What do you think?
Rate this book
The Dark Knight Saga #1-2
Absolute Dark Knight
A stunning collection features Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns, his sequel, The Dark Knight Strikes Again, and unique additional material, including an excerpt from Miller's original plot for Dark Knight Returns #4, sketchbook material, and much more.
512 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2002
102 people are currently reading
2259 people want to read
About the author
Frank Miller
1,354 books5,346 followersFrank Miller is an American writer, artist and film director best known for his film noir-style comic book stories. He is one of the most widely-recognized and popular creators in comics, and is one of the most influential comics creators of his generation. His most notable works include Sin City, The Dark Knight Returns, Batman Year One and 300.
Librarian Note: There is more than one author in the Goodreads database with this name.
Librarian Note: There is more than one author in the Goodreads database with this name.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 129 reviews
October 6, 2019
This gets 3/5 only for the landmark TDKR was back then and now and the quality of the book (extras etc). I won't even start on how Miller dropped in my eyes as an artist with the "The Dark Knight Strikes Again", I'll do that on the separate edition. To put this simply, it's a shame the absolute edition had to include both runs. The second one, especially when read right after the first, is an absolute disgrace and undermines the otherwise great add to my DC's absolute collection.
Read
July 7, 2016I want to start this review by saying the following. I did not grow up in the 80's, hell, I was barely alive for the 90's and don't remember most of the 2000's, so I don't have any personal experience with the time period in which this was written and influenced by. I also am a very leftist person, which I think we all know Frank Miller is not. So, by saying this, I want to bring to the attention of anybody reading this review that I may well be biased or ignorant in the areas of which I touch on. Also, I only read the first two "books" or issues in this, which would be the first two issues of The Dark Knight Returns. I didn't even look at the Dark Knight Strikes Back, and aside from a quick flip-through of the last two parts of TDKR, I didn't read the rest of it either.
So in the introduction of this bind-up, Miller talks a lot about what I would call the inspiration for both titles in this book. In this introduction, he is hyper-critical of the media, which I think is something we all should be doing. However, in the actual story, Miller represents the media to be on the side of people who claim that the Batman, who has recently come out of retirement, is having a negative impact on society, and that while he may be driving down crime levels, which have reached an all-time high, he is only continuing the cycle of crime and that his actions will only spawn more criminals (essentially).
In the introduction, Miller makes reference to some psychologist who wrote a book which would go on to move Congress to creating the Comics Code Authority (I know enough about this already to not need to do any research on who that person was or what his book was titled, and Miller refuses to name it in the book, so I don't know that information, otherwise I would include it here). The CCA, for those who don't know, was created with the above mentions psychologist basically stated that the violence in comic books were driving children to be exhibit "unsocial behaviors" that led youth to committing crime. Even though the evidence was negligible (can't believe I spelled that right without the aide of spellchecker when committing gave me trouble), Congress went ahead an established the CCA to censor comics and make sure they were influencing the youth. This was around the 60's or 50's I believe. It is very similar to what a lot of people are trying to do to video games today.
So, what Miller has done is liked what this psychologist has said about comics to Batman. While I don't think violence in any media affects anybody enough to make them commit a crime if they are "mentally stable", I think it's a bit foolish to liken this to Batman. For one, this Batman is a lot more ruthless than the canon Batman. In one panel, for example, he shot a man. This is not normally something that Batman would do. Batman has always been about seeking redemption for criminals if possible, and if not, then he locks them away for both the safety of them and the public. Batman is traditionally a force for good. In Miller's TDKR, however, Batman is more an avatar of vengeance, and I think that that would only continue the cycle of crime. In our world, when, for example, the poor are kept down by the more wealthy and powerful members of society, they will often turn to crime in order to survive (such as the grandmother who sold drugs to help put her grandchildren, who she raised, through college). Sure, crime is crime, but one must look at the reasons as to why someone is committing a crime before one judges someone.
Miller is basically saying, in my eyes, that criminals are criminals and should be punished and that there is no redemption for them. The character of Two-Face is a prime example of him in this book. Miller write him so that, even have being rehabilitated, he is so traumatized from his past, that he cannot help but return to a life of crime. Sure, these are comic book characters, but still, if Miller is going to make the claims, metaphors, and analogies that he is making, then I can just the same judge him through a real-world lens. To me, what Miller is saying is that there is no redemption for those who commit crimes, only revenge. Which, as I stated above, goes against everything that Batman means to me.
I think it's important for writers to include themes in their work. I think that if you're going to make them a major, obvious aspect of the test though, that you should at least make sure that they don't make you look hypocritical. The messages that Miller includes in the text, or at least the part of it that I read, are a) that the media takes things and warps them to their own narrative and b) the censoring of society will only hold it back. While I can definitely get behind him on how messed up censorship is, I think it's also important to look at what you're saying. For example, Charlie Hebdo. They had all the right to draw Mohammed, and what happened to them was certainly wrong, but what was their intention in drawing the Prophet? I don't think it was anything other than trying to provoke terrorists. Just because one has a right to do something, doesn't mean one should abuse it. We as a society need to look at what we want to do with our time on Earth/in the Universe. Do we want to go around and offend people just for the sake of offending them, or are we going to go and make a statement, whether correct or not, on what we believe to try and make people think?
As for message A, Miller makes the media out to be a hypochondriac, but he's doing the exact same thing, only on the opposite side of the scale. In this book, Miller rights the media to be on the side that Batman is only helping to further the cycle of crime and portrays them as rather air-headed, nonplussed by most of the events (and those that are plussed are normally on the side of Batman), and non-emotional. On the other hand, Miller is making all criminals seem to be hopeless causes that are better of dead or locked away rather than being treated or reintegrated into society. The truth of the matter is this: some people aren't worthy of being treated or are unable to be treated (to far gone), but those cases are, normally, the exception to the rule. Most every criminal is able to be treated and returned to society if they are willing to seek help or open to it.
I don't regret buying this book, because it is a piece of history, and I may one day return to this and read all of it. However, the themes that Miller included in this were just not something I can get behind, and they were too present in the text for me to look beyond them. I don't think Miller is quite on the level of Orson Scott Card (of whom I have no interest in reading any of his work because I just find him to be so low of a person and scum of the Earth), but he is very much, to be frank, an asshole. I am very much a Moore person, if that makes any sense. If his other works have similar messages and themes to this one, I don't have much interest in them, but I'm not going to say I will never read anything else by Miller. I just don't really foresee it in my future.
So in the introduction of this bind-up, Miller talks a lot about what I would call the inspiration for both titles in this book. In this introduction, he is hyper-critical of the media, which I think is something we all should be doing. However, in the actual story, Miller represents the media to be on the side of people who claim that the Batman, who has recently come out of retirement, is having a negative impact on society, and that while he may be driving down crime levels, which have reached an all-time high, he is only continuing the cycle of crime and that his actions will only spawn more criminals (essentially).
