« Recommended reading | Main | How could he? »

August 07, 2008

Whose Dark Knight?

By J. Robert Parks

I don’t think I could hold on to my official film critic badge if I didn’t say something about the biggest movie of this and any summer. For crying out loud, it’s the #1 film of ALL TIME on the imdb poll. I refer of course to John McCain’s wet dream. Just kidding. Sort of.

I don’t agree with this misguided writer, but it’s easy to see how McCain might fully embrace the milieu of The Dark Knight, a world where chaos and terror lie around every corner and where people’s only salvation is cowering under the protection of government-sponsored violence. But what I like about Christopher Nolan’s vision is he’s smart enough to interrogate that position. While Batman’s presence is necessary (this is a summer blockbuster after all), the movie and Batman wrestle with whether his style of vigilante justice is more harmful than not.

The film also calls into question certain axioms of contemporary entertainment (and government): 1) that good always triumphs over evil, so just sit back with a cold one and relax, 2) that the good guys are always good and therefore free to break the law whenever they want, and 3) that those bad things good guys do have no lasting repercussions. Batman is equated at times with a burgeoning fascism and, at other times, with how ancient Rome suspended its democracy in the face of violence and never recovered. There’s also an amazing moment when Michael Caine talks about how he captured a bandit in Burma: “We burned the forest down.” Anyone who doesn’t connect that story to Vietnam and Iraq isn’t paying attention.

But the politics are convoluted enough that some conservatives can legitimately claim Batman as their own. The Joker would likely run wild if he were not confronted by the unstoppable force of Batman. And Batman only locates the Joker at the end by spying on every citizen in Gotham. And most troubling for leftists of a certain view is that the film shows how easy it is for good intentions to be overwhelmed by awful realities and how those awful realities must sometimes be fought with violence.

Of course, few of the millions of people who’ve already seen the movie went because of Batman’s politics. They went for the incredible set pieces, and on that score the movie delivers. The centerpiece of the film is a chase through the bowels of Chicago that ends with the most spectacular stunt I’ve seen in years. People literally burst into applause at the screening I was at, and rightly so. But that’s not the only cool moment in the film. In fact, the movie’s first 90 minutes are filled with them. And unlike Batman Begins, which relied too heavily on CGI, The Dark Knight goes back to old-fashioned stuntwork, beautifully using a variety of Chicago locations.

Audiences also went to see Heath Ledger, and again rightly so. His big entrance with a disappearing pencil is startling and awesome. But Ledger is more impressive in how he taps into the horrible madness at the core of the Joker and the awful random amorality behind contemporary terrorism. But Ledger isn’t the only compelling actor. Gary Oldman as Police Commissioner Gordon is fantastic, Maggie Gyllenhaal brings panache to the role of girlfriend in peril, Aaron Eckhart almost steals the film as an upright D.A., and Morgan Freeman and Michael Caine do what they always do--bring flawless style and welcome comic relief.

It won’t surprise readers to learn that I don’t think The Dark Knight is the best film of the year, much less all time. The last hour drags a bit. And with so many great set pieces, it seems perverse to end with the dullest of the bunch. But there aren’t many summer movies that excite both my senses and mind. Yes, I’m already looking forward to the next one.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00e54ed4315f883300e553f0e3e28834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Whose Dark Knight?:

Comments

Not to be a snot, but it's Michael Caine who burned the forest down. Oldman has other great lines through the movie.

It directly associates the nash equilibrium of game theory with sociopathic, deviant behavior, so that's a plus, no?

Ian, thanks for the correction. Somehow, I wrote it down wrong in my notes.

Should go without saying but

*SPOILERS AHEAD*

"But the politics are convoluted enough that some conservatives can legitimately claim Batman as their own. The Joker would likely run wild if he were not confronted by the unstoppable force of Batman."

It's certainly implied that the Joker is only in Gotham (and perhaps only exists) because of Batman and his actions, both from Batman's statement that he hoped he was inspiring people in a positive manner, and by the Joker's response at the end that there is no way he'll kill Batman, because he's too much fun. This has been an underlying theme or occasionally even an overt one, in the Joker/Batman relationship in pretty much any medium that they've appeared. I'm pretty comfortable in suggesting that conservatives are just as guilty of creating unintended causes from their actions, so indictments all around at worst, but it's certainly been the conservatives that have had the biggest screw-ups lately, so if we are going to imply that there's some level of modern critique going on, I'd argue it's more about them than liberals.

*END SPOILERS*

(no quotes or italics? oh well)

Well the concept of "escalation" which is really what the movie is about, can be seen in a lot of things. Be it blowback, or the war on drugs, or whatever. It's a pretty common idea...you back people into a corner and they'll strike out even harder.

And for what it's worth, I think that if you put it from the view of the set pieces, The Dark Knight isn't that good. That's not what Nolan does...he's always been pretty crappy with it. It's the writing and the acting (the hammy bat-voice aside..but I understand why they did that) that was the reason that I went. It's less Spider-Man than it is Heat taking place in Gotham City.

Does anyone believe that McSame actually had time to watch the movie or that he managed to stay awake through the whole thing?

Is McCain endorsing the movie? or merely trying to connect with pop culture to deliver the message that the "wrinkly, white-haired guy" is "still with it"?

So many say that Dark Knight perfectly reflects the mood of America at the moment. Given that, one guy noted, it's interesting that the movie's creative heavy-hitters are not American. Christopher Nolan is English, for example.

Also that in an interview Michael Caine observed that while Americans like to think of ourselves as being like Superman, the rest of the world sees us as more like Batman: dark, unpredictable, uncontrollable, kind of scary, and while there are times when you really need him, you hope to God it doesn't happen often and are relieved when he finally goes away.

Can I just say that I think think people are wrong who keep referring to Batman as the unstoppable force? The Joker is the unstoppable force; Batman is the immovable object. The Joker spends the entire film moving through the action, destroying anything in his path, even prison. Heck, every scene in the film after his exist takes places in a place he blew up. What The Joker is talking about when he mentions that paradox is that Batman won't kill him, even though he has given Batman every reason to do so. He is a mass-murdering psychopath with no redeeming qualities. And because he is unwilling to act, to move, the Joker and him with keep butting heads for all eternity (since the cops are irrelevant to the Wars of the Gods). The Joker is talking specifically about the consequences of Batman's unwillingness to kill him; Batman's code makes him immovable. The Joker's chaotic nature makes him unstoppable.

That is all.

Please regard all typos in the previous comment as actually being the words that make it make sense. Sorry about that. I need to proofread more.

Actually I really enjoy the movie. Movie is just movie. I did not spend too much time on thinking about the deeper meaning. I am even going to wear Batman costumes on Halloween. I bought it from http://www.squidoo.com/batman_dark_knight_halloween_costumes_2008, and the quality is very good. I just want to have fun. It does not matter who the Dark Knight is.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

July 2009

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31