Miller's "Holy Terror Batman!" no more?

He does the right thing for the right reason = hero. He wants to prevent others from suffering. The victim who refused to stay a victim. that's Batman and that's heroic.


Batman uses deceit as a tactic BECAUSE HE MUST. Superman doesn't have to. That's the reason Superman can play nice, but Batman cannot. Deep inside Batman IS a good guy.

Deep inside The Punisher is a good guy. Deep inside Wolverine is a good guy. Just because someone is an "anti-hero" does not mean they are a bad guy. It just means that they are an atypical hero.

The key part of being an anti-hero is still being a hero.

Batman is more an anti-hero than a deputized hero. The definition of anti-hero describes Batman. He's a proactive character as opposed to most heroes who are reactionary. He uses methods that aren't always considered fair or noble. He's brutal sometimes to the point of excess. He's very much an anti-hero.

Absolutely. :) Also I'm glad you mentioned how brutal he is as characterizing an anti-hero.
 
Something tells me there's more to this than Miller deciding it's "bigger than Batman".

You don't put your heart and soul into a project like this for 4+ years, draw and ink 120 pages - stating that it's some of the best art you've ever done in your life, call it your love letter to NY, only to scrap the whole thing and go in a different direction.

I could be wrong, but my feeling is DC is involved in this somehow.
 
lol come to think of it ... the whole al-qaeda and gotham thing is pretty far-fetched... but very politically clever on the lines of propaganda
 
It's not that I don't like the idea of Batman fighting terrorists, it's that I just don't want Frank Miller to touch Batman ever again.

Year One, hooray! Dark Knight Returns, hooray! I think that's it for his Batman work.
 
Frank Miller is far too over rated. ASB&R is garbage. (But I did enjoy Year One.)
 
Frank Miller is far too over rated. ASB&R is garbage. (But I did enjoy Year One.)

Uh yeah.Without Miller, batman as you see him depicted today wouldn't even exist in this form -he'd still be hanging out with the super friends.

Unbelivable.:whatever:
 
From SHH's Spirit interview-


SHH!: It's been a while since we've seen you draw the interior art in a comic book.
Miller: It's been a while since I published any. There's "Holy Terror, Batman," which is about 40 pages from completion now
 
Something tells me there's more to this than Miller deciding it's "bigger than Batman".

You don't put your heart and soul into a project like this for 4+ years, draw and ink 120 pages - stating that it's some of the best art you've ever done in your life, call it your love letter to NY, only to scrap the whole thing and go in a different direction.

I could be wrong, but my feeling is DC is involved in this somehow.

I've got that gut feeling, too. *sighs*
 
Last edited:
That's Frank Miller for you. Wasn't All-Star cancelled too?
 
I almost lost my faith in Miller.
Almost? You mean your's hasn't been gone for years like most?

Uh yeah.Without Miller, batman as you see him depicted today wouldn't even exist in this form -he'd still be hanging out with the super friends.

Unbelivable.:whatever:
BS. Batman was brought back to the darkness in the comics back in the early 70's thanks to guys like Denny O'Neil/Neal Adams and Steve Englehart/Marshall Rogers.

All Miller did was introduce the EXTREME aka ******* Batman it worked in YO and TDKR, but everything else has been garbage.
 
Last edited:
Almost? You mean your's hasn't been gone for years like most?

BS. Batman was brought back to the darkness in the comics back in the early 70's thanks to guys like Denny O'Neil/Neal Adams and Steve Englehart/Marshall Rogers.

All Miller did was introduce the EXTREME aka ******* Batman it worked in YO and TDKR, but everything else has been garbage.

Frank Miller brought Batman back to his dark roots further than anyone else had, more in line with the original vision of the character. Closer to the police-beating, bone-breaking brutal Bill Finger-Bob Kane original. First is the use of the bat emblem on his chest without the yellow moon in Batman The Dark Knight Returns. In the Golden Age this was the standard. Batman carrying and using guns, which hadn't been seen since 1940. Frank Miller brought back Robin's sling shot which had not been seen since 1940. The gadgets and bat vehicles which had been toned way down in the '70s. Batman originally was a terror striking creature of the night wanted by the police. Batman The Dark Knight Returns was a return to that concept. Frank Miller clearly made Batman darker - far more brutal than he's been in decades - breaking bones, beating cops. He redesigned the batarangs - they're much crueler.
 
