The Dark Knight Rises The TDKR General Discussion Thread - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 147

[ThePhantasm]

I can agree that Bane wasn't exactly used to his full potential, however, I'm not sure an all-out Knightfall movie would be even possible either. I have no problem with Bane attacking an already weakened Batman anyways... Bane is kind of a coward in that sense, as he always attacks when he is fully sure he can win.

The Talia reveal doesn't bother me too much either, and though Bane pointing a gun at Batman is certainly out of character its a minor grumble to me in a film with much bigger problems.

 

[ThePhantasm]

I'll just say Bane not being used to his full potential doesn't bother me any more than Scarecrow not being used to his full potential in the trilogy, or Ra's Al Ghul (the Lazarus pits and his quest to avoid death no matter what the cost is a big part of the character, after all).

 

[Tequilla]

Bane plays the piano

[YT]_oU4guD-CiQ[/YT]

 

[Shikamaru]

I can agree that Bane wasn't exactly used to his full potential, however, I'm not sure an all-out Knightfall movie would be even possible either. I have no problem with Bane attacking an already weakened Batman anyways... Bane is kind of a coward in that sense, as he always attacks when he is fully sure he can win.

The Talia reveal doesn't bother me too much either, and though Bane pointing a gun at Batman is certainly out of character its a minor grumble to me in a film with much bigger problems.

I didn't want an all-out Knightfall movie; just an all-out Bane used to his full potential.

I don't see how Bane is a coward in that sense. That's like saying Batman is a coward because he only attacks Darkseid after coming up with a plan to beat him, which is what Bane did.

I'll just say Bane not being used to his full potential doesn't bother me any more than Scarecrow not being used to his full potential in the trilogy, or Ra's Al Ghul (the Lazarus pits and his quest to avoid death no matter what the cost is a big part of the character, after all).

I agree Scarecrow and Ra's were not used to their full potential but those were different cases. They were set up in such a way that you could have always brought them back for another movie if you wanted to. I'm not saying that I expected that to happen or that I sat in theatre saying to myself "Yeah, they're not used to their full potential but at least they'll come back in the future", or that I even necessarily wanted that to happen.

Also, I gave them more of a pass on Scarecrow and Ra's since BB was a character study of Bruce Wayne and there wasn't much room for them due to how Bruce Wayne-focused the story was. I thought they did a good enough job with them with the time and story they had. Not that TDKR is not very Bruce Wayne-focused but there was so much more room for Bane in there.

 

[The Shape]

My problems with Bane have nothing to do with the Joker. I did not sit in theatre constantly comparing him to see how he lived up to Heath's Joker. My problems with Bane are that he was watered down and was not used anywhere to his full potential. It would have been a great way to end the "natural trilogy that was always meant to be a trilogy from day one" (as Nolan likes to put it) with a villain that was both physically and mentally on the same level as Batman.
.

I never said you or anyone did compare him to the Joker. I was just offering up some thoughts on the task that the filmmakers had ahead of them. Lets be honest. The Joker isn't just the best Batman villain. He's much more than that.

And although this does not need to be said, the Bane from TDKR is only one version of the character, just like all of Nolan's villains were nothing more than singular interpretations. I could sit here and called TDK's Two-Face a "watered down" version of the character that was missing certain character traits and motivations that he has in the comics, but I was happy with what we got because it for the story. Two-Face had some wasted potential, as well, but it wasn't a problem for me. I happen to think Nolan's Bane for TDKR pretty well, especially as sort of a dark mirror to Bruce himself.

If I can accept Bruce learning all of his training/methods from Ra's and the League of Shadows (which many seem to have also accepted), I can also accept the same from Bane.

 

[The Joker]

...I don't understand why Shape automatically assumed that Shika's problem with Bane was that he wasn't as good as Joker.

It reminds me of the same hollow assumption that if you don't like TDKR it's because it's not TDK 2.0

Not that I'm saying theShape is guilty of that particular stupid assumption.

 

[shauner111]

As a big Spidey fan I 2nd that. Death Of Gwen Stay on the big screen would be revolutionary just as it was 40 odd years ago. Every 4 years this board gets a new favourite.
SM2 - 2004
TDK - 2008
TA -2012
TASM3 - 2016?

