Batman is a fascist.

[nashville_brook]

In the hype to the release of the new Batman movie, we've been having this discussion about HEROES and wondering if this version of the movie would say anything new and relevant about *who our heroes are* in this moment in history. After seeing it, I'm thinking that the hero, sadly, is Heath Ledger's Joker.

We saw the movie last night at 11 and sat in the last two seats available in the front row, as seeing Batman on opening night is somewhat of a pop culture must-do. At the Winter Park movie palace were surrounded by cautiously enthusiastic Full Sail students (kids studying to be game developers, graphics engineers and film makers). Unlike the opening night for Batman 2 in Elizabethton, Tennessee, there was no applause at the opening logo. Maybe people were exhausted from the hour's worth of television commercials and that horrid cable tv promo you always see now as opposed to a decade ago with the hillbillies.

Or maybe we've just had enough of the ultra-rich imposing their idea of justice on us.

Batman's superpower is his trust fund and his narcissism which he uses to "protect the people of Gotham" from a consortium of racially stereotypicial crime bosses. You've got scary black gangsters and hispanic crews with fighting dogs and the smart asians with their accountants and satellite phones. Oh, and one slick Italian with greasy hair.

Batman is a strutting and preening authoritarian, who secretly conspires with Gotham's muckety-mucks to wiretap the city in order to stop those dark-skinned criminals. The Joker interjects himself as an agent of chaos who is neither on the side of the criminals nor, of course, the side of "good." As a matter of fact, The Joker is much more effective in putting the kibosh on the crime gangs than any of our supposed heroes.


The People of Gotham are conspired against and kept from the truth out of fear that they will upset the ineffectual status-quo of Batman, Dent and Gordon. They are not to know the truth that Harvey Dent is really Two Face. That the police and political leaders are being held hostage (I'm not making this up) thru HEALTHCARE EXTORTION, as the people who were bribed were bribed via their sick relatives needing hospital care. The People of Gotham are repeatedly used as pawns by good guys and bad guys alike, at one point they are even used as disguised targets -- human sheilds -- against a military insurrection by 'the forces of good/order.'

I think this movie is so anti-heroic that it might even be a cultural marker for a new era of Post-Heroism.

Or maybe that's just what the muckety-mucks want us to think.

You can go back to sleep now.

[Runcible Spoon]

1. well, that's kinda the point.

it's not exactly an optimistic movie, pretty much comes to the conclusion that the only way to prevent corruption is through authoritarianism. I think the film leaves the audience to make the value judgment of whether or not Batman is a hero, or as Joker put it, a necessary ying to his yang, a duality needed to justify the police, as you pointed out.

[Occam Bandage]

2. Certainly a valid interpretation. Batman is not a "good guy," despite the fact that

he fights criminals. His motivation is entirely personal--in fact, it's almost the exact same as Two-Face's. It's happenstance that he fights crime; had his parents been killed through police neglect, it's easy to imagine a cop-killer Batman. He is also a liar to the public, as is Gordon, as is Dent, though all are truthful in private. The Joker, notably, is a consistent liar in private, yet a consistent truth-teller with the public.

I do, however, take issue with the declaration that he is ineffectual. The movie makes it quite clear that his dubious tactics are extraordinarily successful until the Joker shows up. The problem is that Batman's vigilantism and Dent's crusading prosecution were not backed up by a clean government--indeed, the civil authorities are just as corrupt and worthless as they were before Batman existed. All that they accomplished was the creation of a power vacuum in the criminal world fed by universal corruption, and held in place only through public trust in Dent and criminal fear of Batman. When Joker throws a wrench in both, the status quo collapses, and the city begins to slide into chaos.

Oh, and a few minor points: The people are disguised by the Joker to trick the police into shooting them; when Batman realizes this he interferes/fights with the cops who would have otherwise killed them. Batman wiretaps the city by himself; the only person who knows of the plan is Lucius Fox, who immediately quits Wayne Enterprises. The Joker only "puts the kibosh" on the crime gangs by taking full control of them and using them for his own violent purposes. The greasy-haired guy is Chechen. The extortion is also performed by the Joker.

