Frank Miller's Holy Terror

[Kurosawa]

On the contrary, Frank Miller's helped the characters and the art form thrive. Miller's comics featuring the DC characters have been huge successes and hugely influential on other comics writers, artists and filmmakers, animators. Miller popularized the amazing potential that those classic DC characters have to offer to be interesting and entertaining to not only an audience of children, but also older audiences by showcasing their individuality, their differences, their conflicts, their ability to exist relevantly to the times. Miller introduced the most mainstream DC superheroes and villains in stories with very adult themes, situations and language. Miller enforced the idea that the classic DC superheroes are not just kid's items. Miller made use of an internal monologue replacing the narrator so the character's thoughts and feelings are counterpoint to his actions. With Batman: The Dark Knight Returns Frank Miller redesigned the graphic novel in comic book size with each issue being 48-pages, with square binding, high quality paper stock, and watercolor painting. Batman: The Dark Knight Returns introduced the Dark Knight format, later called the "prestige format." It was also the first to be collected into a TPB in the Dark Knight format. Frank Miller revolutionized comics.

To me, most of those things hurt comics, because I like comics more as escapist fantasy and less as grim and gritty downers. And I will grant you that he revolutionized comics, but to me, as I said, I felt it was a bad revolution. I don't like dark superhero comics. Like Mark Evanier once said, i like my superheroes to be super and heroic.

On the technical side, I very much dislike the internal monologue replacing a narrator, I think it is fine for some stories but I hate every story being written with it. The watercoloring was fine with me, but I felt his rendering was in a style that was not attractive, or not to my tastes. That said, had he treated characters like Superman and Dick Grayson with more respect, I wouldn't have cared as much.

But what is so bad is not Miller's work or DKR itself as much as it is that other people copied it (and Watchmen too), leading to all the grim and gritty crap. If Superman had been a total tool just in Miller's story and a real hero in the regular comics, then I could just dismiss it as one stupid story. But when the norm became Superman being a government stoolie and toad and Batman this independent bad ass, then it's harder to dismiss. Luckily, that mess is over and Superman is back.

 

[theMan-Bat]

To me, most of those things hurt comics, because I like comics more as escapist fantasy and less as grim and gritty downers. And I will grant you that he revolutionized comics, but to me, as I said, I felt it was a bad revolution. I don't like dark superhero comics. Like Mark Evanier once said, i like my superheroes to be super and heroic.

On the technical side, I very much dislike the internal monologue replacing a narrator, I think it is fine for some stories but I hate every story being written with it. The watercoloring was fine with me, but I felt his rendering was in a style that was not attractive, or not to my tastes. That said, had he treated characters like Superman and Dick Grayson with more respect, I wouldn't have cared as much.

But what is so bad is not Miller's work or DKR itself as much as it is that other people copied it (and Watchmen too), leading to all the grim and gritty crap. If Superman had been a total tool just in Miller's story and a real hero in the regular comics, then I could just dismiss it as one stupid story. But when the norm became Superman being a government stoolie and toad and Batman this independent bad ass, then it's harder to dismiss. Luckily, that mess is over and Superman is back.

I like dark superhero comics and I also like lighter superhero comics. Batman: The Dark Knight Returns is a downer? Not really, nor is it entirely dark. As Frank Miller explained in Comics Journal #111 (1986):

I like the internal monologue replacing a narrator. Superman has been shown iconically as a patriotic member of the establishment for decades in the '40s, '50s, '60s, '70s, '80s, '90s, '2000s in the comic books, on radio, on television and on films. The Golden Age, Silver Age, Bronze Age and Modern Age. Now, the Superman recognized by generations has been replaced with a ridiculous t-shirt and jeans clad and body armor clad *****ebag considered a menace to Metropolis rather than a hero.

 

[Lord]

I like dark superhero comics and I also like lighter superhero comics. I like the internal monologue replacing a narrator. Superman has been shown iconically as a patriotic member of the establishment for decades in the '40s, '50s, '60s, '70s, '80s, '90s, '2000s in the comic books, on radio, on television and on films. The Golden Age, Silver Age, Bronze Age and Modern Age. Now, the Superman recognized by generations has been replaced with a ridiculous t-shirt and jeans clad and body armor clad *****ebag considered a menace to Metropolis rather than a hero.

