Originally Posted by The Guard
Right, he has a motivation (the nature of which is leading people to call him a "lackey"), and as has been pointed out...his motivation is a thin one. If that's his ultimate motivation, and it certainly appears to be (other than hating the rich and being really evil), it's only touched on in a single conversation that he's not even a part of.
The problem isn't that the characters have no motivation at all...the problem is that their given motivations are thin, (in the case of Bane's actual motivations) not explored much at all, and in the case of Bane referring to Gotham's "corruption", make no logical sense given what the film actually shows us. The reasons Bane gives for doing what he does to Gotham are nonsense...he's just using that as cover...the ultimate goal is to make Gotham suffer, and to make Bruce suffer through Gotham's plight.
Why is it so obvious that what Bane is doing is just "cover" for making Bruce suffer? Where do you see that in the film? (I'm not asking that to be insulting, I really am curious) It is possible to have multiple motivations. How is destroying Gotham and its corruption a thinner motivator than any other Nolan Batman villain motivation? Crane: enjoys playing with people's fears. Thought Ra's was going to ransom the city. Ra's: Wanted to bring "justice" to Gotham by destroying it (same as Bane and Talia). Joker: cause chaos. Harvey: crazy revenge.
Bane's motivations are no thinner than any of those. I'm willing to make any number of critiques of this film, but the critique about Bane's motivations makes absolutely no sense to me. His motivations are no "thinner" than any other villain's motivations in the trilogy, IMHO.