Cinematic or Melodramatic?
In Superman, we saw an invincible superhero full with corny punchlines, unrelatable acts of heroism, and arguably the most dry storyline we've seen all semester. In my previous blog post I compared our readings of Superman and the Batman Chronicles, and concluded while the two were strikingly similar Batman got the upper hand as a result of a superior plot line and more relatable heroism. Here, in Frank Miller's Batman: The Dark Knight Returns, we see an upgrade in every aspect over the late 1930's edition: far more engaging plots, incredibly innovate panel composition, a satisfying amount of gore, historical symbolism, and a sense of personal pride for Batman (especially as an American reader and even more-so as a New Yorker).
However, as much as I enjoyed The Dark Knight, I want to once again make a case for corniness. My first impression of this comic, almost right away, was that every scene, and I would go as far as say (almost) every panel was a climax. While ironically enough the stories do indeed have buildup, the buildups themselves are "mini"climaxes. One of the main reasons I argue for this sentiment comes as a result of Miller's purely awesome panel composition: individual panels, or sequence of panels, are presented in ways that draw (melo)dramatic effects to just about everything. My favorite example of this in action are the top two rows of panels on page 25 where Bruce Wayne is coming to terms with his need to return as Batman. While these two rows of panels are probably my favorite panels we've read thus far this semester, they contribute greatly to the constantly overly dramatic presentation of the story: the stories are a constant high and endlessly invoke overwhelming emotion, and for me, at least, it's hard to appreciate and enjoy the highs without the lows.
However, as much as I enjoyed The Dark Knight, I want to once again make a case for corniness. My first impression of this comic, almost right away, was that every scene, and I would go as far as say (almost) every panel was a climax. While ironically enough the stories do indeed have buildup, the buildups themselves are "mini"climaxes. One of the main reasons I argue for this sentiment comes as a result of Miller's purely awesome panel composition: individual panels, or sequence of panels, are presented in ways that draw (melo)dramatic effects to just about everything. My favorite example of this in action are the top two rows of panels on page 25 where Bruce Wayne is coming to terms with his need to return as Batman. While these two rows of panels are probably my favorite panels we've read thus far this semester, they contribute greatly to the constantly overly dramatic presentation of the story: the stories are a constant high and endlessly invoke overwhelming emotion, and for me, at least, it's hard to appreciate and enjoy the highs without the lows.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.