Dark Knight Returns #2 on Heritage

[Bronty]

 

Well, he does look constipated, and my comment wasn't meant to cut it down. He simply looks constipated to me. I didn't comment on the Ditko ASM or the Romita Sr 'butt shots' and this current comment wasn't related to those.

 

I've got nothin' but love for ya (thumbs u Wasn't directed at you just in general

[jjonahjameson1]

 

Well, he does look constipated, and my comment wasn't meant to cut it down. He simply looks constipated to me. I didn't comment on the Ditko ASM or the Romita Sr 'butt shots' and this current comment wasn't related to those.

 

I've got nothin' but love for ya (thumbs u Wasn't directed at you just in general

 

[Speedy-D]

Wow, I'm pretty surprised there is so much debate on the artistic merit of this DKR cover.

 

 

I'm shocked as well. I'm noticing that whenever there is a major piece for sale, people seem to feel the need to cut it down. In addition to all the azz shot stuff, there was calling the asm 328 cover a "groin punch" etc.

 

I really don't know why people need to cut down these major pieces other than perhaps some misplaced jealousy? I really can't imagine what comic collector who grew up in the 80s wouldn't love to own any dark knight page, let alone what to me is along with the cover to #1 (just as good but very different) *the* piece to have. I also really liked the frontispiece to the S/N hardcover.

Not me man. I love DKR, and I'd be ecstatic to own this cover, any other cover, or any interior page whatsoever. They're all way beyond my means and I have no beef with anyone who gets some. More power to them, I hope they're as happy as I would be.

 

This cover is one of my least favorite images from the run. :shrug: So what? Something's gotta be my least favorite, right? Well, this is close. There's nothing more to it.

[delekkerste]

I'm shocked as well. I'm noticing that whenever there is a major piece for sale, people seem to feel the need to cut it down. In addition to all the azz shot stuff, there was calling the asm 328 cover a "groin punch" etc.

 

I really don't know why people need to cut down these major pieces other than perhaps some misplaced jealousy? I really can't imagine what comic collector who grew up in the 80s wouldn't love to own any dark knight page, let alone what to me is along with the cover to #1 (just as good but very different) *the* piece to have. I also really liked the frontispiece to the S/N hardcover.

 

I don't think it's jealousy. People are more than happy to fawn and slobber over major pieces that come up for sale that they like (e.g., McSpidey #1). I think people think that, with these major pieces, they can be freer in divulging how they really feel. I mean, if you posted a Peter Hsu Adventurers page and people ragged all over it and cut it down and questioned your taste in art, it would be pretty horrific form. A multiple 6-figure piece by McFarlane or Miller, though? Who's feelings are going to be hurt if people say how they really feel about it?

 

The truth? Maybe you can't handle the truth!

[NightGallery1]

There are quite a few pieces of comic art that I don't care for personally (which don't include the three under discussion), but I think it's usually best not to say anything about them because the owner might be reading and I wouldn't want to hurt anyone's feelings. These pieces are obviously all A+ material though, and even if none of them are your cup of tea... I think you'd have to be nuts not to want any one of them hanging on your wall.

 

Bill

 

[batman_fan]

who cares what average joe thinks? I have no doubt that it was absolutely meant to be a grotesque image. He's beaten but not broken. The book is called "dark knight triumphant" after all.

 

I don't mean to sound like a fanboy. I just don't understand holding the artist's obvious intent against him.

 

Ehhh, I better get back to work.

 

What you mention is exactly why I like the Bruce Wayne/Robin splash. I love how Bruce is drawn all scarred up which is how he should really look given the beating he has taken over the years.

 

One thing I am positive of, is that this cover will sell for ALOT OF MONEY !!!

[Pete Marino]

I'm shocked as well. I'm noticing that whenever there is a major piece for sale, people seem to feel the need to cut it down. In addition to all the azz shot stuff, there was calling the asm 328 cover a "groin punch" etc.

 

I really don't know why people need to cut down these major pieces other than perhaps some misplaced jealousy? I really can't imagine what comic collector who grew up in the 80s wouldn't love to own any dark knight page, let alone what to me is along with the cover to #1 (just as good but very different) *the* piece to have. I also really liked the frontispiece to the S/N hardcover.

 

I don't think it's jealousy. People are more than happy to fawn and slobber over major pieces that come up for sale that they like (e.g., McSpidey #1). I think people think that, with these major pieces, they can be freer in divulging how they really feel. I mean, if you posted a Peter Hsu Adventurers page and people ragged all over it and cut it down and questioned your taste in art, it would be pretty horrific form. A multiple 6-figure piece by McFarlane or Miller, though? Who's feelings are going to be hurt if people say how they really feel about it?

 

The truth? Maybe you can't handle the truth!

 

I think this is it pretty much. How often can you really publicly give you on comic art? I mean, sure everyone feels ok to chime in on stuff they like.

 

The stuff you don't? 99.9% of the time you just say something to the person sitting next to you... when the big # items come up... I think no one gets hurt (and the bottom line isn't effected) when you come out and say "it stinks, I don't like it!"

