Customer Reviews

The Dark Knight Strikes Again

5 star:		(57)
4 star:		(27)
3 star:		(20)
2 star:		(36)
1 star:		(65)

 

 

I used to be a hardcore fan of Frank Miller. I mean, growing up through the 80's and 90's, I would just buy anything with the guy's name on it cause you could always trust that it would be great. Longtime comix fans know what I'm talking about. You didn't even have to flip through the pages of a new Frank Miller book at the store to see if it was worth buying. You could just bank on it. A new Frank Miller book was ALWAYS worth buying. Great writing. Great, powerful artwork. He was a modern master of the form. For years and years, this was true. But... the first time I remember thinking "Ooo, Frank - You dropped the ball on this one." Was about halfway through his book "That Yellow Bastard", around 1995 or 96. The artwork looked rushed and hacked-out. Since then, the quality of his work has only continued to decline. It is to the point where I can no longer justify spending my money on his material. I am convinced that the man has either developed a serious alcohol/substance abuse problem, or he just doesn't care about the quality of his work (or entertaining his readers) anymore. There's just no other explanation. If you think I am being unfair, go back and compare the artwork in "To Hell and Back" with the artwork in the first "Sin City" novel. Talk about your stylistic inconsistencies. It's impossible to believe that this is even the work of the same man. Well, "The Dark Knight Strikes Again" is, for me, the final straw. Look at it. It's a mess. Can you imagine a newcomer to the comics field turning material like this in to their editor? They would never work again. I'm guessing the only reason DC Comics went ahead and published "DKSA" is because they know it will sell based on Miller's (and Batman's) name value, and because they had to make back the money they paid Miller to do this job. Sorry to be so blunt, but as a professional illustrator myself, I can recognize the difference between the work of an artist trying out a zany, experimental new style, and someone who just slopped something out to get it done and over with. This is clearly an example of the latter. Frank, if it's health problems, please try and take better care of yourself. And if you are just bored or sick of writing and drawing comics, please get over it or retire. This is unacceptable.

Frank! What have you done to the legendary Dark Knight of myth? I read the original "Dark Knight" Returns in the 80's when it came out in its 4-book series, and whoa, it blew me away. It is hard to believe the same author wrote this piece of ... Instead of the classic and twisted Batman villians we get two Superman chumps and Robin. The original DK was a profound statement of justice vs. the law, government vs. vigilantism, pop psychology vs. common sense, and many other themes. There was no supervillians; the villians were more a symptom than a disease. This ham-handed cop out deserves nothing more that a funeral in my toliet, suitably adorned with some ... material. Oh for the days of "Sin City", Daredevil "Born Again". Frank, you let us down.

In what has to be the biggest disappointment this year (with Wolverine: Origin running a close second), Frank Miller has turned in 2/3 of his weakest story and art ever. Miller publicly expressed ambiguous feelings over the recognition he got for his work on Batman and other characters that he did not create. Given his notorious contrarian attitude, I could almost believe he was daring the comic-reading public to declare the emperor has no clothes. This book has a weak, uninspired story largely designed to depict as many DC characters in decaying senescence as possible. The art literally appears to have been faxed in. To add insult to injury, the last issue is late (not that I will be buying it). Miller's true talent is better showcased in his recent historical work "300," which is everything that DK2 is not.

"Sequels s@*%!" in the words of a character in the movie "Scream 2." And while that statement was intended to describe the usual track record of movie sequels in failing to meet the standard of their predecessors, it can just as easily applied to any other medium of entertainment -including comic books.

Unfortunately, it can also be applied to the "The Dark Knight Strikes Again," Frank Miller's follow-up to his classic four-part "Dark Knight Returns" series of graphic novels.

Let's get one thing straight, Miller's original tale of an aging Batman coming out of retirement wasn't just a groundbreaking classic, it was a seminal event in comics history. Published roughly 15 years ago, it's impact cannot be overstated. Not only did it redefine Batman, changing the way the character's comics were written and drawn, but it also changed the comics medium period.

The graphic novel format, generally used only in occasional experiments prior to "Dark Knight," soon became an industry standard after it hit the stands. Comics themselves became darker and more mature following "Dark Knight." It not only paved the way for harder edged revamps of characters like the Punisher, The Spectre, and the Question but also for D.C.'s mature readers imprint Vertigo which recently prompted Marvel Comics' Marvel Knights and Max imprints.

