Even The Atom fake-out opening was cool. Very underrated sequel in my opinion.
God I love ya videos
Btw are ya gonna do Swamp thing or not?
I like how to mention the squares and prequel. Like a boss skirting around a reference call for his ex employee. Because he doesn't want to get sued
Fantastic examination. Good to see the connection between the rebuilding of the 70s and the 80s became.
Pale skin, green hair, Red liptick and heeled boots are the first things that come to my mind when I think of joker, "darling" Is the word that comes up when I imagine his voice.
I'd love to hear you talk about DK2, I find it one of the most fascinating sequels in comics
Yes, it took me a year and a second reading to even begin to appreciate the subtle cleverness of the story. And how Batman sets up Luthor in the story is pure genius.
Yes it so BAd
@@fredrikgranstrom6743 filtered
@@sweeneezy what
Great video! So many insights about the genre and the time of the release of this book. I have learn so much from your channel.
I appreciate the due diligence in acknowledging the sequels, and certainly understand why you glossed over them! I find Andy Kuberts art in DK3 Master Race to be some of the best of his career, and that’s probably the only reason I would recommend that book to anyone. Anyways, great analysis as always! I love your videos.
When asked which is better; Watchmen or The Dark Knight Returns, the answer is Brat Pack
Finally a man of culture
one of the best GN ever
Whats a GN?
Key Path
Goofy Nerds
@@keypath4389, Graphic novel
For sure
Isn’t a Graphic novel its a Comic Book!!! Jerk!!
Excellent coverage. Batman is my first and greatest love in comics (even if I hate it sometimes... %$#@ing DC), and TDKR was the second Batman comic I read, right after The Killing Joke and right before Morrison's Arkham Asylum. My previous knowledge of Batman came mostly from cartoons. I think this is a fairly typical path to comics enlightenment.
I still marvel at the ingenuity of the graphic aspects of this graphic novel--things like the US flag morphing into Superman's "S." I've run into people who dislike the art, calling it crude. Madness. It's one of the visually smartest mainstream comics out there.
Did you know Alan Moore regrets making the Killing Joke?
@@slothbaby2104 i think Moore pretty much regrets comics. Period.
@@youraveragecrownofthorns8919 If that were completely true he would have never made Tom Strong, 1963 and his run on Supreme
@@slothbaby2104 well... if it's completely true or not, i would say that he managed to write all that material before arriving at his current disdain for the medium, and for the past decade at least.
@@youraveragecrownofthorns8919 He made Tom Strong and America's best after he made the Killing joke
Another splendid job. Gave me a new impression of the work. Much obliged.
I'm happy to see your videos every time. Thank you!
QUESTION: Any chance you could do a piece on the MARVELS sequel called RUINS? It was INCREDIBLY dark and maybe you could find out why they dramatically switched artists at the end. Also a piece on THE QUESTION would be great!
Great, fascinating, I can appreciate this classic story at a subsurface level I wasn't ever really informed about (the bits of Miller quotes and the Alan Moore snippet), having missed creator interviews in fanzines and such.
All Star, him meeting Spawn, Superman Year One, The Golden Child and Batman Year One are also part of this canon with Batman: Year One belling over into Post Crisis and Rebirth canon. And am actually a big fan of The Last Crusade and Batman: Year One of course. The only total duds are DKR III and Spawn but most of the other work is more interesting than good.
DKR III wasn’t written by Frank Miller.
Why was'nt Golden Child mentioned at the end also?
I'd love to hear you do a take on the original Civil War Marvel event comic series
Great commentary, but absolutely impressive "cinematography" (or whatever the term is for plotting and manipulating static images for a video). Nice work!
As always, top notch.
True
Just to let you know this is one of my favorite channels i really enjoy your videos👍
Always so well done. Thanks.
"THE THEYVE BEEN ACKNOWLEDGED" perfect description of the continuations, yes
This is one of my favorites
Thank you for acknowledging Dennis O'Neil's contributions to Batman. Frank Miller's Dark Knight might not be one of my favorite Batman stories of all time, but it helped show superheroes as mythic heroes, and has a a lot of layers that encourages re-reads. Never has a comic book done that prior to Miller's Dark Knight. I loved the final issue, where not only does Batman become a symbol of hope to Gotham City when she suffered a blackout, but also the fight between Batman and Superman (even though I completely disagree with Miller's hatred of Superman), two men whose fight is based purely on resentment and opposite politics.
the melody of the begining makes me soooo nostalgic i wanna cry, for real.
