The Dark Knight Rises Does Bane being a PURELY physical threat hamper him as a villain?

[TheBat812]

Bane was entertaining. Whether Tom was hamming it up in ADR or in his last significant words in the movie (the Blackgate prison scene), or when more serious and introspective like the monologue in the Pit. He broke the Bat. That's what makes him good to me.
In terms of structure, it's true there's no big philosophical debates going back and forth here with Bane and Batman/Bruce like with Ra's, The Joker, Two-face, or to a lesser extent, Talia (some of her philosophical arguing with Bruce has a double-meaning). But it doesn't bother me enough to be disappointed. More of a twist on the LoS philosophy (more originality) could have worked for their return but I've made my peace with it as is.

While there wasn't much expository discussion on the themes, I thought this film did just as good of a job as TDK in making those themes important to the story/plot/characters. I think the fact that there weren't many of those explanatory dialogues that many people are missing alot of the subtler uses of theme.

 

[BatmanBeyond]

I actually thought Bane was well portrayed as a nefariously intelligent bad-guy and that the main purpose of the LOS's return was to illustrate the idea of consequences and, in a way, respond to those who may have figured that Joker vindicated or lessened the evil of Ra's' actions.

Bane is kind of a deconstruction of the "well intentioned" part of Ra's' "well intentioned extremist." Like Bruce, when he was found in that prison he was "lost," but whereas Bruce (and Ra's) had a previous context in which to compare their new codes and philosophies, Bane was born in darkness and basically took to the LOS code and creed at it's starkest and most absolute. He even recognizes that he doesn't fit into the code: he's a "necessary evil," fully expecting to die alongside his city-full of victims.

And I kind of agree that if the Joker's plans seem well executed to you, than you really shouldn't harp on Bane's plans all that much. And there was no way that the LOS defeat in Begins had destroyed their organization-somewhere there was going to be a remnant that would rise to avenge their defeat. And I really couldn't come up with my own scenario that would stand a chance at matching the Joker's rampage without calling back up the LOS in turn. You needed the stakes raised high, and the mob or singular bad-guys not be-decked in make-up or a purple outfit weren't going to cut it for the whole audience. The more imaginative bad-guys can be executed masterfully, but for an ending to the trilogy their threat scale needed to be raised.

Some very good points there. Well said.

 

[The Joker]

To those saying TDK and BB also had plot holes that are not being discussed as frequent as TDKR, I believe it is most likely because the plot holes found in TDKR are valid reasons for why some people do not like the film.

I don't think you can find many people who say they don't like TDK because they didn't like how we didn't see how Joker got out of the Penthouse with Batman outside after he just saved Rachel, or how Batman showed up out of no where to stop Harvey when he had one of Jokers men tied up, or how Joker rigged an entire hospital to blow.--Sure, these can viewed as plot holes, but imo, don't ruin the overall experience of the film.

Compare that to the criticism of TDKR:
-with Bruce having a broken back and being able to climb a pit 3 times, return back to Gotham, fight bane again...all after a random guy punched him in the back.
-or how Bruce just shows up in a Gotham under siege with no money or indication of how he got there
-Talia's death scene
-Not really knowing why Bane is doing what he is doing. We know he was ex-communicated, but wants to fulfill Ra's destiny...because? Fan speculation tells us because he wanted to prove he was superior to Bruce, to Ras, because he hated those with power---if most here were asked what was ra's motivation, what was The Joker's motivation, we would get most likely a consistent answer...doesn't seem like it's the same with Bane IMO.

I just believe that some of these plot holes (IMO), that have been discussed on this site at least, are discussed more than TDK because they seem to take away the overall enjoyment of the film.

Exactly

In terms of structure, it's true there's no big philosophical debates going back and forth here with Bane and Batman/Bruce like with Ra's, The Joker, Two-face, or to a lesser extent, Talia (some of her philosophical arguing with Bruce has a double-meaning). But it doesn't bother me enough to be disappointed.

