The Dark Knight

SPOILERS (is there anyone that hasn't seen it yet?)



OK, back to the "what's the deal with the Joker giving the wrong address?" thing. Here's an item in Roger Ebert's "Answer Man" column this week:

Q. (Spoiler alert) The Joker poses a dilemma for Batman in "The Dark Knight" that forces Batman to choose between saving two people. If Batman has an actual choice about who to save, then the moral consequences of that decision rest with him. However, the Joker lies about who is where, and by choosing to attempt to save either person, Batman only gets an opportunity to save the other person.

Doesn't the Joker's lie defeat the purpose of transferring any responsibility of a death to Batman? More precisely, doesn't the Joker's lie only exist for the purpose of fooling the audience, paradoxically removing Batman of any culpability for who dies? If the Joker only wants to be senselessly cruel to Batman, he has to bet that Batman cares a lot more about one person than the other. Seems like a lot of effort for not such a sure thing. Unfortunately, he gets lucky.
Steve Sherry, Washington, D.C.

A. I rather like the Joker's deception. It provides another turn of the screw. Batman is forced to choose, and the Joker assures that his choice is futile.
 
It also seems to me that the person saved would be all "oh batman, you saved me," and batman would have to be thinking "i chose to let you die."