Monday, July 23, 2012
'The Dark Knight Rises' directed by Christopher Nolan, 20th July 2012
[Spoilers
Throughout]
'The Dark Knight Rises' is a epic summer blockbuster, a film aimed squarely at the
masses, and it's ambitious, confident and unselfconsciously weird.
I was anticipating this film so much that I was somewhat nervous - I've
been burned too many times by hype (the Phantom Menace, Matrix Reloaded,
Spider-Man 3 etc) and even though all signs pointed towards the film being
amazing I still harboured some small doubt that Christopher Nolan could screw
it up. I had tickets to the 1am showing at the Waterloo IMAX, so to refresh
my memory I had a mini-Batman marathon throughout the day, catching up on
Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. Both of these are excellent films, The
Dark Knight particularly so, the bar isset pretty high.
I'm pleased to say that I thoroughly enjoyed it, although it was a
quite different film to what I had expected. The previous films in the
series have tended to keep the action relatively grounded. The stakes
were still high, but the action still took place in a recognisable version of
reality. In this film, Nolan literally tears up the gritty streets of
Gotham City, and imposes a far more bizarre world on top of it.
Christopher Nolan has made a film with courage in its convictions, with a
willingness to explore concepts to their logical, if at times bonkers
conclusions.
 |
| Christian Bale as Batman |
In a world of CG spectacles, Nolan's direction stands apart -
there is a focus on physicality throughout all of his work, but especially here. In sequences involving vehicles he concentrates on their every interaction with the environment, when
something explodes it never feels like an antiseptic blob of graphics -
something has actually gone kaboom. The physicality of the film extends
to the interactions between the actors, the first Batman/Bane showdown is not only
shockingly visceral in its brutality, it concentrates of the 'texture' of the
beating too, with matt surfaces becoming wet and more primal.
The cast is uniformly excellent, without any weak links.
Actors like Gary Oldman, Morgan Freeman and Michael Caine are about the
safest pairs of hands you can get, and inhabit their roles in much the same
ways as they did in the previous films. Caine in particular gets more
emotional range than before to work with to heartbreaking effect.
The primary characters all take their roles to unpredictable and
interesting places. Christian Bale unexpectedly shows us a fairly happy
and contented Bruce Wayne for part of the film. There is a moment where
he realises he's been locked out of his mansion, and his obvious pleasure in
the novelty of this is not something you can imagine from the tortured youth of
Batman Begins. I had been expecting the tortured, depressive, overly
serious loner of the previous films to dominate here, it's fun to see him defy
this and show us a curious, if somewhat emotionally sedated Bruce Wayne.
Bale's physique has changed over the last few films, we see the effects
of inaction and age on the overly cut beefcake of Batman Begins, rendering him
still fit, but thinner, with hollow, gaunt cheeks. It's a nice way of
getting us to feel sympathy for the man, as well as accentuating his
vulnerability.
 |
| A somewhat gaunt Bruce Wayne and Alfred |
It's Tom Hardy's 'Bane' that's likely to garner the most
attention. Combining brains and brawn seems to be an obvious thing to do
to create a nemesis for Batman, but rarely has it been done with such
originality and style. Much has been made of Bane's voice in this film,
but I absolutely love it. Seeing this huge lump of muscle walking around
spouting somewhat mannered yet intimidating dialogue sets off a nice
disconnection in the audience. In terms of his looks, he appropriates a
militaristic revolutionary chic, with a hint of the aristocratic country gent
in his sheepskin coat. The one moment that stands out is when he gently
caresses the cheek of someone who's trying to threaten him. The man
angrily says "I'm in control!" Bane softly replies, "Do
you feel in control?". He's not showing off or being egotistical, the way he
understates his obvious dominance over the situation underlines how scary he really is.
In this mix, Anne Hathaway's Selina Kyle (I don't think she is
referred to directly as 'Catwoman' in the film) doesn't quite get the screen
time that her performance deserves. This film is nearly 3 hours long, but
doesn't waste any time. Even so, of the three leads she gets the least
development. This is a shame, because she gives an interesting
performance, playing a character who's weaponised femininity for her own ends.
There is a contradiction at the heart of her character, she is an
individualist, yet one who frequently adopts different personalities (the
submissive maid, the hysterical victim, the seductress) to achieve her ends.
She is completely in control of her own identity, yet is also trapped by it,
trying to find a way to erase her criminal record and lead a normal life.