In the introduction, Miller makes reference to some psychologist who wrote a book which would go on to move Congress to creating the Comics Code Authority (I know enough about this already to not need to do any research on who that person was or what his book was titled, and Miller refuses to name it in the book, so I don't know that information, otherwise I would include it here). The CCA, for those who don't know, was created with the above mentions psychologist basically stated that the violence in comic books were driving children to be exhibit "unsocial behaviors" that led youth to committing crime. Even though the evidence was negligible (can't believe I spelled that right without the aide of spellchecker when committing gave me trouble), Congress went ahead an established the CCA to censor comics and make sure they were influencing the youth. This was around the 60's or 50's I believe. It is very similar to what a lot of people are trying to do to video games today.
So, what Miller has done is liked what this psychologist has said about comics to Batman. While I don't think violence in any media affects anybody enough to make them commit a crime if they are "mentally stable", I think it's a bit foolish to liken this to Batman. For one, this Batman is a lot more ruthless than the canon Batman. In one panel, for example, he shot a man. This is not normally something that Batman would do. Batman has always been about seeking redemption for criminals if possible, and if not, then he locks them away for both the safety of them and the public. Batman is traditionally a force for good. In Miller's TDKR, however, Batman is more an avatar of vengeance, and I think that that would only continue the cycle of crime. In our world, when, for example, the poor are kept down by the more wealthy and powerful members of society, they will often turn to crime in order to survive (such as the grandmother who sold drugs to help put her grandchildren, who she raised, through college). Sure, crime is crime, but one must look at the reasons as to why someone is committing a crime before one judges someone.
Miller is basically saying, in my eyes, that criminals are criminals and should be punished and that there is no redemption for them. The character of Two-Face is a prime example of him in this book. Miller write him so that, even have being rehabilitated, he is so traumatized from his past, that he cannot help but return to a life of crime. Sure, these are comic book characters, but still, if Miller is going to make the claims, metaphors, and analogies that he is making, then I can just the same judge him through a real-world lens. To me, what Miller is saying is that there is no redemption for those who commit crimes, only revenge. Which, as I stated above, goes against everything that Batman means to me.
I think it's important for writers to include themes in their work. I think that if you're going to make them a major, obvious aspect of the test though, that you should at least make sure that they don't make you look hypocritical. The messages that Miller includes in the text, or at least the part of it that I read, are a) that the media takes things and warps them to their own narrative and b) the censoring of society will only hold it back. While I can definitely get behind him on how messed up censorship is, I think it's also important to look at what you're saying. For example, Charlie Hebdo. They had all the right to draw Mohammed, and what happened to them was certainly wrong, but what was their intention in drawing the Prophet? I don't think it was anything other than trying to provoke terrorists. Just because one has a right to do something, doesn't mean one should abuse it. We as a society need to look at what we want to do with our time on Earth/in the Universe. Do we want to go around and offend people just for the sake of offending them, or are we going to go and make a statement, whether correct or not, on what we believe to try and make people think?
As for message A, Miller makes the media out to be a hypochondriac, but he's doing the exact same thing, only on the opposite side of the scale. In this book, Miller rights the media to be on the side that Batman is only helping to further the cycle of crime and portrays them as rather air-headed, nonplussed by most of the events (and those that are plussed are normally on the side of Batman), and non-emotional. On the other hand, Miller is making all criminals seem to be hopeless causes that are better of dead or locked away rather than being treated or reintegrated into society. The truth of the matter is this: some people aren't worthy of being treated or are unable to be treated (to far gone), but those cases are, normally, the exception to the rule. Most every criminal is able to be treated and returned to society if they are willing to seek help or open to it.
I don't regret buying this book, because it is a piece of history, and I may one day return to this and read all of it. However, the themes that Miller included in this were just not something I can get behind, and they were too present in the text for me to look beyond them. I don't think Miller is quite on the level of Orson Scott Card (of whom I have no interest in reading any of his work because I just find him to be so low of a person and scum of the Earth), but he is very much, to be frank, an asshole. I am very much a Moore person, if that makes any sense. If his other works have similar messages and themes to this one, I don't have much interest in them, but I'm not going to say I will never read anything else by Miller. I just don't really foresee it in my future.
December 3, 2019
Ufffff! It is difficult to do a review of the whole saga. The last books are nuts, cheerios, crazy stuff.
I guess that is a personal vendetta of Frank Miller against the D.C universe.
I don’t share his ideas or his tesis but I have to recognize that Frank Miller is a person that I forgive his bad stuff, I don’t know exactly why, maybe because I think is an honest person, simple and raw. No like Alan Moore, who is a kind of liberal diva.
I guess that is a personal vendetta of Frank Miller against the D.C universe.
I don’t share his ideas or his tesis but I have to recognize that Frank Miller is a person that I forgive his bad stuff, I don’t know exactly why, maybe because I think is an honest person, simple and raw. No like Alan Moore, who is a kind of liberal diva.
June 17, 2017
A parte 1 é uma das melhores HQs que já li: traços simples, Mas que respondem à altura da história fantástica, muito bem contada e fora da curva.
A parte 2 parece que ele já estava com uma preguiça desgraçada: desenhos bem horríveis e uma história bizarra.
A parte 1 é tão boa que compensa a segunda.
A parte 2 parece que ele já estava com uma preguiça desgraçada: desenhos bem horríveis e uma história bizarra.
A parte 1 é tão boa que compensa a segunda.
April 23, 2019
''Stari je Wayne imao gadnu narav. Nije baš bio ono što bismo nazvali psihički stabilnom osobom. Tip se oblačio u glodavca, zaboga..."
Shokre hvala na preporuci!
Shokre hvala na preporuci!
July 4, 2010
The Dark Knight shall forever remain the most enigmatic of superheroes - someone who escapes ridicule by dint of perseverance and sheer insensitivity to the absurdity of it all. Limited in terms of real powers, this is exactly what makes him the most popular; the fact that we can identify with him at some level, at the level of being fully human - mindf*cks, warts and all - make his shenanigans the most intriguing.
Frank Miller has now resurrected the Batman (I always prefix the moniker with the definite article) in a gloomy, post-apocalyptic world where the mind is full of fear and the head is never held high. He examines the struggle within, the attempt to inter the terror that is the Batman by the man that is Bruce Wayne. Like Dr. Jekyll and Dr. Banner, his fight with his inner demon is the crux of the story, the desperate need for the darkness to come out and take to the night again. When finally the demon tears through, he is unstoppable, angry, vengeful and much darker than ever before. His anger has been stoked by years of repression, and now the Dark Knight has come to reclaim whatever he had.
