The Politics Of The Dark Knight Rises (SPOILERS)
It’s pretty close to impossible to discuss this at all without going ALL SPOILERS. So I am going to write the piece after the jump. Come on in if you’ve seen the film or you just don’t care about spoilers.
It’s been fascinating to see how undiscussed the politics of TDKR have been so far, aside from silly conversations about Bane vs Bain.
The film goes about an hour and twenty minutes without much more than a hat tip to any discussion of the communal. Selina Kyle whispers to Bruce Wayne about the storm that’s rising and that he’ll be amazed by the price that will be paid for the failure of trickle-down economics… that he and other Gothamites live so large while “leaving so little for the rest of us.” There is also talk about the fusion device that Wayne has nearly bankrupted his company with, only to mothball it when he realized that it could be used as a weapon and that he would be doing a disservice to the world by creating unlimited cheap energy without being able to keep it from being used as said weapon.
But mostly, it’s personal. Wayne is lingering. Batman has been retired, a villain for appearing to murder Harvey Dent without reason. A cat burglar who steals his print arouses Wayne to wake up. A rival wants to become the biggest fish in the big pond.
And then Bane comes to Gotham and goes after The Money. But still, there is only a hint of the political. Banes notes that Wall Street types who move around money endlessly on the floor are stealing, the same as he is.
There is talk about Bane’s actions devaluing the currency. But the political subtext of that is blunted by the fact that a day later, Bane’s actions don’t seem to be targeting anyone but Bruce Wayne, and that there is no time for there to be any real ramifications, as Bane & Co are about to raise the stakes to a much higher level of danger than financial collapse on the island.
The movie moves aggressively into the political realm when Bane turns the island of Gotham into a ghetto/human laboratory. Ultimately, the claimed politics of the situation – the notion that Bane is a revolutionary and that he seeks to turn the greatest bastion of capitalism into a pure socialist community (even if at gunpoint) – turns out to be a lie. But the reality for the people of Gotham is, until the threat is turned back by Batman, completely real.
The huge challenge for the Brothers Nolan, as screenwriters, is to manage the varying kinds of responses that people have to this imposition of “freedom,” within about forty-five minutes of the two-hour-and-forty-minute movie. The success or failure of this effort can certainly be argued by honest, fairly-intended people. But the dismissal in some quarters that it exists at all is ludicrous. This is not like trying to shove some sort of political metaphor onto Avengers or Spider-Man, where there seems to be very little political intent.
Amongst the responses on view…
Key to the process is the removal of the police from the situation. No one who would push back against the “new freedom” can be allowed to infect the citizenry.
Bane’s group seizes control of the media, though with no apparent push back from said media. There seems to be plenty of coverage of what is happening on Gotham, though no news judgement offered.
Any kind of authority figure not in Bane’s control who is seen in public is summarily removed and, apparently, executed. (It’s worth noting that while destroying the center of the football stadium – the masses survive while those on display do not – there was a second bomb in the stadium specifically to take out the mayor’s box, and with it, the mayor.)
Martial law is put into effect and most of the major city streets are abandoned by the masses. Tanks, acquired from “the guilty/Batman” travel endlessly through the city’s corridors.
Wealthy people – many of whom appear to be Jewish and elderly – are pulled out of their (CPW/5th Ave?) apartment buildings and attacked by crowds, including their previously courteous doormen.
Crowds gather in kangaroo courts (led by The Scarecrow) where being put in front of the “judge” for actions against “the people” also means inherent guilt.
The “people’s government” quickly becomes the only source of food on the island, further controlling the “newly free” masses.
The national government makes some effort to regain control of the situation. But the defining moment for the national government is on the bridge, as John Blake tries to explain to a fellow soldier/policeman that the situation has changed and that lives are at stake if rules are not reconsidered. The response is strict adherence to the rules… as dangerous for the “good government” as the “bad.”
Individually…
Bane gives a lot of speeches. But in reality, they are all a means to an end. His role reminded me of the Tyler Durden speech about airline safety instructions… the goal is not to make you safe, but to keep you from panicking when the situation becomes threatening. Everything he does on Gotham is intended to neutralize leadership and to make the masses docile and manageable. But isn’t this the goal of all military dictatorships when dealing with the masses?
