The Dark Knight Rises Why did the League of Shadows want to destroy a peaceful city?

[Anno_Domini]

Peaceful only because of a lie and could be as corrupted as Gotham City was back in Batman Begins when the League first wanted to destroy Gotham.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Owtch!

That makes Bane sound really pathetic!

Then all villains who are jealous of the hero are pathetic as well?

 

[Hawkeye70000000]

I wouldn't call bane pathetic for attacking Gotham and Bruce in the name of Ra's goal. if you look at through a competitive perspective; Ra's saved bane from the pit and then followed him and trained with him. When Bruce came into to the fold and Ra's thought he would secede him as head of LoS and attack on Gotham. Bane wanted to show Bruce that he was better than Bruce, more deserving of the LoS. It's like to two people who make tablets or phones and sells them. They compete against each other to show who is can produce the best device. It isn't pathetic, it is competition that produces better products or better soldier.

 

[the_scream]

I think if anything Bane was trying to show he was more than both Bruce and Ras. He even says "I am the League of Shadows". He was trying to prove himself. This is very similar to Banes motivation in Knightfall which was to show he could best the Batman for the sake of it. I don't see how his motivation is anymore unusual than that.

 

[Baramos]

In the original draft script of Batman Begins Goyer kept in the comics version of Ra's/League of Shadows goal of keeping civilization from getting out of hand. It isn't just Gotham being corrupt, it's that Gotham as "the greatest city on the planet" is a symbol of Western capitalism/civilization and therefore needs to be destroyed. It's the same reason they "sacked Rome, loaded plague rats on ships, burnt London to the ground" etc. They equate "modern civilization" (at whatever point in history they're in) with this corruption. It will inevitably corrupt men that live in it so it needs to be destroyed.

We got a little bit of this with Ra's in Begins ("this is not how man was meant to live" talking about balance, etc.) but a lot of the greater eco-terrorist bits of Ra's were cut out of the final shooting script. In any case this is also in TDKR since Talia is obsessed with the free clean energy project that would have solved a lot of the "modern world"'s ills. Of course it was revealed that she wanted to use it as a weapon, but there was still this environmentalist aspect to her character.

 

[the_scream]

In the original draft script of Batman Begins Goyer kept in the comics version of Ra's/League of Shadows goal of keeping civilization from getting out of hand. It isn't just Gotham being corrupt, it's that Gotham as "the greatest city on the planet" is a symbol of Western capitalism/civilization and therefore needs to be destroyed. It's the same reason they "sacked Rome, loaded plague rats on ships, burnt London to the ground" etc. They equate "modern civilization" (at whatever point in history they're in) with this corruption. It will inevitably corrupt men that live in it so it needs to be destroyed.

We got a little bit of this with Ra's in Begins ("this is not how man was meant to live" talking about balance, etc.) but a lot of the greater eco-terrorist bits of Ra's were cut out of the final shooting script. In any case this is also in TDKR since Talia is obsessed with the free clean energy project that would have solved a lot of the "modern world"'s ills. Of course it was revealed that she wanted to use it as a weapon, but there was still this environmentalist aspect to her character.

This is actually a pretty good explanation. I didn't think of it like that. Now that I think about it, Ras says something about having to address the cities that have reached the pinnacle of their civilisation. Perhaps the LOS believed it needed to be destroyed regardless of whether it is corrupt.

 

[The Joker]

Then all villains who are jealous of the hero are pathetic as well?

Absolutely. Jealousy is a pathetic motive to have. Especially compared to the motives of the previous villains in this franchise. Even Eddie Brock had more reasons than that to hate Peter Parker in Spider-Man 3, and he's one of the most pathetic loser villains ever put into a CBM movie.

I'm not saying jealousy was Bane's sole motive. In fact I don't think it was a motive at all. I think he was doing it out of loyalty and love for Talia, just like he did all those years ago risking his life in the pit just to protect her when she was a child.

I think if anything Bane was trying to show he was more than both Bruce and Ras. He even says "I am the League of Shadows". He was trying to prove himself. This is very similar to Banes motivation in Knightfall which was to show he could best the Batman for the sake of it. I don't see how his motivation is anymore unusual than that.