The two series - The Dark Knight Returns and The Dark Knight Strikes Back - deal with the realities of real-politick and the graying of lines between good and evil. It is a world where heroes are unwelcome because they put our own insignificance into perspective. As the Batman says, they don't want to be reminded that giants walked the earth. So the man waits and plots while the creature snarls in anticipation.
Oh, and the fight with Superman? Classic. Actually TWO fights with Superman. Both classic.
Frank Miller has now resurrected the Batman (I always prefix the moniker with the definite article) in a gloomy, post-apocalyptic world where the mind is full of fear and the head is never held high. He examines the struggle within, the attempt to inter the terror that is the Batman by the man that is Bruce Wayne. Like Dr. Jekyll and Dr. Banner, his fight with his inner demon is the crux of the story, the desperate need for the darkness to come out and take to the night again. When finally the demon tears through, he is unstoppable, angry, vengeful and much darker than ever before. His anger has been stoked by years of repression, and now the Dark Knight has come to reclaim whatever he had.
The two series - The Dark Knight Returns and The Dark Knight Strikes Back - deal with the realities of real-politick and the graying of lines between good and evil. It is a world where heroes are unwelcome because they put our own insignificance into perspective. As the Batman says, they don't want to be reminded that giants walked the earth. So the man waits and plots while the creature snarls in anticipation.
Oh, and the fight with Superman? Classic. Actually TWO fights with Superman. Both classic.
January 5, 2014
The problem with this book is that, on one hand, you have one of the best "graphic novels" in the history of superhero comics; a story written by Miller at the height of his powers, long before he fell into whatever crazy-guy-cliche-hole he's been living in the for last decade or so. On the other hand, you have The Dark Knight Strikes Again, which is pretty much the antithesis of The Dark Knight Returns. I mean, no one would ever call Miller subtle, but DKR does have some quiet moments mixed in with the big scenes. DKSA is loud and garish, and reads like someone who doesn't write very well decided he wanted to write a Frank Miller story. I do love how the art looks in this big format, even the sloppy inks and bizarre photoshop that make up the second story. It took me two days to go through DKR, because I wanted to take my time with it - by contrast, it took me about an hour to finish DKSA, because I realized I had no interest in reading the words, so I just thumbed through the book and looked at the pictures. I've read that story once before, and believe me, that's enough.
December 11, 2022
The Dark Knight Returns is a seminal piece of work and one of the best Batman books ever created. However, Frank Miller then decides to almost ruin the book by sequels and prequels.
The Dark Knight Strikes Again is awful, and barely even a Batman book. It’s Miller throwing the JLA and other DC characters into this ‘universe’ he’s created and it’s so bad. The artwork is amateurish. The story doesn’t make much sense. And the twist with Dick Grayson being the new Joker makes no sense. Surely it should have been Jason Todd?
So I’m docking the collection 2 stars. It’s a nice hardcover collection of the books and I’ll keep it when i want to revisit TDKR. But I can’t see me reading the sequel again.
The Dark Knight Strikes Again is awful, and barely even a Batman book. It’s Miller throwing the JLA and other DC characters into this ‘universe’ he’s created and it’s so bad. The artwork is amateurish. The story doesn’t make much sense. And the twist with Dick Grayson being the new Joker makes no sense. Surely it should have been Jason Todd?
So I’m docking the collection 2 stars. It’s a nice hardcover collection of the books and I’ll keep it when i want to revisit TDKR. But I can’t see me reading the sequel again.
March 9, 2020
DK 2, so-called, is not as good as The Dark Knight Returns, but I liked it better than I did back when it came out. At the time I'm sure I thought Frank Miller had lost both his mind and his ability to draw, but, hey, I was wrong.
February 25, 2022
At times it was a bit incoherent when read fast and demands close attention to the lettering. Despite this the story is brilliant and took the DC characters to places that they hadn't seen until Frank Miller dared go there. Every character is at the apex of their powers and characterization for this world and is necessary reading for an DC fan.
Read
November 2, 2017This was a great graphic novel. The words, feelings, pictures, and actions of the character really got me hooked and made me want to finish the entire book. The ending was a little sad and horrifying seeing everyone beaten up and on the verge of death. I would recommend this to anyone that likes action, violence, and a little bit of drama.
January 14, 2020
This is a lot of fun! I love the alternate Batman storylines. Frank Miller somehow manages to cram a ton of story content into what seems a simple cartoon. The only reason I gave it 3-stars was because as the story matured, the continuity seems to lack a little. Still, I loved it!
April 30, 2021
The Dark Knight Returns is a 5 star read and a must read for any serious batman fan and comic book fan in general i think. Its succesor sadly is not, making this for me a four start read. The oversized artwork and story alone are still very worth the upgrade to Absolute.
August 21, 2017
Se esse encadernado tivesse só TDK era 5 estrelas izi, mas como tem TDKSA tem q diminuir uma mesmo.
October 3, 2019
You all know Batman, right? And if you like graphic novels on top of that, just pick this deluxe edition. There is nothing to add here!
Start reading and enjoy the ride! And awesome illustrations
Start reading and enjoy the ride! And awesome illustrations
October 2, 2020
The Dark Knight Returns is good but The Dark Knight Strikes Again is EPIC
March 24, 2022
Obra prima do caralho. Simplesmente.
November 14, 2019
The Dark Knight Returns is a masterpiece! 5/5
The Dark Knight Strikes Again is garbage! 0/5
The Dark Knight Strikes Again is garbage! 0/5
February 13, 2025
The Knight’s Last Laugh: A Review of Absolute The Dark Knight
The American superhero, that enduring and paradoxical figure, is at once a force of law and an agent of rebellion, an aspirational figure and an instrument of vengeance, a protector of the weak and an avatar of unchecked power. No hero embodies these contradictions more profoundly than Batman—a character whose mythology has been endlessly deconstructed, reconstructed, and reimagined for nearly a century.
And yet, for all the revisions, one version towers above the rest, casting a shadow over every subsequent interpretation:
Frank Miller’s The Dark Knight Returns (1986).
With Absolute The Dark Knight, we are given the definitive edition of one of the most important graphic novels ever written—a tome that not only collects The Dark Knight Returns but also The Dark Knight Strikes Again, along with supplementary materials that illuminate Miller’s process, artistic evolution, and, at times, his descent into excess.
This is no ordinary Batman story.
It is a manifesto, a warning, a satirical broadside, and a stylistic explosion of ink and fury.
It is a work that changed comics forever—but also, as this volume starkly reveals, a work whose influence has been both profound and, at times, deeply misunderstood.
The Historical Moment: Reagan, Crime, and the Death of Innocence
To understand The Dark Knight Returns, one must first understand the world that produced it.
By the mid-1980s, American comics were in a strange existential crisis.
