das derken bat rise

[Gladius]

are you joking
he sounded like wps voicing some stuffy teacher via a headset or some shit. he was just a big burly dude with a thing on his face who spoke like a middle schooler trying out for prospero in the school's rendition of 'the tempest'. by 'cool' do you mean absurd and not even remotely threatening?

no... i honestly found him a very effective and threatening villain, my favorite scene by far being the main showdown between him and batman. i can see what you mean about his voice but i only got that impression in the intro and got used to it quickly. if there was any similarity to wps i didn't notice it and i think you're giving him too much credit here

the joker, and the performance of the joker, was great because he was completely fucking unhinged. sure they ramped up the scale a bit in this movie, but that's because that's the only possible way they could hope to come close to him. the jokers whole shtick was that he seemed to be completely chaotic and unreasonable, which made him as a character frightening and intriguing. this character was pretty static compared to him and felt like any old "bad guy" doing bad guy type shit. not completely fucking with peoples heads and hiding in the shadows and pitting allies against eachother and forcing people to make complex moral choices. he felt more like a bad guy in a comic book too-ridiculous-to- ever-be-real way.

sure the joker was more plausible, but while very entertaining he was pretty helpless whenever he was cornered, i.e. the police station, when gordon sneaks up on him, when he is finally captured, etc. even though he always had an plan to escape it gives you the impression he was little more than a conniving rat bastard than a true force to be reckoned with. bane had more of a primal "juggernaut" look and feel to him but also possessed intelligence, fanaticism and a deep knowledge of batman and what made him tick, including the same ninja-like training from the league.

not sure how to wrap up this post so personally i think there's little more to joker than his nihilism and "chaos" and bane represents something more powerful and vengeful which i found more appealing. for ledger (rip) to reprise his role and deepen the joker character would have been excellent but what we've ended up getting is still very good in my view.

[Flash]

[spoiler]i think the first showdown between bane and batman is such an amazing and painful moment that when bane won and started executing his diabolical plan, he ended up being a very traditional villain for the rest of the movie - you just know by instinct, as you're watching it, that he can't possibly do anything worse than beating the shit out of the main character and stealing all his stuff. with the joker, it was the opposite - every single scene he appeared in, you knew he'd do something horrible and deranged.
i even think that he does more damage to batman than bane did - he fucks him up psychologically by torturing and killing people "because of him", kills his love interest, turns harvey into two-face and eventually makes batman kill someone again. bane just breaks batman's will for a while. sure, that whole part about the siege on city was cool, but you're just waiting for batman to get up so he can do something about it... and batman as portrayed in these films isn't anywhere near as interesting as his villains.

plus, i think joker's purpose as a character is more interesting - he's trying to prove his point that everyone can be a psycho, like in the killing joke, while bane is focused on breaking batman, like in knightfall... which is also interesting, but a bit more 'traditional' for a supervillain.

then bane gets killed in a rushed way so the heroes can GO DEFUSE THE ATOMIC BOMB AFTER THE PLOT TWIST (ugh)
also the whole tahlia/bane backstory was ok but it made the bane character less interesting, they should have kept his backstory more of a secret imo.[/spoiler]

[psi43]

I would put Bane and the Joker on the same level personally. They were playing 2 entirely different roles which aren't easy to compare, both of them were very interesting in their own ways and saying "the joker is more interesting because of x" is stupid, because Bane was never there to challenge the joker in particular fields. And that's great, why would we want to see a movie with a similar villain.

[Flash]

making a comparison between two different villains in a movie franchise is totally fair, of course they're not gonna have the same motivations and goals, that'd be really stupid and repetitive. but it's obvious that nolan was trying to make bane an even more interesting and threatening villain (because that would make for a better movie) so why would it be stupid for anyone to say they liked the joker better?

[Sinitron]

nolan is a stupid shit-stirring dick imo

[Gladius]

nolan is a stupid shit-stirring dick imo

[psi43]

making a comparison between two different villains in a movie franchise is totally fair, of course they're not gonna have the same motivations and goals, that'd be really stupid and repetitive. but it's obvious that nolan was trying to make bane an even more interesting and threatening villain (because that would make for a better movie) so why would it be stupid for anyone to say they liked the joker better?

