Batman Begins: The Thread

I meant how his portrayed to the reader; being loathed by the police et al just makes him the underdog, and therefore easier to root for, and the fact that police don't like his methods can simply be used as a justification for his vigilantism ("The justice system is weak and can't handle crime, but Batman can."). Certainly his quest of punishing criminals is rarely questioned.

I think, so but Miller's essential points are that vigilantism is justifiable and that it's okay to kill criminals so they won't do more crime. Also, no analysis whatsoever on why people become criminals. And Batman fights against the government because it's corrrupted, and only he is strong enough to oppose corruption. Plus, Dark Knight Returns is pretty fascist in nature: Batman leads an army of kids who inexplicably turn from street punks to fanatic Batman followers, and who dress up as Batman too.

(x-post)

I think all of the evidence that has been given to support that interpretation could be read in a different way. Certainly the film uses Katie Holmes as the voice of reason but it's interesting that people here have said that a liberal Katie Holmes p.o.v. version of the story would have been uninteresting. She is essentially portrayed as a nagging presence that Batman doesn't necessarily have to take seriously. Likewise, Alfred and Gordon also act as voices of reason but I think there's a really strong feeling that Batman alone knows what must be done and so he occasionally has to exercise his own will and disregard the advice of the people around him.

The scene where he plans to murder his parents' killer felt less like a moral turning point and more like a case of frustration over unfulfilled revenge. The fact that the killer ends up dead anyway takes away some of the guilt and allows us to sympathize with the frustrated revenge fantasy.

Even the negative consequences such as the destruction of Wayne Manor only make us sympathize with Batman. The impression is that Batman's role as a savior is a burden he has to bear and that these negative consequences are noble sacrifices he must make to restore order to Gotham.

The bottom line that undermines any criticisms of Batman's actions is the fact that without Batman, Gotham would have been utterly destroyed. He had no choice. So despite the objections of the people around him, Batman really did know what was best.

This is where I disagree with Tuomas' opinion that the League was the less objectionable enemy in the movie. When Batman simply puts away a few gangsters here and there it's much less of a moral imperative for him to exercise his power. This is the same reason I don't object as much to something like Taxi Driver or film noir. Noir films are overwhelmingly cynical and the protagonists usually only win minor victories that barely challenge the status quo. Batman Begins on the other hand sets up a situation where the hero must exercise his power to save the world and ignore the objections of society.

But I think it's important that criticisms of right-wing vigilantism are not confused with a criticism of vigilantism in general. Of course there can also be left-wing vigilantism. I'm curious what Tuomas thinks of someone like Dashiell Hammet who essentially wrote communist vigilante stories. This is also why I think there can be better depictions of Batman that maintain his essential qualities without becoming fascist parables.

I'm not familiar with Miller's comic books but I don't agree that fascism is a logical extension of superheroism so either way he's writing from a right wing point of view.

I agree with Shakey, Batman Begins definitely is more liberal than Miller's work.

I think it's only more liberal in the sense that it soft pedals the right wing tendencies and buries them under the surface. At least something like Sin City didn't pull any punches.

OTM. Beat me to it.

Oh, let's not go to that direction. I'm not a deconstructionist, and never will be. I think it's absurd to eliminate the artist's intentions from art altogether, because art wouldn't exist at all without the artist feeling he needs to communicate something.

thinking about 'art' = democratic

But the saving-the-world element itself isn't what makes the story fascist. Every other fantasy epic doesn't take place in a realistic urban metropolis where a crimefighting capitalist has to clean up a chaotic society. In this case though, the saving of the world element becomes a justification for any other infractions that Batman may commit.

Why, does it consist of boring action scenes and horrible, repetitive dialog?

Human Resources
Doomsday Book
Blindness
Triple X
Mary Poppins
Street of Shame
Pi
Together
Dr. Strangelove
Red Beard
The Tale of One Bad Rat

Those are the first ten to come to mind. Though the real answer is, maybe we don't need the sort of instant solutions Batman and other superheroes offer.

YR TAKE ON 'WAIT (THE WHISPER SONG)' PLZ.

What's that?

I'm not sure if you're asking about Rimbaud and Rambo or if there's something called Rimbaud/Rambo. At any rate, I know very little about Rimbaud and I've only seen pieces of Rambo. It's the kind of movie that was always playing on the big screen TV at the pizza parlor when I was a kid. It has never occurred to me that there would be a reason to actually watch the whole thing.

And that's why we don't have superheroes in real life.

Get one crime-fighting bat-suited billionaire to clean up your town, pronto!

And that's why filmmakers shouldn't take superheroes too seriously.

-- j blount (jamesbloun...), August 3rd, 2005 2:11 PM. (papa la bas) (later) (link)

Funny you should mention that... I was at the Dallas Fantasy Fair in '86 when Gary Groth pressed Miller on that at a panel. (At least a partial transcript ran in The Comics Journal eventually.) Part 2, pgs. 18-20, with the tank... Miller finally said, "Okay, he blew the hell out of 'em!" The entirety of today's posts on this thread were hashed out at that panel...same lack of conclusion or consensus. It was interesting.

But they should still take the stories seriously!

man, Frank Miller can be so goddamned silly...