THE DARK KNIGHT RISES Post-release thread..... - Page 33

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcnooj82 

This is undeniable proof that McClane was in fact...
Goyer!!!!!

"All this time," whispers Nooj. "All this time... The Goy..."

"The Goy..." McClane cautiously responds. "And the er."

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Syd 

Batman doesn't kill...unless you're driving the bad guy's truck, in which case he will shoot his batguns at you through the windshield and blatantly murder you. 

That's pretty much this series of films in a nutshell, they keep putting Batman in uncomfortable situations where his code and methods, while largely noble, are challenged and shown to be impractical/ineffective and, because he's a vaguely relatable human being compared to the ridiculous god & monster beating figure of the comic books, shit happens. You've been shot and there's a kid that's about to get a hole in the head in 2 seconds if you don't do something about it, there's an atom bomb going off in 5 minutes and killing 12 million people unless you can stop that truck right now.

It's still a world away from the outright psychotic murderer of the Burton films, who was just an out and out arsehole (that poor strongman dude, NEVER FORGET).

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcnooj82 

This is undeniable proof that McClane was in fact...
Goyer!!!!!

The Goyer...or the Nolan...

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcnooj82 

 

... but of COURSE emotions can be seen in the nose and forehead. 

 

Not solely. You can't look at a nose and tell me what emotion a person has. But your can probably look into the eyes and possibly the mouth and see what they're feeling.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Parker 

 

The Goyer...or the Nolan...

That's way more clever than what I came up with.

You know, I skimmed that Batman 3 thread and some of the comments that were treated more or less with derision (not that that's anything less than par for the course here on CHUD) were actually quite on point.  Like the fact that Nolan made a less chaste Batman movie.  I mean, Wayne has sex with Tate and Catwoman is... well...

Yeah, but not at the same time.  So, chaste.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carnotaur3 

Not solely. You can't look at a nose and tell me what emotion a person has. But your can probably look into the eyes and possibly the mouth and see what they're feeling.

OH YEAH!?!?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bucho 

 

 

OH YEAH!?!?

 

Cue Erection Jokes Now

mcclane_98 steps to the forum...

And hey... that's not fair, Spook.  I'd actually acknowledged that my writing sucked.  :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcclane_98 

 

mcclane_98 steps to the forum...

 

And hey... that's not fair, Spook.  I'd actually acknowledged that my writing sucked.  :)

You have brought joy into the world McClane.

There is no greater deed than any man can do.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcclane_98 

 

mcclane_98 steps to the forum...

 

And hey... that's not fair, Spook.  I'd actually acknowledged that my writing sucked.  :)

Hey, your writing was good enough that Nolan and Goyer pretty much revealed Robin the same way you did!

Also, Myers87 was great!  I meant that as a compliment!  He was probably in on the joke after post #2.

It's tough to bare your creative impulses around these parts.

Holy shit McClane is still around!!! I want to shake your hand sir.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freeman 

Holy shit McClane is still around!!!

WHY WASN'T I TOLD ABOUT THIS?  WHO'S IN CHARGE?

The defenses of the "Bane is really just Talia's very own guided missile and nothing more" turnaround here are...really, really slack. It's completely irrelevant that other movies have used the same measures before. It's entirely relevant that it works really poorly here. If Talia's plan had anything to do with all of the shit Bane spouts unintelligibly throughout 95% of the film, I don't know if I would care that much, but the entire movie veers way off the tracks as soon as Talia reveals her dastardly scheme to...nuke Gotham and kill everyone in it. Ignoring the fact that it's just a bigger, grander version of Daddy's plan from Batman Begins, it's completely antithetical to Bane's "common man" posturing. So the film flat-out fucking lies to us, which is very different from putting the truth in plain sight. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by agracru 

The defenses of the "Bane is really just Talia's very own guided missile and nothing more" turnaround here are...really, really slack. It's completely irrelevant that other movies have used the same measures before. It's entirely relevant that it works really poorly here. If Talia's plan had anything to do with all of the shit Bane spouts unintelligibly throughout 95% of the film, I don't know if I would care that much, but the entire movie veers way off the tracks as soon as Talia reveals her dastardly scheme to...nuke Gotham and kill everyone in it. Ignoring the fact that it's just a bigger, grander version of Daddy's plan from Batman Begins, it's completely antithetical to Bane's "common man" posturing. So the film flat-out fucking lies to us, which is very different from putting the truth in plain sight. 

