Quote
Originally posted by: Darth ChaltabQuote
Originally posted by: JediSageQuote
Originally posted by: TheSesslerQuote
Originally posted by: JediSageQuote
Originally posted by: Darth Chaltab
The movie isn't really worth it. It doesn't suck per se, but it is way overrated.
I think it was different, which counts for a lot these days with me. We're too often being force-fed (no pun intended) the latest car chase/bang-bang/idiot teen comedy every other week. You could make the case that SC is quite violent, but it was done well (IMO).
Plus he is not a Frank Miller fan, that has to account for some distate towards the movie.
What did you think of DK II? I know many Miller fans were quite dissatisfied with it... I've never read Sin City, but it looks like the local B&N is carrying it now, so I think I'll catch up. My love affair with Miller began with the original Dark Knight and Bats Year One. Ahhh, the day.
Miller wrote Batman? Gosh I'd hate to see how he butchered his character.
Batman: Now you die. *Throws a batarang decapitating the Joker. Blood gushes out and pools up on the ground. Then Ace the Bathound eats Joker's body.
LOL...no, it wasn't like that. The Dark Knight Returns was written in 1986, and it tells the story of the end of Batman's career, set in the future. It was very dark and was the defining work of the time. Pretty much single handedly revived the Batman franchise at DC. He followed it up with Batman: Year One which was a 4 issue mini-series that "reset" the clock and retold the origin story. Again, awesome work that aided in the revitalization. Not as violent as you may think. Miller's strength lies (IMO) in using dialogue to create character.