In Knightfall, Bane didn't know Batman from Adam. He never met him, never even heard of him until Bird told him about him in Pena Duro. Bane in TDKR came to Gotham knowing everything about Bruce from the LOS history with Batman. He didn't figure out Batman's identity like Bane in Knightfall did. He didn't study him. He didn't want to take Gotham from Bruce and own it for himself.

He just wanted to help Talia honor her father by finishing his work. He was handed all the info he knew about Batman on a silver plate in TDKR. He didn't escape the pit like Bane escaped from Pena Duro in the comics, which was the equivalent to the pit, the hell hole of the universe they called it where Bane spent his entire life. He didn't over come any major adversity by himself. In that regard I think he was an inferior version of comic book Bane. He was just some guy sentenced to life in the pit, protected little Talia, got beaten up badly, and was saved, trained, and exiled by Ra's, and then inherited the LOS thanks to his affiliation with Talia. There was nothing impressive about Bane like there was about Bane in Knightfall. He was a sellf made man who over came some major obstacles all by himself and was out to prove himself.

What reason did he give to want fulfill Ra's Al Ghul's destiny? He never gave one. The "I am the League of Shadows" line is blown way out of context. Did anyone expect him to reveal the "twist" that he was doing it for the daughter of Ra's? Of course not. They couldn't have him hinting he was working with someone else that early in the movie. It would spoil the Bane as a child in the pit subterfuge. When Talia is revealed it's all made clear. Bane protected her in the pit as a child when he had no reason to. He just cared about her. So what makes you think he had some new reason for being here now willing to die for her again all these years later? Talia is the one who says they're here to honor her father's work. Name one line where Bane gives any reason he wants to fulfill Ra's Al Ghul's work, because we all know Nolan is anything but subtle when it comes to explaining main villain motivations. Talia got a whole entire monologue scene that basically said this was all her personal quest.

 

[Tequilla]

I'm a fan of TDKR but the biggest gripe I have is a serious issue with the film. In Batman Begins, it is clear that Gotham is corrupt and both Batman and Raas take different ideological approaches to the corruption. Batman thinks it can be saved. Raas believes it is for the good of the world to allow Gotham to perish as it is beyond saving.

Fast forward 8 years or so later. Batman was right. He managed to manipulate the system and work with Gordon and Dent to make a peaceful Gotham. It required Batman's sacrifice but it demonstrated Gotham was not beyond saving.

So, why is it the reformed League of Shadows cares to destroy Gotham? The film toys with the idea that there is still evil below the surface. But this evil is the League itself. The film also toys with the idea that Talia and Bane want vengeance for Raas death. But vengeance means destroying an entire city of people who didn't have anything to do with his death?

My biggest gripe with the film. Would welcome a rational explanation for what motivates the primary villains to want to kill millions of people.

I think there's this huge misconception about the city's behavior. I tend to see a lot of times people writing about Gotham like a monolith that acts uniformly. Gotham is a place full of different ideas , concepts , characterizations. Its not a single entity , that is easy to reshape. Its very important to distinguish this.

We also cant forget , like it as mentioned already , that Gotham is presented like the capital of western civilization. This is very symbolical , and adds to the actions and consequences the city suffers along the trilogy.

The director always toys with the same idea. He presents us always contrasts. Not a single place . A single character. Gotham is very differentiated. Different stratum's. He utilizes the basic storytelling tools. Visual clues about the place , and the operators that operate in that particular location (from the smallest role to the main characters). This adds texture to the diversity of the city. It doesn't mean that Gotham is absolutely represented by those people , but its enough to tell the story he wants to tell.

In Begins we are presented with very different ideas. Ra's defends that Gotham is beyond saving. The city is torn by corruption , and it cant get up by itself. It needs to be reseted. To get back to harmony. The new-man thinking. This is a conception postulated by ideologists of the communist social party. A different archetype of person would emerge under different social and economics conditions. Ra's believes he can only change those conditions by destroying them first. He tried something different before but it failed. He alludes that Gotham , contrary to what you might think , its actually limp. It is trying to rise by itself. He credits that to people like Bruce's father. This acknowledgment is very important , because it shows its not only Bruce that believes that there's another route....a lot of citizens also believe in that. Batman is shown as the symbol of hope. The beacon of light. He exists to break people out of the apathy they let themselves in. In the end of Begins , Ra's fails and the city doesn't disappear . Quite the contrary. Batman hard work is looking like to have some sort of result (at the surface....). The idea that the city was so corrupted that it was beyond saving , was false. From this perspective , the extremism of Los already clashes with reality in the first movie.