Nope, he's actually the same superman that inspired hope in the 30s, with the plus that he doesn't kill anybody and considering that this is also supposed to be a prequel in a way to All-Star Superman, that he will change his ways at some point.

I like Superman in Action Comics, but i don't like the hit first, ask questions later superman that appears in Justice League

 

[theMan-Bat]

Nope, he's actually the same superman that inspired hope in the 30s, with the plus that he doesn't kill anybody and considering that this is also supposed to be a prequel in a way to All-Star Superman, that he will change his ways at some point.

I like Superman in Action Comics, but i don't like the hit first, ask questions later superman that appears in Justice League

The same Superman from the '30s? No. A prequel to All-Star Superman? No. The version of Jor-El, Lara and the rocket ship in All-Star Superman are clearly not the same as in the rebooted version in Action Comics.

The hit first, ask questions later Superman that appears in Geoff Johns' Justice League is the same version that appears in Grant Morrison's Action Comics and the Superman title written and drawn by George Pérez. The Action Comics title written by Morrison takes place in the past, telling the rebooted history, the Justice League written by Johns, at least for the first arc, tells the team's founding before the present day and the Superman title written by Pérez takes place in the present day. Grant Morrison said, "I'm taking my cues from Geoff Johns and George Pérez, and how they're playing it in the present day." The preview cover to Action Comics #8 shows Morrison's Superman wearing the Jim Lee designed body armor instead of the t-shirt and jeans.

 

[Lord]

I only noticed that now, but in a way it's supposed to be a kind of prequel:

Morrison: Doing Action #1 was a little daunting, purely because of the historic significance of the title. As for All-Star Superman, the basic idea of doing young Superman stories started out as a spin-off from my work on that book, so in my own head I see these new adventures as the early years of the Superman from All-Star.

And yeah, Morrison's superman acts like the golden age one, he inspires hope, fights for the weak and needed, you can say that he hits first asks questions later but that's not exactly like that, in Action Comics he already knew the people he attacked were corrupt, he didn't really attack them midlessly and clearly smiled a lot, giving hope to many.

While the Justice League one didn't even know who Batman and Green Lantern were, they were clearly heroes from the way they were dressing like and the reports about them, however Superman attacked them out of nowhere, seeming like he wanted to pick a fight more than to bring peace. And while on the team he didn't have much interaction with others, he only stares and looks mean.

I'm not liking Action comics just because it's grant morrison writing, i didn't even read his JLA run, but i like his take on Action Comics and hope to see more, being a fan of the golden age i also realise that Superman wasn't allways this good samaritan, he would let a criminal go to his death and didn't really care for the damage caused by himself.

This is Superman, in fact, he's pratically modern version of his Golden Age appearances

 

[theMan-Bat]

You said "he's actually the same superman that inspired hope in the 30s," which Morrison's rebooted Superman really isn't. This is not the same version. This is a different version of Superman, with a different history, different characterizations, different costumes.

Morrison: Doing Action #1 was a little daunting, purely because of the historic significance of the title. As for All-Star Superman, the basic idea of doing young Superman stories started out as a spin-off from my work on that book, so in my own head I see these new adventures as the early years of the Superman from All-Star.

He can think of it in his own head however he wants. The reality is this rebooted version is clearly not the early years of the All-Star Superman version. Different Jor-El, different Lara, different rocket ship, different Kryptonian costume, in All-Star Superman only Pa Kent had died before that version of Kal-El became Superman, etc.

 

[Kurosawa]

It's essentially the same character. Morrison's Superman is much closer to the Golden Age version, and in fact all Pre-Crisis versions than anything in years. I can't call Miller's version a legitimate take on Superman, or Byrne's, but what Morrison is doing is great. Geoff Johns' Superman in JL isn't was well-defined, but Johns is a hack anyway. Except for the unnecessary and silly new costumes, Superman is essentially back. He's a little different, but he's still close enough to classic Superman that he feels like Superman should feel.

Right before the reboot, Superman was actually starting to feel right again as well, even though it didn't get anywhere near the publicity. Paul Cornell was writing a Superman in Action Comics that was a leader, and Chris Robinson took JMS' Grounded mess and actually made something of it.

