HOME | DD
woohooligan β The Dark Knight Rises
Published: 2012-09-14 22:14:31 +0000 UTC; Views: 2673; Favourites: 36; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
Let me start by saying that I really enjoyed the Dark Knight Rises, it was an excellent film and I definitely recommend it. Having said that, I thought the film interpretation of Bane was lame. These are the only two complaints I have about the film as a whole, that they spent all this time building up this villain who ultimately turns out to be pitiable more than fearsome. He went from being bigger and stronger than eveyrone to "FEAR ME! ... 'cause, y'know... I work out 3 times a week and stuff." Then Batman makes a very half-hearted attempt to stop him. "Oh what? You're not distracted by gas pellets? Damn. I guess the only other thing I can do then is wail on you with my fists like a 5 year old on a playground." Forget that he actually has bat-shaped tranquilizer darts that he uses later in the film, because he didn't even try them on bane. What could have been an interesting fight was reduced to a several minute straight-up boxing match.Technically, the movie Bane is still a "drug-fuelled" villain, so I guess in that sense Nolan's Bane is in keeping with the comics... you know, like how LSD is similar to Tylenol.
I did something different with today's incentive image, and I spent a lot more time working on this one! I hope you all enjoy this special treat!
Instead of an alternate ending for the comic, I did a full-page single-panel comic featuring my idea for how Batman could defeat Nolan's Bane, using another weapon that's not in the list in panel 3. What could it be? Grenades? A swiss army knife? A dildo cannon? The George Foreman Grill? Vote for Woohooligan on Top Web Comics to find out, because the suspense is killing you! Also I'm a twat... or twit. Whatever you kids are calling it these days. Follow me on Twitter because I announce all my comics there and sometimes I even chat.
Related content
Comments: 100
Even without all the various weapons that would have evened the odds in the fight there is still plenty for Batman to do instead of uselessly punching Bane. Strike him in the throat or solar plexus. Use nerve strikes and pressure points. Blow out his knees. Or most effective kick him in the groin. All of this I would see Batman doing considering the fact Batman is a devout combat pragmatist and likes to end his fights quickly and efficiently. If I was Batman there I would first hurl a gas pellet right in Bane's face then run up and groin kick him while he's blinded.
I believe How it Should Have Ended also noticed the fact Batman could have used those sleeping darts.
π: 0 β©: 1
If I can think of better ways to win the fight than Batman something's wrong.
π: 0 β©: 1
lol "Greatest detective in the world, bested by comic nerd."
π: 0 β©: 1
Sounds even more ridiculous when you say it out loud.Xd
π: 0 β©: 0
I actually liked the movie Bane because they where going for a more realistic view rather than giving us a silly comic book villain like they did in Batman and Robin. Of course I still like the comic book Bane but is they had put him in the movie it would have looked silly.
π: 0 β©: 1
I have no objection with them taking liberties. All I'm saying is that if you think about it, they really just took a really threatening character and made him pitiable, rather than threatening. They certainly could have given the movie Bane some kind of super-steroid (the movie BatMan has plenty of tech that's pushing the envelope of suspension of disbelief, like the motorcycle that suddenly shoots out from underneath the Tumbler). I just think they should have given him something - really *anything* - to make him threatening in the film. Even a nail file in his hand would have made him more threatening than he was in the film. Instead they went with "Fear me, for I am, A DRUG ADDICT!"
π: 0 β©: 1
I actually really liked the design of Bane in the film, it made me think of a rabid attack dog with a muzzle on. So when the muzzle came off you knew that shit had hit the fan. Also none of the tech was to the degree of super human steroids in the department of believably, not even the Bat Bike. But ya they could have given him a steroid addiction or something instead of an addiction to pain killers.Β
What I really disliked about the film was having Tali in there. It wasn't necessary and just kind of took away from having Bane be just an extremist. That and that it tried to demonize the Occupy Wall Street movement. Β Β
π: 0 β©: 1
I had no objection to the way he looked. Actually, I thought the visual representation was an improvement over the comics. But even if all they had done was change the script very slightly to say that he was taking steroids instead of (or even in addition to) being addicted to pain killers, he would have been much more intimidating in the film. That's all it would have taken - one single line of dialogue out of 2+ hours of film and million-dollar special effects.
