The Dark Knight Returns

[thecolorsblend]

Yes, the story continued, and poorly, but I like the dramatic finality of TDK Returns.

Au contraire, the story ended with TDKR.

Most of the classic villains were replaced by the next generation.
Gordon finally retired as police commissioner.

I'm not the first to suggest that "The future belongs to the Mutants" (and the gang's name itself) plus their occasional resemblance to Cyclops were shots across the bow at the X-Men. And at that time, the X-Men had to be hilariously outselling Batman. The idea of Batman firing back at them appeals to me.

Batman and Joker had their last ever confrontation.

TDKR is one reason why I think I'm good when it comes to Joker stories. It's hard to get much more personal than their conflict in TDKR. When you come right down to it, most Joker stories are forgettable. They mostly trade on past glories. TDKR is one of the few which break the mold in a way that doesn't go too far. It's just about how their relationship would logically end.

I also love that TDK Returns is full of social commentary with the talking heads segments. Seeing this play out during the Day of the Dead montage in Dawn of Justice was great. It adds realism to fantastical scenarios in a way that I can enjoy.

I like the commentary too. It's not as biting today as it was back then but it's still fairly true.

In TDK Returns Batman is an alpha male who doesn't back down for anybody. He's willing to go into a mudhole just to prove a point and make a statement.

Exactly that. But he's an aged alpha male. If he'd still been 30 years old, he would've brought down the Mutant leader in the dump. But Batman underestimated the leader and overestimated himself. It was a mistake that nearly cost him his life. But he learned from his mistake. What I enjoy about TDKR is that it didn't go overboard with depicting Batman as a fragile old man. But it did emphasize that his strongest, most ferocious days are well behind him so he has to find other ways to win. He can still beat wholesale ass but he's not the scrappy energetic prize-fighter that he used to be. I love that!

In my opinion, that fight is everything the second Bane fight in TDK Rises should've been.

*sigh*

You are right, of course. The fights with the Mutant leader were so visceral. The reader hurts with Batman, he bleeds with Batman he suffers with Batman. The drama is real on the page... even if Miller's art leaves me cold.

That dig down deep element is missing from TDKRises. Batman got the snot beaten out of him so he did some a few pushups and then he  beat the snot out of Bane. No real stakes, no real visceral investment, no personal investment.

I think it would be fair to say that Nolan was more interested in Bruce's emotional journey than his physical struggles (and physical triumphs). And whatever, that's his prerogative. I'm just saying I wanted something from the Bane/Batman fights in TDKRises that I didn't get while the leader/Batman fights in TDKR gave it to me in spades, that's all.

I first read TDK Returns as a young kid. I'm guessing as an eight year old. I literally walked into a comic store with my father and asked for this specific book because I'd heard it was a classic. I didn't know anything of its dark tone. I didn't really comprehend the book's greatness until I grew older.

My mom bought me the leatherbound Complete Frank Miller Batman (because back then all of Miller's Batman work could fit inside one volume) and TDKR was mesmerizing.

I didn't like the art, even back then. But the journey Batman undergoes in TDKR is remarkable. I understand that core Batman fans might be a little sick of TDKR's rep. And I can't argue against that. But TDKR was part of how I was introduced to Batman (along with Adam West, B89 and The Greatest Batman Stories Ever Told). And it taught me that while there's room for everything, there's a lot to be said for Batman as a hard-boiled figure in gritty, more crime fiction'ish types of stories.

Superman is at his best when he triumphs. It's not just about winning a fight. Superman also needs to win the argument.

With Batman though, you can get a lot of mojo out of the concept of him getting beaten down and then coming back victorious. Batman's victories resonate for me when he triumphs through sheer force of will. And that's what happens in TDKR.

And even if the art bugs the hell out of me, that's why I'll always hold TDKR in high esteem.

[The Dark Knight]

I like the commentary too.

