Would The Dark Knight have survived in this new era of Feminism

[Marvelgirl]

I will start by saying I loved the film, think it is interstellar years ahead of today's formulaic comic movies. One of the minor criticisms back then about the movie was the portrayal of female characters. Dark Knight is a macho film. In 2008, it was easy to sweep this problem under the rug. In 2018, it would be difficult in the era of time's up, me too, empowering female characters, equal gender pay and strong female leads.

I don't think critics and others would have forgiven the movie on the wasted potential that was Rachel after her excellent portrayal in Batman Begins as her character was one of the most pointless and non effective female characters in any movie. I had some nitpicks with her

She was just a love interest
Maggie Gyllenhaal was unimpressive in the role, Katie Holmes was much better and I have to say it but yes, far prettier
Unconvincing love story between Her and Dent
Non-effective to the entire plot. I wish Nolan wrote a better reason for Dent becoming Two Face.

I can erase Rachel from the movie and still have the movie 90% as it is. She is that disposable in the film. Progressive Feminists may have raged against this movie in 2008 with all the attention the film received and could have done it major harm.

[jump]

Whilst you can complain it was down to the script personally I found everything Katie Holmes said and the way she said it to Bruce just came off as nagging rather than inspiring, I was quite pleased with Maggie as her replacement.

[RikWriter]

Regular people would still have loved it.

[MindofShadow]

Anyone else find it absolutely hilarious that a thread opened to talk about 'new feminism" mentions one of the critiques for the actresses is that she wasn't pretty enough lol?


I don't agree with the non-effective for the plot part AT ALL. Rachel's death drove the second half of the movie and establishes much of the movie in TDKR.

Unlike other movies where the love interest dies and all it causes is a few tears and the protagonist to get angry for a bit... Rachel's death actually caused real change in the franchise.

[numberthirty]

Regular people would still have loved it.

Critics would still have loved it.

[Username taken]

First things first, Timesup and Me Too are specific movements and aren't just about female/feminist issues. A number of male celebrities spoke up about their experiences in the industry. Obviously, these movements are female driven (because there was a culture of female sexual harassment) but it's about sexual harassment in general. I don't know what this has to do with the Dark Knight but it seems the OP has more of a problem with feminism than anything else.

Nolan has received criticism of his lack of strong female presence in his movies but it's not anything that could prevent the movie from "surviving".

Besides, if John Wick and John Wick (far more gritty movies than the Dark Knight) then most people won't have a problem with the movie.

[AJBopp]

I will start by saying I loved the film, think it is interstellar years ahead of today's formulaic comic movies. One of the minor criticisms back then about the movie was the portrayal of female characters. Dark Knight is a macho film. In 2008, it was easy to sweep this problem under the rug. In 2018, it would be difficult in the era of time's up, me too, empowering female characters, equal gender pay and strong female leads.

The current era of feminism is, in actuality, a good 50 years old

[numberthirty]

Anyone else find it absolutely hilarious that a thread opened to talk about 'new feminism" mentions one of the critiques for the actresses is that she wasn't pretty enough lol?


I don't agree with the non-effective for the plot part AT ALL. Rachel's death drove the second half of the movie and establishes much of the movie in TDKR.

Unlike other movies where the love interest dies and all it causes is a few tears and the protagonist to get angry for a bit... Rachel's death actually caused real change in the franchise.

Never mind that she is targeted because she is a district attorney who will be involved in Lau bringing the mob down.

It's not like she gets targeted for no reason.

She is about as far away from "Non-Effective" as a character can get.

[CliffHanger2]

TDK was a macho film?Looooool. It was most cucked ,ineffectual version of Batman ever. "Pardon me as I dive off my bike to avoid hitting a psycho shooting into traffic." -Yeah real macho...

