Was Bane from the Dark Knight Rises a good villain?
Yes
56.2% (50)
56.2% (50)
No
43.8% (39)
43.8% (39)
Want to vote? Register now or Sign Up with Facebook
Poll: Bane: Good villain or bad villain?

Ah, Bane. How do I even begin to describe Bane? On the one hand, he had an iconic appearance, unforgettable speech pattern, and a number of instant meme one-liners. On the other hand, his motives were unclear, he didn't really have much of a personality, and he was ultimately sidelined by a character who somehow had even LESS personality. So, was he good or bad as a villain? I'll leave that to you to decide. As always, please justify your answer.

For me a good villain is intimidating and/or despicable. For me, Bane wasn't that. I thought he was just a bad Darth Vader rip-off; robotic voice, cool mask, messes up necks. I found his voice annoying, and he only spouted dull exposition. I... did not like him as a villain at all. He gets defeated just by being punched in the face, and then gets thrown aside by Catwoman. Meh.

As a standalone villain separate from the comics he is a good villain.
If not then I would say they portrayed him terribly, they removed core aspects of his back story and characteristics in that movie. I was extremely miffed when he was given a funny speech pattern, no venom, and that

But these gripes only exist if he is compared to the comic book version. If not then he is, as a whole, a good character and a great villain.

Well, he spoke well. Um...that's about it.

I didn't particularly like TDKR. All three movies were a bit long and pretentious, but TDKR too it way too far.

A lot of the movie could have been trimmed, and that was particularly annoying because there wasn't enough Catwoman. Finally, Batman gets to interact with another costumed person that's sorta kinda on his side...which, IMHO, is the best thing about Batman. On his own he's not great, but with a masked partner or sidekick or ally (police aren't quite the same), he can work. And Catwoman doesn't really do much, giving the movie is close to 3 hours long.

Anyhoo, IMHO, Bane didn't work well because the movie didn't. I coudln't take the movie seriously, so I coudln't take him seriously. I think it would have been better to make it silly and campy, have cackling supervillains and get Catwoman making terrible, terrible cat related puns all the time. If you movie is going to be very silly, at least acknowledge it.

He's a good villain in the comics, but in TDKR...not so much.

He would've been better this way:

Vaguely entertaining but fundamentally boring villain.

Honestly, Bane is an awesome villain. The brute strength to overpower the bat but with the rarer combination of the intellect to outsmart him as well. The pencil necked geek doing impressions of SNLs impression of Sean Connery wearing a rubberized thong backwards is absolutely horrendous and guts the last film of the nolan era. While the narrative of the char in the film is not bad, its the atrocious presentation that makes Bane even worse than campy 60s era batman villains.

The saddest thing is, Nolan could have and SHOULD have replaced Bane with Hush and ditch the headgear and the stupid accent and it would have been quite solid.

Honestly Im glad Nolan is done. While you cant argue the good his films have done for the franchise if not for the viewers KNOWING that moving forward a new reboot would be required, it would be downright damaging, and I hate to think it might even wrongly color impressions of Bane in the future.

Sorry, Just a tad resentful after finally seeing the film recently and gravitating towards Bane as a char the moment I first encountered him.

Kenbo Slice:
He's a good villain in the comics, but in TDKR...not so much.

He would've been better this way:

that video makes me wonder... how does the guy even eat? isn't he in extreme pain when he takes off the mask?

I didn't like him much, the most interesting thing about him was his voicething, and that was kinda annoying. His methods were kinda weird too... he wants to give gotham back to the people by subjecting them to a terror regime? how does that make any sense??

Floppertje:
he wants to give gotham back to the people by subjecting them to a terror regime? how does that make any sense??

He wants to show Wayne that Gotham will destroy itself before he blows it up. The whole thing about giving gotham back to the people is a lie.

The League of Shadows wanted to... uh, I forgot, but it was something about collapsing civilized society and starting with Gotham. He's only finishing what Raj started.

I liked Bane. He wasn't amazingly deep, insightful or understandable, but he was crazy enough to keep me wanting to see what he does next. That counts for a good villain in my book.

But I was also kinda bored of Joker, so eh, opinions.

I liked him. He was a large, brutish beefcake, but with an air of dignity about him. He was fun to watch, and whether his plan made any sense, it was interesting to watch it unfold.

Was he a good villian? Maybe... He was most definitely an enjoyable and entertaining villian though and that's what really counts.

He wasn't a bad villian by any means and he was threatening enough but again he is just fun to watch.

I guess a large part of whether you liked him or not comes down to what you make of his voice changer thingie, I thought it was fucking cool whereas other people think it was silly and out of place. Still Batman had a voice changer as well...

We need a thread about which voice changer is more retarded XD

He was an OK villain throughout the movie. Never mind his voice - I thought it sounded like a horrid dubbing job, granted, like I was watching an equally horrid dubbed version of the film - but I lived with it.