Batman/Bruce Wayne doesn’t ever believe the political claims. Nor does he take any verbal position on the 99% or the 1%. HE sees himself as protector of all who are good, though there are all kinds of complexities in his actions. His power is enabled by his wealth, but he protects the disadvantaged. HE also protects the status quo. He fights with his body, but as argued by Alfred, he would be of more use to the world if he used his mind and financial resources in a less hands-on (cowl’s on?) way. His strength comes from his pain and tenacity when not comforted by his financial freedom… when he allows himself to bathe in that financial comfort, he loses both his strength and much of his fortune.
Selina Kyle is a 99%-er who feels trapped by her past and unable to escape it, using this as a convenient excuse for her choice to be a thief and endless self-exploitation of her sexuality (never made explicit, it seems clear that she is completely wiling to do more than tease to keep her strategies moving forward and that something sexual is what haunts her hope for the future), but also genuinely feeling there is no better answer. She is comfortable “victimizing” 1%-ers because they don’t even feel the pain in her view. But when the city’s hierarchy is leveled by Bane, she is reminded that a city full of self-styled anarchists is as problematic (in some ways) as a city where a 1% is in control (this on top of the danger of Bane’s reign, even before the nuke is an immediate threat).
Still, Selena is the character who actively participates in Bane’s efforts, both for personal gain and with some sense of belief in what he claims to want to achieve. She knows in her gut, as she sells out Batman repeatedly, that it isn’t right. But she is afraid to be on the losing side. And until late in the 3rd act, she sees Batman’s side of the fight to be unwinnable.
Deputy Commissioner Foley (played by Matthew Modine) is given the role of being the powerful, but fearful non-acting reactor. He doesn’t fall in with the Bane crowd, but he refuses to fight back against it, even though he is one of the few policemen who are not trapped underground. How does evil thrive? When we do nothing.
This thread of living on both sides of an idea operates throughout the Nolan Batman cycle. There are doppelgangers all over the place. Bane and Batman. or so we think for most of the film, but it turns out that Joseph Gordon-Levitt is more Wayne/Batman’s doppelganger. Selina and Miranda Tate, as objects of affection/sexual interest, but also as female power players in a male world. Miranda seems to be above using her beauty as a tool, but as we find out, her sex with Bruce Wayne is nothing other than a way to control his perception of her. Ironically, Selina, who often uses her sex with purpose, doesn’t put out for Batman/Wayne at all until her feelings are sincere. Commissioner Gordon is given Deputy Commissioner Foley as a reflection. In many ways, Alfred and Lucius Fox reflect one another as replacement fathers for Bruce Wayne. And of course, on the past we saw the two Ra’s Al Ghuls, as well as the incarnation via the daughter here Harvey Dent and Two Face. It seems almost as though fate was the real reason for the change of actresses in the Rachel Dawes role. It fits.
So what is the “big picture” of the politics of The Dark Knight Rises? I don’t know that there is one. Nolan takes the film – as he has the series – through all kinds of shifts in thinking. Could the 99% rise, led by a powerful leader, somewhere great? The movie doesn’t try to answer the question, as the idea is a facade… a means to an alternate end. Does the 1% need taking down? Again, the movie really avoids tackling the issue with a hero who uses excess as a cover and to the benefit of others. What corrupts people? The movie offers many answers, from personal psychology to fear to a willingness to follow blindly to some sense of higher purpose.. and surely other things I am forgetting to mention.
Thing is, in the end, this is still a movie based on a comic book character. Most of the movie is about that character’s journey and about action. This is not The Battle of Algiers. This is not about how the Third Reich indoctrinated chunks of Europe with paranoia of The Other. But some of it is.
I think a part of the passion for The Dark Knight was that it took a “comic book movie” to a new place of sophistication, in performance and ambitious ideas about more than boom boom. I think some of the discomfort with The Dark Knight Rises is that some people feel it overstepped that ambition by pushing further in a forum – the comic book movie – where there is simply not enough time to fully explore these powerful issues. Add to that the 2:40 running time and the movie feels long enough for any discussion, even though the politics are not given a full airing.
Personally, I think the ambition is great and the goals are better fulfilled than they were in The Dark Knight. It was easy to understand the ideas behind things like the two ferries with explosives on board or Harvey Dent flipping the coin. But to my view, the film didn’t fulfill the promise of the questions it raised. Here, the Nolans ask similar questions about non-costumed human nature, find dark and light, and then move on with the story of our costumed (and goatee-parented) characters. It is not a pretty picture of human nature. But I am fine with that.