[nashville_brook]

23. yes, i got that about the human shields. and the wiretapping is given a happy face -- you know,

only used by "good guys" and then destroyed by a wise old man who'll have nothing to do with such nefariousness. the takeaway being, that what we can always expect of "extraordinary men" doing extraordinary things. your point about the Joker is neither here nor there. he was much more effectual at "taking down" the gangs than the "forces of order." and, that the good guys' extortion is balanced by the Joker's, is to be expected. such is the thrust of the narrative.

[kydo]

3. shout out from winter park ... nt

[nashville_brook]

22. right on.

[Muttocracy]

4. there's a thread I saw earlier about David Edelstein's review of the movie

he thought it was too dark, sadistic, no wit. Will try to find it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3645492

[nashville_brook]

13. we just heard this on weekend fresh air, on the way to home depot.

i liked what he said.

[villager]

5. in graphic novels like the original "Dark Knight," or the later "Kingdom Come,"

Batman is usually an outlaw because he's flouting increasingly authoritarian government edicts.

In fact, in Frank Miller's "Dark Knight," the climactic scene is him fighting Superman, who is protrayed as a White House stooge, a military "asset..."

[nashville_brook]

14. a lot has been said about Frank Miller's Ayn Randian objectivism.

i thought 300 was riotously funny, in that sad, unintentional way.

[villager]

19. I have also subsequently heardtell about Miller's "libertarianism," as it's couched...

Still, plenty of anti-authoritarian tropes in "Dark Knight..."

Reagan, for example, is portrayed as the buffoon he was. No one in film or TV was doing that in '86. Comics were ahead of the game...

[Blue_Tires]

29. yeah, 300 was craptacular...

[arcadian]

37. Frank Miller is wroking on something with the working title: Batman vs. Al Qaeda

He openly calls it "propaganda" and says that Batman is going to kick Al Qaeda's butt.

[FKA MNChimpH8R]

46. Twenty years ago Frank Miller was a visionary

Now he's just a pinhead.

Honestly, anyone over the age of 21 who takes Ayn Rand seriously is a candidate for heavy medications and a lot of reality therapy.

[WCGreen]

79. I think anyone who has had an orgasm would not take Ayn Rand seriously...

[gatorboy]

52. Yeah, I'm not so sure I believe that one.

He talked about this book 2006 and I haven't seen any new material about it. More than likely this was Frank's way of getting a little more self promotion.


Hollywood has turned Miller into such a tool :rofl:

And his new "The Spirit" movie looks horrible.

[FKA MNChimpH8R]

58. "The Spirit" OMG, the late, great Will Eisner must be

spinning in his grave. Eisner was a genius. Miller is a hack. He always wanted to be a bad screenwriter, Eisner always wanted to be a great cartoonist. They got their respective wishes.

[TlalocW]

6. The stuff about facism and Batman is often a theme in Batman and other comics

Especially in stories when he's older. I'm thinking of two in particular, "The Dark Knight Returns," and "Kingdom Come."

In Dark Knight, Batman is retired but comes back. Throughout the comic are various vignettes of point/counter-point and man on the street interviews about the return of Batman, and facism is often brought up. At one point while Batman is chasing someone, the criminal falls through a glass door and begins bleeding profusely and begs Batman to leave him alone as he's got rights, and Batman's response is something like, "Yeah, you've got rights. Sometimes I lay awake at night counting them just to drive me crazy, but right now, you have a piece of glass in a major artery; you're bleeding to death, and I'm the only one who can get you to a hospital in time, so I suggest you tell me what I want to know."

In, "Kingdom Come," it's Superman who retires and comes back, and when he tries to recruit Batman, we learn that Bruce is now an old man, held together by various pieces of metal after straining his body for so many years, but he's almost always at an array of monitors in the Batcave, directing the actions of various Bat-robots as well as his own team of younger super-powered people. Bruce is presented as not caring about scaring both good and bad or even caring about their various rights just so long as he keeps Gotham safe, but Superman and his league eventually are forced down the facist line when having to deal with the younger generation of non-caring super people who care only about fighting each other, often endangering and killing innocent humans.

