Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

During the past week or so, I've been telling my boss at work that he needs to see The Dark Knight due to how good it is. He finally saw it, and he asked me "Did you catch the main theme of the movie?" I told him, "Well, yeah, a lot of it dealt with the corruption of man as a whole, etc." And he said "No, no, no."

At this point he explained to me how the whole movie paralleled our current war on terrorism (Batman being the Bush Administration, The Joker representing the terrorists in the Middle East). He supported this using the example about how Batman uses the sonar/wire-tapping technique to spy on people in order to catch The Joker, etc. He also used the more general example of how Batman is hated by the public, yet he's doing what he has to (similar to how he views George Bush).

Now my question is: Do you agree that the film was a parallel to the current Bush Administration/the War on Terror, and if so, do you think this was an intentional and/or prominent theme in the movie?

I'd very much appreciate any feedback on this, thanks.

Why to people always gotta pick out political meanings in movies? Why can't they just watch and enjoy it....

Originally posted by SnakeEyes
During the past week or so, I've been telling my boss at work that he needs to see The Dark Knight due to how good it is. He finally saw it, and he asked me "Did you catch the main theme of the movie?" I told him, "Well, yeah, a lot of it dealt with the corruption of man as a whole, etc." And he said "No, no, no."

At this point he explained to me how the whole movie paralleled our current war on terrorism (Batman being the Bush Administration, The Joker representing the terrorists in the Middle East). He supported this using the example about how Batman uses the sonar/wire-tapping technique to spy on people in order to catch The Joker, etc. He also used the more general example of how Batman is hated by the public, yet he's doing what he has to (similar to how he views George Bush).

Now my question is: Do you agree that the film was a parallel to the current Bush Administration/the War on Terror, and if so, do you think this was an intentional and/or prominent theme in the movie?

I'd very much appreciate any feedback on this, thanks.

i do not agree.

Although i can see how someone could get the idea, but Bush's administration's actions are more questonable than Batman's motives.

There is the whole, Bush's election was rigged and this is a war to seize oil in the middle east. There was that whole deal in fahrenheit 9-11, how Bush catered the arabs, and actually had no proof to go to war and that his administration didnt even know they had evidence. What is the truth? im not sure what to believe. It's not like Batman has his own agenda behind his message of hope and justice. He is not as questionable as Bush, and Batman got Falcone and his men behind bars, with all the evidence there. Bush however, where are the WMDs? It has gone from stopping terrorism and finding osama, to stopping saddam cuz he helped some al queda fugitives, when Bush did the same thing just prior to 9/11!!

the only thing similar to Bush, is Batman is hated by some and liked by few, it's kind of like nascar. I can see how a person can try and relate these things but it just doesnt work out, Batman is a vigilante but still a hero. Bush? idk, usa needs some change, change that we can believe in

Originally posted by Endrict Nuul
Why to people always gotta pick out political meanings in movies? Why can't they just watch and enjoy it.... I agree. There are always going to be parallels but I never read too much into them.

Um, no... Just, no...

Originally posted by Endrict Nuul
Why to people always gotta pick out political meanings in movies? Why can't they just watch and enjoy it....

There was an article in the New Yorker, I think it was, that discussed this. What I find mockingly intertesting about the Republicans trying to cash in on the publicity and success of this film in an election season is that (A) no one involved in the making of this film was trying to compare or contrast any of the characters in it to anyone in the real world (B) that they're desperately clinging to George W. Bush who is serving the last few months of his dismally failed 2 term presidency and can not be re-elected (C) that none of the people making this claim seemed to have found any reference to John McCain in this movie.

I listened to Rush Limbaugh babble for an hour over this article and the apparently blatant comparrison to Dubya doing what was right in the face of a world that hates him for it and I kept thinking to myself what it was about the world that just didn't click for the man. Bush is over. And I'm fairly certain that Batman wouldn't have started a 6 year war for no good reason, let the economy crash or looted the treasury and left it in trillions of dollars worth of debt. Baman could find Osama bin Laden.

In other words, I think this thread should be closed.

I see no reason at all why this topic should be closed. It pertains to the film completely and it is something I'm genuinely interested in.

As for the rest of your post, thanks for the contribution, I'd like to hear more opinions.

Originally posted by SnakeEyes
During the past week or so, I've been telling my boss at work that he needs to see The Dark Knight due to how good it is. He finally saw it, and he asked me "Did you catch the main theme of the movie?" I told him, "Well, yeah, a lot of it dealt with the corruption of man as a whole, etc." And he said "No, no, no."

At this point he explained to me how the whole movie paralleled our current war on terrorism (Batman being the Bush Administration, The Joker representing the terrorists in the Middle East). He supported this using the example about how Batman uses the sonar/wire-tapping technique to spy on people in order to catch The Joker, etc. He also used the more general example of how Batman is hated by the public, yet he's doing what he has to (similar to how he views George Bush).

Now my question is: Do you agree that the film was a parallel to the current Bush Administration/the War on Terror, and if so, do you think this was an intentional and/or prominent theme in the movie?