Nooooooooooooononononono.

Bane's plan is to bring Gotham to anarchy before it's finally put out of its misery because that's how you get revenge on BatBruce, who loves the city so much. "Torture not just the body, but the soul", or words to that effect. It's the slow death that hurts the most. It's not that the film lies to us, it's that Bane lies to Gotham. We're in on his bullshit all along.

At least we are if we're paying attention to Bane's PERFECTLY ENUNCIATED DIALOGUE.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spook 

It's tough to bare your creative impulses around these parts.

Yeah, I have to admit the drumming I took on that did a job on me for a little bit.  But hey, criticism is valuable.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr Harford 

This would work for me except we never really get a sense of what the city is going through. For the most part it's empty streets and improbable court scenes. There is no sense that it's a city of 12 million people caged like rats with no cops on the streets. The entire third act is a left field Escape From New York-lit riff without the sense of decay and chaos Carpenter brought on a fraction of the budget. I kept waiting for my disbelief to suspend itself and it never happened, partly because there was no feeling that the population of Gotham existed to be trapped at all.

That is how I feel, anyway. As it is, Bane is diminished by the reveal, and the entire villain side of the film ends up being unsatisfying and unfocused. I was stunned sitting there in the theater when they killed Bane for a gag and a one liner. Talk about going out with a wimper to the detriment of the film.

I've already argued a bunch in this thread that Bane's end was mishandled and undermined the drama of his arc, I'm just saying that my buddy Agracru claiming the film "flat-out fucking lies to us" just don't fly with me.

The reason it's underwhelming has nothing to do with any inconsistencies, real or imagined, in the villainous plan, nor does it have anything to do with the fact he's merely the Great General Of The Army Of Evil and not President Nastipants. It has everything to do with the fact we never see him again after he's blown off screen.

I LOVED Bane's plan until the Talia reveal.  My understanding was he was getting the most horrifying painful revenge imaginable on Bruce for betraying the League of Shadows, right?  Whilst at the same time completing Liam Neesons original plan and doing his job as a member of the League. The simple mathematical cruelty was perfect for me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcnooj82 

This is undeniable proof that McClane was in fact...
Goyer!!!!!

Please. Everyone knows that the real David Goyer was strangled to death by Wesley Snipes YEARS ago.

I didn't mind Bane's demise being less than spectacular. I was more focussed on whether the bomb was going to go off or not. The film had gone so big in scale (cutting off the city for 90 days etc) that I wasn't entirely sure how it was going to end.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr Harford 


This would work for me except we never really get a sense of what the city is going through. For the most part it's empty streets and improbable court scenes. There is no sense that it's a city of 12 million people caged like rats with no cops on the streets. The entire third act is a left field Escape From New York-lit riff without the sense of decay and chaos Carpenter brought on a fraction of the budget. I kept waiting for my disbelief to suspend itself and it never happened, partly because there was no feeling that the population of Gotham existed to be trapped at all.
That is how I feel, anyway. As it is, Bane is diminished by the reveal, and the entire villain side of the film ends up being unsatisfying and unfocused. I was stunned sitting there in the theater when they killed Bane for a gag and a one liner. Talk about going out with a wimper to the detriment of the film.

And yet, what you've described is, in my view, ample evidence to show the impact on Gotham: the simple fact that Bane's rule has driven everyone indoors in fear - the Modine character coupled with the empty streets - the remaining cops having to congregate like la Resistance, the board of Wayne enterprises holed up in hiding alongside a bunch of other Gothamites, and the idea that "champions"/ne'er do wells have established de facto jurisdictions over turf (viz. Selina's dialogue when rescuing the kid with the apple). Whether or not those cues add up to enough to convince the individual viewer that there are consequences for the population of Gotham is clearly debatable - but then I've met people who don't think Michael's turn in The Godfather is sufficiently clearly established.

Speaking as a relatively intelligent viewer paying appropriate attention I thought the environment of Gotham under Bane was pretty well substantiated. In a way, empathy with how I'd feel and what my reactions would be, if a nutter like Bane caused that level of carnage and isolated me from the world, was enough to fill in for any "Michael Bay" like montage shots of popular response. But, like I say, clearly mileage varies on that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bucho 

 

 

Nooooooooooooononononono.