It's a nice contradiction, but we only really explore the surface of this
idea - this is a film where character's pasts are vitally important and apart
from knowing that she's got a criminal history we know very little about her.
Despite this, Hathaway neatly fills the role with a dangerous, lithe
charisma - it is easy to see what attracts Bruce Wayne to her.
 |
| Tom Hardy as Bane |
Joseph Gordon-Levitt's John Blake, on the other hand has far more
screen time - and somewhat simpler motivations. He's slowly and gradually
built up as Batman 2.0, and while the need for this concept is fundamental to
the themes of the film, we possibly spend a bit too much time with him.
Gordon-Levitt is one of my favourite actors, improving almost every film
he's in with his charisma - but John Blake is a fairly cliched and simple
character - the hero policeman with a 'hot head' but a heart of gold. We
are repeatedly shown what a fundamentally good person he is, his fixed moral
centre, his unhappiness at using guns and his willingness to act on his own
initiative. But all of this set up is for a payoff that takes place after
the film finishes. We see him discovering the Batcave, and assume he's
going to be a good Batman, but that's about it for payoff.
It's hard to talk about this film without bringing up the
appropriation (intentional or otherwise) of imagery from the Occupy protest
movement. When Bane storms the Stock Exchange in the film it's a
cathartic moment for the audience - the brokers have been quickly sketched as
immoral sharks. It is difficult not to side with Bane, who is dressed in the uniform of a bike courier and his group of
shoe-shiners and cleaners:
Stockbroker: This is a stock exchange. There’s no money here for
you to steal!
Bane: Then what are you people doing here?
Soon after Bane takes over we are shown the proletariat of Gotham
literally dragging the rich out of their houses and stripping them of their
luxury possessions. After the economic crimes committed by the wealthy
it's difficult to sympathise with them as victims. I felt a slight
disconnect here - was I was supposed to be cheering Bane on at this point? But
Bane himself is being bankrolled by the elite of Gotham, and his people's
revolution is explicitly shown to be a sham with the ultimate aim of destroying
the city.
 |
| Heroic? |
There are valid readings of Nolan's Batman series as being about
the importance of maintaining the Western capitalist status quo. I don't
see the politics of this film as being so clear cut - the series has been
fairly clear about showing us how inequality in society leads to criminality.
I do find some of the imagery problematic though, it is hard to swallow
the sequence where the policemen of Gotham square off in open warfare
with the freed prisoners running the city. Throughout the rest of the
series we have had it hammered home that the GCPD are unavoidably corrupt, and
now we are expected to see them as noble heroes fighting these prisoners, who
are painted as scum to a man. The 'Dent Act', that has apparently cleaned
up the city is never explained to us, but there are hints that it is
restrictive of civil liberties. In the climax of The Dark Knight Nolan shows
us the prisoners on the ferry as more noble than we'd assumed - refusing to act
selfishly in sacrificing the lives of civilians for their own. The film
is on shaky ground here, and seems to have conceded some philosophical ground
for the visual impact of a street war between two easily identifiable sides, one
good, one evil.
For me, the film's success lies away from its somewhat confused
politics, and with its summation of the philosophical and societal importance
of symbols. The previous films in the series take pains to 'ground' the
Batman mythos in reality. Batman Begins in particular takes painful care
to justify just about every aspect of the character, from his motivations to
his costume, while The Dark Knight serves as an examination of what the longer
term effects of Batman would be, and ends rather pessimistically with our hero
taking the fall for multiple murders. This, coupled with the rather grim
trailers and advertising campaign seems to set the film up as the ultimate in
grim, realistic, somewhat depressing reality, this time we're going to see
Batman get his face pushed into the mud by the big bully Bane. And we do.
But this isn't a cynical film, one that underlines exactly how flawed the
character is, it's one that takes these grim, depressing elements and systemically
goes about 'curing' them. It's an exorcism of the Batman, outlining his
flaws and showing how to fix them, all the while underlining the central
thematic continuity between the films; the power of symbols.
All good superhero films tend to set their heroes against a warped
aspect of themselves. That's why Spider-Man tends to fight against tragic
scientists who accidentally gain animal-based superpowers, why Superman fights
fascist kryptonians and so on. Nolan clearly understands this, and all of
the previous villains have been reflections of aspects of Batman.
