Devoted to publishing, publishers and to those who craft the written word

I tried to steer clear of all press and commentary before seeing "The Dark Knight." But when I saw your headline "Dueling Metaphors: Is Batman President Bush?" pop up on my RSS feed the day I was planning to go see it, I was a little freaked. Even when my husband whispered "This is the best movie ever made," during the end credits, I only said "I'm going to need to think about this," even though I secretly wanted to say something similar (but less grandiose).

However, after a good night's sleep, some thinking, and some reading, I feel confident that this movie is incredible, definitely not as simplistic as some annoyingly blithe Wall Street Journal editorial would indicate.

"Barnacle" on the New Republic forum you linked to articulated some of the things that didn't readily come to me but rang totally true when I read them (7/25/08):

"I hope this doesn't spoil any part of what was an excellent film for anyone who has not seen it, but this WSJ column is sort of like that list of the 'Best Conservative Rock Songs' from a couple years ago -- when you want to see your message in something, you can twist plot details into one wicked pretzel.

Sadly, this WSJ article is not the first articulation I've heard this warped message from The Dark Knight. Most of the conservatives have honed in on the scene late in the film where Batman has invaded the privacy of the entire city using their cell phones and some variety of sonar technology as proof that Batman is OK with violating privacy and civil liberty to get the job done. However, Batman also destroys the machine after a single use; he doesn't lobby and demand that it become a permanent part of his Bat-arsenal.

Secondly, the WSJ column ignores what is easily the film's most powerful scene -- Batman's interrogation of The Joker. With Harvey Dent missing and Joker clearly behind it, Batman interrogates Heath Ledger's brilliant Joker by beating him. After a few rounds of beating, the Joker reveals that he is holding not just Dent captive, but also Batman and Dent's love interest. Batman proceeds to beat up Joker even more. Joker then remarks that for all his strength, Batman doesn't really have anything on him and cannot beat the information out of him. Joker gives up the information as to the locations of the hostages when he feels like it. Both hostages, meanwhile, have just minutes to live before bombs go off.

Isn't that scene the exact '24' style example that Republicans turn to when they stress the need for torture? The ticking bomb, the need for information at any cost -- send in Rudy Giuliani!

And what does Batman get from beating information out of the Joker? Nothing -- the beating doesn't get him the detectives or hero anything. In fact, the beating it out of the suspect results in the Joker giving up information that is intentionally incorrect (which was his plan to begin with) and then engineering an escape. So there's your lesson: Torture doesn't just not work, it results in bad information. It could not have been spelled out more clearly unless after beating up the Joker Batman decided to go bomb Iraq.

So even if we overlook the fact that the WSJ author is now comparing real-world global affairs to comic book movies and take this guy at his word, it shows that conservatives are really no better at interpreting film than they are music. Alternatively, you can believe that there is a conservative message in 'You Can't Always Get What You Want,' by The Rolling Stones. www.nytimes.com/.../25brockweb.html"

I agree, esp. regarding the torture scene. Academics like historian Alfred McCoy regularly debunk arguments like the "ticking time bomb" scenario, where you beat the crap out of someone until they tell you where the bomb is that's going to blow everything up in two minutes. The Joker gives up the information when he damn well pleases, and bad information at that.

It's clear that the writers, director, and actors are well aware of the topic they're presenting, both in the "torture" scene and the whole "phone tapping" scenario. And I don't think they manipulate the conclusions to be drawn from such scenes. I've been thinking about the movie all weekend, but certainly not because I think "Batman=Bush" or because I have secret gastric distress due to the sinking realization that "Oh my god, Dubya was right." Please.

Given that "The Dark Knight" grapples with issues of morality in a compelling, masterful way that makes you connect your own dots, that it's story-telling at its best, and wildly popular to boot, it's no wonder the Right would want to co-opt it, or at least publish pieces like Andrew Klavan's to try and knock the wind out of its sails. Nice try, guys.