[Koa]

I've always like this cover because it was ugly. every page in the DKR is Ugly, that's what makes the book so beautiful

[Koa]

C'mon the beef-a-roni diarreha Batman comment made you laugh. I still don't get all the hype as even the DK#3 cover at $448K boggles my mind. I can think of dozens of other issues that have as much if not more "importance" for their era that would fetch only a fraction of $448K. The highest prices on Heritage for a Kirby page is only $155k, same for Ditko, Byrne $65K, most Adams pages are under $20K. I guess my point is that for the most part the art work from this DK series pales in comparison to the above noted giants of this industry and I don't think that Miller was so cutting edge that he is head and shoulders of anything we have seen hit the market over the last 10 years.

 

DKR has incredible historic significance in comics and tremendous influence. That's fact, whether we like it or not. There was nothing done in the last 10 years that will carry the weight DKR has for the past 28.

 

There is a lot of real hostility toward Miller's work these days, makes me wonder how much of it is due to his political ravings.

[drdroom]

I'm shocked as well. I'm noticing that whenever there is a major piece for sale, people seem to feel the need to cut it down. In addition to all the azz shot stuff, there was calling the asm 328 cover a "groin punch" etc.

 

I really don't know why people need to cut down these major pieces other than perhaps some misplaced jealousy? I really can't imagine what comic collector who grew up in the 80s wouldn't love to own any dark knight page, let alone what to me is along with the cover to #1 (just as good but very different) *the* piece to have. I also really liked the frontispiece to the S/N hardcover.

 

I don't think it's jealousy. People are more than happy to fawn and slobber over major pieces that come up for sale that they like (e.g., McSpidey #1). I think people think that, with these major pieces, they can be freer in divulging how they really feel. I mean, if you posted a Peter Hsu Adventurers page and people ragged all over it and cut it down and questioned your taste in art, it would be pretty horrific form. A multiple 6-figure piece by McFarlane or Miller, though? Who's feelings are going to be hurt if people say how they really feel about it?

 

The truth? Maybe you can't handle the truth!

 

I think this is it pretty much. How often can you really publicly give you on comic art? I mean, sure everyone feels ok to chime in on stuff they like.

 

The stuff you don't? 99.9% of the time you just say something to the person sitting next to you... when the big # items come up... I think no one gets hurt (and the bottom line isn't effected) when you come out and say "it stinks, I don't like it!"

 

Third. If somebody can lay down six figures (or pick up six figures) for a funnybook page, I feel like my ability to hurt their feelings is limited, they are probably smarter than me anyway, and it's a news story so kibitzing is allowed. So here goes: This is a brilliant cover, maybe one of the most influential superhero images ever published. It distills nearly the whole reinvention of the character into one image. I'm not even jealous, this is so far out of my league. I wouldn't want the responsibility.

[Pete Marino]

I'm shocked as well. I'm noticing that whenever there is a major piece for sale, people seem to feel the need to cut it down. In addition to all the azz shot stuff, there was calling the asm 328 cover a "groin punch" etc.

 

I really don't know why people need to cut down these major pieces other than perhaps some misplaced jealousy? I really can't imagine what comic collector who grew up in the 80s wouldn't love to own any dark knight page, let alone what to me is along with the cover to #1 (just as good but very different) *the* piece to have. I also really liked the frontispiece to the S/N hardcover.

 

I don't think it's jealousy. People are more than happy to fawn and slobber over major pieces that come up for sale that they like (e.g., McSpidey #1). I think people think that, with these major pieces, they can be freer in divulging how they really feel. I mean, if you posted a Peter Hsu Adventurers page and people ragged all over it and cut it down and questioned your taste in art, it would be pretty horrific form. A multiple 6-figure piece by McFarlane or Miller, though? Who's feelings are going to be hurt if people say how they really feel about it?

 

The truth? Maybe you can't handle the truth!

 

I think this is it pretty much. How often can you really publicly give you on comic art? I mean, sure everyone feels ok to chime in on stuff they like.

 

The stuff you don't? 99.9% of the time you just say something to the person sitting next to you... when the big # items come up... I think no one gets hurt (and the bottom line isn't effected) when you come out and say "it stinks, I don't like it!"

 

Third. If somebody can lay down six figures (or pick up six figures) for a funnybook page, I feel like my ability to hurt their feelings is limited, they are probably smarter than me anyway, and it's a news story so kibitzing is allowed. So here goes: This is a brilliant cover, maybe one of the most influential superhero images ever published. It distills nearly the whole reinvention of the character into one image. I'm not even jealous, this is so far out of my league. I wouldn't want the responsibility.

 

, you don't think rich people are not insecure? I've met some wealthy people, and I'd say that some are very insecure.....

[Koa]

Is that Miller on crack? I really appreciate most of Miller's work but this is just horrid. If this was Liefeld's work we would be ripping it to shreds right now.

 

What's different with miller's work during this period vs. liefeld or any other artist who get's ripped to shreds by the peanut gallery for "bad drawing" is content of the work as a comic narrative. I'd argue that the comics that resonate the most are usually done by artists who are inferior from an illustrative standpoint.