I'd very much appreciate any feedback on this, thanks.
I get what your Boss is saying, and personally I'm going to avoid putting up my political views in this matter or reading anyone else's posts, due to me getting rather angry at people for their idiotic beliefs.
That said, I think it's just a movie, and you can relate things to Bush or what not, but that's not really what the director meant, I can't imagine that being the point of The Dark Knight, it was simply entertainment. But your boss at least didn't pick out something ridiculous, he said something that you actually could relate to the movie. I've heard things from The queen in Aliens being related to black women, and of course I think we all heard the BS 300's creators are racists thing. Most of these theories are just stuff people want to see.

There are an obvious number of references to current events in the film - Wire Tapping, the treatment of criminals, a villain who simply wants to create chaos for no good reason (like terrorists), video tapes of people being forced to say things, then promptly murdered, paralleling some of the death videos that the terrorists make, and others . But I gotta reject the idea that Batman is supposed to represent Bush. The fact that Batman is simply covering up for someone ELSES vile deeds and allowing the public to hate him in order for Dent's character status to stay glowing and positive really has no parallels to Bush.

It's an interesting theory, though.

Thanks Backfire, I think that was the most intelligent post yet in this topic. I talked it over a bit more with him, and it sounds as though he thinks Batman represents the U.S. as a whole and not necessarily Bush himself.

That makes a bit more sense, but seeing as it's made by a brit, I doubt that.

I think it's more a glorified employment of steady and heroic ideals, than any specific person or country or anything like that.

batman is a hero, bush admin. not so much.

why's batman meddlin in the affairs of gotham, he lives there, the streets need to be clean

whats bush admin'/usa doin in iraq? liberating the country? freeing them? etc.

its not quite the same. Batman has all the business in the world to stop terror and criminals in his own town. how would we feel in foreign soldiers patrolled our streets, and they didnt know who the enemy was cuz of a language barrier. well idk im canadian

I can see the parallels of your bosses opinion. Although, I'm sure it wasn't the movie makers intentions.

Originally posted by SnakeEyes
During the past week or so, I've been telling my boss at work that he needs to see The Dark Knight due to how good it is. He finally saw it, and he asked me "Did you catch the main theme of the movie?" I told him, "Well, yeah, a lot of it dealt with the corruption of man as a whole, etc." And he said "No, no, no."

At this point he explained to me how the whole movie paralleled our current war on terrorism (Batman being the Bush Administration, The Joker representing the terrorists in the Middle East). He supported this using the example about how Batman uses the sonar/wire-tapping technique to spy on people in order to catch The Joker, etc. He also used the more general example of how Batman is hated by the public, yet he's doing what he has to (similar to how he views George Bush).

Now my question is: Do you agree that the film was a parallel to the current Bush Administration/the War on Terror, and if so, do you think this was an intentional and/or prominent theme in the movie?

I'd very much appreciate any feedback on this, thanks.

I think your boss took this film waaaaay too seriously. Rather than enjoy the story and entertain himself...he try to find connections with the film and current political events.

This has happen before with other films. Land of the Dead is such case, there was also the same theory with Episode III. Heck! Even M. Night's The Village was consider some sorta of a metaphor for modern day america.

I can't change your opinion nor your boss opinion. But I think is time people need to start learning to have some fun.

Stop looking for signs of things everywhere. Connecting 2+2 will give you 4....it will never give you a 8...never...no matter how much philosophy thinking you can come up....

Sure, I'll give you the fact that Harvey Dent say the word "terrorist" but life is always been like that...terrorism didn't begin with 9/11 and it certainly will not end there...

Basically and to the core not directly at you....Stop over analyzing everything and watch the movie.

the only things that should be analyzed in this film are the themes (& or symbols) in the film, such as morality, the defined line between chaos & order, themes beyond good vs evil, human logic, or duality for example

I think there are some similarities and yes they were put there on purpose but I actually think Batman is doing is the right way (as in he only gave one man control over the surveillance equipment and didn't oversee it himself and he had it destroyed immediately) and that the Bush administration is doing it the wrong way. That's how I took it anyway. *shrugs*. But I did think they were purposely using language like terrorism etc to draw comparisons at certain points of the movie but you also have to consider the fact that American super heroes have kind of always been paralleled to American politics in some shape or form. When you think about it there really aren't very man non American produced super heroes because the super heroes usually reflect how we view ourselves and what we believe people should do in general as an American culture so you will often find mini political implications IMO in comic book movies etc because that's how our culture is. Just my two cents.

Seemed like a batman movie to me

Thread doesn't need to be closed; it's a worthwhile discussion, even if some people are reaching with the parallels. The word terrorist will continue to be associated with 9/11, the Bush presidency & the War in Iraq for a long time to come. Any film that uses the term will have to deal with the scrutiny. Hell, I remember when New Line Cinema was concerned with the upcoming release of LOTR:The Two Towers - a year after 9/11 - just because of the name.

Originally posted by roughrider
Hell, I remember when New Line Cinema was concerned with the upcoming release of LOTR:The Two Towers - a year after 9/11 - just because of the name.

That is because there are some really illiterate morons in this country that read far too much into things like this and they're spending too much time listening to Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh.

Originally posted by Mairuzu
Seemed like a batman movie to me

NO WAY!!! this is a Batman movie? I though is was a political movie done by Moore.

Fahrenheit Why So Serious

Funny: Batman or Bush?