I love the whole theme that Batman fights back against a world that is overrun with crime with people suffering in silence. Things get so bad that Batman simply has no choice but to emerge and make people feel empowered again. He gives people a voice. We have the likes of Doctor Wolper who say Batman is a fascist and the rights of criminals who rape and murder need to be considered. We have the likes of the Mayor of Gotham who denounce Batman and say he needs to stop his one man crusade. The types of people who support the criminal's rights but openly admit they'd never live in the city.

The know it all Mayor tries to negotiate with the Mutant Leader and instead becomes a corpse. Batman's way was the only way for the problem Gotham faced and that was confirmed time and time again (Gotham became the safest City in the United States), yet the opposition to Batman from these types of people remained. Batman simply ignored all the noise from the TV personalities, The Council of Mothers (Batman went on to save a two year old), The Victims Rights Task Force and countless other petitions....and simply did what needed to be done.

[thecolorsblend]

Those elements with Wolper, "fascism" and all that is one of the more intriguing parts of the book and it's shocking that Miller didn't take more flak for that.

Caveat: "Fascism" means everything now... which basically is saying it means nothing.

But if we abide by the strictest definition of what "fascism" is (eg, a strong central authority acting to protect and guide society by whatever means are necessary) then I guess Batman qualifies as a "fascist" -- although he's arguably also a "libertarian" as well but I digress.

Batman is the only effectual authority in the whole city. Batman. A fascist.

Wolper complicates the issue in that a lot of the stuff he says ends up coming to pass. That passage where he compares the social consciousness to a "moist membrane" is what I mean. "Crime is shrinking... but there will be blowback from Batman's actions." Well, Batman came back and crime dropped off... but then the Joker came back and murdered hundreds of people.

Wolper was a celebrity-obsessed media whore and blowhard. We're not meant to like or sympathize with him. But still, what was he wrong about? It looks like Batman really was exacerbating the problem. In the end, the reader can't help but conclude that Reagan, Superman and the Army should've acted to put the Mutants down to prevent Batman from coming back and turning a problem into a full blown crisis.

Considering how often Reagan was called a "fascist' in his own day, it again raises the question of if Miller is condemning fascism (oooh, what a brave stance to take!) or if he's actually championing it (which would, in fact, take a lot of balls).

Separately, I never realized it but I'd always "heard" a voice like McKean's when I read Wolper in TDKR. That was pitch-perfect casting. His voice, his phrasing of the lines, seriously I wouldn't change a thing.

[The Dark Knight]

Wolper complicates the issue in that a lot of the stuff he says ends up coming to pass. That passage where he compares the social consciousness to a "moist membrane" is what I mean. "Crime is shrinking... but there will be blowback from Batman's actions." Well, Batman came back and crime dropped off... but then the Joker came back and murdered hundreds of people.

Every action has a reaction. That is true. A storm erupted because of Batman's methods, but it's better than the alternative of doing nothing. Batman brought the situation to a head. Joker came back and did his damage for the last time, but he's now dead. The Mutants were a violent mob killing indiscriminately. Now they're aligned with Batman and fighting against criminality. Batman made a big problem (roaming gangs) part of the solution. It's a big improvement to where the story began in my eyes. The moral of the story as I see it, is that the likes of Two-Face and the Joker cannot be rehabilitated. They will always act out and go back to their old ways. Bottom line, if you don't fight back the situation remains the same. I choose fight back every time. I honestly don't think it's a matter of Batman making the problem worse, but the outcry over how he's going about the problem. Gotham became the safest city in the country. The results speak for themselves.

[thecolorsblend]

Wolper complicates the issue in that a lot of the stuff he says ends up coming to pass. That passage where he compares the social consciousness to a "moist membrane" is what I mean. "Crime is shrinking... but there will be blowback from Batman's actions." Well, Batman came back and crime dropped off... but then the Joker came back and murdered hundreds of people.

