The Dark Knight: Anarchy

Three years later, after Christopher Nolan reteamed with Christian Bale and Michael Caine to do The Prestige, the movie that broke countless box office records and proved that a comic book movie could be art arrived in theaters. I know I'm gushing, but The Dark Knight was an incredible film. Beware of some spoilers.

Knight continues working on the theme of fear that was introduced in Begins, but it looks at the nature of heroism as well, and touches on order vs. anarchy. But let's begin with fear. Batman's crusade of terrorizing Gotham City's criminals has worked well enough to reduce the various mob families into a single group trying to take back the streets. This has created a bit of a power vacuum, since the crime families no longer rule the street, and this has allowed small-time criminals to attain a level of power. One such small-timer was the Joker.

The Joker is unlike the mob, though. He uses theatrics, disguises his identity and is a loner. Sounds kind of like Batman. Allow me to take this opportunity to clear up my labeling of Batman as a terrorist. I find the character of Batman to be an interesting one (much more so than Superman), and he is truly a dark superhero. He breaks the law to protect innocents. There is an adage that claims that, "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter". George Washington fits that description; he was a terrorist to the British, but he did what he did for very principled reasons. Osama bin Laden may believe that he is helping a cause, but his violent acts are not justified, since he targets innocents. Batman may break the law, but he attacks the guilty, and does not kill.

The Joker is much closer to bin Laden, except he doesn't seem to be fighting for anything except chaos. Alfred summed it up best in the lines from the very first teaser trailer for the film:



The Joker uses fear against citizens, but does so in a way much more dangerously than the way Batman uses fear against the city's criminals. Batman strikes fear into the hearts of criminals to make them easier for him to take down. But it takes the truly crazy genius of the Joker to scare the citizens into doing his dirty work for him. The Joker believes that fear can force people to do anything, even turn against each other. For example, when a Wayne Enterprises employee threatened to expose Batman's identity, the Joker broadcasted a message to Gotham City telling them that if said employee weren't dead within an hour, he would blow up a hospital. And then, people listened. Fearful that a hospitalized loved one would die, they made the choice to take the life of another to prevent it.

Of course, the Joker isn't above doing some dirty work of his own, and he truly relishes it, making him all the more scary. Heath Ledger's performance as the Joker was beyond incredible; he effectively played a character devoid of morals or humanity. He knew no fear, not even of death (he was willing to blow up an entire roomful of people, including himself, to prevent being killed by a mobster)... or at least, he effectively convinced people he had no fear. But praise also goes to Aaron Eckhardt, playing District Attorney Harvey Dent. Referred to as Gotham's "White Knight", Dent brought hope to the people of Gotham because he was able to bring down the mob through legal channels. Dent's role in the film was to contrast with that of Batman; one is a vigilante and the other is an elected official. Both are heroes in their own right, each with their own limitations as well abilities that the other does not have. Eckhardt's portrayal of a man willing to do anything within his power, even if it meant self-sacrifice, to uphold the law was incredible. And then, when Dent became the man (men) he was destined to become, Eckhardt's performance changed into something even more incredible.

Of course, the entire cast deserves praise, as do Nolan, Goyer, and everyone involved. The Dark Knight once again proves that summer blockbusters can be smart and well-acted. Nolan is contracted for at least one more Batman movie (Bale I think has two more on contract), and I walked out of The Dark Knight wishing that the next one was already being filmed.

I do want to end this by talking about a couple of things I thought of while watching the movie, all of which had to do with a scene taking place towards the end. Therefore, if you haven't yet seen the movie, you may want to skip to the end. (Woot! Spaced reference!)

