"It's not about the money. It's about sending a message."

So says the Joker in the latest Batman movie. But what exactly is his message, and to whom is he sending it?

If you've seen The Dark Knight you might agree with me that the movie is complex and smart enough to work on a number of levels. Sure, it's good fun as a comic-book action movie ... but director Chris Nolan and his cast have crafted a film with a serious philosophical subtext. Especially with regard to the Joker. The film's villain, brilliantly portrayed by the late Heath Ledger (and yes, I've come to enjoy the taste of crow) is just as thought-provoking and challenging as you might want him to be. There's a lot to think about. And there's a lot to discuss, if you're of a mind to do so.

A number of bloggers and writers are up to the task:

• RC at Strange Culture draws parallels between The Joker and the Anthrax killer, Bruce Ivins:

  There is a significant amount of circumstantial evidence of Ivins' craziness, including his obsession with a sorority, Kappa Kappa Gamma, and his poem version of I'm a Little Teapot.
  
  This mentally unstable poetry to the tune of I'm a Little Teapot with a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde nature sounds like it could totally come out of a Super Villain movie:
  
  "I'm a little dream-self, short and stout.
  I'm the other half of Bruce-when he lets me out.
  When I get all steamed up, I don't pout.
  I push Bruce aside, then I'm free to run about!"
  
  And I find myself drawing this correlation, and wonder if anyone else does?

  I think that correlation is unavoidable. I mean, that twisted nursery rhyme sounds exactly like the kind of thing the Joker might gleefully sing while carrying out one of his crimes.



• Jason Lee Steorts, writing for the National Review, looks at the Joker through the prism of Frederick Nietzsche:
  

  ...the Joker doesn’t do just anything. What he does is destroy. He is not chance, for chance might treat you well. He is, rather, a vandal. Why he wants to vandalize is not clear. Beyond question is that he thinks there is no such thing as right or wrong...
  
  ...“moral relativism” is the regnant doctrine among the most important shapers of popular opinion: Hollywood, the music industry, the media, and the otherwise übercool...
  
  ...In these parts, people like to kick (Nietzsche). Some kick him because he wrote in metaphors, a few of which sound anti-Semitic or bellicose when taken literally. A whole lot of us kick him for three little words he wrote about God. But we rarely bother to look at the pictures that went with those words. We get so carried away in the kicking that we ignore the answer he gave to the problem of God’s death (and it was, for him, a problem). That answer was roughly: “Yes, all is permitted; now go make something beautiful.”

  
  Read the whole article, it's very good.



• Mark D. White and Robert Arp think about the Joker in terms of terrorists and torture at Boston.com:
  

  ...if we say that Batman should kill the Joker, doesn't that imply that we should torture terror suspects if there's a chance of getting information that could save innocent lives? Of course, terror is all too present in the real world, and Batman only exists in the comics and movies. So maybe we're just too detached from the Dark Knight and the problems of Gotham City, so we can say "go ahead, kill him." But, if anything, that detachment implies that there's more at stake in the real world - so why aren't we tougher on actual terrorists than we are on the make-believe Joker?




• There are a number of people you might compare the Joker to ... but Ghandi? Well, before you dismiss the idea, consider what the blogger at A Layman's Philosophy has to say. For all his violence and insanity, the Joker does believe, deep down in his broken mind, that he's making the world a better place:
  

  To the Joker, his scars are important because they remind him of his ideals. He is an anarchist. He doesn’t believe in the conventions of the world, only the conventions that will distract people from the illusions of the world. The joker, despite his trickery, at least makes an attempt to change the world for the better...
  
  If the Joker could find a different way to make the changes he desired in the world, perhaps he would have been likened to Gandhi instead of an insane criminal with issues. The Joker sees the illusion of polarity in the world, he simply tries too hard to help others and not himself. The outcome is violence, torture, pain, and suffering.

  I'm not going to lie to you, I don't share this perspective about the Joker at all. But I was happy to stumble across this blog and find an utterly unexpected idea about the movie.



• I enjoyed what Father Raymond J. De Souza had to say about the Joker and his ideas about good and evil:
  

  “I choose chaos,” the Joker confesses. There is no order built into human nature, no moral law written on the heart. There are rules of common agreement. But they are only manufactured rules, entirely arbitrary, without enduring value. They do not correspond to any truth — and they cannot, for there is no order or design at the heart of reality. There is only chaos, and the Joker embraces it...
  
  Richard Dawkins, call your agent: As a sworn enemy of Godly design, you should be getting royalties...

  
  The only problem with that is that Richard Dawkins is utterly humorless. Whereas the Joker enjoys a good chuckle. Come on, Richie ... let's put a smile on that face!

Personally, I see The Dark Knight's Joker as sort of a Jim Jones figure. The Joker and Jones both used a certain dark charisma to captivate both their followers and those who oppose them. Both of them are nihilists. Both Jim Jones and the Joker are flashy attention-hounds. Both of them pervert innocent symbols to convey their own warped world view: The Joker dresses up as a clown to mock his victims, Jim Jones employed a demented version of Christianity to control his followers. Both of them prey on the weak and emotionally unstable. And both of them are egomaniacs.

Oh, and both of them have high-pitched, odd-sounding voices.

The Dark Knight is an outstanding film; much better, I think, than any of us expected it to be. And how cool is it that a movie this big and loud and gaudy and flat-out entertaining also has interesting, considerable ideas at it's core? Each of us who enjoyed it ought to make an effort to see it in the theater again. Movies like this, with this much to offer, come along maybe once every twenty years.

Labels: Entertainment, Faith, Movies