KRIM why WOULD/SHOULD Bane have tattoos, in your opinion? Just going off what we know of the character.
Let's go through the reasons people get tattoos -
Spiritual significance - Bane's never been a spiritual guy.
Cultural significance - Bane was not raised in a specific culture, nor has he ever embraced one in life.
Aesthetics - Bane's always struck me as a utilitarian. I don't see him interested in such trivialities.
As I noted above, I'm not necessarily being an advocate for it. I merely find it an interesting direction to go if it were used. As for why he
should, I can only supply a recursive question; why is anything added or changed in adaptations and reinterpretations? There isn't a single answer I could give because there are literally dozens and dozens of them, all unique. Artistic liberties are a tricky course because by nature it serves to disassemble preconceptions and disturb the accepted rules of these universes. I apologize if this isn't too precise of an answer for you, but as someone who isn't terribly attached to this newfound topic, it's the best I can do.
Of course, Nolan could change the character. But right now all we have to go on is what we know of the character as he exists in the comics. Nolan could've covered Bruce Wayne in tattoos, and explained it off as some sort of symbolic account of his travels or something. Wouldn't have gelled with the character as we know him.
Sure, but it's easy to dismiss such ridiculous suggestions when they only exist as an imaginary scenario. But if Nolan has proven anything, it's either that some fanboys are too enthralled with his work to overlook any "missteps", or are not so firmly attached to a particular blueprint as they stereotypically are. I won't go into the fine details of what Nolan has brought and changed to the franchise as it should be obvious here. But surely you would agree that of the artistic choices he's made through both films... just 6 years ago these very same concepts and approaches would have been easily laughed off if any one of us tried to bring it to the table. The difference is Nolan had the shot to execute it on-screen. Here we are in quite possibly the most critically praised and lauded interpretation of the character, yet is unique of its predecessors all the same.
It may not be tattoos, but you can bet it will be something else with Nolan. As per my Joker reference, it could even be more drastic. I've learned my lesson in jumping the gun with these types of things long ago. Too much egg on my face from past years have made me more humble.
Let me ask you something, and I hope it doesn't offend - are you just kind of bracing yourself for the possibility that Nolan lets Tom Hardy keep his tattoos visible as Bane?
I only ask this because I notice stuff like that around here. There were dozens of people, back in the Marion Cotillard rumor days, trying to convince me (or themselves, maybe) that it somehow made more sense for Catwoman to be French than it did for her to be...er, not French.
If I were to describe my position on
this matter, it's more of just playing devil's advocate. I honestly couldn't care less if it were there or not. But since it was brought up, I'm going to explore ways in which I think it would be fitting for the character and universe. It's not very conducive to the discussion environment to write off anything on the basis of absolute faithfulness to the source. Especially when it's not the first priority of any creative team working on an adaptation, and especially not when we have absolutely nothing to talk about in this dreaded news drought.
