Bane vs Loki

[Sachiel]

Shoulda, woulda, coulda made it a different movie.

 

[FQRizzo]

In Tom Hardy's book he mentions all the things that his character had to do. He said Bane is a genius and speaks 6 different languages as well as a very good detective. He spent 5 or 6 months doing detective work to find out Bruce Wayne is Batman. Thought that was pretty cool that he had a very similar back story to the comics with detective work and all.

Yet some orphan named Robin figures it out after meeting Bruce Wayne once. Gotta love TDKR!

 

[crows]

Yet some orphan named Robin figures it out after meeting Bruce Wayne once. Gotta love TDKR!

I didn't even think of that right now lol. I was just imagining Bane doing detective work.

Seriously, I would have loved to see Bane looking for clues and figuring everything out.

 

[TheProcrastinator]

Nope.


Wasn't the comic version a self made man with a moral code and a sense of honor? He even worked with Batman from time to time I believe. TDKR Bane had no honor. He gets whipped in a fight? He crosses a line and despartely puts a shotgun to his opponents head.

The comic version was improsined and escaped by himself. He trained by himself. He strategically defeated Batman by tiring him out, and watching/studying him closely. He even deduced he was. He didn't go up against a rusty, 8 year hermit. TDKR needed a little girl and a League of crazies that despised and excommunicated him. TDKR Bane beat a tired, old has been that didn't have any fight in him that was all self inflicted.

The original interpretation makes the movie version look one-demensional in comparison. The only Bane the TDKR version tops is the Batman and Robin version, which wasn't hard to top.






And TDK Joker kills Bane. He's so much better as an antagonist to Batman it's not even funny. No comparison.

I know the comic book version was also supposed to be a genius, but they didn't really went anywhere interesting with this idea. They keep describing him as an intellectuall, but never really shown him do or say anything extraordinary. The movie interpretation showing a third-world tramp orchestrating and performing a coup on the wealthiest city in the world is much more evocative in my opinion than most of his shennanigans in the comics.

Also, while I can't say I am a strict believer of the "realism trumps comic book flashines", in case of Bane it does. The movie version is much more terryfing exactly couse he is more real. Hardy's Bane bears resemblence to real world neo-natzi skinheads and all the other **** up funataics. The kind of **** who would jump up and down your skull, while at the same time, pontificating some political, worldview bull****. That's exactly one of the reasons movie Bane was so evocative.

You mentioned the honor of comic book Bane. Firstly, I wouldn't call Hardy's Bane dishonourable in any way. His job was to defeat the Batman, so he did what he had to do. When he pointed the gun at his face, Bat was allready beaten, what was he supposed to do? Hand him a medikit and say "lets start again"? The comic book version sided with Bat, becouse he wasn't his main enemy at the time. Also, when did "more honourable" means "better villian"? I couldn't care less about Bane momentarily siding with Bats for whatever reason (it surely wasn't becouse of his good nature), it doesn't make him more interesting.

 

[joshh]

Bane all the way. Loki didn't do much. Most of the combats were taken care of by the Chitauri vs the avengers, instead of Loki vs the avengers

 

[Wor-Gar]

Bane all the way. Formidable, terrifying and intriguing.

Nolan's take on Bane, blows the comic book potrayals out of the water. Bane in TDKR is a terrifying fanatic, the very epitome of a super-villain terrorist and a walking juggernaut. The comic version was simply a big, overmuscled, hairy wannabe-luchador, Hardy's version is a real menace who doesn't need caricatural frame, to be imposing. The guy oozes voilence and fanatical conviction. One look and You know he means buisness. There is an aura of constant physical threat and utter ruthlessness about the guy (which I believe is far more in essence of the character, than just grotesquely huge musculature). Even his somewhat underdeveloped, rough physique attests to that. Hardy looks like a real thick-necked brute, not a clean-cut male model. There is even a promise of danger in the very way he moves, always walking, never running. Like a guy that knows what he is capable of and doesn't need to show off.

Unlike Joker who didn't give a **** about anything and was a chaotic anarchist, Bane has specific, ambitious plans for Gotham and is going to force them with practical, surgical violence and carnage. Bane in TDKR is someone who despite his great intelect, is nonetheless driven by some misguided and pathetic beliefs, that he is trying to force upon the world at gun-point. A mix between a neo-natzi militant and a romantic revolutionary. Hardy also brings a certain subtlety to the role. His eyes show intellect, his over-the-top, out-of-place voice brings a creepy quality to him. You can even see it in the way he handles and kills people. The scene where he murders Dagget is chilling. First he lightly places the side of his hand on Dagget shoulder, then touches him delicately, almost carresing him, finally he slowly grabs him by the face and breaks him.

