Skip to comments.The Dark Knight has no use for FISA
Posted on 07/23/2008 9:06:31 AM PDT by thinkingIsPresuppositional
The Dark Knight has no use for FISA
By Sharon McGovern
This is not a review, though I submit The Dark Knight kicks a** so very hard. Instead, this will be a brief look at themes employed in TDK; a sequel to Batman is a NeoCon. If you haven’t already contributed to the movie’s astonishing opening weekend take, you might want to decide right now if you want to read something that gives away a number of its plot points.
The Dark Knight begins with “the bat man” having become a fixture in Gotham. He inspires resentment for the toll his fight against evildoers is taking on the city and for his high-handed approach to law enforcement, as well as some loyalty among those who appreciate the dangers of whacking the hornets’ nest of the villainous elite—and a cadre of bat-groupies, vigilantes whom Batman contains and leaves for police pick-up along with the criminals they flail at. The war Batman is fighting is too dangerous and too compromising for amateurs. Still, it bespeaks a civic mindedness in Gotham that didn’t exist before, and hope in a previously hopeless city. Batman is a one-man surge.
Bruce Wayne is growing weary of bat-enforcement and as the city takes a turn for the sane (a glimpse of the bat signal discourages minor criminals), hopes to de-escalate his superhero duties and let the relatively ethical police and increasingly effective district attorneys take over. Then he could drop his twin masks—caped crusader and playboy rake—and properly romance the only woman he ever loved. The costs of being Batman wear at him, drain him of money, health, and reputation...
(Excerpt) Read more at modernconservative.com ...
It even causes him to lash out at his mother and sister.
Don't want to sound like Bob Barr here, but for conservatives, tradition and society are necessary to preserve because they reflect higher truths. I'm willing to be instructed here.
Batman is IMHO well aware of the inherent danger in having too much power. A couple or three times in DK, we hear the phrase “you either die a hero or live long enough to become a villain.”
As for conservatism, I see it in his pragmatic approach. Yes, he understands the danger of unauthorized surveillance, for example, but he also has the gumption to know that when you’re under mortal threat, you first worry about survival and THEN you can have the ethics debate.
I absolutely loved the movie. Saw it Sunday night in IMAX and it was a genuine treat of the kind you only get a couple times a year even when you’re a frequent moviegoer like me.
Quit analyzing. Who cares if the masked crusader is a conservative. Is the acting good? Is there lots of creative action? How are the special effects? Does a lot of stuff blow up? Will I leave wondering when there will be another like I did after Ironman or wondering how I can get 2 hours back after watching the second in the double feature (Indy)?
Thanks. This helps. I’ll likely see it tomorrow.
Bruce wayne was an only child...
or am I missing a joke reference there?
actually if he is a conservative he is fighting for good.
Imagine if batman were a flaming liberal? Then the dark knight would be beating up the person getting robbed for having more money than the robber. In the dark knight liberal, wayne would have celebrated the robber killing his capitalist parents.
The inherent problem with the poor writing an liberal theme plots is that the characters need to work the defined good and defined evil but modern liberalist specificall holds as a vital tennant there is no right and wrong.
See the movie. Its well worth the effort. Heath Ledger’s performance alone is worth the price of admission. Don’t worry about Conservative vs. Liberal. Its a movie. Take from it what you want to take from it. Thats what they make them for. “The Dark Knight” isn’t perfect but it is very entertaining with some outstanding performances. Just see it.
Ok. plan to. I just wasn’t a huge “Batman” fan, esp. when my favorite Batman, Michael Keaton (the only one I thought caught both the dark undertones and the necessary likability of Bruce Wayne) left.
Yes it was a joke reference. Here is the punchline
Taking a page from the second Spiderman movie on the downsides of being a superhero.
1) Oscar for Ledger. Unbelievable performance. I thought, with Daniel Day Lewis and Javier Bardem, I had seen the most evil characters on screen ever, but Ledger's Joker is by far as crazy as Hannibal Lector and as evil as the "Natural Born Killers." The thing with his tongue was pure creepy. I like that he was impervious to pain---a sure sign of a loonie.
2) Great small part for Anthony Michael Hall, who was one of the geek kids in "Weird Science." (the reporter)
3) Interesting story line that could be read one of two ways: Evil wins, because to win, Batman must become evil. Or, heroism wins, because to save the image of a hero, Batman sacrifices himself.
4) Hate to see Morgan Freeman and Michael Caine go.
5) Overall, great movie. However, one can suspend reality for only so long; how does ANYONE move that many barrels of gas and/or explosives ANYWHERE, let alone into a hospital, without someone ah, getting a clue?
6) Still don't like Bale as Batman. Keaton was my favorite.
Regarding Ledger: I totally agree. He made you uncomfortable just watching him. I loved the way he introduced himself to the mobsters with a “magic trick.” Too funny and really, really twisted. As to the suspension of disbelief...well, I did say it wasn’t perfect. I thought it was a little too long with too many plot lines but, Ledger’s performance really made the movie for me and there were several other good performances from the rest of the cast as well.
For my money, nothing is going to top “Wall-e” this season. Best movie I’ve seen in a while.
BTW, the previews were more CGI junk and a remake of "The Day the Earth Stood Still." Klaatu Barrada Nicto, as I recall.
Of all the superhero movies, I thought that a "Justice League" without Batman or Superman would be interesting. I loved Green Lantern, the Flash, and Wonder Woman as a kid--but the whole notion of teamwork,/i> which was kind of lost in the X-men movies (but somewhat recaptured in the Fantastic Four, was always appealing.
Ok, I've read both reviews of this movie---guess I want to see it now---but I'm still trying to figure out how this movie reflects conservative themes. Bad guys are tracked through FISA-type laws? Ok, but ultimately, what "constitution" is Batman supporting? Might makes right? Is there any question what happens if or when Batman goes off teh rails?
I think the author's reaching a little bit here. There's a discussion about spying on all Gothamites, sacrificing individual privacy in the name of public safety.
Batman's contention is that anyone interested in having such power is by definition not trustworthy enough to use it. I guess that's a conservative theme, but saying that Batman "has no use for FISA" is really pushing it.
Yah, I remember that line. Again, though, it leaves unanswered, “What happens if Batman goes off the rails?” really, and not just, as in the movie he pretends to be “bad?”
Bale as Bruce Wayne/Batman is one of the best things about the new “Batman” movies. He is far and away superior to the others who came before him, and will stand the test of time as the definitive screen Batman.
Keaton, despite being miscast, was actually good in the role. I will readily admit to that. But Bale is in a different league. It helps, of course, that Bale has superior material to work with, but he brings more to the role than Keaton (or Kilmer and Clooney). In addition to his considerable acting talent, Bale also passes the ‘can I imagine him kicking my a**’ test. Keaton was in no way an intimidating physical presence.
Disagree. Bale may be a “more intimidating physical presence,” but he completely lacks that insane quality of Keaton, and I can’t stand that quasi-lisp he has in his “tough” voice. Course, I really don’t like Bale anyway: didn’t like him in “The Prestige,” and pulled for Hugh Jackman the whole movie.