The Dark Knight What Have we learned? The Emotional and Moral Issues of TDK.

[Lando81]

I kinda had the idea for this thread before the BOF podcast of the same subject but now im gonna go through with it.
What are the main issues that seemed to stand out to you? for me the blatant corelation with Bruce's sonar tech and the recent wire-tapping incidents really stood out to me; even on my first viewing.

 

[Cancer4TheCure]

I agree. To me the biggest idea present in the film morally was the issue of "How far do you go?". This is evident in the sonar and also in Alfred's speech about men who just want to watch the world "burn". Also, it pays off later when Bruce asks Alfred how they caught the bandit and he says "we burned the forest down". I found this to be an interesting subject to discuss, because I see the arguments of both sides. How far do you go to stop a maniac? It's a marvelous thing to talk over.

 

[Lando81]

I agree. To me the biggest idea present in the film morally was the issue of "How far do you go?". This is evident in the sonar and also in Alfred's speech about men who just want to watch the world "burn". Also, it pays off later when Bruce asks Alfred how they caught the bandit and he says "we burned the forest down". I found this to be an interesting subject to discuss, because I see the arguments of both sides. How far do you go to stop a maniac? It's a marvelous thing to talk over.

True, one of the things that shocked me after watching the film a few times is that i keep agreeing with the Joker and his views on the world. The Joker just MAKES SENSE. That is incredibly shocking to me because his outlook on the world is so bleak but he does speak the truth.

 

[Mr. Earle]

People who want to watch the world burn: Sadistic terrorists who bomb train stations and throw planes into buildings, Bin Laden, Sadam, anyone who opposes the bastion of freedom and justice the US of A. People who America hasnt sold guns to, hasnt harassed, embargoed or waged war upon and who unjustifiably want to watch it burn.

And what do you do when those people threaten you? You burn the forest down: You deprive citizens of their most profound rights in order to catch said criminals. You get them to sign that its alright to tap their phones, its alright to bust into their houses without a warrant (if there is a terrorist case), its alright to live in a military state.

Even Cartman wont shoot people in the dick.

I got the fact that batman didnt want to resort to that, but the fact remains that a wrong message was sent across.

 

[chintai80]

True, one of the things that shocked me after watching the film a few times is that i keep agreeing with the Joker and his views on the world. The Joker just MAKES SENSE. That is incredibly shocking to me because his outlook on the world is so bleak but he does speak the truth.

I think he twists the truth. his outlook is shaped by his (irrational) hatred for humanity. but thats the point about the joker, he'll be able to sell you his message because he'll convince you of his negative worldview AFTER he's broken your spirit.

that's what i noticed when i watched the movie. he constantly lies but makes it look like he was speaking the truth. that's his power. he's like the devil.

 

[Copyright 2008]

I think at the end, TDK holds a mirror up to us as viewers and asks us to look closely, to examine ourselves as humans and as citizens. It doesn’t always do this gracefully or perfectly and maybe we don't like the answer, but it tries far more than any comic book movie in recent memory has ever done and quite honestly more than some other non comic book movies have done as well. The fact that it succeeds most of the time is a testament to the Nolans' script and artistry.

 

[Carmine Falcone]

People who want to watch the world burn: Sadistic terrorists who bomb train stations and throw planes into buildings, Bin Laden, Sadam, anyone who opposes the bastion of freedom and justice the US of A. People who America hasnt sold guns to, hasnt harassed, embargoed or waged war upon and who unjustifiably want to watch it burn.

And what do you do when those people threaten you? You burn the forest down: You deprive citizens of their most profound rights in order to catch said criminals. You get them to sign that its alright to tap their phones, its alright to bust into their houses without a warrant (if there is a terrorist case), its alright to live in a military state.

Even Cartman wont shoot people in the dick.

I got the fact that batman didnt want to resort to that, but the fact remains that a wrong message was sent across.

What message was sent across in your opinion?