No, what ruined it for me was the finale. The final battle between Bats and Bane was terribly underwhelming, with Catwoman's casual intervention to boot. But what bothered me moreso was how they took away Bane's doctrine and masterminding and gave it to Talia. This turned Bane into little more than a thug - a very gracious, eloquent, genially-sounding thug, albeit a thug. We all loved Joker for being his irreverent own master and following his code alone, and now we get a glorified thug to take his stead.

He's not just a thug taking orders. Bane is a soldier to Talia (with whom nobody is very impressed or frightened, I imagine)... Talia is a soldier to Ra's. Who is dead. So the big baddie turns out to be the thug of another thug to a dead guy whom we stopped caring for movie #1. I was distinctly underwhelmed by all of these revelations and felt they took away whatever splendor Bane could've taken for himself.

Decent. He was undercut by the really unnecessary Talia twist (by extension, Talia seriously didn't serve much of a purpose in the film anyway), the out of place voice (technically and otherwise), and the serious neutering the PG-13 rating gave the entire film.

I'd say yes, right up until the last part of the film where everything is handed over to Talia.

I found him a joy to watch, his physical presence and subsequent dominance and intimidation of everyone around him was incredible. I also think that he was portrayed well as a mirror image of batman (as all good bat villains are), being just as if not more strong and intelligent as the bat himself.

I also really liked his philosophy of the lower classes overthrowing the upper classes, something that Nolan has done consistently well, explaining the villains motives to the point where you may not agree with them but you can certainly understand them, and that is truly terrifying.

Like I said, I enjoyed him right up until the point where it was climatically reviled that everything he said was bollocks and he had taken Gotham the same way the corrupt had, by blatantly lying. Come on, the Joker had a thew drums of gasoline and a couple of bullets, while bane has an entire army and the most impressive take over this genius can come up with is to lie?

I can understand the practicality and effectiveness of just lying but it just doesn't seem as impressive as what came before. I think his character would have worked a lot better if it was reviled at the end that Bane actually did believe everything he said and was only working with Talia so that he could get close to Wayne and thus brake the Batman, who's very existence he would see as a symbol of the injustice of his own existence.

Having said all that I did really enjoy Bane and he remains one of my favorite cinematic characters of 2012.

He was a good villain up until the Talia revelation I'd say. Up until that point he was interesting and witty while also being intimidating which I think qualifies him as a good villain.

Trying to figure him out was the only thing that made the film interesting. Once the reveal finally came it was a bit of a let down.

So while interesting, ultimately he was a pretty poor villain.

Yeah, he was good. Not as bad as some people say he is "cough" MovieBob "cough". His voice was that stand out to me. It sounded very uncanny when you heard it. He manged to beat up Batman and take Gotham.

MacNille:
He manged to beat up Batman and take Gotham.

That's no achievement, though. Anyone can do that if the author wants them to.

His voice made him sound more like a warrior poet, but he acted more like a brutish jerk.

Keoul:
As a standalone villain separate from the comics he is a good villain.
If not then I would say they portrayed him terribly, they removed core aspects of his back story and characteristics in that movie. I was extremely miffed when he was given a funny speech pattern, no venom, and that

But these gripes only exist if he is compared to the comic book version. If not then he is, as a whole, a good character and a great villain.

Actually, in a sense, this is the best portrayal of Bane yet. Since Bane was originally meant to be the "ultimate" opponent for Batman, both physically and in a few cases mentally. Physically, he is much stronger then Batman in the comics, mentally he also apparently had genius level intelligence... But that's overlooked in most portrayals just to turn him into a big, muscular hispanic mook. The creators of bane even said that, despite changing quite a bit about his backstory, look, and race, this was still one of the most accurate portrayals yet.

Floppertje:

I didn't like him much, the most interesting thing about him was his voicething, and that was kinda annoying. His methods were kinda weird too... he wants to give gotham back to the people by subjecting them to a terror regime? how does that make any sense??

Anarchism, dear boy. In the movie, up until the big "reveal", Bane ideologically seemed to be an Anarcho-Communist or perhaps Anarcho-Syndicalist. His "argument" in favor of the army would be that they're "protecting" the city from being re-conquered by the "corrupt" U.S. government. Plus they're keeping other more "brutal" warlords from rising up. He may be a warlord, but he set no laws and has given himself no true authority to tax or "rule" people. That's all and all just part of an Anarchy. There's no rules or laws, you can take what you want and live where you want without fear of any government cracking down on you. To an Anarchist, Bane may very well be a hero, at least until he betrays his ideology at the end.

ah! we pretend critics show have a chance to shine at last! i liked bane, even if his motives were unclear to some, but to me it seemed like his motives were Talia's, which were to continue Ras Al Ghul's plans from Batman Begins, after all he was part of the League of Shadows in this one (which personally i thought was a nice touch).

No. Just no.

I'm sure he's awesome in the comics and stuff, but I couldn't take that film seriously. From the first word Bane spoke, I was gone.

Now I can't hear a quote from The Dark knight Rises without making it uber-silly.

"Citizens of Gotham! One Of You Snuggly-wuggly fluffywuffykins holds the trigger to freedom and lollipop rainbows!"

Say it in his voice, it'll make your day brighter.

But it doesn't make him a good villain to me.

 

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked