So, I watched this Angry Joe rant on the Superman/Batman movie today and he was very upset about The Dark Knight Returns.

As a huge Batman fan, I love The Dark Knight Returns and is the only book that I've read more than 10 times. But do most Superman fans hate The Dark Knight Returns as much as Angry Joe does? Like, I get that it totally doesn't give justice to Superman, but this is a what-if story... And at the time, Superman was known for his American way so why wouldn't he be pro-American government and always stay by its side?

So yeah, what are Superman fans' thoughts on The Dark Knight Returns? Is it a good piece of literature even though it doesn't portray Superman well, or is it really bad because of what they did to Superman?

Yeah, I hate that part of the book. Before I got to the Superman disrespect, I was digging the story, but Miller's treatment of Supes broke it for me. I really got the impression that Miller was just a Batman fanboy who's jealousy for Superman being the top dog caused him to write an extremely unflattering depiction of Superman as a naive goody-goody yes-man.

Superman was a good patriotic guy, but he wouldn't support a government that was as morally corrupt as Miller presents. And I very highly doubt Superman was a big fan of war in the 80's. I would take Superman from Superman IV: The Quest for Peace over the Superman in TDKR. As stupidly idealistic as that movie was, at least it kinda made sense for Superman. TDKR Supes came off as a hamfisted satire of Superman rather than an actual depiction of him.

I actually compare TDKR and Kingdom Come because both series address similar situations and have similar journeys for Batman and Superman respectively. However, one of the many reasons why KC is better is because it doesn't break down one character to build up another which is TDKR's greatest sin. Sure, they are at odds during parts of the series, but Clark never shows up Bats and at the end they reconcile as friends.

Yes. We do hate it. At least the part that features Superman. This is pretty much where the trend of 'Batman beats Superman' started.

I like tdkr it's a really good batman story but the way superman is used in it makes me want to tear my hair out. I did not like that at all.

Well Frankmillerman to me isn't batman to me its Franks Millers opinion of the DC universe,some say he likes Superman but doesnt like how Superman was being portrayed or how WW was being portrayed cause in franks eyes Superman wasn't the Social Crusader he used to be which i agree with i mean its only now in the New 52 he is going back to being about that. What i hate though is that Frank Miller made Batman and Superman hate each other and to me that's not right after Bruce calls Clark a brother he never had this is what you do frank. Batman sees both WW and Superman has his somewhat surrogate Brother and Sister. This i couldn't forgive frank for it, just because Batman and Superman had different opinions on what a superhero should be.

Some say which i think is also true is that Superman in franks eyes was too much of a Liberal Superhero ( -_-) which is weird cause you have Green Arrow the most liberal hero ever. Anyhow to Frank some fans say Batman was a conservative wet dream or some crap like that, Bruce being portrayed has a Neo-Conservative was pushing it for me at least cause thats what Frank Millers batman was but that's the politics of it or that Batman is a Facist and Superman is a communist. Yeah there is a lot of implications that Frank Miller didn't respect the DC characters apart from Batman, but sometimes i think where his portrayals of DC characters him feeling that they weren't what they used to be in terms of there ideals.

I haven't bought the comic, but I flicked through it recently in Waterstones and wasn't impressed by the ending. A poor portrayal of Superman. Firstly I couldn't understand why he was so weakened by a nuclear blast. I mean if Superman can live in the sun, how could even being at ground zero on a blast hurt him? Then there's the whole "I want you to remember" speech, which is just spite.

Having said all that, the Batman fan side of me (I like both characters) is wondering if I should at some point buy it to add the my collection!!!

Personally I prefer Superman Red Son, which also has Batman defeating Superman, but I think in that novel the way the Batman of that world goes about doing it is more realistic and quite clever.

^That was beautiful man.

*Sheds manly tears*

It's an alternate Universe. The power levels thing doesn't surprise me (so long as they built up and pointed out that he didn't seem as strong as in Main Stream continuity).

Also, I pretty sure a large reason of why he can live in the sun is because it super charges him.

I agree wholeheartedly.Couldn't say it better.

it was just a quote from a graphic novel that wasn't even cannon before the new 52

he died in all*star superman because of getting super charged by the sun

That's ANOTHER, DIFFERENT universe.

