The Dark Knight Returns: Academic Response

The following is in response to the prompt for the discussion for or against the artistic differences between the film and literary versions of The Dark Knight Returns:

While you make a strong case for the use of The Dark Knight Returns’ art and its’ insight into the world of Miller’s story, I generally disagree that the film version is hindered on an emotional level by the streamlining of its visuals. At the heart of my argument, I generally believe that the art and visuals of graphic novels are second to the nature of story, in terms of emotional determination. Although, I will however compromise and say that art definitely reinforces the tone of a graphic novel.

            One such other graphic novel, conveniently enough another Batman tale, Arkham Asylum: A Serious House on Serious Earth serves the function of detailing character’s appearances based solely on other character’s perspectives. In the graphic novel, written by Grant Morrison and illustrated by Dave McKean, characters outward appearances and even their speech bubbles are based on other character’s thoughts on the character. Maxie Zeus is extremely elongated, sporting a blue text bubble, representing his lightning based abilities. The Joker is almost devilish in appearance, and his text is large and messy, written in scribbled red, bursting through the bubble itself; this all represents the Joker’s antagonistic nature to the Batman as well as his inherent chaotic nature. Batman himself is painted from the view of the criminals, appearing more as a frightening specter than a costumed hero; even his text is white lettering against a black bubble, symbolic of his dark nature. All this is to say that while the art in The Dark Knight Returns is a reinforcement to the tone of the novel, its absence in film form does not hinder the film in any way, unlike it would for the Arkham book.

            While I do like the idea that Gotham may not or may not be as grim and foreboding as it is presented to us, I don’t agree that the Dark Knight Returns is told (shown) threw the vernacular of Bruce Wayne. The points in the story in which we are actually made to observe things perspective are framed for us by Frank Miller. Take for example the final page of Book 1: Batman has just foiled Two-Face’s plan and is now face to face with Harvey Dent. First we see him as he actually appears, then, as Bruce narrates about closing his eyes and being able to actually see him, we get a glimpse at how Batman sees him. The fact that Miller went out of his way to show us Batman’s perspective implies that the book is naturally not seen through his eyes.

            On a personal level, the artwork of The Dark Knight Returns is actually what kept me from reading it for a long time. The dull coloring and disjointed visuals, while symbolically relevant, hinders my enjoyment of the story on a certain level. It’s like these action movies nowadays with their shaky hand-held camera scenes during the action sequences. While it’s all well and good that we feel like “we’re actually there” by having our view be shaky, uneven and unfocused, I’d much rather just  be able to actually see the fellows actually duking it out.