The Dark Knight Rises The Joker (The Dark Knight) vs. Bane (TDKR)

[Anno_Domini]

It's not a comparison. It's a which one is your favorite, hence the poll. You're choosing which one you like more.

Ahh, okay. I must've confused this with the other thread that was comparing the two villains. I thought milost only created this because of that previous compare/contrast thread with Joker and Bane.

I love the poll results.

Of course you do, as I said. And I respect that. People love Joker, that's cool.

It would still be a case of him winning the battle and not the war. The Joker establishes this to be a long ongoing war when he says "You and I will be doing this forever." (which didn't happen for obvious reasons)

That is winning the war when Joker's "ace in the hole" doesn't have the outcome that Joker wanted in the first place. You're taking the "You and I will be doing this forever" line way too much in Joker's plan with Dent, imo.

Us knowing a bit of brief information on his backstory is not enough to tell us about his character. What does he believe in? What is his philosophy? Why is it that he believes this? What formed him as a character? How did that prison and darkness form him? All we get is a throwaway line where he states he was born into darkness and molded by it. That is barely anything.

And when we were given a tidbit of a fake backstory for Bane, we have nothing to really answer those questions either; I'm just saying that we do know Bane's backstory when you said we don't in TDKR.

Edit: Although after thinking about those questions you having regarding Bane, we do have some idea of Bane's mind in that he simply thinks there is only despair in hope, a place where Bruce has been in for quite some time after the events of TDK.

Another thing that hurts both Bane and Talia is that unlike the other main villains in the previous films (Ra's and Joker), Bane and Talia don't have a philosophy to counter Batman's, or at least not one that is addressed or that we are made aware of.

I would beg to differ(well, obviously ).

Bane is this protector of innocence to Talia while Batman is this protector of his city. And while Batman is the savior of his city, Talia is the destroyer of the masses. Plus, more mumbo jumbo about Bane being this dark-mirrored version of Batman and Talia being this dark-mirrored version of Rachel, but I'm sure you don't want to hear that t:

The reveal in a nutshell is "Bane is not the main big bad that runs the whole show, Talia is." Due to this, we don't know how much truth there is or isn't to whatever Bane has said throughout the film. We don't know what was him telling the truth and what was him just lying/BS'ing to manipulate people.

What does that have to do with anything Bane actually said in TDKR? He still had loyal men on his side, he still revealed the Dent lie, the movement in Gotham was always a facade....what exactly made Bane's words not real besides things Alfred said about Bane?

The difference is that Batman Begins doesn't constantly ask the viewers to question why Ras' men are so loyal to him. TDKR constantly asks its viewers to question why Bane's men are so loyal.

Ra's al Ghul is also given a philosophy and his followers presumably follow that philosophy as well. Like I already said, Bane is not given a philosophy to counter Batman's. Due to that, we don't know what his followers even believe in. Do they follow the same values of the LOS? Do they believe in power to the people? The movie never answers these questions.

Presumably one can see that Bane was this general that always ordered respect, even from the look Barsad gives Bane right after Gordon escaped the sewers.

It's not about people no longer caring about Bane. That's not what I was talking about. I said that they revealed the true big bad of the plot was actually a villain that is far less interesting than who we thought was the main villain (Bane).

Great, Talia is far less interesting. But that doesn't take anything away from people caring about Bane, or at least shouldn't. Imo, it's fickle to say people stopped caring about Bane.

Yes. A villain with tons of honor for those who defeat him is turned into a man who grabs a shotgun and points it at the head of his wounded opponent (who is only wounded due to a third party intervening) right after the opponent beat him fair and square. That sounds like the Bane from Knightfall.

Lol, so the end of Bane's arc in TDKR is your argument of him not having respect? Yah, I'd try to make the tiniest bit to make my side of a debate too

Nolan gave his best to use all of Bane's attributes, but is it 100% true to the comics? Nope...but nothing is in Nolan's trilogy. You of all should know this.

Let's say for the sake of argument that Bane came up with the plan. Even if that is the case, that still doesn't make Bane the intellectual of Knightfall because the plan is completely stupid and does not many any sense. The plan in a nutshell is that Bane plans to prove to Bruce Gotham is still just as corrupt as it was before and just needs a slight "push" to fall back into the corruption it got out of. And how does he plan to prove this to Bruce? By closing all entrances to the city, causing fear among the public, trapping all the cops underground, and then releasing all of Gotham's criminals back on the streets to cause chaos just so that he could justify blowing up the city 5 months later. On top of that, what evidence did Bane have that Gotham can still be as corrupt as before? He has no knowledge of the Dent coverup until he got to Gotham. His plan was already planned out by then.