I liked it for what it was an alternate reality telling of Superman and Batman.

I do hate it, but unlike everyone else here, I also think Frank Miller is a hack of a writer. As in, I dont even think it was good BEFORE the Superman part.

The other thing is, is that it completely inverted the two characters. Batman has always been the authoritarian, putting law and order first. This is the reason Batman's arch nemesis, the Joker, is an agent of Chaos, because that is Batman's opposite. Superman would always put altruism above the law, and basically every portrayal besides the DKR one shows this, whether it is him forcibly disarming the world's governments or telling the UN off in the New 52. This is why his arch nemesis is Lex Luthor, who is an agent of Order and is part of "the establishment".

To simplify it, I'll use D&D terms: Batman is Lawful Good id argue Lawful Neutral in the Miller/Dark Age versions) and the Joker is Chaotic Evil, Superman is Chaotic Good and Lex Luthor (And Darkseid) are Lawful Evil.

sorry

agree

I thought it was great but i gate the whole "supes is a government tool"

@deaditegonzo: THANK YOU YO!!!!!! Like seriously this is what i am talking about this is why Frank Millers Superman doesnt make sense if his villains Darkseid and Lex Luthor are about lawful evil. Superman being lawful good makes him kinda like the villains he fight who think of the opposite. Lex Luthor manipulates the systems for his own personal gain

I would imagine superman fans don't like it because he was beat up by batman. But it was a totally bad@ss book still for batman. But if I was a superman fan I would be upset. At least it isn't really in continuity I guess

Yes i hate that entire book.

I like the book, I don't like their portrayal of Superman considering he's probably my favorite hero, but to me it's still a good story. Also, I don't think Batman would have gotten as far in that fight as he did if Ollie didn't help him out.

I just think that the whole thing sucks, I mean Frank Miller couldn't write a Batman villain decently to save his life, Two-Face, Joker, Catwoman he sucks with all of them.

the underlying political message or tone of the thing rubs me the absolute wrong way.

I think the portrayal (more like betrayal) of Superman might be the most significant grievance I, a Superman fan, have with the book, if only because of how significant it is but I think it sucks through and through.

I thought Year One was pretty good, and some of his Dare Devil stuff, but other than that I don't care for Frank Miller.

Honestly, I don't mind it as much as most Superman fans do. I would hate it if it was part of continuity because it is an awful representation of Supes but as an else world, its fine.

It's amazing how people completely miss the point of things.

Batman didn't beat Superman. He managed to get a few good shots in against a Superman who had just been nuked and gassed with concentrated Kryptonite, inside a sunlight-less Gotham. And the fight ended with Batman having a heart attack.

Superman didn't "support" the Government, he acted as their agent so he was able to continue saving people, and prevent nuclear war. Superman showed a willingness to forsake his pride in order to protect the world. He'll outlive these idiotic Governments, he'll remain the Earth's protector long after the Cold War ends. But he has to get the world to survive with him. The only way to do that was act as a weapon for the US that meant they didn't rely on nukes. But people naturally take that as a shot, for some reason.

Batman wasn't able to let go of his pride and one of his wards went insane, the second died, his third he has a very disturbing Lolita-style relationship with, and his oldest friend has a stroke.

Batman brought order to Gotham by creating an army of malcontents. What happens when Batman dies? Those malcontents will flock to someone else and use the skills Batman taught them to cause more chaos around Gotham. Who'll eventually stop it? Superman.

Batman saved Gotham for awhile with short-sighted thinking.

Superman prevented the Cold War, by looking ahead and giving up his pride so as to make that terrible world a safer place.

The Dark Knight Returned, but the Man of Steel was Triumphant.

@fadetoblackbolt: Great post but i don't think this is what Miller had in mind when he wrote the book.
If i remember correctly he said that he was disappointed that Byrne's Superman lost the anti-establisment element of the Golden age Superman.

I love DKR. It's one of the essential reads of a DC fan. What I don't like are people using DKR as an excuse to justify Bats beating Supes.

@fadetoblackbolt said:

It's amazing how people completely miss the point of things.