I still disagree that the Bat Bike was within the realm of "totally believable" tech when it just pops out of the bottom of the tumbler like it's just been a Michael-Bay-style Transformer all along, or that some kind of enhanced steroid would have been less believable.
Tali I didn't have any problem with. I mean... if we're going to have a problem with her being part of the plot, then why don't we object to including Cat Woman too? If Tali took away from Bane being an extremist, then didn't Cat Woman take away from Bruce being a hero? Both of them added shades of complexity to the plot that I thought were plenty warranted... as opposed to say, oh I dunno... a flaming bat on the side of a building for no particularly strong reason (beyond of course, "Hey! This is a movie! There's an audience watching just over that 4th wall there, we need to entertain them!").
Re: demonizing occupy wallstreet : It'd been a while since I'd seen the film and I didn't remember having that impression when I saw it. So I looked up an article to see how people were drawing that conclusion. In retrospect, I can see how people might attribute the scenes of "we're putting the rich on trial and then shoving them out onto an ice-flow to die" as an attack on the occupy wall-street, but I can also see that having been unintentional on Nolan's part, simply trying to spice up the story. I could also see it actually happening in certain circumstances, given the psychology of social pressure and the threat of violence or death for anyone who disagrees, with any given group of people. Maybe it's because I've read quite a bit about things like the bystander effect and the Milgram experiment www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcvSNg⦠that showed how the majority of people involved in the Nazi's holocaust probably didn't actually want to kill Jews, but they did anyway because of enormous social pressure and the threat of punishment if they didn't comply. There's a similar sort of controversy from the opposite side regarding the villain Tex Richman in the new Muppet movie, people claiming that the film is deliberately demonizing the rich. At the end of the day, I think I have to give them the benefit of the doubt that they were just trying to write an entertaining story.
π: 0 β©: 0
I agree with your view on Bane. I really watched the movie because it was filmed in my hometown and knew people who were in it {extras). I always thought of Pittsburgh as a Gotham city. with its century old churches and steel and glass towers, it was only lacking an epic battle between good and evil
π: 0 β©: 1
π: 0 β©: 1
well that sounds like an epic battle between good and evil to me :/ and it's pretty cool that your great, greatΒ grandfather had a plaza named after him
π: 0 β©: 1
Oh, I guess that was kind of confusing... I was thinking more about all the old gothic architecture. Yeah, George Bannerman Dealey was the editor for the Dallas Morning News and was really involved in public affairs and in getting the idea of city planning started.
π: 0 β©: 1
Pittsburgh is very unique in it's architecture. I have a few photos in my gallery. Β
π: 0 β©: 0
not completely agreed, but yeah, it was a little boring.
π: 0 β©: 1
Thanks, Austin.
π: 0 β©: 0
Alas, this is why I don't much care for live-action interpretations of comics and cartoons. They just about always seem to be lacking something.
π: 0 β©: 1
Thanks for the fav, bro! 
I've been pretty happy with the movies leading up to and including the Avengers. And with the recent Spider Man films... The first 3 X-Men were okay, but the creators threw away a ton of great source material because they can't see past a freaking trilogy. I'm a little concerned that will be the case with Iron Man as well, that they'll kill the Mandarin in Iron Man III. They did that with Deadpool in the X-Men Origins: Wolverine movie too... and although I enjoyed the Spider Man movies, what the hell was with killing of Venom in Spider Man III? I thought the new reboot of Spider Man with the Lizard was better tho.
π: 0 β©: 1
You're welcome.
That's one thing that always has pissed me off with a lot of these live-action comic-based movies. Why are they killing off the major villains? The primary reoccurring villains in the comics are always getting killed off in these live-action movie interpretations. I've always thought this was stupid; even looking back at the first Tim Burton Batman films. You could have a more dynamic movie series by keeping the main villains alive to spread terror in the future sequels...and I also agree that they need to get past this played-out concept of a trilogy. They only make movies in trilogies because they're trying to copy the success of the original Star Wars movies anyway.
π: 0 β©: 1
Which ultimately was 6 films... d'oh! I don't understand why they think they can't stretch it out into several films... we would absolutely go see them if they did.
