For anyone who actually checks up on me here regularly I have to apologize. Since Omaha Bible Church’s South Campus has gotten underway I’ve been teaching Adult Bible School and ! Corinthians 12-14 have been wiping the floor with me. Most evenings aren’t winding down till 9:30 or 10pm, and I just haven’t have the gumption to write after all that.
That said, I saw something that I found jarring, disturbing and deeply profound.
I went to go see “The Dark Night” last weekend, for my birthday by the way, and I’ve been stewing in the residue of the film since. if you’ve been by this blog much you probably know that I enjoy the subject of Christian worldview and particularly the work of Francis Schaeffer. I also have some ideas about how Christians should look at art that I think need to be considered. Approaching this movie from that vantage point, my mind was spinning so furiously during this movie that smoke was coming out of my ears. I think there are several posts in the offing but I have to start with the performance that stirred me the most since the bold statements about truth and meaning made in the “Matrix” trilogy: Heath Ledger’s role as the Joker.
Now I don’t want to be a philosophical bore who reviews movies on the side, but this character fascinated me. Not just because the character was played so well, but because he was right.
You read that right: In this film, the Joker is the only character who isn’t crazy.
The joker is a character who poses at first simply as a really crazy villain. Then we start to see that he seems to engage in evil just for it’s own sake. And then we see that the Joker has a very profound and deliberate point to make. About two thirds of the way into the movie, adding a nurse’s uniform and curly red wig to his already grotesque appearance, the Joker makes this assertion:
“The only sensible way to live in this world is without rules.”
That statement chilled me because because he is right. Exactly right.
Toward the end of the film, the Joker’s elaborate scheme is all devised to make the point that the kind of evil that thrives in him is present in everyone. By devising a moral dilemma in which only one of two parties can live, and that by first killing the other, the Joker hopes to prove this point. In other words, the Joker assumes the total depravity of man.
Worse than that, the Joker combines human depravity with another dangerous ingredient: the lack of objective truth. What people in this world fail to realize is that when we abandon God as the objective source of truth, we also abandon our moral compass (more on that here). Nothing revolutionary here, humanism has been trying to replace God as a source of moral direction for centuries now.
What’s fascinating to me is that the Joker rejects the belief of secular humanism that man is basically good. He believes that all that is needed to reveal man’s depravity is a little push. As in, when a man’s life is at stake he will take another’s to preserve his own. As a Christian, I agree with the Joker on this one. When you mix man’s depravity with the “anything goes” mentality of moral relativism, what you get is anarchy. My point is that the Joker is the only character in this movie who doesn’t try to live in denial of this. The Joker is right.
The film tries to salvage the nobility of man from the joker’s plot. In the movie, the citizens of Gotham ultimately refuse to play the Joker’s game. I believe that in real life, two things curb the depravity of man:
- Government bears the sword against evil ( Romans 13:4). This point is reflected in the film, especially during the climactic game played by the Joker.
- Our creation in the image of God ensures that we have a conscience of evil, and sometimes do what is right even if for the wrong reasons (Romans 2:14-16). This point was also echoed in the final sequence, though director Christopher Nolan would have us see this as the latent nobility of man.
Heath Ledger’s Joker was frightening to me because he was bold enough to really live out the implications of his belief. He lives out what most people in this world are too cowardly to admit: that their rejecting of God as the moral center of the universe leaves them with no ability to declare wrong from right. The result is a world in which people must be freed to pursue their desires to their fullest extent.
Even uglier is the fact that the Joker’s depravity is inside all of us. His corruption of district attorney Harvey Dent , Gotham City’s “white knight”, remains a victory for the Joker, even though Batman takes the fall for it. It interests me that the film declined to dignify his fall. The truth is that this apparent lunatic knows us better than we know ourselves, and that is real food for thought. I am very interested to see what Hollywood does with the popularity of this character.
More to come: “The Dark knight” inadvertently tips it’s hat to the Biblical worldview on government, and also toys with justifying moral ambiguity. In exploring the radical beliefs of the Joker, “The Dark Knight” also develops Batman as an anti-hero who himself muddies the moral waters in order to stop the Joker. There is a lot to be said. Stick around to see it through.
I enjoyed your reflections Matt, and I look forward to your coming ‘Dark Knight’ posts.
As a side note, Heath Ledger did do a fantastic job re-inventing the Joker. For an actor, I think this role is certainly one that you’d be proud to be ‘known’ for. He definitely didn’t come across as a young little Aussie actor, but rather as a true villain…
Oh Matt, you don’t have too, but if you want you can change my link from Reformed Geek on your blogroll to my new blog Cal.vini.st
Thanks for posting again Matt. I have not seen the movie yet but my son who is into film has seen it enough times to fill me in on the interesting points it attempts to make. I will be checking back to read your further posts so that by the time I do see the film I will be looking for the areas you point out. Some more discussion to follow.