You have that wrong, lol. Bane's "hope" that he gave Gotham was turning everything upside down by viewing the rich and the cops as the real criminals and letting the true criminals escape Blackgate Prison to create martial law. He was giving "hope" to the ones who've been under depression that ended up just being his tool because they were going to die as well. I loved the idea myself. But that is also when he finds out the Dent lie. Who knows what the idea was going to be beforehand. I doubt it would have been anything similar, because I don't think it was going to be just that from the start. Did Joker plan on turning Harvey Dent from the very beginning in TDK?

You're misinterpreting what it means to be at your peak. A professional soccer player in his 20's who is very tired after a long game would still be considered to be in his peak. A professional soccer player in his 60's would not be considered to be at his peak regardless of how much energy he has during a specific game. The other difference between Knightfall and TDKR is that it was Bane himself in Knightfall who weakened Batman. It was all part of his plan. Batman being weakened in TDKR had nothing to do with Bane. I would be curious to know if Bane would've been able to come up with a plan to beat Batman if he fought the Batman that we saw at the end of TDK.

An exhausted and sick Bruce Wayne to a weakened Bruce Wayne...I don't see how the latter is any worse. Never will even when you try to explain it, lol.

That's right. I don't. I'm just going by what I feel is heavily implied. Obviously I can't say I know for sure (partly the movie's fault for not exploring their relationship).

Plus, there are also good reasons to believe that Bane was a pedophile. He "loved" a little girl and was excommunicated from the League of Shadows for being a "monster". I'm not trying to claim this is true; just that it is a theory that wouldn't be too out of the blue.

Then I will continue to view what has and what has no proof.

I view it as this...Bane loved a little girl like she was his little sister and he was a "monster" because of his physical look as he's shown as a "monster" throughout TDKR

 

[BatLobster]

A scene where Bane is defeated, sheds a tear, and is basically reduced to doing it for Talia, in comparison to Joker's disappointment at the ferries not blowing each other up.

Brilliant comparison.

Not exactly. I was comparing the moment Bane was defeated by Batman to the moment where Joker realizes he was wrong about the ferries. I thought this was a fair game comparison because Batman/Bane are physical adversaries and Batman/Joker are philosophical/psychological adversaries, and both were seen as pretty much invulnerable up until those moments.

What happened afterwards and the way they deal with defeat are where the characters and movies diverge.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

Not exactly. I was comparing the moment Bane was defeated by Batman to the moment where Joker realizes he was wrong about the ferries. I thought this was an apt comparison because Batman/Bane are physical adversaries and Batman/Joker are philosophical/psychological adversaries, and both were seen as pretty much invulnerable up until those moments.

What happened afterwards and the way they deal with defeat are where the characters diverge.

And what makes the example not very appropriate.

 

[The Joker]

Not exactly. I was comparing the moment Bane was defeated by Batman to the moment where Joker realizes he was wrong about the ferries. I thought this was an apt comparison because Batman/Bane are physical adversaries and Batman/Joker are philosophical/psychological adversaries, and both were seen as pretty much invulnerable up until those moments.

What happened afterwards and the way they deal with defeat are where the characters diverge.

I see. I thought you were comparing the scenes as a whole, since Joker turned it around on it's head again by revealing what he did to Dent. Whereas Talia took over as the cocky confident villain in Bane's scene.

 

[BatLobster]

And what makes the example not very appropriate.

It got harped on too much. I made a simple observation, it was never the thesis of my whole argument.

I see. I thought you were comparing the scenes as a whole, since Joker turned it around on it's head again by revealing what he did to Dent. Whereas Talia took over as the cocky confident villain in Bane's scene.

Right. And I guess for me, it helped to see Bane defeated by Batman before the story moved on. If Talia had randomly stabbed Batman in the middle of his fight with Bane, then I would have felt both Batman and Bane were undermined. As it stands, I felt like the story had reached a turning point where Bane's "stock" had already went down to speak. I didn't need to see him flip the script on Batman like Joker did.

 

[BatmanBeyond]

It got harped on too much. I made a simple observation, it was never the thesis of my whole argument.