That's one of the primary reasons why I think some may read too much into something that isn't there. I love Nolan, but subtle he is not when it comes to the villains, and what they want to prove, what their goal is, generally their whole ideology. Talia's reveal proves that when we get a lengthy exposition on what is the real agenda behind all of this.

Bane never mentioned he was trying to prove himself worthy of Ra's, or better than Bruce as a successor, or why he wanted to fulfill Ra's Al Ghul's destiny. The clanger is dropped in Talia's reveal when we hear it is her who is the child of Ra's, she's the one who escaped the pit, she's the one who wants to honor her father by finishing his work. Bane was her protector whom her father took in and then excommunicated.

To me the movie really paints the picture that this is Talia's baby. Her personal vendetta because it was her father and his work she wants to honor. They had to make Bane look like the boss because if it looked like he was following orders or working with someone else it would dilute the twist of Tate being revealed as Talia (but that ship had sailed as soon as those incriminating pics of her in LOS looking garb was leaked).

I don't think Bane was a lackey like some say. But I don't think he was the driving force or at least the primary driving force behind any of this. He was doing it for Talia, just like he put his life on the line to protect her in the pit when he had no incentive to other than he cared about her. Here he was willing to die again for her.

 

[A Necessary Evil]

He was doing it for Talia, but he was also with Talia. I feel she was just one of the many driving forces behind this (you can tell he was sore about the league of shadows still as he went from toying with Bruce to flat out beating his ass.)

 

[BatLobster]

I would agree that Nolan has been more direct in supplying motivations for his villains in the first two Batman movies, but I do think Nolan has shown in his other work that he can do subtle when it comes to character motivations. For that reason it's not hard for me to go into that interpretive mindset when it comes to Bane and Talia in this film.

When Bane says things like, "I am the League of Shadows" in response to Batman mocking him for being ex-communicated, it's hard for me not to get that sense of indignation and of him wanting to step in and be a superior leader. Just the thought of wanting to fulfill another man's destiny is a very peculiar one. There's an implicit idea there of succeeding where someone else failed.

For me though, great movies are about more than what's on the page. It's all about giving you an impression of an entire world that's off the page. And that's how Bane was for me. The words he spoke, the way he spoke them, his body language, and especially Tom Hardy's eyes...it told a whole story. It was a fully formed character that had been on a journey. I don't see anything wrong with him having multi-faceted motivations, considering he's a dark mirror for Bruce and Bruce himself is complex in his motivations.

 

[The Joker]

I would agree that Nolan has been more direct in supplying motivations for his villains in the first two Batman movies, but I do think Nolan has shown in his other work that he can do subtle when it comes to character motivations. For that reason it's not hard for me to go into that interpretive mindset when it comes to Bane and Talia in this film.

I would agree with that if you completely ignored the Talia reveal scene which explains everything behind the whole plan. Any ambiguity went out the window there under layers of exposition from Talia.

For me though, great movies are about more than what's on the page. It's all about giving you an impression of an entire world that's off the page. And that's how Bane was for me. The words he spoke, the way he spoke them, his body language, and especially Tom Hardy's eyes...it told a whole story. It was a fully formed character that had been on a journey. I don't see anything wrong with him having multi-faceted motivations, considering he's a dark mirror for Bruce and Bruce himself is complex in his motivations.

That's all fine if that's how you like to interpret it. I don't want to belittle your opinion in any way. But for me when a director with a certain style and approach to his main villains doesn't do what he did with his previous villains in two movies in the same series, as in have them directly spell out why they are doing what they're doing, then I think it's fairly obvious it's because it's not there in the first place. If it was Nolan would be having them monologue it to the hilt.

We know the reason why Bane couldn't get into specifics about why he was in Gotham because they couldn't let the cat out of the bag about Talia. When Talia is revealed, we find out why they're there and who Bane really was in the pit story and why he was excommunicated.

He didn't escape the pit, and he wasn't excommunicated because he was too extreme as we were previously led to believe. He was Talia's protector in the pit because he loved her, and he was excommunicated because Ra's couldn't stand having him around as a reminder of what happened to his wife. There's a whole lot of misdirection with Bane's character right up until Talia is revealed, then everything becomes clear.