After TDK ends , they create a lie. Nolan says that the solution they arranged was papering over the craks. And its exactly like that. Why ? Because the city is still very much corrupted. Again , about the generalizations we make , the Joe Chill's are not the root of the problem. They are a consequence of it. They exist because of the system. They are a face of a society that has grown distorted. What they achieved by the end of TDK , was that they took this people out of the streets. They cleaned at the surface. No crime , doesn't mean an uncorrupted society. It is still very much a pollute city (at its core , visually and thematically this idea is presented us has the bubble up of evil in the sewers)

In Rises , its kinda crazy to think we are show an unpolluted society, when Nolan keeps showing us a Gotham with so many flaws and vulnerable. He tackles one of the most important aspects of modern civilization , the youths. This is a problem we share. With the slow down of human labor industrialization , we've started to create a big problem. The biggest. Inability to fit the younger generations in the mechanics of our society. A city without the prospect of the younger ones , is doomed. Doesn't exist. This is a very important idea to this particular trilogy , because this thing is all about Legacy. The ones who will take the mantle. TDKR also plays witht the orphanages , and Blake , the youngest character that Rises to the occasion. We see a city that isnt able to absorb young kinds , and they "migrate" to the underground. To the root of Gotham (the sewers). The corruption that never ceased to exist , and is ready to burst.

But he keeps going. John Dagget. An horrible man. Also a very important one. Member of the board of Wayne Entp. , an entrepreneur , he has been the main player in developing the infrastructures of Gotham in the last few years. He has also been dealing with Los for quite a while. Its funny Nolan resort to construction , and how they affect the foundations of it. It also very clear how they have , once again , "have infiltrated every level of its infrastructure".

It doesn't stop. Foley , the commissioner. The guys at the party , scheming against good old Gordon . This time its not low level agents like Flass , but upper tie. Foley the minute he sees Batman he goes in his pursuit , completely forgetting the major assault has happened. He only care for one thing , himself. His fame. Who cares about justice. The man gets completely frozen after the city is on siege.

The same city who after Bane's assault , stays in complete...apathy. The same apathy that existed towards the criminality , the corruption , the values. Everything Batman tries to fight and shake out of them. How the hell , is this city presented as "peaceful" and unpolluted , when the director clearly show us the other way.

So , i dont agree with you. They wanted to attack Gotham once again , because they believed the city itself was in the same sort of state. And there's a lot of it pointed to us in the Rises.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Absolutely. Jealousy is a pathetic motive to have. Especially compared to the motives of the previous villains in this franchise. Even Eddie Brock had more reasons than that to hate Peter Parker in Spider-Man 3, and he's one of the most pathetic loser villains ever out into a CBM movie.

I'm not saying jealousy was Bane's sole motive. In fact I don't think it was a motive at all. I think he was doing it out of loyalty and love for Talia, just like he did all those years ago risking his life in the pit just to protect her when she was a child.

If done right, jealousy is not a pathetic motive to have. I would have been fine if Bane was jealous of Bruce of being the "favorite" while Bane was kicked out of the League for saving Ra's al Ghul's daughter and while we both agree jealousy didn't play a part, I would have been fine if this was played out in TDKR.

But...jealousy can be written right. Look at TSSM for example. I thought Eddie's jealousy matched his anger correctly.

 

[BatLobster]

Jealousy can be seen as a "pathetic" motive for a character to have, in that is indicative of some kind of inner weakness but that doesn't make it a bad motivation for a writer to give a villain. Just off the top of my head, Amadeus and The Prestige are two examples where jealousy is a huge factor in making characters do bad things.

