Batman... comparable to George Bush?

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