(SPOILERS)
Going into watching The Dark Knight Rises, I was thrilled to see Christopher Nolan’s final film in his Batman trilogy. It was the opposite of going in to see The Dark Knight, a movie I had low expectations for. I hadn’t been a big fan of Batman Begins, seeing it as just another superhero movie, but The Dark Knight completely blew my mind, providing incredible characters, thrilling action, philosophical themes, and a fresh storyline. Coming out of The Dark Knight Rises, I could say that all of those things were provided again, but I still walked out of the theatre disappointed. I still enjoyed watching the film, and appreciate how Christopher Nolan created a well-made smart summer blockbuster, but couldn’t shake the feeling that this film was significantly more flawed than its predecessor.
Perhaps the most obvious complaint about the film is the same complaint that can be made about The Hangover 2, which is that many of the key plot points were similar and too often worse than the previous film’s. This starts immediately with the opening scene. TDK starts off with a daring and borderline ridiculous bank robbery. It is revealed that the main villain, The Joker, is one of the masked robbers, who is executing just one of many steps aimed at creating chaos. In TDKR, the opening starts with a daring and ridiculous plane hijacking, where it is revealed that one of the prisoners whose face is hidden at first is the main villain, Bane, who is executing just one of many steps aimed at creating chaos. Wait, that sounded familiar. The lazy plot structure is something to gripe about, but is excused by the opening in TDKR being thrilling and Bane just being a complete badass. Which, however, brings me to my next point…
Bane was freaking awesome. I got chills when he gave speeches. I hadn’t seen a villain that compelling since The Joker in TDK. Wait… But The Joker’s plan was to create chaos in Gotham and prove people were bad, while Bane’s plan was to create chaos in Gotham and punish people for being bad… ok that’s pretty similar as well. Again, the obvious similarities are excusable because both villains feel real, and are just awesome.
The similarities go on. Harvey Dent, the politician who appears as a shining beacon of hope, has a similar role to Joseph Gordon Levitts’ character Blake, who has the same unfaltering morals (except Dent becomes a villain and Blake becomes a hero, but either way they make a transformation). Similarly, in the end of TDK Batman makes the sacrifice to become the villain with a lie, while in TDKR Batman makes the sacrifice and becomes the hero. And in both films, we are taught that Republicans are good and Democrats are bad.
If you disagree that TDK is about George W. Bush’s administration, I suggest you read Crack’s article on the subject (I’m sure many other sites have excellent articles as well). Basically, though, Batman is the son of a formerly powerful citizen (the first Bush president) who then himself takes power, and who violates Gotham’s citizen’s privacy by tapping their cell phones to find The Joker (the PATRIOT Act), as well as breaking the law to get that Asian guy back from Asia (take your pick), all for the good of the people while taking the fall and being willing to be a villain. While this is a bit of stretching, and could be argued against as simply a movie about Kantian and Utilitarian ethics, there are some signs.
TDKR completely disregards all subtlety, and goes all out against socialists and focuses on how we need the upper class and we need government control. The reason why the donations to the orphanage stopped were because the giant corporation needed to make more money, and when giant corporations don’t make enough profit 17 year olds are sent to the sewer to work for villains. The only reason why there was a fusion core capable of killing everyone in the city was because someone was foolish enough to try and make a source of renewable energy. When Bane brings up the idea of giving Gotham back to the people (really a mix of communism and the Occupy Wallstreet Movement), the lower class seems to be represented by crazy prisoners who end up killing any rich people they can get their hands on. Also, Bane attacks a stock exchange floor, on what is pretty much Wall Street (Occupy Wallstreet). Add that with the idea that when a movement to give power back to the people happens, those in charge of the movement never actually give power back to the people, and you have even more criticism of a movement by the lower class to gain power. And of course, the film reminds us just how important it is to have an army of police to control the lower class, because there is no such thing as police brutality, only lower class chaos.
I don’t mind when a film tries providing a bit of a political message, but TDKR goes way too far. Not only that, but it becomes manipulative in its message. Instead of providing a balanced, realistic message, TDKR approaches Fox News levels of ignoring reality at the expense of forcing a message upon viewers. TDK maintains balance, and relies more on philosophy than politics. In another film, Hero (the one with Jet Li) makes a case for a government that controls its citizens, basically promoting authoritarian government. However, balance is kept by the decision being contested logically by different characters, and the decision to run an authoritarian and often oppressive state is seen as seriously flawed (although the right decision) by the King. The film’s political message comes to a conclusion, but still gives insight into the necessary evils of the choice. TDKR simply makes liberals and poor people villains who are destroying Gotham. Quite simply, this is an irresponsible, manipulative position that is morally detestable and also funny after Rush Limbaugh’s claims that the movie was comparing Obama to The Dark Knight (because he’s black, and they made Batman black in these movies, and Limbaugh isn’t racist at all) and Bane was named after Romney’s old company Bain Capital (because the character from 1993 was named Bane in an effort to turn people away from a 2012 political candidate).
Similar plot structure and manipulative political views aside, the biggest flaw in TDKR is how they take away from Bane’s character at the end of the film. When they reveal Miranda Tate (Marion Cotillard) is really Talia al Ghul, it turns Bane from badass supervillain mastermind into simply a henchman, and makes him a much less interesting and important character. I don’t know the comic history of Bane, and what his traditional backstory is, but why did they have to make this twist? I guess Christopher Nolan loves his twists, and I concede that it made a lot of sense in the story and allowed things to be tied up neatly, but there is no way that anyone can think that the twist did anything but hurt Bane’s character. Even worse is that after the twist, Bane becomes dispensable. Bane’s death, after his defeat and Batman’s betrayal, seems incredibly sudden and passed over. Instead of being given a respectable death (or even any mention of him after his death), he is shot by an unseen Selina Kyle and quickly forgotten. It seems like a copout, and a terribly understated death for one of the best villains ever in film.
I still enjoyed TDKR, but it was far from the breath of fresh air that TDK proved to be. It’s still better than any non-Christopher Nolan superhero film (yes, it’s better than The Avengers, despite having more flaws), but fails to provide the near-impossible goal any series seeks: an ending that satisfies every diehard fan.
No comments:
Post a Comment