What The Dark Knight has to teach us.

Malkavian

I actually heard that Nolan originally intended for The Joker to break out as a part of the final film's hook, but obviously they had to change their plans.

Ah what could have been...

Waltzy

Too bad that no matter what the outcome the next Joker gets Tough Act to Follow syndrome HARD.

Malkavian

Oh christ yes. Ledger's performance is just so spot-on. If you look for it, you can see points in the film where Ledger just looks like he feels emotionally tortured. He really just put himself through hell for the sake of the role.

of course the drug abuse probably didn't help.

MadassAlex

I found the most powerful moment of the movie was Batman's willingness to take the blame for Dent's actions. He tarnishes the name of Batman and all the work he's done so the people of Gotham can believe in their ability to make the world better. That kind of sacrifice, for that kind of reason, is what it means to be a hero, and that's when Batman forever distances himself from the supervillains he fights against. For me, the entire movie boils down to that point. Compared to the relationship between Batman and Dent, even the Joker becomes largely irrelevant, because it's that final character moment and that choice that makes Batman what he is.

Nova

It's at that point where he stops being a superhero and becomes a hero- not someone who fights to stop the bad guys from killing everyone or whatever, but someone who's genuinely willing to sacrifice to make their lives better. Not by stopping them dying, but in sacrificing his good name to give them something to believe in.

Malkavian

As a character moment it's pretty perfect. Where it tends to frustrate me is the implications it seems to have on a larger society. It seems to be saying that access to the truth and with the lack of their white knight/christ figure the citizens will be more frightened than ever. It's an implication about the necessity of stability that I don't really like on a personal level, though that doesn't affect the strength of how the film delivers it.

Nova

I don't think that's quite the message it's carrying.

It's more... Dent is a white knight, as you say. He's more of a symbol- a paragon.

Malkavian

But that's the thing. What it's saying is that people don't need truth: they need a symbol. It's almost like it's a Machiavellian look at Religion. "I mean, Jesus isn't real, but the people think he is and that keeps them good."

Waltzy

^x6 Yeah, definitely. You could totally tell he acted from the top of his head to the tips of his toes for this one.

I wish I could contribute something more to the eloquent tapestry you've delicately woven of your analysis on the film but ahmygosh you pretty much hit everything on the head. I'll try anyway.

The whole section about Dent, just yes. He was as interesting to watch as the Joker. He's the man who has everything and has just this passion for the city and for Rachel, and watching the tragic domino effect of Rachel's death extinguishing his purity and his channeling of that once-benevolent energy into chaos was an amazingly poignant thing. You want to hate him because he's a 'bad guy' but you were already conditioned to love him, so it really added a lot to the emotional value.

And I feel like less of a loner nerd for finding someone else who knows what mise-en-scene is.

This is an awesome analysis Malky~. *huggle* Thank you for writing it. Just asdfghjkl. Words cannot express.

Malkavian

I was kind of holding out for Two-Face showing up in the sequel, especially because of Eckheart's phenomanl performance. I've kind of given up, since with the buzz we would have heard something by now.

I think one thing that needs the obvious to be stated is that this is a serious film with genuine statements about human nature that also has Batman, The Joker, and Two-Face.

The most telling scene for how well Superheroes can work despite the insistence of naysayers is the scene where Dent and Gordon are yelling each other and it feels like it's scene from the departed and the fucking Batsignal is on the entire time. Then Batman shows up, and we all act like it's business as usual.

Everyone on the team knew how to sell it perfectly.

MadassAlex

I see where you're coming from, Malk, but I think the value from both character and narrative perspectives outstrips that implication.

^ Actually, I thought that argument scene was kind of funny on additional viewings. You've got a scene that's absolutely brilliant and then Batman shows up. And he has pointy ears and everything.

Malkavian

Like I said, as a character moment it's a perfect example of Batman as an ego-less fighter, but damned if I'm not going to remind people of the unfortunate conclusions one could reach from them.

