Why can't all comics be this epic and inventive? I mean I get why they're all not this dark, but man this series really worked for me. I'm almost afraid to read "normal" Batman or JLA comics now because I'll always be comparing them to this.

I may have to go on a Frank Miller binge now, except that I feel like I'll be sorely disappointed because I may have started at the pinnacle. ( )

Un petit chef-d'oeuvre ! La suite du "Dark night" va encore plus loin que son tome 1 : un Batman et un Superman (tous vieux et pleins de rhumatismes) semblent se poser le problème de leur descendance et de la justesse du monde qu'ils ont contribué à forger. D'où une critique directe du pouvoir (encore plus sensible que dans le DK1) et surtout un mode d'expression qui semble vouloir renouveler complètement le genre si codifié du Comics américain. Une leçon à retenir : les superhéros ont une psychologie et une idéologie ! ( )

The final volume of Frank Miller's long-awaited sequel to his classic "The Dark Knight Returns". This could have been such a better work, if Miller hadn't felt compelled to scrunch everything up into just three volumes. The story is a compelling one, about the team-up of Bruce and Clark (and daughter) to rescue Kandor from the grasp of Luthor and Braniac. But the story takes a lot of deciphering and effort, and the supporting cast covers such a wide range of heroes from DC's past that I couldn't place a few of them, and wondered what the point was of bringing in some others (Hawk & Dove, for cryin' out loud?). And finally, the last battle by Batman to save his ward Carrie's life is disturbing, in the betrayal it represents by one of DC's most venerable and respected figures. It gets better on repeated readings, but it still leaves a queasy feeling. I wish Miller hadn't done this; it so definitely places the story outside of the "actual" Batman chronology that it detracts somewhat. Artwork is interesting, but more stylistically derivative than Miller's better work, and there are times when it too detracts. ( )