![]() ![]() Such self-made characters as we meet in the film are, by and large, fishy – power-grabbers hiding behind a fig-leaf of philanthropism. The Occupy Gotham movement, as organised by gargly terrorist Bane, is populated by anarchists without a cause, whose actions are fuelled by a lust for destruction, not as a corrective to an unjust world. Your average Joe, it turns out, requires a benevolent, bad-ass billionaire to set him straight, to knock him sideways, if necessary. Christopher Nolan's film indulges in much guttural talk of the gap between the 99% and the 1%, but it is the former who are demonised, whose revolting actions require curbing and mutinous squeals muting. So it should be no surprise that The Dark Knight Rises so firmly upholds the financial status quo. He's always been a curious idol: within aspiration because he's flesh and blood beyond it because he's the lucky recipient of inherited wealth. Bruce Wayne can splurge on the kit and cars to set himself up as a crime-fighting Christ substitute, plus power and glitter enough to hide his hobby. They're not powers at all, simply a simulation made possible by good fortune and the leisure that accompanies it. His superpowers are not an accident of birth, or of stumbling into the wrong lab at the wrong time. But the Dark Knight has always been murkier than most.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |