The Dark Knight Returns animated movie

[The Laughing Fish]

**SPOILERS** - Just attempting to do a review. 

I read TDKR five years ago, and I must admit that my reaction wasn't exactly positive. At first I thought it had a great first chapter, but then I thought everything went downhill from there. My problems with it at the time was I thought there were too many subplots that didn't contribute to the story (e.g. the lunatic who is about to kill an entire theatre audience, the woman's last few moments before being killed at the subway station), too many political themes that not only felt dated for a younger audience - but became hard to understand if you're not from America like me, and I just didn't care for the bleak tone. Last but not least, the quality of the illustration worsened as the plot progressed; making the plot even hard to follow towards the third and fourth chapters too. Nonetheless, I began to slowly appreciate TDKR overtime, and I was eager to see TDKR as a cartoon adaptation and judge it for myself.  I have to say, I thought TDKR was not only a very good adaptation, but I thought that it expressed Frank Miller's plot better as a film.

I'll talk about Part I first. Like the first chapter in the comic, I enjoyed this film a lot. The animation does resemble a lot like the comic's illustration, but it gave it a clear, polished look about it. It mostly stays true to what goes in the first two chapters, but gone are those two subplots I mentioned and replacing them with moments that contributed the story better - e.g. Batman facing off the military official who was responsible for giving the Mutants ammunition in exchange for funding his dying wife's medical treatment. That particular scene gave dramatic tension as opposed to Batman finding the General's dead body draped in the American flag in the comic (or at least that's how I remembered). Furthermore, the film fleshed out Bruce's recovery in the cave as he remembers being at his parents' funeral, making that moment nuanced and defining of Batman's personality. That part, with Bruce saying "you are never finished with me" as the bat approaches is the best scene that defines Batman like I thought he was supposed to be - always dedicated to rid crime of Gotham until the end. I've noticed also that Batman was gentler towards his treatment with Carrie Kelley, unlike how he came across as a Drill Sargeant-like disciplinarian in the comic. The whole film has excellent pacing, perfectly animated action, and contains the comic's realistic public debate about whether Batman is protecting Gotham from crime or if he's actually dangerous as the criminals he defeats. This is something that no live-action Batman film has bothered doing despite the writers were supposedly inspired by comics like these.

Now for Part II. My reaction towards is somewhat similar to the second half of the comic, though I have a rather mixed-to-positive feeling about the animated version. This is not only even more violent than Part I, but I think it's the most violent Batman film, both animated and live-action, ever made. Not even Under the Red Hood was this unsettling. The violence in the comic was graphic, but I felt the violence in this film made everything a little more extreme. The scenes where Joker gasses the TV audience to death, and gunning down every bystander at the theme park while he was being chased after by Batman was by far the worst sort of violence the character ever committed in a non-comic medium, in my opinion. I'm observing this rather than criticizing it, but I'd be lying if I were to say that this isn't unsettling.

The battle between Batman and Superman in the end was a highlight, and up there with the abandoned warehouse and mud fight scenes. Despite some reservations, I still thought Part II was decent, if not quite as satisfying as Part I. So why didn't I like the second half of the plot in TDKR? I simply thought the animated film version fleshed out the plot, whereas the in comic I thought some parts dragged on, mostly because of some subplots I felt did nothing for me and I even misunderstood what was going on because I couldn't get through the poor quality of the illustration. I used to also not like how Superman was being pawn of the government and thought he was being manipulated, but afterwards I realized that he was only doing his best to keep the peace and coming to terms with the world needing to move on from superheroes. From a more simpler point of view, I felt the final confrontation between Batman and Joker was anti-climactic. I understand why it ended the way it did, so the story could end with Batman faking his death to get the US government of his back after fighting Superman, but I still can't help but feel it was slightly anti-climactic. That's just my preference though.

Nothing needs to be said about the voice acting - I believed everybody did their jobs well.

In short, I enjoyed this adaptation of TDKR more than the comic itself. If I had to rate both out of five, I'd give Part I 4.5/5 and Part II 3/5.

By the way, did anyone catch the Burton Batmobile and Reeve Superman poster easter eggs during Part II?

[thecolorsblend]

Guess I never posted my thoughts about the movie. So. On with the show, this is it.

Baggage and Disclaimers- I'm a Superman guy and I don't like how he's presented in TDKR. But whining and complaining about that seems out of place here so we'll simply note that stuff and move on.

Honestly I enjoyed both parts. The break between Parts I and II were done masterfully and the structural change to the story so that Part I ends with the Joker "coming back to life" was absolutely the right call. See, this is how you adapt a story. You structure it in a way that makes sense for your movie without arbitrarily deleting stuff just because.

The line style doesn't bother me. It looks sufficiently like vintage Miller while remaining animation-friendly. All the lines and detail and style he brings doesn't easily lend itself to animation. They cut corners with his style but kept the essential flavor of it. No complaints.

Maybe I'm misremembering TDKR's coloring but I've always hated it. It's just looked BAD to me. I've never been able to relate to the hype about TDKR's color palette. I totally see it with Watchmen's color design because that's awesome but TDKR's coloring? Completely overrated, if you ask me. I don't know what it is that other people are seeing which I'm not but TDKR has always looked like it was colored by a 1st grader to me. I'm glad that the movie version didn't try to replicate the terrible crayony look of TDKR as a comic and instead went with what has become a more traditional route. In fact, it looked like a good bit of the color design in both TDKR I and II could've come from BTAS.

Do I seriously need to mention the voice cast? Weller did a phenomenal job. A lot of times with these sorts of DTV movies, the voice actors sound like they're reading from a card. Maybe they actually are or maybe they're really giving it their best shot but I'm usually completely underwhelmed by the voice acting in a lot of these DC animated movie. But here, the entire cast usually deliver the goods. True, some line readings just sound off and under-rehearsed  but those are the exceptions which prove the rule.

A lot of people have griped about the lack of narration. Yes, it's crucial to TDKR as a comic book. And in this respect, the filmmakers were caught between a rock and a hard place. If they deleted the internal monologues, purists would complain. But if they kept them, you're left with a situation where Batman has a 1/4 of a page of dialogue while someone "sneaks up" on him from less than three feet away and so Batman cripples him. You can't do the full extent of the text justice in the four or five seconds that moment is given on film. Slow-mo would look out of place in this movie, if you ask me, so the filmmakers wisely decided it's best to skip that stuff. Sure, we lose stuff like "this would be a good death... but not good enough", "I think about Sarah and the rest is easy" and "my timing wasn't quite precise enough etc". But this was always going to be a tricky thing; the filmmakers did the best they could. No complaints.

The Joker's river of love escapade was every bit as chaotic, random and bloody as it should've been. This is the moment where the Joker came the closest he ever has to winning. Not just killing Batman but, ultimately, in making Batman a killer. That's what the Joker sees as victory. Killing Batman is one thing; making him kill... ooh, now there is a challenge! And the Joker damned near succeeds. The Joker kills himself as a consolation prize, knowing Batman will be blamed for it but still the Joker had to go to whatever hell waits for him with the full knowledge that when the chips were done, Batman truly was incorruptible. He lost.

Of all DC movies so far, this is the one with the clearest identity and mission statement. To this point, it's like WB has wanted to make movies that do everything and so accomplish nothing. The movies are marketed to kids but include a lot of inappropriate sexual innuendo. The movies are marketed to adults but include a lot of cutesy kid crap. The movies are marketed to women but include lots of violence. The movies are marketed to men but include lots of romantic/relationship crap. The "all things to all people" bull$#!+ annoys me because nothing can be everything to everyone and you only shortchange everyone when you try it.

Superman vs. The Elite, I'm looking right at you.

But that's all less problematic with TDKR because it's tough (maybe impossible) to make this film anything other than what it is while doing Miller's story justice. The same is true to a lesser degree of BY1. In fact, it looks like Miller's Batman work has so far benefited the most from being adapted both in terms of tonal consistency, story fidelity and entertainment value. These weren't really kid stories to begin with so the movies are naturally not kid stories and don't really seem like they were intended for them. That works for me.