 

Bane's plan is to bring Gotham to anarchy before it's finally put out of its misery because that's how you get revenge on BatBruce, who loves the city so much. "Torture not just the body, but the soul", or words to that effect. It's the slow death that hurts the most. It's not that the film lies to us, it's that Bane lies to Gotham. We're in on his bullshit all along.

 

At least we are if we're paying attention to Bane's PERFECTLY ENUNCIATED DIALOGUE.

Yeah, I "get" how his plan fits into Talia's grand scheme, but it's still a lie. We're not in on anything until Talia reveals herself for who she is. So the film spends all of its time just duping us so that Talia can come along and put a nuclear-powered cherry on Bane's anarchic shitstorm sundae. There's nothing about his plans that suggests Talia's involvement-- when he talks about torturing the soul as well as the body (I think you've got it right, dude), there's not a hint that he's referring off-handedly to anything else. He's doing exactly what he says-- crippling Gotham while crippling Bruce. 

While you're right-- he is lying to Gotham-- he's also lying to us, and while I don't mind being deceived, I mind being baldly lied to. There's no cleverness or finesse to what Nolan does there; he can't think of another way of pulling the wool over our eyes, so he just fibs. And Bane's lie to the city really makes no sense in the long run. He has no reason to lie. He has all the power. And I frankly think orchestrating the sort of terror he does so, so well and then blanking it with a nuke just seems perfunctory. (Though I begrudgingly admit that it's in-character. I mean, Bane does what he does to people or peoples, and then kills them unceremoniously. Him making an example of Gotham and then turning it into Hiroshima seems like his "thing". I just wish that it was his "thing" and not Talia's, and yes, most of my problems with the way the climax plays have to do with Talia's involvement. It's just not necessary.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by agracru 

 

Yeah, I "get" how his plan fits into Talia's grand scheme, but it's still a lie. We're not in on anything until Talia reveals herself for who she is. So the film spends all of its time just duping us so that Talia can come along and put a nuclear-powered cherry on Bane's anarchic shitstorm sundae. There's nothing about his plans that suggests Talia's involvement-- when he talks about torturing the soul as well as the body (I think you've got it right, dude), there's not a hint that he's referring off-handedly to anything else. He's doing exactly what he says-- crippling Gotham while crippling Bruce. 

 

While you're right-- he is lying to Gotham-- he's also lying to us, and while I don't mind being deceived, I mind being baldly lied to. There's no cleverness or finesse to what Nolan does there; he can't think of another way of pulling the wool over our eyes, so he just fibs. And Bane's lie to the city really makes no sense in the long run. He has no reason to lie. He has all the power. And I frankly think orchestrating the sort of terror he does so, so well and then blanking it with a nuke just seems perfunctory. (Though I begrudgingly admit that it's in-character. I mean, Bane does what he does to people or peoples, and then kills them unceremoniously. Him making an example of Gotham and then turning it into Hiroshima seems like his "thing". I just wish that it was his "thing" and not Talia's, and yes, most of my problems with the way the climax plays have to do with Talia's involvement. It's just not necessary.)

I'm pretty sure it was established earlier than the Talia reveal that he planned on detonating the bomb. Not sure how much that affects your point, but the moment where Tate becomes Talia seemed more about a character revalation than suddenly deciding to detonate the bomb. It was going to go boom from the moment they weaponised it and removed the core. In fact doesn't Bane say to Pavel when told it will decay and explode in five months, "For your childrens' sake, doctor, I hope it does."

The turn immediately following Batman taking Bane down was the fact that Gordon had neutralised the remote device. So she needed to detonate it herself (or at least avoid it being put back into the reactor) in order to wipe out Gotham. I took it at that point as the last throw of the dice facing imminent failure of their attack on hope in Gotham and Batman.

Apologies if I've missed your point.

I think it's worth saying again that TDKR is, in many ways, more a direct sequel to BEGINS than TDK or to TDK. We have a lot of throughlines here, and I honestly don't think a viewer is going to catch everything without a good working knowledge of BEGINS.