Again to me all of this spells out that Bane is devoutly loyal to Talia and had been since she was a child when he had no incentive to put his life on the line for her even back then. So why did he? It's because he cared about her. Now here he was again willing to go up in ashes because Talia wants to honor her father by finishing his work.

We hear why Talia is doing it, but we never hear why Bane is. The reason I think we don't hear Bane's reasons is because Bane's reasons are it's for Talia. They couldn't say that all through the movie because Talia was supposed to be a twist at the end.

 

[Omegabat]

I think the problem lies with the character itself. Bane was basically created as a gimmick and a comic stunt back in the 90's, and his character's peak is breaking Batman's back.

Aside from that, he's pretty much a one note character. Aside from TDKR, he really hasn't had a decent story and certainly isnt anywhere near the complexity of characters such as Joker, Two-Face , Ra's Al Ghul, or Catwoman.

Nolan's version is the best on screen, including animated versions of the character, but even then, Tom Hardy's natural charm and charisma isn't utilized to make the character more than what the comics presented. Ditto with Talia who imo, was less complex then she was in BTAS back in the 90's.

Ultimately the Bane character , imo, doesn't have much going for him. He works as the final villan for the saga thematically but with Bane, there really isn't much there, there.

In terms of personality neither Two-Face nor Ra's al Ghul are remotely as complex as Bane,sorry not even close.
With Ra's it's always the same Doomsday plan 101 and looking for an heir,Two-Face is as dull as you can get.
They may be philosophically more complex(atleast in concept) but those angles have been ridiculously played out.
Joker enjoys inconsistency,writers can put their own spin on him and for that reason he stays fresh and exciting.
Catwoman is the only character you mentioned who may have more depth to her than Bane but she aint exactly your blockbuster movie villain type.

 

[TheBat812]

I would agree with that if you completely ignored the Talia reveal scene which explains everything behind the whole plan. Any ambiguity went out the window there under layers of exposition from Talia.

She's explaining HER reasons, and why bane would have been willing to have helped her, but she's not really giving us one definitive motivation. He explains his own wants and desires throughout the film as well, which we've been over ad nauseum. We know you disagree, but the evidence is there that he's taken to heart the ideals of the LOS (vis-a-vis his distaste for those in power, and his use of Crane as a judge to decide those who have abused power over those with less than themselves), that he feels slighted by Bruce's betrayal (the reasons for which are not pinpointed during the film, but given the characterization depicted, it's likely because of Bruce's weakness from not having been born in darkness - he IS one of the wealthy he views as the problem), and feels a sense of duty to an innocent he took on as his responsibility, who repaid him with kindness and devotion. Bane has those 3 various motivations to drive him to do what he did in TDKR, two of which are not directly Talia related, but as godisawesome pointed out, are a result of him having been with no code, save for the anger of being trapped in that prison.

 

[Victarion]

Ra's was duller than Bane for me. Two-Face, however, had been pushed to the extreme. He tried to warn Gordon multiple times about Ramirez and maybe another of his people. Ramirez was one of those instrumental in Rachel's death. He had lost everything and was prepared to inflict that on the person responsible. Then he was going to off himself.

I put Two-Face and Bane on equal footing. I enjoyed both because they brought something different to the table.

 

[BatmanBeyond]

That's all fine if that's how you like to interpret it. I don't want to belittle your opinion in any way. But for me when a director with a certain style and approach to his main villains doesn't do what he did with his previous villains in two movies in the same series, as in have them directly spell out why they are doing what they're doing, then I think it's fairly obvious it's because it's not there in the first place. If it was Nolan would be having them monologue it to the hilt.

And yet, we have Nolan claiming in interviews before and after TDKR's release that Bane was and is meant to be a mirror of Bruce Wayne, even though the movie itself doesn't make any overtly literal mentions of that. My point being that the intention was indeed there, but they didn't touch upon it very clearly within the movie itself and so we are left with only allusions and our own conjectures regarding that particular aspect. Nolan can be much more subtle than some people give him credit for.

