Why Chris Nolan’s BATMAN Isn’t Racist
How Nolan's Batman is desegregating comic book films with Tom Hardy's casting in The Dark Knight Rises.
(our article from February re-posted to keep you busy over the weekend) How Nolan's Batman is Desegregating Comic Book Films The announcement that Tom Hardy would be portraying the character Bane in The Dark Knight Rises, caused a lot of discussion and debate over the casting of a white actor for what many fans consider a Latino character. Within that debate, there were discussions that moved beyond the limited case of Bane and toward a more comprehensive consideration of racial representation in comics and comic book films. I want to look more closely at those issues, because I feel that despite the ongoing debate over Bane and "The Dark Knight Rises," the evidence in fact points toward the conclusion that Christopher Nolan's Batman films represent a move toward racial representation in comic book films. To begin, we really have to be honest and frank about a few important facts that are at the root of all of these matters. Comic books tend to focus on white lead characters and mostly white supporting casts for the most well-known, long-lasting, popular characters. For decades, comics were segregated like the rest of society, and the initial inclusion of minorities was largely an exercise in racial stereotyping and/or outright racism. Only in the second half of the 20th Century did that start to change, and at first it was still tough going, with well-intentioned efforts that produced sometimes less-than-stellar results that were still rooted in stereotypes. By the 1980s, most inclusion of non-white characters had overcome the stereotyping and racism of the past. But minorities were still in short supply, and it's really only been the last ten to twenty years that really ushered in a whole lot more minority characters. Even today, though, the truth we need to admit is, while lots of gains have been made, most of the characters are still white. And that is probably because, throughout the history of comics, most of the readership has been overwhelmingly one specific demographic: young white males. 
Comic book characters reflect their audience, and that's hardly a staggering revelation. Yet, it's one that a lot of fans and creators are perhaps a little reluctant to readily admit. But it's true, and we need to talk about that if we have any hope of getting to the point where we can then admit that a medium overwhelmingly portraying mostly white people is, in the modern world and modern USA, failing to reflect the reality of demographics. Where do most comic book stories take place? Think about Superman, Batman, Spider-Man, the X-Men, the Avengers, and so on. They are usually in cities, aren't they? Yep, they are. And where are those cities usually located? On either the East or West Coasts. In the real world, those are the two areas with the largest concentration of non-white populations. The non-Latino white population has its largest demographic percentage in the South and the Midwest, but is in fact often a minority (even if a plurality) in many parts of the East and West Coasts. Nearly one-third of this nation's population is non-white, and the percentage tends to be higher along the coasts. However, is this racial demographic reality really, honestly reflected in most of the comic books we see? How diverse does Metropolis look? Or Spider-Man's New York City? I don't just mean in crowd shots or passing once-only appearances by a filler character, I'm talking about the recurring characters important to the world of the superheroes, their friends, family, lovers, and coworkers. They are all pretty white, aren't they? The tendency is for fans at this point to start listing off a handful of non-white characters and declaring this proof that the criticism isn't valid. Well, we need to get beyond denial and talk seriously about this, and that begins by being intelligent enough and rational enough to know that it's simply not intellectually honest to pretend that naming a dozen minor characters that include a sometimes-appearing guy, a villain or two, a single friend, and a couple of coworkers all from an array of different comics does NOT add up to any serious diversity. Not in a world where the lead characters and most of the actual cast of main characters are overwhelmingly white people. A black neighbor doesn't mean diversity is achieved, any more than "we have a black president so racism is over" is a rational claim. Admitting, then, that most of the main characters in most comics (notice the word "most") are white, and that their world and circle of recurring characters don't really reflect the true world around us, especially in the regions of the country where most of these books take place, lets us move on to the next point -- the films. Comic book films, because they are based on those books, will tend to carry over a lot of the same characters, and they tend to target the same demographic (albeit a broader slice of that demographic). Translation: comic book films are full of a whole lot of white people. Watch "Superman Returns" and count the non-white people who speak in that film. How many have names? How many did you see at the Daily Planet, on the Space Shuttle, at NASA, in the bars and places around the city? Only during a few specific quick shots of the baseball stadium did we actually see any serious number of non-white people, and it was mostly Latinos and Asians... and I won't even get into discussing the nuances of that. Suffice to say, it appears that Superman lives in a very segregated city, and that he makes a point of avoiding non-white people. Metropolis, a major U.S. city on the coast, appears to be an extremely white city outside of their ballpark. 