Last edited:
Batman carrying guns, Robin carrying a slingshot, and crueler batarangs changed Batman into what we know now?? Funny, cause with the exception of the rangs being more like shurikens these days I don't see Batman carrying a glock or Robin playing Dennis The Menace.

Thank god.

Frank Miller wrote two very good stories in the mid-80's focusing on the beloved caped crusader. They were excellent. But they get far too much credit.
 
Batman carrying guns, Robin carrying a slingshot, and crueler batarangs changed Batman into what we know now?? Funny, cause with the exception of the rangs being more like shurikens these days I don't see Batman carrying a glock or Robin playing Dennis The Menace.

I didn't say writers have Batman carrying a gun or Robin using a sling shot these days. Frank Miller brought Batman back to his dark roots further than anyone else had, more in line with the original version of the character.
 
So did O'Neil and the others, and they didn't have to break their back trying to be EXTREME!!!1eleven to do it. Frank Miller delivered one great story in Year One and one other that is only great because it's a 'what if' kinda thing about Batman's last hurrah. I enjoyed them very much but they are not what made Batman dark, again, and if anything they've negatively impacted the character because of some of the goofballs that have written the character since trying to be something only Frank Miller can be: Frank Miller.
 
So did O'Neil and the others, and they didn't have to break their back trying to be EXTREME!!!1eleven to do it. Frank Miller delivered one great story in Year One and one other that is only great because it's a 'what if' kinda thing about Batman's last hurrah. I enjoyed them very much but they are not what made Batman dark, again, and if anything they've negatively impacted the character some of the goofballs that have written the character since trying to be something only Frank Miller can be: Frank Miller.

While it's true that Batman had been pushing in a darker direction for years, ever since the work of Neal Adams, Denny O'Neil, Len Wein and Frank Robbins (among others) started taking the character closer to his roots in the early '70s (which I love), Frank Miller brought the character closer to his roots than anyone else had. Miller didn't break his back doing it, and Finger and Kane's Batman was extreme. Miller's successors (Brian Azzarello, Bill Willingham, Judd Winicks, Chuck Dixon, Ed Brubaker) tried to employ the same sort of 'grim and gritty' style as Frank Miller had, but it was obvious that the new people, unlike Miller himself, didn't find such style particularly fun; they were just doing what they thought was expected of the dark Batman. Stories like War Games are just awful stories, that's the writers fault, not the characters, and not written by Miller anyway. It's not Miller's fault that other writers interpreted Miller's 'grim and gritty' as sad and depressing. Miller's Batman is dark, yet still has plenty of humor, and is always a fun read.
 
Last edited:
While it's true that Batman had been pushing in a darker direction for years, ever since the work of Neal Adams, Denny O'Neil, Len Wein and Frank Robbins (among others) started taking the character closer to his roots in the early '70s (and I love the O'Neil/Adams stuff), Frank Miller brought the character closer to his roots than anyone else had. Miller didn't break his back doing it, and Finger and Kane's Batman was extreme. Miller's successors (Brian Azzarello, Bill Willingham, Judd Winicks, Chuck Dixon, Ed Brubaker) tried to employ the same sort of 'grim and gritty' style as Frank Miller had, but it was obvious that the new people, unlike Miller himself, didn't find such style particulary fun; they were just doing what they thought was explected of the dark Batman. It's not Miller's fault that other writers interpreted Miller's 'grim and gritty' as sad and depressing. Miller's Batman is dark, yet still has plenty of humor, and is always a fun read.
I will agree that Miller's Batman is fun to read, at least pre-TDKSA and All-Star. I re-read Y1 and TDKR probably more than I read any others so I'll just leave this one lie. I still think he gets way more credit than he deserves, though. :p
 
I'll more than likely pick it up if he ever finishes it. Just to see what Miller has done with his take on things.
 
I'll more than likely pick it up if he ever finishes it. Just to see what Miller has done with his take on things.


Sucks for you. It comes with The Spirit storyboards and it'll probably be around $3,000,000.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"