 

[Doc Samson]

People who want to watch the world burn: Sadistic terrorists who bomb train stations and throw planes into buildings, Bin Laden, Sadam, anyone who opposes the bastion of freedom and justice the US of A. People who America hasnt sold guns to, hasnt harassed, embargoed or waged war upon and who unjustifiably want to watch it burn.

And what do you do when those people threaten you? You burn the forest down: You deprive citizens of their most profound rights in order to catch said criminals. You get them to sign that its alright to tap their phones, its alright to bust into their houses without a warrant (if there is a terrorist case), its alright to live in a military state.

Even Cartman wont shoot people in the dick.

I got the fact that batman didnt want to resort to that, but the fact remains that a wrong message was sent across.

The message probably was wrong, but I felt given the circumstances, Batman did what was needed. The Patriot Act gave the government the ability to disrespect anybody under the false pretense of terrorism, Batman was just doing this to find one man in particular for this one unique situation so I don't feel the parallel is really justified. What I do think however, is that any situation like that is a lose/lose for all involved. The 9/11 terrorists were operating freely in our country for quite some time, so in theory, the government should have the power to investigate whoever they feel is suspicious, but where do we draw the line? That's the real moral issue I took away, when is enough, enough? Especially when dealing with men who have no rules, how do you combat that without becoming a monster yourself?

 

[gwynplaine]

I don't know what I have learned (besides the fact that imax allows an even deeper immersion in a movie) but I sure had a great time.

 

[Mr. Earle]

What message was sent across in your opinion?

That its alright to break the rules if the threat is too grand. That its alright to have a ceasar, and have faith that he doesnt abuse his power.
The only rule you cant break is killing. But then, if you happen to throw Bin Laden and an innocent child from the balcony and (oh what a twist) you choose to save the kid, its not manslaughter.

Also, from BB: you can place villains in mortal situations but you dont have to save them afterwards. Its not manslaughter.

Yeah, way not to break your one rule Bruce!

Ok, i know i should overlook those problems, but the fact remains that the two villain deaths could have been handled better. And as for breaking the rules in order to respond to a threat, well it was a good examination of the subject, but i would have prefered it if batman didnt resort to becoming a Bush. Even if it was just for once.

 

[Mr. Earle]

The message probably was wrong, but I felt given the circumstances, Batman did what was needed. The Patriot Act gave the government the ability to disrespect anybody under the false pretense of terrorism, Batman was just doing this to find one man in particular for this one unique situation so I don't feel the parallel is really justified. What I do think however, is that any situation like that is a lose/lose for all involved. The 9/11 terrorists were operating freely in our country for quite some time, so in theory, the government should have the power to investigate whoever they feel is suspicious, but where do we draw the line? That's the real moral issue I took away, when is enough, enough? Especially when dealing with men who have no rules, how do you combat that without becoming a monster yourself?

I agree. Its a really complex issue, so lets not get tangled up with it. I am exaggerating it a bit. But i think that it really sent the wrong message across. The movie would have been an awesome discreet propaganda when the new counter-terrorist laws were introduced.

I don't know what I have learned (besides the fact that imax allows an even deeper immersion in a movie) but I sure had a great time.

So true! The movie was great entertainment. And i am so sad that we dont have an imax here!!!

 

[November Rain]

I learnt that you can't let idealistic dreams guide your decisions in life otherwise when they are lost, you fall into your own personal nightmare

bruce, dent and the joker had each fallen into their own nightmare by the end of the film and none achieved their goals.

they are all broken men.

 

[Mr. Earle]

I learnt that its cool to have a remote controlled Batmobile which ejects a freaking cool Batpod when damaged. Chicks dig the car!

Chicks dig the car!

And now i feel bad!

 

[Magenta666]

I learned that you cant be perfect, you have to sacrifice some of yourself for your cause but you can never give up.

