The Dark Knight Falls

The more I’ve read and the more I’ve thought about the last Batman movie the more I’ve grown to question its merit.  I do think there were some amazing moments but I think it was mired in mediocrity for such a talented director and team.

There are numerous spoilers below.

Disconnect

The film often  felt disconnected from the other two movies of the trilogy and from the source material.  Since when does a story involving Batman take place predominantly during the day.  It just screws up the whole aesthetic.  The film has the words Dark Knight and the darkness in the movie is usually metaphorical.  It wasn’t just metaphorical it was dark.  Batman worked at night and used the night to his advantage.  In this universe (the film one) he was trained by the league of assassins.  Speaking of which if you were trained by an elite theater of ninjas one would think when you face down a great enemy you don’t start yelling like a cave man and throwing wild haymakers.  Nice martial arts training there.  Any decent martial artist who thinks being tense and muscling out a wild punch is superior to literally anything else is not such a good martial artist.  And you don’t use the same tactic twice when the first time resulting in a broken spine and severe head trauma.  Although the severe head trauma might explain a few things.  But fortunately the whole mask thing allows for a quick and easy way to win which the World’s Greatest Detective seemed to overlook the first time as an option.

It’s odd how a film so obviously predicated on the events of the who last ones can feel like it’s an odd man out.  For one thing the first two movies were about Bruce Wayne/Batman.  The cast of characters revolved around him.  The first movie, the origin piece introduced the main characters; Bruce, Alfred, Gordon, Fox, and Rachel.  It also introduced Ra’s and Dr. Crane (Scarecrow) as well as Falcone (the mob boss).  The second film burrowed a bit deeper into Gordon’s character and flushed out more the character of the mob bosses.  The mob has always played heavily in Batman’s universe.  It also introduced Harvey Dent and the Joker.  These two individuals were the turning point of the series.  This was the big choice.  The third film was the after effects of the choice made.  The second film was all  setups forcing choices (the Joker’s twisted intention was to force these kinds of games upon the supposedly incorruptible).  The third film introduced even more characters into an already crowded world: Selina, Blake (Robin), Bane, Miranda, Foley, and Daggett.  With such a cast it’s unsurprising that the last film was the also the longest.  There was an effort made to put all the characters on screen for more than a fraction of a moment but it made it feel like more of a collage than the story of one man our hero.  Sadly the best actors had the shortest part.  Morgan Freeman was barely on screen and the same for Michael Caine – and damn you Michael Caine for making people misty eyed every time you were in front of the camera with your whole relatable emotion strife.  I’m sure Anne Hathawy is a wonderful actress but it’s difficult to take a performance as serious when she’s in skin tight leather and performing acrobatics.  Not that this bother me mind you.

With this many people involved and so many plots swirling around it felt like Batman and friends the movie.  Honestly I felt that if we replaced the character and got rid of the whole Batman part it would had made much more sense.  Every part of the first two films as I sat in the theater I was thinking man Batman is awesome not this movie kicks ass.  Because that’s half the point of Batman.  He’s the guy we wish we could be except for the crippling paranoia, the lack of a normal life, the immense physiological scarring, and the constant pants shitting level of danger.  This film I thought hey this cool.  This whole motif and thematic relevance.

Villians or the legacy of the Joker problem

Part of the problem was the last film was just so good.  It had a few points that merit critiquing but it was so pitch perfect on many accounts that such trivial errors feel just so, trivial and of little consequence to the whole.  But this was not that movie.  Another reason is it’s hard to move on past the Joker.  He has cemented himself as the foil for Batman.  In the enormous and varied collection of rogues Batman has accrued no one can touch the Joker.  Joker is to Batman as Moriarty is Holmes.  A dark broken reflection.  The two circle each other eternally unable to truly defeat one another because of their own code and motivations.

Bane tested Batman but not on the same level.  Bane’s goal was vengeance.  Bane’s goal was to break the body and spirit of Batman.  He accomplished one of those things temporarily) and almost accomplished the other.  But Wayne rose from his trial.

The Joker didn’t try to test Batman physically.  He tried to corrupt him.  Batman is rigid in his code.  It is the one thing that keeps him total psychosis.  Once he crosses that boundary there is nothing holding him back.  His lust for justice would turn him into another Ra’s Al Ghul.

Another point why Bane is not as exciting or as memorable (besides his poor use in the god awful Batman and Robin movie which is a prime example of why technology from Men in Black should be used and how) is because he isn’t as true a reflection of Batman as the others.  Ra’s was Btman once he eschewed his holiest moral stance.  The joker was the exact inverse.  Where Batman stood for order the Joker stood for chaos.  They both did all that could be allowed to force their societal direction.

Internal Logic and the hypocrisy of character

Generally when you work from preexisting stories you try to be true to the source material.  This was, to an extent, accomplished.  This was not a warm fuzzy romp of a movie series.  It was gritty, it was dark and it was unflinching.  As such the series portrayed Batman/Wayne as paranoid, angry, bitter and vengeful .  However in the last film he was completely inconsistent in this regard.  Or rather the script had inconsistencies here there and everywhere and even the central character who was well defined still ended up betraying the set expectations.  This is generally a bad thing.  When a story creates an expectation or a rule it cannot be dismissed or altered lightly.  That’s like creating a zombie film, taking time to explain a head shot is the only way to kill zombies and then in a pivotal scene a headshot doesn’t work then the best friend dies.  Which is kind of bullshit.

The main lapse in character here is Batman’s paranoia.  Wayne practically bankrupts his company to fend off the possibility of a nuclear disaster.  Once this had been made clear it has to be set in motion that that nuclear disaster will play out to an extent.  So on paranoia he hid the instrument of hope because of fear of the possibility of death.  But yet he constantly sets into motion events where Selina is allowed to betray him.  He gives her everything with no sign of hesitation.  He is unafraid of her possible betrayal.

Another lapse is he is not over Rachel, yet he, without much provocation whatsoever, sleeps with Miranda.  Or his calm acceptance of Blake’s knowledge of his secret identity.  He spends so much time protecting the secret identity for him to so lightly allow another person to know seems odd.  He hid the truth from Rachel even when he knew it would benefit himself.

And if he was so intent on protecting that identity how come right around the time Batman retired Bruce Wayne fell out of the public eye to become a recluse.  Then shortly after Batman comes out from hiding so does playboy Bruce Wayne with no repercussions or possible implications.  World’s greatest detective, huh?

Okay how about the whole Batman is a symbol idea?  Bruce out of rage created Batman to circumvent the law but to uphold order by foiling crime.  In the first movie he become a symbol.  IN the second movie he looks to another white knight but Dent falls.  In the third he looks to Blake as the person who could pick up the mantle in his absence.  But this negates an important part for the second movie.  The copycats near the beginning of the film.  They dress like Batman and fight crime in their own vigilante manner.  Yet Batman disavows them.  But Blake is okay.  In the comic books Bruce know he can never not be Batman and he understands deep down how he can’t stop and his only out is death.  It’s a beautiful moment of sorrow and true understanding of self.  The man is half-deranged.

Was the movie awful?  Not really but it fell flat a lot of the time.  The aesthetic felt off, the characters seemed wish-washy and I was as emotionally invested as the other times.  The only part of the movie that I really thought was awesome was the scene where Selina is negotiating with Daggett’s man and she executes as her various fail safe’s which all were necessary to stay alive.

Ben