The Silver Age optimism of the 1950s and ‘60s had faded, replaced by grittier, more cynical storytelling reflecting the social anxieties of the late Cold War era.
The Bronze Age (1970s) had brought more complex characters, social realism, and mature themes, but superheroes still existed in a world of restrained consequences and clear moral lines.
The 1980s, however, was a decade defined by Reaganism, rising crime rates, urban decay, and Cold War paranoia—and comics, still largely viewed as juvenile escapism, had yet to fully absorb these darker realities.
Enter Frank Miller.
A writer-artist who had already reshaped Daredevil into a noir-infused street saga, Miller brought a cynic’s eye and a filmmaker’s sense of pacing to The Dark Knight Returns, crafting a dystopian, near-fascist future where an aging Bruce Wayne emerges from retirement for one last, brutal war against crime, corruption, and irrelevance.
It was, quite simply, a revolution in superhero storytelling.
The Art: Brutality, Abstraction, and the Language of Chaos
Visually, The Dark Knight Returns is a deliberate rejection of the sleek, polished superhero comics of the past.
Miller, along with inker Klaus Janson and colorist Lynn Varley, crafts a world that is jagged, claustrophobic, and perpetually on the verge of collapse.
Batman is no longer an acrobat but a tank, his body bulky, almost monstrous, his movements slow but devastating.
The city is a character in itself, drawn with expressionistic splashes of shadow and neon, a modern Gotham more akin to a crime-ridden nightmare than a playground for caped crusaders.
The action is raw, fragmented, and violent, each fight staged not as a ballet, but as an ugly, bone-crunching brawl, where every punch feels like it might be the last one Batman ever throws.
The use of television screens, media interjections, and propaganda-infused talking heads gives the book a relentless, oppressive rhythm, a feeling that information overload is as much the enemy as crime itself.
This is not the Batman of Neal Adams’ sleek dynamism or Jim Aparo’s classical adventure serials.
This is Batman as a walking piece of war propaganda, a brute force of nature, a fascist’s dream or a populist’s nightmare, depending on the reader’s perspective.
It is, in a word, uncompromising.
The Story: A Deconstruction of Heroism, or a Celebration of Power?
At its core, The Dark Knight Returns is a story about power, aging, and the cyclical nature of violence.
Batman is old, broken, but still addicted to his war on crime.
He returns not out of necessity, but because he cannot let go. The city’s descent into chaos is merely an excuse for a man who needs violence to feel alive again.
His allies—Carrie Kelley’s Robin, an irredeemably cynical Commissioner Gordon—are either pulled into his orbit or discarded when they cease to serve his mission.
His enemies—Two-Face, the Mutants, the Joker, Superman himself—are merely ideological foils, reflections of what Batman could be or used to be, rather than fully realized threats.
Miller, at his best, crafts a savage critique of power, control, and the myth of the infallible hero.
But Miller, at his worst, seems to revel in that very myth.
The book’s distorted vision of crime—a Gotham where gang violence is apocalyptic, where youth are all nihilistic anarchists, where liberalism is portrayed as weak and ineffectual—can feel more like reactionary fearmongering than genuine social commentary.
Batman’s final confrontation with Superman—framed as the ultimate clash between authoritarian power and government control—feels less like a deconstruction and more like a libertarian fantasy of unchecked vigilantism.
This is the tension at the heart of The Dark Knight Returns:
Is Batman a warning against fascism or a figurehead for it?
Miller, perhaps wisely, never provides a definitive answer.
Instead, he leaves us with a story that is either the greatest superhero critique ever written or the most beautifully drawn justification for moral absolutism.
Either way, it changed comics forever.
The Dark Knight Strikes Again: A Cautionary Tale of Excess
The second half of Absolute The Dark Knight includes The Dark Knight Strikes Again (2001)—a bizarre, neon-drenched sequel that is, to put it mildly, divisive.
Where Returns was tight, structured, and deliberately paced, Strikes Again is an anarchic explosion of Day-Glo chaos, a book that feels less like a sequel and more like a parody of its predecessor.
The art is crude and exaggerated, abandoning Miller’s earlier sense of tension and weight.
The plot is borderline incoherent, veering wildly between political satire, superhero deconstruction, and outright lunacy.
Batman himself becomes a secondary character, overshadowed by Miller’s larger obsessions with media, propaganda, and the post-9/11 American psyche.
If The Dark Knight Returns was a revolution, Strikes Again is its self-inflicted counter-revolution, a book that pushes its themes past the breaking point until they collapse under their own weight.
Final Verdict: A Monument to Comics, for Better and Worse
Absolute The Dark Knight is, in every sense, essential reading.
It contains one of the most important superhero stories ever written, presented in the finest possible format, complete with extras that reveal Miller’s creative process and the book’s lasting influence.
It also contains one of the most baffling superhero sequels ever published.
But together, they form a complete picture of a creator whose vision for Batman was nothing less than seismic.
If you want to understand why modern superhero comics are darker, more psychological, more politically charged, and more obsessed with “gritty realism” than ever before—
You need look no further than this.
Because some stories define a character.
But this story redefined an entire genre.
As well it should.
The American superhero, that enduring and paradoxical figure, is at once a force of law and an agent of rebellion, an aspirational figure and an instrument of vengeance, a protector of the weak and an avatar of unchecked power. No hero embodies these contradictions more profoundly than Batman—a character whose mythology has been endlessly deconstructed, reconstructed, and reimagined for nearly a century.
And yet, for all the revisions, one version towers above the rest, casting a shadow over every subsequent interpretation:
Frank Miller’s The Dark Knight Returns (1986).
With Absolute The Dark Knight, we are given the definitive edition of one of the most important graphic novels ever written—a tome that not only collects The Dark Knight Returns but also The Dark Knight Strikes Again, along with supplementary materials that illuminate Miller’s process, artistic evolution, and, at times, his descent into excess.
This is no ordinary Batman story.
It is a manifesto, a warning, a satirical broadside, and a stylistic explosion of ink and fury.
It is a work that changed comics forever—but also, as this volume starkly reveals, a work whose influence has been both profound and, at times, deeply misunderstood.
The Historical Moment: Reagan, Crime, and the Death of Innocence
To understand The Dark Knight Returns, one must first understand the world that produced it.
By the mid-1980s, American comics were in a strange existential crisis.
The Silver Age optimism of the 1950s and ‘60s had faded, replaced by grittier, more cynical storytelling reflecting the social anxieties of the late Cold War era.
The Bronze Age (1970s) had brought more complex characters, social realism, and mature themes, but superheroes still existed in a world of restrained consequences and clear moral lines.
The 1980s, however, was a decade defined by Reaganism, rising crime rates, urban decay, and Cold War paranoia—and comics, still largely viewed as juvenile escapism, had yet to fully absorb these darker realities.
Enter Frank Miller.
A writer-artist who had already reshaped Daredevil into a noir-infused street saga, Miller brought a cynic’s eye and a filmmaker’s sense of pacing to The Dark Knight Returns, crafting a dystopian, near-fascist future where an aging Bruce Wayne emerges from retirement for one last, brutal war against crime, corruption, and irrelevance.
It was, quite simply, a revolution in superhero storytelling.
The Art: Brutality, Abstraction, and the Language of Chaos
Visually, The Dark Knight Returns is a deliberate rejection of the sleek, polished superhero comics of the past.
Miller, along with inker Klaus Janson and colorist Lynn Varley, crafts a world that is jagged, claustrophobic, and perpetually on the verge of collapse.
Batman is no longer an acrobat but a tank, his body bulky, almost monstrous, his movements slow but devastating.
The city is a character in itself, drawn with expressionistic splashes of shadow and neon, a modern Gotham more akin to a crime-ridden nightmare than a playground for caped crusaders.
The action is raw, fragmented, and violent, each fight staged not as a ballet, but as an ugly, bone-crunching brawl, where every punch feels like it might be the last one Batman ever throws.
The use of television screens, media interjections, and propaganda-infused talking heads gives the book a relentless, oppressive rhythm, a feeling that information overload is as much the enemy as crime itself.
This is not the Batman of Neal Adams’ sleek dynamism or Jim Aparo’s classical adventure serials.
This is Batman as a walking piece of war propaganda, a brute force of nature, a fascist’s dream or a populist’s nightmare, depending on the reader’s perspective.
It is, in a word, uncompromising.
The Story: A Deconstruction of Heroism, or a Celebration of Power?
At its core, The Dark Knight Returns is a story about power, aging, and the cyclical nature of violence.
Batman is old, broken, but still addicted to his war on crime.
He returns not out of necessity, but because he cannot let go. The city’s descent into chaos is merely an excuse for a man who needs violence to feel alive again.
His allies—Carrie Kelley’s Robin, an irredeemably cynical Commissioner Gordon—are either pulled into his orbit or discarded when they cease to serve his mission.
His enemies—Two-Face, the Mutants, the Joker, Superman himself—are merely ideological foils, reflections of what Batman could be or used to be, rather than fully realized threats.
Miller, at his best, crafts a savage critique of power, control, and the myth of the infallible hero.
But Miller, at his worst, seems to revel in that very myth.
The book’s distorted vision of crime—a Gotham where gang violence is apocalyptic, where youth are all nihilistic anarchists, where liberalism is portrayed as weak and ineffectual—can feel more like reactionary fearmongering than genuine social commentary.
Batman’s final confrontation with Superman—framed as the ultimate clash between authoritarian power and government control—feels less like a deconstruction and more like a libertarian fantasy of unchecked vigilantism.
This is the tension at the heart of The Dark Knight Returns:
Is Batman a warning against fascism or a figurehead for it?
Miller, perhaps wisely, never provides a definitive answer.
Instead, he leaves us with a story that is either the greatest superhero critique ever written or the most beautifully drawn justification for moral absolutism.
Either way, it changed comics forever.
The Dark Knight Strikes Again: A Cautionary Tale of Excess
The second half of Absolute The Dark Knight includes The Dark Knight Strikes Again (2001)—a bizarre, neon-drenched sequel that is, to put it mildly, divisive.
Where Returns was tight, structured, and deliberately paced, Strikes Again is an anarchic explosion of Day-Glo chaos, a book that feels less like a sequel and more like a parody of its predecessor.
The art is crude and exaggerated, abandoning Miller’s earlier sense of tension and weight.
The plot is borderline incoherent, veering wildly between political satire, superhero deconstruction, and outright lunacy.
Batman himself becomes a secondary character, overshadowed by Miller’s larger obsessions with media, propaganda, and the post-9/11 American psyche.
If The Dark Knight Returns was a revolution, Strikes Again is its self-inflicted counter-revolution, a book that pushes its themes past the breaking point until they collapse under their own weight.
Final Verdict: A Monument to Comics, for Better and Worse
Absolute The Dark Knight is, in every sense, essential reading.
It contains one of the most important superhero stories ever written, presented in the finest possible format, complete with extras that reveal Miller’s creative process and the book’s lasting influence.
It also contains one of the most baffling superhero sequels ever published.
But together, they form a complete picture of a creator whose vision for Batman was nothing less than seismic.
If you want to understand why modern superhero comics are darker, more psychological, more politically charged, and more obsessed with “gritty realism” than ever before—
You need look no further than this.
Because some stories define a character.
But this story redefined an entire genre.
As well it should.
March 9, 2012
There are a lot of things that can be said for The Dark Knight but that it is not enjoyable every time you read it is not one of them. It is hard in this post Watchman age to divorce the series itself from the darkness that has seemed to change comic books forever until you pick it up and start to read it again.
And then you remember why it changed everything.
frank Miller's art is not for everyone but in the case of this there is literally no one else who could have married images to words like the author himself. This is the comic book you have people read when they say comic books are stupid. This is the series you shove into people's face when they say Batman is Adam West and make that stupid POW! sound to you.
If you haven't read this book, read it. If you haven't read it in a while, read it again. if you just read it again like me...wasn't that badass when he did that thing and then he...wow.
Just wow.
And then you remember why it changed everything.
frank Miller's art is not for everyone but in the case of this there is literally no one else who could have married images to words like the author himself. This is the comic book you have people read when they say comic books are stupid. This is the series you shove into people's face when they say Batman is Adam West and make that stupid POW! sound to you.
If you haven't read this book, read it. If you haven't read it in a while, read it again. if you just read it again like me...wasn't that badass when he did that thing and then he...wow.
Just wow.
January 31, 2008
These DC Absolute editions are MASSIVE. Bigger than coffee table books. And the format really does justice to Miller's art. Dark Knight is, of course, the seminal work of the 1980s that ushered in the "grim n' gritty" era of comicdom. There's a lot more going on in this book though, from political criticisms of Reagan era policy to commentary on media culture. I would've given this format of Dark Knight full stars but it does include Miller's sequel story The Dark Knight Strikes Back. DKSB is straight-up parody and satire of Dark Knight itself, and Miller's art is disgustingly comedic. Even still, well worth the price tag.
March 3, 2013
"Dark Knight Returns" is commonly referred to as the best graphic novel of all time and while I liked it, I didn't love it. It had some memorable parts for me and I can still pictures some of the artwork in my mind even after all the time that has passed since I read it.
"The Dark Knight Strikes Again" on the other hand isn't as good at all. Only recommended for the hardcore Batman/Frank Miller fan.
Luckily for me, they came together in a huge book with a sexy book vest and the best part, it was free!