[...] You can read the whole thing here http://theimageiseverything.wordpress.com/2008/08/03/heath-ledgers-joker-crazy-like-a-fox/ [...]
Matt,
The movie ends with a plot between Batman and the commissioner to hide the true nature of man, seen in Harvey Dent’s corruption, so as to deceive the city into believing man has the ability to be good.
I also thought the sacrificial nature of the Dark Knight in giving up his role of hero and becoming a heel was a good twist. Very true to the comics.
Toby
[...] On the flip-side of social norms and pressures promoting “moral” behaviours we see the Joker. Ikonograph has argued that, “Heath Ledger’s Joker is the Sanest Man in Gotham“: [...]
[...] second big hit was this analysis of the Joker’s worldview. Here is a little tease, but oh my, oh my, how good the whole thing [...]
[...] it just gets better after that. He talks about Albert Camus (he shared the existential nihilism of the Joker) and Pullman’s Golden Compass books. Very good [...]
Toby,
The ironic title “Dark Night” is what I’d like to blog on next. Nice to see you here.
dude, your worlds are colliding…theology, worldview, film…if you could mix in a hamburger and a New Castle I think you’d become postmil.
[...] addition to exploring (inadvertently) the moral implications of post-modernism through the character of the Joke…, I’ve also been hungry to examine the film’s commentary on moral ambiguity as seen [...]
If I am talking too much do not print my thoughts; I think that movie has a lot of trivial points to discuss and we never get to the real values discussion. For Example uou have focused on the Joker and I do not think that he per se should be the focus.
I have seen the movie. My initial comments are rather non-praising. I will submit my more in depth comments at a later time. Based on what I have read in this column I will see the movie again because I need to see what everyone saw that I evidently missed.The reason that I have to say these non-praising comments is I must wade through the trivia to get what I deem is more profound another time; I would like some counterpoints on that.
I enjoyed the long loud movie but it was like taking a few spoons of cod liver oil. The action scenes and all those toys were great. I was very grateful that I did not have to watch pointless sex scenes. However, it was apparent to me early that the Harvey Dent was on the way to being the infamous Two-Face; however it took forever to get there. The soundtrack was so loud that I could not hear the philosophical dialog at the end. The tracks were played over and over with no new music just blurred out discussion.
Now I may have missed the ‘doing of evil to achieve good’. Was this the part where Mr. Fox turned everyone’s cell phone into a TV transmitter and GPS device in order to give Batman the precise location of the Joker. Give me a read on this. I did not think that this was bad. Batman was looking for a guy, the Joker, that was blowing up hospitals.
I did not think that Heath Ledger’s acting was consistently engaging. First it was not his fault, but the third time he put a sharp knife in someone’s mouth, I was worn out. Ledger probably did the best he could with those scenes. Second, it was his fault that the range of the Joker was narrow for a movie of this length. It was his job to carry the movie and he did not appear to have the range for it. He was like a tenor that could not cover the score and strained at the high notes. There was a requirement for him to provide a more varied canvas of evil. It seemed that the director was not paying attention.
On the profound side which I will leave to another time, we have Batman who wants to become a normal family guy, the Joker who is evil incarnate (at least he has arrived at this point from being raised in a bad family) and Two-Face who has just become evil. I would like to see some comments on this situation.
[...] HERE [...]
[...] ”The Dark Knight.” Like his earlier post on the worldview of the Joker (found here http://theimageiseverything.wordpress.com/2008/08/03/heath-ledgers-joker-crazy-like-a-fox/), this is worth reading… even if you aren’t a Batman fan. You can find it here [...]
Good thoughts! Now when we actually get around to seeing the movie, we’ll probably be looking at it through a different lens than we would have if we heard nothing about the film. Nothing like a good discussion on the topic of depravity…
Henryjos,
My object was not to analyze the whole movie, simply to consider the Joker character. Every film has something to say, sometimes it isn’t much. This film had a lot to say, but I don’t want to belabor the point a suck all the fun out of life. You may already have read my second post on the film, probably my last. Keep coming around.
you raise several great points, and i too found the film to be chock full of self-discovery-inspiring points.
however, i am an atheist with what i consider to be the remnants of a moral compass instilled by my parents when i was young. i don’t follow rules because they are there or because anyone says i have to for fear fo whatever consequences; i follow the rules that i agree with or have set for myself to ensure my well being, both mentally and physically.