Also, thanks again to Grant Morrison, Batman is back-a Batman with a good dose of humanity and much less of an absurd hardass than he became after Miller. I can never claim that Miller's work hurt Batman's popularity-it clearly made him very popular again-but I do like a less dark but not silly Batman.

 

[theMan-Bat]

The ridiculously rebooted look makes it painfully obvious that the rebooted Superman is certainly not the same as the Golden Age version or any version from the past. Grant Morrison himself admitted that he would "recreate" Superman. "Change some of the basics" and reintroduce familiar characters in some unfamiliar ways.
http://insidepulse.com/2011/06/12/d...s-action-comics-1-paul-cornells-stormwatch-1/
In order to feel like the classic Superman, he must look and act like it, especially for such an iconically recognizable character as Superman. A Bruce Springsteen inspired t-shirt, blue jeans or body armor feels decidedly un-Superman. This rebooted version feels more like an arrogant obnoxious brat, rather than Superman. Green Lantern gets punched in the face by this arrogant Superman, knocking Green Lantern across two blocks. Then this arrogant Superman condescendingly asks Batman, "So what can you do?" Geoff Johns' childish Justice League all act like bratty children. A angsty slob Clark Kent feels decidedly un-Clark Kent. A Lois Lane who doesn't have a crush on and admiration for Superman, thinks Metropolis is a target for mayhem because of Superman and doesn't work as a newspaper reporter for the same newspaper with Clark Kent feels decidedly un-Lois Lane. Siegel's Lois refers to Superman as her "dream lover" in Action Comics #7 (1938), "the only man I'll ever love" (Superman #14 (1942)). The public trusted the Golden Age Superman as a hero, even during his vigilante days. Even in Action Comics #1 (1938) the Governor says "Thank heaven he's on the side of law and order!" In Action Comics #6 (1938) the newspaper headline for World Herald says "Entire Town Saved by Superman" and Evening News says "Superman Wars on Injustice", etc. Even the Metropolis police chief said "Off the record I think he did a splendid thing and I'd like to shake his hand!" in Action Comics #8 (1939). In Action Comics #9 (1939) a reporter says "Good for him!" Another reporter says "What the world needs is a couple more guys like him!"

JMS actually brought Siegel elements back to Superman in his Grounded storyline without rebooting the character. He brought Superman back to his roots as a positive down to earth figure helping humanity, standing up for the little guy. Showing a care. There’s some great messages of universal humanitarianism. It's a refreshing change seeing Superman giving a minute to help a citizen rather than just fighting supervillains for the billionth time. An assistant to the helpless and oppressed is what Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster created Superman to be. And Superman scaring crooks by holding them by their shoe. That aggressive side of Siegel and Shuster's Superman is another thing that JMS brought to Superman in Grounded. And I'd love that. I liked seeing Superman really return closer to the characters roots.

JMS' Superman: Grounded featured Superman going from state to state and assisting ordinary people, returning Superman to his Golden Age roots by creators Siegel and Shuster. Back to the basics. I liked that, until JMS abandoned his own storyline and Chris Roberson took over in Superman #707 and turned it into a continuity heavy story featuring appearances by Grant Morrison's Superman Squad, the Fortress of Solidarity, references to Geoff Johns' New Krypton, James Robinson's World of New Krypton, James Robinson's Last Stand of New Krypton and War of the Supermen events, etc. When I pick up an issue of Superman I want to see and read about Superman, not Superman's uniqueness diluted with a Superman Squad or an endless flow of 100,000 Kyptonians running around. Superman wasn't even starring in his own title during James Robinson's run. Mon-El was. If the book is called Superman, I want to see Superman, in his iconic costume, and see him do something super and fun!
When I pick up an issue of Batman or Detective Comics I want to see and read the adventures of Batman, not Dick Grayson impersonating Batman, with an obnoxious little brat as Robin or the adventures of Batwoman in Detective Comics instead of Batman.
Frank Miller's Batman shows plenty of humanity, human foibles, anger, frustration, determination, obsession, sadness, humor. Miller's version of Batman is much closer to the original brutal vigilante version created by Finger and Kane. Morrisons' Batman, Inc. is closer to the much lighter Silver Age '50s Batman with the Batmen of All Nations created by Edmond Hamilton. I prefer characters to have their own individual original and unique secret identities, rather than being extra Batman's diluting Bruce Wayne's uniqueness.

