3 best Batman graphic novels

[thebrownranger]

I'm just wondering, what are your favorite Batman graphic novels out of these 3? Out of the many Batman stories, these three have always caught my attention. Knowing that Alan Moore and Frank Miller did these, makes me even more interested. I never read any of them (only parts of "Hush") so I was hoping someone could lead me in the right path here.

[The Stryker]

Hush is bland.

Dark Knight Returns is the most influential Batman story of all time, Read that one. Killing Joke is good but It's nothing spectacular unless all you're reading for is Joker.

Long Halloween is another good one.

[thebrownranger]

Well I've always been intrigued by Jim Lee's art, but on the other hand, I haven't read any Frank Miller stuff in a while.

[Spitfire]

"Dark Knight Returns" may be raved about but I bought it and only made about a quarter of the way in. In my personal opinion the artwork is ugly and it reads more like a novel then a comic. The amount of text per page is insane and I quickly grew tired of everything bring narrated by long lengthy news reports.

I recently read "Hush" and I liked it quite a bit. I figured out who Hush was really quick so there was little mystery but even if the story doesn't do much for you the art work is breath taking.

I got "Killing Joke" and read that recently as well. It's a great story with some nice artwork but it's rather short. Unless you can get it for a good price it's really not worth that much. It took me like 10-15 minutes to read it and I'm a slow reader. It tells the Joker's origins but nothing says it's cannon as I read "Hush Returns" literally right after where they go over his origins and they're different. By the way "Hush Returns" sucks don't bother with it.

I also finished "Knightfall" not to long ago. That's a great series though if you get the trades there's an entire portion of it missing. Just last week I finished off "No Man's Land". It was long and confusing because I only read what was collected in the trades. It all in all has a great ending but the journey leading up to it seems rather pointless.

Lastly just today I got though "Batman: Vampire" which is an Elseworld story that takes place in a completely different universe. The artwork is perfect for the tone of the story and the writers really just had fun with it. It's a great story with some deep character development on Batman's part. You get to see what happens to Batman when he becomes the thing he hates.

Anyways out of those three you listed I'd say go with Hush. It's interesting, not to long or to short, and has the most happening in it. That's just me though. I read comics because I want to see a balance of great artwork and great story. While Dark Knight Returns may be good the balance between novel and artwork is tipped in the novels favor and it's to wordy for me as a comic.

[thebrownranger]

Originally Posted by Spitfire

Anyways out of those three you listed I'd say go with Hush. It's interesting, not to long or to short, and has the most happening in it. That's just me though. I read comics because I want to see a balance of great artwork and great story. While Dark Knight Returns may be good the balance between novel and artwork is tipped in the novels favor and it's to wordy for me as a comic.

Ok Thanks man! Hush it is!

[Voltron]

Hush sucked. Loeb is a hack. Get DKR, it's the comic that I use to measure all other comics.

[Sewer Bull]

This list lacks a few notable titles. Like "Arkham Asylum: A Serious House on Serious Earth" by Morrison and McKean. Or "Year One". Or "Year 100" by Paul Pope.

And "The Killing Joke" is so painfully overrated. I mean, it's pretty decent, but people have been reading way too much into it.

[thebrownranger]

Well these three novels are the ones that caught my attention, and I don't plan on reading every Batman novel so I'll just stick with what I have right now I guess.

[raphael_is_cool]

I remember reading Hush ages ago and thinking it was pretty good (which it is in parts). But I reread it not long ago and some things annoyed me. I hate the 'big event' tendency towards shoehorning in as many characters as possible; which happens here. Some of the twists and such are so poor and contrived. Also, the story quickly derails and resolves itself suddenly. At least the artwork is top notch.

Although, having said all that, I quite like The Long Halloween...and Knightfall is also good.

[Voltron]

Originally Posted by Mino

This list lacks a few notable titles. Like "Arkham Asylum: A Serious House on Serious Earth" by Morrison and McKean. Or "Year One". Or "Year 100" by Paul Pope.

And "The Killing Joke" is so painfully overrated. I mean, it's pretty decent, but people have been reading way too much into it.

What the hell did I miss in Arkham Asylum? I thought it was awful. Nothing happened, and nothing made sense. Things just sort of wrapped themselves up when it seemed Morrison became bored. The character of Batman changes more than a candle's flame and ugh. . . I just couldn't make heads or ends of it.

[Candy Kappa]

Voted Dark knight returns, its just awesome

[Sewer Bull]

Originally Posted by Voltron

What the hell did I miss in Arkham Asylum?

McKean's art and those rich Jungian references, although, come to think of it, you are right, the outcome was rather weak. It looked like Morrison was lazily conducting his plot and then all of a sudden he was reminded they have a limited number of pages, so he wrapped it up quickly.

Not saying that "Arkham Asylum" is the best Batman comic book ever, but... the idea of choosing the best Bats' graphic novel out of three titles only isn't too reasonable for me.

[Cipher]

I've only read four Batman series: Dark Knight Returns, Dark Knight Strikes Again, The Long Halloween, and Dark Victory.

Of those, Dark Knight Returns is my favorite. Honestly, I had alot of fun with The Long Halloween, and probably come back to it more often. But it's just fun, well written genre. Dark Knight Returns is literature, or at least something closer to it. It's not really so much an action comic as it is social commentary. Like Spitfire said, the amount of text per page is insane.

And even though everyone hated it, I really did like Dark Knight Strikes Again. On it's own, it is kind of a mess. But when you take it in context of what Miller did to the comic book industry, you see that it's trying to deconstruct everything his first Batman book did, and that's interesting. Also, I kind of dig the trippy art, and the continued themes of information, technology and media from its prequel.