It's kind of a common storyline in other comics as well since you're dealing with a group of people with super powers - anyone of whom could bend the world to their way of thinking if they got fed up with how slowly or ineffectually, they're making a difference. The annuals of all DC comics one year dealt with a time-traveling superhero who was trying to determine which of the then current crop of heroes eventually became the Monarch who took over the world in his normal time.

TlalocW

[HawkerHurricane]

7. Superhero stories aren't about facism, but feudalism.

It's all about the "Nobless Oblige"(sic), the need for the powerful to protect the weak, often from themselves. There are a lot of stories about that. Look at Robin Hood sometime.

[nashville_brook]

26. yeah -- that's kinda the point -- that, noblesse oblige isn't worth the dictionary it rode in on

if it too runs roughshod over the people of Gotham.

[HawkerHurricane]

64. Saw the movie "Hancock" last night.

And it's more superhero as Fuedal "Knight Protector". With an emphasis on the kind of property damage that a man who can pick up a battleship can cause.

[warrior1]

8. It's a movie

[Sezu]

11. Heh! Hope they don't make a counter culture road runner movie

and we have people jumping off cliffs.

I concur....it's a fucking movie kiddies.

[nashville_brook]

27. back away from the zeitgeist -- you might hurt yourself.

[Posteritatis]

65. At least he didn't watch Boondock Saints (nt)

[judasdisney]

75. It's NOT "just a movie"

Since 2000, among the first and only films to deal with political issues head on have been the marginalized "comic book" films, such as "X-Men 2", "Spiderman", and the anti-fascist "Batman Begins".

"The Dark Knight" -- like "Batman Begins" -- concerns itself very strenuously and explicitly with philosophical ideas. Films such as this are intended to be ART and not simply "entertaiment" -- not "just a movie."

[DailyGrind51]

9. We thought John Ashcroft was a fascist, also, until he indicted

Ken Lay, Jeff Skilling, Bernie Ebbers, etc. and refused to sign off on Alberto Gonzalez & Andy Card's unwarranted wire-tape authorization from his hospital bed.

[nashville_brook]

20. "we thought" ?? are you saying "we're" in agreement that Ashcroft is now a hero of Democracy?

"Unique among the nations, America recognized the source of our character as being godly and eternal, not being civic and temporal. And because we have understood that our source is eternal, America has been different. We have no king but Jesus."

that John Ashcroft?

[Sheets of Easter]

10. He's also a fictional character.

[treestar]

35. Who said he wasn't?

[judasdisney]

76. No -- Batman is a "fictional character" in a film intended to reflect "hyperreality" and not

a comic book world.

If you're saying that the filmmakers had zero intent to create social commentary on contemporary conditions in "The Dark Knight" then you're a fool.

[Dreamer Tatum]

12. "Go back to sleep?"

Are we supposed to be taking to the streets to protest a fictional movie about a man who puts on a bat suit?

I think maybe you should GET some sleep. The rest would do you good.

[nashville_brook]

15. hey, settle down -- it's a rhetorical turn you brute.

[gatorboy]

18. I take it you'll not be at the next Plastic-Man protest rally.

Nazi.

[treestar]

34. That's not stated anywhere in the post

[FKA MNChimpH8R]

16. It's a bit simpler than that

The Batman is an over the top figure of authority and control; he represents a rejection of randomness and chaos;

The Joker exists because he must. There is no Batman in the absence of a figure, like the Joker, who represents chaos.

Personally, my allegiance lies with The Joker.

[nashville_brook]

24. me too -- the "you complete me" line was priceless.

[ColbertWatcher]

17. I've always had a problem with stories where one character...

...was filthy rich.

It seemed to be a type of "God in the machine" device I find simplistic.

The only story that had filthy rich characters in it that I enjoyed was Gilligan's Island.

[nashville_brook]

25. Smallville's Green Arrow is interesting for this -- portrayed as a kinder, gentler capitalist

than the Luthers.

[ColbertWatcher]

28. I don't know about all that...

...I just think from a storytelling standpoint it's pretty damn lazy.

Most of the stories with filthy rich characters the money helps get them out of dilemmas, they can buy and sell other people's services without hesitation and their freedom of movement is unlimited.

