"There Will Be Spoilers..."If Christopher Nolan’s “The Dark Knight” were to only exist in a vacuum, it would be merely the greatest comic book movie ever made. To me, this is not up for debate. “The Dark Knight” is the rare film to transcend it’s humble origins as a mere superhero movie and enter the pantheon of truly Great films. “The Dark Knight” is simply amazing. It inexplicably surpasses it’s great predecessor, “Batman Begins”, in almost every concievable way possible as the performances in the film are richer, the story is more engrossing and expansive, the action is tighter and better shot and it features one of the most iconic, villainous performances in the history of cinema. As noted by virtually any critic and fanboy alike who actually have functioning eyeballs, Heath Ledger manages to completely re-define and revolutionize the role of one of pop culture’s most notorious bad guys, the Joker and does it with a sense of style and utter menace. As almost $300 million dollars worth of Box Office in a mere two weeks can attest, this is the truth and if you want another mere glowing review of the film, you can always read Rolling Stone. I want to the discuss the politics presented in the film.
The film does not exist in a vacuum. It exists and has been released into a very real, post-9/11 world where the threat and fear of terrorism has become painfully clear to the American people. “The Dark Knight” to it’s credits does not ignore this. In fact, it’s one of the first mainstream American film’s to truly deal with a post-9/11 America that is truly mature and without hyperbolic jingoism or vitriolic cynicism. It’s truly a remarkable feat considering the nature of the Hollywood system and it’s shyness towards dealing with difficult political topics that might harm a film’s potential blockbuster. “The Dark Knight” is about society’s use of power against unspeakable evil and the political and personal cost that the exercise of that power costs. It’s also quite unexpectedly about the dangers of placing too much faith in any one political figure in saving the figure.
As many writers and cultural commentators have noted in “The Dark Knight” that there is a striking resemblance to the mass murderous actions of the Joker as analogous to modern day terrorism of groups like Al Qaeda or Hezbollah and that Batman’s less than legal actions in stopping the Joker’s reign of destruction as similar to the actions of Bush Administration in their “zeal” to stop (*cough* steal oil *cough*) terrorism. Some cultural commentators on the right and left see the film as tacit approval of the Bush Administration and that the film is painting Our Glorious Leader as a misunderstood hero doing what needs to be done in order to protect ourselves against true evil. It’s true, at least, on a superficial level that Batman’s actions bear a resemblance to the policies of the Bush Administration over the last eight years in combating terrorism. In the film, Batman breaks numerous laws fighting organized crime and the Joker and in his desperation and zeal resorts to borderline torturing criminals for information and employing a highly-illegal sonar wiretapping system that allows him to easily track the Joker’s movements. All of this bears more than a little similarity to the Bush Administrations by any means necessary methods to protecting our country from terrorism. In the end Batman gets his man and Gotham is saved so I suppose if you want to read it as an approval of these methods than I suppose it is there. However, I find this to be an incredibly superficial and self-serving reading of the film because it ignores the consequences of these actions and the toll it takes on the character’s psyche and lives.
In the film, Batman grapples with the weight of his actions and quickly learns that his methods have only made things dramatically far worse than he had hoped. In “Batman Begins”, Bruce Wayne had hoped that by using the Batman as a symbol, he could inspire good in the people of Gotham City and they would rise up against the wave of corruption and organized crime in the city and save their city. In “Dark Knight”, Bruce learns that while his violent vigilantism has inspired some good in the city that the actions he has also caused the conditions of the city to get exponentially worse. He hoped that his activities would inspire the citizens of Gotham towards political activism and philanthropy but finds that instead he has inspired it’s citizens to become more violent copycats of his nightly escapades and after nearly destroying the cities organized crime families, the crime lords of the city turn to the ultra-nihilistic psychosis of the Joker who only wishes “to watch the world burn” and shares little of their interest in money and power in desperation of returning the city to it’s previous corruption. Instead of the threat of being mugged by a desperate criminal as Bruce’s parents were, Batman creates an environment where there is a threat they could be blown up in a hospital. Nolan is hardly tacitly approving of Bush Administration policies. The film argues almost completely against that. If taken at literal value, Batman’s violent activity has only served to increase the criminal level in the city instead of alleviating it. This mirrors the real-life situation in Iraq and Afghanistan where U.S. invasions under the pretense of liberating the people of these countries from tyrannical rule has only served to radicalize and create more terrorists in the native populations of the country which only creates further danger to the U.S.