Every action has a reaction. That is true. A storm erupted because of Batman's methods, but it's better than the alternative of doing nothing. Batman brought the situation to a head. Joker came back and did his damage for the last time, but he's now dead. The Mutants were a violent mob killing indiscriminately. Now they're aligned with Batman and fighting against criminality. Batman made a big problem (roaming gangs) part of the solution. It's a big improvement to where the story began in my eyes. The moral of the story as I see it, is that the likes of Two-Face and the Joker cannot be rehabilitated. They will always act out and go back to their old ways. Bottom line, if you don't fight back the situation remains the same. I choose fight back every time. I honestly don't think it's a matter of Batman making the problem worse, but the outcry over how he's going about the problem. Gotham became the safest city in the country. The results speak for themselves.

I agree. The issue, as I see it, is that Batman didn't do anything that anybody else wasn't capable of doing. In theory, the Gotham police, the federal government, Superman or any number of other agencies could've shut the Mutants down, taken the Joker out, restored order after the blackout, etc.

Batman simply had the will to do it while the others didn't (for whatever reason).

The older I get, the more my appreciation for TDKR as a sophisticated literature gets because there are nuances and gradations to TDKR that a lot of TDKR-influenced Batman stories simply lack. They copied the window dressing of TDKR but without all the little shades of gray that make TDKR the triumph that it is.

[The Dark Knight]

I also like the tagline for TDKR Part One - heroes never die, they just get darker. I think that is best represented by the fact Batman started out in the original blue and gray costume that is associated with the lighter incarnations of the character. Also what's interesting is that we actually get the red bat phone from the 60s TV show in the comic and the movie. I think the movie actually has the same bat phone noise from the 60s show. So this is pretty much the same guy who has evolved with the times. As the world became harder he did too.

As I said before, I think one of the messages is Two-Face and Joker can't be rehabilitated. And equally so Batman can't be rehabilitated. The way I read the scene between Two-Face and Batman when he says he sees a reflection which is a full bat face, is pretty much saying Batman has become consumed by his persona just as much as the villains. In that sense he does share traits with his foes.

In terms of Batman being an effective crime fighter with Gotham becoming the safest city in there US, it's also the embarrassment factor. They had denounced Batman's methods and they were working. The government had lost the narrative there that Batman was a bad thing for Gotham. Even Yindel gives up trying to take Batman down because he's 'too big'.

In terms of Reagan, he's my second favorite president and I think he was a good old boy. I differ with him in a couple areas but I digress. I think Miller was probably going for the generic government commentary with him.

Batman had to be the ultimate outsider. Reagan loved military might and the fact he utilised Superman fits that vibe.

[The Laughing Fish]

But over the years I slowly reached a new found appreciation and a better understanding of Batman's journey. Batman was never mistreating Carrie, he served more a Drill Sargeant role to keep her mind focused, which makes sense because of the fact that crimefighting is a matter of life and death. As much as Gotham City needs a Batman, it needs Robin too.

Building on from what I said in my own quote last year, it strikes how Batman has become very militaristic in his approach. Not only he is a strict disciplinarian of Carrie, he even goes further by using the Sons of Batman, and encouraging the escaped Mutants, to stop the chaos throughout Gotham City's blackout.

Despite all the bloodthirsty violence these impressionable yet psychotic kids got themselves into, Batman encourages them to engage in community spirit to maintain order during such a difficult time. Commanding them as a general to use safer tactics instead of using unnecessary lethal force and to protect the wider community's welfare, instead of engaging in impulsive destruction for cheap thrills. Which shows that, despite how brutal, tough and cynical how Batman has become, his can still believe people can be redeemed to keep up the peace.

The only downside is it reminds me how people can easily fall into the wrong path if they look up to a bad influence. Which we've seen this happen many times in real life.

[The Dark Knight]

TDK Returns can be distilled to one question: what choice did Batman have?