Now, I don't think jealousy was a major motive for Bane, but I do think there is a subtle undercurrent of him wanting to prove himself to be the better than both Bruce and Ra's. A sense of indignation that Ra's chose the rich brat over him to be his successor. An overblown sense of pride is one of the signature traits of Bane in the comic and it was definitely there in the film. He did have a selfless sense of dedication to Talia and their plan, but he wasn't without that pride and ego. It's written all over his body language alone.

 

[TheBat812]

That doesn't prove a thing. Deciding on what villain they wanted doesn't mean they'd decided what exactly they were going to do with him in the story. Or indeed what the story was going to be. Your own article you posted there proves that when it says Nolan didn't even start looking at Batman Begins plot threads til after Inception. What more proof do you need?



You just acknowledged that they were thinking about Bane just after TDK premiered. How does working with Hardy for the first time on Inception and thinking he'd be perfect for Bane give you the impression they had already decided on the LOS before? Again your own article says Nolan did Inception first, THEN he looked at the plots he'd established in Batman Begins.

I'm not sure how you can think no information that Joker wasn't going to be used is somehow proof that he might have been originally planned, when something Chris has said specifically is that he planned to use the LOS all along for thematic reasons. Sure, maybe Joker might have been involved had Heath been alive, but either way LOS was coming back. Nolan has stated many times that they had a basic outline for the trilogy ever since BB, but they didn't look into the specifics of the stories until they finished each film so they wouldn't hold anything back. Joker's thematic purpose was done by the end of TDK. His line at the end of TDK about them being destined to do this forever is more of a thematic idea of opposing forces than a statement that he'd appear in the sequel.


Also, like BatLobster indicated, jealousy can certainly be used as a great motivation (it is, after all, a very human feeling that can drive one to obsession, something Nolan has a penchant for), and there was certainly a hint of Bane's need to prove himself the true worthy successor to bring balance back to Western civilization rather than the rich idealist who's unwilling to do 'all that is necessary' to reset the balance of Gotham's social infrastructure. Both him and Talia seem to ooze resentment for Ra's having chosen Bruce as his heir only for him to betray them all. Which I can't really blame them for, it was pretty ****ed up (from their point of view).

 

[MagnarTheGreat]

I see this come up every now and then but, movie Ra's never chose Bruce as his successor. He chose him to destroy Gotham City because he could be in an ideal position to pull it off when he returns to Gotham. That's all that's ever elaborated on.

 

[Anno_Domini]

When Ra's said it should have been Bruce at his side when destroying Gotham, it made it seem like Ra's favored Bruce the most than just being in an ideal position of destroying Gotham.

 

[747]

It wasn't so much about Gotham itself this time (except that the peace was built on a lie, which doesn't mesh with the more purifying thoughts), LOS wasn't really LOS anymore. I'm not sure Ra's would have agreed with Bane's plan. It was more about both Bane and Talia's own personal vendettas and goals this time around. LOS was more of a tool and a cover for the true intentions.

Bane wanted several things. He wanted to prove to himself that he could do what Ra's failed to do, as a kind of response for him being thrown out of the LOS. He also wanted to extend his own misery and pain unto others, on a larger scale to Gotham and to a more personal level to Bruce. With both Gotham and Bruce he makes them suffer what he had to suffer, the false hope that he consider the worst suffering and misery of all. Bane is also in this for his love for Talia (whether it's platonic or not doesn't really matter) and wants to prove himself to her while also helping her get revenge on her father's murderer.

Sometimes I think people want to make TDKR simpler than what it really is.

 

[BatLobster]

I see this come up every now and then but, movie Ra's never chose Bruce as his successor. He chose him to destroy Gotham City because he could be in an ideal position to pull it off when he returns to Gotham. That's all that's ever elaborated on.

Well, he does call him his "greatest student" and that he should be standing at his side. Sounds to me like he could have very well made Bruce his no. 2 and heir to the throne.

 

[The Joker]

I'm not sure how you can think no information that Joker wasn't going to be used is somehow proof that he might have been originally planned, when something Chris has said specifically is that he planned to use the LOS all along for thematic reasons.

Because Chris never said that. That's how I can think it. If he had then the link would have been posted here and this discussion wouldn't even be happening. Give me a link that shows me he said he always intended to bring them back even before Heath died.