I learned that even the mightiest can fall, and that good and evil arent just black and white...not even grey, there is no line of good and evil, you define it yourself with your actions and ideals.

you need to have hope

 

[Jack O Lantern]

I've learned that if people enjoy a movie they'll but anly line of bull **** that they are fed. I've learned that it takes very little for people to sell out the political and moral beliefs to get in line with a movie.

You have a choice about whether to be a good person or not. It is easy to maintain your morals when they are not challenged. It is when what you believe in looks cold that a person of courage still stands behind that. When you burn a forest or invade people's privacy you lose what you are fighting for. I hear Geroge Bush speak all the time about how the terrorists hate the freedom that the USA have and that he needs to tap phone lines and read e-mails to ensure that those freedoms remain. Well I'm sorry when every piece of personal information you have gets swallowed up in a government machine then what the hell kind of freedom do you have. If the terrorists really did attack the USA because they hate your freedom and want to see it destroyed, then mission accomplished. But now I'm getting off topic.

Batman was wrong in this film and I believe that the next film will show this. "You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villian." People seem stuck on that piece of dialouge, go back into that scene. Dent talks about how Rome would elect a dictator in times of a great threat, then after six months he would step down. rachel comments that the last person they elected was Ceaser and he never left. Ceaser's decision to decide what was best for Rome led to a bloody war. Geroge Bush's decision to decide on his own what is best for America has thrown the world's economy into chaos and thousands of people are dying in a pointless war. Batman has made a similar decision and at some point his war or crisis is going to bit a massive chuck of his Batbutt.

Which brings me back to my oringial point, people who have and continue to disagree with Dubya's policies have agreed with Batman's because he is Batman, and that is kind of scary. It's a sharp reminder that a good piece of propaganda can still shape the views of people who refuse to analyize the issue and instead just follow Batman.

 

[ronny]

In terms of a moral message I only found one thing applicable from The Dark Knight. Basically, it extends to crime and the impotence of the law. At least here in England it seemed to really hit home.
The idea that crime cannot truly be stopped because it has become motiveless is very true, it's reached new levels of lunacy and any victory against it is short lived.
All in all a rather bleak outcome. Now one wins, not The Joker, not Dent and certainly not Batman. All that's left is a lot of needless death.

 

[El Payaso]

In terms of a moral message I only found one thing applicable from The Dark Knight. Basically, it extends to crime and the impotence of the law. At least here in England it seemed to really hit home.
The idea that crime cannot truly be stopped because it has become motiveless is very true, it's reached new levels of lunacy and any victory against it is short lived.
All in all a rather bleak outcome. Now one wins, not The Joker, not Dent and certainly not Batman. All that's left is a lot of needless death.

very well said.

 

[Doc Samson]

I've learned that if people enjoy a movie they'll but anly line of bull **** that they are fed. I've learned that it takes very little for people to sell out the political and moral beliefs to get in line with a movie.

You have a choice about whether to be a good person or not. It is easy to maintain your morals when they are not challenged. It is when what you believe in looks cold that a person of courage still stands behind that. When you burn a forest or invade people's privacy you lose what you are fighting for. I hear Geroge Bush speak all the time about how the terrorists hate the freedom that the USA have and that he needs to tap phone lines and read e-mails to ensure that those freedoms remain. Well I'm sorry when every piece of personal information you have gets swallowed up in a government machine then what the hell kind of freedom do you have. If the terrorists really did attack the USA because they hate your freedom and want to see it destroyed, then mission accomplished. But now I'm getting off topic.

Batman was wrong in this film and I believe that the next film will show this. "You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villian." People seem stuck on that piece of dialouge, go back into that scene. Dent talks about how Rome would elect a dictator in times of a great threat, then after six months he would step down. rachel comments that the last person they elected was Ceaser and he never left. Ceaser's decision to decide what was best for Rome led to a bloody war. Geroge Bush's decision to decide on his own what is best for America has thrown the world's economy into chaos and thousands of people are dying in a pointless war. Batman has made a similar decision and at some point his war or crisis is going to bit a massive chuck of his Batbutt.

