Originally Posted by psycheoutsteve
2nd of all, the irony of the nuke plot device is that the nuke was created from a reactor that was meant to provide the world with an unlimited resource of clean energy. What makes this plot element even more ironic is that the hero in the film was responsible for the reactors existence. That to me is interesting; a device meant to help the world is converted into a weapon by the enemy. Even more interesting is the question [I]is Bruce.
There was definitely some sort of political critique going on, and you picked up on an interesting element of it. All three of these films have been political in different ways. I'm not sure what exactly the political message was, but to be honest while I was watching, whether purposeful or not, the whole movie felt Marxist in its orientation. So much of the movie revolved around criticizing the status quo: questions of class, privilege, the tyranny of liberal democracy (after all, who is complicit in the crime? The government that refuses to let people save themselves). There were also all these symbolic relationships between the total destruction of the fictional world, and global capitalism: the use of the stock market, shots of a Sachs Fifth Avenue while society goes to shit. Also at the end JGL quits because "structures are becoming shackles" and he "can't take the injustice". Of course on the other hand, given that the film hero-worships a billionaire capitalist, who the fuck knows? What I'm sure of is there was something political going on -- either left or right -- and it felt far more like some sort of leftist critique than a right wing one.