The Dark Knight Rises Tom Hardy as Bane IX

[KalMart]

Ledger's performance as the Joker was capturing lightning in a bottle. It's not something that happens very often. He was the only Nolan villain to be nominated for an Oscar for a reason.

As I've now said several times, the Joker argument does not hold up. The Joker still looked like the Joker. His hair was green. His face was white. His lips were red. His suit was purple. This Bane looks nothing like Bane.

He's still very muscular, he's still menacing, he still wears a mask.....

 

[DoomsdayApex]

physical features aren't characteristics. Bane's defining characteristics are his tactical brilliance and his strength/savagery, which according everything we've seen and heard so far are intact. No "random thug" has broken Batman's spirit and body, only Bane has done that. Him wearing a different mask and a coat doesn't really change that for me.

QFT

 

[BatmanBeyond]

It holds up, because we can say it looks like The Joker now, but back then there were plenty of people saying it was absolutely unrecogisable as The Joker. "If you showed me this picture out of context, I'd think it was The Crow, not The Joker." And many similar such pics.

But yes, Heath Ledger looked more like The Joker than Tom Hardy looks like Bane. But The Joker has a much more iconic look than Bane. Ra's al Ghul's green cloak is his only recognisable piece of wardrobe in the comic, and the world didn't end when it wasn't carried over into the movie. And Jonathan Crane didn't need to dress up in a full-blown Scarecrow costume to be Scarecrow.

Well said.

This being said, I understand where people are coming from when saying Bane's look in TDKR will not look like the comic-book incarnation of the character. A valid point that you've touched upon in your post, which is so easily forgotten when it comes to this debate is that Bane's look from the comics is definitely not as iconic as the Joker's, what with Bane appearing in much lesser and even lesser known Batman storylines(apart from Knightfall). I think this is one of the reasons Nolan's taken notable visual liberties compared to the character's appearance in the comics.

Another important thing to keep in mind is that the movie hasn't even been released yet, so we can't make competent judgments on where Nolan is going to take Bane's character. As others have mentioned a few times, one of Nolan's trademarks and fortes with these movies has been his ability to keep the essence and spirit of the villains, despite the noticeable visual differences.

I think what I'm trying to say here boils down to this...I know that, visually at least, this Bane is a pretty radical departure from the comics. I actually like the comic-book version Bane as well and yes, there are visual characteristics that make him the Bane of that universe. But you can't really say that just because his visual appearance won't be the same as in the comic-books, he'll be just some "random thug". Keep in mind that Nolan's universe isn't the same as the comic-book one, especially visually. Again, the essence is there and I'm sure that will be the case with Bane's character, even though he probably won't be as tall as in the comics. But I think the character will have traits that will make him the Bane of Nolan's Batman universe, while still retaining the essence, as well as other certain traits from the character in the comic-books.

 

[Travesty]

Why can't people just admit that it doesn't look like Bane?

I'm not even saying you can't like both, because you most certainly can, but just admit that it looks nothing like Bane.

Edit: And good post above, BatmanBeyond.

 

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

To me he looks like Bane, just a different interpretation of him as far as appearance goes.

 

[redfirebird2008]

Physical appearance has everything to do with a character.

This comment is ludicrous. If it had everything to do with a character, then Schumacher's Bane would not be ridiculed the way it is.

 

[Marx]

This comment is ludicrous. If it had everything to do with a character, then Schumacher's Bane would not be ridiculed the way it is.

Oh good lord. How many times do I have to say that the Schumacher Bane was ridiculous on this forum? Do you want me to say it again???

SCHUMACHER'S BANE WAS A DISGRACE. Yeah, it resembled the comic Bane but was nothing like the character.

You're quoting me completely out of context, by the way. All that I am saying is that physical characteristics and appearance are important to a character. For anyone to suggest otherwise is what's ludicrous.

 

[Travesty]

This comment is ludicrous. If it had everything to do with a character, then Schumacher's Bane would not be ridiculed the way it is.

You kinda quoted him out of context.

 

[HighFivingMF]

Why can't people just admit that it doesn't look like Bane?

Because it does look like Bane. Not 100% like him, but you can tell it's Bane.

 

[Astro13Zombie]

To me he looks like Bane, just a different interpretation of him as far as appearance goes.

If you were shown a picture of Nolan's "Bane"..Not knowing who he was supposed to be.
And asked to guess who it was.
Would you be able too? t:

 

[Rod47]

Give him some pants and many people one here would surely be happy with it.

If his acting skils are on an at least average level, then I'd be happy with him as Bane. And no need for him to put on pants. I'll be aroused and happy.

 

[redfirebird2008]

Oh good lord. How many times do I have to say that the Schumacher Bane was ridiculous on this forum? Do you want me to say it again???

SCHUMACHER'S BANE WAS A DISGRACE. Yeah, it resembled the comic Bane but was nothing like the character.