Batman didn't beat Superman. He managed to get a few good shots in against a Superman who had just been nuked and gassed with concentrated Kryptonite, inside a sunlight-less Gotham. And the fight ended with Batman having a heart attack.

Superman didn't "support" the Government, he acted as their agent so he was able to continue saving people, and prevent nuclear war. Superman showed a willingness to forsake his pride in order to protect the world. He'll outlive these idiotic Governments, he'll remain the Earth's protector long after the Cold War ends. But he has to get the world to survive with him. The only way to do that was act as a weapon for the US that meant they didn't rely on nukes. But people naturally take that as a shot, for some reason.

Batman wasn't able to let go of his pride and one of his wards went insane, the second died, his third he has a very disturbing Lolita-style relationship with, and his oldest friend has a stroke.

Batman brought order to Gotham by creating an army of malcontents. What happens when Batman dies? Those malcontents will flock to someone else and use the skills Batman taught them to cause more chaos around Gotham. Who'll eventually stop it? Superman.

Batman saved Gotham for awhile with short-sighted thinking.

Superman prevented the Cold War, by looking ahead and giving up his pride so as to make that terrible world a safer place.

The Dark Knight Returned, but the Man of Steel was Triumphant.

@squalleon said:

Doesn't matter if it's what he intended lol

The volleyball scene in Top Gun wasn't intended to be so homo-erotic, but here we are.

@fadetoblackbolt: I never thought i would find a batman fan that doesn't worship DKR 0_o
Personally it was one of the first batman comics i read and since i was very young i didn't catch much of the depth of the situation.
Nice post and you make me wanna re-read it now.

@squalleon: I really enjoy the first half.

Carrie Kelly is one of the worst characters ever.

Batman's a sociopath whose relationship with her is just downright disturbing.

No, I don't worship it :P

I still love certain scenes though like the mudpit fight.

@fadetoblackbolt: I loved the first half.The whole mutant leader scene the "operating table" was awesome,seeing Bruce return as Batman was great.The Joker part was good but It didn't really stand out to me after the first half and then the Superman act which i liked but with the passage of time i really learned to ignore.I was a pretty big batman fan when i first read the story i remember i bought it because "Batman beats Superman"!

For me the best batman i have read is Killing Joke and Morrison's Batman & Robin these two are pure brilliance.

It's actually complicated for me...I read that book years ago, and back then, I pretty much read books that only contained Batman in it...so when I first read it, I was sorta pleased.

But the years have passed, and I've actually grown to resent the treatment that Batman has had over the years. not just by the fans, but by DC as well.

I still very much like the book, but now I'm actually not too happy about how Superman (who I probably like more than Batman nowadays) was written - especially during 'that' fight scene.

I thought the book was a good read but I hate the way Supes is portrayed. S

The video made me wonder a bunch of other stuff too, like - why the hell would you remove the figurines from their boxes?

As to the OP's actual question. As a Superman fan, I would say that I actually enjoyed TDKR, however was originally a bit annoyed with how Superman was portrayed. It grew on me though (despite it's problems) and I enjoyed it for an else-worlds story as many others have said. I think the reason most Superman fans don't like it is because it became fodder for every Batman fanboy since then, as to why Batman would be beat Superman, in forums such as these. It's annoying and ridiculous and just gets every Superman fan on edge.

The setting and era of the story is key though, and often gets over-looked. Also it IS a Batman story - so of course he is going to dominate in it. I don't disagree that both characters ended up being very different to our general perceptions of them, but hey - that happens all the time in comics. Every writer puts their own spin on things, and some writers doing these else-worlds style stories get given complete and total free reign.

I love Bats and Supes. They are my #1 & #2

"Returns" is a great story. Supes was very much the same guy but he was working for the government so he could still operate as a hero. So he was willing to do things he might not like so he could still help. Very noble. Plus he saved the Earth basically by stopping the bomb and preventing nuclear war. When Superman is talking to the Earth in that story it's a great moment.

The fight between the 2 heroes was one of only a few times Bats vs Supes works. Batman was at the end of his life,Supes was at half strength.

People say Batman beat Superman in "Returns" but only one of them was conscious at the end and that was Superman. Plus we see Superman's caring side when he yells at the Police not to touch Batman. Superman was still the noble caring person in that story.