Sure, maybe Joker might have been involved had Heath been alive, but either way LOS was coming back.

Again show me the quote where Nolan said this.

Nolan has stated many times that they had a basic outline for the trilogy ever since BB, but they didn't look into the specifics of the stories until they finished each film so they wouldn't hold anything back.

You know that's a crock of poop since Goyer said they originally intended to have Dent become scarred and turned into Two Face in the third movie and have Two Face as the main villain for the third movie.

Read;

"The next one would have Batman enlisting the aid of Gordon and Dent in bringing down The Joker...but not killing him, which is a mistake they made in the first one," Batwriter David Goyer tells the latest issue of U.S. movie magazine PREMIERE. "In the third, the Joker would go on trial, scarring Dent in the process."

http://www.movieweb.com/news/david-goyer-confirms-the-joker-in-the-batman-sequels

Joker was originally intended to be in both sequels, but with Two Face as the main villain in the third. I don't see any mention of the LOS do you?

Joker's thematic purpose was done by the end of TDK.

No it wasn't, since his work was covered up by Batman and Gordon. His purpose was far from being done. Whereas the LOS tried and failed to destroy Gotham in BB. There was no loose plot threads from Batman Begins regarding them. Ra's was dead, and there was no mention of any LOS successors who could carry on his work. Whereas with TDK, the Joker's victory was covered up by a lie, and the Joker lived. His work was not done.

His line at the end of TDK about them being destined to do this forever is more of a thematic idea of opposing forces than a statement that he'd appear in the sequel.

That's your personal interpretation of it. Meaning your opinion. Nothing more. David Goyer said after TDK came out regarding whether Joker would have been in another movie, and I quote "If Heath were still around, and there was to be a third movie, I think it would be a no brainer".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qz6_vBAvLIA

I'll take his word over yours.

Also, like BatLobster indicated, jealousy can certainly be used as a great motivation (it is, after all, a very human feeling that can drive one to obsession, something Nolan has a penchant for)

Batlobster used two examples of movies where the characters motivated by jealousy were not villains. Taking The Prestige as an example, since it's a Nolan movie, things didn't turn bad between Angier and Borden until Angier's wife is killed, and Angier blames Borden because he can't remember if he screwed up the knots on the ropes. It was more a tale of vengeance than jealousy. No great villain is motivated primarily by petty jealousy of someone. There's not a hint of jealousy from Bane towards Bruce.

Both him and Talia seem to ooze resentment for Ra's having chosen Bruce as his heir only for him to betray them all. Which I can't really blame them for, it was pretty ****ed up (from their point of view).

There is nothing in TDKR that suggests either Talia or Bane are resentful to Ra's for choosing Bruce. Not a single thing. Talia was resentful against her father for excommunicating Bane. That's why she couldn't forgive him. That's it. Nothing to do with Bruce. Bruce only came into the equation for vengeance for killing her father. As for Bane, he never says a single thing that suggests he is resentful towards Bruce for being picked by Ra's to lead the LOS. Not one thing.

You're entitled to your opinion and all, but I think you're just making things up that the movie doesn't support. Nolan is anything but subtle when it comes to the villain's motives. If any of this jealousy stuff was true, it would have been stated as subtly as a sledgehammer to the kneecaps.

 

[BatLobster]

I think hatred is a probably very common trait among villains. Many of them act out of hate. And a lot of things can funnel into hatred- envy, injustice, vengeance, spurned love, a superiority complex, etc. or some combination thereof.

 

[the_scream]

Absolutely. Jealousy is a pathetic motive to have. Especially compared to the motives of the previous villains in this franchise. Even Eddie Brock had more reasons than that to hate Peter Parker in Spider-Man 3, and he's one of the most pathetic loser villains ever put into a CBM movie.

I'm not saying jealousy was Bane's sole motive. In fact I don't think it was a motive at all. I think he was doing it out of loyalty and love for Talia, just like he did all those years ago risking his life in the pit just to protect her when she was a child.