It wont be revolutionary. Even though it should be. Unfortunately for the general audience and Spider-Man fans (like myself), we had Rachel's death in TDK where she was killed by the Joker in such a tragic way. Im not saying she's anywhere near the character Gwen is, of course shes not. But that's all irrelevant. Fact is, the GA and fanboys have seen this same type of thing go down in TDK so now Gwen's death will come off as "been there done that". It wont have the same effect if it was released prior.

It still has the potential (if done dramatically enough) to be the best moment thus far in the Spider-Man franchise. But it wont be revolutionary on film.

 

[Shikamaru]

I never said you or anyone did compare him to the Joker. I was just offering up some thoughts on the task that the filmmakers had ahead of them. Lets be honest. The Joker isn't just the best Batman villain. He's much more than that.

And although this does not need to be said, the Bane from TDKR is only one version of the character, just like all of Nolan's villains were nothing more than singular interpretations. I could sit here and called TDK's Two-Face a "watered down" version of the character that was missing certain character traits and motivations that he has in the comics, but I was happy with what we got because it for the story. Two-Face had some wasted potential, as well, but it wasn't a problem for me. I happen to think Nolan's Bane for TDKR pretty well, especially as sort of a dark mirror to Bruce himself.

If I can accept Bruce learning all of his training/methods from Ra's and the League of Shadows (which many seem to have also accepted), I can also accept the same from Bane.

What I wrote to Phantasm about Scarecrow and Ra's is what I would apply to Two-Face as well. I would have loved to see him in TDKR but I think he was great with the screen time and plot he had to work him.

Plus, Bane was the main villain (excluding the Talia reveal) and the film was mainly marketed on him. Watering down the main villain is always worse than the secondary villains and produces a bigger level of dissapointment from the audience, especially if there is a lot of hype leading up to the film. Not that Ra's wasn't watered down but BB is heavily Bruce Wayne-focused in a way the next two weren't and a lot of people didn't even know who the villain was going in.

 

[Isearch4dope]

I can agree that Bane wasn't exactly used to his full potential, however, I'm not sure an all-out Knightfall movie would be even possible either. I have no problem with Bane attacking an already weakened Batman anyways... Bane is kind of a coward in that sense, as he always attacks when he is fully sure he can win.

The Talia reveal doesn't bother me too much either, and though Bane pointing a gun at Batman is certainly out of character its a minor grumble to me in a film with much bigger problems.

By no means was I expecting a Knightfall movie. It's just that the Bane in this universe presented so much exciting raw possibilities right off the bat and to see it realized in the least interesting and watered down way was so disappointing. I mean this is the last movie. You need to bring it and end with a bang. And you're right that the movie had far bigger problems in the story itself I believe a great deal of that is tied to they're version of Bane (The Final Villain).

 

[Green Goblin]

It wont be revolutionary. Even though it should be. Unfortunately for the general audience and Spider-Man fans (like myself), we had Rachel's death in TDK where she was killed by the Joker in such a tragic way. Im not saying she's anywhere near the character Gwen is, of course shes not. But that's all irrelevant. Fact is, the GA and fanboys have seen this same type of thing go down in TDK so now Gwen's death will come off as "been there done that". It wont have the same effect if it was released prior.

It still has the potential (if done dramatically enough) to be the best moment thus far in the Spider-Man franchise. But it wont be revolutionary on film.

Did the GA care for Rachel Dawes... like really... at least the Katie Holmes one anyway...

 

[MagnarTheGreat]

Bane was great, particularly in comparison to so many middling or lame comic book villains over the past 15 years. I mean, if I were to make a personal list, I'd think he'd be pretty high up there. I'd put McKellan Magneto above him and Cox's Stryker from X2 as well and some others like Neeson's Ra's al Ghul.

TDKR Bane was an aggregate characterization drawn from his entire existence in the comics reworked into the canon of the Nolan series while drawing many elements from the past villains (and even what Bruce could himself have once been) that made appearances in the trilogy. I found more to like than dislike and my expectations were generally met, maybe it was helped by following the pre-production and production process of the film.

In particular, Nolan wanted to connect the first film with the third film, in much the same way he made demands to connect first acts of films to the third acts. It's just the way he seems like to do things. Full circle. While also repeating much of the structure of the first movie within the third movie. The movie does feel a bit inorganic and checklisty as I've said in the past, but it also had some upsides.