the joker appears to lack this (and yet not, for as you said, he lives up to what he believes) and this is demonstrated by his ’social experiment’ when the only person with the courage to act on what is truly right is the guy who played dibo on the movie ‘friday’.
what i find interesting is the duality of both agreeing and disagreeing with the joker. he never says an incorrect or untrue thing when he espouses his philosophy, and yet he carries it out in a way i find abhorrent. this duality is something i am grappling with presently, as the character strongly reminds me of someone i know who is just as twisted and without morals or ethics, but operates on the same basic principles; and yet, the accurate portrayal of a sociopath also reminds me very much of myself, minus my self-imposed compass.
what i feel the need to most comment on, however, is the use of the term ‘objective’ with the concept of a god. from my perspective, god is just another subjective attitude toward our existence, and one based on an ancient and incorrect world view that never took most of what we know to be extant today into consideration, because they simply were not aware of it when they came up with the idea. in fact, i personally hold beliefs and the fight to secure them responsible for the greater majority of the things the joker himself seeks to disrupt. what he represents, in his essence, is the desire to shake up the status quo because tradition, complacency and ignorance of fact or consequence are all hallmarks of a religious society. he seeks to disrupt because nobody else seems to want to even question its authenticity. status quo is people doing what they are doing simply because that’s what everyone has, is and will be doing. to me, that inability to question the truth of your (rhetorically) existence or beliefs is the present status quo with many. and i agree totally that it needs to be shaken up a bit.
this film bolsters the notion because batman, the ‘good’ guy uses violence to accomplish his aims, and the joker, the ‘bad’ guy is the most right-minded one of the bunch in many ways, even if his actions are not. and nobody in the film bothers to think about that, or at least nobody says anything. that is left entirely to the audience to decide, objectively, so to speak, through observing as an ouside witness to the film as opposed to mired in the thing as it happens.
i’ve always found that everything works more like a spectrum than black or white or any other polarization. the universe works this way, and so do we, as we live in it. batman’s black-and-white, good-and-evil ideals are inherently flawed, and it ultimately prevents him from accomplishing his aim of stopping the joker. meanwhile, the joker puts absolute faith in his beliefs and ideals, and is proven wrong when the least likely person on either boat finally steps up and does something right.
the point being that it’s all a spectrum: good and evil, light and dark, love and hate, are all polar opposites but with a multitude of spectra in between. shades and tints of frequencies mixing. blurred lines. it’s been my entire experience in life that the lines themselves are arbitrary and drawn by those with subjective views. to be truly objective is impossible, but one can take as much into account when thinking about anything, and come away with a much fuller grasp of what they just saw.
if you objectively look at things as huge as all existence or the concept of a deity, you might learn that even those notions of limits or power are also subjective and arbitrary.
that said, it was a tremendous movie and i wholly appreciated the thought-provoking execution of the movie and the role.
an honorable mention must also go to the scene with lucius (played by the guy who played god in bruce almighty) telling batman how wrong the surveillance system he created is. to be omnipotent without regard to the consequences of your actions is a dangerous line to walk. thankfully, the one who he chose to run it had a level head on his shoulders and could destroy it whenever he felt the need.
this film is just bursting at the seams with allegory, metaphor and excellent points to be made. anyone who claims objectivity is still subjective in various ways, and as we act this way all our lives, it stands to reason that either the creation of a god, or a god’s creation of us are strictly viewed through a subjective lens as well.
thank you for the intelligent analysis and excellent thoughts on this movie. i have a feeling that was exactly what they had in mind when they made it. truly, something for everyone.
[...] over at the Ikonograph blog analyzing the worldview of the recent Dark Knight movie (found here http://theimageiseverything.wordpress.com/2008/08/03/heath-ledgers-joker-crazy-like-a-fox/ and here [...]
Actually, the Joker made that comment when Batman was beating him up in the interrogation room.
Sorry to split hairs, but I just watched the clips yesterday.
He is making a statement about the hypocrisy of “civilized” society by living out its darkest elements.
I see the Joker as the embodiment of American imperialism and conquest. He has no problems with violence, stealing, terrorism and collateral damage. The ultimate statement of the modern times.
Kind of like that scene in “Time After Time” where H.G. Wells asks Jack the Ripper to return to the 1890’s with him, and Jack turns on the TV, showing explosions and mayhem, and says, “No, THIS is where I belong.”
I like the way you explained who the Joker was in this movie. I like the points you made. I will look at your posting how how to view art, because I am an artist, and I am very interested in making good art.
wow, a very good intepretation, i also find that the joker reflects our society today, and his murdering and violent crimes are representative of the moral crimes that happen in our society. Even though his crimes are explicit and are deemed unacceptable in which they are, it shows the hidden crimes that are just as bad in our world, such as discrimination and racism