"The Dark Knight Strikes Again" on the other hand isn't as good at all. Only recommended for the hardcore Batman/Frank Miller fan.
Luckily for me, they came together in a huge book with a sexy book vest and the best part, it was free!
August 12, 2014
The Dark Knight Returns was one of the first Batman stories I ever read years and years ago. I was really disappointed when I found out it wasn't cannon. The art is edgy and awesome, and Miller can spin a great story. It's a shame Carrie Kelley doesn't get any cred. She's one of my favorite characters in comic books, and it's great seeing more of her in second half. And anyway, I love seeing the boy scout get ... oh wait, you need to read that part for yourself. :)
June 19, 2021
5 estrelas mas o cavaleiro das trevas 2 não tem uma história tão boa quanto a primeira, romance meio forçado, umas ideia meia torta no meio da história... mas no geral uma ótima HQ, cavaleiro das trevas 1 é muito pika. Uma das melhores de todos os tempos, referência dos quadrinhos!!!
December 8, 2015
Una auténtica maravilla. Sin más.
March 9, 2016
The Dark Knight Returns: 4.5/5
The Dark Knight Strikes Again: 2/5
The Dark Knight Strikes Again: 2/5
May 19, 2024
It's a great collection, though remarkable in contrast with the similar stories yet strikingly different to place side by side.
The Dark Knight Returns
I've heard a lot about this story. Frank Miller has been known to love Batman with all his heart and has created great stories that have championed that love. Batman Year One was exceptional and I eagerly awaited to read this, with my library frequently checking out this story, especially with the new movies that used various imagery from Christopher Nolan to Zack Snyder.
Eventually, I read it and I have to admit this while the story is splendid, there has never been a faithful adaptation. In some respects, this story is overhyped.
The story's premise is that the world is akin to the Robocop stories, dystopian and under an insanely politically correct mindset. Yet Mr. Miller creates a character like Ronald Reagan who pushes for his champion in Superman. From here I realize another rumor is true, that Frank Miller hates certain depictions of Superman. Whereas Batman is dreary but smart and savvy. Superman is a goody-two-shoes who lives up to moralistic standards that make him ineffective against crime.
Miller creates him as not necessarily the villain but a part of the problem. Superman is on call to save the day sort of in the same way Dr. Manhattan was in Watchmen. But disaster strikes worse than the US Government and Superman could have imagined. Batman has returned after a crime rate that has grown after a ten-year retirement doesn't say or promise anything. He just does what he does. Unanswerable to anyone, doing what he does because it is the right thing to do. While the media calls him a fascist when in reality it is they who are the fascists.
Batman returns to fight back against Two-Face, finally defeats the Joker, and turns the criminal underworld on his side and into his army. All this leads to an epic conclusion, which is great. But not without a long and slow buildup.
I hate the media style breaks that pop into the story, it slows down the pacing to a snail's crawl. I dislike Miller's championing such hardcore methods of Batman and making Superman look uncaring or worse a parasite. I do love the female Robin and how Batman is really capable after all those lost years. But it is great, like those old westerns in which the hero comes back from retirement to save the day again.
The Dark Knight Strikes Again
Interesting.
I read this first before reading Dark Knight Returns and now that I have read it I have to admit that this story, while chaotic and depressing at times is much more interesting.
After the epic battle between Superman and Batman, the caped crusader sends out the Sons of Batman to continue to serve him. While Superman is out fulfilling the interests of the politically correct society. However, things become more than they seem, and here is where Frank Miller throws out the rules that he established in the original Dark Knight Returns.
He adds the Justice League but even more than that, after fifteen years Frank Miller, well probably created this story while he was drunk... But nobody can be this drunk... I'd instead go for senile.
The realism of the plot goes away, when you realize that instead of the story starting where it left off in the 1980s, it becomes a modern-day dystopia where Lex Luthor is manipulating the media to convince them that a US President is taking charge of the country when it is himself. Presumably, this is why Superman serves this country's interest not because he respects authority, but because Lex Luthor and Brainiac hold the bottled city of Kandor hostage. 'Do what we say or your civilization dies.'
It is this reason why certain superheroes have left the world. But even more than that, it's why certain superheroes are gone... and Batman finds out why. He learns that several of them have been kidnapped and imprisoned as his faithful sidekick Carrie Kelly, skipping the Robin costume and declaring herself as Catgirl, comes to their rescue. Others have been killed, while others have simply retired. But those that have died have families that want redemption and those that have retired come back.
While Superman is blackmailed and forced to do their bidding, the heroes of old fight him first, but then come to his rescue. I have to say it is cool seeing Superman and Wonder Woman together and knowing that they have a child of their own. It's also cool seeing the Flash, the Atom, Green Arrow, and others back into the fray.
What is not good is how sensationalized the story is. It is not as realistic and gritty as Dark Knight Returns and the way the story is written is poor. I also hate how they butchered an old hero who comes back as a villain, someone I did not expect.
Still, this has its moments, the art looks cool, less dreary, and dark with bright coloring. However, it doesn't feel real anymore. I love Carrie as Catgirl, I love Lara as Supergirl. Nice to know there is going to be a sequel to this. I hope it's told better.
Once again, a great collection.
The Dark Knight Returns
I've heard a lot about this story. Frank Miller has been known to love Batman with all his heart and has created great stories that have championed that love. Batman Year One was exceptional and I eagerly awaited to read this, with my library frequently checking out this story, especially with the new movies that used various imagery from Christopher Nolan to Zack Snyder.
Eventually, I read it and I have to admit this while the story is splendid, there has never been a faithful adaptation. In some respects, this story is overhyped.
The story's premise is that the world is akin to the Robocop stories, dystopian and under an insanely politically correct mindset. Yet Mr. Miller creates a character like Ronald Reagan who pushes for his champion in Superman. From here I realize another rumor is true, that Frank Miller hates certain depictions of Superman. Whereas Batman is dreary but smart and savvy. Superman is a goody-two-shoes who lives up to moralistic standards that make him ineffective against crime.
Miller creates him as not necessarily the villain but a part of the problem. Superman is on call to save the day sort of in the same way Dr. Manhattan was in Watchmen. But disaster strikes worse than the US Government and Superman could have imagined. Batman has returned after a crime rate that has grown after a ten-year retirement doesn't say or promise anything. He just does what he does. Unanswerable to anyone, doing what he does because it is the right thing to do. While the media calls him a fascist when in reality it is they who are the fascists.
Batman returns to fight back against Two-Face, finally defeats the Joker, and turns the criminal underworld on his side and into his army. All this leads to an epic conclusion, which is great. But not without a long and slow buildup.
I hate the media style breaks that pop into the story, it slows down the pacing to a snail's crawl. I dislike Miller's championing such hardcore methods of Batman and making Superman look uncaring or worse a parasite. I do love the female Robin and how Batman is really capable after all those lost years. But it is great, like those old westerns in which the hero comes back from retirement to save the day again.