Scarecrow took Batman's tactics of fear to an impersonal and unbalanced
chemical conclusion. Ras al Ghul was a megalomaniacal surrogate 'dark' father
figure. The Joker was the chaotic and unpredictable reaction to a man
with a fixed moral code. Two-Face was a demonstration of how a man that's
suffered massive personal tragedy can fall into murderous, evil revenge, as
opposed to Batman, who used his tragedy to mould himself into a figure for
justice.
 |
| Bane vs Batman |
So what of Bane then? Bane encapsulates almost all of these
themes and more. This film is an apocalypse, and he is the antiBatman.
Contrast their outfits, Bane's is the inverse of Batman, his armour
covering only his mouth, as opposed to the mouth being the only exposed area of
Batman. Batman is a creature of stealth and shadows, while Bane marches
around in daylight in front of huge crowds making speeches. Batman has a
gruff, growling affected voice, Bane's is cultured, effete and aristocratic.
Batman rejected the League of Shadows, Bane was rejected by the League of
Shadows. Whereas Batman uses the city itself as a weapon, Bane tends to stamp
upon it.
What is Nolan trying to show us here? Throughout the film,
Bane is portrayed as scarily competent, explicitly outlining his plans and
effortlessly executing them. He seems unstoppable, an inexorable force
rolling over Gotham City like a steamroller. When he and Batman face off
for the first time, Batman gets effortlessly ground into the dirt by Bane, who
mocks him throughout. None of Batman's attacks have any discernible
effect upon him, not his hard, furious punches, not his gadgets and not his
stealth. Bane ends the fight by relentlessly pounding Batman's mask, a symbolic
smashing of the Batman identity. They fight later during the climax, without
Batman using any dramatically different tactics, and this time it is Batman who
is triumphant. Why? What changed?
This is because in a series that repeatedly outlines the
importance of symbols, Bane co-opts nearly all of Batman's symbological power,
draining him of meaning and therefore rendering him ineffective. In
Batman Begins, Bruce Wayne is shown to be clumsy and ineffective until he
realises the importance of becoming more than a man:
"People need dramatic examples to shake them out of apathy
and I can't do that as Bruce Wayne. As a man I'm flesh and blood, I can be
ignored, I can be destroyed, but as a symbol I can be incorruptible, I can be
everlasting."
He's absolutely right, in The Dark Knight Rises we open
to a Gotham City that's essentially free of crime. The 'Dent Act' has
allowed the police to crack down on organised crime, a piece of legislation
that's only been possible to enact through the lie of Dent's martyrdom constructed
by Commissioner Gordon and Batman. In taking the blame for the murders
Dent committed and becoming a symbol of the danger of vigilantism and the
importance of an incorruptible legislature Batman has done more good for the
city as a idea than he ever did as a guy in body armour punching people in
alleyways.
 |
| Anne Hathaway as Selina Kyle |
With Batman the idea cleaning up the city far more effectively
than he ever did, Bruce Wayne is left adrift and stripped of meaning. He
is effectively neutered when we meet him, a recluse hobbling around his huge,
empty mansion. It's interesting to note that he's not in some dark and depressed fury, he seems relatively upbeat about the situation.
Throughout these scenes Nolan frames him as vulnerable. One of my
favourite scenes during this sequence is Wayne in a doctor's office getting a
checkup:
Doctor: I've seen worse cartilage in knees.
Bruce Wayne: That's good.
Doctor: No, that's because there is no cartilage in your knees.
Scar tissue on your kidneys. Concussive damage to your brain tissue. I cannot
recommend that you go heliskiing.
In this shot we look down upon a slightly nervous, seated Bruce
Wayne - he seems a little lost and childlike in his optimism, but again, not
particularly angry about it. He seems to have accepted that this is the
price he's had to pay for apparently succeeding in his mission as Batman.
This serenity doesn't last for long though, a Batman film featuring a
happy and relaxed domestic Bruce Wayne pootling around his house isn't going to
put bums on seats.
Soon after this, he's back in the suit, but unbeknownst to him
causing far more damage than harm. The idea has over-taken the man, and
his very presence distracts the police to such an extent that Bane manages to
escape from his raid on the stock exchange. Batman doesn't know it yet,
but the ideological balance of power has shifted. Before we know it,
Alfred has left him, Bane has stripped Bruce Wayne of his wealth and he's been
betrayed, suffered massive injuries and been dumped in a big hole in the
desert.
