Bruce Wayne's inability to resist the forces surrounding him, driving him inevitably to don the mantle of the Dark Knight is expounded skilfully in the new film "Batman Begins". The film is an exposition of the Hegelian Dialectic, which frames social growth as a progression in which each successive movement or action emerges as a solution to the contradictions of the previous movement, before itself falling prey to it's own contradictions. In short, this can be termed "action-reaction-solution".
The League Of Shadows appear as masterful manipulators of world events, as well as human lives. Although some of their claims are a little hard to stomach, such as the masterminding of the fictitious Depression (out of place in the timeline of our universe), let us assume that these are valid in the fictiverse where they are set. Thus, the timeline of the film has them create an economic depression with the objective of social upheaval, and an overall cleansing of society, and then when the society they are trying to 'fix' reforms itself, as an indirect result of the charitable acts of Bruce Wayne's father, the League retreats to plot physical destruction of Gotham, hoping thereby to build anew.
They train Bruce Wayne with the hope of molding him to their interests. His basic ethos is too strong, however, to submit - primarily as a result of the nurture provided by his substitute father, Alfred. He is influenced to the extent of being able to control his deepest fears, and resolves to make a difference to society.
Bruce is caught up in two currents, one intensely personal, and another affecting Gotham. His need to prove himself to the memory of his father, and show, through his actions, that his father was not a coward in failing to protect the family, are contrasted with his desire to cleanse society of it's evils and excesses. The two streams intertwine, until he learns in the end that his father's courage was in standing up against the darkness, and helping others stand fast.
Article comments
1 - swingingpuss
I thought the main theme of the movie was the difference between revenge and justice.
While the latter is driven by pain, rage and emotions, the former however by virtue of objectivity is able to see beyond the woods at the forest.
At the same time the movie points out that compassion is a part of justice which the villain clearly did not realise.
2 - Aaman
Revenge & Justice are two sides of the same coin, IMHO
Noticed this post is on Google News front page:)
3 - Dan
Batman- the true Capotalist superhero. His only rea; superpower is money.
4 - Aaman
Money is power, but this film, at least, does not demonstrate Bruce Wayne's usage of the the power of money as a cleansing force for society.
5 - Aaman
Some insightful comments on the film, the New Deal and terrorism over at huffingtonpost.com
6 - berkeley joe
great post, one little thing though; although the joker is referenced in the end, it's not in order to dovetail into tim burton's flick. remember that in that film it was the joker himself who actually killed bruce wayne's parents (something totally made up for the movie - joe chill was the actual killer in the comics) so i think if nolan is hinting at a film with the joker in it, it is possibly the next film with a new joker?
7 - Blackstar
You almost sound credible except that you really mis-represented the Hegelian Dialectic of Thesis - Antithesis and Synthesis. You make it sound as though the "problem" arises accidentally, when if fact it is engineered in order to attain sythesis.
Example: Thesis= Democracy - introduce terrorism = Antithesis (engineered and plotted) and you get The Patriot Act or the loss of more freedom = Synthesis.
Also, Batman Begins is neither a prequel or a sequel and does NOT tie into Tim Burton's Batman. Christian Bale signed for three movies to restart the franchise anew.
8 - Mary K. Williams
I have issues with this whole "tie-in" thing. I'd say the movie was almost ruined for me in the beginning [Batman Begins] when I saw that it was NOT the Joker involved in the murder of the Waynes. I had not read the comics, my only exposure to Batman before was the TV series from the 1960s. So, I was not aware of who the true killer was supposed to be.
When Bruce's father showed the pearls to Bruce, I thought, "great - this is exactly what happened in the Burton Film. I was waiting for, "Ever dance with the devil in the pale moonlight?", but no, it was this other dude, a very undramatic killer. The whole thing pissed me off!
I will say though, that I was glad that they included Gordon in the next scene, as a sympathetic patrolman.
9 - Aaman
Apart from the conspiracy rhetoric you espouse, I do agree with you about the engineered perspective of the Dialectic, but remember that Marx went beyond Hegel - and while Ras Al'Ghul might like to claim that history was engineered, he offers no proof, and one would prefer to believe in the historical inevitability of the entire thesis-antithesis-synthesis cycle.