Act I: Batman Begins

We wanted to have an escalation of threat. I think Scarecrow, in a sense, performs the function of a henchman, but because Ra's al Ghul is off-screen he seems like the central threat. We always thought it was very important that we have a second-act villain who would be seen as the main villain so that we could bring back our first-act mentor as a third-act villain. The central difficulty David was facing was my demand to relate the first act to the third act. What you have is Bruce Wayne leaving Gotham; he's not Batman yet. He goes on this journey which could be a detour — and something the audience wants to get past to get to Batman. The challenge in the screenplay when we were first working out the story was, 'How does that pay off at the end of the film? How does that relate to what happens? So we decided pretty early on that the mentor of the first act should be the super-villain of the third act.

We had to have the character of Ra's al Ghul be in the beginning and be in the end, but we had to make it feel organic. We had to reveal at the end that Ra's al Ghul/Ducard was this grand master behind everything, including Scarecrow. We had to make his ultimate reveal feel inevitable. It was Chris's idea that Ducard should exist; that the characters of Batman's mentor and his prime adversary be the same two people. I think the audience is genuinely surprised when Ducard/Ra's al Ghul shows up because you don't expect to see him and it's a revelation that they're one and the same. Ra's has an important line when he says, 'I was the one that taught you to use an alias. What makes you think I wouldn't use an alias?'

Act III: The Dark Knight Rises

I knew that we had to return to Batman Begins and those philosophical ideas of Ra’s al Ghul, those challenges - that all had to come back.

We wanted a very physical monster. We wanted more of the Darth Vader, if you like, and that was very important in the story dynamics. We wanted Bruce to be facing a stronger presence, physically, which we hadn't done before. That felt like a necessary escalation and so the story behind it, which we were able to draw on, was quite epic. The really interesting thing about Bane is, he's massively strong but he's also extremely intelligent, and his past very much mirrors Bruce Wayne’s in interesting ways, from his training and with the League of Shadows background. Bane represents the the wrong path of Bruce Wayne almost back to “Batman Begins.” So Bane is the return of that danger. The wrong side for Bruce Wayne.

 

[Travesty]

What I wrote to Phantasm about Scarecrow and Ra's is what I would apply to Two-Face as well. I would have loved to see him in TDKR but I think he was great with the screen time and plot he had to work him.

Harvey/Two-Face was my favorite part of TDK, but even then, I wish he wasn't killed off. We never really got to see a proper Two-Face. It was close, but he didn't really flip between Harvey and Two-Face, he was just mainly Mad-Face after Rachel died.

 

[Green Goblin]

I found Bane's death extremely anti-climatic...

 

[ThePhantasm]

I didn't want an all-out Knightfall movie; just an all-out Bane used to his full potential.

I don't see how Bane is a coward in that sense. That's like saying Batman is a coward because he only attacks Darkseid after coming up with a plan to beat him, which is what Bane did.

I always thought Bane was a coward in Knightfall because he kept bragging about how he could take down the Bat but he really had to deploy Wayne's entire rogues gallery against him before beating down an opponent who could barely stand. Batman preps for fights, sure, but he's more honorable than to attack someone who is practically already beaten.

 

[Travesty]

I always thought Bane was a coward in Knightfall because he kept bragging about how he could take down the Bat but he really had to deploy Wayne's entire rogues gallery against him before beating down an opponent who could barely stand. Batman preps for fights, sure, but he's more honorable than to attack someone who is practically already beaten.

Oh, he defiantly took the easy road to defeating Batman, but he did learn his identity, which I thought was really cool.

 

[Shikamaru]

It wont be revolutionary. Even though it should be. Unfortunately for the general audience and Spider-Man fans (like myself), we had Rachel's death in TDK where she was killed by the Joker in such a tragic way. Im not saying she's anywhere near the character Gwen is, of course shes not. But that's all irrelevant. Fact is, the GA and fanboys have seen this same type of thing go down in TDK so now Gwen's death will come off as "been there done that". It wont have the same effect if it was released prior.

It still has the potential (if done dramatically enough) to be the best moment thus far in the Spider-Man franchise. But it wont be revolutionary on film.

Rachel is nowhere as memorable to people as Gwen is and was never as big of a character as some of the other characters in the film. She was also not as important to the plot as Gwen is. If you ask the average Joe on the street about Rachel's death, you would have to refresh their memory.

Gwen is known as THE Spidey girl in this franchise much like how MJ was in the last one, making her far more iconic. She is much more important to the story, is one of the most important characters almost up there with Spider-Man and the villains, and is generally more likeable and more memorable (plus played by Emma Stone). Her death will also be a bigger part and bigger highlight of the film. Despite it being done before in TDK, I wouldn't really count it.

