MovieChat Forums > The Dark Knight (2008) Discussion > Nolan doesn't have an argument against J...

Nolan doesn't have an argument against Joker's Nihilism. It makes this film frustrating to watch.


First off Batman never actually tries to understand the Joker or his philosophy. To him he's just a thug.

Joker had ideas on the inherent mindlessness of society and its nihilism. Batman never engages with any of those ideas because Nolan himself doesn't have an answer against it. It be like in Fight Club instead of the Narrator arguing with Durden it ended in a fist fight. "Wow I guess Tyler and his ideas have been defeated"

Joker basically goes "Most people are sheep and don't care about anyone" and Nolan goes "Um.. what can batman say to counter this?" And then he realized he had nothing. So he made it so Batman never has a scene thinking about Joker's ideas or refuting them.

Then Nolan writes the biggest deus ex machina I've seen a movie just to get out of this mess he found himself in. Those 2 boats would definitely have blown each other up. It's obvious the only reason it's there is because Nolan straight up didn't know how to argue against Joker's philosophy.

Batman would have lost. But because we need to have him win he gets to make a stupid speech "this city just showed you..." It feels so forced. If you're gonna make a gritty realistic version of a superhero movie you have to commit.

This is why Joker (2019) is a better film. In the real world Joker would have won.

reply

I'm not saying Joker was right. But there's ways to argue against him without just resorting to "and then despite everything neither boat explodes and everything works out for no reason"

reply

It's right no one in the movie tries to understand who is the Joker or what he wants, but I don't agree about what you say because the situation is more complex than "Joker tries to point everybody is bad". That's a childish thing to say. People are not good, they are coward, and the Joker ( Who looks like a vengeful ex militar/spy) wants to put society and its citizens in a position where they have to kill and do the bad things society protects them to do. He fails, they are too coward. I mean, the guy in the boat of civilians doesn't push the buttom of the detonator because he is good. He would have been perfectly happy if the official pushes it. The problem is he DOESN't wanna take personally the responsability (even if that's just moral) of killing hundres of people. On the other hand, the big guy in the prisoners boat knows what is killing someone (he was probably a converted christian in prison) and doesn't wanna participate in the Joker sick game. It's true no one pushes the buttom, but for very different reasons.

On the other side Joker is a bad film which doesn't deep into the conflict it presents, neither develops any interesting moral conflict.

reply

"In the real world Joker would have won."

Toughened your nipples, didn't it?

reply

Toughened your nipples, didn't it?

Very agreeable, indeed.

reply

Wow, I never thought about this. That's a very good point that Batman never directly counters Joker's philosophy. But, allow a rebuttal: Batman himself is the answer to the Joker's philosophy.

What does Joker believe in?

He's an anarchist. Not in some sophisticated, cafe hipster, "Anarchism" type of anarchy that makes it sound civilized, no. Joker is a hard-core, OG anarchist who just thinks chaos is the answer. In fact, it's specifically the chaos that he embraces. It's not just "everybody make up your own rules," it's "actively despise order, sanity, and society."

He's anti-social. The Joker's specific madness is nebulously defined, in comics and on-screen. It should be that way. It keeps him fresh every time, whether Nicholson or Romero. But one thing is pretty consistent: he wants to burn it all down.

He's an animal. He's psychopathy belies a lack of human empathy, but think about his actions in the film. He makes elaborate plans to cause carnage and mayhem, but he does so impulsively. He doesn't care about the long-term, only the now. Survive now (blow up the other ship), make Batman fail even at catastrophic personal cost (Hit me!) and so on.

Joker wants everybody to "realize" that this is them. Deep down, everybody is a lizard-brain run, selfish person. Society is a collective dream that only works because we all pretend together. Realize the "truth" (Joker's truth) and you can do whatever you want, which is pure Id.

So, how does Batman respond?

If Joker wants anarchy, Batman responds with order. He might break the rules, but he breaks surface rules (within the world of Batman - there's a whole other discussion about vigilantism in comics vs. real life). He isn't about "man's laws," he's almost a deity. He's protean. "This is the Natural Law. This is Justice. I'm Batman." Batman will restore order to society, even through rule-breaking.

If Joker is anti-social, Batman rebuilds it. First, as Wayne, he heals the city by providing infrastructure and opportunity for the citizens. But, as Batman, he provides a rallying point. He has been annihilating bastions of anti-social behaviour, from corrupt cops to pervasive gangsters.

If Joker is an animal, Batman is the ultimate human. He pushes himself to the limits, but as a symbol, he provides others a goal to shoot for. He challenges everyone to take the hard path of pushing past impulse and Id. Batman is SuperEgo. Batman challenges Joker's philosophy by showing the benefits of long-term planning and thinking big-picture - like a human with a stake in civilization itself.

Now, your post did make me think: how could Batman have acted to bring about this change? Perhaps something simple and visual. I'm thinking... if, when the boats received the detonators, Batman ascended to a visible place and flashed on a couple flood lights on the construction site. The prisoners and Gothamites see him through the windows in the ships. They see the shadow of the Bat and take that in. They realize that they aren't just scared people clawing for survival: there is an ideal, a guardian, and a judge that they can look up to - that they must answer to - and from hope or fear, they choose not to hit the buttons.

reply