Its So Close

[Leonard Leroy]

not true lol it was a good point

see?

Deebo was like "That's mine"

[broneck]

So I just saw it again for round two. . .and I'm trying to wrap my head around the moral issues that everyone is so pumped about for this movie, and also how the film is viewed as an allegory for the current state of affairs (I.e. sonar = NSA wire taps).

I mean, the scene where it really comes to a huge head is the scene in which joker is kidnapped...batman clearly could've killed him easily, and stopped the death of several dozen (and potentially hundreds of) people. Clearly this would not have made for an exciting film, but I'm wondering what this says about Batman's sense of right and wrong...certainly he's saying that by killing the Joker he would be "lowering" himself, stooping to a level to which good men should not stoop, but had he killed the joker at that moment, Harvey and Rachel (as well as many other officers and inmates) may have lived...this is something I'm really struggling with, the idea that if Batman ever kills anyone than the joker "wins" his sick game...in his own twisted mind maybe, but in the grand scheme of things morality is far more simple than that. Good guy lives, bad guy dies.

If he's a detective, and one in as corrupt a city as Gotham, isn't taking someone down in the line of duty just part of the job? Police are viewed as heroes and often shoot people in the line of duty...why is it so paramount that Batman never kills someone?

Where does this film stand on the torture of enemies for the greater good? Batman never kills anyone, but he really doesn't hesitate to beat the crap out of the Joker to try and get information out of him, nor does he have a problem with dropping a mobster off the roof of a 3 story apartment building. It's interesting to me that, in a war, people are expected to die, but it's this kind of torture that gets people up in arms regarding morality...death is a part of war, but torutre never should be. I mean, even looked at from a legal standpoint, if Batman had killed the Joker during the faceoff on the batpod (or even just let him fall from the roof), he would've been hailed as a hero, and probably considered legally justified...but putting him alone in a room with a prisoner and letting him have his way is certainly all kinds of against the law.

[the_state]

if anyone wants to see Maggie Gyllenhaals tits watch

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherry_Baby

are they spectacular?

[the_state]

see?

Deebo was like "That's mine"

DAS MY IGNlTOR PUNK!

[the_state]

I mean, the scene where it really comes to a huge head is the scene in which joker is kidnapped...batman clearly could've killed him easily, and stopped the death of several dozen (and potentially hundreds of) people. Clearly this would not have made for an exciting film, but I'm wondering what this says about Batman's sense of right and wrong...certainly he's saying that by killing the Joker he would be "lowering" himself, stooping to a level to which good men should not stoop, but had he killed the joker at that moment, Harvey and Rachel (as well as many other officers and inmates) may have lived..

wait... which scene is this? when joker was in the interrogation room? weren't harvey and rachel already rigged up at that point?

[broneck]

the scene where he's initially captured and they save Harvey...had batman just offed him in the process, I dont think it's much of a stretch to think that there safety would've been secured.

beyond that (once Harv and Rachel have already been rigged up), had the Joker been killed in the interrogation room several other men may have lived (all of the cops blown up by the tummy-bomb)

[the_state]

^ gotcha.

tummy bomb was totally next level.

[azn8oi]

I'm not going to quote your rant clopek, but if Batman killed the Joker, all it would've made him was a murdering vigilante. Remember, Batman is only accepted by Gordon, Dent, Rachel, Fox, Alfred, and some citizens of Gotham. And if Batman murders someone, the only person that would still be on his side would be Alfred. To everyone else, Batman is a criminal.

Morally, murder is not justified. By popular vote though, you're probably right that many people would've justified it in their mind, especially if they could've known that Joker was going to kill more people in the next few hours.

But that's never the case.

edit- and what bouwnt said.

[bouwnt]

.why is it so paramount that Batman never kills someone?

to put it simply, i think he believes he would suffer severe moral recourse if he chose to take a life, because it was the taking of his parents' lives that had tainted his own.

