What Frank Miller thinks of Superman and Batman's partnership in World's Finest, during 40th anniversary of Dark Knight Returns

At the ComicsPro convention, Popverse says veteran artist Miller told the following about the partnership and friendship between the Man of Steel and Masked Manhunter:

"When I was a child, and I would see World's Finest Comics come out, even then I'd say, 'This is crazy, these guys would never like each other.' And I knew I could build toward the crescendo of the animus between them [in The Dark Knight Returns]," Miller said.

Sigh. How can the two of them like or dislike each other when they don't exist? I think this symbolizes another problem with Miller: he can't put his absurd biases aside to enjoy something based upon merit, let alone escapist entertainment. Also worth considering is that both Supes and Bats were co-stars in Justice League of America, and if it wasn't wrong to depict them getting along there as much as with their other co-stars, then it's stupid to say it's implausible for them to have a comfy partnership in World's Finest, which became more of a team title for the twosome by the early 60s. Let's also remember Miller was the one who made such a big deal out of women in comicdom allegedly looking like they did little more than take a shower, he drew Black Widow with short hair.

And this wasn't the only thing Miller had to say at the convention. He also told how DC editorial approved of putting allusions to Ronald Reagan in DKR:

DC's The Dark Knight Returns features a range of familiar Batman characters like The Joker, Two-Face, and Barbara Gordon, but there's another familiar face in the pages of Frank Miller, Klaus Janson, and Lynn Varley's story: Ronald Reagan.

Now, Ronald Reagan was President of the United States at the time that Miller wrote The Dark Knight Returns, so it's only natural that the writer include panels of the President while showing the larger political context beyond Gotham. However, Miller's inclusion of Reagan in The Dark Knight Returns may still raise a few eyebrows, which he addressed at ComicsPRO 2026.

When Miller was asked if DC had any objections to his putting Ronald Reagan into The Dark Knight Returns, he had a succinct answer: "No."

But of course not. This was a right-wing president in focus, and even back then, most liberal artists/writers weren't exactly known for taking seriously negative approaches to left-wing politicians. But if it so matters, did anybody at the time take issue with Reagan for specific failures like running away from Lebanon and failing to avenge the USA military officials who were murdered by Hezbollah jihadists in 1983? Did anybody like Miller take issue with how, in a way, Reagan enabled Iran's ayatollahs to build up nuclear development? And while he may have taken issue with Russia's commnism, he didn't exactly do the same when it came to China's. His vetoing the Anti-Apartheid Act on South Africa in 1986 was decidedly another serious mistake. But, if neither Miller nor his fellow liberal peers ever called Reagan out on his weaknesses regarding Islamic terrorism, communism, and what occurred in the South Africa republic, what's the point of their taking potshots at him? If you can't acknowledge all his flaws with honesty, it makes no sense to belittle him in DKR, if that's what Miller really set out to do.

"By any standards, this is fair game. This is fair use, which is the legal term for it. It is satire, it is parody. Just as a newspaper cartoonist can draw the President of the United States, a comic book artist can as well. Perhaps it would have been different if I had drawn actor Ronald Reagan by name and said anything about him that wasn't true. But to do a cartoon imitation of the absurdity of some of his excesses and, of course, his personality... sorry, he ran for that Office," Miller said.

Reagan isn't the only leader to have made an appearance in DC Comics around this time. Dave McKean's cover for Hellblazer #3 features graffiti of Margaret Thatcher with vampire teeth behind John Constantine. As Miller said, it's "fair game."

