Batman: The Dark Knight Returns, Part 2

Batman vs. Superman at least.

Again the voice work falls flat with some main characters nearly indistinguishable from each other. But Miller's story shines through; shockingly so at some points. The animation looks good with the action scenes well staged. Breaking this up into two parts really helped the story to breath and I hardly missed the voice over narration during this part. Fortunately both parts live up to my expectations and so I highly recommend them.

Holy Shit does this movie suck. Everything is wrong with this in my opinion. Batman goes around crippling and killing, Joker is a gay brainless half wit, Superman is Reagan's lapdog? And then the crap with the nuclear strike and everyone going ape shit within five minutes and then Batman comes along and rallies everyone in seconds by attacking them from horseback. Oh and Superman is some kind of life force vampire. Final battle between Superman and Batman was kinda lame. Ending...Super lame.

the talking head psychologist getting his ass killed for his smug hubris was pretty good. the rest of this movie is basically the dumbest thing ever and is the kind of scare-mongering crimewave shit that puts fascists into power. and on a base artistic level, Michael Emerson's Joker is one of the worst voice performances I've ever heard

The real BvS

72 = 60 points the story, 12 the movie. On the good side, it faithfully sticks to the Miller's original story, which is why it gets this high a rating. The moments it strays it gets plain silly. On the bad side - acting's pretty flat & animation's too rigid for my taste. I also didn't care much for that polished character design - I think Miller did much better job there, too. All in all, fans of the graphic novel won't be too pissed, but if you don't know the story, I suggest you buy a book.

Second part is better than the first. Both missing important newscast elements from the comic but a good way to get into them for starters.

I think this will be a better Superman film than Man of Steel. Good adaptation, stronger than the first part (although watch both of course!)

The second half of Miller's groundbreaking comic assumes some famliarity w/ the likes of Green Arrow & the director has Bats avoiding far 2 many bullets 2 be plausible, but next 2 Nolan's films ur not going 2 see a more compelling or exciting Batman tale. Miller's hyperbolic imagination is firing on all cylinders here w/ easily the most disturbing climax 2 a Joker battle u'll ever see & a Superman-Batman face-off that'll knock u on ur a-s. A MUST-SEE 4 anyone w/ any interest in Batman.

Parts 1 & 2 - Uneven and at times uncertain Batman reimagining should have been either much longer or more stripped down - Part 1 is a little tedious, focusing too much time on the mutants, who are not especially interesting as villains - Part 2 picks up considerably, with Emerson's terrific underplaying of the Joker a highlight, and bringing a rivalry with Superman to the forefront (and neatly undercutting his "boy scout" image); Weller is an unfortunately one-note Bruce/Batman.

Slightly better than the first part, well made Batman set in time of Cold War.

Much better than the first installment, it still suffers wooden voice acting and some shoddy animation but the fact that it sticks mostly to the comic, including the one armed Ollie Queen, bumps it way up for me.

audiovisual 70 overall feeling 72 avg 71

Pretty much on par with part 1. I don't think it's as consistently good, but they certainly did the graphic novel justice. There are wonky elements like Batman just avoiding TOO many bullets (as another reviewer stated), and the voice acting, like part 1, isn't as stellar as it could be... but for an epic Batman vs Superman clash, and Joker going straight psycho (memorable because you even tho its animated, you hardly see this level of chaos).

The first one ends in an obviously truncated manner, so much so that it's hard to justify the 70 minute run time. This one has a similar run time and a whirlwind plot so thick with things happening that my complaint remains. The ending may be tidy and complete, but "The Dark Knight Returns" begs expansion into a three part movie, or at the very least and extra half hour of time on each part. As it is, it is an good (almost great) two part movie with too much stuffed into it.

The second part of TDKR deals with two important moments in the Batman comics: Batman's final showdown with the Joker and Batman's battle with Superman. Both are handled very well, although the voice acting isn't always perfect. The music for both part 1 and 2 really surprised me. It added an extra layer to the proceedings once again proving that movies are better than comic books (jk).

The second part is atleast as good as the first, if not a little better. The story was done very well (while dropping some of the pointless stuff from the story). It turns out that there was a good story in The Dark Knight Returns, you just had to get rid of a lot of the stupid stuff Frank Miller likes to put in his stories. This is an example of an adaptation that surpases the source material in every way.

I was a big fan of the comic, so bias may be a factor here, but I thought this was a good adaptation that managed to translate the style of the comic fairly well into motion. Peter Weller did a great job in the role as this older, gritter Batman as well.

TDKR Part II is the conclusion of my favourite graphic novel of all time. The story definitely benefits from being split into two parts and there's a sense of breathing space between the two films. Personally I preferred Part 1 which I thought was more engaging content wise. However Part 2 has the more exciting moments and the Batman vs Superman finale translates from page to screen superbly. It's essential viewing for any Batman fan, but it doesn't come close the the graphic novel.

Homosexuality is the best all-around cover a vigilante ever had.

Part 2 has a few more memorable moments compared to Part 1 though the story isn't as tight, and it still suffers from the overly bleak worldview. The Joker's end was good, as was the ending with BvS. The bullets, nuclear escalation, and many character attitudes are logically unresolvable; Commissioner Yindel seems to come straight from a machismo's fever dream. Mediocre at best.

Dope bruce clark talk bout happenin+joker doc talk show flying gas dolls kill all+mind control lip stick kiss selena+bat wipes it and kisses her <3+worst joker ever til death fight+did cool things though+lit joker on fire distraction+superman nuke in space heals sucking sun out plants+both weakened for fight+no electricity sons of batman help make only city to maintain order+traps ready+cool fight+talking during+kryptonite arrow+i want you to remember the man who beat you+fake death train so

Pretty good adaptation to the movie version. I cannot remember the page by page story line, but there are still scenes in this movie that are shocking, even by today's standards. The level death and mayhem done by the villains to the media to politics. Some stuff were dated, like Reagan and the Soviet Union. Still, this was way better than some of the recent movies by the big Hollywood studios.

I don't know how but the voice acting got worse from part 1. It's shocking how bad it ended up being, and how it really hindered my enjoyment of the movies. That and the awful bald eagle landing on a certain characters arm. How on the nose was that crap.

There was some weird shit introduced in this one... Like apparently the Joker has these two weird-ass robotic flying dolls that do a lot of his work for him? I'm not familiar with the comic, so things like that kinda come out of left field for me. I also wasn't expecting other DC characters, specifically Superman, to show up. Still, the story is well executed, and those few oddities don't stop this from being a solid movie.

Bir saniye bile durmayan yüksek tempolu, başarılı senaryo ve kurgu eşliğinde gelmiş geçmiş daha iyisi yapılana dek en başarılı batman filmi.

Is less focused and pointed compared to Part 1 (which has a significantly more engaging and cohesive storyline), but is probably more entertaining in many ways and has some excellent imagery. It sticks to it source material well and is, all things considered, just plain fun.

I *think* it's ironic - but either way it's neither especially clever nor engaging. Mostly boring.

I liked this one a lot more than part 1. It has more action and faster pace, and also cooler characters. Has some good music too.

Hell yeah batman kicking superman ass!

*Spoilers.*Keeping the story in its historical context becomes both the best and worst decision this adaptation makes. On one hand it sets the mood in that belieable Watchmen-esque way. On the other hand - there is no repurcussions to the Soviets nuking the United States. Also I still think Weller is an odd choice at best for the caped crusader. Other than that this is pretty damn good.

The Superman battle was good and the ending was well made, but the film wasn't engaging enough to make me care who won.

Pretty much on par with the first part, but I'll give it a few bonus points for the satisfying conclusion, plus I enjoyed Michael Emerson's take on the Joker.

How BVS should have been

I think the story gets better and there is some action scenes that look actually good with good characters. Personally, I think character development is a very important thib thing to the story and the main character because it affects the whole story and the main character in good way. If done right though.

Rating both parts together: its the epic batman film i wish Rises had been. Weller is great as world weary batman who cant give up his righteous obssesion. The animation was great, creating that dreary 80s graphic novel world and delivering on exciting energetic and epic action scenes. Sticking hard and fast to the source was a smart idea. I didn't enjoy emersons joker but night learn to appreciate it in future viewings

Zero subtlety in its message or ideology. My other complaints lie with it's extremely choppy narrative, underused Joker and undeveloped Superman, and honestly, I really disagree with the voice casting. Like Part 1, though, it more than makes up thanks to very potent action, social criticism/commentary, and despite it's bleakness, it does have a lot of hopeful moments, though that ending is a spirit breaker.

I loved this even more than the first part! Mostly because it gets even darker and more brutal. And because they didn't try to turn the 80s USA vs. Soviet Union situation into a more modern setting. And because Superman gets a good beat. Also, does the US presidents look like an evil green-faced zombie or was that just my screen?