During the scene where two ferries were launched from Navy Pier (ok, so it wasn't Navy Pier in the film, but it was shot at Navy Pier), I started to wonder what the Joker's real intention was. When he radioed the boats to tell them that each boat had the detonator for the bomb on the other boat, I thought that he was lying, and that if a boat were to turn the key, they would blow themselves up. I also thought that the prisoners were going to be the noble ones and throw away the detonator (which is what actually happened), but I also thought that the citizens were going to go through with their plan to destroy the prisoners' boat (which, if I was correct about the detonators, would have blown themselves up). The Joker would be able to point out how crazy society is, and that "honest, law-abiding" citizens could be just as cruel and crazy as the people we lock up. Of course, this would have ruined the idea that people are redeemable (and further proves how sadistic I am when it comes to fictional characters; when I saw WALL-E, I hoped that, at the end, WALL-E would not regain his memory, and the end credits would show EVE teaching WALL-E how to be human, just as he originally taught her).

Up next: Last men, elected superheroes and Runaways...

Batman Begins: The Power of Fear

After doing a bunch of low-budget independent films, all of which received critical praise, Christopher Nolan said that it had always been a dream of his to direct a summer blockbuster. He didn't want to forsake his roots, and the result is one of the smartest and best-casted "blockbuster" ever produced. Batman Begins is a reboot of the Batman film series, since Warner Brothers wanted a clean slate after Batman and Robin (insert any joke you want here). I don't know how much of the planning of the movie can be credited to WB and how much to Nolan (I'm guessing the style was more Nolan and David Goyer's idea), but unlike the previous four Batman films, which were certainly "comic book movies", Batman Begins would be based in reality.

The first 45 minutes or so are presented out of chronological order; it begins with Bruce Wayne in a Bhutanese prison, where he willingly fights the other inmates with a kind of sick enjoyment. He is released by a man named Henri Ducard, who promises to teach him how to be a one-man force of justice. As Wayne trains under Ducard and Ra's al Ghul, we see how he came to be in an Asian prison. Childhood tragedy, disillusion with the legal system (the mob in Gotham City either owns the law, or they kill the idealists) and scared into leaving his home city brought him to Asia, where he fell in with criminals in order to develop the skills to take on Gotham's criminals. When his training with Ducard and Ra's al Ghul is complete, he learns that their definition of justice is slightly different from his own; al Ghul's League of Shadows believes that it is their job to eliminate (read: kill) not only criminals, but societies that "pose a threat" to the rest of humanity. Gotham City is next on their hit list, and they ask Wayne to lead a strike force to take down the crime-ridden city. Wayne vows that he will never kill in the name of justice, and destroys Ra's al Ghul's home during his escape.

He returns to Gotham City, masquerades as a clueless billionaire playboy by day, and develops the Batsuit and Batweapons with his butler Alfred and employee Lucius Fox. After a shaky start, he becomes a feared vigilante, a kind of spook story for criminals ("Be good, or the Batman will get you"). In a single night, he does something the cops and the District Attorney's office had been trying to do for years: take down the Falcone crime family.

But he soon learns that Falcone was up to something a little bigger than normal, involving a creepy psychiatrist named Jonathan Crane. Crane, also known as the Scarecrow, has developed a toxin that forces people who inhale it to experience their fears come to life. And that is as good a segway as any to discussing the film's major theme: fear.

The power of fear is prevalent throughout the film. A lot of Bruce Wayne's training involved conquering his fear of bats that he developed when he fell into the Batcave as a child. This fear is what caused him to ask his parents to leave the opera with him, leading to them getting shot, something he blamed himself for throughout the rest of his childhood. When Wayne returned to Gotham City, he chose the mantle of a bat, since he wanted to turn his fear onto those who use fear against the innocent. He uses detective skills, martial arts, and parlor tricks to confuse and frighten criminals with sudden appearances and quick takedowns. And he must prevent the Scarecrow's toxin from bringing the entire city to its knees with fear.

The Scarecrow and his boss are terrorists; they employ fear to achieve their goals. But then, so is Batman. To quote the first X-Files Movie, "The rational object of terrorism is to promote terror", and that is just what Batman does. On that note, I would like to share an interesting article I found on The Onion's AV Club; they reported on an op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal that claimed that the new Batman film, The Dark Knight, is a parable for the presidency of George W. Bush (gag reflex!). Check it out. Now, assuming none of the things the AV writer said were true (which they all are; there is a difference between a vigilante and an elected official), the fact would remain that the WSJ writer called the president a terrorist. Very interesting.