The film also questions the effectiveness of Batman/Bush’s illegal methods like torture and wire-tapping in preventing terrorism. In the film’s best and most memorable scene, Batman confronts the Joker about the location of Harvey Dent and Rachel Dawes in a police station holding cell and in a rage beats the Joker to an inch of his life hoping to gain the information. The Joker whose twisted sado-masochism actually enjoys the beating he receives cruelly mocks Batman for the presumption that this will actually elicit the information that he wants and that he has “nothing to do with all of his strength.” Eventually, Batman gains the information that he wants only to discover that the locations of the hostages have been switched and the Joker was lying to him. Nolan is questioning the effectiveness of torture against a prisoner as Batman’s “strength” is negated against a strong-willed opponent. Information gained from torture is notoriously unreliable as the prisoner will often say anything to stop the attacker from continuing the punishment. In Batman’s case, the information received caused the death of somebody he deeply cares about and the mental breakdown of another. The film also takes care to debate whether or not, some of the illegal activities are truly as ineffective as others. Lucius Fox upon discovering that Batman has created an illegal wire-tapping system of the entire city’s cell phones threatens to resign immediately from Wayne’s employ but still goes along with a scheme he finds deeply troubling. The wire-tapping in the end helps Batman defeat the Joker but his sins do not go unpunished. Batman finds himself the pariah at the end of the film, having his reputation permanently damaged, and he loses people that are close to him because of it. This is hardly an approval of Bush who faces no retribution for the crimes that he’s committed over the last eight years (Thank You, Nancy Pelosi!).
The other political idea of the film that Nolan takes care to critique is the idea that society should place too much faith in one political figure into saving their people. Harvey Dent is portrayed in the film as a Barack Obama-like “white knight” and the cities true hope to save Gotham from its despair. Bruce Wayne wishes to end his charade as Batman and give the mantle of the cities’ hero over to Harvey Dent who he sees as a transformative political figure capable of inspiring the citizens of Gotham. He places great faith in the man. However, over the course of the film, we learn that Harvey Dent isn’t quite the golden boy as he seems. Even before he goes through his radical transformation, we see Harvey threaten one of Joker’s men with a gun and even Commissioner Gordon is hesitant to his place his faith into the man due to Harvey’s days as a “two-faced” careerist hack opportunistically prosecuting dirty cops to advance his political career. In the end of the film, Harvey Dent is corrupted and destroyed by the Joker and becomes Two-Face, a murderous vigilante hell-bent on revenge. Nolan seems to be arguing that we shouldn’t place too much faith in “white knight” political figures because in a moment’s notice all that they work for and represent can be taken away at a moment’s notice by either a moment of weakness by a candidate or the media’s zealous “gotcha” news coverage. Gordon and Batman have to conspire at the end of the film to prevent Harvey’s crimes from reaching the light of day in order to protect the message but it costs both of them unimaginably. In an election year, where one of the candidates is seen as an almost messiah-like figure by parts of the country, this message is as salient as ever. I believe in Barack Obama but it’s nice to be reminded that it could be crushed in a moments notice. Nolan argues that if we want to save our world, we shouldn’t place faith in one man. We should save ourselves.