With regards to Talia and the reveal, TDKR - as a sequel to and building on BEGINS - doesn't cheat. Talia is the literal embodiment of what Ra's says to Bruce when Wayne Manor is burning down around him in BEGINS; the unexpected person stepping up behind him and stabbing him in the heart. She also, through key wording, reveals herself to the audience in her first exchange with Bruce - she uses the words "restoring the balance" which is a key phrase of the League and Ra's. And it's established that the League does not reveal it's true leader most of the time, but works through proxies and deception. Bane appearing to be the leader is SOP for the League.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelM 

I think it's worth saying again that TDKR is, in many ways, more a direct sequel to BEGINS than TDK or to TDK. We have a lot of throughlines here, and I honestly don't think a viewer is going to catch everything without a good working knowledge of BEGINS.

 

With regards to Talia and the reveal, TDKR - as a sequel to and building on BEGINS - doesn't cheat. Talia is the literal embodiment of what Ra's says to Bruce when Wayne Manor is burning down around him in BEGINS; the unexpected person stepping up behind him and stabbing him in the heart. She also, through key wording, reveals herself to the audience in her first exchange with Bruce - she uses the words "restoring the balance" which is a key phrase of the League and Ra's. And it's established that the League does not reveal it's true leader most of the time, but works through proxies and deception. Bane appearing to be the leader is SOP for the League.

Those are clues, though, not an actual reveal.  It's still supposed to be surprise when she's unveiled in the third act. 

I would need another viewing to decide if the movie actually lies to us, but my initial misgivings were all about how the reveal happens in the climax, rather than to set up the climax, and Bane is swept away and then she's the bad guy and now she's gone before we have time to reorient ourselves.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhp1608 

 

I'm pretty sure it was established earlier than the Talia reveal that he planned on detonating the bomb. Not sure how much that affects your point, but the moment where Tate becomes Talia seemed more about a character revalation than suddenly deciding to detonate the bomb. It was going to go boom from the moment they weaponised it and removed the core. In fact doesn't Bane say to Pavel when told it will decay and explode in five months, "For your childrens' sake, doctor, I hope it does."

 

The turn immediately following Batman taking Bane down was the fact that Gordon had neutralised the remote device. So she needed to detonate it herself (or at least avoid it being put back into the reactor) in order to wipe out Gotham. I took it at that point as the last throw of the dice facing imminent failure of their attack on hope in Gotham and Batman.

 

Apologies if I've missed your point.

My point is more that Bane gets shortchanged as a villain when Talia reveals that she's the mind behind the entire plot, and he's just the blunt force instrument she's employed to do her bidding. It's not an uncommon device, but it serves this particular story pretty badly just because Bane works as a compelling villain all on his own. His entire arc is a lie, whether he meant to detonate the bomb. You're right that he did mean to do so, but that's another problem entirely since nuking Gotham doesn't really fit into the ideological drive he espouses throughout the entire film. My real issue is Talia. Apart from how her appearance undermines Bane somewhat, she's just a cardboard stand-in for Ra's, which is pretty uninteresting and doesn't serve the dramatics of the third act particularly well; we don't know anything beyond apart from the fact that she's revenge-obsessed. She's flat, and herself under-served by the film (and in turn, her involvement in the climax under-serves the film itself).

And yes, the film cheats. One throwaway line in TDKR coupled with sentiments expressed in Begins do not work as replacements for character development and motivation. I'm well aware of how the League operates, but knowledge of their SOP actually compounds my problems with her reveal because Miranda Tate's entire relationship with Bruce feels perfunctory. Maybe if that had been better fleshed out, seeing her step out of the shadows (figuratively I mean) to shiv Bruce would have been more effective, but Tate just serves as a standard, nebulous love interest before being revealed as the real power behind the throne, so to speak. Tate feels hollow, and Talia feels just as hollow-- she's defined by nothing more than what Ra's represented in the first film.

On second thought, I could accept that that's not a cheat, but it's really, really undercooked, which is just as bad but in totally different ways.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schwartz 

 

Those are clues, though, not an actual reveal.  It's still supposed to be surprise when she's unveiled in the third act. 

 

I would need another viewing to decide if the movie actually lies to us, but my initial misgivings were all about how the reveal happens in the climax, rather than to set up the climax, and Bane is swept away and then she's the bad guy and now she's gone before we have time to reorient ourselves.