But Batman Begins is held together by more than just a compelling and well-applied theme (something usually lacking in summer blockbusters). The story and cast are wonderful. Christian Bale, Michael Caine, Liam Neeson, Morgan Freeman, Cillian Murphy, Rutger Hauer and Katie Holmes make up one of the best casts ever assembled for a big-budget blockbuster (pretty much only trumped by the cast of the sequel), and they are all at the top of their games. And the real-world style of the film, which redesigns many aspects of the Dark Knight's world and arsenal, makes disbelief easier to suspend than ever.

Batman Begins was a triumph. Not just for comic book films, but for films in general. It showed that superheroes can be serious, that blockbusters can be well made, and that intellectual themes can be backed up with great action scenes. But it was nothing compared with what was to come.

Up next: Darkest before the dawn...

The Prestige: Real Magic

I am doing this movie out of release date order since I want to keep the two Batman films together; The Prestige was released in between the two of them. This movie was adapted from a book written by Christopher Priest, and is probably one of the best adaptations ever produced. This is not because of the faithfulness to the plot; for the most part, it is the same story, but changes are made for dramatic and medium purposes. Nolan is obviously a man who understands that books and film are two completely different media, and something that may work in one may not work in the other. No, this is a great adaptation because the movie stays true to the themes of the book, most notably, the idea of obsession.

Taking place in London at the end of the 19th century, The Prestige follows the careers of two stage magicians, starting at their humble beginnings and following them through their struggles, their fame and fortune, and their obsessions, which threaten to tear them apart. However, we don't see these occur in that order. The story begins toward the end, chronologically, and we are filled in on past events through diaries. To make matters even more complex, Christian Bale's Alfred Borden reads the diary of his rival (Hugh Jackman's Robert Angier), much of which is comprised of Angier reporting on the findings from reading Borden's diary. We often see events from one perspective that take on a new meaning once we see them from another (sort of like misdirection, a staple of all magic tricks).

Most of the action is from Angier's perspective, and we are endeared to him as he tries to compete with the shadowy Borden. Angier is a terrific showman; he can add class and flair to any illusion. Unfortunately, he needs to have the methods of illusions explained to him. It is very hard for him to discern where the trick lies on his own. Borden, on the other hand, is a master of illusions, but he needs help developing his ability to entertain. Each man strives to be a great magician, and if they were to work together, their success would have known no bounds. Unfortunately, due to a tragic event, they become bitter enemies.

Initially, Angier becomes obsessed with getting revenge on Borden, believing he is responsible for the death of Angier's wife. When Borden unveils a phenominal teleportation illusion, Angier's new mission (obsession) is to understand how it works. Borden's obsession is protecting his secret at all costs. Angier, along with his engineer and on-stage assistant, stage a knock-off that impresses audiences due to its flashiness, but Angier's obsession with performing the trick the way Borden does threatens everything else in his life. Of course, Borden's life is no easier, despite what Angier believes. Borden is so protective over his secret that he keeps his own family in the dark about it, and stays in character as his on-stage persona whenever he is in public, much to the chagrin of his wife.

The lengths that each man goes to in order to fulfill their obsession are incredible. I've talked about obsession before, in my posts about Sweeney Todd, where I noted that it can destroy the obsessor. The situation is no different here; death may not be the result, but as the old saying goes, there are fates much worse than death. Each man is willing to lose nearly everything (one does have something they truly care about aside from themselves), even forsake things they once held very dear.

Of course, watching how obsession destroys us would be pointless if we didn't care about who was being destroyed. Nolan effectively creates intriguing characters that we can feel an attachment to withing the first act of the film. And not only that, he does so by revealing bits and pieces of their history out of order. Granted, he had great source material to work with, but Priest had much more time to set things up since books can be as long as the author wishes.

Up next: Fear itself...