But note that Thatcher too, whatever flaws she had, was also a right-leaning figure, and if they had no intention of belittling left-leaners, British or otherwise, then that too falls flat, even though Thatcher never made any serious effort to prevent Islamofascism from overtaking the UK. One of the most questionable things Thatcher's government did do, however, was ban marketing of toy merchandise with the word "ninja" in them, which led to the Ninja Turtles being renamed "hero turtles" instead. There was even some ostensible concern over bloody horror movies. But the creep of sharia didn't concern them? If Thatcher and company really thought something was wrong with horror films, hers and her colleagues' failure to take an objective view of the Religion of Peace made such concerns a joke. Of course, even Miller himself has done something like that with his 2011 GN, Holy Terror, recalling the defeatist interview he gave to the UK Guardian in 2018. By the way, what in Miller's view was true or not about Reagan? Not sure if he specified.

Miller even said that Batman's supposed to symbolize hope:

When you think of Frank Miller's writing, what words come to mind for you? What images of his vision of Batman are conjured up for you? I'm willing to bet that a lot of you thought of something along the lines of "dark." But even though Miller likes to explore darkness in his writing, he doesn't see Batman as an entirely dark character.

The writer-artist reflected on the legacy of The Dark Knight Returns with Klaus Janson at the ComicsPRO industry conference this year. "I see it as that even though [Batman is] a big, scary guy who employs terror in his methods, that he's ultimately a figure of hope. And hope is an extraordinarily powerful thing that gives people great strength and resilience," said Miller.

In that case, does he find it disappointing less editors and writers in the years after DKR tried to develop a viewpoint that could convey hope better, and depict Bruce Wayne as a guy with an optimistic side, along with possible more of a sense of humor? Come to think of it, what's his view of the supporting cast of characters like Robin? Does he think Chuck Dixon did a good job with his take on the 3rd, Tim Drake, and does he find it disturbing that later editors and writers took apart much of what made Dixon's take work in the first place? And the one who really set things in repellent motion was, alas, another so-called conservative, Bill Willingham, who never did enough to prove he's remorseful for alienating fandom. Also note that, last time I looked, Tim's father Jack never had his fate reversed. And he, on the other hand, was put in the grave by left-leaning Brad Meltzer during that repugnant "event", Identity Crisis. Something else Miller's never commented on.

And Miller even let know that it was John Byrne's idea to create a female Robin in DKR:

At ComicsPRO 2026, Frank Miller revealed where the inspiration came from to include a version of Robin in the story, opposite a grizzled and middle-aged Bruce Wayne. Of course, at the time in 1986, there had never been a female Robin, as the mantle had only been carried by Dick Grayson and Jason Todd. And the idea to create a Robin who was also a girl didn't come from Frank Miller's mind, but the mind of another creator.

"I never thought there would be a Robin. But it was my colleague, John Byrne, as a matter of fact, who suggested that I put Robin in it and that I make Robin a girl," Miller began.

Miller continued, "And I set out to create Carrie Kelley. And the whole thing really started rushing together, because all of a sudden, there was a bright spot in Batman's dark world. And all of a sudden, this middle-aged superhero had a fatherly aspect."

Wait a minute. Is he saying that before all that, Batman never had a fatherly angle in his partnership with Dick Grayson? I just don't know what's going on here anymore. What I do know is that the aforementioned Willingham made a sick mockery of even that by turning Spoiler/Stephanie Brown into a female Robin for 2 issues around 2004, even though his willingness to participate in crafting a crossover (War Games) where she'd be tortured to death by Black Mask made that far more offensive than impressive. Similar points can be made with what Willingham did with Dr. Leslie Thompkins, whom Willingham wrote telling she allowed Spoiler to die to serve as an illogical lesson to Batman.

Anyway, Miller's latest tales of his past career just don't impress me any more than some of his previous ones, perhaps because he doesn't follow through properly on whatever points he wants to make. Again, I realize DKR's not really the fault of where things wound up with the Masked Manhunter's downfall as a storytelling vehicle, but rather, subsequent editors/writers. Even so, I think it's disappointing Miller has to stick with all this grating darkness, and won't emphasize anything brighter. Or, if darkness matters, why does he grind to a halt today when it comes to more serious issues like Islamofascism and communism? At least that's what it's looked like for nearly a decade now.