Yeah, this says it better than I did.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcclane_98 

 

Yeah, I have to admit the drumming I took on that did a job on me for a little bit.  But hey, criticism is valuable.  

But you handled it with grace and class. And never be afraid to create. Or to take shit for it. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by agracru 

 

My point is more that Bane gets shortchanged as a villain when Talia reveals that she's the mind behind the entire plot, and he's just the blunt force instrument she's employed to do her bidding. It's not an uncommon device, but it serves this particular story pretty badly just because Bane works as a compelling villain all on his own. His entire arc is a lie, whether he meant to detonate the bomb. You're right that he did mean to do so, but that's another problem entirely since nuking Gotham doesn't really fit into the ideological drive he espouses throughout the entire film. My real issue is Talia. Apart from how her appearance undermines Bane somewhat, she's just a cardboard stand-in for Ra's, which is pretty uninteresting and doesn't serve the dramatics of the third act particularly well; we don't know anything beyond apart from the fact that she's revenge-obsessed. She's flat, and herself under-served by the film (and in turn, her involvement in the climax under-serves the film itself).

 

And yes, the film cheats. One throwaway line in TDKR coupled with sentiments expressed in Begins do not work as replacements for character development and motivation. I'm well aware of how the League operates, but knowledge of their SOP actually compounds my problems with her reveal because Miranda Tate's entire relationship with Bruce feels perfunctory. Maybe if that had been better fleshed out, seeing her step out of the shadows (figuratively I mean) to shiv Bruce would have been more effective, but Tate just serves as a standard, nebulous love interest before being revealed as the real power behind the throne, so to speak. Tate feels hollow, and Talia feels just as hollow-- she's defined by nothing more than what Ra's represented in the first film.

 

On second thought, I could accept that that's not a cheat, but it's really, really undercooked, which is just as bad but in totally different ways.

 

 

 

Yeah, this says it better than I did.

It doesn't work with character development but it does work with motivation, since all the League has to offer. Let's say Bruce Wayne did lead the League's men in Batman Begins, under Ra's wing. Does that make him a mere lackey?

Bane doesn't lie when he tells Bruce he's there to fulfill Ra's Al Ghul's destiny. He is. And without him, Gotham wouldn't be in the shit-hole it is. He's commanding the forces while Talia controls the deception. And the way Bane goes about making the plan succeed is pretty thrilling, scary, and genius, even if Talia was probably the one to come up with the plan. There's a hierarchy in the League. To say Bane is just a stooge is not seeing the forest for the trees here.

He's there to fulfill Ra's destiny, sure, but not because he's the believer. Talia's the believer; she's the person who really represents the League. Almost everything about Bane's involvement with the League and his personal legend turns out to just be rumor and hearsay; he's the guy fighting for Talia and not the child who climbs out of the pit, after all. While I completely agree that his approach to carrying out Talia's plan is incredibly gripping and frightening, my impression walking away from the film is that Bane is just Talia's loyal attack dog, echoing sentiments she's expressed to him rather than come up with them himself. He's a shell. She's speaking through him. Like the fake Ra's in Begins, he's something of a decoy, and while that fits just fine into the League's established methods, it's not as dramatically satisfying here as in the first film.

And if the motivations are more clear, it's the lack of development that's really problematic for me. I understood the why but I didn't really give a shit regardless.

Quote:

Originally Posted by agracru 

He's there to fulfill Ra's destiny, sure, but not because he's the believer.

What tells you he isn't a believer? Anyone willing to die in their own nuclear blast must really believe in the cause. I don't think it's just because of the girl.

Bane is a believer, he drank the Kool-Aid, he received the training, the whole package; the only reason he was eventually excommunicated is because he was in love with Talia and Ra's was having none of that. Like Bruce used LoS tactics for his own personal crusade, Bane was using his for merc jobs independent of the League. From what I can gather, Talia reconnected with Bane after her father was killed (arriving in Gotham maybe 3-4 years after Begins). Bane is his own man, but he's also lovesick and devoted. If he has any resentment towards Ra's, it's certainly not ideological.