So you admit that appearance doesn't have "everything" to do with a character. Thank you for proving my point.

You kinda quoted him out of context.

Not really. He said physical appearance has everything to do with a character. The comment is what it is. And as I pointed out, Schumacher's Bane would not be ridiculed the way it is if appearance had "everything" do with a character. Clearly personality and intelligence matter a hell of a lot.

 

[Marx]

So you admit that appearance doesn't have "everything" to do with a character. Thank you for proving my point.





Not really. He said physical appearance has everything to do with a character. The comment is what it is. And as I pointed out, Schumacher's Bane would not be ridiculed the way it is if appearance had "everything" do with a character. Clearly personality and intelligence matter a hell of a lot.

Actually, you quoted me out of context to make a misguided point. I've honestly come to expect nothing less from people in this forum.

 

[redfirebird2008]

Actually, you quoted me out of context to make a misguided point. I've honestly come to expect nothing less from people in this forum.

Words matter. There is no extra "context" needed for a line like "physical appearance has everything to do with a character." It is what it is.

 

[BatmanBeyond]

To me he looks like Bane, just a different interpretation of him as far as appearance goes.

Yep, this is what I was trying to say earlier. Again, I agree that he looks almost nothing like the comics. But to me at least, it's obvious even from these spy pics that the essence and the spirit of the character are there. Nolan's such a subtle director, it doesn't surprise or upset me that he hasn't gone for a full-blown adaptation from the comics with Bane.

Edit: And good post above, BatmanBeyond.

Thanks, Travesty.

 

[Marx]

Words matter. There is no extra "context" needed for a line like "physical appearance has everything to do with a character." It is what it is.

And yet you completely ignore the examples I gave of why I said what I said. Again, I've come to expect nothing less in this forum.

 

[Keyser Soze]

If you were shown a picture of Nolan's "Bane"..Not knowing who he was supposed to be.
And asked to guess who it was.
Would you be able too? t:

Depends on the context. If I knew nothing about this film, and was shown this pic completely out of context and asked who it was, I admit I may be at a loss. But if you showed me this pic and said, "What Batman villain is this?", Bane would be the most obvious answer to me. The mask and the physicality - even if it isn't the same design of mask or the same physical stature as in the comics - is enough to identify him in that regard.

 

[redfirebird2008]

And yet you completely ignore the examples I gave of why I said what I said. Again, I've come to expect nothing less in this forum.

Not my fault you chose a poorly worded sentence to back up your examples. A better sentence would have been something along the lines of, "Appearance is an important part of a character." When you drop the "e" word in there, you're jumping the shark a bit because we have Schumacher's Bane as rock solid proof that appearance is not "everything."

 

[Keyser Soze]

In Marx's defense, even though I'm arguing against him here, I think it's quite clear that he meant that physical appearance is as important to a character as their personality, not that you had to choose one or the other.

 

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

We've seen him in one outfit for the spypics for only one scene. We've also seen him in the trailer without a shirt on, who's to sAy that he's going to wear the same exact outfit for the whole film?

 

[Rod47]

Hey guys, Bane's size and muscles don't matter. It's the acting skills.

So why not have Christian Bale wear a suit similar to BnR. I mean come on, just like what the apologists say, it's all about the acting skills and the rest will be tolerable.

 

[Travesty]

Not my fault you chose a poorly worded sentence to back up your examples. A better sentence would have been something along the lines of, "Appearance is an important part of a character." When you drop the "e" word in there, you're jumping the shark a bit because we have Schumacher's Bane as rock solid proof that appearance is not "everything."

But his sentence was just a summary of his overall point, to what he was responding to. His response was to someone who said the physical features don't make up any kind of characteristics. And physical appearance does have everything to do with making up a characteristic, but it's not the only defining quality.

You kinda cherry picked a little sentence, and never gave thought to what he was responding to, and you also took away his points before it.

 

[Laderlappen]

Hey guys, Bane's size and muscles don't matter. It's the acting skills.

So why not have Christian Bale wear a suit similar to BnR. I mean come on, just like what the apologists say, it's all about the acting skills and the rest will be tolerable.

Yes it does. If looks didnt matter then they would have cast Meryl Streep.

 

[Zero7756]

If you were shown a picture of Nolan's "Bane"..Not knowing who he was supposed to be.
And asked to guess who it was.
Would you be able too? t:

Irrefutably, yes.

 

[thewhyteman]

Well I for one disagree.
Appearance can be altered but the traits of a character are what mattes the most.
I am not bothered a bit by Nolan's Bane. Hell I expect for a fresh take coming form Nolan.
When I first heard of Heath's casting, I was one of many who went "WTF?! Heath as Joker"
Well I **** quickly when I saw him in action.
I only wish Nolan would make a couple more, just so I can see his vision of other Batman characters.