The name of the game 'round these parts.

Nope. It's which villain do you like more.

Open your eyes, it's long moved on from that, considering all the discussions that have been going on so far. And when arguing which one you liked more, you're obviously going to bring up which one you thought was better.

In that sense, I think it's a bit unfair - the Joker's obviously the better character, both in the source material and in the trilogy. This is not to say I didn't like Bane - I did, loved Hardy's performance, physicality, as well as the voice and I'm glad Nolan and Co. showed the potential of the character when he's portrayed to his true standards. But the simple fact is that Joker's psychological shtick is much more interesting than the physical threat Bane provides. I mean, sure, the latter provides a psychological challenge too, that's why he's a great character, but it's not on the level of the yin and yang relationship Joker has with Batman.

Moving on for a bit, I think it's interesting how each of the villains in this trilogy essentially believed in the same thing, namely Joker's idea that "when the chips are down, these civilised people will eat each other" and basically devised plans around it. Of course, their end goals and how they went about them were different, but I believe it's an interesting observation. Also, Ra's did it first.

 

[Ryan]

It's not about people no longer caring about Bane. That's not what I was talking about. I said that they revealed the true big bad of the plot was actually a villain that is far less interesting than who we thought was the main villain (Bane).




Plus, there are also good reasons to believe that Bane was a pedophile. He "loved" a little girl and was excommunicated from the League of Shadows for being a "monster". I'm not trying to claim this is true; just that it is a theory that wouldn't be too out of the blue.

Bingo! Err..not for the pedophile part though..lol. Nolan mentioned in interviews how Bane was like an old fashioned movie monster. The scene at the end with Bane showing his softer side towards Talia always reminded me of the scene from the old Frankenstein movie where he encounters the young girl by the water, and we get a glimpse of him being "human" as well. I guess looking back, maybe ole Frank was a pedo as well

 

[The Joker]

Open your eyes, it's long moved on from that, considering all the discussions that have been going on so far.

Irrelevant. That's not what the premise of the thread was, which is what you asked in the first place. It's hardly the first thread to go off topic.

And when arguing which one you liked more, you're obviously going to bring up which one you thought was better.

Yeah so? That's not a comparison, it's just saying why you liked one more than the other.

 

[BatmanBeyond]

Yeah so? That's not a comparison, it's just saying why you liked one more than the other.

Well, as long as you want to offer arguments for your choice you are going to end up comparing the two, one way or the other. Unless your wish is to simply state 'I like X better than Y', in which case sure, you're totally right.

Irrelevant. That's not what the premise of the thread was, which is what you asked in the first place. It's hardly the first thread to go off topic.

I don't think discussing why you prefer one character over the other, comparing them in the process, classifies as 'going off topic', but sure.

 

[Anno_Domini]

not for the pedophile part though..lol.

The pedophile theory is totally out of left field and the first time I heard such a weird theory.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

Plus, there are also good reasons to believe that Bane was a pedophile. He "loved" a little girl and was excommunicated from the League of Shadows for being a "monster". I'm not trying to claim this is true; just that it is a theory that wouldn't be too out of the blue.

That happens more than once in Nolan's bat-world. Not saying bane was a pedophile, but I never got how this Bruce-Rachel brother-sister kind of relationship suddenly become a romance in Batman Begins. Maybe I get that Bruce falls in love since pretty much the only girl she has ever met, and he has issues. But after Bruce's long absence, she falls in love with him too. How? When? Nobody in the movie cared.

 

[BatmanBeyond]

That happens more than once in Nolan's bat-world. Not saying bane was a pedophile, but I never got how this Bruce-Rachel brother-sister kind of relationship suddenly become a romance in Batman Begins. Maybe I get that Bruce falls in love since pretty much the only girl she has ever met, and he has issues. But after Bruce's long absence, she falls in love with him too. How? When? Nobody in the movie cared.

Being childhood friends, Bruce associates Rachel with the innocence he had before the death of his parents. As TDKR establishes, Bruce is a man frozen in time - he's still hung up about his parents' death and that's why he wanted to be with Rachel, because he naively believed that having a romantic relationship with her would bring him some measure of the life he had before the tragic event. The truth is that he probably loves what Rachel represents for him, not the person herself. But it's Bruce Wayne we're talking about here, so these sort of issues are commonplace.

