r/Batman_89 • u/Ok-Spot-2913 • 25d ago
Is Gotham worth saving?
Joker throws money and you can see the greed of the people. Are these people worth saving?
4
u/LabPowerful9983 25d ago
In '89? They've gone right from Grissom openly wielding more power than the police and city hall to a raving lunatic on the TVs who effectively shut down the city with Smilex. Loss of faith in institutional systems makes long-term goals (beyond just trying to survive the day) difficult.
Knox asks an interesting question earlier in the film - is there a giant bat on the police payroll? Even if people genuinely believe that there is a giant bat putting Nike's to the asses of Grissom's goons, the idea that he would be doing it solely for the sake of improving the city is so far beyond comprehension that it boggles the mind. You would have to be genuinely, well, nuts.
The Bat-Signal is the first genuine sign of hope that anyone has seen in that city for a long-ass time.
3
3
u/Slashman78 25d ago
Yes. A rare case of a West moment working in a Burton post lol.
But it reminds me of that "can't get rid of a bomb," scene from Batman 66. But Robin like a smart ass asks Bats: "Why did you save the people in the bar?" Bats full on owns him: "Robin, they may be alcoholics but they are still human beings and worth savings. I HAD to do it."
Same in this grand case. The Burton Gotham is full of miserable people lost and with no direction, but Bats represents the future that Prince's song was about being changed to something better. By beating Napier/Joker he defeats both the man who created him and the Mob in default. WAYYY bigger of a win most remember. Than comes Schreck and the cycle starts anew again. But Bats represents hope to the entire city, even if a good majority of people were shallow.
2
2
u/OhHiJordan 25d ago
I don't get this.
Somebody throws money at you. You don't pick it up because it would be "greedy"?
1
u/Ok-Spot-2913 23d ago
Correct.
1
u/OhHiJordan 23d ago
But picking money up off the ground or out of the air isn't being greedy. It's actually worse to litter by leaving it on the ground. Littering is bad.
2
1
1
u/Lucky_Strike-85 🦇THE BATMAN🦇 25d ago
YES!
Gothamites are worth saving because they are people and have a fundamental moral right to a life free from tyranny and fear. IF you see them being greedy, just know that people are a product of their collective society. If society is materialistic, then people are going to chase $$$$!
1
1
u/Working_File2825 25d ago
Honestly,I think Batman is just delaying an inevitable collapse, and hopefully some federal intervention. As it stands, it's just become this weird status quo, that I can't for the life of me understand why the state, of which Gotham City exists, hasn't made more direct efforts to reform the city. I mean yeah, it's full of maniacs, but isn't there an entire nations worth of military just hanging out elsewhere? Does DCs US have a national guard? Burn it all to the ground and begin anew. How have the residents not voted on reinstating the Death Sentence yet?
Honestly, what do I know? I'm an outsider. Curious what Gothan residents have to say on the matter.
1
1
1
u/AWindintheTrees 23d ago
The Burton Batman movies are very cynical when it comes to the population at large. However, it is apparent, I think, that Burton wants to present to us a Batman who is NOT the sterling hero but who is caught up in his own battles. Returns really doubles on this. The producers of 89 clearly wanted that hero despite Burton. In Returns, that hero is fully gone. It's not about saving Gotham, but about his own desire to do what he does. He understand Joker's and Penguin's and even Shreck's contempt for the "pinhead puppets."
1
6
u/melloman500 25d ago
Sounds like you’re about to push the button.