I can't speak for you, but it really works for me. Like, Batman's presence actually seems a godsend. He breaks up the fight and the two actually seem relieved to see him.

Nova

But that's the thing. What it's saying is that people don't need truth: they need a symbol. It's almost like it's a Machiavellian look at Religion. "I mean, Jesus isn't real, but the people think he is and that keeps them good."

I'm looking around at how many people are told to be role models and set a good example -_^

Malkavian

God damn I'm thinking back now and going 'God damn how could I have forgotten thaaaaat?' Maybe I'll do an addendum later.

Nova

I said something intelligent =D

MillerCross

I admit that the whole "Batman is now a villain" decision kinda bothered me because of the disturbing implications going on there.

Yes, Batman makes the ultimate sacrifice and becomes Gotham's most wanted man in order for people to keep their belief rewarded. But he still tampers with the criminal justice system via misdirecting resources, and makes them go in a wild goose chase (BEcause, let's face it, Batman getting captured? Are you high or something?)

However, I think that The Dark Knight Rises will deal with this decision and why, even though it's a morally right choice for Batman as a person, it's a bad choice for Batman and Bruce Wayne as a citizen of Goham

That's how I think of it, really.

Nova

But he still tampers with the criminal justice system via misdirecting resources, and makes them go in a wild goose chase

Which is worse though?

MillerCross

Welp, way I see it, Dent being dead and not having to chase a grave doesn't sound like such a bureaucratic nightmare. Nor such a moral conundrum, either. And I think that by now, it'll come out at some point. At least, to the citizens of Gotham, that is. 

I dunno. Maybe it's because it reminds me way too much of the shit that goes down here everyday where corrupt politicians get away with things because they manage to efficiently pin it down on other people for me to take it seriously and on stride. 

Nova

He got away with a lot of shit thanks to Batman's decision. That is true. And it would have been better if he hadn't.

However, don't underestimate just how powerful a leader or a role model can be. That's the entire point behind people giving speeches- to inspire people. Dent himself was an inspiration to Gotham- somebody actively taking a stand within the system and helping them out. Also, there was that huge case with those heaps of gangsters that would have been invalidated if he had been found guilty for his crimes.

That's what Batman saved here. Not Dent's personal image- he was a horrible man by the end.

But the man's public image and status as a source of inspiration and hope.

After all, in the end, there's only so much Batman can do. He can beat up criminals all he wants and throw them in jail.

But that's not what needs to be done to save Gotham. The criminals, the crime, the scum that accumulates there- they're the symptom, not the problem.

Batman can deal with the symptom, but it's up to the Gothamites themselves to fix the problem. Harvey Dent was a larger-than-life person who was working to fix that problem, and he gave the people who lived in the city hope that it could be changed for the better.

MillerCross

It's just that to me, in an hypothetical long run, I don't see how productive can it be for Batman to have two factions against him, a government wasting resources against him rather than on actual criminals, and the citizens of Gotham being torn.

Because it's not like Gotham is one mind and simply are going to be fed bullshit and go "Hmmm, yummy!". If there is one thing Gotham is good at, it's creating a civil war for the simplest shit. And "Do you believe in Harvey Dent?" isn't an entirely bad reason for at least some civil unrest, in my opinion.

I just feel that Batman took that decision without thinking of consequences and just seeing the short term benefits

Yes, those people will be kept in jail, but for how long? Because the higher ups will appeal. Not to mention that the fact that Batman now knows there are psychopaths like the Joker on the loose means that at least one of them will go and try to take the prison in order to release the criminals (Which is, funnily enough, Bane's plot in his first appereance, and which lead to Batman's back being broken and all that) and he put them in a place where they can plot and plan to their hearts content.

It's not a bad, or stupid decision, but it's a decision that bothers me, because Batman has done better. And taking the fall for a villain in order to keep some goons in prison is, in my opinion, hardly clever.