 

[Ryan]

And yet, we have Nolan claiming in interviews before and after TDKR's release that Bane was and is meant to be a mirror of Bruce Wayne.

I've actually never heard that. Do you have a link? I'd be curious to read it.

 

[The Joker]

She's explaining HER reasons, and why bane would have been willing to have helped her, but she's not really giving us one definitive motivation.

I think she is. She makes everything clear about the whole story of her, Bane, and why they were here.

You wonder through the movie why would Bane want to fulfill the legacy of a man who excommunicated him. Then you find out it's because of Talia. Look at the facts;

- Bane protected Talia in the pit as a child when he had no reason to put his life on the line for her
- Talia sent her father back to the pit where they found Bane and took him in
- Bane was kicked out because Ra's couldn't accept him, saw him as a monster who just reminded him of what happened to his wife

He explains his own wants and desires throughout the film as well, which we've been over ad nauseum. We know you disagree, but the evidence is there that he's taken to heart the ideals of the LOS (vis-a-vis his distaste for those in power, and his use of Crane as a judge to decide those who have abused power over those with less than themselves)

You know full well all of this was just nonsense to feed Gotham false hope to poison their souls.

that he feels slighted by Bruce's betrayal (the reasons for which are not pinpointed during the film, but given the characterization depicted, it's likely because of Bruce's weakness from not having been born in darkness - he IS one of the wealthy he views as the problem), and feels a sense of duty to an innocent he took on as his responsibility, who repaid him with kindness and devotion. Bane has those 3 various motivations to drive him to do what he did in TDKR, two of which are not directly Talia related, but as godisawesome pointed out, are a result of him having been with no code, save for the anger of being trapped in that prison.

You see I can't debate with this because it's just conjecture. You just yourself admitted none of this is pin pointed, so how can you build an argument on something that isn't in the movie?

It's your choice to interpret it this way and that's fine, but I don't see this.

And yet, we have Nolan claiming in interviews before and after TDKR's release that Bane was and is meant to be a mirror of Bruce Wayne, even though the movie itself doesn't make any overtly literal mentions of that. My point being that the intention was there, but they probably didn't want to spoon feed it to the audience and so we are left with only allusions and our own conjectures regarding that particular aspect. Nolan can be much more subtle than some people give him credit for.

No, the movie makes the dark mirror part very obvious with Bane exclaiming they were both members of the LOS, both initiated, both found by Ra's in a prison and taken into the LOS, and how Bane owns the shadows while Bruce merely adopted them etc.

I'm not talking about that. I'm talking motives.

 

[Victarion]

I agree--the stuff about the rich etc. etc. was meant to bait Gotham's citizens into savagery. Its funny how this time around the League didn't force the Gothamites to turn on each other; rather the Gothamites did it of their own volition. It adds more to Bane telling his audience at the football field that they'd claim what was rightfully theirs.

As I have argued, I felt Bane's desire to fulfill Ra's legacy was to prove himself the superior being to Ra's. That isn't to say he didn't care for Talia; they did have that platonic relationship thing going. The torture of Bruce was all Bane though; remember that Talia said getting revenge on Bruce was secondary to wiping out Gotham.

 

[Ryan]

I would agree with that if you completely ignored the Talia reveal scene which explains everything behind the whole plan. Any ambiguity went out the window there under layers of exposition from Talia.



That's all fine if that's how you like to interpret it. I don't want to belittle your opinion in any way. But for me when a director with a certain style and approach to his main villains doesn't do what he did with his previous villains in two movies in the same series, as in have them directly spell out why they are doing what they're doing, then I think it's fairly obvious it's because it's not there in the first place. If it was Nolan would be having them monologue it to the hilt.

We know the reason why Bane couldn't get into specifics about why he was in Gotham because they couldn't let the cat out of the bag about Talia. When Talia is revealed, we find out why they're there and who Bane really was in the pit story and why he was excommunicated.

He didn't escape the pit, and he wasn't excommunicated because he was too extreme as we were previously led to believe. He was Talia's protector in the pit because he loved her, and he was excommunicated because Ra's couldn't stand having him around as a reminder of what happened to his wife. There's a whole lot of misdirection with Bane's character right up until Talia is revealed, then everything becomes clear.