Oh sweet! Caught this right on time! Made my afternoon! 🤙
Funny how the world of the dark knight returns mirrors our own current day world so much it's almost scary
New sub here, GREAT video essay..
Not to be pedantic, but there are 4 prequels (Batman: Year One/Superman: Year One/All-Star Batman, and Robin the Boy Wonder/The Dark Knight Returns: The Last Crusade and 4 sequels The Dark Knight Strikes Again/DK III: The Master Race/The Dark Knight Universe Presents...(the 9 different connected one - shots inserted into the main books of DK III)/The Dark Knight Returns: The Golden Child.
I may be a Miller 'fanboy' but I honestly like all of the books
You are like comicbook asmr in a wired way
I'm now curious on your take on Terminal City and it's sequel by Dean Motter and Michael Lark. I myself loved it and found the loose end thematically appropriate.
love this channel!
Agree with you!
Excellent job
Current DC management wouldn't even publish this
Nice analisis
Your entire repetroire will be in the Library of Congress one day. What an amazing well scripted series you have sir!
359 likes from 2386 views and ZERO dislikes!?!!???!!
Keep this up you 100% ten minutes into every future.
When I was in my late teens I had read this multiple times. Batman was a badass who did what was needed and superman was a chump and political tool. I thought Frank Miller was hitting the nail on the head about how vapid media had become and how taking it easy on people led society down to degradation. I also really liked Starship Troopers(the novel). Then I grew up and realized there is a lot more to a good society than strong men and violent punishment. Its hard to read Miller's stuff any more without thinking, "you sad, angry, and deluded man"
Ouch. Sounds like you lost your balls
@@DeltaAssaultGamingouch, looks lije you have your masculinity shattered. 😅
I don't think anybody ever pegged the media for what they truly are better than Frank did in this book .
Excellent content
excellent videos
Speaking of Miller, not sure if you take requests but I'd be interested in your thoughts on Ronin. :)
what a terrific video (although there is some disquieting political analysis missing, but I get it). The problem with Dark Knight is that there was a sequel
Regarding the sequels to Dark Knight -- *and* Watchmen -- my favorite statement on this was a piece in the New York Times. "The American novelist James M. Cain once remarked that he had rarely gone to see the screen version of one of his novels. 'People tell me, don’t you care what they’ve done to your book? I tell them, they haven’t done anything to my book. It’s right there on the shelf. They paid me and that’s the end of it.'" Then there's a story I heard about Isaac Asimov's reaction when he first saw "2001: A Space Odyssey." During the movie's intermission, he supposedly grasped the labels of his friend's jacket and exclaimed, "They're violating the Three Laws of Robotics!" His friend allegedly replied, "Well then, Isaac, why don't you strike them dead with a bolt of lightning?" At which point, again allegedly, Isaac got the point, sat down, and thoroughly enjoyed the rest of the movie." I heard that story but can't find a written reference to back it up.
8:32 Joker is an excellent example of that
Frank Miller and too a lesser extent Ridley Scott are proof. If you'rer going to do a wequel wait no more than 10 years at the longest to do it. I think Frank's mind is "different" now ?😉
fantastic video
I dont know about the joker and batman "hate that they love each other" stabbing means that its implied "thrusting" (LOL) I mean I like that interpretation but it isn't mine.
I saw the battle as the end of a twisted codependency. One can't fully function without the other in a dysfunctional way. Codependency is usually misinterpreted as love hence the tunnel of love. Plus, the burning of jokers body and the brutality of the fight, I saw it as the batman letting go, and leaving that behind. The fire is usually a symbol of purification, and I saw the brutality of the fight as how brutal an end to a "relationship" especially a codependent toxic relationship can be.
I do agree on Joker's fluidity though.
Nice analysis.
Superb
I wish DC would stop making sequels to The Dark Knight Returns: each one of them waters down the original.
Blame Frank.
Love you
7:37
Did you change the channel name?
Love it
11:01
You know where that Alan Moore quote came from?
I don't remember precisely, but it was from an early part of his Miracleman run. I do believe it was a phrase used when Miracleman and Bates fought the first time. So, roughly issue #2. I think.
