MovieChat Forums > Batman: The Dark Knight Returns, Part 1 (2012) Discussion > Lack of Batman's explanatory voice-overs...

Lack of Batman's explanatory voice-overs made this movie terrible for me

posted 12 years ago by Batmanuel1987
8 replies | jump to latest

Without the inner monologues featured in the book, I felt that this was just Batman and not Frank Miller's Batman. It's a shame since Peter Weller would have done a great job with them.

Like how in the book, Batman tells you why he chose to have to wear a bright yellow bat symbol on his costume and how he says he can take down a thug in a bunch of ways and chooses the one that would hurt the most.

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.comicsalliance.com/media/2012/07/dkr02.jpg

I wish the movie had shown Batman's sadistic side that Miller wrote in TDKR.

Time to hurt demon feelings!-http://tinyurl.com/2hxvv9

[–] snelgrov 12 years ago

I agree about the lack of inner monologue, although it doesn't detract too much for me. I've read the books maybe 3 or 4 times since I bought them in 1986. I know the story, so I know what's happening in the background. Now, I'm not so sure for those who haven't read the original source material. I still would give it a 9/10, with the 1 off due to the lack of inner monologue.

I am the white Urkel!

[–] BrunoAntony 12 years ago

I agree ... the inner monologue was like half the majority of the writing from the comic.

[–] paul-2219 12 years ago

IMO it's too easy to just do an inner monologue. It's sorta like the cop-out narration in Blade Runner. In a moving picture, you have the extra medium to get the message across without all the inner thought bubbles you get in a comic or in a novel.

I wanted to hear "Why do you think I wear a target on my chest" too, but I think that would have just seemed like a heavy-handed exercise and would have made the film essentially a moving comic book. And do we really want that? This is a movie, we aren't supposed to hear everybody's every thought. Most of the time filmmakers decide we shouldn't hear Anyone's thoughts. I agree with their decision. Yes, it loses some great lines, but it also leaves more to the imagination and lets the action and the expressions of the characters take the place of the words in the thought balloons.

[–] gluvnast31 12 years ago

inner-monologues in an animated feature DO NOT WORK. you can just look at batman year one as a PRIME EXAMPLE.

[–] circawhenever 12 years ago

Year one was better then this because it had the inner monologues.

[–] venem123 12 years ago

SOME wouldve been fine, scenes that brought across batmsn methodology in the comic like the crime alley mugging scene, where hes thinking to himself about how many angles he could attack the muggers from. instead in the movie hes just standing there silent. that scene would translate just fine.

[–] paul-2219 12 years ago

I'm pretty sure they debated this, and my guess their decision was that if you show some inner monologues, you have to show them all. I mean, if he's thinking to the audience in one scene, and then silent in the next, it would just seem like he wasn't thinking then, wouldn't it?

[–] infamousone8seven 12 years ago

Inner Monologues work perfectly and they were sorely missed in this adaption. I give it an 8.5/10 just behind Red Hood and slightly above Year One. They should have showed all the inner monologues. Extended the film another 20 to 30 min.