The impact of the original "Dark Knight" was felt even beyond comic books. One could argue that Tim Burton never would have been handed the reins of the Batman movie franchise if Miller's series hadn't shown that audiences were willing to spend their dollars on a Batman that wasn't of the Adam West, "Biff, Bang, Pow" variety. And the success of that first film clearly paved the way for a new wave of cinema superheroes that continues to this day.

Bottom line, "Dark Knight" wasn't just a great comic book series. It was a series that changed the medium it operated within in the same way that Michael Jackson's "Thriller" changed pop music or "Star Wars" changed moviemaking.

This being the case, it was almost impossible to expect that the sequel "DK2" would meet the standards set by its predecessor. But could any fan have expected that it would be a disaster of colossal proportions?

Simply put, "DK2" isn't just bad. Its' a train wreck.

To list everything that is wrong with it would be almost impossible but let's start with the highlights or in this case, lowlights:

1) The Plot - has to do with Batman coming out of retirement to thwart a government conspiracy to take over the world masterminded by old Superman archenemies Braniac and Lex Luthor. The obvious question this raises is why nemeses of another hero are placed front and center in a Batman storyline. This isn't a bad thing in and of itself. The problem is that the plot is so sketchy and so poorly executed that it just doesn't stand up even for three issues as opposed to the original series' four.

Certain story elements are introduced and either discarded or never fully fleshed out. Others, like the reemergence of the original Robin, come out of the blue in a way that is completely unnecessary.

Furthermore a running theme of interjecting television news style commentary and narration throughout the series is ultimately just distracting.

Bad writing, Bad art - Even though major players from the original series returned for this project, most notably Miller and Lynn Varley, neither the writing or the art are up to snuff here. The writing is scattershot as hell and the artwork lacks the detail and richness that made the "Dark Knight Returns" such an oft duplicated but never replicated classic. Shading on many panels is virtually non-existent and the use of so many bright, lurid colors isn't at all consistent with what we've come to expect from Batman storylines.

Too little Batman - though his work clearly paved the way for the Batman film series, you'd think Miller would have learned from the critical mistake the movies made - namely making Batman a supporting character in his own story. In the same way that the movies crowded Batman out of the frame in favor of villains and sidekicks, Miller has done the same here by cramming this series full of other superheroes.

The involvement of Luthor and Braniac pretty much guaranteed that Superman would get major facetime. But is the involvement of a new Supergirl, Wonder Woman, Green Arrow, the Atom, Flash, and Captain Marvel, just to name a few, really necessary. Given the number of costumes here, a better title for this series would have been, "The Justice League Strikes Again."

Continuity problems abound - Given that the original "DK" took place in a DC universe that had yet to be completely reshaped and retooled by the "Crisis on the Infinite Earths(that's another piece of seminal eighties-era reading for those of you not familiar with DC history)it was inevitable that a sequel wouldn't completely square with what we now know to be the DC Universe.

But the continuity flaws here raise obvious questions that you wish somone had thought of in the editing process. For example, if this series takes place in a universe where the Crisis never occurred why is Captain Marvel around when anyone familiar with DC comics history knows that, pre-Crisis, Captain Marvel lived on a parallel earth, Earth S?

This obviously suggests that maybe the series does take in place in current continuity. But if so, that raises even more questions like Why is Silver Age Flash Barry Allen still alive? Why does the bottled Kryptonian City of Kandor still exist?

One suspects that all flaws aside, the powers that be at DC let an inferior product like this hit the stands for one reason and one reason only: Commerce.

For years Hollywood studio heads have green lighted movie sequels that they knew wouldn't hold a candle to the original movies. They knew and still know that a large portion of the public will still show up at their local multiplex with cash in hand regardless of how good or bad these movies area. With "DK2", the DC brain trust has essentially done the very same thing with the comic-buying public.

The hard truth is that this series is an insult to the memory of the original "Dark Knight" series and everyone involved with it should be ashamed. This series gets one star and that only because there's not a "no star' option.

This sequel to the incredibly entertaining The Dark knight Returns has a lot of problems. For starters the title is all wrong, it should have been called The Dark Knight Strikes Again: Starring Superman. This alludes to the fact that Batman is hardly even in the book. There is no Batman doing detective work, no great fight scenes, and even when the dark one makes an appearance the reader gets the feeling that it is not Batman at all; in that Miller has changed key features in the Batman charactor. There is also a side story centered around Dick Grayson which seems tacked on. The only reason for buying this book is if you liked the artwork in The dark Knight Returns. Maybe someday Miller will do a remake of this book and spend a little more time on it.