I’m going to go out on a limb and argue that “The Dark Knight” will go down as the ultimately the best film of the entire decade. It’s transcendent. Taken on it’s own, it’s a stunning piece of crime noir wrapped in the pulp traditions of a superhero film. I mean Heath Ledger’s incredibly scary turn as the Joker alone is worth the price of admission. It’s superb entertainment on it’s own right but the political message of the film is equally as salient as anything done in any snooty art house pic or big-budget Hollywood message movie. Nolan has crafted a truly important film and the fact that he managed to do this re-inventing one of America’s most beloved characters is simply awe-inspiring. I can’t wait for part three.
Film Of The Decade... with all due respect to Peter Jackson.
The film does not exist in a vacuum. It exists and has been released into a very real, post-9/11 world where the threat and fear of terrorism has become painfully clear to the American people. “The Dark Knight” to it’s credits does not ignore this. In fact, it’s one of the first mainstream American film’s to truly deal with a post-9/11 America that is truly mature and without hyperbolic jingoism or vitriolic cynicism. It’s truly a remarkable feat considering the nature of the Hollywood system and it’s shyness towards dealing with difficult political topics that might harm a film’s potential blockbuster. “The Dark Knight” is about society’s use of power against unspeakable evil and the political and personal cost that the exercise of that power costs. It’s also quite unexpectedly about the dangers of placing too much faith in any one political figure in saving the figure.
As many writers and cultural commentators have noted in “The Dark Knight” that there is a striking resemblance to the mass murderous actions of the Joker as analogous to modern day terrorism of groups like Al Qaeda or Hezbollah and that Batman’s less than legal actions in stopping the Joker’s reign of destruction as similar to the actions of Bush Administration in their “zeal” to stop (*cough* steal oil *cough*) terrorism. Some cultural commentators on the right and left see the film as tacit approval of the Bush Administration and that the film is painting Our Glorious Leader as a misunderstood hero doing what needs to be done in order to protect ourselves against true evil. It’s true, at least, on a superficial level that Batman’s actions bear a resemblance to the policies of the Bush Administration over the last eight years in combating terrorism. In the film, Batman breaks numerous laws fighting organized crime and the Joker and in his desperation and zeal resorts to borderline torturing criminals for information and employing a highly-illegal sonar wiretapping system that allows him to easily track the Joker’s movements. All of this bears more than a little similarity to the Bush Administrations by any means necessary methods to protecting our country from terrorism. In the end Batman gets his man and Gotham is saved so I suppose if you want to read it as an approval of these methods than I suppose it is there. However, I find this to be an incredibly superficial and self-serving reading of the film because it ignores the consequences of these actions and the toll it takes on the character’s psyche and lives.
In the film, Batman grapples with the weight of his actions and quickly learns that his methods have only made things dramatically far worse than he had hoped. In “Batman Begins”, Bruce Wayne had hoped that by using the Batman as a symbol, he could inspire good in the people of Gotham City and they would rise up against the wave of corruption and organized crime in the city and save their city. In “Dark Knight”, Bruce learns that while his violent vigilantism has inspired some good in the city that the actions he has also caused the conditions of the city to get exponentially worse. He hoped that his activities would inspire the citizens of Gotham towards political activism and philanthropy but finds that instead he has inspired it’s citizens to become more violent copycats of his nightly escapades and after nearly destroying the cities organized crime families, the crime lords of the city turn to the ultra-nihilistic psychosis of the Joker who only wishes “to watch the world burn” and shares little of their interest in money and power in desperation of returning the city to it’s previous corruption. Instead of the threat of being mugged by a desperate criminal as Bruce’s parents were, Batman creates an environment where there is a threat they could be blown up in a hospital. Nolan is hardly tacitly approving of Bush Administration policies. The film argues almost completely against that. If taken at literal value, Batman’s violent activity has only served to increase the criminal level in the city instead of alleviating it. This mirrors the real-life situation in Iraq and Afghanistan where U.S. invasions under the pretense of liberating the people of these countries from tyrannical rule has only served to radicalize and create more terrorists in the native populations of the country which only creates further danger to the U.S.
