this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2024
31 points (97.0% liked)
Comics
300 readers
1 users here now
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
One thing I've been thinking about is the new Batman movie. That one highlighted Batman's philanthropy as a means to helping the impoverished of Gotham. Although to be fair philanthropy is hardly an effective means to improving people's socioeconomic conditions and discrimination groups face.
I just don't think I've seen a superhero ever address the systemic causes of crime.
He doesn’t.
At the end of the movie, he monologues about how the city is full of crime and misery. But he needs to continue being an accountable vigilante because it gives people hope, and hope will fix things.
But the movie didn’t show the Wayne family’s philanthropy as good. It was portrayed as a corrupt political move that resulted in the abuse and neglect of orphans which the Riddler was a victim of. It also resulted in the murder of a journalist orchestrated by Bruce’s father and the mob. The Riddler spends the whole movie exposing the crime and corruption of the elite, then Batman doesn’t even acknowledge them besides “I need to follow the clue of this crime scene to catch the Riddler”
Zamn.
I haven't had the time to watch movies but is that really what that was about?
Yes, but the lack of acknowledgement from Batman and Riddler just committing random acts of violence at the end just made the movie dumb as hell to me. They built up this grand narrative then just… liberalism.
With Joker, at least they didn’t try to make Joker into some underdog with an agenda trying to fight the rich. He just had a personal grievance due to the same factors as Riddler (abuse, poverty, mental illness) that spiraled out of control and accidentally made him a symbol of resistance.