In Knightfall, Bane didn't know Batman from Adam. He never met him, never even heard of him until Bird told him about him in Pena Duro. Bane in TDKR came to Gotham knowing everything about Bruce from the LOS history with Batman. He didn't figure out Batman's identity like Bane in Knightfall did. He didn't study him. He didn't want to take Gotham from Bruce and own it for himself.

He just wanted to help Talia honor her father by finishing his work. He was handed all the info he knew about Batman on a silver plate in TDKR. He didn't escape the pit like Bane escaped from Pena Duro in the comics, which was the equivalent to the pit, the hell hole of the universe they called it where Bane spent his entire life. He didn't over come any major adversity by himself. In that regard I think he was an inferior version of comic book Bane. He was just some guy sentenced to life in the pit, protected little Talia, got beaten up badly, and was saved, trained, and exiled by Ra's, and then inherited the LOS thanks to his affiliation with Talia. There was nothing impressive about Bane like there was about Bane in Knightfall. He was a sellf made man who over came some major obstacles all by himself and was out to prove himself.

What reason did he give to want fulfill Ra's Al Ghul's destiny? He never gave one. The "I am the League of Shadows" line is blown way out of context. Did anyone expect him to reveal the "twist" that he was doing it for the daughter of Ra's? Of course not. They couldn't have him hinting he was working with someone else that early in the movie. It would spoil the Bane as a child in the pit subterfuge. When Talia is revealed it's all made clear. Bane protected her in the pit as a child when he had no reason to. He just cared about her. So what makes you think he had some new reason for being here now willing to die for her again all these years later? Talia is the one who says they're here to honor her father's work. Name one line where Bane gives any reason he wants to fulfill Ra's Al Ghul's work, because we all know Nolan is anything but subtle when it comes to explaining main villain motivations. Talia got a whole entire monologue scene that basically said this was all her personal quest.

I see what you're saying but don't really agree...at all. The Bane in this film is presented as someone wh is methodical, brutal, loyal, completely committed, arrogant and ultimately self serving. This is shown throughout the film. I don't see him as simply following Talia. All the scenes shown in the film, bar one, shows he is an unstoppable force and self driven. He could have got the LOS to beat Batman but he chooses to confront him one on one with no weapons. A loyal servant doesn't need this fanfare. He's trying to show Bruce he's the better man.

A loyal servant does not stand up and give passionate speeches to cause revolution. He doesn't ignore the wides of their "master" and decide to kill the hero anyway even though his supposed master wanted him alive. He doesn't arrogantly announce in front of the entire LOS that he IS the LOS.

The way I believe Bane is interpreted is one with several motivations. He seems to want to best Batman in battle. He wants to fulfil the destiny of Ras but I interpret it as wanting to show he can do what Ras couldn't--showing he is better than the man who cast him out. At the same time, I also see hm as a man as a protector of Talia because this interpretation of Bane isn't just a two dimensional killing machine like his comic counterpart. He has more to him.

Your depiction of him is simply not what was shown on the film IMHO.

 

[Hawkeye70000000]

If Bane was just following orders from Talia then why did he need to be the one to kill Bruce in the end. Why not just hold him there till the bomb went off? With ten minutes left he could have had an underground bunker that could have survived the blast. I know this is just speculation, but him wanting to kill Bruce personally shows him wanting credit for killing Bruce and yet it would not have had it with him also dieing when the bomb went off. He had already beaten Bruce, killing him before the bomb detonating is pointless.

 

[BatmanBeyond]

I see what you're saying but don't really agree...at all. The Bane in this film is presented as someone wh is methodical, brutal, loyal, completely committed, arrogant and ultimately self serving. This is shown throughout the film. I don't see him as simply following Talia. All the scenes shown in the film, bar one, shows he is an unstoppable force and self driven. He could have got the LOS to beat Batman but he chooses to confront him one on one with no weapons. A loyal servant doesn't need this fanfare. He's trying to show Bruce he's the better man.

A loyal servant does not stand up and give passionate speeches to cause revolution. He doesn't ignore the wides of their "master" and decide to kill the hero anyway even though his supposed master wanted him alive. He doesn't arrogantly announce in front of the entire LOS that he IS the LOS.