Interesting to note: most people in this thread who don't think those themes are there on purpose are liberals who don't support the Bush administration. Shocking coincidence.

The answer is: yes. Of course it's there on purpose.

It's not the main point of the movie or anything, but those questions are raised to be thought about and discussed. I'd say the movie is more about modern America after 9/11 than the war in iraq in particular.

All the points raised in the opening post are valid: Batman is around the law, uses wire-tapping like technology, interrogates through torture (maroni's broken legs, anybody?), and does whatever he has to to get the job done.

I don't think he's meant to represent Bush or his administration, but rather the general American attitude towards terrorism after 9/11. (and let's not pretend that in the first few months when everybody was scared that we weren't all at least halfway thinking: "Do whatever, however to keep us safe."

And further, this isn't necessarily presented as a good thing. In fact, it makes Batman look kinda scummy and Luscious Fox is against it. I think that's the Nolan brothers position on things, IMO.

Alfred on the other hand is your John McCain, with his polite but firm "Stay the course" advice about being hated and burning down the village to catch the bandit.

The movie isn't pro-Bush as some would seem to say, but it also is definitely asking some big questions about things behind the comic story and it's all rather obvious. (if you're pro-bush, it's easy to say that he's like batman doing all these things for the greater good and so on, but you'd be remiss to not take the other points into consideration: alot of good people die, close friends and family are destroyed, and you're not better off than you started...which again I think was a clear point of Nolan's.)

You can look at the whole "Escalation" theme and see where just like Batman being in gotham and getting rid of Falcone brought the joker, the US (who I believe Batman stands for) being in Baghdad and getting rid of Saddam only brought more destruction than what was there under Saddam.

But whatever. People see what they want, I guess.

To me:

Joker - Liberals. Full of chaos and doing whatever they want, when they want. Society will be destroyed by legal drugs, prostitution, abortion, gay marriage, polygamy, transsexual men who have babies, etc... and will be a bunch of "civilized people who eat each other." if the libs have their way and America becomes a secular-progressive nation like Holland. Some of the above things are already happening and our country has gotten progressively worse.

Batman- conservatives. Kicking butt and taking names, standing for justice and what's right and decent. What was good and could be again. Belief in people that they do deep down want to do what's right and moral.

ummm....yea right

When I see a movie I couldn't care less whether or not it has political overtones. Just about every film does, but I don't pay attention to it, let alone worry about it.

Back at work today. argued more with my boss. In addition to what he said previously, now he is saying that the opening shot of the film (panning forward in Chicago/Gotham until it stops and the window blows out) is a parralel to 9/11. Personally, I just don't believe that's an allusion to current events.

Your boss either thinks too much or is nuts. Tell him, just watch the focking movie and enjoy it for what it is.

Originally posted by SnakeEyes
During the past week or so, I've been telling my boss at work that he needs to see The Dark Knight due to how good it is. He finally saw it, and he asked me "Did you catch the main theme of the movie?" I told him, "Well, yeah, a lot of it dealt with the corruption of man as a whole, etc." And he said "No, no, no."

At this point he explained to me how the whole movie paralleled our current war on terrorism (Batman being the Bush Administration, The Joker representing the terrorists in the Middle East). He supported this using the example about how Batman uses the sonar/wire-tapping technique to spy on people in order to catch The Joker, etc. He also used the more general example of how Batman is hated by the public, yet he's doing what he has to (similar to how he views George Bush).

Now my question is: Do you agree that the film was a parallel to the current Bush Administration/the War on Terror, and if so, do you think this was an intentional and/or prominent theme in the movie?

I'd very much appreciate any feedback on this, thanks.


If you look hard enough you can find a political metaphor relating to your personal interests in just about anything. How certain are you that your Boss wasn't being facetious?

I suppose it is a creative correlation that your Boss came up with, but i think the only credence to his metaphor lies in his mind. Many Batman story lines usually have both, heavy political and societal undertones. Unlike many other vigilante's, Batmans' character (or the comic in general) tries to explore more philosophies other than what is right and what is wrong. In the comics, Batman ALWAYS does what it takes to complete his goals, if he believes he is right. The joker IS a terrorist, so, in this regard i don't know what your boss thinks he discovered other than common knowledge.

As for the Sonar gadget. It is very possible that Nolan and company were inspired by the topical issue of wire tapping in it's creation. I would wage, however, if this were the case. It was an isolated inspiration that comes not only from the current issue's of wire tapping, but the age old fear of big brother and the moral questions of how much is to much power. I could be wrong, but i think that Nolan and company were only trying to make a good crime thriller based off of comic characters and not pose any questions that the Batman comics haven't already asked.

Originally posted by SnakeEyes
I see no reason at all why this topic should be closed. It pertains to the film completely and it is something I'm genuinely interested in.

As for the rest of your post, thanks for the contribution, I'd like to hear more opinions. SnakeEyes, this is an interesting topic you brought up. I do think that the parallels are coincidental. I belive there was no intention of having the movie resemble our current war.

Originally posted by Quincy
I can see the parallels of your bosses opinion. Although, I'm sure it wasn't the movie makers intentions. Originally posted by Endrict Nuul
Your boss either thinks too much or is nuts. Tell him, just watch the focking movie and enjoy it for what it is. Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
I think your boss took this film waaaaay too seriously. Rather than enjoy the story and entertain himself...he try to find connections with the film and current political events.

