"W" as The Dark Night?

[Matthitjah]

Quote The Wall Street Journal;

What Bush and Batman Have in Common

By ANDREW KLAVAN

July 25, 2008; Page A15

A cry for help goes out from a city beleaguered by violence and fear: A beam of light flashed into the night sky, the dark symbol of a bat projected onto the surface of the racing clouds . . .

Oh, wait a minute. That's not a bat, actually. In fact, when you trace the outline with your finger, it looks kind of like . . . a "W."

Warner Bros. Pictures

There seems to me no question that the Batman film "The Dark Knight," currently breaking every box office record in history, is at some level a paean of praise to the fortitude and moral courage that has been shown by George W. Bush in this time of terror and war. Like W, Batman is vilified and despised for confronting terrorists in the only terms they understand. Like W, Batman sometimes has to push the boundaries of civil rights to deal with an emergency, certain that he will re-establish those boundaries when the emergency is past.

And like W, Batman understands that there is no moral equivalence between a free society -- in which people sometimes make the wrong choices -- and a criminal sect bent on destruction. The former must be cherished even in its moments of folly; the latter must be hounded to the gates of Hell.

"The Dark Knight," then, is a conservative movie about the war on terror. And like another such film, last year's "300," "The Dark Knight" is making a fortune depicting the values and necessities that the Bush administration cannot seem to articulate for beans.

Conversely, time after time, left-wing films about the war on terror -- films like "In The Valley of Elah," "Rendition" and "Redacted" -- which preach moral equivalence and advocate surrender, that disrespect the military and their mission, that seem unable to distinguish the difference between America and Islamo-fascism, have bombed more spectacularly than Operation Shock and Awe.

Why is it then that left-wingers feel free to make their films direct and realistic, whereas Hollywood conservatives have to put on a mask in order to speak what they know to be the truth? Why is it, indeed, that the conservative values that power our defense -- values like morality, faith, self-sacrifice and the nobility of fighting for the right -- only appear in fantasy or comic-inspired films like "300," "Lord of the Rings," "Narnia," "Spiderman 3" and now "The Dark Knight"?

The moment filmmakers take on the problem of Islamic terrorism in realistic films, suddenly those values vanish. The good guys become indistinguishable from the bad guys, and we end up denigrating the very heroes who defend us. Why should this be?

The answers to these questions seem to me to be embedded in the story of "The Dark Knight" itself: Doing what's right is hard, and speaking the truth is dangerous. Many have been abhorred for it, some killed, one crucified.

Leftists frequently complain that right-wing morality is simplistic. Morality is relative, they say; nuanced, complex. They're wrong, of course, even on their own terms.

Left and right, all Americans know that freedom is better than slavery, that love is better than hate, kindness better than cruelty, tolerance better than bigotry. We don't always know how we know these things, and yet mysteriously we know them nonetheless.

The true complexity arises when we must defend these values in a world that does not universally embrace them -- when we reach the place where we must be intolerant in order to defend tolerance, or unkind in order to defend kindness, or hateful in order to defend what we love.

When heroes arise who take those difficult duties on themselves, it is tempting for the rest of us to turn our backs on them, to vilify them in order to protect our own appearance of righteousness. We prosecute and execrate the violent soldier or the cruel interrogator in order to parade ourselves as paragons of the peaceful values they preserve. As Gary Oldman's Commissioner Gordon says of the hated and hunted Batman, "He has to run away -- because we have to chase him."

That's real moral complexity. And when our artistic community is ready to show that sometimes men must kill in order to preserve life; that sometimes they must violate their values in order to maintain those values; and that while movie stars may strut in the bright light of our adulation for pretending to be heroes, true heroes often must slink in the shadows, slump-shouldered and despised -- then and only then will we be able to pay President Bush his due and make good and true films about the war on terror.

Perhaps that's when Hollywood conservatives will be able to take off their masks and speak plainly in the light of day.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1216942473...in_commentaries

[Xan]

Interesting. As long as my cold doesn't keep me down, I'm planning on seeing it tonight. I'll see if I agree with the commentary. "Batman Begins", although a fun movie, seemed to lean a little too much to the left, so this commentary on the second movie surprises me some. I'm thinking someone saw it the way he wanted to rather than as it really is.

[Rick-Parker]

Fantastic. 20 years from now, Bush will be remembered as one of the greatest presidents, right there with Washington, Lincoln and Roosevelt. All whom defended freedom and ensured that future generations have the same freedoms as we have today. God bless him.

[The Lorax]

Bush definitely sees himself as the Dark Knight--a rich, reviled crusader battling against all odds.

Everyone else knows him as the Dim Knight, though.

[Guest]

[Gerioke]

I have to wonder how Christians can be so politically motivated. I'm sure Jesus would rather we approach life at a more personal level and let Caesar have his own.

[nebula]

Interesting article, Dave.

And I happen to agree. We (family) were talking about the film after we saw it, and among the things we discussed this very issue was brought out.

I said this elsewhere, but if I was into computer graphics, I'd interpose a picture of the Joker with Iranian Pres. Akhminajab (sp?) and overlay it with Alfred's line: "Some people just like to see the world burn."

But it's funny - is the portrayal of Batman any different than some of John Wayne's roles (i.e. Rooster)? Or Clint Eastwood? Batman really isn't the first "dark" hero - pushing the envelope, playing by the criminal's rules in order to get him.

[Matthitjah]

playing by the criminal's rules in order to get him.

I believe this is the crux of many issues with Bush. We are supposed to be above/better than criminals/our enemies. Leading by example and all, PROVING that we are better than they by NOT resorting to their tactics.

Grace to you,

Jg

[Matthitjah]

Ah yes, go back to the Lords work with the Jews when it suits your position. So in that case we can assume that God actually does want us, Christians, today, to dash our opponents babies against rocks and stone our disobedient children... or were those things for the Jews, then, to bring them to know the Lord?

Grace to you,

Where did you get the notion that God was only trying to Save Jews in the OT?

Do you also subscribe to the equally false notion that God isn't interested in Saving Jews at all today?

God hasn't changed.

Peace,

Dave

[Guest shiloh357]

Ah yes, go back to the Lords work with the Jews when it suits your position. So in that case we can assume that God actually does want us, Christians, today, to dash our opponents babies against rocks and stone our disobedient children... or were those things for the Jews, then, to bring them to know the Lord?

That was not his point.

The only way to defeat the terrorists is to make the price for terrorism higher than they want to pay. The only way to win to respond to them with such overwhelming ferocity and deadly force, until they despair of further conflict. Tear into them until they are on their knees and begging you to stop and are will to give anything to save their miserable lives.

That is when you win and you will have peace, but on your terms. Real peace is never "negotiated." It is won and then it is enforced.

There is simply no substitute for victory.