Bruce could've done nothing, which would've been easy and cowardly. He was retired and living a decent life, besides the mental trauma and aching loneliness of course. But he loved Gotham too much. His comeback caused one hell of a stink, but without his presence the city would have fallen. If his tactics were a failure Gotham wouldn't have become the safest city in the US.

Abolitionist Frederick Douglass spoke about the right of self defense. Douglas strongly supported the right of fugitive slaves to have and use weapons to resist kidnapping.

When government fails to protect the just right of any individual man, that man rests on his original right of self-defense, even if it means shooting down his pursuers. "Slavery is a system of brute force. It must be met with its own weapons."

Gotham officials and the Federal Government let the city go to the dogs. The mutants had the run of the city and the status quo wasn't working. Regular people were crying out for leadership and Batman provided it.

Law enforcement failed their citizens, plain and simple. There was a leadership vacuum and Batman filled it. Batman literally had to saddle up and ride into war on a stallion to sort things out - fighting a pigheaded and incompetent police force in the process.

The mutants were after leadership, a sense of direction and belonging in a dystopian world. The Mutant Leader was a violent criminal, but nonetheless, he served that function for them. Many of these mutants were young kids – likely from broken homes or with no homes at all. They were eager to please.

When the Mutant Leader's arms and legs are snapped in the mud, the law of the jungle dictates Batman is once again king. Men of the street only really understand strength and pain. And so the herd gets in line with Batman as their new role model. And that proved to be a positive outcome for all involved. It was a re-education for these kids.

Sure, they perhaps can't be rehabilitated as men of the cloth. But their existence can be honed into an asset and not a liability, even if just for the short term. If heads are to be kicked, it's better to kick criminal skulls and not innocent members of the public. That works for me. The concept of Robin but on a grander scale.

[The Laughing Fish]

The mutants were after leadership, a sense of direction and belonging in a dystopian world. The Mutant Leader was a violent criminal, but nonetheless, he served that function for them. Many of these mutants were young kids – likely from broken homes or with no homes at all. They were eager to please.

When the Mutant Leader's arms and legs are snapped in the mud, the law of the jungle dictates Batman is once again king. Men of the street only really understand strength and pain. And so the herd gets in line with Batman as their new role model. And that proved to be a positive outcome for all involved. It was a re-education for these kids.

Sure, they perhaps can't be rehabilitated as men of the cloth. But their existence can be honed into an asset and not a liability, even if just for the short term. If heads are to be kicked, it's better to kick criminal skulls and not innocent members of the public. That works for me. The concept of Robin but on a grander scale.

Good analysis TDK, particularly this passage. It was a logical tactical move on Batman's part to persuade the Mutant outcasts to help him take Gotham City back from the chaos and panic. And it was a tactical move that actually succeeded. It would've been foolish and suicidal of Batman if he had tried to tackle the Mutants all at once while the rest of the city is tearing itself apart.

Meanwhile, while speaking at a Q&A session with other famous comics artists at this year's London Comic Con, Frank Miller revealed he had originally considered ending TDKR with Batman dying in a hail of bullets during a final showdown with the police, and Superman wasn't part of the story at all. He speaks around 11:00. He's also revealed to be working on a Superman: Year One story, including how he first meets Batman, as you can hear around 38:00.

I imagine Batman getting killed for real was an idea that Miller was imagining before he had conceived the whole story properly. I'm glad he chose not to pursue with this ending, because it wouldn't have boded well once Gotham City became a safe place thanks to his heroics during the blackout. Government interference causing Batman to fake his demise and work secretly underground was the best way to go in comparison.

[The Dark Knight]

Superman's addition made the comic feel more definitive because it provided a direct contrast in philosophy and methods. Batman became a darker, angrier personality over time, whereas Superman was not really hardened by the passage of time. He wanted to maintain a shaky peace (via force only if absolutely necessary) by complying with authority, whereas Batman refused to do so. He was labelled a troublemaker because he wouldn't accept his city as a violent hellhole.