This has happen before with other films. Land of the Dead is such case, there was also the same theory with Episode III. Heck! Even M. Night's The Village was consider some sorta of a metaphor for modern day america.

I can't change your opinion nor your boss opinion. But I think is time people need to start learning to have some fun.

Stop looking for signs of things everywhere. Connecting 2+2 will give you 4....it will never give you a 8...never...no matter how much philosophy thinking you can come up....

Sure, I'll give you the fact that Harvey Dent say the word "terrorist" but life is always been like that...terrorism didn't begin with 9/11 and it certainly will not end there...

Basically and to the core not directly at you....Stop over analyzing everything and watch the movie.
agreed with all three of those quotes. i dont have a problem with ur boss finding parallels, its jst hes connecting it to us and thinking over his head. and im bugged at how he thinks thats the theme. YOUR original theme was correct.

Again every one skips the fact that in this film a terrorist is killing people by using bombs and broadcasts home made videos of victims tied up, while Batman fights when the people want him to give in. And Alfred (as I said, in the John McCain role) politely but firmly advises him to "stay the course". Fear in the public, wiretapping, torturing for info? (maroni)

Can nobody really see the parallels?

Like I said in my first post (would love some real responses to it, btw), they aren't the main point of the movie or anything, but it is asking us questions about how we've all changed since 9/11. And it's there and not too hard to find.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Again every one skips the fact that in this film a terrorist is killing people by using bombs and broadcasts home made videos of victims tied up, while Batman fights when the people want him to give in. And Alfred (as I said, in the John McCain role) politely but firmly advises him to "stay the course". Fear in the public, wiretapping, torturing for info? (maroni)

Can nobody really see the parallels?

Like I said in my first post (would love some real responses to it, btw), they aren't the main point of the movie or anything, but it is asking us questions about how we've all changed since 9/11. And it's there and not too hard to find.

And the Joker hasn't been doing that since his first appearance in issue no.1 in 1940? In the very first issue he murdered people and made threats over the radio! I get the cell-phone set up being a point you guys can bring up, but can the Republican's really be so desperate for inspirational figures in their party that they have to point at a comic book character and claim he represent's their president that can not be re-elected? Desperately searching for themes that don't exist is typically the accusation leved against the intellectual, touchy-feely, "f@ggots" that spend too much time inside their own heads. At the very least, folks like Mr. Limbaugh and the gentleman who wrote the article should realize the hypocrisy of their accusations when the tables are turned and the straw-clutching is their claim against the other side.

And I agree with that. It's not necessarily supposed to be some pro-rebuclican, pro-bush film. It's actually critical of Batman's stance, especially in the character of Lucious Fox.

See my original post:


"It's not the main point of the movie or anything, but those questions are raised to be thought about and discussed. I'd say the movie is more about modern America after 9/11 than the war in iraq in particular.

All the points raised in the opening post are valid: Batman is around the law, uses wire-tapping like technology, interrogates through torture (maroni's broken legs, anybody?), and does whatever he has to to get the job done.

I don't think he's meant to represent Bush or his administration, but rather the general American attitude towards terrorism after 9/11. (and let's not pretend that in the first few months when everybody was scared that we weren't all at least halfway thinking: "Do whatever, however to keep us safe."

And further, this isn't necessarily presented as a good thing. In fact, it makes Batman look kinda scummy and Luscious Fox is against it. I think that's the Nolan brothers position on things, IMO.

Alfred on the other hand is your John McCain, with his polite but firm "Stay the course" advice about being hated and burning down the village to catch the bandit.

The movie isn't pro-Bush as some would seem to say, but it also is definitely asking some big questions about things behind the comic story and it's all rather obvious. (if you're pro-bush, it's easy to say that he's like batman doing all these things for the greater good and so on, but you'd be remiss to not take the other points into consideration: alot of good people die, close friends and family are destroyed, and you're not better off than you started...which again I think was a clear point of Nolan's.)

You can look at the whole "Escalation" theme and see where just like Batman being in gotham and getting rid of Falcone brought the joker, the US (who I believe Batman stands for) being in Baghdad and getting rid of Saddam only brought more destruction than what was there under Saddam.

But whatever. People see what they want, I guess."

Originally posted by sithsaber408
And I agree with that. It's not necessarily supposed to be some pro-rebuclican, pro-bush film. It's actually critical of Batman's stance, especially in the character of Lucious Fox.

See my original post:


"It's not the main point of the movie or anything, but those questions are raised to be thought about and discussed. I'd say the movie is more about modern America after 9/11 than the war in iraq in particular.

All the points raised in the opening post are valid: Batman is around the law, uses wire-tapping like technology, interrogates through torture (maroni's broken legs, anybody?), and does whatever he has to to get the job done.

I don't think he's meant to represent Bush or his administration, but rather the general American attitude towards terrorism after 9/11. (and let's not pretend that in the first few months when everybody was scared that we weren't all at least halfway thinking: "Do whatever, however to keep us safe."

And further, this isn't necessarily presented as a good thing. In fact, it makes Batman look kinda scummy and Luscious Fox is against it. I think that's the Nolan brothers position on things, IMO.