I can't imagine any of you haven't seen these things yet but if you haven't, give 'em a shot. They're well worth it.

[Silver Nemesis]

Random trivia of the day- according to the movie's composer, Christopher Drake, Michael Keaton actually passed on doing the voice...of the Joker:
https://twitter.com/DrakeFilmscore/status/358699310566748161

Maybe they should have approached him about playing Batman? Then again, maybe it wouldn't have made a difference. Though it would have been cool if he'd been the first actor to play both Batman and the Joker.

I reckon this is a fairly strong indicator that Keaton isn't interested in returning to the franchise. At this stage he probably sees it as a backwards step in his career.

[thecolorsblend]

Maybe they should have approached him about playing Batman? Then again, maybe it wouldn't have made a difference. Though it would have been cool if he'd been the first actor to play both Batman and the Joker.

Seriously. Val Kilmer is auspicious for having played both Doc Holliday and Wyatt Earp. So what's Keaton's excuse?

I reckon this is a fairly strong indicator that Keaton isn't interested in returning to the franchise. At this stage he probably sees it as a backwards step in his career.

All due respect to Keaton... but what career?

[BatmAngelus]

Though it would have been cool if he'd been the first actor to play both Batman and the Joker.

Technically, this title's been taken by two others.  Michael Dobson did the voice of both Batman and Joker in the Night after Night segment of the Batman: Black and White motion comics (he also voiced Alfred).  Kevin Michael Richardson also did the same, voicing Joker in The Batman and Batman in the Plastic Man TV show.

As for Keaton, I suspect that since Joker wasn't really needed until Part II (aside from the closing line of Part I), Peter Weller already may have been cast (and maybe even had recorded all his lines) by the time they were casting Joker.

Honestly, as much as I love Keaton- he's my favorite live action Batman- I personally don't think he fits the Dark Knight Returns Batman, either in live action or vocally for animation. 

Keaton's Batman voice was a light, gravelly whisper which worked well for the Burton films, but I can't really hear him delivering the TDKR lines that way and having the same impact that Weller (or Michael Ironside in the Legends of the Dark Knight episode) did.  Just imagine him doing the "This isn't a mudhole" part or "I want you to remember the one man who beat you."  It doesn't hit as hard, in my opinion.  Sure, he could've changed his voice and deepened it to fit, but personally, if it were down between the two actors, I would've picked Weller, too.

[Silver Nemesis]

Technically, this title's been taken by two others.  Michael Dobson did the voice of both Batman and Joker in the Night after Night segment of the Batman: Black and White motion comics (he also voiced Alfred).  Kevin Michael Richardson also did the same, voicing Joker in The Batman and Batman in the Plastic Man TV show.

I stand corrected... W-wait a minute, there's a Plastic Man TV show?! Why have I not heard about this?

Keaton's Batman voice was a light, gravelly whisper which worked well for the Burton films, but I can't really hear him delivering the TDKR lines that way and having the same impact that Weller (or Michael Ironside in the Legends of the Dark Knight episode) did.  Just imagine him doing the "This isn't a mudhole" part or "I want you to remember the one man who beat you."  It doesn't hit as hard, in my opinion.  Sure, he could've changed his voice and deepened it to fit, but personally, if it were down between the two actors, I would've picked Weller, too.

I have to disagree there. I can easily imagine Keaton saying those lines. He'd have been perfect for the TDKR films. Check out his vocal performances in the Studio Ghibli film Porco Rosso (1992) or when he guest appeared on The Simpsons. He can easily pitch his voice much lower than he did when he played Batman. And his voice has only gotten deeper with age.

Having a former Batman reprise the role would have added extra resonance to the production. Like how they included the Furstmobile in the background in one scene; it could just as easily have been any other generic-looking Batmobile and it wouldn't have affected the plot, but having a recognisable design from a previous era added historical weight to its presence in the cave. Likewise having Keaton voice Batman would have appealed to the fans' collective memories of a previous era in the franchise.