My hand at your throat Clark, remember when us Batman fans finally beat you Superman fans.,

In a contest over which fans are the most delusional and angry, we loose big time.

@sugarnickvirga: We share many of the same feelings, but you have a much more healthy approach to the film. Both Supes and bates are my 1# and 2# respectively and while I enjoyed returns, and his soliloquy when he's absorbing the energy from the Earth is amazing, but for then he'll ruin it by referring to people as weak and stupid and always needing his help and all, and to me if he actually had those thoughts he wouldn't be doing what he does. He'd probably pull a Red Son and rule us. It would be noble if Batman wasn't a little right in that story about that version of Superman. But then again Batman in that story was almost a little too "Frank Miller", it balanced out due to his age, it was kinda sweet like a grouchy old man... except that man was Batman so he's super grouchy and doesn't take any shit, if you're on his lawn, then you're probably gonna miss the use of your legs when he'd done. (If you read all star batman and robin... well THAT is when Miller went over the edge)

I hate it. Absolutely terrible story and even more garbage artwork.

See, these were basically my thoughts. Also, if you watch the special features on The Dark Knight Returns, one of the comic writers makes a good point that they're only staging this for the rest of the world. They are working out how to be at good terms with one another for the rest of their lives (assuming we don't count The Dark Knight Strikes Again as ever existing).

Well, I think that the fans of Superman AND the fans of Catwoman too can hate the book. I hate it because Superman would never does that kind of thing, he would never get beat like that.

And the American way doesn't following the USA. It's kinda like for Captain America, it means supporting values like freedom and democracy.

Yeah, I don't really like that part of the book at all. Miller writes Superman so terribly. I don't like Frank Miller.

@kdp2:

Superman, before being super, is morally inclined. Like Captain America, superman doesn't question his superiors.

His appearance was certainly eye opening. I mean, aside from the fact that superman's presence lights up the dark city of Gotham, he is the face of superhero genre. That's quite a big "print" in the comic book world whether you're a fan of his or not. Superman is so iconic he's even mentioned in Marvel! Take Spider-man, 2002, for example. Aunt May says the following to Peter Parker-- "You do too much. You're not superman you know."

With all that said, I enjoyed watching superman in The Dark Knight Returns. But at the same time, a part of me hated that he paraded (unintentionally of course) over our Caped Crusader's glory. So when Batman balanced the scales, or at least I like to think so, with kryptonite, I felt relieved; mainly because two of the most recognizable superheroes aren't overshadowing one another.

@drudox19: Thats a 55 YEAR OLD BATAMAN! He has seen it all, of course he won't like some 30 year old US government poster boy.

First of all, this is not true. Superman doesn't have a superior, he isn't a military man like Captain America. Seeing as how one of Superman's antagonists is General Sam Lane, I think we can say for sure that Superman questions authority. Hell, his first appearance had him facing off against a crooked politician.

Besides being wrong wrong on Superman, you're also wrong about Captain America. In 2016, Marvel is coming out with a movie called Captain America: Civil War. Who is the main antagonist in that story? The U.S. Government, like in his last movie.

Enough of this bull excuse people keeping spouting that Superman was written correctly because he would never challenge authority. Do you think that if a police man told Superman to kill a criminal that he would? Do you think that if the president told a canon Superman to heat vision an entire country that he would? If the answer is no, then Superman DOES question authority.

And I don't want to hear Miller's crap about Superman selling out and being propaganda! Every hero was used as propaganda!

I'm honestly indifferent about it. I think it's a good story and don't really care how Superman was used. Let them have it, my problem is when Batfans start shoving it in your face as a the only victory that matters and mock Superman because of it. Especially now because of the set fight in BvS, they think Batman is gonna stomp Superman. They ignore that story wise it doesn't make sense and that at the end of the day they have to form the JL. TDKR is set post JL and their relationship isn't in good standing.

I have thought about Dark Knight Superman for a while, and given how bad the situation was, Superman didn't do as badly as some may say. He did prevent nuclear war, which saved billions of lives. He did make tough choices so that he did not have to go underground and could still operate as a hero. Yeah, he wasn't the greatest guy. But in Frank Miller's world, it's an awful world that takes ugly heroes and anti heroes to save it.