π: 0 β©: 1
Exactly my point. With as many villains as Spider-Man and Batman have they could have made dozens of movies that could have featured multiple appearances by certain villains and even villain team-ups (those are always fun).
I mean, heck! If freakin' "Land Before Time" can make over 10 freakin' movies over the course of nearly 20 years just think of how many films comic superheroes could have if they'd just stop killing off all the dang villains in every movie.
π: 0 β©: 1
Yeah, how can you do a Sinister Six film if you kill off Doc Oc?
π: 0 β©: 1
Banana cream pie kind of stands out in that list lol
π: 0 β©: 1
Did some research on me did you?
π: 0 β©: 1
Just checked your profile. 
I always do that when someone comments or watches me.
π: 0 β©: 0
Still beats the hell out of the Batman and Robin Bane.
π: 0 β©: 1
π: 0 β©: 0
I haven't seen it yet.I suppose I will,eventually.I just...really wasn't a big fan of the last one.
And before I turn this into a several-paragraphs-long diatribe on WHY I didn't like it,I'll stop right here and say, "Good cartoon".
π: 0 β©: 1
Thanks, Mark!
I enjoyed the last one, but there were things I didn't care for... I was fine with the Joker's appearance and the scarred face, but I felt all the "why so serious" stuff and the constantly coming up with new stories about how he got the scars was kind of gratuitous and didn't add anything fun or interesting to the film. So I think there definitely was room for improvement even though I enjoyed it overall. I think I felt pretty much that way about all 3 of Nolan's films.
π: 0 β©: 1
I realized the real reason I liked Nolan's first Batman was because I really,REALLY hated what Joel Schumacher did with the last one.
Until the day comes when someone uses digital effects to create a realistic "Man-Who-Laughs" Joker
π: 0 β©: 1
π: 0 β©: 0
I was really hoping that they were going to do that in the movie as a surprise.
π: 0 β©: 1
Which one? The swarm o' bats?
π: 0 β©: 1
No make him really muscular with those steroids.
π: 0 β©: 1
Oh you mean that they would get to either of the fight scenes and Bane would start bulking up like Mr. Hyde in the League of Extroardinary Gentlemen. Yeah, that would have been cool!
π: 0 β©: 1
Yes it would have.
π: 0 β©: 0
Another nice one you did here. The only thing is that I thought Dark Knight Rises Bane was "powered by faith" or something. I don't recollect them saying anything about drugs.
Still, he was tons cooler than Batman forever Bane, even after getting lightly killed off by Catwoman.
π: 0 β©: 1
Thanks, Kyle!
They don't out and out say "Bane is addicted to morphine" in the film, but the mask is a delivery system. The first (only?) time they mention morphine specifically is in the prison, the Dr. mentions the kid's protector becoming addicted to morphine after his injuries from being badly beaten by the other inmates when the kid escaped. The scar on Bane's back that's only visible in the shirt-off scene with Gordon indicates that he likely underwent spinal fusion, which I hear is tricky and sometimes leaves people with chronic pain afterward. And then in the 2nd fight with Bane, Batman punches him repeatedly in the face and the tubes on the front of the mask pop off and you can hear a bit of a hissing sound as at least some of the gas is released into the air instead of being delivered to Bane. And of course Bane himself becomes rather debilitated until the mask is "repaired" by gently sliding the tubes back into place.
π: 0 β©: 0
Thanks, Andrew!
After I put it up I realized that I neglected to put "taser" and "hot fire poker" on the list.
π: 0 β©: 1
All good choices.
---AK
π: 0 β©: 1
Did you see the incentive? I'm considering doing another version of that with the Mentos and Coke option.
π: 0 β©: 0
I remember that the cartoon Bane was one scary mofo
π: 0 β©: 1
Yeah, I liked the cartoon episode with Bane.
π: 0 β©: 1
Bane in Batman and Robin was badass too
π: 0 β©: 1
Why does everybody keep calling him Bane? Bane wasn't in Batman and Robin -- that was Mr. Freeze. With the incredibly horrible casting of Arnold Schwarzenegger.
π: 0 β©: 2
| Next =>