And I'm one who didn't suddenly think of Bane as this film's Oddjob all of a sudden - I thought the relationship between him and Talia, and his eventual fate, was tragic, in the classical sense.  As for the Talia switcheroo, it was no worse than other last minute character switches I've seen, worked well enough to elicit a shocked gasp, and served to deepen both Bane and the interactions between Bruce and Talia earlier.

But I feel like I'm now getting into a "I liked it more than you" discussion, which is ultimately reductive.

Tate and Bane's timelines are so weird in this movie.  How long was Miranda Tate working with Wayne corporation on the reactor thingee?  Years?  Months?  Long enough that Wayne is aware of her and someone in Wayne Enterprises does some kind of background check on her, right?  That's some deep cover shit.  Kudos to her.

And there's no established age for Bane, right?  At the end of the movie when the twist with them is revealed I'm guessing Talia is under 10 and Bane is some unknown age, but seems adult age.  So is Bane a pedophile on top of all his other villainy?  

The Bane thing I don't really care about.  The Tate thing is so rushed and sloppily handled that her betrayal of Wayne carries no weight in addition to rendering Bane an afterthought.

Bane is probably in between 17 and 21 in the flashbacks. Some of it is left vague, but the impression is that Bane became attached to Talia because he was (from his own mouth) born and raised in the prison as well (or at least imprisoned at a very young age). By the time Bane was released by Ra's (per Talia's insistence), she had likely matured into a young woman and that big brother / little sister dynamic changed into something else (for Bane anyway). 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rando 

The Tate thing is so rushed and sloppily handled that her betrayal of Wayne carries no weight in addition to rendering Bane an afterthought.

This is in many ways a YMMV thing, but I don't agree it carried no weight. TDKR is Bruce's story; part of that story is Bruce looking for a way out, looking for hope, looking for something to pin love and life on. He's practically pushed onto Tate by Fox and Alfred. He finally opens up to her, and even gives her access to something he's feared made into a horribly destructive weapon. And she literally stabs him from behind. 

For me, Bale completely sells the pain of the betrayal. Someone he had counted on as a close, trusted ally - someone he had hoped would help him protect Gotham - knifes him in an attempt to destroy the city he wants to protect and nurture.

Worked for me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JacknifeJohnny 

Bane is a believer, he drank the Kool-Aid, he received the training, the whole package; the only reason he was eventually excommunicated is because he was in love with Talia and Ra's was having none of that. Like Bruce used LoS tactics for his own personal crusade, Bane was using his for merc jobs independent of the League. From what I can gather, Talia reconnected with Bane after her father was killed (arriving in Gotham maybe 3-4 years after Begins). Bane is his own man, but he's also lovesick and devoted. If he has any resentment towards Ra's, it's certainly not ideological.

Fair enough on the training and such, but you and Carnotaur are missing my point, I think largely because I'm not being super articulate or clear. He's involved in this plot because of Talia, not because of his beliefs-- otherwise she wouldn't pop up at all (and I am going on the assumption that this is really her master plan). Yeah, he's a believer, but as has been said, he's using his League background to do merc stuff instead of furthering League goals. My sense is that it's Talia's sense of belief that's driving the entire plan; Bane carries out her wishes not strictly because of his belief but because of his loyalty to her. If that makes more sense.

I also really didn't get the impression that Bane was in love with Talia. Then again, I also had a hard time picking out dialogue throughout the entire film-- the soundtrack kept drowning parts of it out at inopportune times, and I don't know if that's just my experience or if anyone else had the same-- so I'm willing to admit I may have missed that. I can't argue that he's not devoted.

But I can argue that none of this mitigates the effect Talia's reveal has on Bane as a figure. If he shares her sentiments, if he's her partner and not her thug, if he's her equal, then the way that her reveal is handled doesn't honor their bond and their equality. Like I said, it's hurried and perfunctory. I wanted more of Talia and Bane and more of their connection. It's just air-dropped into the third act, which isn't really what happens in Begins, which is why I say that Begins' little twist is more dramatically satisfying. I'm not saying it ruins the movie or anything, but it does hold it back. I wanted to understand Tate/Talia better; I understood Bane well enough, just not in relation to her.