Alfred on the other hand is your John McCain, with his polite but firm "Stay the course" advice about being hated and burning down the village to catch the bandit.

The movie isn't pro-Bush as some would seem to say, but it also is definitely asking some big questions about things behind the comic story and it's all rather obvious. (if you're pro-bush, it's easy to say that he's like batman doing all these things for the greater good and so on, but you'd be remiss to not take the other points into consideration: alot of good people die, close friends and family are destroyed, and you're not better off than you started...which again I think was a clear point of Nolan's.)

You can look at the whole "Escalation" theme and see where just like Batman being in gotham and getting rid of Falcone brought the joker, the US (who I believe Batman stands for) being in Baghdad and getting rid of Saddam only brought more destruction than what was there under Saddam.

But whatever. People see what they want, I guess."

So, you are under the impression that we've had 8 years of Batman as president and are expecting at least 4 more with Alfred Pennyworth? Oh, right Batman is America, but Alfred the butler is John McCain.

Now, as I said, the Joker has been doing all these things for the last 70 years. He's blown things up, killed people, devilverd tapes to news stations, taken over broadcasts, radio addresses, poisoned the water, murdered to make his point and he's been doing it far longer than bin Laden has been alive.

Of course he has.

But you don't find those other inclusions to be a little bit of a....coincidence, I guess? I mean the torture and wiretap stuff? The fear of the populace to give in to what he wants and all that? The whole "stay the course" logic that Alfred has?

Again, I'm saying that first and foremost it's a comic film (the BEST ever, in fact), but also that Nolan is a very talented and intelligent filmaker and I believe that there are quite a few sublte nods to current events/cultural attitudes that are included to provoke thought.

And not necissarily in Bush's favor either. I mean in a more general way.

But to me it's all right there and the thread starters boss and anybody else who picks up on the obvious is right on. In fact, I got that Alfred "Stay the course" bit from the New York Times film review, so apparently others are picking up on it too. (another review, can't remember which, metioned the "escalation" theme and how it compares specifically to the war in iraq, i.e, that our presence may have just made things worse.)

The dark knight was a bad movie...Gearge bush was a bad president....there you go

Originally posted by SnakeEyes
During the past week or so, I've been telling my boss at work that he needs to see The Dark Knight due to how good it is. He finally saw it, and he asked me "Did you catch the main theme of the movie?" I told him, "Well, yeah, a lot of it dealt with the corruption of man as a whole, etc." And he said "No, no, no."

At this point he explained to me how the whole movie paralleled our current war on terrorism (Batman being the Bush Administration, The Joker representing the terrorists in the Middle East). He supported this using the example about how Batman uses the sonar/wire-tapping technique to spy on people in order to catch The Joker, etc. He also used the more general example of how Batman is hated by the public, yet he's doing what he has to (similar to how he views George Bush).

Now my question is: Do you agree that the film was a parallel to the current Bush Administration/the War on Terror, and if so, do you think this was an intentional and/or prominent theme in the movie?

I'd very much appreciate any feedback on this, thanks.

Yeah I have to agree with your boss on this.Those were kinda my thoughts when wacthing this movie.Thats the thing I have always enjoyed about the Nolan Batman movies and always hated about that horrible Burton/Scumacher franchise is the Nolan Batman movies have realism and believeability in them.In real life,Batman would not be able to operate outside the law and take the law into his own hands and kill people and be treated like a hero for it like he was in the Burton films.Where in the Nolan films,its much more realistic and believeable cause he does all these great things like bringing in all these big time criminals but he is STILL wanted by the law which is the way it WOULD be.

But getting back to what your boss said,those were my thoughts as well the way Batman was playing big brother spying on every citizen to get to the joker.Nobody should have that kind of power,yet because of Bush,the us government DOES now and 1984 and what you read about in that novel Brave New World,thats happening right now at this moment thanks to Bush and his designed 9/11 plan.The only difference here is Batman US doing what he has to do and is hated for no good reason at all where Bush is lying to the public about his war on terror and is using it against the people with his wire tapping and everything he has abused so people have good solid reasons to hate Bush and want to see HIM impeached for his crimes.

I very much view this film as a parrallel on Bushs so called war on terrorism.I totally agree with your boss.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Of course he has.

But you don't find those other inclusions to be a little bit of a....coincidence, I guess? I mean the torture and wiretap stuff? The fear of the populace to give in to what he wants and all that? The whole "stay the course" logic that Alfred has?

Again, I'm saying that first and foremost it's a comic film (the BEST ever, in fact), but also that Nolan is a very talented and intelligent filmaker and I believe that there are quite a few sublte nods to current events/cultural attitudes that are included to provoke thought.

And not necissarily in Bush's favor either. I mean in a more general way.

But to me it's all right there and the thread starters boss and anybody else who picks up on the obvious is right on. In fact, I got that Alfred "Stay the course" bit from the New York Times film review, so apparently others are picking up on it too. (another review, can't remember which, metioned the "escalation" theme and how it compares specifically to the war in iraq, i.e, that our presence may have just made things worse.)

Yeah, I "get it". I just don't think it's the flag waving madness and intentional Bushgasm you want it to represent. And the reason that so many people who agree with you are in such a joyus twist over it is because you think it clearly represents the good-intentioned, doing it for the people, totally non-malicious and heroic reasons that Batman breaks the law and that in the end Mr. Bush will do the right thing and destroy his illegal machine. You look at it as a validation of everything you've been saying for the last 6 years.

