Third Dark Knight Story From Frank Miller Coming In 2015

[Ranorak]

.....How can he possibly top his last batman A-hum "Master piece"?
He already "beat" batman, so in this part he's going to single-handedly defeat Darkseid, Thanos and Goku!

Why?

CAUSE HE'S BATMAN!

you forgot about the hulk, Cthulhu, Azathoth, God, zeus and everything else in existence because his batman

Yup, cause we all know that knowing your enemy's weakness is instantly the same as successfully using that weakness in a way that you're always the winner.

Come to think of it, I really REALLY would like to hear someone make a good suggestion on how Batman could beat Goku... No wait, lets go with Vegeta.

Yes, Batman vs Vegeta.

Because a fictional character's "power" is ENTIRELY up to the author.

No, not always.
Superheroes have limits. The have things that go beyond what they can do.
For instance, Batman is human. Therefore his limits are tied to a human. A good writer will keep this in mind when writing a story, in order to keep the willing suspension of disbelieve. So if Batman suddenly picks up a car and throws it several feet at an airborne Superman this breaks the suspension of disbelieve.

Yes, they are fictional, but a good writer tries to convince us they're not. And in order to do that he has to be consistent with what they can and cannot do. Superman can fire heat vision, and has X-rays vision. So he would clearly see if Batman has Kryptonite. Superman is also not a moron, so even if he can't see it, he knows Batman is always prepared so is probably holding kryptonite anyway. Thus, keep your range and batman is useless. Shooting the Kryptonite also doesn't work because superman is known for his "faster then a speeding bullet." stick.

And yes, you can write a character stronger then superman, batman, the incredible hulk and goku combined. If that's what you want, but that's a new character with new powers, and a new willing suspension of disbelieve.

 

[Ranorak]

snip

That's fine, If that makes movies and comics more enjoyable for you, alright.
But then I fail to see the point you originally tried to make.

Because a fictional character's "power" is ENTIRELY up to the author.

We know that, we know that they're not real, it's just fun to debate this. And if you have the (perfectly valid) opinion that writers can do whatever the fuck they want with their characters, that's fine, but that wasn't really the point of the discussion.... was it?

Trying to define and discover the limits of these characters is partly why we enjoy them, and discussing who would win in a battle is almost as old as comic heroes themselves. And if you're not interested in that discussion, fine. But don't act like we're morons who don't know this shit is all fake.

 

[Soulrender95]

Frank Miller today is not the Frank Miller that wrote the Dark Knight returns or Year One and I wish DC would realize that, if this was classic Frank Miller I'd be all for it but not these days.

still I suppose we're going to see Superman presented as Hitler given the title "Master race" and blood dripping superman logo, still considering his last planned comic for batman is a wonderfully hateful piece of trash called "Holy Terror", yeah I'm going to be fine with prejudging this as hate-filled xenophobic rant on the evils of "Krypton" (as a stand in for any group frank currently hates).

 

[CaptainMarvelous]

.....How can he possibly top his last batman A-hum "Master piece"?
He already "beat" batman, so in this part he's going to single-handedly defeat Darkseid, Thanos and Goku!

Why?

CAUSE HE'S BATMAN!

you forgot about the hulk, Cthulhu, Azathoth, God, zeus and everything else in existence because his batman

Yup, cause we all know that knowing your enemy's weakness is instantly the same as successfully using that weakness in a way that you're always the winner.

Come to think of it, I really REALLY would like to hear someone make a good suggestion on how Batman could beat Goku... No wait, lets go with Vegeta.

Yes, Batman vs Vegeta.

Because a fictional character's "power" is ENTIRELY up to the author.

I can create characters that can whipe the floor with Dragon Ball, DC and Marvel combined. I can write Batman doing the same if I want to.
They are fictional.

Now, when REAL things are treated in this manner it annoys me.
Like stupid Mecha, Kaiju and Dinosaurs... somehow beating superior military designs and tactics.

Or American M1A2 Abrams tanks being able to take on numerically superior T-90 units (which are already equal or superior to American tanks) on the defensive and somehow winning with no losses cause 'Murica and Call of Duty...

wait, why don't mecha and kaiju get a pass? If you can suspend disbelief for comic characters why can't you suspend it for large monsters or aliens against military weapons, maybe the writer has written them with supernormal features so that they are superior to regular military. Bearing in mind, you got no beef with a well trained fit male beating an alien who can literally blow up the sun while standing on Pluto and has very little qualms with murder, why don't kaiju or mecha get the same plot armour?

EDIT: Also after Holy Terror I am borderline terrified about Miller writing a piece called 'The Master Race', there is almost a 0% chance this won't be racist.

 

[CaptainMarvelous]

Well for Kaijus and Mecha it depends.

For example:
In Pacific Rim - no pass. The Kaijus were killed with weapons the robots had. Those weapons can be produced and put on chassis and used more efficiently.