The only reason why it worked on Gilligan's Island was because no matter how much money the Howells had, they were still on the island and couldn't get off it.

[Captain Angry]

31. The Howells were fun.

Can you imagine any situation where somebody fabulously wealthy in the year 2008 would be on the same boat as poor people?

[ColbertWatcher]

33. LOL! Good point. n/t

[elehhhhna]

40. heck yeah -- the poor people would be the yachts staff

[FKA MNChimpH8R]

30. Lex Luthor was always an asshole

going back to the Superman comics of the early 60s. Quintessential Repiglican royalist. "I deserve without earning!!" No one "deserves" anything without earning. This is Republicanism distilled to its basics.

[WCGreen]

80. In teh comic books, Queen lost his fortune...

[lame54]

21. If it doesn't have Adam West I don't want to see it.

[MedleyMisty]

32. I definitely identified with the Joker

Everyone else was morally weak and represented everything I hate about humans. "Oh, we have to suspend democracy and spy on everyone and beat up and torture people we don't like and blow up that boat of convicts because they're scum and not really human like us self-righteous pricks."

As my husband pointed out - the prisoner got the control away from the guy who had it and immediately threw it off the boat. The civilian had to think about it for a while and then he just put it down. Like "I won't right now for the plot, but I'm still quite willing to."

I've been reading reviews and noticing how people see it and what their reactions are. I have been trying to figure out ever since 2001 why humans are so scared. I still haven't figured it out, but I think that the Joker represents it. Reality, chaos, things not going according to plan and not fitting in to your neat little boxes of prejudices and preconceptions. He represents freedom.

Speaking of little boxes - I've seen it so often so many times in reviews. People have a box in their mind that is labeled "superhero movies - special effects, costumes, stupid and mindless" and they all have to gush about how the Dark Knight overcomes that or something. I just want to scream - "It's not the movie. It's you overcoming your prejudice for once in your sad little boxed in life."

Well - off to get ready and go out and perhaps see it again tonight so I can catch stuff I missed before and find even more symbolism and metaphors. :)

[GaYellowDawg]

56. Then you seriously need some help.

How anyone could identify with the Joker is beyond me. He was a completely amoral character; a complete sociopath, with a complete lack of empathy, glorying in whatever violent impulses occurred to him. The Joker's brand of "freedom" is one that is free of any and all concern for others. And you identify with that? You took umbrage at wiretapping, but saw a character who killed without hesitation or remorse as a hero?

Damn.

[nashville_brook]

60. your observation about the ferry scene is right on.

when you get right down to it, this hero narrative overthrows the status quo. we come away identifying with the Joker, as his social experiement(s) reveal the masses and the "noblemen" to both be lacking in nobility. in this way i completely embrace the story.

i also agree (maybe for different reasons) that it's lame to put these narratives in a box marked "just a superhero movie." who our heroes are, and how they act, says a lot about who we are and who we hope to be. when we study humanities, we look to hero narratives in order to unearth the the nature of the motives and motivations of the people during the time being studied. Hector, Odysseus, and Antigone are all heroes who inform our opinion about the ancient Greeks. My basic question is, 'what do our heroes tell us about ourselves.'


this hero story tells us, I think, that heroes are not all they're cracked up to be.

[cbc5g]

36. Thats why I liked Captain Planet

The powers of the people combined created him to fight polluters. And you had to have all of them together for it to work.

[rch35]

38. WHAT? Batman is a MORALLY AMBIGUOUS character?!?! WHO WOULD'VE KNOWN?

Gosh, its like the whole series WASN'T centered around the characters individual struggles with dark and light, and what they must do vrs. what they feel like they should do, where all options they have conflict with their moral code.

and FYI, Batman says himself, that he is not a hero, he is "anything Gotham needs him to be", he can be the villian they need, or the savior they need.

You act like this movie frames the whole thing as BATMAN AND THE FORCES OF GOOD against JOKER AND HIS EVIL MINIONS and the MOB, when actually, it is nothing like that. the people of gotham attempt to make batman give himself up, the mob turns against the joker, harvey dent attempts to fight police corruption.