As for why she supposedly fell in love with him...I don't think that's actually the case. I mean, sure, she tells him some bs at the end of BB that 'the man she loved never came back' bla bla, but I don't think Rachel was ever certain of what she actually felt for Bruce until just before her death in TDK, when she chooses Harvey. I think the 'romantic' feelings she thought she had for him in BB were maybe a result of the shock of seeing him alive after all the years he had been gone. Just a supposition.

At the end of the day, I don't think the Bruce-Rachel angle was ever intended to be truly romantic - like I said before, Bruce sees her as a representation of his life before the tragic event, a life he actively cherishes. I think the 'love' Bruce thinks he feels for Rachel is just a manifestation of the fact he's frozen in time and can't move on. Until TDKR, that is.

Now this is off-topic.

 

[Tequilla]

That happens more than once in Nolan's bat-world. Not saying bane was a pedophile, but I never got how this Bruce-Rachel brother-sister kind of relationship suddenly become a romance in Batman Begins. Maybe I get that Bruce falls in love since pretty much the only girl she has ever met, and he has issues. But after Bruce's long absence, she falls in love with him too. How? When? Nobody in the movie cared.

When you were younger didn't you had some crushes over a friend? How is that strange ? That's the most normal thing in the world. They grow up but still keep the feelings.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

When you were younger didn't you had some crushes over a friend? How is that strange ? That's the most normal thing in the world. They grow up but still keep the feelings.

Of course I had them, but none of those little girls lived with me and played with me every day like a sister. So I naturally grew out of my childhood crushes.

 

[Anno_Domini]

How do we know Rachel played with Bruce every day like a sister?

 

[Senator Pleasury]

How do we know Rachel played with Bruce every day like a sister?

That was suggested in the movie.

Sure, maybe not every single day. Who knows.
Sure, they might have played the doctor too. Who knows.

 

[Anno_Domini]

It's not suggested at all. We see them play once, and we hear Rachel say she misses the place and it's understandable for her to miss it since they obviously didn't play around in their teens or during high school.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

It's not suggested at all. We see them play once, and we hear Rachel say she misses the place and it's understandable for her to miss it since they obviously didn't play around in their teens or during high school.

Oh you see, movies sometimes show people doing something once but you get it didn't happen just once. Like sleeping.

And they probably didn't play there as they grew up (I myself said you grow out of certain things you used to do as a child).

 

[Anno_Domini]

Oh you see, movies sometimes show people doing something once but you get it didn't happen just once. Like sleeping.

And they probably didn't play there as they grew up (I myself said you grow out of certain things you used to do as a child).

And yet it's still only assuming that they continued to play. You have no idea how Bruce's parents died could have effected even his childhood.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

And yet it's still only assuming that they continued to play as friends. You have no idea how Bruce's parents died could have effected even his childhood.

No, I'd say they stopped seeing each other after Bruce's parents death. I'm saying they played together more than once before that.

 

[The Joker]

Yeah I got the impression Bruce and Rachel played together all the time. Rachel's mother worked at Wayne Manor and Rachel would be there with her hanging out with Bruce.

You could tell they spent a lot of time together. The little anecdotes like them stealing the condensed milk off the top shelf. Harvey saying to Alfred that Rachel talks about him all the time and that he's known Rachel her whole life etc. That kind of familiarity comes from very regular contact.

 

[Anno_Domini]

No, I'd say they stopped seeing each other after Bruce's parents death. I'm saying they played together more than once before that.

Before the death, yes, I'll agree, but they didn't continue on afterwards. But because of that time apart, I think it's safe to say it shouldn't feel like a "brother/sister" thing anymore.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

Before the death, yes, I'll agree, but they didn't continue on afterwards. But because of that time a part, I think it's safe to say it shouldn't feel like a "brother/sister" thing anymore.

I agree. But after having her as a sister... it's still weird to see her after years and immediately think of her as something else.

I am of the theory that Bruce fell for her after the double-slapping. A man with affective issues would react like that.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Not really. I've heard many stories of that's how relationships grow where it starts as a very close friendship.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

Not really. I've heard many stories of that's how relationships grow where it starts as a very close friendship.

Since they were both little children?

That was more common in stories from centuries ago. Like Frankentstein (Victor falls in love with his cousin who lived with him as an adopted sister). Still, weird, and, as I said, there's no visible reason as to why something like that would happen between them. Specially from her.