The actual DESIGN of a giant military robot is silly though. This wont exist as a military vehicle. Never. No matter what tech exists. It just wont. It is a stupid, inefficient, moronic battle design. A big, expensive, badly armed and armoured target.
Showing it as more effective...that gets me


As for Superheroes...usually they dont stop me enjoying a work. Usually.

I can see where you're coming from. I kinda disagree purely because the grounds for Mecha are that a human pilot can move it like a normal body or something so it's more... responsive or some bullshit, but it's plot bullshit that just flimsily rationalises punching a kaiju in the face or laser sword duels in space.

Totally legit criticism though, I get why it would annoy you.

 

[Shiftygiant]

As lackluster as Millers recent output has been, he's written some real classics. I'll be checking this out in the hopes he's manage to find the spark again. Plus Azzerelos really good and might help balance some of Millers crazy tenancies

The man's last three attempts at writing Batman have all been awful failings (DK:SB, B&R:AS, Holy Terror), I don't see how a fourth will recapture that spark. Though Azzerelo could be a good impact.

 

[Seishisha]

I'm just wondering how much of this comic will feature random bolding of letters, and prostitutes.

So many prostitutes.

Don't forget he has to call the city a woman at some point and needlessly repeat his dialogue multiple times per page.

"This city is a whore.. a whore.. a whore who i can't help but love and hate... hate... hate..."

 

[Gorrath]

Or American M1A2 Abrams tanks being able to take on numerically superior T-90 units (which are already equal or superior to American tanks) on the defensive and somehow winning with no losses cause 'Murica and Call of Duty...

While the T-90 is a really exceptional tank, it is not equal or greater than the new models of M1A2. I would agree that the idea of a tank engagement resulting in 0 losses for the M1A2 is silly though. It's also worth noting that playing the stats game on paper is generally worthless. People tried this with the T-80 and that tank was generally a disaster. The T-90 takes the best parts of the T-72 and the T-80 and wraps them in an affordable package. But yeah, I don't think I've seen or heard anyone claim that the T-90 is on par with or superior to the M1A2 new models; that seems like a pretty big stretch. It's also worth nothing that crew experience and training make up a huge part of the success of most weapon systems. That's my 2 cents as a soldier anyway.

 

[Gorrath]

Or American M1A2 Abrams tanks being able to take on numerically superior T-90 units (which are already equal or superior to American tanks) on the defensive and somehow winning with no losses cause 'Murica and Call of Duty...

While the T-90 is a really exceptional tank, it is not equal or greater than the new models of M1A2. I would agree that the idea of a tank engagement resulting in 0 losses for the M1A2 is silly though. It's also worth noting that playing the stats game on paper is generally worthless. People tried this with the T-80 and that tank was generally a disaster. The T-90 takes the best parts of the T-72 and the T-80 and wraps them in an affordable package. But yeah, I don't think I've seen or heard anyone claim that the T-90 is on par with or superior to the M1A2 new models; that seems like a pretty big stretch. It's also worth nothing that crew experience and training make up a huge part of the success of most weapon systems. That's my 2 cents as a soldier anyway.

If I am not mistaken, the Abrams tanks in CoD just went ahead and slaughtered 10 or so T-90 tanks from ranges of 100-200 meters. Something that is absolutely impossible.

The newest T-90SM models have demonstrated to be exceptional tanks. With incredible active and passive defense systems. Most of which the Abrams lacks. Admitedly though, untested in combat.
Whilst the Abrams has fought inferior generation monkey models firing low grade ammunition with obsolete training and tactics, it still FOUGHT. Which is more then the T-90 and its newer variants especially, have done.
Also according to the Chinese weapon trials, the gun of the T-90 is overall superior to the L44 (though not to the L55, which is on EU tanks only).

Also no matter what your opinion on the T-90 vs Abrams is, I think we can agree that the Leopard 2 and Leclerc do BEAT both of them.

The crew training is always a factor. Unknown though. So I dont take it into account. It would be arrogant and disrespectful of me to claim Russian crews are better trained then American crews

Oh I don't really play the CoD games but I do agree that that is just silly. I don't claim to be a tank expert by any means either, I'm simply an interested layman with real world experience in combat. I tend to avoid "who would win" scenarios because there are just too many factors to consider, I just didn't think it was fair to say that the T-90 was on-par with or superior to the Abrams new models. What I will say is that both tanks appear to be exceptional at what they are designed to do and what each military expects from their MBT differs. I (and pretty much everyone I've ever discussed this with) seem to agree that the Abrams is superior to the T-90 in most respects with regard to stats and capability but that the T-90 also has some distinct advantages.

As far as stat-sheet comparisons do go, I would agree that the Leopard 2 is probably the best MBT in the world right now. That's just a guess though, since no one has ever seen them fight and even the best weapon systems on paper can have serious problems that only crop up once the shooting begins.

I've got a ton of respect for soldiers from many different countries, including Russia. I've had the immense honor of serving along side forces from more than twenty different nations and we always love to argue about who's the best! It's all comraderie.

 

[Raika]

The worst comic book writer ever is making a sequel to a terrible sequel to a terrible story. How is this news?