 

[shauner111]

By no means was I expecting a Knightfall movie. It's just that the Bane in this universe presented so much exciting raw possibilities right off the bat and to see it realized in the least interesting and watered down way was so disappointing. I mean this is the last movie. You need to bring it and end with a bang. And you're right that the movie had far bigger problems in the story itself I believe a great deal of that is tied to they're version of Bane (The Final Villain).

Hardy's Bane is so far my favorite version of the character in terms of look and voice, etc. But ive always loved Bane from the comics. A lot of great stories from the 90s. His intelligence is amazing. But you can also say that Ras (or Raysh ) Al Ghul is more fascinating of a character than Nolan's. This all means nothing to me when im watching a film. I concentrate on what im getting in the movie and I don't compare too much. This version of Bane was amazing and one of the best villains these genre of movies have to offer. It closed off the last movie with a bang. He was still intelligent and powerful as hell. I also adore Neeson's version of Ras who was an amalgamation of Ras Al Ghul and Henri Ducard.

For the story that was told, I don't see how Hardy's Bane could have been better. I cant think of any ways to show that he was more intelligent or whatever you're nitpicking. I guess you wanted the entire plan to be his and not Talia's? Well it was both of their plans. He still had an incredible journey. Showing him break out of the prison or reading in his cell wasn't necessary for this version. He was smart and physical, he was like a warlord. He was trained by the League, just like Bruce in Begins..but people don't complain about that do they?

Bane was excommunicated and then he went on his own path and gathered up followers. Sure it would have been cool to see him climbing mountains, recruiting his men, but this probably happened anyway. You just have to use your imagination.

Heck there was a certain level of emotion at the end of the movie that I don't remember him having in the comics. There were no damn teddy bears or romantic puppy love stuff going on. It was a love for a child in a protector kind of role. Like a guardian. The only innocence left in his life. He was nobodys *****.

Yeah, he wasn't so obsessed to the point where he comes to Gotham to challenge Batman, nooo, but he it's cool that Nolan liked to change things up to fit his universe.

It comes down to opinion I guess. I loved Nolan's Bane as he is. I don't need the comics to come to life. Ill just read the comics for that.

 

[Green Goblin]

Rachel is nowhere as memorable to people as Gwen is and was never as big of a character as some of the other characters in the film. She was also not as important to the plot as Gwen is. If you ask the average Joe on the street about Rachel's death, you would have to refresh their memory.

Gwen is known as THE Spidey girl in this franchise much like how MJ was in the last one, making her far more iconic. She is much more important to the story, is one of the most important characters almost up there with Spider-Man and the villains, and is generally more likeable and more memorable (plus played by Emma Stone). Her death will also be a bigger part and bigger highlight of the film. Despite it being done before in TDK, I wouldn't really count it.

Well said, us talking about spidey shows how boring arguing about how good or bad TDKR is around in circles is.

 

[Shikamaru]

Harvey/Two-Face was my favorite part of TDK, but even then, I wish he wasn't killed off. We never really got to see a proper Two-Face. It was close, but he didn't really flip between Harvey and Two-Face, he was just mainly Mad-Face after Rachel died.

Two-Face is technically not written as the dual-identity Two-Face all the time even in the Modern Age of comics. I admit that I far prefer the dual-identity Two-Face over the "joined the dark side" Two-Face (for lack of better term) but both versions are valid.

I always thought Bane was a coward in Knightfall because he kept bragging about how he could take down the Bat but he really had to deploy Wayne's entire rogues gallery against him before beating down an opponent who could barely stand. Batman preps for fights, sure, but he's more honorable than to attack someone who is practically already beaten.

He could take down the Bat in the sense that he could completely crush him inside out. He didn't just beat him; he physically broke his body and his spirit (for a while). He developed a tactic that would not only result to him beating Batman, but destroying him completely while still keeping him alive to let him know this.

I didn't see Bane as a coward in Knightfall. A coward would be someone who fears those stronger than him or above him. Bane always had a sense of honor. When he fought Batman again (Azrael), he even told Batman/Azrael to kill him for being stronger and winning the fight fair and square. This is a man who honors those that he considers "superior" to him. A coward would grab a shotgun and attack a man in his weakened state (who is weakened due to a third party, NOT due to Bane himself) after admitting just previously that that same man was his superior. That is a coward to me.