Is he a man dreaming he's a bat, or a bat dreaming he's a man?
Chance of a DK2 retrospective?
You forgot The Golden Child the fifth book of the series
Did the Batman tv show move the comic into a campier direction, or was it the other way around?
The other way around. Due to the publication of the controversial book "Seduction of the Innocent" in 1954, comic books in general were forced to undergo severe tonal changes to avoid censorship. In Batman's case, his stories during the 50's and 60's were far more light-hearted, campy, science-fiction-oriented. This era was the inspiration for the 1966 show
9:20
Unfortunately, you are wrong about the camp TV series influencing the comic character. I hated the TV series because of its ridiculous camp approach. However, I have been reading Batman comics since the 50s and you can clearly see that the TV series took its lead from the comics
10:30
Speaking of the devil... my like was the 666th.... I swear to God
Batman being possessed by a demon would explain why he gets along with Jason Blood/Etrigan so well.
He does?
👏🏻 👏🏻 👏🏻 👊🏼
There's a prequel?
Batman Year One and All-Star Batman and Robin are prequels to Dark Knight Returns.
Then you have Dark Knight Strikes Again, Dark Knight 3: The Master Race, and Dark Knight 4: The Golden Child.
Yes.
I think i'm the only person in the world that actually likes Lara
What do you think comic book writers and artists would've written and drawn their comics if stuff like the SCP Foundation, The Backrooms and more types of internet creepypasta horror came a bit earlier into the mainstream comic book fandom? Do you think that they would've been much more cautious about how to write and draw more mature topics or do you think they would've been ignored or do you think that they would've only further justified the stuff that they were writing? Do you also think that indie stuff like Undertale, Pizza Tower, Team Fortress 2 or more would've changed the comic book landscape as we knew it?
TV is projected a little under 30fps bruh
10:00 Force of Will is not ''Fascism'', and that's the only argument you gave to justify the use of the Term. which is pretty fascist in itself
please look at the mask comics
I despise Zach Snyder, but if he had made a film adaptation of The Dark Knight Returns instead of Watchmen he'd have committed one less sin in my eyes.
Punisher Max turned out to be better.
Maybe
*☼ hot*
If only they had stuck to this story line, Batman V Superman would have been much better. Doomsday, nor Lex, were needed.
Not really.
No you don’t base your first mainline dcu Batman Superman story on an DKR
Sorry for English, but i find this interesting.
The main difference of Miller superman from "normal" superman is that one consider USA to be HIS country and his main home and the other is cosmopolite and consider whole planet his home, never acting like weapon for government of any country.
So we can see Miller superman being corrupted and become a weapon of US government in act of patriotism, probably his parents in this world was more about "being patriotic" than "being good man". Truth and justice disappeared and the only thing that left is "american way".
Never thought about that.
☆☆☆☆
Fascism has nothing to do with strict dissemination of morals or interpretation of justice. Fascism is a politcal movement that puts importance on group identity (not strictly based on any one characteristic), the groups authority of rule, and the states embodiment of that rule. Your interpretaition of this comic is ill informed from your lack of knowledge about the theme you superimpossed on it. Authoritarianism, endoctrination, and Self-rightiousness, yes. Fascism, not so much.
I was a teenager when this came out and I don't remember the word fascism being used in reference to it's content at all. (I may be mistaken. No internet and my political understanding was poor.) Only much later did this seem to be commonly used in reference to this book and I think it may have more to do with some kind revisionism due to the direction the author himself went. On the other hand most of the analysis of Watchmen from that period still remains intact to this day.
I think that it is common place that fascism is conflated with authoritarianism in general discussion, even if as a historical phenomenon, fascism is its own thing. It doesn't mean that it isn't useful to discuss violent authoritarianism in media as "fascism". Maybe there should be a disclaimer that fascism as an construction of Italian politics of the 20th Century is not the subject of this video essay. But even then, we can say that with the disappearance or corruption of the state and the morality of the group in the America of TDKR, Batman is a kind of talisman for said fascist values. In the absence of the dispenser of values of the group, Batman becomes the state. He’s Il Duce of Gotham.