[broneck]

I'm not going to quote your rant clopek, but if Batman killed the Joker, all it would've made him was a murdering vigilante. Remember, Batman is only accepted by Gordon, Dent, Rachel, Fox, Alfred, and some citizens of Gotham. To everyone else, Batman is a criminal.

Morally, it's not justified. By popular vote though, you're probably right that many people would've justified it in their mind, especially if they could've known that Joker was going to kill more people in the next few hours.

But that's never the case.

but how do you address the difference between a criminal being killed by an agent of the law (in this case, batman, despite being a vigilante) versus a prisoner in police custody being tortured for the purposes of gathering information?

even as a citizen, lets say (spoiler alert!!) that bruce wayne killed the joker...he wouldn't be punished by the law for killing Joker as he would've committed no crime (by way of self defence, something legally sanctionned when applied to defending the lives of others as well). If killing Joker saved lives of others, Batman would be guilty of no crime, but beating a prisoner to a pulp is inexcusable regardless. yknowwhaddamean?

[azn8oi]

Americans love torture.

Don't you watch American crime shows?

[broneck]

I'd submit that "american's love come-uppance"

[azn8oi]

But seriously-

the only reason why Batman is "an agent of the law" is because Gordon uses some technicalities to get around arresting Batman. In any other case you would probably have cops chasing him around. But cops know that he's Lieutenant Gordon's (beginning of movie) 'ally' so they kind of just leave it alone. Gordon says "leave us alone/give us a minute" so many times, and the cops just accept that.

The Bat-Signal is "a malfunctioning piece of equipment" at the beginning when Dent first gets introduced to Batman.

You clearly see at the end, where he frames himself for Two-Face's apparent death, that cops are ready to turn against him whenever Gordon says so. That's the real talk side of why Batman can't murder, from a perspective other than Batman's own concept of morality.

[broneck]

but to re-iterate, if a citizen takes a life in the course of saving him/herself or others, it's self defence. killing the joker would be a pretty clear cut case (at the point at which Harvey was in immediate danger, anyway)

[azn8oi]

Like I said, that doesn't happen in real life.

Using self-defense as a tool for preventing more future murders... never heard of it.

[High Monika]

But really, it seemed like the DK sent way too many mixed signals about security and vigilantism, and ultimately a negative one about the state of the American populace (think how Wall-E shit all over fat people, the DK did that to the public's morality).

I think one of the biggest things you need to do is completely separate Batman from the police in any discussion of moral right and wrong. Batman is, first and foremost, a comic/mythic character and if you notice, Alfred consistently points out how Batman must be more than human (which consequently also means somewhat inhuman). When his personal life gets in the way, he fails (Rachel). When he gives that up, he serves best (the ending)

[broneck]

Yeah, I'm still not sure where the film stands...or if it's just raising questions simply so that people talk about them (although, I think most discussion revolves around just how creepy the joker was).

What is it saying about spying? It's okay , until you've served your purpose, than let go? It can only be wielded for good if it's in the hands of someone who doesn't want the power? (Harry Potter much?)

[High Monika]

SPOILER

I could get no clear messages out of the movie. The easiest message about spying I could get was: Spying is morally unjustifiable but if you use it, only use it on a limited basis. If you rely on it, you'll lose focus on the situation at hand (e.g. blinding during the joker fight). But even then it doesn't make sense. He used it perfectly to save the hostages. Add to that the fact that Fox, the voice of Black Magical reason, knows and says flat out it's unjustifiable but he trusts Batman enough to use it.

This is where you have to separate Batman from normal morality, I think. It's unjustifiable for normal people to use spying but not Batman because he has a different set of rules/morals.

[broneck]

but he gave the power over to Fox to use it...this is why I think I dig TDK as more of an action movie than a thinker. Too much contradiction?

[High Monika]

^ I agree. When Batman gets involved, common logic and morality has to get thrown out. The movie might try to send messages but ultimately it's still a superhero movie so things get too confused.

[artificialsky]