Comic book movies needed a character like this. Every superhero movie is filled with ridiculous, flashy villans that are either unintentionaly silly, or simply bland. Bane works almost like the classical movie mosters, dominating every frame, while being interesting and terrifying at the same time.

Plus, he looked badass in that coat


But props have to go to Loki as well, as he is probably the most charismatic and fleshed out villian in Marvel films.

This is a very well-written point-of-view. Very well-written. And very much one man's point-of-view.

I have to disagree with the relish you thrust upon Bane's intellect and "plan". The plan was silly -- bogged down by an impossible timetable. How many years would Bane have to be working in the shadows to make that exploding concrete and then pour-and-build? How long could he really hold an entire city hostage? My suspension of disbelief just didn't last that long. To me, Bane was crippled by an overly complex plot that simply did not need to be. The opening plane sequence telegraphed that perfectly -- a blood transfusion in that situation just to fake a death? And ripping a plane apart to kidnap someone? Really? Couldn't just fake a crash deep at sea where they would never find the wreckage or body? Trying to be too clever doesn't make a cartoon character a genius.

I like that Bane is more realistic than Loki... but come on, they are both fantasy movies in different ways.

 

[jye4ever]

This is a very well-written point-of-view. Very well-written. And very much one man's point-of-view.

I have to disagree with the relish you thrust upon Bane's intellect and "plan". The plan was silly -- bogged down by an impossible timetable. How many years would Bane have to be working in the shadows to make that exploding concrete and then pour-and-build? How long could he really hold an entire city hostage? My suspension of disbelief just didn't last that long. To me, Bane was crippled by an overly complex plot that simply did not need to be. The opening plane sequence telegraphed that perfectly -- a blood transfusion is that situation just to fake a death? And ripping a plane apart to kidnap someone? Really? Couldn't just fake a crash deep at sea where they would never find the wreckage or body?

I like that Bane is more realistic than Loki... but come on, they are both fantasy movies in different ways.

 

[TheProcrastinator]

This is a very well-written point-of-view. Very well-written. And very much one man's point-of-view.

I have to disagree with the relish you thrust upon Bane's intellect and "plan". The plan was silly -- bogged down by an impossible timetable. How many years would Bane have to be working in the shadows to make that exploding concrete and then pour-and-build? How long could he really hold an entire city hostage? My suspension of disbelief just didn't last that long. To me, Bane was crippled by an overly complex plot that simply did not need to be. The opening plane sequence telegraphed that perfectly -- a blood transfusion in that situation just to fake a death? And ripping a plane apart to kidnap someone? Really? Couldn't just fake a crash deep at sea where they would never find the wreckage or body? Trying to be too clever doesn't make a cartoon character a genius.

I don't see anything silly about the motives behind the plan. Remember that he was prepeard the die with the city. And from the very beggining was bluffing about giving them hope. He didn't do this for any external goal, like money or power. He was a fantatic with a twisted worldview, who wanted to force his bull**** upon the people. This wasn't one of those Bond villan, "give 100 BILLION dollars, or else I'll blow up half the east-coast" plans. He was ready to go up in flames, along with the city. In this regard his plan wasn't overly elaborate, it was suitably big and epic, to make people notice. Couse that's what he wanted. To torture the population and turn Gotham's crater blast-hole into a message to the world and personal gravestone for him and his ****ed up couse. Not unlike real world crazies.

Also the things You mentioned. Those are all purely practical issues of movie logic, that can be easily debated. The concreate thing? His team worked for months in secrecy, unopposed couse officialy they were performing maintanace deal under Dagget's name, I don't really see anything that would require some incredible suspension-of-disbelief (there are bigger, more ****ed up, cooco things in this film ). As for the plane action. While its true that it looked unnecessarely elaborate, the truth is we - the viewers - have no idea what circumstances that brought the plan about. We have no idea, what happened directly before the flight, or what their final destination was. It's possible that the moments when the plane was in the air, was the only timetable they had to get the information out of Pavel and kidnap him, becouse otherwise he was too well guarded by the CIA. The movie doesn't have to explain this.

I like that Bane is more realistic than Loki... but come on, they are both fantasy movies in different ways.

And I've never, ever argued with that. I just said that in case of Nolan's characterisation of Bane, the more grounded approach certainly worked in that particular character's favour. The number of suspens-of-disbelief required fantasy elements in the whole film, is another matter. I was talking about Bane specifically, not the whole of TDKR.

 

[Wor-Gar]

Those are all purely practical issues of movie logic, that can be easily debated.

Yes, but you can't pick and choose what is "movie logic" and what is poorly developed. And the supporting evidence of Bane's genius is at issue with the compounded complexity of the Rube Goldberg plot.