[Powerboy]

I will start by saying I loved the film, think it is interstellar years ahead of today's formulaic comic movies. One of the minor criticisms back then about the movie was the portrayal of female characters. Dark Knight is a macho film. In 2008, it was easy to sweep this problem under the rug. In 2018, it would be difficult in the era of time's up, me too, empowering female characters, equal gender pay and strong female leads.

I don't think critics and others would have forgiven the movie on the wasted potential that was Rachel after her excellent portrayal in Batman Begins as her character was one of the most pointless and non effective female characters in any movie. I had some nitpicks with her

She was just a love interest
Maggie Gyllenhaal was unimpressive in the role, Katie Holmes was much better and I have to say it but yes, far prettier
Unconvincing love story between Her and Dent
Non-effective to the entire plot. I wish Nolan wrote a better reason for Dent becoming Two Face.

I can erase Rachel from the movie and still have the movie 90% as it is. She is that disposable in the film. Progressive Feminists may have raged against this movie in 2008 with all the attention the film received and could have done it major harm.

Maybe it's an age thing but I find it kind of funny that someone perceives Feminism in 2008 as being significantly different than Feminism in 2018. Maybe there's a slight difference that someone who was hugely aware of it would notice but, I think most people would not notice any difference.

That said, as someone already mentioned, it's funny that in a post that seems to be pro-Feminist, a criticism is that they recast a role with an actress that you didn't find as attractive as the original actress. Yes, I think Katie Holmes is more physically attractive too but Maggie Gyllenhaal was a far better actress to the point that I'm tempted to say she is objectively a better actress which I think had a lot to do with the recasting and I much preferred her in the role.

I don't remember enough of the plot to get into how much she was treated as just a love interest. Unfortunate if she was.

[Powerboy]

TDK was a macho film?Looooool. It was most cucked ,ineffectual version of Batman ever. "Pardon me as I dive off my bike to avoid hitting a psycho shooting into traffic." -Yeah real macho...

I found it a very powerful scene that established that this is really Batman, the guy who, among other things, won't kill. He expected the Joker would move out of the way but the Joker, establishing he understands who Batman is (and that this really is a recognizable Batman), stands his ground knowing that Batman won't kill. Might as well say that almost every superhero is unmacho, cuckolded and ineffectual.

[Hall]

Feminism in 2008 was heading towards a dark place with the arrival of Bella Swan from the Twilight series that went on to rule blockbusters with a female driven series. I understand where marvelgirl is coming from, maybe you are right, maybe you are not though the bigger question should be, would the The Dark Knight be The Dark Knight had Heath Ledger lived? Those that think it is overrated and only praised was due to Heath's passing seem to have a valid argument or do they? We will never know. The film is excellent but has never truly been able to shake off that... Heath Ledger tragically died pity party thing.

[Powerboy]

Feminism in 2008 was heading towards a dark place with the arrival of Bella Swan from the Twilight series that went on to rule blockbusters with a female driven series. I understand where marvelgirl is coming from, maybe you are right, maybe you are not though the bigger question should be, would the The Dark Knight be The Dark Knight had Heath Ledger lived? Those that think it is overrated and only praised was due to Heath's passing seem to have a valid argument or do they? We will never know. The film is excellent but has never truly been able to shake off that... Heath Ledger tragically died pity party thing.

Did Heath Ledger deserve the Oscar? Yes. Was his death the one push the Academy needed that pressured them into awarding it to him? Probably considering no other actor in such a genre as superheroes ever won it before or since.

[CliffHanger2]

I found it a very powerful scene that established that this is really Batman, the guy who, among other things, won't kill. He expected the Joker would move out of the way but the Joker, establishing he understands who Batman is (and that this really is a recognizable Batman), stands his ground knowing that Batman won't kill. Might as well say that almost every superhero is unmacho, cuckolded and ineffectual.

Gonna have to disagree with you there m8.

[Scott Taylor]

If the Dark Knight were made today, it would be criticized so much while in production that it would end up a quite different movie from what we saw. The two big strikes against it are that people criticize DC no matter what and love Marvel no matter what.