 

[Kurosawa]

I disagree with almost all of your post except the new costumes do suck. But everything Grant Morrison has done over the past few years has been great to me, and I loved Dick as Batman as well. I'll take Morrison's Batman over Miller's any day, and he's the only person in comics right now that I want on Superman. Morrison is the best writer in mainstream comics at the moment.

 

[TruerToTheCore]

In order to feel like the classic Superman, he must look and act like it, especially for such an iconically recognizable character as Superman. A Bruce Springsteen inspired t-shirt, blue jeans or body armor feels decidedly un-Superman. This rebooted version feels more like an arrogant obnoxious brat, rather than Superman. Green Lantern gets punched in the face by this arrogant Superman, knocking Green Lantern across two blocks. Then this arrogant Superman condescendingly asks Batman, "So what can you do?" Geoff Johns' childish Justice League all act like bratty children. A angsty slob Clark Kent feels decidedly un-Clark Kent. A Lois Lane who doesn't have a crush on and admiration for Superman, thinks Metropolis is a target for mayhem because of Superman and doesn't work as a newspaper reporter for the same newspaper with Clark Kent feels decidedly un-Lois Lane. Siegel's Lois refers to Superman as her "dream lover" in Action Comics #7 (1938), "the only man I'll ever love" (Superman #14 (1942)). The public trusted the Golden Age Superman as a hero, even during his vigilante days. Even in Action Comics #1 (1938) the Governor says "Thank heaven he's on the side of law and order!" In Action Comics #6 (1938) the newspaper headline for World Herald says "Entire Town Saved by Superman" and Evening News says "Superman Wars on Injustice", etc. Even the Metropolis police chief said "Off the record I think he did a splendid thing and I'd like to shake his hand!" in Action Comics #8 (1939). In Action Comics #9 (1939) a reporter says "Good for him!" Another reporter says "What the world needs is a couple more guys like him!"

I agree a little bit here, although this shows that Superman is popular with the common man, not the "establishment", due to his populistic actions. But Morrison's Superman is a little bit too much of a brat (as he's starting out), I never got that vibe from the early Superman stories.

JMS actually brought Siegel elements back to Superman in his Grounded storyline without rebooting the character. He brought Superman back to his roots as a positive down to earth figure helping humanity, standing up for the little guy. Showing a care. There’s some great messages of universal humanitarianism. It's a refreshing change seeing Superman giving a minute to help a citizen rather than just fighting supervillains for the billionth time. An assistant to the helpless and oppressed is what Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster created Superman to be. And Superman scaring crooks by holding them by their shoe. That aggressive side of Siegel and Shuster's Superman is another thing that JMS brought to Superman in Grounded. And I'd love that. I liked seeing Superman really return closer to the characters roots.

You know, JMS might have been well-intentioned... the thing is that he is a total hack and is not skilled enough to pull it off.

 

[theMan-Bat]

I disagree with almost all of your post except the new costumes do suck. But everything Grant Morrison has done over the past few years has been great to me, and I loved Dick as Batman as well. I'll take Morrison's Batman over Miller's any day, and he's the only person in comics right now that I want on Superman. Morrison is the best writer in mainstream comics at the moment.

I'd much rather have Paul Dini, Darwyn Cooke and Steve Rude on the Superman titles, returning much more faithfully to Siegel's Superman. I love Grant Morrison's older material. Particularly his Doom Patrol run (1988-1992), Batman: Arkham Asylum (1989) and Batman: Gothic (1990). I dislike Morrison's recent material.

 

[theMan-Bat]

I agree a little bit here, although this shows that Superman is popular with the common man, not the "establishment", due to his populistic actions.

I was showing that even while he was a vigilante Siegel's Superman had the personal support of the people, including the Metropolis mayor and police chief, as well as the press, before he became fully accepted in the legal establishment.

But Morrison's Superman is a little bit too much of a brat (as he's starting out), I never got that vibe from the early Superman stories.

Agreed.

You know, JMS might have been well-intentioned... the thing is that he is a total hack and is not skilled enough to pull it off.

I wouldn't call him a hack, he certainly showed skill on the issues he actually wrote, it was just very unprofessional of him to abandon his own run halfway through his storyline.

