The second movie in Nolan’s trilogy is The Dark Knight, again with Bale. In the first story Batman is very traditional, very canon. Any changes here?
Well, for the first half of the movie Batman is nothing. He either only reacts or is characterless, just a warm body in the story. We have Heath Ledger’s performance as Joker, which steals all the oxygen, and we have Eckhart’s Harvey Dent/Two Face, which is quite good. Even Rachel, now played by Gyllenhaal, is mesmerizing. The limelight has no room for our titular hero. At this point I give him a Null Enneagram.
He has a bit of a run-in with Fox, who’s offended by Wayne’s use of the R&D department to develop an invasive sonic-based spyware. Batman flirts with a moral line in this movie, eventually landing on the side of honor. That’s his quandary, his conflict. Does the Joker — his nihilism and his malevolent genius — warrant breaking the code, taking human life, in order to defeat him? The answer is eventually no.
Any number can confront this problem. We’ve learned nothing new about Batman’s Enneagram here.
Ultimately, the story settles on sacrifice as its moral answer. Batman will take the blame, become the city’s scapegoat, in order to keep the memory of Dent clean and inspiring. It’s a very classical solution, and it’s Batman’s idea. Batman will assume the role of villain so that Dent can be a martyr.
Nope, I can’t get there. I can’t find a character in this version of the Bat. It’s hinted that he wants to be free of his alter ego, free of the responsibility of saving the city, and that he wants a chance with Rachel, but I don’t see him pursuing that desire. He’s not even really thwarted. Rachel is fridged.
The movie is a mish-mosh and the hero is bland. The supporting work is outstanding and worth the time. And that’s that.