The Dark Knight Strikes Again
Interesting.
I read this first before reading Dark Knight Returns and now that I have read it I have to admit that this story, while chaotic and depressing at times is much more interesting.
After the epic battle between Superman and Batman, the caped crusader sends out the Sons of Batman to continue to serve him. While Superman is out fulfilling the interests of the politically correct society. However, things become more than they seem, and here is where Frank Miller throws out the rules that he established in the original Dark Knight Returns.
He adds the Justice League but even more than that, after fifteen years Frank Miller, well probably created this story while he was drunk... But nobody can be this drunk... I'd instead go for senile.
The realism of the plot goes away, when you realize that instead of the story starting where it left off in the 1980s, it becomes a modern-day dystopia where Lex Luthor is manipulating the media to convince them that a US President is taking charge of the country when it is himself. Presumably, this is why Superman serves this country's interest not because he respects authority, but because Lex Luthor and Brainiac hold the bottled city of Kandor hostage. 'Do what we say or your civilization dies.'
It is this reason why certain superheroes have left the world. But even more than that, it's why certain superheroes are gone... and Batman finds out why. He learns that several of them have been kidnapped and imprisoned as his faithful sidekick Carrie Kelly, skipping the Robin costume and declaring herself as Catgirl, comes to their rescue. Others have been killed, while others have simply retired. But those that have died have families that want redemption and those that have retired come back.
While Superman is blackmailed and forced to do their bidding, the heroes of old fight him first, but then come to his rescue. I have to say it is cool seeing Superman and Wonder Woman together and knowing that they have a child of their own. It's also cool seeing the Flash, the Atom, Green Arrow, and others back into the fray.
What is not good is how sensationalized the story is. It is not as realistic and gritty as Dark Knight Returns and the way the story is written is poor. I also hate how they butchered an old hero who comes back as a villain, someone I did not expect.
Still, this has its moments, the art looks cool, less dreary, and dark with bright coloring. However, it doesn't feel real anymore. I love Carrie as Catgirl, I love Lara as Supergirl. Nice to know there is going to be a sequel to this. I hope it's told better.
Once again, a great collection.
April 21, 2019
Esta es la segunda vez que leo estas dos obras, pero es la primera vez que las leo juntas y en esta edición pasta dura que trae Dark Knight Returns y Dark Knight Strikes Again. Por razones obvias haré esta reseña por partes, lamentablemente la calidad varía tanto entre las dos obras que no podemos generalizar la calificación.
Primero la edición. Es en pasta dura y aunque tiene casi 550 páginas, no se siente tan pesada. No me gustó mucho el arte retirando el cubre polvos porque es el mismo que el del cubrepolvos, al menos en la edición mexicana de Smash Televisa. Trae como 50 páginas de arte, sketches, portadas, fotos, etc. Tamaño adecuado, más grande que un cómic normal.
La calificación de The Dark Knight Returns es cinco estrellas. Una verdadera obra maestra. Y si no les gusta o no me creen sólo vean el parte aguas que significó en la historia del hombre murciélago. El tono del personaje y de las historias se volvió mucho más oscuro y "serio" después de Frank Miller, específicamente después de esta obra y Year One. Miller sabe perfectamente qué está escribiendo, le da una nueva capa de significado a Bruce y a sus villanos; lo que hace con Two Face y con Joker se me hace una gran manera de abordar a dos personajes clásicos. Al mismo tiempo usa técnicas narrativas innovadoras para la época como usar los reportes de televisión para darle mucha más información al lector de la que está viendo, etc.
La historia es muy simbólica y tiene varios momentos claves que te ayudan a dimensionar al personaje. Miller no sólo construyó bien su historia sino que hizo un gran trabajo construyendo a sus personajes.
La segunda historia contenida en este volumen, The Dark Knight Strikes Again, su calificación es de 3 estrellas. Es un desastre y ni siquiera es uno bello, es plano y llano, un desastre. Si bien la historia retoma años después de donde acabó la primera serie, y nos presenta un mundo distópico donde los héroes renunciaron y se fueron y ahora el mundo es gobernado por unos tiranos, Batman y su ejército regresa a poner todo en orden. La historia es interesante y hubiera sido aún mejor si hubiera sido más corta. Miller ya no utiliza las noticias como un recurso narrativo, lo intenta pero no le sale tan bien como en la serie anterior.
La historia hubiera sido llevadera sin el horrible y grotesco arte de Miller y los colores de Lynn Varley. El arte de Miller es feo de por si, pero cuando Janson lo entinta y Varley lo colorea a mano, es impresionante. De ejemplo tenemos la primera obra contenida en este volumen, el arte es un completo deleite. Para la segunda obra, Varley utilizó una técnica innovadora en ese momento: El coloreo digital, siendo una de las primeras obras coloreadas de esta manera. Lamentablemente el tiro les salió por la culata y el cómic quedó con página tras páginas de colores horribles y efectos sacados del Word Art acompañando unos dibujos deformes y caricaturescos y unas imágenes sin fondos y sin detalles. Varley se pasó de simple y sus colores carecen de degradados, cambios de tonos y sombras. Todo está hecho por computadora al más puro estilo Corel Draw. Realmente una pena.
La historia se me hizo mucho menos confusa y hasta la disfruté. La primera vez pensé que era un cómic deplorable pero creo que más que el cómic fue la sorpresa de encontrarme con un arte tan feo. Esta segunda lectura, ya sabía que me esperaba así que sólo me quedó disfrutar la obra.
En total le pongo cuatro estrellas a este tomo porque tiene una obra maestra y una obra no tan mala pero con un arte que podría hacer llorar a un niño. En serio.
Primero la edición. Es en pasta dura y aunque tiene casi 550 páginas, no se siente tan pesada. No me gustó mucho el arte retirando el cubre polvos porque es el mismo que el del cubrepolvos, al menos en la edición mexicana de Smash Televisa. Trae como 50 páginas de arte, sketches, portadas, fotos, etc. Tamaño adecuado, más grande que un cómic normal.
La calificación de The Dark Knight Returns es cinco estrellas. Una verdadera obra maestra. Y si no les gusta o no me creen sólo vean el parte aguas que significó en la historia del hombre murciélago. El tono del personaje y de las historias se volvió mucho más oscuro y "serio" después de Frank Miller, específicamente después de esta obra y Year One. Miller sabe perfectamente qué está escribiendo, le da una nueva capa de significado a Bruce y a sus villanos; lo que hace con Two Face y con Joker se me hace una gran manera de abordar a dos personajes clásicos. Al mismo tiempo usa técnicas narrativas innovadoras para la época como usar los reportes de televisión para darle mucha más información al lector de la que está viendo, etc.