 

[Kurosawa]

JMS has ADD or something....he never seems to finish what he starts. His intentions were good but he didn't pull it off. Loved what Robinson did with it after he left, though. All of the modern Superman writers I have liked are influenced by Maggin.

 

[Lord]

I was showing that even while he was a vigilante Siegel's Superman had the personal support of the people, including the Metropolis mayor and police chief, as well as the press, before he became fully accepted in the legal establishment.

And he was suported by the public in Grant Morrison's Action Comics, people were saying how much he inspired them and how much they supported him, the only against him until now were the police and the military, but that's because of the different in times, if Grant Morrison's superman did the same thing the original one did in Action Comics 1, the military and police would have the same reaction.

In Action Comics 1 he assaulted the Mayor's house (or something like that, i don't remember all), however they say he's in the side of order and justice, but most of his actions were destructive, Grant Morrison's superman is doing the same things but because of the different settings some people act differently, in this case, the military take some interest.

Morrison's Superman is supposed to be a tribute to the Golden age one, he seems a bit more bratish but he mostly acts as the Siegel/ Shuster one would act, the part where some buildings are destroyed even reminds me of a story where Golden Age superman destroys old buildings to make the people living there have new and better ones.

I would have liked to see more Morrison's Superman stories set in Superman's years fighting real crimes as seen in his first issue of Action Comics, but his story has developed quite nicelly,

There can also be seen some paralels between Morrison's Jor-El and rocket, and the golden age ones

 

[TruerToTheCore]

And he was suported by the public in Grant Morrison's Action Comics, people were saying how much he inspired them and how much they supported him, the only against him until now were the police and the military, but that's because of the different in times, if Grant Morrison's superman did the same thing the original one did in Action Comics 1, the military and police would have the same reaction.

In Action Comics 1 he assaulted the Mayor's house (or something like that, i don't remember all), however they say he's in the side of order and justice, but most of his actions were destructive, Grant Morrison's superman is doing the same things but because of the different settings some people act differently, in this case, the military take some interest.

Morrison's Superman is supposed to be a tribute to the Golden age one, he seems a bit more bratish but he mostly acts as the Siegel/ Shuster one would act, the part where some buildings are destroyed even reminds me of a story where Golden Age superman destroys old buildings to make the people living there have new and better ones.

I would have liked to see more Morrison's Superman stories set in Superman's years fighting real crimes as seen in his first issue of Action Comics, but his story has developed quite nicelly,

There can also be seen some paralels between Morrison's Jor-El and rocket, and the golden age ones

Good post. I see it like that, too.

Now, if it weren't for that stupid costume...

 

[Lord]

Good post. I see it like that, too.

Now, if it weren't for that stupid costume...

Thanks.
I'm ok with him wearing jeans and a t-shirt in the very begining of his career, but the original superman costume should be later used instead of the armor one, i mean, this costume is classic:

Some changes were made during the years, like making the "S" bigger

But i think they were for the best, this time they are trying to make this way too realistic (In their oun minds)

 

[theMan-Bat]

And he was suported by the public in Grant Morrison's Action Comics, people were saying how much he inspired them and how much they supported him, the only against him until now were the police and the military, but that's because of the different in times, if Grant Morrison's superman did the same thing the original one did in Action Comics 1, the military and police would have the same reaction.

The public and the press, including Lois Lane, display negative public opinion against this rebooted Superman.

He is hated and feared by quite a lot of the public and is confronted by an angry crowd.

Morrison's Superman even considers quitting.

In Action Comics 1 he assaulted the Mayor's house (or something like that, i don't remember all), however they say he's in the side of order and justice, but most of his actions were destructive, Grant Morrison's superman is doing the same things but because of the different settings some people act differently, in this case, the military take some interest.

Siegel's Superman rushed into the governor's house with evidence to get the governor to stop an execution. He broke through the governors' doors out of necessity. The governor says Superman seems to be on the side of "law and order!"

Morrison's Superman is supposed to be a tribute to the Golden age one, he seems a bit more bratish but he mostly acts as the Siegel/ Shuster one would act, the part where some buildings are destroyed even reminds me of a story where Golden Age superman destroys old buildings to make the people living there have new and better ones.