Bane, meanwhile has seized power in Gotham through a display of
overt force, exposed the lie of Two-Face, opened the prisons and is maintaining
martial law by using (among other things) versions of Batman's own Tumbler
'Batmobile' to keep the citizens quelled. Bane's revolution seems be a blunt
extension of Batman's own burgeoning fascistic tendencies towards the end of
The Dark Knight. Whereas Batman 'merely' illegally wiretapped the
population of Gotham to defeat the Joker, Bane is far less subtle and directly
imposes his will on the citizenry. This perfectly ties in with the two
men's tactics, Batman subtle and covert, Bane obvious and overt. It is
possible to imagine Batman going completely off the deep end and enforcing
martial law over the city using a fleet of Batmobiles to cow people into
behaving the way he feels they should.
At this point in the narrative, Bane has comprehensively
out-Batmanned Batman on nearly every conceivable level. So how does Bruce
Wayne come back and save the day? What is that gives him the power to
climb out the hole he's been thrown in and save the day? Well, much like
another character from a great comic book film, Batman must earn the
power of self-respect. Nolan shows us this through extremely
straightforward symbolism. Bruce Wayne must climb out of a big dark hole
into the light. There's a rope that looks like it's aiding him, but this
is an illusion, and this connection to the dark is holding him back. It's
only when he severs this link, realising that he values his life, that he has many
people that care about him and that he needs to get over his own insecurities
that he succeeds. From this point on, he quickly seizes control of his
own symbology back from Bane. He begins by lighting a huge flaming
Batsignal over the city, asserting the notion of the 'light' as his own over
Bane. He then trumps Bane's fleet of ersatz Batmobiles with his more
intimidating flying 'Bat' vehicle. He sets in motion plans with his
network of friends, expanding his influence. This time when he fights Bane,
he's got the ideological upper-hand, and before we know it, Bane has become
just another big thug to be dispatched.
 |
| 'The Bat' vs Tumblers |
Much of the power that Bane wields comes from his aura of
invincibility. His backstory as the 'one man to climb from the pit' seems
to be common knowledge - setting him apart from other men. The film
literally strips this back-story away from him and transfers it to others -
this time Batman has co-opted Bane's myth. With Bane's true motivations
revealed and his power as a symbol stripped away he is broken, and is
unceremoniously finished off with a blast from Catwoman.
At this point, Batman is ideologically triumphant, but the ghosts
of his past still haunt him. The legacy of Ra's al Ghul lives on in the
form of a ticking nuclear bomb. If these films have been about the power
of symbols then we know there is but one way for Batman to defeat this ghost -
he must sacrifice himself to save the city. Whereas Harvey Dent was an
illusory martyr, Batman must become a genuine martyr. And he does, flying
off into the sunset and exploding in a nuclear blast. His status as a symbol
is now unimpeachable, shown by the city erecting a statue of Batman in honour
of his memory. He has finally achieved his ambition of becoming a legend,
of being more than a man.
Batman is conclusively dead, but thankfully Bruce Wayne has
survived, and is leading a truly happy, carefree life with Selina Kyle in
Europe. Is this a cop out? Would the film be more powerful if Bruce
had indeed sacrificed himself. From a certain perspective this 'lie' is
another version of the fake martyrdom of Harvey Dent. It's more than
that though, in truly transforming Batman into legend Bruce Wayne has finally
succeeded in disentangling himself from his creation. Batman is dead.
Bruce Wayne is now a healthy, well-balanced and happy individual.
Yet although his demons have been exorcised, the concept of Batman
lives on. Someone, somewhere needs to work out their own demons and so John
Blake takes up the mantle.
Batman is dead! Long live Batman!
Tags: action , Anne Hathaway , Bane , Batman , Catwoman , Christian Bale , Christopher Nolan , Occupy , The Dark Knight Rises , Tom Hardy , writing too much about Batman
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 Responses to “'The Dark Knight Rises' directed by Christopher Nolan, 20th July 2012”
July 24, 2012 at 12:24 AM
I wasn't quite as enthusiastic. The end should have been cut where we see Alfred's smile. We didn't need to see Wayne then. Would have been a much more open-ended finish, especially as we earlier learned that the auto pilot on the Bat had been fixed.
Too much set up for another film, ambiguous end, Selina Kyle (no need for her in this) and surely John Blake will be Robin (he was even told by someone that they preferred his real name “Robin“).
So, very enjoyable but too long (and with constantly intrusive music) the studios got to Nolan in a way that didn't happen for the first two films of the trilogy.
Post a Comment