Today, I went to see Man of Steel and was sorely disappointed by the ending. Anyone who has seen it probably knows why. Nearly ten years ago, Christopher Nolan gained notoriety revamping Batman as a more realistic and down to earth hero (especially after the god-awful outing by Shumacher). In 2005, we got to see the training of Bruce Wayne, saw his motivations, and even got a logical explanation for his toys (especially that cool Batmobile, the Tumbler!). Long story short, it was box office gold. So much so, that he did a sequel three years later. It was even darker, and raised serious questions about the limits of how far law enforcement should go in a free society. It also raised a few red flags about Nolan's own political leanings.
Nolan almost seemed to be endorsing things like domestic spying and saying that it's okay for the authorities to go over the legal line once in a while for the sake of protection. Because it was the end of Bush's term, this was seen as an interesting observation of the times. But very little was made of Nolan's own beliefs. That is, until the third installment came out.
Dark Knight Rises, in comparison to the two previous films, is arguably the weakest. It is also the most politically brazen in it's seeming endorsement of conservative politics. Bane with his "anything goes once you get rid of the authorities" attitude and the mock trials of Gotham's rich read like something out of an Ayn Rand novel. I'm not the first to notice this either. Matt Tiabbi wrote a scathing review of the movie for Rolling Stone at the time it came out basically saying the same thing. This was the first major red flag for me that Nolan is hiding something about what he really believes and perhaps is not the best person to put on a Superman movie.
Read More