Morrison's Superman wasn't destroying buildings in an attempt at urban renewal. In fact, those Siegel Superman stories never even happened under Morrison's reboot, which is completely rewriting history. John Byrne's The Man of Steel mini-series stayed true to the basics of the classic Superman mythos, with Superman in the classic costume and having the public's support, Clark being a clean cut reporter working with Lois at the same newspaper, Lois being a supporter of Superman and having an attraction to Superman and a rivalry with Clark, leaving room for many of the Siegel stories to still have happened in between issues of The Man of Steel. John Byrne said that many past Superman stories still happened and Superman remembers the domestic abuse case from Action Comics #1 (1938) by Jerry Siegel in Superman: The Man of Steel #16 (1991) "Crisis at Hand: Hard Knocks" by Louise Simonson.

I would have liked to see more Morrison's Superman stories set in Superman's years fighting real crimes as seen in his first issue of Action Comics, but his story has developed quite nicelly,

I'd much rather have Superman returning much more faithfully to Siegel's Superman.

There can also be seen some paralels between Morrison's Jor-El and rocket, and the golden age ones

That is the Silver Age/Bronze Age one by Curt Swan. This is the Golden Age version by Superman co-creator Joe Shuster.

I'm ok with him wearing jeans and a t-shirt in the very begining of his career, but the original superman costume should be later used instead of the armor one, i mean, this costume is classic:

Some changes were made during the years, like making the "S" bigger

But i think they were for the best, this time they are trying to make this way too realistic (In their oun minds)

The classic Superman costume should be used from the start and continued to be used.

 

[Kurosawa]

Mostly, I think you support Byrne's Superman and try to spread this mistruth that it is somehow linked with the original because that gives more legitimacy to Miller's **** treatment of Superman in DKR. Not to even mention his dislike of Robin, which he clearly states he has felt since childhood-he basically called Dick Grayson incompetent.

Miller hates Superman and Robin. Period. Rationalize and cherry-pick all you want, but he does. If he liked the characters, he would make them look good when he uses them.

Also, Miller's insane dedication to Ayn Rand influences his hatred of Superman, a character that exemplifies altruism.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2011/nov/24/frank-miller-hollywood-fascism

http://goodcomics.blogspot.com/2006/02/why-frank-miller-is-fascist-writer.html

Miller's complete contempt and hatred of Dick Grayson:

And his young Dick Grayson was already psychotic:

http://scans-daily.dreamwidth.org/1481748.html

The guy twists my stomach. His comics literally make me sick.

 

[theMan-Bat]

Mostly, I think you support Byrne's Superman and try to spread this mistruth that it is somehow linked with the original because that gives more legitimacy to Miller's **** treatment of Superman in DKR.

"Mistruth?" I've produced evidence from the comics that Byrne's version of Superman was indeed linked with the original version. I support Byrne's version of Superman because I enjoyed Byrne's version of Superman. I support Superman in Frank Miller's Batman: The Dark Knight Returns because I enjoyed Superman in Frank Miller's Batman: The Dark Knight Returns.

Not to even mention his dislike of Robin, which he clearly states he has felt since childhood-he basically called Dick Grayson incompetent.

You are deliberately ignoring most of what he said. Frank Miller explained in Comics Journal #111 (1986) that as a kid he "resented" Robin, thinking "I could do his job better." Frank Miller wasn't alone on this as a kid. Jules Feiffer explained in his book The Great Comic Book Heroes (1965) that "Through I may have pirated the super-heroes I never went near their boy companions. I couldn't stand boy companions. If the theory behind Robin the Boy Wonder, The Sandman's Sandy, The Shield's Rusty, The Human Torch's Toro, The Green Arrow's Speedy was to give young readers a character with whom to identify it failed dismally in my case."
However, Frank Miller explained that in researching Robin for Batman: The Dark Knight Returns, he discovered that "this brightly colored little kid who was bouncing around represented for Batman and the reader a sort of what we are fighting for. Robin is an innocent and a very positive light character, as opposed to the basic darkness of the Batman character. Batman is essentially a very grim character. Without a Robin he becomes a bit too monolithic, a bit too relentless, and it's a little to easy for him to forget why he's doing it."

Miller hates Superman and Robin. Period. Rationalize and cherry-pick all you want, but he does.

