02 August, 2012

More Bully Than Bane

Ever danced with the Devil in... eh, skip it.
Well, I finally went to see Dark Knight Rises. I decided to wait ten days, not out of fear of attack, but rather to prove that some people know how to wait a few days for something they want, like movies. Or handguns. I enjoyed the film, as I have with Christopher Nolan’s entire trilogy. But as a fan of Batman, I have mixed feelings about the portrayal of Bane. [Readers beware: spoilers ahead, so don't bitch.

I get that Nolan wanted to do away with the messy “magical realism” that usually bursts from Gotham City. He worked hard to ground the comics in reality. And often his methods worked brilliantly, evolving Batman and villains in modern and believable ways. Other times, though, Nolan robs those characters of the very things that make them worthy of their roles in the Batman series.

"Girly men! You cannot defeat my muscles!!"
Bane is proof enough. His incarnation during Batman & Robin was little more than a henchman for Poison Ivy. A joke. In Dark Knight Rises, Bane is a rogue assassin from the League of Shadows. Just a strong, well-trained muscleman who somehow has the ability to break another man’s back with his two hands. Oh but then later, that same strength and training are defeated with a gun. Darn the luck.

The original Bane concept was super human. He augmented extra musculature on his body by juicing up on chemicals. He became a monster with incredible strength, the kind that could snap a guy like Batman in half. It’s what made him such a worthy adversary. Bane was too strong at first; he was something the Batman had to overcome. 

Go forth and conquer. I'll be right behind you.
Now I’m not suggesting that Nolan use chemical enhancement to build his Bane character into a monster. But come on; the guy was in league with Tahlia al’ Ghoul. She funded the construction of a potential atom bomb beneath Gotham. I’m pretty sure she could afford to enhance her buddy Bane after his accident. Human bionics. Gene therapy. Christ, get House involved if you have to. 

Meow.
Nolan grounds the character of Bane too much in this movie. The guy’s main threat was his power to organize thugs. As for Catwoman… she was fabulous, per usual. Her goggles doubled as her ears! And she had some kickin’ stiletto heels. I felt she portrayed the right amount of self-interest and grace usually afforded to the character. AND I like that she’s from the streets. Something about a spoiled rich girl who loves kitties just doesn't suit Selina Kyle. (Although I did miss the whip. Next time, maybe...)

Overall, four stars. One character does not ruin this movie for me. I'll just laugh at Bane's voice whenever he appears on screen. I can make it a drinking game for the home version!

[For more of my comic book geekery related to Chris Nolan's Batman series, see JUST NOT FUNNY from 2008.]

2 comments:

jeff said...

Not having previously been all that aware of Bane character prior to the movie, I found his portrayal to be acceptable. I did somehow expect him to be beefier and his ability to get thugs to follow him to their deaths cult fashion was a bit under developed. But that aside, I left the theatre quite pleased with this last movie in the Nolan trilogy. And I hope beyond everything that another director doesn't get signed on to start all over again. I really don't need to see the Batman's origins story re-re-re-re-retold again. It's time to move on to some of the other stories.

D B R said...

Most people don't follow the comics, so it's not a big deal for the success of the movie. We comic book geeks know. ;) And GAWD yes, I'm with you... no more origin stories. Batman is now America's #1 super hero.