Will Gotham learn from this experience? Unaddressed. Will the world change in some way because of it? Unaddressed. What about the nuclear fallout from a fairly close distance? Really unaddressed.
By the end, you are wrapped up in the individual stories. The police have been freed and with a little help from Batman, go mano-a-mano with the bad guys and overcome them. The death of both Talia al Ghul and Bane are kind of quick and lacking huge impact… but yet, fit where each person is at that point. Bane’s role has been reduced to being a powerful, smart henchmen with leadership skills who gets shot by a big gun. Tania dies in the delusion of her success in avenging her father. Great curtain calls all around for “the good guys,” as we feel good about what they have done for themselves. Gotham and the political discussion are forgotten completely.
There are plenty of holes to pick on and complain about. But I don’t think it’s fair to claim any kind of lack of ambition or of ideas.
Ultimately, Bruce Wayne’s journey is a personal one. Being The Batman is about his personal demons. Not being The Batman is about his personal demons. Alfred’s dream for him is one that most parents might have for their children. And there is every chance that a former-Bruce Wayne at peace could also add a great deal to the world. (The big question is whether he will appear in costume in the Nightwing series – doubt they will call it “Robin” – as Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Juno Temple as Holly Robinson (who became the second Catwoman) continue with a new director, Nolan exec producing… not a reboot, but a continuation. This is not news. This is a prediction.)
And if that’s not enough… well, find a better superhero movie if you can. There are plenty of empty-headed effects films in the world. The Dark Knight Rises is not one of them. And to fault a film for ambition is, to me, sad.
MAJOR SPOILERS, obviously…
I think those who resent what they see as the film’s politics will make the case that Bane’s plan is a parable for how Occupy Wall Streeters are people being duped by evil socialist villains (Obama/ANSWER/MSNBC/Soros, whoever) to fight against capitalism in a destructive way. It is a red herring, though. Bane’s plan isn’t even his own, and he’s ultimately working for a definite member of the 1%, using the Vietnam-era line of “destroy the village in order to save it.” And even on that he’s unthinkingly parroting the wishes of a dead guy.
What does it say that both Batman and The Avengers hinge on a source of ultimate clean energy being turned into a deadly bomb? Is that anti-environmentalist? Does it matter?
The fallout issue is frequently and conveniently ignored by movies (Sum of All Fears, True Lies). The best out here is to say that it’s a new kind of fusion reaction that simply doesn’t do that. Otherwise happily-ever-after Bruce will die of cancer pretty quickly.
Also conveniently ignored – the time it would have to take to get to and from that foreign prison from Gotham, which has always been presumed an east-coast city (though Batman did get to Japan pretty easily in the last one).
blah blah blah blah… shut the fuck up and just enjoy the goddamn movie.
Nolan’s films are about a simple question: What kind of individual effort does it take to keep collective societies functioning for the greatest good for the greatest number? Nolan, I think, isn’t revolutionary but reactionary — someone needs to preserve order and justice, and keep the barbarians at the gate. Who better than a patriarchal Billionaire white guy? (The scariest shot in TDK has nothing to do with Ledger: It’s the sight of a fire truck set ablaze, saying, hey, civilization, nice run, but now all bets are off.)
And I’m not going to ‘mock’ this piece, which you suggested I might do earlier, as you seem to have backed off from your earlier, tweeted, silly assertion of “Hmmm… still waiting for someone to mention that almost a third of TDKR is dedicated to the way a fascist/Nazi gov rises without opposition.” I rudely earlier — and rudely now — refer to this as a silly assertion simply because it’s factually not true; Bane and his gang are nihilist terrorist anarchists. (Say what you will about the Nazis and the Fascists, as the old joke says, but they were elected.) And TDK still works better with Nolan’s thematic ideas, if only because it works as an accidental cover version of The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance.
J.
Thanks for not mocking, James, but the fact of what Bane is really up to does not keep Gotham from falling in line after being subjected to the methods of fascists and the Nazi movement.
And Bane isn’t an anarchist at all. He and his main people are true believers… all willing to die for their cause, however stupid.
Well, David, Nazism and Fascism were methods of government, and that’s not what’s created here. But I feel like we’re going to be at loggerheads, so I’ll politely step out.
Bane is definitely an anarchist. Anarchists can be true believers, but what they believe in — as Bane does, the way I understand it, anyway — is ripping down the existing government and structure. (I’m glad you mentioned the “willing to die” element — the semi-gleeful look on the face of the Bane associate who’s going to go down with the plane in the first scene is so chilling.)
exile or death
There are anarcho-capitalists, anarcho-communists, anarcho-collectivists, and individualist anarchists. The list goes on. It’s basically a euphemism for libertarianism.