The film also questions the effectiveness of Batman/Bush’s illegal methods like torture and wire-tapping in preventing terrorism. In the film’s best and most memorable scene, Batman confronts the Joker about the location of Harvey Dent and Rachel Dawes in a police station holding cell and in a rage beats the Joker to an inch of his life hoping to gain the information. The Joker whose twisted sado-masochism actually enjoys the beating he receives cruelly mocks Batman for the presumption that this will actually elicit the information that he wants and that he has “nothing to do with all of his strength.” Eventually, Batman gains the information that he wants only to discover that the locations of the hostages have been switched and the Joker was lying to him. Nolan is questioning the effectiveness of torture against a prisoner as Batman’s “strength” is negated against a strong-willed opponent. Information gained from torture is notoriously unreliable as the prisoner will often say anything to stop the attacker from continuing the punishment. In Batman’s case, the information received caused the death of somebody he deeply cares about and the mental breakdown of another. The film also takes care to debate whether or not, some of the illegal activities are truly as ineffective as others. Lucius Fox upon discovering that Batman has created an illegal wire-tapping system of the entire city’s cell phones threatens to resign immediately from Wayne’s employ but still goes along with a scheme he finds deeply troubling. The wire-tapping in the end helps Batman defeat the Joker but his sins do not go unpunished. Batman finds himself the pariah at the end of the film, having his reputation permanently damaged, and he loses people that are close to him because of it. This is hardly an approval of Bush who faces no retribution for the crimes that he’s committed over the last eight years (Thank You, Nancy Pelosi!).
The other political idea of the film that Nolan takes care to critique is the idea that society should place too much faith in one political figure into saving their people. Harvey Dent is portrayed in the film as a Barack Obama-like “white knight” and the cities true hope to save Gotham from its despair. Bruce Wayne wishes to end his charade as Batman and give the mantle of the cities’ hero over to Harvey Dent who he sees as a transformative political figure capable of inspiring the citizens of Gotham. He places great faith in the man. However, over the course of the film, we learn that Harvey Dent isn’t quite the golden boy as he seems. Even before he goes through his radical transformation, we see Harvey threaten one of Joker’s men with a gun and even Commissioner Gordon is hesitant to his place his faith into the man due to Harvey’s days as a “two-faced” careerist hack opportunistically prosecuting dirty cops to advance his political career. In the end of the film, Harvey Dent is corrupted and destroyed by the Joker and becomes Two-Face, a murderous vigilante hell-bent on revenge. Nolan seems to be arguing that we shouldn’t place too much faith in “white knight” political figures because in a moment’s notice all that they work for and represent can be taken away at a moment’s notice by either a moment of weakness by a candidate or the media’s zealous “gotcha” news coverage. Gordon and Batman have to conspire at the end of the film to prevent Harvey’s crimes from reaching the light of day in order to protect the message but it costs both of them unimaginably. In an election year, where one of the candidates is seen as an almost messiah-like figure by parts of the country, this message is as salient as ever. I believe in Barack Obama but it’s nice to be reminded that it could be crushed in a moments notice. Nolan argues that if we want to save our world, we shouldn’t place faith in one man. We should save ourselves.
I’m going to go out on a limb and argue that “The Dark Knight” will go down as the ultimately the best film of the entire decade. It’s transcendent. Taken on it’s own, it’s a stunning piece of crime noir wrapped in the pulp traditions of a superhero film. I mean Heath Ledger’s incredibly scary turn as the Joker alone is worth the price of admission. It’s superb entertainment on it’s own right but the political message of the film is equally as salient as anything done in any snooty art house pic or big-budget Hollywood message movie. Nolan has crafted a truly important film and the fact that he managed to do this re-inventing one of America’s most beloved characters is simply awe-inspiring. I can’t wait for part three.
Film Of The Decade... with all due respect to Peter Jackson.