 

John Buscema could draw as well as anyone and told a story very well, visually yet the content of his work is largely forgettable and never really achieved the popularity of lesser skilled artists.

 

Even when the content isn't there, Most super popular artists work can usually be picked apart because they are connecting on a subjective level through exaggeration, abstraction, symbolism, design, line quality and so fourth rather than objective skill. That's the way it seems to me in any case. I think usually the better the artist is in reproducing life, the more limited his/her appeal. Alex Ross being the exception to the rule.

[artoholic]

It is always amazing to see the original artwork for a historic issue such as DKR2. Even though most of us will never have an opportunity to see the actual art in person, even a glimpse in the form of an online scan resurrects wonderful memories.

 

We can be grateful that this cover did not pass through the hands of Mr. Itkowitz, otherwise we would only hear about its mythological existence.

 

 

I am late to this thread. But this comment makes me feel I should chime in.

 

Recently when I was in NY, I stopped by Mitch's house. While there, I held the cover to Dark Knight #1. From my vantage point, the art looked great in person.

 

I think if anyone was serious or interested in purchasing the cover, they should just email Mitch directly and get the facts for themselves.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Koa]

It is always amazing to see the original artwork for a historic issue such as DKR2. Even though most of us will never have an opportunity to see the actual art in person, even a glimpse in the form of an online scan resurrects wonderful memories.

 

We can be grateful that this cover did not pass through the hands of Mr. Itkowitz, otherwise we would only hear about its mythological existence.

 

 

I am late to this thread. But this comment makes me feel I should chime in.

 

Recently when I was in NY, I stopped by Mitch's house. While there, I held the cover to Dark Knight #1. From my vantage point, the art looked great in person.

 

I think if anyone was serious or interested in purchasing the cover, they should just email Mitch directly and get the facts for themselves.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Image fan is eluding to the comments Mitch has made being of a indirect nature, which he seems to have taken negatively.

[Bronty]

He's hiding from comments that were alluded to?

[blowout]

What's different with miller's work during this period vs. liefeld or any other artist who get's ripped to shreds by the peanut gallery for "bad drawing" is content of the work as a comic narrative. I'd argue that the comics that resonate the most are usually done by artists who are inferior from an illustrative standpoint.

 

John Buscema could draw as well as anyone and told a story very well, visually yet the content of his work is largely forgettable and never really achieved the popularity of lesser skilled artists.

 

Even when the content isn't there, Most super popular artists work can usually be picked apart because they are connecting on a subjective level through exaggeration, abstraction, symbolism, design, line quality and so fourth rather than objective skill. That's the way it seems to me in any case. I think usually the better the artist is in reproducing life, the more limited his/her appeal. Alex Ross being the exception to the rule.

 

I agree with everything you say here, except the last part about Alex Ross. Comercial appeal yes, artistic appeal? Not so much.

[buttock]

I just showed it to my wife. She said:

 

"It's Zombie Batman, he's squeezing something... maybe a mouse. It looks like he's taking a dump."

 

 

[Koa]

[Bronty]

I'm shocked as well. I'm noticing that whenever there is a major piece for sale, people seem to feel the need to cut it down. In addition to all the azz shot stuff, there was calling the asm 328 cover a "groin punch" etc.

 

I really don't know why people need to cut down these major pieces other than perhaps some misplaced jealousy? I really can't imagine what comic collector who grew up in the 80s wouldn't love to own any dark knight page, let alone what to me is along with the cover to #1 (just as good but very different) *the* piece to have. I also really liked the frontispiece to the S/N hardcover.

 

I don't think it's jealousy. People are more than happy to fawn and slobber over major pieces that come up for sale that they like (e.g., McSpidey #1). I think people think that, with these major pieces, they can be freer in divulging how they really feel. I mean, if you posted a Peter Hsu Adventurers page and people ragged all over it and cut it down and questioned your taste in art, it would be pretty horrific form. A multiple 6-figure piece by McFarlane or Miller, though? Who's feelings are going to be hurt if people say how they really feel about it?

 

You're right about that and I have no doubt that's a significant part of it. It just seems... a little mean spirited at times? I dunno. To me all of those pieces were wonderful pieces of comic oa and its really short changing them to distill them into butt shots and bowel movements.

 

Anyways. Nuff Said.

[Claudio]

 

DKR has incredible historic significance in comics and tremendous influence. That's fact, whether we like it or not. There was nothing done in the last 10 years that will carry the weight DKR has for the past 28.

 

There is a lot of real hostility toward Miller's work these days, makes me wonder how much of it is due to his political ravings.

 

It could very well be one of the most historically significant comics ever and I don't think that can be understated.

 

This piece reminds me of something like a Picasso cubism piece. It might not be the standard definition of beauty but he used art to try to evoke a reaction and I think he succeeds. He crowds batman into the confined space in order to express his strength. He is beaten down but is getting up and never giving up. He arms show power and his mouth shows grit.

 

It would be something I would be proud to put on my wall. Like I said, it might not be my idea of beauty but it is definitely art. Miller is trying to find different ways to express his ideas and I think it should be commended.