SPOILERS
It doesn’t really do any good to try and fit Bane into the traditional left/right political spectrum IMO. He is however definitely a terrorist though but it turns out his motivations were actually not even political at all. In the end we find out Bane’s motivation was… LOVE! In the end he even sheds a tear over the memory of protecting Talia as a child who he was following all along. And Talia? Were her motivations purely political? Turns out she was following out her father’s work, driven by love for her dead father, and also probably a lot of anger for Batman who “murdered” him.
Bottom line, the political is always a bit personal anyway!
My 2 cents — and great movie!
Also, great review — thanks, Dave!
Surely if anyone is Jewish, that would be Joseph Gordon-Levitt, the only Jew in the cast?
“Bottom line, the political is always a bit personal anyway!”
Also very true of Batman, motivated by his own personal loss. The reason the Joker was so tough to figure out was that he mocked the very idea of that, by having no specific motivation save a made-up one that kept changing.
But anarchy is also a euphemism for doing whatever you want, without opposition, so if there are any sorts of rules or leadership or government then it’s not anarchy.
And what’s the point of being a jewel thief if those who could buy your loot are getting rounded up and shot? You might be better off stealing toilet paper–at least it’s useful.
I don’t really care about the ‘politics’ or whatever, but this film was a pretty amazing feat of filmmaking. Still, as much as I thought DK was slightly muddled and the last 45 mins was too drawn out, it’s hard to beat that film, simply b/c it set the bar for realistic comic book films. While i enjoyed TDKR more than its predecessor, I’m not sure it upped the ante – except for brutality and bleakness (which I really loved).
If Nolan wants to make the perfect dark comic book film (which this ALMOST is), then it’s hard to forgive some of the narrative choices. Too many coincidences (Wayne finding Selena out of nowhere after he leaves the prison, for one thing), and too many times characters just seemed to coincidentally walk into other characters to further the plot.
Also, there were a few too many plot holes (why didn’t the cops think of planting that device on the bomb sooner?) Also I didn’t really get the whole point of that last scene on the bridge with the school bus. And why was Gordon Levitt at Wayne’s burial? Did he know Wayne was Batman? (I may have missed that) And that bomb which was in the truck, getting blasted non-stop by machine gun fire, and getting smashed non-stop… a little hard to swallow.
Still the twist with the Cotillard character was great (i didn’t see that coming), and the set pieces were fantastic. A trull masterful piece of filmmaking. I’ll have to see it again.
PS – don’t see it at the Ziegfeld in NYC – the audio fucking sucked.
Arisp, did you sleep through the movie?
“(Wayne finding Selena out of nowhere after he leaves the prison, for one thing)
Did you miss the timeframe? The second half played out over 5 months, and Wayne escaped the prison with about 28 days to go (if I remember rightly). I don’t think there were any points where people “coincidentally” walked into someone else, one of them was almost always looking for the other and had days or even weeks to track them down.
“why didn’t the cops think of planting that device on the bomb sooner?
You mean the device that Lucious Fox got from The Bat (“Do you remember where you parked?”)
Additionally, there was the whole debate between Oldman and Modine about who the triggerman was which prevented them from acting until Fox could take the remote detonator out of the picture.
“And why was Gordon Levitt at Wayne’s burial? Did he know Wayne was Batman? (I may have missed that)”
You missed an entire scene where Blake visited Wayne Manor, threatened Alfred with a warrant for investigation into Harvey Dent’s murder, told Wayne he knew exactly who he was because he recognized the emotional mask that Blake himself had learned, and then said outright “We need you back – and by ‘you’ I mean ‘Batman'”.
“I didn’t really get the whole point of that last scene on the bridge with the school bus”
That was Blake’s impetus for quitting the police force (and, after Wayne gave him the location of the batcave, the new Batman) – after the section of the bridge fell away Blake yelled at the officer (paraphrased) “You just killed all these children because you were ‘just following orders’!”
That’s not to say there weren’t weaknesses in the script (I’ll give you the shooting at the bomb thing – in fact, that would have been the best way to disarm it since deuterium and tritium used in fusion reactors are in no way explosive or flammable. Feel free to wreck the damn thing). But apart from that there weren’t any glaringly obvious errors that I noticed, and I’m usually fairly tough on Nolan.