And for it to work ALL the cops in Gotham need to go into the sewers. That simply would never happen.

I don't think I'm picking on anything that hasn't been mentioned a million times. A good villain has to be supported by a good story too. And the more possible, the more frightening. Thus, Bane's "threat" to me was severely undermined.

The movie doesn't have to explain this.

It does if it doesn't make sense.



And doesn't Batman have an EMP? Why didn't he use that to stop the bomb? It's electronic, isn't it?

 

[TheProcrastinator]

Yes, all of this was brought up, many times before, but a lot of it can (and was) argued about in the movie favour. Like the concrete thing.

The thing is, we can only call the plan uncessarily complex, or Rube Goldberg-ish, if the movie setting shows that other, simpler methods could be easily implemented. That is not the case in TDKR plane scene. We know nothing about the acrobatic stunt in the prologue, nothing about the circumstances that brough it about. Its purpusefully left in mystery and we are thrown right in the middle of the action. In this way, the filmmaker is free to use this as an occasion for some good, old fashioned, epic, movie theatrics.

As for the other things You mentioned. It never was ALL of cops, just most of them. Its still a strech, but not beyond the border of suspension-of-disbelief in what is otherwise an action film.

And the EMP? Do You know the specifications of radioactive material handling? Perhaps if he used the emp, he would have shut down the last remaining failsafes on the bomb and it would all go to **** Its exactly this kind of movie-logic debates that have no sense.

Also all of this are just details of practicality that can be argued about in many ways, details of logic that are found wanting in practically any film ever. The overall theme of Bane's intentions is what is most interesting to me. Whatever he did, it sure was more interesting than Loki relying on MOVIE MAGIC ARTIFACT to do all the job for him.

Cheers!

 

[Wor-Gar]

And the EMP? Do You know the specifications of radioactive material handling?

Nope. But I do understand remotes. And they require electricity.

Anyway, that's the least of it. Not arguing with your POV -- it is yours as mine is mine -- just sayin'...

That said, I have many movie loves that are silly and illogical too, or require a lot of justification.

 

[The Josh]

Loki was just a better character on both movies he appears in. He comes across like a cold and calculating villian that isn't denutted in the end. Bane would have been pretty darn awesome but Nolan cut off his man hood by having him be somebodies lacky at the end.

 

[KneelBeforrSmallville]

Loki had more to him, more of a personality and you knew what was going through his head, we also had another movie for him to build up his character.

But Bain was ment to be very mysterious and evil, both great villians, but you could make a Loki movie, idk how a Bane movie would turn out

 

[karamazov80]

It does if it doesn't make sense.

[ame]https://youtu.be/xwdba9C2G14[/ame]

 

[Uncanny Web-Slinger]

I loved Loki in Thor, he's the best ACU villain so far in that movie.

In Avengers he was no longer conflicted about being the villain like he was on Thor. In that he was jealous of Thor and just wanted the attention of his father. His plan in the end was just to kill Laufley during his assassination of Odin to come out the hero. He died at the end still a guy seeking to be loved equally by his Father.

Then in Avengers he's somehow lived, ended up with thanos and no longer cared about his Father or anything from the Thor movie and has become ridiculously happy and over-confident compared to his characteristics from Thor.

One thing though that's weird is the after credit scene of Thor, in that it showed that not only is he alive but he's a reflection of Eric Selvig, then in the next movie he's in space and in the employ of Thanos. Was he even on Earth before Avengers?

 

[Wor-Gar]

^^^ ah, man, I can't see what that video is. It won't load here at work.

 

[TheProcrastinator]

Loki was just a better character on both movies he appears in. He comes across like a cold and calculating villian that isn't denutted in the end. Bane would have been pretty darn awesome but Nolan cut off his man hood by having him be somebodies lacky at the end.

I think if somebody appeared cold and calculating out of this duo, it was Bane. Loki is supposed to be the God of Mischiev, but in this regard his plans and what he accomplished was in no way bigger or more elaborate than Bane schemes.

Also I don't see how the revelation of Talia's character (though stupid, unnecessary and hurting TDKR as a whole) makes Bane *****-whipped. He just worked with her that's all. He was an acomplished mercenary and a guy who drew CIA attention by performing coup's in the third world, long before the events of Rises. They shared beliefes, but the plan and execution was still as much his own.

 

[karamazov80]

^^^ ah, man, I can't see what that video is. It won't load here at work.

Chewbacca defense! It doesn't make sense. Therefore, Bane wins.

 

[Wor-Gar]

Chewbacca defense! It doesn't make sense. Therefore, Bane wins.

what's the Chewbacca defense?

 

[youbastards]

The Johnny Cochrane defense from South Park.

Yes, there's a Wiki article on it!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chewbacca_defense