SO just let me say something

BATMAN IS NOT A HERO

he is a VIGILANTE.

and its a FUCKING MOVIE.


and your point about stereotypes is just plain fucking idiotic and hardly warrants a response, other than, do you remember the BIG SCARY black inmate that took the bomb detonator from the police and threw it out the window?

wow, its almost as if that single moment throws that entire portion of your argument on its ass.

[elehhhhna]

41. I'm with you. Great post!

[rch35]

48. thank you nt

[Occam Bandage]

43. Great post. Batman's ambiguity is the selling point of the character and the franchise.

[rch35]

50. exactly, he was never packaged or sold as the icon of goodness that this guy

is trying to make out to be.

[nashville_brook]

61. and the Illiad is just a poem. the point is, these stories tell us a lot about ourselves.

the racial stereotyping was a character in itself -- it definitely merits examination. the torture, wiretapping and corruption also merit examination, if you're interested in what hero stories tell us about ourselves -- what sorts of heroes we're looking for. in this way, it doesn't matter a whit that the character equates his heroism with vigilanteism -- that's the center of the narrative. we're being told (and we can either agree or disagree) that we live in a world unable to produce heroes. the best we can hope for are capitalists and vigilantes. we are also being told that torture and warrantless wiretapping are a-okay because only "nice vigilantes" use them, and they all have wise old butlers and COOs who will dismantle them when they're through.

[rch35]

71. im going to quote myself.

"BATMAN IS NOT A HERO"

its called a "superhero" movie because people like you dont understand what its about, and assume that any movie based on a comic book or with masked characters is a super hero movie. The DArk Knight is a "superhero" movie in the very same way that V For Vendetta is a superhero movie, in that they are not.

It does not say that the city is incapable of producing heroes. It produced Jim Gordon (The new commissioner) who is virtually incorruptible. theres a hero. (OH MY GOD HES A COP! THE MOVIE IS TRYING TO TELL US NOT TO QUESTION AUTHORITY!)

It also created HArvey Dent (oh no! another government stooge!) who fell to insanity, which does create an interesting story, im sorry to tell you.

I would also like to add that when people read a story or watch a movie, they are not necessarily looking for a character who they agree with on every decision. you know why? cuz that makes it really, really, really fucking boring.

and when has anyone characterized batman as nice? Batmans fuckin nuts. thats what makes him interesting. hes INSANE.

And the fact that now youre going after morgan freeman is just beyond the pale.

[judasdisney]

77. The righteous f**king indignation of f**king "rch35"

The "it's a FUCKING MOVIE" trope is fucking evil. There's a big difference between "entertainment" and "art" -- and the Nolans are clearly concerned with film-as-art and not a throwaway piece of cinematic trash.

Do the filmmakers NOT spend an inordinate amount of time creating theme and meditating on philosophy over the course of "The Dark Knight"? To say that the film doesn't aspire to much more than popcorn entertainment is a cop-out.

Unfortunately, the filmmakers want to have it both ways, much like "rch35".

Unfortunately, Batman in "The Dark Knight" seems intent upon justifying the Bush Administration -- not only with warrantless wiretapping, dismissal of checks and balances, but also crossing borders and entering a soveriegn nation to kidnap foriegn nationals on foreign soil without legal extradition.

I'm not the only one who felt kicked in the teeth by "The Dark Knight." Screenwriter Jeff Goldsmith at CreativeScreenwriting.com does a podcast for Creative Screenwriting Magazine, and this week's podcast is an interview with Jonathan Nolan, the co-screenwriter of "The Dark Knight." Goldsmith is blunt about the political problems he sees in "The Dark Knight." The Batman of "Batman Begins" was an anti-hero who stood outside the law because he held a higher code. That Batman is absent from "The Dark Knight."

You can download the podcast here: http://media.libsyn.com/media/creativescreenwritingmag/TheDarkKnightQandA.mp3

Jonathan Nolan takes comic books seriously as a higher art form, using the pretentious "graphic novel" nomenclature, as does Goldsmith, as do millions of readers of this art.

