The Sequel Problem

Frank Miller’s Batman: The Dark Knight Returns is a masterpiece, one of the landmark comic books which reenergized the genre.  He wrote a sequel: Batman: The Dark Knight Strikes Again.  I first read the sequel years ago.  My conclusion then:  it is a total mess.  Lynn Varley’s art was Garish at best, the plot was…well was there a plot?  It was all simply too much of...what?  A disaster of a book.  I figured I would never look at it again.

So, what possessed me to read it again?  I’m really not sure.  Really, I have no idea.

My conclusion this time:  It’s not nearly as bad as I originally thought.  The reason I hated it so much before was pretty obvious on a rereading.  It’s no Dark Knight Returns.  Not even close.  It isn’t even trying to be DKR.  It’s the classic sequel problem: how do you write a sequel to a masterpiece?  DKN did things in a comic book which made your jaw drop.  Indeed, you can almost infallibly tell if a Batman tale is before or after DKN.  You can see it in the movies too.  Adam West is pre-Miller; the Burton/Michael Batman is at the turning point; the Nolan/Bale Batman Begins is post-Miller. 

So, when you have written a comic book which changed a genre, how do you write a sequel?  You can either a) do another one just like it, or b) try to change the genre again.  The first route is what everyone expects, but it is really difficult to pull it off.  (Think again about the movies—the second Burton/Keaton film is not nearly as good.  (Interestingly, the second Nolan/Bale film is better than the first.  Maybe having the Joker in your movie is the key?))  Option b) is the bigger risk; you run a chance not only of not doing it well, but also of alienating everyone who liked the original.

Miller clearly aimed to change the genre again in DKSA.  It fails.  Indeed, it is not terribly original at all.  The art in DKN is subdued and gritty.  It’s very well-done and it fits the tale.  The art in DKSA is loud, bright, splashy, loud, colorful, and loud.  Well, its louder than that.  Every page is a blaze of bright color.  Page after page of bright, loud colors.  It is a veritable assault on the senses.  The pictures are crudely draw.  It is a book full of Neon Cave-Paintings.

And the plot?  It is also abrasively chaotic.  Which is the point.  The story, such as it is, has Lex Luthor creating a Police State.  (Nothing original there—Luthor is always trying to create a run the world.)  Batman is an anarchist.  (Nothing original there—Frank Miller is an anarchist.)  So, we have a comic book which is a visual depiction of anarchy overthrowing order—which is a good thing in this world—fortunately for the tale, we never have to see how the whole anarchy thing works out.  We get rid of Lex Luthor, get to watch Superman, the epitome of TurthJusticeandtheAmericanWay, get beat up, and then imagine the nice world where nobody ever tells us what to do again.  And those Neon Cave Paintings?  Well, perhaps that was just Miller and Varley’s subconscious selves screaming that anarchy is going to return us all to the caves of our ancestors. 

The one theme that runs through both books is that the media is a superficial, feckless bunch.  I’m not sure why this is in both.  The media in DKSA is, of course, louder and more chaotic.  But, I suspect Miller just liked the idea of telling his tale through the lens of TV.

In the end, DKSA is not even remotely Miller’s best work.  But it isn’t the complete disaster I once thought it was.  I don’t think I’d recommend it to anyone, though.