I never read anything in terms of their relationship being other than one of big brother/little sister - for years, he protected her from the rest of the inmates (ultimately paying a high price for doing so), after she escapes she later comes back with her father and rescues him. Talia says he was kicked out of the League because he loved her but that doesn't necessarily mean he wants to bang her. Some have suggested elsewhere that Ra's true issue with Bane was that he was a constant reminder of his failure to save his wife and child from the Pit, which is an interesting take on it (and certainly fits Ra's character) but I'm not sure if there's really evidence enough to support it outside of the implication that Bane had been more of a father to her than he had.

This is exposition from the film. Talia says it in the flashback.

I don't know about that.  At the same time that Tate was investing in the energy project, Bane was doing "merc stuff" for Daggett, gaining his trust by militarily securing a mine for him in some far-off country (which trust he later uses to gain access to Daggett's construction company and place explosives all over Gotham).  The movie leaves open the possibility that Talia/Bane's plan to destroy Gotham - the League's goal - has been in the works for several years and that they were both approaching it from different ends the entire time, with Bane taking the more public approach while Talia used subterfuge.

Quote:

Originally Posted by agracru 

 

But I can argue that none of this mitigates the effect Talia's reveal has on Bane as a figure. If he shares her sentiments, if he's her partner and not her thug, if he's her equal, then the way that her reveal is handled doesn't honor their bond and their equality.

But what about her gently fixing the tubes of his mask? The tear rolling down his cheek as she recalls her past and the connection they share? That doesn't come across as "Oh, he's just my thug." She obviously cares for him. And she just stabbed Batman in the side, she could have killed him right then. Bane wasn't necessary at that point.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rfahey 

 

I don't know about that.  At the same time that Tate was investing in the energy project, Bane was doing "merc stuff" for Daggett, gaining his trust by militarily securing a mine for him in some far-off country (which trust he later uses to gain access to Daggett's construction company and place explosives all over Gotham).  The movie leaves open the possibility that Talia/Bane's plan to destroy Gotham - the League's goal - has been in the works for several years and that they were both approaching it from different ends the entire time, with Bane taking the more public approach while Talia used subterfuge.

The sense that I got from the film is that the whole thing was sparked by Talia, who found and called upon Bane to serve in her scheme. There's certainly a strong sense as well that their plan has been in place for a long, long time, but I'm speaking more to who kicked the whole thing off. Bane might be a believer, he might be an integral part of his and Talia's plot, but I definitely walked out of the theater with the feeling that Talia's the primary architect here.

But all of this conjecture really just drives home my problems with Talia and Bane's link being so undercooked.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carnotaur3 

But what about her gently fixing the tubes of his mask? The tear rolling down his cheek as she recalls her past and the connection they share? That doesn't come across as "Oh, he's just my thug." She obviously cares for him. And she just stabbed Batman in the side, she could have killed him right then. Bane wasn't necessary at that point.

What about it? What does it tell us about why he chose to protect her and help her escape the pit? What does it tell us about their bond beyond some superficial recognition that they have some nebulously defined, hurriedly introduced emotional connection? Why doesn't that bond ever matter outside of Talia's speech to Bruce? I'm not asking for a big, huge, melodramatic "moment" between the two, but if the point is that she really cares for Bane, I feel like that should have some impact on the events that follow her reveal.

Also, if she truly cares about her protector, then that last sentence doesn't make any sense to me; if they're really loyal to each other, Bane's necessity should be irrelevant. I'm thinking that I'm just not receiving your meaning there, and I apologize for that. I'm quite exhausted.

Quote:

Originally Posted by agracru 

You're right that he did mean to do so, but that's another problem entirely since nuking Gotham doesn't really fit into the ideological drive he espouses throughout the entire film.

You keep saying this and disregarding the fact, as others have pointed out, that his ideology was simply a ruse to keep Gotham chaotic for the sole purpose of distraction from their true intentions while torturing Bruce.

Quote:

Originally Posted by agracru 

He's there to fulfill Ra's destiny, sure, but not because he's the believer. Talia's the believer; she's the person who really represents the League.

Did you miss the part where they stated he was a believer and that Ra's wouldn't allow him anyway? Is it too hard to imagine that while Talia's personal revenge was the driving force that their personal relationship and similar belief structure couldn't have created a mutual plan?

I'll go on the record stating that the Talia reveal wasn't staged with much grace but I also believe many peoples' opinions were voided (mine included) when so many of us were going in and already knew, warping our impression of Miranda from the outset.