Jonathan Nolan spends the hour-long podcast philosophizing and ruminating on the deeper themes of "The Dark Knight." Unfortunately, the liberal Goldsmith directly questions Nolan about the wiretapping and extradition political dimensions of the film, saying "These parts of the script are so direct and in-your-face, that you cannot ignore the deliberate intent of putting them in the film." Nolan cops-out and says its "not political."

Either films are art, not just entertaiment, or there is no such thing as art. You can't "FUCKING" have it both "FUCKING" ways.

And drop the "FUCKING" righteous indignation. If it's "just a FUCKING MOVIE" then why does "rch35" have SO MUCH ENERGY and HATE and RIGHTEOUS INDIGNATION over "just a fucking movie"? Does "rch35" have the same strong reactions to the latest Jim Carrey flick or Adam Sandler turd?

"The Dark Knight" is worse than fascist. It's a fascist cop-out in the guise of justice, which is quite different from the tradition of the "anti-hero". Just like the Democrats with FISA. Like Bob Dylan said, "To live outside the law, you must be honest." "The Dark Knight" is the worst of all worlds -- it's more honest and deeply-felt than 99% of all films out there, yet it still manages to justify an explicitly political act.

Explicit political acts disqualify any "movie" as "entertainment."

[gmudem]

69. Right on.

And some people are taking this movie entirely too seriously. It's just a great movie, nobody is should pretend it's anything more than that.

[rch35]

72. thank you. its an amazing movie, in my opinion, adn the fact that i think

spying on new york city is without warrant is VERY VERY NAUGHTY! i still managed to enjoy it quite a bit.

[gmudem]

73. The spying didn't bother me in that case

It was one of those ticking time bomb scenarios that never actually happen in real life. And he destroyed it afterwards which proved that he really only wanted to use it for that emergency situation.

And the idea itself was pretty damn cool, even though its probly not even close to possible in real life.

[rch35]

74. Haha, i was attempting a joke, i didnt have any qualms with it either

and i thought it was a pretty neato idea as well

[Fire Walk With Me]

39. Any extreme precipitates the appearance of its opposite, equally destructive counterpart.

[mduffy31]

42. Seriously

IT IS A FUCKING MOVIE

[ellisonz]

68. Seriously

IT IS A FUCKING CULTURE

[LostinVA]

44. I believe in certain kinds of vigilante justice

Even though, I'm anti-death penalty.

So, Batman is a-okay in my book, although he's kinda gay.

[Hippo_Tron]

67. Batman Begins was loaded with subtle anti death penalty commentary

Bruce is basically transformed from someone who simply wants to execute the guy who killed his parents to someone who is truly interested in justice and not vengeance.

[MilesColtrane]

45. He's not a fascist...he's just insane.

[LaurenG]

47. Oh noes, not Batman!

:rofl:

[FKA MNChimpH8R]

59. Yes, Toki

he is dildos and a douchebags anyways. We shoulds be practicings our guitar parts for the nexts album.

Skwisgars

Answers your Dethphone for one, stupids!

:P :rofl:

[Mz Pip]

49. Batman is not a documentary

It's a high budget summer blockbuster. Good guys, bad guys, special effects.

I doubt anyone will turn to the dark side and vote for McCain after seeing this.

Lighten up.

[dems_rightnow]

63. Not so certain.

I saw Mama Mia, and I've been having ABBA tunes run thru my head ever since.

[Deja Q]

51. Oh good grief. Nobody would conjure up this blither if everybody kept to the 1966 TV show version.

And if I ever see at 12:01AM, it might be "Quantum of Solace", but don't expect me to dress up as Bond and get hauled to jail for carrying what appears to be a firearm despite it being part of the costume. :crazy:

[GaYellowDawg]

55. The 1966 TV show version was a complete travesty of Bob Kane's vision.

Batman was always intended to be a very dark character.

[prayin4rain]

53. Did you watch the end?

They state that Batman is not a hero. This is not a news flash. They plainly say it at the end of the movie.

[GaYellowDawg]

54. What a steaming load of horse manure (caution: spoilers in response).

Batman's superpower is his trust fund and his narcissism which he uses to "protect the people of Gotham" from a consortium of racially stereotypicial crime bosses. You've got scary black gangsters and hispanic crews with fighting dogs and the smart asians with their accountants and satellite phones. Oh, and one slick Italian with greasy hair.