Again to me all of this spells out that Bane is devoutly loyal to Talia and had been since she was a child when he had no incentive to put his life on the line for her even back then. So why did he? It's because he cared about her. Now here he was again willing to go up in ashes because Talia wants to honor her father by finishing his work.

We hear why Talia is doing it, but we never hear why Bane is. The reason I think we don't hear Bane's reasons is because Bane's reasons are it's for Talia. They couldn't say that all through the movie because Talia was supposed to be a twist at the end.

This to me this seemed pretty straight forward. Talia's twist at the end (which really wasn't much of a surprise) basically takes the time to outline all of the points explained above.

 

[BatmanBeyond]

You see I can't debate with this because it's just conjecture. You just yourself admitted none of this is pin pointed, so how can you build an argument on something that isn't in the movie?

So what if it's conjecture? Is what he said really that far-fetched in the context of what the movie tells us?

No, the movie makes the dark mirror part very obvious with Bane exclaiming they were both members of the LOS, both initiated, both found by Ra's in a prison and taken into the LOS, and how Bane owns the shadows while Bruce merely adopted them etc.

I'm not talking about that. I'm talking motives.

True. But again, is it really that far-fetched to believe that Bane developped a hate for the rich and privileged for example, when he had grown up in a hellhole with basically nothing to call his own, but his own life? And then when the LoS come and save his life, is it really that far-fetched that he'd buy into their ideology of 'justice is balance' considering his harsh up-bringing and the previously mentioned distaste for the rich and privileged of the world?

Now, I can understand why you'd be skeptical about all this, as there's more than one layer of conjecture. But is it really far-fetched in the context of the movie, with all the illusions and subtle hints we are given?

 

[The Joker]

This to me this seemed pretty straight forward. Talia's twist at the end (which really wasn't much of a surprise) basically takes the time to outline all of the points explained above.

Same here.

I'm cool with other people having their own interpretations, but to me Nolan is as subtle as a sledgehammer when it comes to the villain motives, and it was no exception in TDKR.

 

[BatmanBeyond]

I've actually never heard that. Do you have a link? I'd be curious to read it.

It was during his most recent TDK trilogy-related interview. Although I can't quite remember what was the name of the website.

 

[DACrowe]

To those saying TDK and BB also had plot holes that are not being discussed as frequent as TDKR, I believe it is most likely because the plot holes found in TDKR are valid reasons for why some people do not like the film.

I don't think you can find many people who say they don't like TDK because they didn't like how we didn't see how Joker got out of the Penthouse with Batman outside after he just saved Rachel, or how Batman showed up out of no where to stop Harvey when he had one of Jokers men tied up, or how Joker rigged an entire hospital to blow.--Sure, these can viewed as plot holes, but imo, don't ruin the overall experience of the film.

Compare that to the criticism of TDKR:
-with Bruce having a broken back and being able to climb a pit 3 times, return back to Gotham, fight bane again...all after a random guy punched him in the back.
-or how Bruce just shows up in a Gotham under siege with no money or indication of how he got there
-Talia's death scene
-Not really knowing why Bane is doing what he is doing. We know he was ex-communicated, but wants to fulfill Ra's destiny...because? Fan speculation tells us because he wanted to prove he was superior to Bruce, to Ras, because he hated those with power---if most here were asked what was ra's motivation, what was The Joker's motivation, we would get most likely a consistent answer...doesn't seem like it's the same with Bane IMO.

I just believe that some of these plot holes (IMO), that have been discussed on this site at least, are discussed more than TDK because they seem to take away the overall enjoyment of the film.

Er, Talia's death scene ain't a plot hole. It's just a piece of acting that you didn't like. Likewise Bane's motivations being murky is not really a plot hole. No more than Ra's Al Ghul's or Joker's anyway. While all three have ideological motives, why they are all so willing to die or their cause and came to these extreme conclusions is never really explained other than they are who they are. Nolan is far less interested as to why villains became villains than so much of what drives them as villains.