Weller was fine, but his involvement in the films had no greater significance. Sure, he played RoboCop. But RoboCop's not Batman. And the strength of Weller's voice is that he speaks in a mechanical monotone. When it comes to Batman, I prefer more emotion and tonal diversity. Even with a portrayal as one-note as the one in TDKR.

What really irks me is the fact Keaton's appearing in the new RoboCop film. Instead of some lame watered-down CGI-filled PG-13 remake, they should be producing RoboCop Returns, a proper hardcore R-rated sequel to the original film. And it should star Peter Weller. These guys should have switched movies.

[BatmAngelus]

I stand corrected... W-wait a minute, there's a Plastic Man TV show?! Why have I not heard about this?

I wouldn't have heard about it either, but I found voice samples at Behind the Voice Actor.com.  Richardson's here is from New Teen Titans and IMDB lists that he also did it for the Plastic Man show:
http://www.behindthevoiceactors.com/voice-compare/Batman/Batman/

Another name to add to the list- Troy Baker, who voices Batman in LEGO Batman and Joker in the upcoming Arkham Origins.

I have to disagree there. I can easily imagine Keaton saying those lines. He'd have been perfect for the TDKR films. Check out his vocal performances in the Studio Ghibli film Porco Rosso (1992) or when he guest appeared on The Simpsons. He can easily pitch his voice much lower than he did when he played Batman. And his voice has only gotten deeper with age.

Having a former Batman reprise the role would have added extra resonance to the production. Like how they included the Furstmobile in the background in one scene; it could just as easily have been any other generic-looking Batmobile and it wouldn't have affected the plot, but having a recognisable design from a previous era added historical weight to its presence in the cave. Likewise having Keaton voice Batman would have appealed to the fans' collective memories of a previous era in the franchise.

Weller was fine, but his involvement in the films had no greater significance. Sure, he played RoboCop. But RoboCop's not Batman. And the strength of Weller's voice is that he speaks in a mechanical monotone. When it comes to Batman, I prefer more emotion and tonal diversity. Even with a portrayal as one-note as the one in TDKR.

What really irks me is the fact Keaton's appearing in the new RoboCop film. Instead of some lame watered-down CGI-filled PG-13 remake, they should be producing RoboCop Returns, a proper hardcore R-rated sequel to the original film. And it should star Peter Weller. These guys should have switched movies.

I haven't seen Porco Rosso and I don't think I've caught the Simpsons ep(s) before, so I'll check them out when I can.  I've mainly heard his voice acting in Cars and Toy Story 3, though he'd obviously use a different voice if he ever came back to the Batman role through animation.

I agree that Keaton's casting would have more resonance than Weller's, for the obvious reasons.  Ideally, a TDKR adaptation- either live action or animation- would be filled with older actors who've played these roles before- Batman, Alfred, Superman, Harvey/Two-Face, Gordon, Selina, Oliver, etc.  Failing that, I was happy with the cast we got.

[BatmAngelus]

The Dark Knight Returns score by Christopher Drake is set for release on October 8th.  You can hear samples on iTunes:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/batman-dark-knight-returns/id711828022

[The Dark Knight]

I think I've settled my mind. TDK Returns is my number one Batman graphic novel. It took the animated movie to cement this view. It has nearly everything I like about the character included in one package.

The soundtrack by Christopher Drake is also worthy of mention. It has a 1980s dance club vibe mixed with a dystopian Terminator influence. Which goes really well given the period the comic was released and the themes of the story.

[The Laughing Fish]

I didn't really begin to appreciate The Dark Knight Returns until the animated movies. Like I said before in my review, the plot is better off as a movie. Some people might argue with this, but I reckon the comic had a few problems that ruined it for me i.e. the messy illustration, the frankly unnecessary subplots such as the schizo about to kill an entire audience at the cinema and so on. The movies made the plot flow better, and focused a little more on Batman in my opinion.