Normally, you'd have to convince me this P.O.S had anything to do with Batman...let alone Frank Miller. This is bad. Real bad. Artwork is missing the detail and depth, storyline is real confusing as it introduces new (but old DC Justice League characters) at random and doesn't build their characters. Just altogether goofy and I can't see the relationship between DKR and this DKSA sequel. Seems like he went to the well one too many times on this one...

If you want a good one, get "The Complete Frank Miller Batman" Leatherbound Hardcover with Batman: Year One, Santa Claus Wanted Dead or Alive and Dark Knight Returns.

Ah, where to begin? I dearly love The Dark Knight Returns. It needs no further praise. When I heard that Frank Miller had written a sequel, my gut reaction was "Big mistake." How can you follow up something so brilliant?

The answer is that you can't.

I've avoided reading the book for over a year, and have just now finally pushed myself into doing it. Having just finished it, I have mixed feelings. I feel disappointment, because what Miller had here was the chance to make a darn fine sequel. While nothing will beat the original, he at least could have made it worthy of what it was following. Some parts of the book shine (especially Part One), other parts turn into a confusing, hasty mess. In The Dark Knight Returns, Miller took a few good ideas and developed them richly; here he takes a huge amount of ideas and covers each one superficially. What we end up with is all flash and no substance, no emotional impact, no reason to care about what's going on. Character portraits are mere sketches (perhaps reflected in his hasty artwork). Is this coming from the same man so good with characters that he even turned Two-Face's brief appearance in DK1 into something relevant and affecting? The story is not without it's rich characters: I liked Carrie Kelley (the new Catgirl) and genuinely cared about her character. I also liked how Superman was given room to breathe, and The Atom was also handled nicely. But Batman! Come on, here! He is a wisp, a ghost of a presence. But maybe that's all for the best. After all, what has Miller got left to say about him that he hasn't already said?

A part of me feels that he's doing this on purpose, that Miller knew he couldn't outshine DK1 by its own rules and so didn't try at all. He couldn't recreate the depth of those characters, or add anything further to them. So, he decided to just make it something completely different. As Batman says in the book "It's a whole new ballgame." He just had his fun, made it flashy and crazy. It's an intention I can respect--thinking outside the box, using the characters in different ways to tell a new story. The only problem is he doesn't do it very well. It's hard to follow the story, which progresses in a herky-jerky fashion, like a slide show turning too fast. It's okay if you emphasize plot over character, but if you're going to do that, can you at least not make it feel so slap-dash? Subplots are brought up and just as quickly discarded, handled as if Miller just had to tie up loose ends. The Joker subplot had the potential to be some powerful stuff (in many ways the Joker subplot in DK1 is the emotional core of that book), but here it's handled in a disappointing, anticlimatic fashion.

I wanted to like this book, and it is good, but it feels hasty, rushed--not the fruit of fifteen years to think about it. One positive thing I'll say is that the artwork is quite appealing and Lynn Varley's coloring absolutely stunning. I'd be willing to pay [money] for it just for that. But I just wish the story was as good.

The original dark knight returns was a milestone in comic history that set new guidelines from story-telling. The DKR portrayed Batman as a violent, delusional, arrogant and bitter superhero (what can you expect after fighting crime for so long?) This was Batman at his best. It would be hard to top this one. Fast forward to 2002. Readers of the Dark Knight Returns are brimming w/ anticipation of the long-awaited sequel to the Dark Knight Returns. The first story is good, all the superheroes have either left or are incarcerated. Superman along w/ Wonder Woman and Capt. Marvel are the only ones allowed to operate on Earth. And Lex Luthor and Brainiac are the supreme rulers of Earth and control Superman and his teammates. Everything looks dandy from the surface but all the rights and freedoms of the people are gone. At this point Batman decides that he and his "bat-boys" have been hidden long enough. They make their debut and break out Captain Atom (who has been living in a petri dish the last couple of years). They also break out the Flash (who had been running on a hamster wheel in order to generate the electricity for the world). Lex Luthor is threatened by the reemergance of these heroes and sends Superman to find whoever is responsible. The issue concludes with Superman getting his butt handed to him by Batman. Then comen the second story...stop everything. The art in the first story was a little sloppy but still decent but by the time, you reach the second issue, the art work has totally deteriorated and continues to do so until the least page. It's like Frank Miller suddenly started to paint w/ a mascara at 3:00 am in the morning to make the 9:00 am deadline. In this one, we are bombarded w/ more characters, their appearances are irrelevant and suddenly this becomes a geriatric JLA story. Although this issuse was bad, I decided to get the next one for closure. But then, due to unexplained delays, I wind up waiting 6 months for the final installment. Guess what, the art work is even worse. Miller dumped the mascara he painted issue two with and now he is using his fingers dipped in paint. The story is fast-paced and barely coherent. At the end, the final villain is....Robin....the same Robin Batman kept remembering in the original DKR. Except now, the boy wonder is a genetically altered supervillain w/ the ability to heal himself no matter how severe the injury (i.e. at some points he is decapitated, is doused w/ gasoline and burned alive, shot w/ flaming arrows, guns, bombs, etc.) Where did that come from? Feels like Miller just needed to fill pages at the end of the story. At the end, he is defeated by having his head chopped off by Batman and is thrown into a volcano. This book was a total disappointment and does not do the original DKR justice. The art was bad, brainiac looks like a pac-man reject, and what's the deal w/ the big feet on all the characters (I think Miller has a foot fetish) and the story is more about the JLA than Batman. If you didn't read the original DKR, then you might actually enjoy this, but if you read the original, then you will be really disappointed.

