I just watched this, and while I haven't quite digested it in full, I don't think this is what the movie suggests at all. Rather it is holding a mirror to almost everyone. To the rich that allowing the difference between rich and poor is a dangerous force that can be easily channeled for all sorts of purposes. To law enforcers that blindly obeying orders and not thinking for yourself is dangerous, or that only thinking of yourself not willing to make sacrifices can be a bigger risk to those you love. To stock traders they can be worse, more powerful thieves than any bank robber ever could be. To the government that only desperate times allow for desperate measures, and that as soon as the urgency is over, those weapens should be destroyed (including guantanamo - even the so far near flawless Gordon was scolded here). Even Batman is scolded for what happened here - his lapse in watchfulness and neglect of the importance of his work as Bruce Wayne is what caused Bane to get as far as he did in the first place. In fact I would have almost found it more believable if Batman had indeed killed himself. At least give him a walking stick or something. Or become the next Batman's butler.
I had the feeling that you express in your post much more in fact after the second Batman Movie, which left me with a bad taste in my mouth.
Anyway, for me personally it was too ambitious and wanted to be too big. I much prefer personal development aspects of a story and although some of that was present here, I got the i pression I would have preferred the book.
In the end I think there just wasn't enough to love in here. But it does at least make you think.
I believe that the symbolism was quite clear.
Everything is referenced as minor mistakes, that (here I absolutely agree with you) ultimately lead to a bad situation.
The threat of Bane though, overshadows everything else.
He is the ultimate villain of the movie.
And taking into account, that the major players whose actions led to this catastrophe are, by no means ordinary people, but are on the contrary, extraordinary people of influence, and therefore somehow responsible for everyone’s lives and choices (or lack thereof) makes it impossible for me at least, not to reach to that conclusion.
To me, the mistakes, are secondary to the fact, that people need leaders to make those mistakes for them.
They need to be lied to, controlled, and at the same time be saved by the same people that lie to them. (heroes – saviors).
In the context of the movie, the people are sheep, therefore they cannot by any means “Take back their city” .
What I also think is evident, is that what is at stake here, is,
Their civil liberties, sense of justice, (People's Courts, were in this case, criminally insane and plain criminals are the equivalent of the People) .
Their way of life, (the stock exchange).
Their freedom (criminals rise to power and take it away from them).
Essentially , from the above, anyone that wants to change this way of life, (since it’s not the very citizens of Gotham who are the definition of irresponsibility ) is a common thug.
Look, if the movie didn’t take itself so seriously (pun intended), I wouldn’t be so judgmental.
But it does… And I can’t see it in any way other than either a political statement, or a very boring action film.
It does though, make you think. :smile:
The second movie, left me with a bad taste as well, but I chose to criticize it based on the fact it was, after all, just a superhero movie . This one cemented the deal...
