A question on Batman:DKR

[Hzurr]

So I was going back through and reading Dark Knight Returns, and something I had always skimmed past before made me stop and go "hrrmm?" and I was hoping someone could clarify.

Note: There will be some spoilers for those who haven't read it

In book 2 (pages 64-65 in my edition) Batman goes to fight a group of mutants who kidnapped a baby (named Kevin Ridley, I believe), and try to hold him for ransom. Batman comes in, one mutant freaks out and shoots another mutant, and Batman reaches through the wall to take out a second mutant. Here's where things get fuzzy. The third mutant has a gun to the baby's head, and says "back off man, I'll kill the kid. Believe me, mann, I will. BELIEVE me!" And then Batman takes the gun from mutant number two, kills mutant number 3, and says "I believe you."

... wait, what?

Batman just shot and killed a mutant. Huh?!?!? I mean, Batman's finger is on the trigger, the gun makes a "Brakkk" noise, and then you see the mutant slumping over, giant bloodstain in the wall, and a hole in the wall where his chest was. That looks like a dead mutant to me.

Doesn't this invalidate not only everything Batman has ever stood for, but also the final climax at the end with the Joker? Am I just missing something here?

[Fineous Orlon]

I don't see any bullet wounds on the mutant who was holding the kid. I think Batman scared the bejeezus out of the mutant by firing a really big machine gun on auto at him, and the mutant dropped the kid while simultaneously crapping his drawers/ whatever [shocked look on face].

It would be such a dramatic change for Batman that Miller would explicitly show that Batman actually shot the guy, with wounds, splash page, extra panels, etc....

[Tirian]

I don't have my copy in front of me, but is that the guy that he goes on to do the scene with the "I keep myself up at night counting the number of rights that you have, but you're losing a lot of blood here and I'm the only one who can get you to a hospital in time, so why don't you tell me what I want to know" speech?

Because I agree that he still absolutely does not kill, but that he evidently felt the need to amp up the fear to gain the respect of a generation of mutants who didn't know who he was. At the same time, you'll have to do a lot of looking to find another instance of Batman firing a gun even non-lethally -- it's the tool of his parents' killer, after all.

[Hzurr]

I don't see any bullet wounds on the mutant who was holding the kid.

I don't see any wounds either (which gives me hope), but that definately looks like a bloodstain on the wall


but is that the guy that he goes on to do the scene with the "I keep myself up at night counting the number of rights that you have, but you're losing a lot of blood here and I'm the only one who can get you to a hospital in time, so why don't you tell me what I want to know" speech? Nope, different guy (although the mutants look similar enough that I could have been fooled).

*sigh* I'm pretty sure that y'all are right, but I don't make it a habit of trusting Frank Millar, so it ha me worried.

[W Herzog Zwei]

Those are very confusing couple of panels.

But (if we first disregard the triggerhappy early golden-age Bats) I really don't think Bats machinegunning the mutant down makes sense in the context of the story - it would be the only use of lethal force in the story, and things go worse than the situation later on. Also I agree with the idea that it would have been made more clear if he really was supposed to kill the mutant.

[darkblade]

The mutant panicked and shot his buddy by accident.

[sealemon]

I've always read that panel as Batman killing the Mutant. The reason I think it works, because the mutant was going to kill the kid right then, and there was no non-lethal way to take him out without him killing the boy. Bats did what he had to do.

The difference between that scene and the one with the Joker? Because first of al, Batman has always held out hope of reforming even the Joker, and becuase during the confrontaiotn there were no hostages in immidiate danger. A very fine line, but one I felt was explained well by Batman's internal monologue...he really WANTS to kill Joker, but he simply can't justifiy it.


The mutant panicked and shot his buddy by accident.

no way. It was clearly Batman who pulled the trigger. If it was supposed to be anyone else at all, Miller would have shown it.

[....]

Mutants aren't people.

[Hzurr]

Mutants aren't people.

You raise a compelling point, sir.

[commander43]

Yeah, I've always seen that as Batman shooting him. The "I believe you" line really clinches it, because Batman knows that the mutant would have shot him. At that point, it was either the Mutant or the kid, which is an easy choice for Batman.