Memento: Mori

Amnesia as a plot device is pretty much a cliche; it has been done to death in books, films and television. Even the best of stories aren't immune to how lame it can be (24's first season was great except for Teri Bauer's amnesia storyline), since it is much easier to do poorly than to do well. Memento is something different. I'm sure that there have been other stories about anterograde amnesia, but as far as I know, none have gained the following that Memento has.

Unlike retrograde amnesia, which erases the memories you already have and forces you to piece everything together, anterograde amnesia prevents you from making new memories. All memories up to a given event are preserved, but after that, everything you experience seems to take place directly after said event. I'm sure that not knowing who you were can't be easy to live with, but not knowing who you have become, not knowing why you are where you are or are doing what you're doing must be worse.

Most of Nolan's films are not told chronologically, but Memento has one of the most interesting storytelling devices I've encountered. The very first frame we see is the one that takes place at the end of the story being told. The movie runs backwards, and the end of each scene replays the beginning of the scene that preceded it. A set-up like this requires that the viewer pay close attention to events, so that they remember why the current scene is significant. But this also puts us in the mind of Leonard, the protagonist. If we don't know what happened, we are working with just as much information as him.

Leonard lost his ability to make new memories one night when two thugs threw him into a mirror. He woke up when he heard noises, and found his wife being raped by one of the men, and when he tried to help her, the other knocked him out. Since then, he has been trying to find the thug who got away, hoping to avenge his wife, who not only was raped, but died as a result of the incident. Since he can't remember anything he does for longer than five minutes, he is forced to take notes about the case (many of which he tattoos on his body) and take Polaroid photos of people he meets so that he can prove to himself that he knows them. His situation makes him a ridiculously easy mark for people trying to scam him, so he takes extreme precautions to avoid being taken advantage of.

This system of note taking means that he can only rely on what he's written. This may seem like a fail-safe system, especially since he only pays attention to notes written in his own handwriting, but he doesn't account for the fact that something you may believe to be true at one time may turn out to be false. If a normal person were to make such a realization, their attitude towards the information they once thought true would change, but if Leonard doesn't have access to a writing utensil or some other way to make sure he can make a not of the realization will mean that the new information will be lost.

And even if Leonard had a perfect system for taking notes, memories do more for us than to just keep us informed of events. Without them, Leonard can never truly make a new friend, since every time he runs into someone he's met, he is meeting them for the first time (in his eyes). And even more than that, he no longer remembers who he is. A recurring line throughout the film is that Leonard Shelby is the name of the man he was, not the man he is now. Leonard can never remember if he's happy or sad, whether his life is fulfilling, and, most importantly, he will never know if he has avenged his wife.

In a science fiction class I took during my undergrad years, we watched the movie Total Recall, which dealt with whether "we are our memories". The film made the claim that our identities are not dependent on our memories, but I think that the idea is much more complex than presented in Recall. We are not just our memories because we live in the moment; we often make spontaneous decisions and, hopefully, have the ability to experience the present. However, our memories, our experiences dictate the decisions we make. We sometimes ignore old mistakes, but most of the time, our decisions are based directly on past decisions we've made. Furthermore, our personalities are shaped by our memories; cynics are cynical because of memories of being let down, while memories of people doing good deeds tend to give us a positive outlook on humanity. But as I said, it's more complicated than that; some personality traits may be genetic or gleaned from parents. After all, some people are assholes for seemingly no reason at all.

The first time I saw Memento, I thought that I was seeing a good movie, but I wondered how Nolan would end the film. We'd seen the end of the chronology, so what kind of twist could he spring on us? At first, I thought the film would end with us seeing the incident that gave him his amnesia, but after seeing a flashback to it mid-way through, I was perplexed as to how it could end. So when the end finally came, I was floored by what actually transpired. This was the first Christopher Nolan movie that I fully remember (I've seen Insomnia, but I don't remember it too well), and it gave me undying respect for him as a director and a writer (though I'm not sure how much credit he should get for that, since he adapted it from his brother's short story Memento Mori).

Up next: Mysteries and magic...