So the more you're telling us that Bush is the Batman who does the right thing and ends up getting hated for it even though he's doing it for our own good does not correspond to your admittance that he's broken the law. Im sorry, but The Joker nor Osama bin Laden are terrorizing us and holding us hostage. Bin Laden is not out for chaos and the only thing stopping him is George Bush swinging from the rooftops. It's an absoultely pathetic attempt to cash in on the publicity and success of a movie in a season when the Republicans are not doing so well. And if it were the democrats who were drawing a comparisson, Mr. Limbaugh would be sitting on his face blowing hard out of his ass telling the world how silly and stupid it really was. So, remember that the next time some neo-con leader casts dispersion on some silly tactic a democrat uses that involves using the brain. They've spent the last year telling us how all these liberal hollywood war movies and television shows have tanked because America can see through the liberal effort to discredit the war on terror, and now they're saying that the most successful movie of the year is really a huge metaphore for the war on terror?

*sighs*

I only said about 5 times that I DON'T think it's about Bush personally or a ringing endorsement of his administration. So stop saying that I do and that there are others "agreeing with you".


I said that I think it's meant to have us ask questions about the country, the feelings in society, and what we've allowed to happen.

I think that the film is in fact criticizing those type of actions (seen by all the death, loss, and destruction in everybody's lives) and that the Nolan's are probablly liberal and against Bush/Iraq/war on terror.

Limbaugh and any others who don't catch that part of the film are simply too dense to realize that the film is showing a critical look at what happens when you have that mentality: people, good people that you care about die and you are outcast. Is it worth it?

In their ignorance, they jump up and down and wave the film as some Bush endorsement, when really it's more of a critique on American society in the last 7 years.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
*sighs*

I only said about 5 times that I DON'T think it's about Bush personally or a ringing endorsement of his administration. So stop saying that I do and that there are others "agreeing with you".


I said that I think it's meant to have us ask questions about the country, the feelings in society, and what we've allowed to happen.

I think that the film is in fact criticizing those type of actions (seen by all the death, loss, and destruction in everybody's lives) and that the Nolan's are probablly liberal and against Bush/Iraq/war on terror.

Limbaugh and any others who don't catch that part of the film are simply too dense to realize that the film is showing a critical look at what happens when you have that mentality: people, good people that you care about die and you are outcast. Is it worth it?

In their ignorance, they jump up and down and wave the film as some Bush endorsement, when really it's more of a critique on American society in the last 7 years.

No, I heard you say it. But then you go on to say that while Batman is representative of America, The Joker is liberals who rape animals and marry the same sex and leave babies in parked cars with the windows rolled up and that John McCain is Alfred.

Someone probably already brought this up, but the Conservative right has cried and cried for years how Hollywood was nothing more than a liberal breeding ground and movies were nothing more than disguised propaganda to push "liberal views".

But since TDK is doing so extremely well (especially with the younger crowds) they're laying siege to it and claiming Conservative similarities with the film? What petty and backhanded tactics, but hey, getting them while they're young has always been a Conservo tactic.

Edit: Who would Fox be in the film then by Conservo rational? Since he's the one who ultimately does the right thing by destroying the machine?

Originally posted by Robtard
Edit: Who would Fox be in the film then by Conservo rational? Since he's the one who ultimately does the right thing by destroying the machine?

Colin Powell? And Alfred is John McCain. The Joker is Osama bin Laden/Hitler/f@ggot liberals/Chinese lead in our toys/dey tuk ur jhobsss! And Joe Liberman is Two-Face and Rachel Daws is Condoleeza Rice and Dead Batman wanna be that hit the window is Karl Rove and George Bush senior is Jim Gordon and God in the Nolanverse is literally played by the late Ronald Reagan. And Scarecrow is the liberal media. And in the next one the Riddler will be Barack Obama and Catwoman will be Hillary Clinton. (or Nancy Pelosi. We have to see if she's free that weekend) Batwoman IS Nancy Reagan.

How did this even get to 3 pages? Movies are a form of art, and art is always up for interpretation, especially when the artist is Christopher Nolan. If you want the movie to be political, these posts have all proven that evidence can be found that backs it up. But to me, and maybe I'm the only one who thinks this way, but Batman isn't about Democrats vs. Republicans or liberals vs. conservatives. Batman is about right vs. wrong and that's something that transcends political parties. No, Batman has his flaws and it's up to the individual to decide whether Lucius Fox was right or not in his stance. I will say, though, that even though Batman is one of the greatest and most recognizable symbols of good, the comics and the movies go to great lengths to portray him as three-dimensional, which means he has his flaws and he makes errors in judgment at times...which, holy cow, liberals and conservatives both do on occasion also. It's a movie.

batman is not comparable to Bush

batman went after the joker (everyone in society agrees this is a good thing)

bush went after Saddam (most people in society thought this was the wrong thing to do)

while batman is similar to bush in that they both utilize whatever means necessary to achieve their goals, batman's goal is undeniably noble and heroic whereas Bush's is much more of a question mark

Originally posted by willofthewisp
It's a movie.