La historia es muy simbólica y tiene varios momentos claves que te ayudan a dimensionar al personaje. Miller no sólo construyó bien su historia sino que hizo un gran trabajo construyendo a sus personajes.
La segunda historia contenida en este volumen, The Dark Knight Strikes Again, su calificación es de 3 estrellas. Es un desastre y ni siquiera es uno bello, es plano y llano, un desastre. Si bien la historia retoma años después de donde acabó la primera serie, y nos presenta un mundo distópico donde los héroes renunciaron y se fueron y ahora el mundo es gobernado por unos tiranos, Batman y su ejército regresa a poner todo en orden. La historia es interesante y hubiera sido aún mejor si hubiera sido más corta. Miller ya no utiliza las noticias como un recurso narrativo, lo intenta pero no le sale tan bien como en la serie anterior.
La historia hubiera sido llevadera sin el horrible y grotesco arte de Miller y los colores de Lynn Varley. El arte de Miller es feo de por si, pero cuando Janson lo entinta y Varley lo colorea a mano, es impresionante. De ejemplo tenemos la primera obra contenida en este volumen, el arte es un completo deleite. Para la segunda obra, Varley utilizó una técnica innovadora en ese momento: El coloreo digital, siendo una de las primeras obras coloreadas de esta manera. Lamentablemente el tiro les salió por la culata y el cómic quedó con página tras páginas de colores horribles y efectos sacados del Word Art acompañando unos dibujos deformes y caricaturescos y unas imágenes sin fondos y sin detalles. Varley se pasó de simple y sus colores carecen de degradados, cambios de tonos y sombras. Todo está hecho por computadora al más puro estilo Corel Draw. Realmente una pena.
La historia se me hizo mucho menos confusa y hasta la disfruté. La primera vez pensé que era un cómic deplorable pero creo que más que el cómic fue la sorpresa de encontrarme con un arte tan feo. Esta segunda lectura, ya sabía que me esperaba así que sólo me quedó disfrutar la obra.
En total le pongo cuatro estrellas a este tomo porque tiene una obra maestra y una obra no tan mala pero con un arte que podría hacer llorar a un niño. En serio.
September 22, 2023
I'll echo what most reviewers are saying because almost any comic fan would say it: The Dark Knight Returns is one of the best Graphic novels ever, the Dark Knight Strikes Again is one of the worst graphic novels ever. Like every reviewer we wish this deluxe edition just contained the Dark Knight Returns. Why not just get that then? Well, try to find a hardcover edition with just that in it.
I think our dream edition would have Batman: Year One with the Dark Knight Returns and we would see Frank Miller at his best and why he is a genius. Although, if Frank really was a genius he would burn all copies of Dark Knight Strikes again because story-wise and art-wise it is an abomination.
For Dark Knight Returns I remember seeing the single issues in my comic shop and being so turned off by the exaggerated Batman (cover of issue two) and thinking "that isn't my Batman" not realizing the brilliance that lay within the cover. It wasn't until a few years later when I got the graphic novel (paperback) that I sat down and was blown away. It is one of those comic reading experiences you feel to your core. It is a high like no other. Now the art does get worse as the series goes on (the scene with the Joker in the amusement park is oddly bad) but then it starts to get better with the Superman/Batman fight and then you get the ending that is a perfect end for the perfect story. I think I still prefer Batman Year One (also WRITTEN by Miller but drawn by the brilliant David Mazzucchelli) because it is more grounded in "our world" but I would argue Dark Knight Returns is more a masterpiece of how it breaks so much new ground (some pages feel like they have 25 panels on them). There is no wasted space.
Dark Knight Strikes again...sigh...I read it once when it came out and felt I had to read it again just to see. One positive I will say is how we discover the heroes of yesterday are being trapped by Lex Luthor and Brainiac (particularly Atom and Flash) but then Miller runs out of ideas for that and really runs out of ideas for everything. Where DKR is subtle, a slow burn, has scene after scene that is classic...DKSA is void of cool ideas and I don't even know what its point was. There are double page spreads for no reason, other than to fill up space. It goes on and on and never has any interesting scene. The art is so bad it is hard to imagine this is the same artist who did Daredevil, DKR, and Sin City. It is hard to know how to critique it because it is so incoherent. The good guys win in the end but I don't even care. sigh - it is rare to say "I would pay more for this book if it didn't have extra stuff" but I would gladly pay more for a deluxe edition that didn't have DKSA. that is how bad it is.
Miller..I don't know how you came up with DKR and I will forever be in awe of you because of it.
Miller...I don't know why you wasted your talent, our time and ink and paper on DKSA and I will forever be confused by it.
I think our dream edition would have Batman: Year One with the Dark Knight Returns and we would see Frank Miller at his best and why he is a genius. Although, if Frank really was a genius he would burn all copies of Dark Knight Strikes again because story-wise and art-wise it is an abomination.
For Dark Knight Returns I remember seeing the single issues in my comic shop and being so turned off by the exaggerated Batman (cover of issue two) and thinking "that isn't my Batman" not realizing the brilliance that lay within the cover. It wasn't until a few years later when I got the graphic novel (paperback) that I sat down and was blown away. It is one of those comic reading experiences you feel to your core. It is a high like no other. Now the art does get worse as the series goes on (the scene with the Joker in the amusement park is oddly bad) but then it starts to get better with the Superman/Batman fight and then you get the ending that is a perfect end for the perfect story. I think I still prefer Batman Year One (also WRITTEN by Miller but drawn by the brilliant David Mazzucchelli) because it is more grounded in "our world" but I would argue Dark Knight Returns is more a masterpiece of how it breaks so much new ground (some pages feel like they have 25 panels on them). There is no wasted space.
Dark Knight Strikes again...sigh...I read it once when it came out and felt I had to read it again just to see. One positive I will say is how we discover the heroes of yesterday are being trapped by Lex Luthor and Brainiac (particularly Atom and Flash) but then Miller runs out of ideas for that and really runs out of ideas for everything. Where DKR is subtle, a slow burn, has scene after scene that is classic...DKSA is void of cool ideas and I don't even know what its point was. There are double page spreads for no reason, other than to fill up space. It goes on and on and never has any interesting scene. The art is so bad it is hard to imagine this is the same artist who did Daredevil, DKR, and Sin City. It is hard to know how to critique it because it is so incoherent. The good guys win in the end but I don't even care. sigh - it is rare to say "I would pay more for this book if it didn't have extra stuff" but I would gladly pay more for a deluxe edition that didn't have DKSA. that is how bad it is.
Miller..I don't know how you came up with DKR and I will forever be in awe of you because of it.
Miller...I don't know why you wasted your talent, our time and ink and paper on DKSA and I will forever be confused by it.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 129 reviews