Scan barcode
A review by steveatwaywords
Batman: The Dark Knight Returns by Frank Miller
adventurous
dark
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.0
It's easy to understand both the initial controversy and later broad acceptance of this work. An ageing (and perhaps mentally troubled) Batman was--especially at the time--not canon. In the past some 35 odd years, though, we've had a generation of revisionist superhero stories, and the "dark" knight is a staple of them, not least in nearly a dozen films since then.
The "future" history of an America troubled by superhero vigilantism, with Superman being something of a sellout to the American gov't, is contemporaneous with Moore's Watchmen. Those 1980s were a time when we grew tired of clean moral tales, it seems. Graphic superhero novels were catching up with what literature had been doing for some decades.
So the question is, does this work still stand out as Time magazine suggests, one of the greatest graphic novels of all time? To be sure, the artwork--while at times occluded or bewildering--is still extraordinary, with plenty of iconic poster-worthy moments. The design, too, offers a layered look at the whole social satire, heavy on ironic media coverage and political maneuverings--all examples of denialism that we would come to embrace in real life.
Even so, while the historic moment of this work for the Batman canon is significant, the storyline remains weaker. For one, the characters are fairly static from start to end: villains are universally psychotic, heroes are pointedly suffering for their causes, and they run into each other to inevitably larger climaxes with none ever coming to "realize" anything at all. In other words, once the premises of the story are established, we all--author and reader--can sit back and watch the demolition derby begin. The re-emergence of an aging Batman into a world which has fallen to political and capitalist ideologies is interesting, but pre-determined.
The thing is, Miller has lots of room for storytelling, and adding yet another villain into the mix doesn't explore the space very much. It's true I have recently completed <i>Watchmen</i> which has similar moves in more creative and complicated ways, and it's also true that I have seen graphic novelists outside the superhero genre do literarily far more with the medium in fewer pages, so <i>Time's</i> grandiose claim must be limited in terms of The Dark Knight's history, not against the broader and more contemporary comparisons out there. It's tough to break a superhero comic out of its trope-ic rut, and Miller almost did it.
Nevertheless, this is an entertaining read, fulfilling a number of fan wishes along the way for a Robin, for a Superman, for a prodding at mental health science . . . made all the more so by looking back now at what enormous changes it helped create in the industry.
The "future" history of an America troubled by superhero vigilantism, with Superman being something of a sellout to the American gov't, is contemporaneous with Moore's Watchmen. Those 1980s were a time when we grew tired of clean moral tales, it seems. Graphic superhero novels were catching up with what literature had been doing for some decades.
So the question is, does this work still stand out as Time magazine suggests, one of the greatest graphic novels of all time? To be sure, the artwork--while at times occluded or bewildering--is still extraordinary, with plenty of iconic poster-worthy moments. The design, too, offers a layered look at the whole social satire, heavy on ironic media coverage and political maneuverings--all examples of denialism that we would come to embrace in real life.
Even so, while the historic moment of this work for the Batman canon is significant, the storyline remains weaker. For one, the characters are fairly static from start to end: villains are universally psychotic, heroes are pointedly suffering for their causes, and they run into each other to inevitably larger climaxes with none ever coming to "realize" anything at all. In other words, once the premises of the story are established, we all--author and reader--can sit back and watch the demolition derby begin. The re-emergence of an aging Batman into a world which has fallen to political and capitalist ideologies is interesting, but pre-determined.
The thing is, Miller has lots of room for storytelling, and adding yet another villain into the mix doesn't explore the space very much. It's true I have recently completed <i>Watchmen</i> which has similar moves in more creative and complicated ways, and it's also true that I have seen graphic novelists outside the superhero genre do literarily far more with the medium in fewer pages, so <i>Time's</i> grandiose claim must be limited in terms of The Dark Knight's history, not against the broader and more contemporary comparisons out there. It's tough to break a superhero comic out of its trope-ic rut, and Miller almost did it.
Nevertheless, this is an entertaining read, fulfilling a number of fan wishes along the way for a Robin, for a Superman, for a prodding at mental health science . . . made all the more so by looking back now at what enormous changes it helped create in the industry.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Violence