But this is hardly a new problem. If the American superhero comic, historically, hasn’t been the literary embodiment of American Exceptionalism, then I don’t know what has. The super powered vigilante is all about above the law unitary power, in both micro and macro contexts, depending on the title and character(s) at hand. And Marvel Comics, especially, has a long tradition of propagandizing American Exceptionalism and a generalized “might makes right” ideology (if such barbarism even qualifies as such), as well as perpetuating and exacerbating aggressive national myths of “The Other”: be they Nazis, Commies, Ragheads, etc.

Without spoiling the movie for those who haven’t seen it, there was one scene in particular where the Joker attempts to pit two groups of people against each other in a very darwinistic “kill or be killed scenario”, but it doesn’t work…. And I thought this was overtly symbolic of what the “war on terror” is doing to us.

Maybe I give too much benefit of the doubt, but I also think it is a little too simplistic to condemn the whole movie as propaganda.

On another note, if folks haven’t seen it yet, be sure and watch “Shooter” from last year, starring Danny Glover and Mark Wahlbergh. Trust me, you’ll be asking yourself “How did this one get past the corporate censors?” There is nothing politically ambiguous about this movie!

One thing I did notice, though, is that, if we are speaking of social class propaganda and such, is that the only reason Bruce Wayne can become Batman is because he is the epitome of capitalist. There is theory that goes around in the realm of thought I like to stay in that boredom is the worst thing in human existence – Bruce Wayne seems to fight boredom by becoming Batman. If he wasn’t a billionaire, nay “the richest man in the world,” the question is . . . could he become Batman? Is really a hero? Or is he just protecting the wealth, like the police, and the army, and whatever else you want to add to that category.

Seems weird to want to take-apart a character like Batman in this respect, but this idea really caught my attention while watching the film, especially when looking at the cars Bruce Wayne is given to drive.

To be honest, as a humanist, I wouldn’t go near anything Miller-esque as a director.

http://cronotica.blogspot.com/2008/08/dark-knights-willing-deception-or-die.html

Joker as Batman’s foil IS the ethos that can be harmful. Long before the cold war/war on terror, people were still acting with the same mental sicknesses.

Also what makes the Joker difficult to fit conceptually is that the originators never developed a backstory for the character. Therefore anyone can conceive whatever they choose to say about the Joker. It could be right or it could be way off but it’s open to interpretation since there is really way to really describe the character’s motivation.

What can be examine is how those around the character respond. I think that was the main theme of Nolan interpretation. It was how the Joker created fear and how the public responded. Ultimately the people made the right choice during the ferry scene.