Idols and Sacrifice: Faith in The Dark Knight

Review of THE DARK KNIGHT
by Diana M. Taibi
starring Christian Bale and Heath Ledger
directed by Christopher Nolan
Rated PG-13

The Dark Knight is as an absolutely stunning movie, a true action-drama that transcends the comic book genre. The film is so densely packed with moral, emotional, and social dilemmas that the viewer is left ruminating for days or longer. Yet these heavy questions never detract from the momentum and enjoyment of the film. As I untangle the theme presented, I find interesting commentaries on the nature of faith and self-sacrifice.

The plot has been described in a previous review on this blog, so I will start by commending the excellent performances in the film that make contemplation of the difficult themes unavoidable for the audience. Heath Ledger’s Joker is menacing and mocking, unflinchingly violent. He refused to offer any laughable “monologuing”; indeed, any monologuing is intentionally manipulative. This is a stand-out performance of an irredeemably evil man and a worthy archenemy. However, as noted in the previous review by Pastor James Harleman, the emotional “heavy lifting” was truly done by Gary Oldman as Police Lieutenant (future Commissioner) Gordon and Aaron Eckhart as District Attorney Harvey Dent. Eckhart’s performance, in my opinion, rivaled Heath Ledger’s role as a stand-out performance. Eckhart’s performance as an ethical “white knight”, an unmasked hero (the flip side of the coin from Batman) makes both Bruce Wayne and the audience root for Dent. However, we know from Batman lore that Harvey Dent’s downfall is inevitable, which makes it all the more heartbreaking to watch.

The film presents two messages on faith, one hopeless, and one hopeful. First, the film presents faith as necessary for inspiring people to be moral and responsible. For faith to be transforming, it must be in the image of someone “good”, but the foundational truth behind the image (i.e., whether or not the person actually is good) is immaterial. A relevant statement was made in an episode of Firefly that dealt similarly with faith: “It’s my estimation that every man ever got a’statue made of him was one kind of sommbitch or another. Ain’t about you,… ‘Bout what they need.” The position is that people need to believe in something, but the veracity of that something is moot. In this sense, the film posits that people do not need a real God and redeemer, but rather an idol, simply an image to inspire. This type of faith truly is Marx’s opiate of the masses, a band-aid happiness to get the people through until they rise up from their own inner strength and create a better world.

There is much wrong with this perspective from the Christian point of view. First, and most important, our object of faith is true. The Lord Jesus came to earth, lived a sinless life, and was sacrificed for the sins of the world. He is not an idol or a Dark Knight; he is Lord of all. We are not people whose ultimate salvation will come from being inspired by an idol to pull up our own bootstraps. Our hope is not in an inspirational image, but in a Savior who will, himself, come to deliver us.

The other point made in The Dark Knight, however, was more heartening, though challenging (I have tried not to include spoilers, but general plot directions may be implied in this section). In two crucial moments of the film, it is not the ostensibly good people who do what is right, but rather the tarnished sinners who do what is right, regardless of the consequence to both life and reputation. In one sequence, a group of criminals and a group of ordinary people must decide if they will kill the other group that they might live. Without revealing the outcome, many of the good people show a clear lack of moral strength needed to decide that killing another that one might live is simply not an acceptable action. The lack of action by these individuals is from cowardice rather than from an active decision to do what is right. That is, when put to the test, the morality of these modern Pharisees (the “good”) fails them because their morality is built on rules that have not prepared them for moral strength in situations that their rules have not explained. They have not actually learned goodness in their hearts (compare to Matthew 15:7-9) and thus are unprepared for self-sacrifice. However, many of the criminals actively decide that it is wrong to murder others that one might live. Those who have nothing to lose, who admit that they are not good people, are able to free themselves from fear and make the right choice.

The Dark Knight rejects being rule-bound as simplistic and morally inadequate. Through the Joker, the film rejects anarchy and chaos as madness. What, then, are we left with? We are left with moral maturity, the internal compass to do what is best when no choice appears clearly “right” or “good”. This dilemma is played out in the tension between the Dent and Batman characters as they presents two different pictures of self-sacrifice. Throughout the film, Dent is the opposite type of hero from Batman- publicly visible and emotionally engaging as well as morally assured. His fall is, metaphorically, from a great height. This “moral” character is ruined, driven to madness and revenge, by failed self-sacrifice. On the other hand, Batman, the tarnished “sinner” is the moral victor. He is redeemed in his righteousness, even though he must sacrifice everything: reputation, friends, mentors, and love. In this role, he is very much a savior like Jesus who not only submitted to death, but sacrificed his reputation to be killed among criminals (Luke 23:32, 39-43). Christ who was “a man of sorrows, acquainted with grief” (Isaiah 53:3) and was himself forsaken by God the Father in his greatest suffering (Matthew 27:46). Thus, on the point of redemptive self-sacrifice, I found the film presented a difficult, but hopeful, challenge to the Christian viewer. Are we prepared to “count everything as loss” (Philippians 3:8) to do what is right and follow the example of Christ?