No. It's a loaded political commentary on America and the War on Terror and how justifiable the actions and attitude of the current administration are in acheiving their noble, noble goals of keeping us safe at night. (No one goes out anymore because we're all broke. I guess looting the economy is a justifiable method of protecting us from the bad people that roam the streets, sidewalks and alleys of every American city. Be curful, they gonna git ya!)

Originally posted by Devil King
No, I heard you say it. But then you go on to say that while Batman is representative of America, The Joker is liberals who rape animals and marry the same sex and leave babies in parked cars with the windows rolled up and that John McCain is Alfred.

That was a joke.

I thought the little "shifty" smilie afterword was obvious that I was screwing around.

Trust me, I realize it's a joke. A very large joke that you believe is true and representative of the opinion of the "real" American public.

Originally posted by Devil King
No. It's a loaded political commentary on America and the War on Terror and how justifiable the actions and attitude of the current administration are in acheiving their noble, noble goals of keeping us safe at night. (No one goes out anymore because we're all broke. I guess looting the economy is a justifiable method of protecting us from the bad people that roam the streets, sidewalks and alleys of every American city. Be curful, they gonna git ya!)

So when everyone in the world agrees with a stupid president's stupid decision, movies are just movies, but when no one in the world agrees with a president's correct decision, movies are political statements? I guess There's Something About Mary spoke volumes about Clinton's decisions. I mean, flashbacks of 1970s prom? Obviously a reference to Clinton sending the military to Somalia without even knowing what the hell was going on. The little dog obviously was a symbol meant to show that after the embassy bombings in Kenya and the bombing of the Cole, Clinton was justified in doing, oh, NOTHING. The hair gel? That's too easy, so I won't say anything more about it. If you thought The Dark Knight was political and was a statement directly about the Bush administration, go ahead and think so. You have evidence and it's not a stupid thing to believe. But movies are art and if people who don't let movies influence their political ideologies say it's just a movie, they have something going for them too.

Originally posted by willofthewisp
So when everyone in the world agrees with a stupid president's stupid decision, movies are just movies, but when no one in the world agrees with a president's correct decision, movies are political statements? I guess There's Something About Mary spoke volumes about Clinton's decisions. I mean, flashbacks of 1970s prom? Obviously a reference to Clinton sending the military to Somalia without even knowing what the hell was going on. The little dog obviously was a symbol meant to show that after the embassy bombings in Kenya and the bombing of the Cole, Clinton was justified in doing, oh, NOTHING. The hair gel? That's too easy, so I won't say anything more about it. If you thought The Dark Knight was political and was a statement directly about the Bush administration, go ahead and think so. You have evidence and it's not a stupid thing to believe. But movies are art and if people who don't let movies influence their political ideologies say it's just a movie, they have something going for them too.

Next time you complain about a thread being three pages long, maybe you should take the time to read those pages and figure out where people stand on the issue and which of them are expressing an opinion with which you disagree.

Originally posted by willofthewisp
It's a movie.

And movies are often used to push political views; sometimes overt and sometimes covert. Look at the upcoming film W, do you honestly think that'll just be entertainment for the sake of it? Yeah, Oliver has no ulterior motive there.

Last year, a lot of people accused 300 of being a metaphor of the war on terror: big buff English-speaking white guys heroically battling monstrous invaders from the Middle East for a noble cause. Now whether it was true or not, I can see the argument. Same with The Dark Knight and the current political climate. If you sit down and think about it, The Joker as a stand-in for the terrorists isn't 100% outlandish. For one, he technically is a terrorist, kills people and puts it on the internet (which didn't exist in 1940), likes explosions and killing random people, has mindless followers, fires RPG's at armored vehicles, publicly mocks certain celebrities, and has no obvious motives.

Now I'm not about to agree with the claim that the new Batman movie is a veiled pro-Bush/America propaganda film, but I can definitely see the argument and parallels.

Eh there are political undertones to all comic book characters and their movies IMO. Comic book characters reflect our values and how we view justice. Spider Man 1 had the whole scene with the New Yorkers doing their whole "you mess with one of us you mess with us all!" dealio and then him ended up posted on the American flag. I don't know what the meaning of the political undertones in this film were, if they were critical of or supportive of certain things but yes I totally think they were there.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
(which didn't exist in 1940)

I saw The Joker make no use of the internet in The Dark Knight, but that is beside the point. He certainly did utilize the equivalent technology of the time. As I'm sure any number of historical terrorists would.

But I find the idea that there was a concerted effort on the part of the film makers to parallel the current American political climate to be absolutely absurd. Just because you point out certain movies or directors that have made blatant and self-admitted movies that are meant to serve a particular social and political point of view does not mean that this movie was made with that intention.

And when it came to the movie 300, it was the people from the Middle East that got bent out of shape first, but the same kind of people who are talking about TDK are the ones that absolutely wallowed in their own filth over the idea that an American movie caused those ignorant camel jockies to get their turbans in a twist.

Originally posted by Devil King

But I find the idea that there was a concerted effort on the part of the film makers to parallel the current American political climate to be absolutely absurd. Just because you point out certain movies or directors that have made blatant and self-admitted movies that are meant to serve a particular social and political point of view does not mean that this movie was made with that intention.