I think part of the problem is that it's not as engaging to root against a villain who spends the whole movie espousing an ideology he doesn't actually care about.

Yeah, Talia's the main architect, that's pretty clear, but their cause is the same. Bane is essentially serving the same function that Bruce would have served had he decided to go full LoS - Ra's second-in-command / replacement in the event of Ra's death. Remember, the ulterior motive Ra's had for inviting Bruce to the LoS was that he would have served a similar function as Talia does in TDKR - tearing Gotham down from the inside. In this film, the command hierarchy is essentially the same, but Talia has placed herself as the "double agent" since she was born off the grid and doesn't look like the Lord Humongous.

- in response to agracu.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schwartz 

I think part of the problem is that it's not as engaging to root against a villain who spends the whole movie espousing an ideology he doesn't actually care about.

I'm surprised by this - especially given said villain had just flat out murdered people, broken the back of the movie's hero and menaced the heck out of his screen time. The manipulative, OTT demagoguery just made him seem even more diabolical.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schwartz 

I think part of the problem is that it's not as engaging to root against a villain who spends the whole movie espousing an ideology he doesn't actually care about.

I was less concerned with his ideology and more with the notion that he was about to murder 12 million people which, incidentally, isn't an action that makes it hard to root against a villain. But maybe that's just me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shaun H 

 

You keep saying this and disregarding the fact, as others have pointed out, that his ideology was simply a ruse to keep Gotham chaotic for the sole purpose of distraction from their true intentions while torturing Bruce.

But, as Schwartz points out, that doesn't make for a particularly compelling villain, and besides that he really gains nothing from deceiving the Gotham citizenry. His best weapons aren't deception; it's his brute force techniques that bring the city to its knees more than his false sentiments. He could have kept Gotham chaotic without mentioning a single word about the common man's plight, so for me those ideological proclamations feel like put-ons for the sake of being put-ons.

The "well, he was a mass murderer" defenses don't work for me. If that's all that's needed to make a villain compelling, then I could easily argue that the giant yellow cloud of bullshit in The Green Lantern is an absolutely amazing villain just by virtue of its mass-murdering capabilities. Actions alone don't make a great villain. Character does, and the result of the twists and turns here is that Bane's is kind of fuzzy.

Which is too bad because he's excellent as a heavy until it becomes clear he's not buying the bullshit he's selling.

Right, he's a believer, but if Talia is the progenitor of the entire plan-- and I really don't see the movie doing much to suggest that concocting the plan was a team effort-- then it's her belief that's driving it forward. When and where Bane came into it isn't well-explained (though I am, again, willing to admit I missed it while straining to pick out words during those integral parts of the film), but I don't feel like he's involved because of beliefs but because of Talia. I don't know if that makes more sense.

I agree with you on the second bit. It's a poorly staged reveal, but you probably have something with the notion that foreknowledge of Tate's true nature may have done a number on our perception of the character right out the gate. I don't think that the absence of that knowledge would have changed my stance entirely, but I can't in good conscience argue that I didn't find that awareness to be kind of burdensome. But I can really only blame myself for that for clicking on news items containing that nugget of info.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JacknifeJohnny 

Yeah, Talia's the main architect, that's pretty clear, but their cause is the same. Bane is essentially serving the same function that Bruce would have served had he decided to go full LoS - Ra's second-in-command / replacement in the event of Ra's death. Remember, the ulterior motive Ra's had for inviting Bruce to the LoS was that he would have served a similar function as Talia does in TDKR - tearing Gotham down from the inside. In this film, the command hierarchy is essentially the same, but Talia has placed herself as the "double agent" since she was born off the grid and doesn't look like the Lord Humongous.

 

- in response to agracu.

Glad I'm not the only one who thinks so, and I agree that their cause is the same. I just don't really see Bane as a believer in the same way Talia is a believer by virtue of her position as the main architect. And I'm definitely not arguing against the parallels between Ra's' intentions for Bruce in Batman Begins and Talia's role in The Dark Knight Rises; it's very clear that Talia's plot unfolds exactly as Ra's would have wanted it to had Bruce joined him in Begins.

Like I said, I wanted more character development for Bane and for Talia. It's a simple way of boiling down my problems with the movie, but it's the most honest, straightforward way to say it. I wanted more of them, flat-out.