[Leo656]

((Shrug)) I just can't help but feel like Miller is the single most overrated Batman writer ever. Dark Knight Returns was OKAY, but I've never met eyes with a person who can say with a straight face that DK2 was good. His stuff is okay in its own universe, but thank god none of it is canon. I think Loeb is way better most of the time. He gives the fans a lotta big moments and totally gets every individual character's personality. Miller's All-Star Batman is a good example of how little Miller cares for the personalitites of any DC characters save Batman; his treatment of Green Lantern in particular was horrid.

Of the choices, I'd have to say Killing Joke, though it is way too short.

[Voltron]

With all due respect, I hold the exact opposite opinion.

I can see where fans would get upset by Miller's portrayal of some characters, but, most of the time, strikes me as being in good fun. Loeb has things happen to fast and rarely puts thought into how stories should move. I feel as though I'm reading a poor attempt at a mystery when reading his stuff. It moves too fast and half the explanations for events seem very lazy.

[Cipher]

Originally Posted by Leo656

His stuff is okay in its own universe, but thank god none of it is canon.

Of course not. His Dark Knight stories are all about deconstructing superhero canon. Not canon as in "events in continuity" but canon as in the accepted standards of the genre. Those standards, at the time DKR was written, included a happy-go-lucky, infallibly moral hero, which DKR tore to shreds. At the time DK2 was written, Miller's own writing had birthed a standard which required melodrama at its worst. Dark, brooding heroes, psuedo-intellectual garble, etc. DK2, in the same vein as DKR, set out to mock the industry, with its garish colors, and celebration of the superhero as someone who should be worshipped and enjoyed in all their absurdity (check Superman's arc in that book). All the themes about information and media were still present from DKR as well, if that's your thing.

I've never met eyes with a person who can say with a straight face that DK2 was good.

On it's own, it's sloppy (but not without merit). Taken within the context of the industry, it's pretty damn relevent, and it doesn't devolve into the total trash that All-Star Batman seems to be. (I'll give you that one.)

I think Loeb is way better most of the time. He gives the fans a lotta big moments and totally gets every individual character's personality. Miller's All-Star Batman is a good example of how little Miller cares for the personalitites of any DC characters save Batman; his treatment of Green Lantern in particular was horrid.

Take this with a grain of salt, because like I've said, my only exposure to Batman comics has been from these two writers. But Loeb gives you a decent genre story. His Batman presents the character well, and tells fun, if slightly inept mysteries. There's even a little bit of depth in his stuff. But Miller does something far more interesting by using superhero archetypes to point out flaws in societal and media trends (at least in DKR and DK2). You know that image of DK2's first cover which is edited so that Batman is flipping of the reader? That's exactly what Miller's doing, and it makes it so much more intruiging.

It's a TMNT site, so let's go with this comparison: Loeb is like watching the 2003 cartoon. He'll give you tight plots, classic stories, and perhaps an overall more professional showing. But if you want to think about what you're reading, see experimental stories, and maybe even disagree thouroughly with what's presented, you're going to read the Mirage comics (Miller).

[Mr._Mutant_Man]

I went with The Killing Joke. It's pretty much the essential Batman v. Joker story.

I don't know if Miller's stuff has ever made me "think" all that much. Even Dark Knight Returns, which is a good book overall, but I still don't find it all that deep or anything.

[Spitfire]

I just re-read "Batman/Spawn" which is obviously a Batman Spawn team-up. Macfarlane did the artwork, which is apparent from panel one, and Miller did the story. Why I mention this is because he did the same exact thing he did with "Dark Knight Returns" and uses news broadcasts to drive the stories. I read some "Sin City" books a long time ago but I don't remember him using them much in those, I could be wrong though.

[Leo656]

I "get" a lot of why Miller does his stuff the way he does, I just take issue when some people are like "DK was so good it should be canon", which is what I'm used to hearing from people, who usually add how he "beat up Superman" as justification. Meh.

It's weird, though, b/c I have kind of an opposite thing with Morrison. I don't love a lot of what he does, but then stuff like Final Crisis I understood and liked and nobody else did. I'unno, I'm of two minds. Part of me loves it when guys like Miller and Morrison tinker with the genre, and another part of me says "It's just comics, who's gonna "get" this stuff?" Depends on my mood.

As for Loeb, I admit I became a fan of his when he started doing Superman/Batman. He's one of the few writers who captures both characters perfectly, and that book hasn't been nearly as good since he left. The little character moments or dialogue where it shows the points where both characters differ or have something in common were brilliant, although I agree some of his action runs a bit fast. Still, he gives the fans those "Holy Sh*t" moments, like Superman vs. Batman, Batman fighting Darkseid, or putting Lex back in the armor (an idea I hated and still kinda do, but thanks to Loeb's handling I accepted it more than I likely would've).

I do agree, Loeb is more of a "straight-up super-hero comic" writer, Miller is more like a novelist or "real" writer that dabbles in comics. But I also think only people who read tons of comics fully understand that, just like only people who already are invested in comics can really appreciate Watchmen. My comic-fan friends all find it brilliant, and the people who are "too smart to read comics' somehow miss all the metaphors and subtext and can't understand why a comic with a naked blue guy and a fat Batman ripoff is so "ground-breaking" just because it's violent.

I guess it's true that the best stories happen when you don't worry about who's gonna read it, you just write and let the fanboys figure out what's important and why.

[cqb101]

I'd say it's a toss up between DKR and The Killing Joke. Hush has pretty art, but lazy writing. Not a fan of it.