The previous Superman films weren't much better, either. Aside from Richard Pryor, Superman films rarely had many non-whites at all, except in occasional crowd scenes in the streets of the city sometimes, and almost no non-white speaking roles. In fact, besides Richard Pryor, did Superman ever speak to a black man besides the one guy who told him "That's a bad outfit! Whoo!" right before Superman flew up to catch Lois in the first film? Actually, he did -- "Superman IV: The Quest for Peace" put him in the UN giving a speech, so for the second time in the film series Superman directly addressed some non-white people. I jest, but really, go back and watch your Superman film collection, and you will be just as surprised as I was when I started to think about this and went back to check. The New York City of the "Spider-Man" films fares better, but not much. Besides Robbie at the Daily Bugle, Peter/Spider-Man almost never interacts with any non-white people except in a few quick shots with unnamed extras. In fact, the scene in "Spider-Man 2" where Peter jumps off his bike and tells the two little kids to eat their green leafy vegetables appears to be the longest conversation Peter/Spider-Man has with any non-white person. In all three films. Seriously. There just aren't many significant non-white people who do anything of any importance in Spider-Man's world... in New York City, folks. 
The X-Men series of films are harder to pin down, because a lot of people are blue or other less common colors. But of course, the actors playing most of them are white. There are a few non-white characters, but overwhelmingly the X-Men and the people they fight against are mostly white people, or white people painted another color. The third film in the series, "X-Men: The Last Stand," goes a long way toward trying to at least include a lot of smaller cameos and supporting roles of non-white characters around the main characters, making the concept of a worldwide race of super-powered mutants feel like it's not actually just confined to mostly North American and European white people, and that was much appreciated. But overall, the series had a main cast that still lacked much minority representation. The first "Hulk" film, as well as the "Fantastic Four" films, don't have much for any non-white people to do, aside from a couple of exceptions. And "Daredevil" seemed to have non-whites most only as criminals or prisoners. 
"Watchmen" likewise was pretty much set in a world with less than half a dozen non-white people, or at least it seems that way sometimes. Most non-white characters had very little speaking roles at all, or were just extras in war, prison, or street protest scenes. Otherwise, there were almost no non-whites anywhere to be seen interacting and speaking or having any impact on anything that ever happens. The "Iron Man" films have the virtue of including a very strong supporting character, Rhodey, and a large portion of the first film is set in Afghanistan where a lot of non-white characters show up. The second film added Nick Fury to the equation, creating two significant recurring characters who were non-white. So, I give the film credit for all of that. However, it's important to note that in the first film, outside of the Middle East setting Tony Stark/Iron Man had very few encounters with any non-white people aside from his best friend (Rhodey), and Nick Fury is only in a brief after-credit cameo scene. Consider also that most ("most" I say) of the non-whites in the Middle East who had speaking roles or were on screen for more than a few seconds were all villains. Overall, very few of the non-white characters had much to do, and the ones who did were mostly bad guys. Likewise, besides Rhodey and Fury, there were no non-whites with anything noteworthy to do in "Iron Man 2." It's a case of films set mostly in big cities but having very little for non-white people to do, even though the second film's Expo is set in New York City. On the other hand, it is noteworthy that this series has a limited number of lead recurring characters and includes two black men among that small main cast, and so it deserves credit for being way ahead of most other films of the genre in that regard. 