The others I'll give you. But just as I can suspend disbelief that the Joker could sneak explosives on every floor, and apparently into the walls, of a major city hospital or how I can accept Batman can fall faster than Rachel or that Harvey's eye is not burned off or that the chopper happened to be flying at the exact right height at the exact right moment, or that Joker could provoke a cop who chose to stay in the room with him for no good reason to attack him, or that no cop on the ferries radioed in to the bomb squad to be walked through disarming their bombs when they had HOURS to do so....

I can likewise suspend my disbelief that Bruce's back was injured in just such a miraculous way that it can be punched back into place for proper healing or that he can make it back to Gotham in time or that Bane knew that Gordon would send most cops into the sewers, etc. etc.

If you want to pick it apart, it's there. But do not pretend it is not there in the other ones, as well.

 

[Killgrave]

I've actually never heard that. Do you have a link? I'd be curious to read it.

Here it is...

Nolan Interview

 

[The Joker]

So what if it's conjecture? Is what he said really that far-fetched in the context of what the movie tells us?

True. But again, is it really that far-fetched to believe that Bane developped a hate for the rich and privileged for example, when he had grown up in a hellhole with basically nothing to call his own, but his own life? And then when the LoS come and save his life, is it really that far-fetched that he'd buy into their ideology of 'justice is balance' considering his harsh up-bringing and the previously mentioned distaste for the rich and privileged of the world?

Now, I can understand why you'd be skeptical about all this, as there's more than one layer of conjecture. But is it really far-fetched in the context of the movie, with all the illusions and subtle hints we are given?

No, I'm not calling you guys day dreamers or delusional for believing what you do. I don't want to seem like I am belitting your choice to interpret it the way you.

To me the movie, specifically the Talia reveal scene because it's the first truthful villain monologue in the movie regarding the whole plan, as Bane's was generally all false hope fluff to poison Gotham's souls, is the light bulb going off on what is really going on here.

Before all of this we're given several misdirections about Bane. We're led to believe he escaped the pit as a child. False. We're led to believe he was excommunicated because he was too extreme for Ra's. False. He leads Gotham to believe he's giving the city back to them with all the nonsense he spins them when we know he is planning to kill them not give them back their city. Finally we learn who is the one with the real personal stake in this plan; Talia. The real child of Ra's, the one Bane was protecting in the pit and willing to die for, the one who wants to honor her father by finishing his work, the one Bane loves and was willing to die for before and is now again.

That to me is how the movie presents it.

 

[BatmanBeyond]

No, I'm not calling you guys day dreamers or delusional for believing what you do. I don't want to seem like I am belitting your choice to interpret it the way you.

To me the movie, specifically the Talia reveal scene because it's the first truthful villain monologue in the movie, as Bane's was all false hope fluff to poison Gotham's souls, is the light bulb going off on what is really going on here.

Before all of this we're given several misdirections about Bane. We're led to believe he escaped the pit as a child. False. We're led to believe he was excommunicated because he was too extreme for Ra's. False. He leads Gotham to believe he's giving the city back to them with all the nonsense he spins them when we know he is planning to kill them not give them back their city. Finally we learn who is the one with the real personal stake in this plan; Talia. The real child of Ra's, the one Bane was protecting in the pit and willing to die for, the one who wants to honor her father by finishing his work, the one Bane loves and was willing to die for before and is now again.

That to me is how the movie presents it.

Fair enough, I can see where you're coming from.

Here it is...

Nolan Interview

Ah, that's the one.

 

[Ryan]

Here it is...

Nolan Interview

Thanks, I"ve never seen this interview before!

 

[TheBat812]

I think she is. She makes everything clear about the whole story of her, Bane, and why they were here.

You're right, it's telling the story, but it's not pinpointing every motivation Bane might have had or was shown having. Bane was arguably Nolan's most complex villain in terms of motive. Like the other movies, like you said, they pinpoint just one aspect.

You know full well all of this was just nonsense to feed Gotham false hope to poison their souls.