The way I believe Bane is interpreted is one with several motivations. He seems to want to best Batman in battle. He wants to fulfil the destiny of Ras but I interpret it as wanting to show he can do what Ras couldn't--showing he is better than the man who cast him out. At the same time, I also see hm as a man as a protector of Talia because this interpretation of Bane isn't just a two dimensional killing machine like his comic counterpart. He has more to him.

Your depiction of him is simply not what was shown on the film IMHO.

 

[The Joker]

I see what you're saying but don't really agree...at all. The Bane in this film is presented as someone wh is methodical, brutal, loyal, completely committed, arrogant and ultimately self serving. This is shown throughout the film. I don't see him as simply following Talia. All the scenes shown in the film, bar one, shows he is an unstoppable force and self driven.

Yes, just like he was brutal, loyal, self driven, and completely committed to Talia in the pit when she was a child protecting her from dozens of vicious murderous inmates. Putting his life on the line just to protect a child when he had no personal incentive to do so other than he loved her. Here he was years later willing to die for her again.

So what makes you think his priorities of servitude, loyalty and willing to die just for Talia because he loved her had changed?

He could have got the LOS to beat Batman but he chooses to confront him one on one with no weapons. A loyal servant doesn't need this fanfare. He's trying to show Bruce he's the better man.

What makes you think it wasn't Talia's idea to do that? To have Bane beat Batman senseless and then toss him in the pit?

"Vengeance against the man who killed my father is simply a reward for my patience"

Talia is the one who infiltrates Wayne Enterprises. Talia is the one who seduces Bruce, sleeps with him, gains his trust. What personal reasons do you ever hear from Bane about him wanting to break Batman other than saying he betrayed the LOS? You don't.

Some of you do be saying well I think Bane was doing it for this or that, but there is nothing in the movie that supports any of these interpretations. No dialogue, and no plot points. What the movie does show is Bane was a brutally driven loyal servant to Talia, willing to die for her, ever since she was a child. What is the big difference to what he was doing for her in the pit to what he was doing years later in Gotham?

A loyal servant does not stand up and give passionate speeches to cause revolution.

He does if he's doing it for someone he is loyal to and loves. You know kind of like willing to die for a child you don't even know in a prison pit. If you're willing to die for someone, then giving a few phony speeches is a drop in the ocean compared to that.

He doesn't ignore the wides of their "master" and decide to kill the hero anyway even though his supposed master wanted him alive.

With ten minutes left to live for all of them, that hardly makes a big difference does it. Especially since Talia would be oblivious to it.

He doesn't arrogantly announce in front of the entire LOS that he IS the LOS.

What you mean when Talia isn't there and can't hear it?

You mean he wasn't going to give away the "twist" that he's working with the daughter of Ra's that early in the movie? I'm shocked!

It's like Ra's hallucination that conveniently reveals Ra's was the mercenary and Bane was his child. It was all subterfuge.

The way I believe Bane is interpreted is one with several motivations. He seems to want to best Batman in battle.

The only reason he got to fight Batman in the first place is because Batman went looking for him in the first place, and used Selina to do it, who betrayed him in order to save herself.

What makes you think Talia wasn't told about this opportunity and instructed Bane to break him and put him in the pit she, Bane and her mother suffered in?

He wants to fulfil the destiny of Ras but I interpret it as wanting to show he can do what Ras couldn't--showing he is better than the man who cast him out.

You can interpret it that way if you like. There's certainly nothing in the movie that supports that. Name one single quote that suggests it.

We all know Nolan is anything but subtle when it comes to the villains motives. So lets hear it.

At the same time, I also see hm as a man as a protector of Talia because this interpretation of Bane isn't just a two dimensional killing machine like his comic counterpart. He has more to him.

Two things:

1. Bane's back story in the comics has more dimension to it than just being some prisoner in a pit whom we don't know why he's in there, why he want's to protect little Talia other than he just cares about her. Have you read Vengeance of Bane?

2. You do know Bane loved Talia in the comics, too, right?

Your depiction of him is simply not what was shown on the film IMHO.

Funny I was just going to say the same thing to you

If Bane was just following orders from Talia then why did he need to be the one to kill Bruce in the end. Why not just hold him there till the bomb went off?