Also making some progress was "The Incredible Hulk," which -- like "Iron Man" -- set a decent portion of the film in another non-white country. And although the most-used characters there were kind of bad guys (well, violent jerks at least), there were still several sympathetic non-whites and most of the people there were portrayed as regular people, and several had speaking roles. In the states, sadly, it becomes a sea of mostly white faces again, and I can't recall any non-white person with a speaking role that was of any great significance. That was in New York City, by the way. Now, having said all of this, I want to stress that I am not suggesting that the films were racist or intentionally ignored non-whites. I love the comics, I love the films, and I have admiration and respect for the people who make them. The primary reason the films are so white and usually lack any significant presence for non-whites is that they are based on comics, and the films were using characters from those comics, and in being faithful to the source material they inherently had casts of main characters who were exceedingly white. I can sympathize with them in considering the likely reaction of angry fans to any attempt to make characters more diverse. In a world where a certain segment of fans seem determined to perpetuate the worst stereotypes of narrow-minded, immature, shrill fanboys, those are the voices that sadly most often echo loudest and influence buzz for films. Time after time, when a non-white actor is suggested for a character who is white in the comics, a chorus of angry white male voices shouts in opposition. This isn't due to racism in most cases, but rather that simple myopic mentality of those kinds of fans who think any deviation is a cardinal sin. These are boys who cried out over the short-list of Captain America actors because some of them didn't have light enough blond hair, or because in the comics Superman is a specific height and Henry Cavill is "only" 6 ft 1 inches tall. If you're investing more than $100 million in a film that needs those loudmouths to show up, then, I understand it can be like walking a tightrope. So, the combined influence of source material that has overwhelmingly white characters, fans who can be very fickle and denounce even moderate changes, and the fact of the target demographic being predominantly young white males, all adds up to a case of inertia. An object in motion will tend to remain in motion unless acted upon -- in this case, the trend of white dominance in characterizations has been perpetuated in large part just because that's how it was yesterday so that's how it is today, which adds one more day to the weight behind it that moves it forward. Which brings me to Batman. Or more correctly, which brings me to Christopher Nolan's Batman. Previously, the Batman films of the '80s and '90s were a very white affair, just like most comic book films. Granted, Billy Dee Williams as Harvey Dent broke up the extremely white cast of the first film, but he vanished from a second film that was so white it even snowed and turned the ground white. The third film had Dent miraculously switch to white, perhaps to fit in better with the surroundings. Then the fourth film was... well, actually it was so neon I'm not sure what color anybody was in that film. But a funny thing happened when Batman got rebooted -- the trend of whiteness in comic book films got rebooted, too, and Gotham City was a lot less white. We start off in Asia, we meet a group of ninjas who are of all colors and nationalities, we go back to a Gotham City with a Latino mayor, a black police commissioner, plenty of non-white judges and non-white police, the smartest guy at Wayne Enterprises is black, and the black and other non-white mobsters are every bit as successful and organized as the white guys. 
But look even closer, and you'll see that not only did the Chris Nolan Batman films create a city far more reflective of the reality of race in America, and not only did it go even farther to cast plenty of non-whites in major positions of power and as good guys all over the place, but even some of the "bad" non-white people end up not being quite so terrible in some cases (the prisoner on the boat who takes the detonator from the white guy and throws it out the window, or Lau deciding to help take down the mobs -- yeah, he turned on them, but he was going to help bring down the worst of the worst in Gotham City). More than that, though, what do you notice about most of the white people in Gotham? Look at the recurring white roles -- do you notice how white people, white guys in particular, are kind of mostly out of their frigging minds? White people are up to crazy s**t in this Batman world, and it's not a coincidence that Gambol's reaction to the Joker is to act incredulous that everybody else is listening to this nutjob and point out the Joker is a "freak" and finally just put an end to the game of "let's all sit around talking politely to the psychotic white guy dressed like a clown." In Christopher Nolan's Gotham City, there's a good chance at any given moment that any white people around are going to put on weird masks, paint their faces, or otherwise dress up crazy and start acting out. Meanwhile, most of the non-white people are acting pretty normal, trying to keep the city running, and generally seeming to shake their heads at how utterly out of their minds the white people are becoming in this city. 
I'm saying this all tongue-in-cheek, but it's also kind of true, isn't it? The Batman franchise has become the place where not only are non-white people in plenty of roles with important things to do and say, and in positions of power, but they are the most rational and normal people while most of the worst people and crazy folks are the white ones. Nolan's Batman movies are the most all-around well-integrated comic book films, and now he's about to embark on another step forward in this regard, but so far nobody seems to realize it. I am talking, of course, about Bane. The last film of what many consider the best comic book franchise yet produced, and the end of the Christopher Nolan Batman trilogy, will have as Batman's next foe -- and, presumably, in light of the character's background in the source material, Batman's most difficult foe to date -- a character of Latino background. I don't agree with those who expect the film to jettison Bane's Lation origins, I think it will be part of the character's background in the film. But wait, you're thinking, Tom Hardy is a white guy! Yes, he is. And so is Bane, kind of. He's a white guy with Latino/Hispanic/Caribbean origins, but mostly white nonetheless. 