The only one showing hatred is you with your display of kneejerk hatred for Frank Miller.

 

[theMan-Bat]

If he liked the characters, he would make them look good when he uses them.

Frank Miller has made them look good. One of my favorite Superman scenes in Batman: The Dark Knight Returns is when Superman fights crime in Gotham while moving so fast that people can't even see him.

 

[theMan-Bat]

Superman heroically diverts a bomb from a populated area and suffers the explosion himself, he goes on about how petty and cruel and awful we are and then still hopes to be able to save us.

 

[theMan-Bat]

Superman faced Batman in a weakened state from the bomb explosion and Superman still picked up the tank Batmobile with ease.

Superman didn't want to fight Batman and tried reasoning with him.

Superman reluctantly ripped off Batman's armor and broke Batman's ribs with ease without really trying to beat him up.

Batman sucker punched and kicked Superman in a weakened state from Kryptonite and then Batman faked his own death. That was a strategic withdrawl on Batman's part rather than a win.
Even after Batman viciously fought him, Superman cradles Batman in his arms and shouts "Don't touch him!" at the off-panel military onlookers.

Despite Batman's best efforts, Superman figures out Batman's scheme.

 

[theMan-Bat]

Frank Miller showed Dick Grayson as an amazing acrobat, very brave, courageous, very smart, very strong.

And as I've explained to you before, having bad things happen to characters does not mean a writer hates those characters. To insist Miller must hate Superman and Dick Grayson, despite the evidence to the contrary, just because he had bad things happen to them is ridiculous. He has had bad things happen to nearly every character he's written, including Batman and Daredevil, he's had Elektra killed, and many other characters, the Joker and Hartigan kill themselves, and that does not mean that he hates those characters.

Also, Miller's insane dedication to Ayn Rand influences his hatred of Superman, a character that exemplifies altruism.

Nonsense. In Batman: The Dark Knight Strikes Again Superman saved the planet from Luthor and Brainiac's totalitarian government, and creates a Utopian society.

Miller's complete contempt and hatred of Dick Grayson:

Making Dick Grayson extremely powerful and beating Carrie Kelley is not a sign of complete contempt and hatred of Dick Grayson. The fact that Miller's made a Dick Grayson centered series with the All-Star Batman & Robin the Boy Wonder/Dark Knight: Boy Wonder where Dick Grayson redeems Batman is evident that he doesn't really hate Dick Grayson.
“It’s [about] how he is redeemed through Dick Grayson,” Frank points out.
http://www.nycgraphicnovelists.com/2010/12/frank-miller-part-2-on-pastiche.html
Frank Miller said, "I love the 'Boy Wonder' line, before he was turned into the "Teen Wonder," and almost a "Grim Robin." But I just love the idea of a young Robin. That's why I created Carrie Kelley in Dark Knight - I just loved the contrast between this stocky, tough, dark adult, and a colorful little pixie running around. I found that introducing Robin completes Batman as a character."
http://www.sternfannetwork.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-66854.html

 

[theMan-Bat]

And his young Dick Grayson was already psychotic:

Context is key. What happened with Hal was Batman's fault in his early training of Dick Grayson. He taught Dick how to fight, he taught him how to kill, and that's all he'd taught him. Batman rushed things. Batman was reckless. He left Dick full of pent up rage and pain by not allowing him to grieve over his parents deaths.

So he took Dick to the cemetery to grieve, to release that pain and that hurt and comforts him.

The guy twists my stomach. His comics literally make me sick.

No ones forcing you to buy and read his comics.

 

[Kurosawa]

It really blows my mind that you have such good taste so much of the time, and then you defend Frank Miller's fecal matter comics like they actually have value.

Sorry Mr. theMan-Bat, but I have to mark you down as a hopeless case. We don't need to discuss Miller any further. I will say I have never met anyone as completely dedicated to an artist as you are to him. If any writer I liked ever treated a character that I love as badly as Miller treated Superman, Dick Grayson, Selina Kyle, etc, I would tear them to bits no matter who they are. The characters matter more to me than the writers. If Grant Morrison degraded Superman like Miller did, then I would call him a worthless SOB just as quick as I do Miller or Byrne. No one is above criticism. I don't care about the creators, only the characters. Frank Miller is now a washed up hack, but Superman and Batman endure.