Angry bruised ego for getting his ass kicked in front of Talia by someone he'd already beaten. Talia was gone. He was never going to see her again. They were all going to die in a few minutes. What difference would it make if Batman died a few minutes earlier? Talia would be none the wiser and never would find out either.

 

[batbax]

I love the movie but I am still really really shocked that Nolan went this route w the movie. It worked better on screen than it sounded beforehand but I'll admit; It felt like they had no better ideas left and threw the whole Los/bane/talia thing out there to just end it. I remember back in the speculation days when people would theorize how it was gonna be bane n talia vs. batman/catwoman w the Los in tow it just sounded so awkward and forced. Like I said I love the film for what it is but I have a nagging feeling had Heath ledger lived wed have gotten something much more dynamic and closer to what Nolan probably would've wanted. I just can't get over the similarities to begins at certain parts of rises. They r so in your face that it's almost off putting. Hard to believe really. But I will say its made up for for me in that the things it does well, it does unbelievably well.

 

[JDonaldD]

I think Bane is probably the most underdeveloped villain in the trilogy but there is enough in his dialogue to suggest what Bane's motives are. We know he spent most of his life in a prison somewhere far from America, he views the 8 years of peace as "borrowed time," and the line about "the next era of Western civilization," are telling. He shares the disgust for Western decadence, which is even more prominent in TDKR. Like Ra's, Bane does not think Gotham is redeemable, it doesn't matter what is happening on the surface, it is rotten to the core. Learning of the Dent lie is just further proof of what he already believes. I think it could have been elaborated on but it's implied that a lot of Bane's army is not his mercenary group, it's the poor in Gotham looking for work and then those rallied by his speech. The class warfare is Bane's version of the fear toxin, which suggests it is something he personally identifies with. "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times," could have been elaborated on a bit more.

 

[BatLobster]

I think Bane is probably the most underdeveloped villain in the trilogy but there is enough in his dialogue to suggest what Bane's motives are. We know he spent most of his life in a prison somewhere far from America, he views the 8 years of peace as "borrowed time," and the line about "the next era of Western civilization," are telling. He shares the disgust for Western decadence, which is even more prominent in TDKR. Like Ra's, Bane does not think Gotham is redeemable, it doesn't matter what is happening on the surface, it is rotten to the core. Learning of the Dent lie is just further proof of what he already believes. I think it could have been elaborated on but it's implied that a lot of Bane's army is not his mercenary group, it's the poor in Gotham looking for work and then those rallied by his speech. The class warfare is Bane's version of the fear toxin, which suggests it is something he personally identifies with. "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times," could have been elaborated on a bit more.

I agree. It's all there, it's just not as elaborated on as the other villains' motives were. But that's exactly how I see it.

I don't believe for a single second that Ra's (if he were alive) would react like "Wow, the Dent Act has truly redeemed Gotham, all these years trying to destroy that city and I was wrong about it after all. If only every city in the world would implement harsher penalties for organized crime...balance would be restored and I could finally retire!"

 

[Tacit Ronin]

The main reason of Talia's mission was to fullfill the League's unfinished task. Revenge against Bruce, as she says herself, is merely ancillary to her goals and a personal reward. It is true that the League abandoned all pretenses of logic by that time and let their base hatred of Goham shine through, attacking Gotham even if it didn't deserve it in accordance to their logic. And it is also true that is how a defeated fundamentalist terrorist organization might act out as. But it makes for a poorer movie with poor motivations from the antagonists. Especially compared to the tighter logic of Ras and The Joker. Or perhaps they did have proper justification. Perhaps Gotham was just as corrupt as it was pre-Begins. But Nolan did a poor job emphasizing that in the film. Perhaps he should've afforded us more than verbal hints of a sort of Police state Gotham morphed into. But I don't know if a more totalitarian goverment that pushed crime out so much that going after book thieves ccould be used as a joke among policeman would be what incites the League's wrath. One would think they would cheer the severe limitation of civil rights imposed on criminals. I dunno. It's all so contradictory. All so logically jumbled. All too vague, buried under verbal exposition without actual exploration to give it weight.