Not worth the trees killed, and certainly not worth money spent, I was absolutely shocked at the disaster that is DK2. I cannot believe that this was approved. Of course the excitement over a sequel to the brilliant Dark Night Returns would ensure would ensure that people would line up to buy stick figures drawn on toilet paper, but that does not make it a decent thing to do.

I don't know what happened here, but this pandering garbage should never have seen the light of day. Crude drawings, absolutely dreadful background work; the complex, extraordinary Gotham in the first is replaced by pages of lazy, IMac rendered shades of red or blue. *YAWN* The story is boring, silly and predictable. The Batman is glib, sadistic, and lifeless. It was fun watching Superman v. Batman at the end of the first DKR, but this story is totally ludicrous.

I was so disappointed, I can imagine the frustration of the tens of thousands of fans who appreciated the first DKR for the incredible, artistic and socially incisive bombshell that it was. A total letdown from Frank Miller. I was shocked at this heartless, obvious sellout.

It's hard to be critical of a graphic novel that sucks you in, entertains, fascinates and makes you wish there was another volume in the series, but I am going to criticize anyway.

For me, Dark Knight Returns was an awesome addition to and reinterpretation of the Batman Saga. The simplicity of the dichotomy between the "sell-out" Superman and the embittered-but-still-fighting Batman powered the story. I am a casual comic book fan so I was easily able to follow along since every casual fan knows the basics of both Batman and Superman.

This one, however, has so many characters and so many sub-plots going on that it actually gets confusing unless one backs up and re-reads a bit. Many of the characters are relatively minor when compared to Dark Knight Returns' focus on Superman, Batman, Robin and the Joker.

Another strength of Dark Knight Returns was that it primarily focused on an aging Batman who is appalled at what has become of the world that he voluntarily (well, sort of...) retired from protecting. Batman becomes the tool that Miller uses to criticize modern society and what we have done to ourselves. "Strikes Again" has so many characters that Batman often becomes just a part of the crowd. In the second volume, Superman is the focus - we get to see him re-born into something new after he sacrifices himself. In fact, the series deals so much with Superman, it would not have been inappropriate to have re-worked it a bit and called it "Superman Returns". However, that name has already been used so perhaps "The Blue Knight Returns".

It also would have been better to have slowed it down and made it a 10 volume series rather than forcing everything in to a 3 volume set. The third volume seems awfully rushed - too many things with too many characters going on in too few pages.

Perhaps most disappointing was the presence of Lex Luthor. I have no problem with Luthor vs. Batman. What disappointed me was that all of the ills that Batman is fighting against are not the ills of humankind's very nature (as implied in "Batman Returns"). No, they are the product of the skillful manipulations of a master criminal. Batman's Quixotic struggle agains the built-in evils of the human race is transformed into a standard plot that could have been stolen from Adam West's Batman TV show (Holy holograms, Batman! The President has been replaced by a computer generated image controlled by that Evil Lex Luthor! Pow! Bam! Oof!)

All that being said, I enjoyed myself thoroughly. It was a fun dip into the mind of Frank Miller. I don't agree with many of Miller's political stances, but I do enjoy the presentation of his arguments. The sloppy style that many have criticized in this forum was part of its strength - the reader has to closely look at the pictures to see what is going on. Miller hides lots of fun stuff in his art so it is worth a closer look. I especially enjoyed the touch of having Superman's "S" logo changing as he changed - it went from the oversized block style "S" of the 80's and 90's Superman to the more informal "S" that Superman started with in the 30's as Superman's worldview began to change.

So, final thoughts: Despite the deep, deep flaws in this series, I have to give it a grade of B+.