(Additionally, for me, the biggest giveaway for the twist was the fact that both female leads were being portrayed as “the love interest” despite Wayne making his choice after the first hour – and since you were being fed background information about Selena and not Miranda…)
Re: The political stuff – my interpretation was that Bane was just using it as a pretext. He seemed to have no inclination whatsoever to be involved with governance or organization after the Dent Act prisoners were released (which Crane took pains to point out to ex-henchmen).
Another great film from Nolan. It delivers the goods. It’s a shame and a blessing that this was his last, but really, where could he really take the character from here without it becoming played out?
Nolan always tries to give the audiences so much. He crams so many characters and layers into the movie. And he’s given us as intelligent take on a comic book character. I’m willing to forgive the excesses. With that, some questions.
Wasn’t this the most convoluted nuclear bomb plot ever? I almost preferred the Dr. Evil method of stealing one from a foreign country. This one seemed awfully contrived.
Miranda Tate gets on the board of Wayne Enterprises, steals Bruce Wayne’s fingerprints, has Bane stage a huge, public armed robbery of the stock market, forcing Wayne to put her in charge gaining her trust by showing her the reactor which is then used to create a bomb…..
And then the next day at Wayne Enterprises Lucius Fox says “we could maybe prove it was fraud.”
Wouldnt that huge, public robbery at the stock market the day before clued everyone in the known world that it was fake?
Most of the problems i had revolved around the weird series of events tied around getting the bomb. It felt like there would be eight billion better ways to find a nuclear weapon that didn’t require an obscenely convoluted plot to put one in their hands.
Couldn’t the opening scene have been Bane stealing a nuke in mid air? Would you have lost anything removing the complexity of the bomb acquisition? In fact, i’d argue you could have spent more of that time on character development, specifically Hathaway who felt like she could have used some more scenes.
I liked the film. But man, the scope of the plot to grab a nuclear bomb felt long winded.
My other major complaint was Matthew Modine. You could have cut him out of the movie entirely and would have lost nothing. And at 2 hours and 45 minutes, wouldnt losing Modine have been a gift to the audience?
“where could he really take the character from here without it becoming played out?”
Id love a Gordon-Levitt Batman film, though i know the reality of that happening is 800 billion to 1. The ending was so nice and tidy. But id be thrilled with an epilogue style film in the same universe with a new challenge in a post No Man’s Land Gotham.
That’s just the fanboy in me wanting more trip to this world.
Actually, I wanted to see even more of Modine’s character. Maybe on the DVD?
And consider this: I think it’s safe to say that, had Heath Ledger not died, The Joker almost certainly would have had at least a cameo appearance here. But where? And when? We’ll never know, alas.
Joe, i heard a lot of people speculating he would have been the judge at the kangaroo court.
Scarecrow at the court was pretty funny though.
I was a little confused by the timing of the bomb. How did they calculate to the second that the bomb would go off five months from now?
I liked it, but my greatest wish is that I didn’t have to spend so much effort trying to understand Bane. I think I caught 90% of what he said, but it shouldn’t feel like such effort.
The Dent Act/Patriot Act parallel was nicely done. Here’s something that’s kept us safer. But you know, it’s based on a lie.
@Krillian
I’ve heard a few people complain about Bane’s dialogue. I honestly don’t get it. He was super articulate and clear to me, and I saw the film twice in two different theaters.
This is the 1st Nolan film that moved me to tears more than once (Alfred’s consoling the young Wayne in “Batman Begins” also had me in a “Field Of Dreams” state & “Inception” had its share of “moments”). Nolan has always been more Kubrick than Spielberg, but here he tilts more towards Steven than Stanley. I reacted on a gut level –like most movies– & this movie floored me. Just when I thought Nolan couldn’t grow much further as an artist he topped himself. I’m certain that the Oscars will ignore him again.
As to the question of about fallout from the nuke they threw out at some point that the bomb would be a neutron bomb. Neutron bombs have little or no fallout since they release most of their energy as radiation.
I had a friend who was angry about it, said he couldn’t understand half the dialogue.
I couldn’t understand half the dialogue. When Bane and Batman’s voices weren’t being twisted through some vocoder device, everyone else decided to whisper. Maybe it also had to do with people being loud around me…but still…
Also, Batman wears an expensive armored suit and is trained to the hilt, but he still can’t manage to beat up a guy who wears only a wifebeater and has the same training?