Which brings me back to my oringial point, people who have and continue to disagree with Dubya's policies have agreed with Batman's because he is Batman, and that is kind of scary. It's a sharp reminder that a good piece of propaganda can still shape the views of people who refuse to analyize the issue and instead just follow Batman.

Good post, but like I said previously, I don't think the situations are really the same. The Patriot Act gives the government the right to disrespect, and violate anybody under the false pretense of terrorism. They can mold and shape the definition of that to whatever they see fit. On the other hand, Batman was using the sonar to catch a particular person, not to combat an ideal that he could never defeat or lock up. He was in pursuit of one man, Bush used a time of crisis to further entrench the power of the government over not just a city, but the whole world, and it isn't connected to some machine that he plans on destroying either.

 

[Mr. Earle]

I've learned that if people enjoy a movie they'll but anly line of bull **** that they are fed. I've learned that it takes very little for people to sell out the political and moral beliefs to get in line with a movie.

You have a choice about whether to be a good person or not. It is easy to maintain your morals when they are not challenged. It is when what you believe in looks cold that a person of courage still stands behind that. When you burn a forest or invade people's privacy you lose what you are fighting for. I hear Geroge Bush speak all the time about how the terrorists hate the freedom that the USA have and that he needs to tap phone lines and read e-mails to ensure that those freedoms remain. Well I'm sorry when every piece of personal information you have gets swallowed up in a government machine then what the hell kind of freedom do you have. If the terrorists really did attack the USA because they hate your freedom and want to see it destroyed, then mission accomplished. But now I'm getting off topic.

Batman was wrong in this film and I believe that the next film will show this. "You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villian." People seem stuck on that piece of dialouge, go back into that scene. Dent talks about how Rome would elect a dictator in times of a great threat, then after six months he would step down. rachel comments that the last person they elected was Ceaser and he never left. Ceaser's decision to decide what was best for Rome led to a bloody war. Geroge Bush's decision to decide on his own what is best for America has thrown the world's economy into chaos and thousands of people are dying in a pointless war. Batman has made a similar decision and at some point his war or crisis is going to bit a massive chuck of his Batbutt.

Which brings me back to my oringial point, people who have and continue to disagree with Dubya's policies have agreed with Batman's because he is Batman, and that is kind of scary. It's a sharp reminder that a good piece of propaganda can still shape the views of people who refuse to analyize the issue and instead just follow Batman.

GREAT POST!

Good post, but like I said previously, I don't think the situations are really the same. The Patriot Act gives the government the right to disrespect, and violate anybody under the false pretense of terrorism. They can mold and shape the definition of that to whatever they see fit. On the other hand, Batman was using the sonar to catch a particular person, not to combat an ideal that he could never defeat or lock up. He was in pursuit of one man, Bush used a time of crisis to further entrench the power of the government over not just a city, but the whole world, and it isn't connected to some machine that he plans on destroying either.

Its not about sonar....its about....sending A message!

 

[Copyright 2008]

I've learned that if people enjoy a movie they'll but anly line of bull **** that they are fed. I've learned that it takes very little for people to sell out the political and moral beliefs to get in line with a movie.

You have a choice about whether to be a good person or not. It is easy to maintain your morals when they are not challenged. It is when what you believe in looks cold that a person of courage still stands behind that. When you burn a forest or invade people's privacy you lose what you are fighting for. I hear Geroge Bush speak all the time about how the terrorists hate the freedom that the USA have and that he needs to tap phone lines and read e-mails to ensure that those freedoms remain. Well I'm sorry when every piece of personal information you have gets swallowed up in a government machine then what the hell kind of freedom do you have. If the terrorists really did attack the USA because they hate your freedom and want to see it destroyed, then mission accomplished. But now I'm getting off topic.