You and your co-writers put a lot of what many people take to be political metaphors in your Batman movies. Are these deliberate?

Nolan: Well, the simple answer is yes. That's not to say that we're trying to make political stories. That's not the case. We just write from the perspective of the world we live in, what interests us and frightens us. And one of the things we're very aware of right now is the idea of society breaking down. That's what we're doing with the Joker. He's essentially an anarchist. An agent of chaos, we like to call him.


http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20215252,00.html


So....no they aren't the main focus of the film, but YES they are there and intentional.

As I said.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
You and your co-writers put a lot of what many people take to be political metaphors in your Batman movies. Are these deliberate?

Nolan: Well, the simple answer is yes. That's not to say that we're trying to make political stories. That's not the case. We just write from the perspective of the world we live in, what interests us and frightens us. And one of the things we're very aware of right now is the idea of society breaking down. That's what we're doing with the Joker. He's essentially an anarchist. An agent of chaos, we like to call him.


http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20215252,00.html


So....no they aren't the main focus of the film, but YES they are there and intentional.

As I said.

Right. You highlighted where he says that they aren't political stories. And they aren't. They're Batman stories.

But you'd be remiss to skip where the questioner asks: "Are the political metaphors from you and your co-writers deliberate?" and Nolan responds: "YES."

They aren't the main point of the films, but are there to provoke thought and discussion. (pretty sure I've said that 6 or 7 times now)

In Nolan's words: "We write from the perspective of the world we live in, what interests/frightens us. We're aware that the idea of society is breaking down. Joker is an anarchist, etc...."

That to me says that while he's not trying to hit anybody over the head with a sledgehammer, he's very obviously included real-world political situations and ideas about our current post 9/11 society in the films.

They aren't necessarily pro-bush like some have asserted but they are there and they are deliberate. That's what Nolan himself said.


As I said.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Right. You highlighted where he says that they aren't political stories. And they aren't. They're Batman stories.

But you'd be remiss to skip where the questioner asks: "Are the political metaphors from you and your co-writers deliberate?" and Nolan responds: "YES."

They aren't the main point of the films, but are there to provoke thought and discussion. (pretty sure I've said that 6 or 7 times now)

In Nolan's words: "We write from the perspective of the world we live in, what interests/frightens us. We're aware that the idea of society is breaking down. Joker is an anarchist, etc...."

That to me says that while he's not trying to hit anybody over the head with a sledgehammer, he's very obviously included real-world political situations and ideas about our current post 9/11 society in the films.

They aren't necessarily pro-bush like some have asserted but they are there and they are deliberate. That's what Nolan himself said.


As I said.

I saw him say nothing about post-9/11 anything. I heard him say modern cultural paranoia. You can take that for what you take it, if you're a person that changed post-9/11. Consider those ho didn't, however.

So, if they "aren't political", I have a hard time understanding how you or others could possibly assume he's drawing a comparisson to Bush or McCain while bashing Obama or liberals. By claiming that his intention isn't political, no comparisson can be absolutely drawn by the audience in regards to 1) a political message being his intention or 2) current political figures being metaphored in this movie.

Saying that the Joker is a terrorist is certainly a referrence to modern life in a world that claims everything that isn't parallel to the current administration's one-sided claim of patriotism isn't the same as saying he intentionally involved metaphores about Bush or McCain or conservatives or liberals. Especially when being hit over the head with the obvious is what many like yourself are claiming about this movie; despite him saying such was not the case.

You know what's funny? When I saw this post I actually thought it was refering to this video I saw on CollegeHumor

go to collegehumor.com and look through the videos for Bush or Batman...it is pretty recent so it shouldn't take long to find

Now while it doesn't talk about TDK batman I still find it humorous and some of you may get a kick out of it.

Originally posted by HorseShoeKing
You know what's funny? When I saw this post I actually thought it was refering to this video I saw on CollegeHumor

go to collegehumor.com and look through the videos for Bush or Batman...it is pretty recent so it shouldn't take long to find

Now while it doesn't talk about TDK batman I still find it humorous and some of you may get a kick out of it.

A link to that video was posted in this thread already on the second page I believe.

My bad I thought I looked carefully before i Posted. guessed I overlooked it

I'd say Batman is comparable to Bush, in a way, looking at it from my angle.

Batman, in essence, protects interests. He seemingly does it for vengeance or for what he think is right but he'd capture, beat up, and arrest a petty bank robber who'd steal, lets say, 50 grand yet won't, if anything, rarely, do anything to and about white collar criminals, (even with all the super advanced tech he has) whom do more way, way damage to the general public. Case in point: what's going on now. (bailouts) No one wanted to correctly supervise and regulate the system cause of interests now look at what we're facing. I doubt a petty bank robber would cause this much turmoil. (Go after the little guy and use him as a scapegoat) Sounds like iraq in a small way.

For every Ken Lay or AIG that fails how many Petty penny criminals (compared to the mammoths) get overvilified, viciously pursued, caught, arrested, tried, and convicted. An great number, i assume. Not saying let them get away with it, but get the people on the top, just as much, as well. (whom do more damage)

Maybe your boss just wants to see Bush put on a cape and some spandex...

Originally posted by Blind
Maybe your boss just wants to see Bush put on a cape and some spandex...

Wow, thanks for that... colourful image...