 

[Gorrath]

Oh I don't really play the CoD games but I do agree that that is just silly. I don't claim to be a tank expert by any means either, I'm simply an interested layman with real world experience in combat. I tend to avoid "who would win" scenarios because there are just too many factors to consider, I just didn't think it was fair to say that the T-90 was on-par with or superior to the Abrams new models. What I will say is that both tanks appear to be exceptional at what they are designed to do and what each military expects from their MBT differs. I (and pretty much everyone I've ever discussed this with) seem to agree that the Abrams is superior to the T-90 in most respects with regard to stats and capability but that the T-90 also has some distinct advantages.

As far as stat-sheet comparisons do go, I would agree that the Leopard 2 is probably the best MBT in the world right now. That's just a guess though, since no one has ever seen them fight and even the best weapon systems on paper can have serious problems that only crop up once the shooting begins.

I've got a ton of respect for soldiers from many different countries, including Russia. I've had the immense honor of serving along side forces from more than twenty different nations and we always love to argue about who's the best! It's all comraderie.

Fair to say... I disagree. But we can both agree that we would not want to ever be proven right or wrong in this case

Generally people with which I have talked usually put them equal. Till the T-90SM came out. Hence the "probably a bit better" part.
The new T-14 Armata will, obviously be for a time the best tank in the world. But that is cause it is new. Though the Type 10 does look good too IMHO.

So does the cheap but VERY well made Type 99 from China. Damn, my country ought buy some of those...

The Leopard 2 is one of those constantly tested things whose systems have individually seen real use. But still, fair enough.

No doubt about that! If we were ever to find out which tank is superior, it would a bad day for all. Much better that we leave such confrontations to the realm of speculation!

Without turning this whole thread into a series of spreadsheets and arguing about posted statistics (if anyone's interested in this debate, go look at message baords where these arguments pop up as often as the name Anita does on The Escapist) for me it comes down to asking myself, "Which tank would I rather crew." and the answer to that question is the Abrams.

As far as future tanks go, it's all head-scratching really. Is the Chinese Type 99 as good as the Chinese say it is? Who knows really. They bang on about their J-series jets and the new FC-31, but real analysis of those craft may suggest they are sub-par. I don't know that I can trust anything they state about their tanks for the same reason. I'm not saying the Type 99G/A2 isn't good either, just that I always take claims about Chinese equipment with a grain of salt. Frankly, a lot of the tech seems to copied/lesser versions of the superior Russian equipment it's often based on.

The T-14 is damned exciting! I can't wait till we get to see post-production trials of it. There is no doubt that it will be the most powerful tank ever produced, especially if they do mount the 152 mm gun on it. Even though I'm an American, I won't play fanboy when it comes to military equipment and the T-14 looks amazing.

 

[elvor0]

OK, I know I said this in the other thread, but how does Frank Miller still have a job after holy terror. I mean who would hire him after that train wreck. Just why? DC WHY!?!

I was just saying to my wife the other day that I was pretty sure DC or Marvel refuse to work with him anymore after Holy Terror and Ultimate Captain America, yet lo and behold he's got work. Bleh, this is going to be horrid and an obvious cash in for Batman vs Superman. I kind of want to read it, in a car crash sort of way though.

The worst comic book writer ever is making a sequel to a terrible sequel to a terrible story. How is this news?

Your first sentence should answer your question. The news is that somehow he still gets work.

Having really liked Brian Azzarello's Joker, I'm... curious, if nothing else. Never did read DKR2 after hearing about what a mess it is, though, and I'm curious if that'll be a prerequisite, or if this'll take the thread from the end of the first DKR and run with it instead.

For all the batshit crazy Miller's output has been the last 15 year or so, I still love Year One and The Dark Knight Returns, warts and all. I've never heard anything negative about his Daredevil or Wolverine runs, either, though to be fair I've not read either of them.

I shall have to check out Azzarello's Joker, I'd not actually heard of it before now, or at least I'd forgotten about it, though word about town is that his work on Wonder Woman has been good and I need to pick that up too. Maybe Azzarello will be able to reign Miller in.

I haven't read Wolverine, but his Daredevil book is excellent, I've very fond memories of it, it being one of my first proper comics I'd read. If you enjoyed the Daredevil tv series, it takes a lot of influence from that. It's not /exactly/ an adaptation of the comic, but it's very indebted to it. I actually find it quite amazing how many of the shots actually trigger memories of the comic considering I read it like...13 years ago.

 

[Callate]

Frankly (no pun intended), it reads like "We respect and trust Frank Miller exactly enough to use his ties to titles some still remember fondly."

A second writer, and possibly no artistic credit? Sounds like they're keeping the dog on a short leash. Hell, it might be that someone at DC is doing Miller a favor- his star has fallen a lot since the days of, say, The Spirit.

I'm not going to dogpile on the man himself. Artists are allowed to have some kooky ideas; hell, I think people as a whole should be, so long as they don't go buying guns or threatening to skin people's pets or the like. Miller has created some interesting and worthwhile stuff. But his brand is definitely tarnished.