Not to mention that any criminal judicial law system that overrides a decision based on the main crusader for said decision being gone is...non-existent, so the argument that the arrests he made were going to be made doesn't really make much sense to me beyond the fact that people will, again, appeal. Which is bound to happen when a mafia boss ends up in jail. 

Nova

Not to mention that any criminal judicial law system that overrides a decision based on the main crusader for said decision being gone is...non-existent, so the argument that the arrests he made were going to be made doesn't really make much sense to me beyond the fact that people will, again, appeal. Which is bound to happen when a mafia boss ends up in jail. 

It's not that he's gone. It's that if Batman didn't take the blame, Dent's criminal actions would have been exposed- and if that had been done, well, when the main prosecutor is accused of murder, assault and many other serious allegations, his testimony and such is going to be thrown right out of court.

It's just that to me, in an hypothetical long run, I don't see how productive can it be for Batman to have two factions against him, a government wasting resources against him rather than on actual criminals, and the citizens of Gotham being torn.

It's just, the thing is, before Dent was there, how did Gotham act? Who did they have to look up to?

Batman. Batman, that's who. Someone who sneaks about at night and beats up people he suspects of being criminals. That's a terrible role model.

You can argue what you'd like, but role models do influence people. Harvey Dent was someone to look up to- someone who was doing the right thing and inspired people to do the right thing back.

Just look at Spiderman 1 and 2 for an example of what I mean, you know?

Now imagine how people would react if Spiderman was accused of multiple murders, assaults, killing police officers and the like.

Myrmidon

http://itself.wordpress.com/2008/08/23/theses-on-the-dark-knight/

Nova

The Joker is the protagonist and hero of The Dark Knight. He is the only truly ethical character in the film. As he repeats three times, he is “a man of his word.”

ಠ_ಠ

Legionnaire

Of course the possibility that he's lying all three times doesn't exist

No sir

MillerCross

Now imagine how people would react if Spiderman was accused of multiple murders, assaults, killing police officers and the like.

except he's constantly persecuted and accused at every single possible change by JJJ. Sure, lack of evidence, but still...

Anyway, my problem with it is just that the fact of the matter is that Dent went insane. He wasn't corrupt. He didn't act as a corrupt person during his tenure as DA of Gotham, and I don't see how any judge would go and say that him being insane during a period of his life that doesn't correspond with his period as a DA and that that would retroactively destroy all the evidence, arguments, and work put on not just by him, but by the whole DA office as a whole. 

And again, I'm OK with Batman's decision thematically. I just expected him to, you know, give it some thought before jumping in and doing something like that. Because that's playing with the lives of millions of citizens just to solve Gotham (and his) most recent problems. 

Hence why I'm excited for Dark Knight Rises, as it seems that it will deal with the consequences of said actions right away. Specially since it involves Gordon on his deathbed. Which is always bad.

MadassAlex

I think what Batman did was a little different from the usual political misdirection. Usually, politicians pin something on another to avoid blame themselves; Batman willingly took on the sins of a dead man. Remember that it's critical that the people believe that Dent was the white knight they thought he was until the end.  Any public recognition of his fall would threaten to break the confidence Gotham held in itself.

As for the use of resources, it's unlikely that too much will be wasted on Batman. With Gordon as chief commissioner and in the know, he'd be ensuring that resources are diverted to where they're really required. To my mind, it's pretty done and dusted.

Vivi

Gordon's gonna die?!

Awww...:<

MadassAlex

Oh yeah, thanks for the spoilers. Jerk!

MillerCross

Geez, you'd think nerds would be all over the trailer, analysing it and shit.

Admittedly, it's more of a sick bed, but I don't see him coming out of this one.

Malkavian

I didn't read it as Gordon dying, more as 'holy crap shit's bad'

Also, it's worth noting that the primary villain in Rises is going to be Bane, who is more physical villain as opposed to Raz'z and Joker who were more cerebral. I wonder how that's going to affect the film.