 

[shauner111]

Rachel is nowhere as memorable to people as Gwen is and was never as big of a character as some of the other characters in the film. She was also not as important to the plot as Gwen is. If you ask the average Joe on the street about Rachel's death, you would have to refresh their memory.

Gwen is known as THE Spidey girl in this franchise much like how MJ was in the last one, making her far more iconic. She is much more important to the story, is one of the most important characters almost up there with Spider-Man and the villains, and is generally more likeable and more memorable (plus played by Emma Stone). Her death will also be a bigger part and bigger highlight of the film. Despite it being done before in TDK, I wouldn't really count it.

On film Gwen isn't as huge as MJ in the raimi movies. There's a lot of people who still haven't seen Marc Webb's movie. BTW we only have 1 movie so far. It's just 1 movie and not only is it NOT a worldwide phenomenon where everyone has seen it, it gets split reactions from people.

We'll see how the new movie goes.

I don't think people really care that much at this point, maybe they will depending on the box office results with Electro and Rhino or how she's written. The same thing still happened in TDK and it WILL have an effect on people's reactions. They may be very shocked but the shock level will be brought down a few notches no doubt. When a love interest has been killed off in a superhero movie already, and done with in a dramatic fashion, and it has a profound effect on the rest of the plot AND the movie that follows, yes, it doesn't matter if the character wasn't as good as Gwen or Lois Lane, it still happened already. It wont be revolutionary.

 

[Green Goblin]

On film Gwen isn't as huge as MJ in the raimi movies. There's a lot of people who still haven't seen Marc Webb's movie. BTW we only have 1 movie so far. It's just 1 movie and not only is it NOT a worldwide phenomenon where everyone has seen it, it gets split reactions from people.

We'll see how the new movie goes.

I don't think people really care that much at this point, maybe they will depending on the box office results with Electro and Rhino or how she's written. The same thing still happened in TDK and it WILL have an effect on people's reactions. They may be very shocked but the shock level will be brought down a few notches no doubt. When a love interest has been killed off in a superhero movie already, and done with in a dramatic fashion, and it has a profound effect on the rest of the plot AND the movie that follows, yes, it doesn't matter if the character wasn't as good as Gwen or Lois Lane, it still happened already. It wont be revolutionary.

TASM was still quite a successful film though. It is the highest grossing reboot (unless MOS does it in the tail ends of it's run but that would be unlikely) It's got a tied User Score on RT with both MOS and SM2. It is the 2nd most well received reboot by critics and beat even BB in top critics (81%). You are right to say that we shouldn't jump ship though.

 

[ThePhantasm]

Maybe it is better to say that Bane isn't a coward, per se, but uses rather cowardly tactics at points when he can.

Batman wasn't spiritually beaten until after Bane broke his back. So the tactic Bane used to get there was still pretty cowardly... to defeat Batman spiritually and physically he basically had to beat the crap out of a guy who already could barely stand.

Contrast with Batman, who encounters Azrael in the batcave in a scene that mirrors his encounter with Bane. Batman takes on a fully physically strong Azrael and uses tactics to beat him and spiritually break him. But he defeats Azrael straight up, not weakening him to a ridiculous level first.

Bane is the opposite of Batman in that he preps for combat but Batman would still go into combat against greater odds. Bane prefers enemies who are already on the verge of collapse and THEN uses his venom to boost himself up even further.

Bane in his first fight with Azbat flees the scene. But I'll give the last point to you... his final fight with Azbat isn't cowardly.

 

[ThePhantasm]

I thought at one point in the comics Talia called Bane a coward for the very reasons I'm mentioning? Maybe I'm remembering wrong.

 

[regwec]

I found Bane's death extremely anti-climatic...

It was, though his one-liner before did make me laugh, however inappropriately.

 

[The Shape]

...I don't understand why Shape automatically assumed that Shika's problem with Bane was that he wasn't as good as Joker.



Yeah, I can tell you don't come around here often, lol

I didn't even respond to anyone's post when I said that about Joker? Someone had posted that Bane was awesome and I was mostly in agreement, offering up my own thoughts on what it was like to follow the Joker as a villain and how I was happy we got something different. I didn't even say anything about whether Joker was better or worse than Bane. I didn't assume anything.

Also confused as to why you would "call me out" without replying to me directly.