Okay, so first of all, the ones with the dogs were Russians, not hispanics. Wow, I've never heard of a Russian in organized crime! :sarcasm: It's a movie about a comic book character. They are chock full of - you guessed it - stereotypes. And you completely neglected to note that the big, scary black prisoner accounted for the most noble moment of the entire movie (throwing the remote off of the boat).

Batman is a strutting and preening authoritarian, who secretly conspires with Gotham's muckety-mucks to wiretap the city in order to stop those dark-skinned criminals.

Wrong again. Batman did it on his own. The muckety-mucks never knew about the wiretapping. And extraordinary threats do take extraordinary measures. You also neglected to mention that Batman had Lucius Fox shut the whole thing down permanently. It wasn't like he got Congress to grant him retroactive immunity. He used an extreme measure for no other reason than to save lives and didn't abuse the power. How can you possibly have a problem with that?

The People of Gotham are conspired against and kept from the truth out of fear that they will upset the ineffectual status-quo of Batman, Dent and Gordon.

Ummm, no. They were kept in the dark about a police operation. You know, letting the public know about a trap that's being laid for a criminal kind of undoes the trap, don't you think?

That the police and political leaders are being held hostage (I'm not making this up) thru HEALTHCARE EXTORTION, as the people who were bribed were bribed via their sick relatives needing hospital care.

Well, um, the extortionists - none of whom were the protagonists - were bad people, you know, as in bad people do bad things. Do you get that, or is that too difficult?

The People of Gotham are repeatedly used as pawns by good guys and bad guys alike, at one point they are even used as disguised targets -- human sheilds -- against a military insurrection by 'the forces of good/order.'

Did you even watch the movie? Are you sure? Because the people of Gotham were used as pawns and disguised targets by the villians. Just the villians. And in case you're wondering: villians do bad things, otherwise they wouldn't be villians. And If there were bombs blowing the shit out of a city, calling the national guard in would make some kind of sense. It wasn't a "military insurrection." How dumb.

After seeing it, I'm thinking that the hero, sadly, is Heath Ledger's Joker.

Then you are in some serious need of therapy. Anyone who identifies with that character... brr. You just didn't get the movie at all. At. All.

[jobycom]

57. Wow, don't go see Ratatouille, then.

Darned rats are a health menace.

[nashville_brook]

62. no, i don't need therapy -- i disagree with you, and last i checked, that's still allowed.

[gmudem]

70. Great post.

It's almost as if the OP was deliberately misinterpreting the movie and just writing an attention-getting headline so people will read what he said.

And I agree that those who are who identifying with the Joker really need to go see the movie again. He is a psychotic serial killer who likes to kill people just for the sake of killing people. Are you sure you want to identify with that?

[Hippo_Tron]

66. You don't think that health care extortion bit might just be a subtle way of noting...

That the health care system in this country is pretty fucked up? Because I think that was certainly part of the commentary. I don't know if you saw Batman Begins, but it was loaded with subtle commentary about the death penalty and about the military industrial complex.

And I don't know if you noticed, but The Joker is a masochist. He wasn't yelling in pain while Batman was torturing him, he was enjoying every moment of it. It seemed clear as day to me that Nolan was trying to show that Batman was wrong for torturing The Joker. The torture didn't get him the information he wanted, and it forced Batman to lower himself to The Joker's level. Batman is of course, human, and humans do have a dark side.

[judasdisney]

78. "24" was just a popcorn TV show. Inspired Guantanamo torture? Get over it.

All of the DU fascists on this thread who vehemently and angrily scream "It's just a FUCKING MOVIE" seem to have missed the implications of the military being inspired by "24."

"24" was NOT just intended as "entertainment" either by its creator. He explicitly is a right-wing nutcase who wants to promote extrajudicial torture.

Explicitly political acts disqualify any "movie" as "entertainment."

http://www.politicalcortex.com/story/2007/2/10/185355/989

http://www.democracynow.org/2007/2/22/is_torture_on_hit_fox_tv