To me, saying Miller is Fascist is what a lot of critics have said of Miller's work. That a fair amount of Miller's work has him come across as a fascist to various critics and fans, that his heroes are in a world run by corrupt, naive idiots and they're the only person around with any smarts and common sense. However Miller, like the late Steve Ditko is an objectivist. This makes the jabs against the liberals in TDK and the tone of his work make sense. That the heroes are in a world that is broken and corrupt and they must force those around them to adopt their views on right and wrong and appropriate behavior. For the jab against the liberals, it's similar to the first Mr. A comic by Ditko, saying that reforming criminals is a garbage dream by touchy feely hippy liberals who are incapable of processing the concept that the criminal is abusing their faith in them and will just go do the exact same crimes all over again. Both works state that criminals can't change their behavior and will forever be criminals. Overall an excellent analysis on how it's different than Watchmen and is great in it's own way.
@12:20 Batman + Superman are best friends for over 40 years, its literally hundreds of comics.
So that decades-old success is the FAME and achievement that F.miller is latching himself to and like a parasite is riding on.
So if he REALLY thought that the friendship of besties made no sense then he certainly wasnt qualified to handle the subject; if arithmetic makes no sense to me then I'm not qualified to handle arithmetic.
Thats why IN the DKR comic F. Miller shows them together not fighting in an open peacful + beautiful country landscape, meeting each other in a friendly environment where you would have a picnic. So miller knew he's standing on the shoulders of giants; The legacy of Two Best friends, two of the most famous superheroes in the world....THE WORLDS FINEST.
To give the climactic ending he had to make a mortal defeat a "god" and to do that by way of story of two best friends he had used them in opposite political positions that miller fabricated w/the BANNING of Superheroes in the plot.
That's how he could arrange the legacy of two best friends to somehow fight. The law declared superheroes illegal in the country and kept Superman thier little secret to use, tho batman retired before that law was placed so had no conflict, but since he has....RETURNED, well the law isn't having any of that. So the two besties end up meeting together in the lovely open plains as old chums and go "well this is a hell of a thing bruce, whatta we do?" "May the best man win is what we do Clark".
And what a battle!
Of TWO BEST FRIENDS FOR LIFE.
I don't think Frank Miller understand Superman and Batman's friendship
They are the same just on the different side of the same coin but no matter what, they understand each other
I feel like with this story, Bruce understands why Superman did what he did, but doesn’t agree that he should have done it.
@@noahgaming8833 after 4 years
Yeah
A more informed view of Joker would be genderfluid but Miller would not know that and go for Gay Panic instead.Nowadays, commodification has gone in the opposite direction.
Interesting you mention Jason Todd near the end. Miller said that he wrote the four-issue tale so adults could have a comic they could read on a flight without being embarrassed. To me, this meant that Miller was attempting to tell a ""classic" Batman tale that anyone with a passing knowledge of the character could appreciate. At this time -- and I still feel this is true for the most part -- is that "John Q. Public" doesn't know who Jason Todd is. Simply, he is not iconic. Ask a person on the street who Robin is (assuming they actually have an answer), and they will likely respond "Bruce Wayne's youthful ward, Dick Grayson." Ask yourself why doesn't Dick appear in this story? He's certainly more important to the Batman mythos than Green Arrow or even Superman! So why isn't Dick in the story? My theory has always been that's HIS costume on display, not the costume of some nobody not known to the general public. (This may not fit into the sequel stories, but I never read those, nor do I intend to.)
You completely misread the intent of Miller's Dark Knight work. This overly psycho-analytical reductivism is precisely what precipitated Miller's attempts to return the mythic to the Batman mythos. I would also point out that Bruce is an unreliable narrator of his own story, as are we all. Much the same, Miller is an unreliable guide to his own work. An artist creates largely subconsciously, unaware of the realities of objective hows and whys. That's the Miller way, and why Miller's work feels organic while Moore's work feels crafted (precisely). Your denigration of Miller's other Dark Knight works was completely unnecessary.
I believe Miller refered to it as " gave Batman his balls back"
"Superman represents a compassionate world ... like America" - I dont think you have taken a good look at what america has done to the world in the past 30 years - but COMPASSION certainly doesnt enter into it !
jesus. dumbass, the books almost 35 yrs old.
The Dark Knight Returns ruined Batman and is still ruining him to this day.
How did TDKR ruin Batman?
Much like Batman himself, it was a necessary evil. :)
No u
My younger self would've agreed with you.