Along comes a foreign supervillain who is part-Latino, hopped up on some kind of drugs like steroids that make him big and menacing, and he walks around in a pro-wrestling mask. It's not like he's walking around in a sombrero and bandoleers, of course, but it's still a culturally relevant bit of imagery (the pro-wrestling mask) and when mixed with the other character elements it might raise some eyebrows. Was it intentionally a racial stereotyping? No, not at all -- hey, the fact is that all of those young white guys who read comic books were starting to become even bigger fans of pro-wrestling, in part because a lot of Latino and Hispanic guys were kick-a** wrestlers with outfits like comic book superheroes. Working that into the comics to create a character with some Latino origins, who is one of the greatest mental and physical challenges to Batman of all time (comparable to a "bad" Doc Savage) wasn't a concept with any racist intentions at all. The mask quite frankly was just probably one of the easiest -- and, in the context of the times with pro-wrestling being so popular, coolest -- ways to give him a costume that also demonstrated one of the cultural elements that readers might most recognize. It's only looking back, without really thinking deeper about it, that it might on the surface appear to pander to stereotyped imagery. So, if the film is able to avoid any potential for the appearance of that kind of stereotyped imagery, while remaining true to the character's origins as a mostly white/European ethnicity mixed with some Latino heritage and upbringing, then I think it will have found a very strong balance that's faithful and racially sensitive. I think Tom Hardy appears quite obviously capable of portraying a character of that ethnic background with that upbringing. At face value, then, the casting of Tom Hardy as Bane is not at all inconsistent with Bane's ethnic background, and has the advantage of avoiding a situation where there might have been the appearance of some form of subtle stereotyping in the character's inception (I worked hard to work that one in, let me tell you). Moreover, Hardy is a great actor more than capable of playing a character he is entirely suited to play. And he will be doing so in a film series that has in fact set a new standard for the genre with regard to minority representation, and will in fact bring the positives of showing Latino origins while avoiding an "evil" Latino villain characterization. 
It's my feeling that comic books and the films they inspire have a history of minority representation that is far below the real diversity in our society. This is largely due, in my opinion, to the fact of history and of the target audience -- an audience which, in modern times, has too often shown itself to be intolerant of changes that would otherwise help inspire more diversity in the comics and films. It's not racism, it's just inertia and a common absolutist view among fans who don't want any changes, be it hair color or height, and so skin color becomes not a matter of race but of "this is what color they used on the comic book page." The films try to accurately depict the comics and avoid making fans freak out too much, and so the result has often been a whole lot of white people with very few minorities in significant roles. The films do try to put in non-white faces in the background in a lot of cases, but overall there's just been a very noticeable lack so far. Some recent films -- like the Iron Man and Hulk films of the last few years, for example -- have likewise made big strides in minority representation. But it is Christopher Nolan's Batman films that are really setting a brand new standard. It is ironic, then, that it's this same Batman series that is being accused of "whitewashing" or "Airbending" Bane, a character who was always actually mostly of white and European ethnicity and who would in fact lose some potentially seemingly stereotyped imagery by giving him a more white face but while also still showing some Latino culture in his history. I hope this situation allows comic book fans to start looking more closely at the films and at the sort of demands we make and reactions we have. The films will only be better and get a broader audience if and when a certain segment of fans stop the knee-jerk tendency to oppose casting of more non-whites in traditionally white character roles, and stop denying that the problem even exists in the first place. The more the comics we read and films we watch better reflect the world we recognize, that diversity is a strength, not a weakness, and it's why the last several big comic book films that had more diversity are also among the best produced so far. 
Meanwhile, it's also important that when we do cite these problems, that we keep in mind how great this genre is, how talented are those involved, and that raising diversity issues is not just a "race card" or accusation of racial intolerance -- it is a reality that exists in our society on many levels, one we have to be able to talk about honestly and frankly, and one that is improving as the genre progresses. Let's encourage that, not fight it. Let's admit the mistakes and understand them, without feeling defensive or as if admitting it means calling someone a "racist." And let's realize that sometimes, there are indeed instances where the accusation of lack of diversity is in fact mistaken -- as it is in the case of the complaints about Tom Hardy playing Bane.