Batman was wrong in this film and I believe that the next film will show this. "You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villian." People seem stuck on that piece of dialouge, go back into that scene. Dent talks about how Rome would elect a dictator in times of a great threat, then after six months he would step down. rachel comments that the last person they elected was Ceaser and he never left. Ceaser's decision to decide what was best for Rome led to a bloody war. George Bush's decision to decide on his own what is best for America has thrown the world's economy into chaos and thousands of people are dying in a pointless war. Batman has made a similar decision and at some point his war or crisis is going to bit a massive chuck of his Batbutt.

Which brings me back to my oringial point, people who have and continue to disagree with Dubya's policies have agreed with Batman's because he is Batman, and that is kind of scary. It's a sharp reminder that a good piece of propaganda can still shape the views of people who refuse to analyize the issue and instead just follow Batman.

Right there is where this argument falls entirely to pieces. I really don't want to get sidetracked into a whole separate debate on this but it might be inevitable.

George Bush really doesn't do what he thinks is best for America. In fact he himself really doesn't do much of anything, he's just a face (much like almost every other recent President). But to not melt people's brains with that truth, let's just work under the illusion that he does actually make those decisions you read about in the newspapers and hear about on TV.

Bush does whats best for a small percentage of people who, really at the end of it all, run this country. Or you could say he does best for the owners of this country, not the citizens. Batman stands for the exact opposite of that. You can loosely tie things together in some areas (like with wire tapping and the sonar in TDK), but the bottom line is that Bush really doesn't care about the people and Batman does. This whole comparison of Bush and Batman has always been ridiculous to me. They are so fundamentally different I can't imagine why it's even being discussed as a serious point.

 

[Doc Samson]

Right there is where this argument falls entirely to pieces. I really don't want to get sidetracked into a whole separate debate on this but it might be inevitable.

George Bush really doesn't do what he thinks is best for America. In fact he himself really doesn't do much of anything, he's just a face (much like almost every other recent President). But to not melt people's brains with that truth, let's just work under the illusion that he does actually make those decisions you read about in the newspapers and hear about on TV.

Bush does whats best for a small percentage of people who, really at the end of it all, run this country. Or you could say he does best for the owners of this country, not the citizens. Batman stands for the exact opposite of that. You can loosely tie things together in some areas (like with wire tapping and the sonar in TDK), but the bottom line is that Bush really doesn't care about the people and Batman does. This whole comparison of Bush and Batman has always been ridiculous to me. They are so fundamentally different I can't imagine why it's even being discussed as a serious point.

I Agree, 100%. Bush himself may not be all that smart, but one thing I can say for him is that he had one of the most intelligent (albeit corrupt) administrations in history. Batman isn't some figurehead for a nefarious part of the government, he's a lone crimefighter, doing what needed to be done to put a stop to a madman the likes of which Gotham had never seen

 

[gwynplaine]

I haven't learned anything other than maybe we have entered the golden age of comic book movies.

 

[Anita18]

Good post, but like I said previously, I don't think the situations are really the same. The Patriot Act gives the government the right to disrespect, and violate anybody under the false pretense of terrorism. They can mold and shape the definition of that to whatever they see fit. On the other hand, Batman was using the sonar to catch a particular person, not to combat an ideal that he could never defeat or lock up. He was in pursuit of one man, Bush used a time of crisis to further entrench the power of the government over not just a city, but the whole world, and it isn't connected to some machine that he plans on destroying either.

Exactly.

I actually think the more controversial moral issue is Batman and Gordon's deception to the public at the end of the film. When is it all right to lie? It's a definite moral grey area.

Although, I also think that sacrifice trumps all superhero movie sacrifices. Losing one's life or loved one has been done ad nauseum, but never has a superhero actually refused the recognition of being a "hero" at all.

 

[Copyright 2008]

Yeah and at the same time, what other choice did they have if they wanted to keep Gotham's best interests at hand? I don't think the film is saying "This is the right thing to do" rather it's more like "This is the reality in Gotham City." The right way, the wrong way, and the way it is.

 

[Carmine Falcone]

I'm REALLY tempted to say ''It's only a movie''.

I guess I just did.