One intention maybe, yes, but Nolan has already said that everything Bane says, he believes. He's more likely pointing out that the only way to get them out of a mess like this is "from the inside" as Gordon points out. He's challenging Bruce's notion that the people of Gotham CAN get themselves out of their unbalanced system. He's challenging Bruce's people to rise up and take control, but he knows they won't (much like Joker did). And he's right - notice that none of the citizens actually try - he ultimately says this to get under Bruce's skin, to punish him for foolishly believing in the good of Gotham. This is why he's pretty much mocking them throughout his whole speech. Not because it's a false pretense, but because he doesn't believe they have the balls and gumption to do it, thereby making a mockery of Bruce's belief system that strayed from that of the LOS.

You see I can't debate with this because it's just conjecture. You just yourself admitted none of this is pin pointed, so how can you build an argument on something that isn't in the movie?

It's your choice to interpret it this way and that's fine, but I don't see this.

Fair enough, but it seems like a fairly obvious implication to me. These lines about the LOS and his emphasis of betrayal are not just thrown in there for the sake of it. It's a clear tie to the theme of rich vs. poor. The darkness he speaks of is not just about literally being in shadow, but about being in a hopeless place. He was born in it, whereas Bruce sought it out from his place of privelege. You can say I'm reading into it too much, but given Nolan's penchant for depth and double meanings and metaphors, I'd say the odds are in my favor. It's a bit ironic that you are the one who always rags on Nolan for using blatant exposition, and this is one of the reasons he often resorts to it. Without a blatant line of exposition from Talia, not nearly as many would even see the finely woven metpahors and subtelties throughout the movie that act as clear pieces in the puzzles of this film.

Just because you fail to see it does not mean it isn't there, as this ridiculous statement indicates: "But for me when a director with a certain style and approach to his main villains doesn't do what he did with his previous villains in two movies in the same series, as in have them directly spell out why they are doing what they're doing, then I think it's fairly obvious it's because it's not there in the first place." That is just bad film analysis.


Joker, that is a great analysis of the surface of the film, but it is simply not all there is in there.

 

[Ryan]

No, I'm not calling you guys day dreamers or delusional for believing what you do. I don't want to seem like I am belitting your choice to interpret it the way you.

To me the movie, specifically the Talia reveal scene because it's the first truthful villain monologue in the movie regarding the whole plan, as Bane's was generally all false hope fluff to poison Gotham's souls, is the light bulb going off on what is really going on here.

Before all of this we're given several misdirections about Bane. We're led to believe he escaped the pit as a child. False. We're led to believe he was excommunicated because he was too extreme for Ra's. False. He leads Gotham to believe he's giving the city back to them with all the nonsense he spins them when we know he is planning to kill them not give them back their city. Finally we learn who is the one with the real personal stake in this plan; Talia. The real child of Ra's, the one Bane was protecting in the pit and willing to die for, the one who wants to honor her father by finishing his work, the one Bane loves and was willing to die for before and is now again.

That to me is how the movie presents it.

This is how I see it as well. Unfortunately with these debates, as with everything else, stuff is open to interpretation. I'm more of a literal person, so if I don't hear it in the movie or see some type of particular proof I find it hard to accept. Not to say others interpretations are wrong, its just that I need more hard evidence. Other's see the movie and interpret all kinds of things. I talked to one person that said that the LOS was all over TDK and therefore it was natural they would be in tdkr..really? He pointed out some facts here and there, and I guess ya by a huge stretch they were...but would the average fan that saw begins once and tdk once honestly see that? No idea.

 

[The Joker]

Fair enough, I can see where you're coming from.

As I do with you. But I'm more a creature of fact (not that I don't enjoy some personal interpretation because I've done it myself with BB and TDK) when it comes to Nolan's movies because I know his style with the villains in the Batman movies, is to be so literal about their motives. He doesn't go for subtly.

The moment Talia starts to monologue and filling in all those blanks about the bits and pieces we were given all through the movie about the story of Bane and the pit and his tie to the LOS, you know this is Nolan's moment where he's spelling out the real story behind the whole LOS return. Namely her.