I didn't say that it's stupid for people to like one of them better. But what's happening in this thread is saying "yeah the joker is better cause he played mind games on people" etc., which is true but that only makes him better if that kind of stuff is your taste. Bane isn't the mind game kind of villain, he's more the planning kind that has a plan almost done before you even realize that he's there. I don't have a problem with people stating their opinions as to why they like a villain better, but saying that a certain villain IS better because of their traits is stupid, because they're both good in their own fields. I'd say both of them are written and performed in a very nice way, suiting their goals and appearance.

[Flash]

uhh when i said  liked the joker better, i was just saying that i personally like him better, he seems much more interesting to me
i'm not talking about which of the two actually kicks more batman butt if that's what you're talking about

[psi43]

I was more referring to nonzop and gladius

[Sinitron]

JOKER IS A FAG BANE IS A FAT FUCK AND RA'S IS A COCK-KNOCKER ALL THE BATMAN MOVIES WERE BAD AND HEATH LEDGER WAS A STUPID DRUGGIE

[Gladius]

um guys stop giving your opinions without attaching 10 qualifiers it is mean and scary to me

No.

[funzop]

no... i honestly found him a very effective and threatening villain, my favorite scene by far being the main showdown between him and batman.

oh well yeah that scene was fantastic
btw warning: big gay nerd needlessly lengthy internet post ahead

i just think the joker was more interesting of a character and his methods of doing things seemed a lot more explainable and subsequently, realistic and fucked up than banes. when the joker puts bombs in two boats, one in a boat of civilians and one in a boat of convicts and gives them both a trigger for the other, it makes sense. the joker is trying to prove that anyone is capable of doing horrendous fucked up things based on the desperation of their situation and a single bad day (see harvey dent), which is a concept that the joker is an embodiment of (see: batman: the killing joke), and in turn seeks to completely terrorize the public, and turn the people who once supported batman against him, all while breaking batman's will to protect the city. joker's actions are over the top in a recognizably super villain kind of way, but the joker's motivations and history + the conviction behind heath ledger's performance in the film make what he does seem somewhat plausible in the real world, which helps the audience identify with batman's struggle and makes the film really engaging imo!

[spoiler]when bane goes and claims to have given the trigger to the bomb to a civilian, it seemed like a bid by the writers to match the psychological tactics used by joker, in the sense that nothing ever really comes from it. we don't really know why he does it other than to scare people or give them false hope, and at that point he already has a huge army he created in the sewers/ trapped the police underground/ locked everyone in the city, so i don't think he needs to do anything else to scare everyone/ he's already created a completely hopeless situation anyway. despite this, we never see people flipping their shit and turning on eachother or frantically searching or worrying about it, and in the end, we find out that he didn't actually do it anyway.[/spoiler]

sure the joker was more plausible, but while very entertaining he was pretty helpless whenever he was cornered, i.e. the police station, when gordon sneaks up on him, when he is finally captured, etc. even though he always had an plan to escape it gives you the impression he was little more than a conniving rat bastard than a true force to be reckoned with. bane had more of a primal "juggernaut" look and feel to him but also possessed intelligence, fanaticism and a deep knowledge of batman and what made him tick, including the same ninja-like training from the league.

you're talking less about the quality of the characters and how they carry the film, and more about who caused more destruction/ who was a better super-villain. bane was, as you say, a complete badass who completely did unbelievable amounts of damage to the city and its people, and held his own against batman both physically and intellectually. if you compare him to joker based on who pwnt more batman @$$ and achieved more, there's no comparison, bane trumps batman in terms of effectiveness. joker is physically weak and rather disorganized when compared to bane, but that is part of what makes him such a fantastic character in my eyes. in this film, while batman fights to keep order and peace in gotham, bane fights looking to methodically destroy the establishment, but ultimately seeks order, just under his ruling. in the dark knight, while batman fights for order and peace, the joker is the complete opposite, causing chaos without much rhyme or reason and has no real obvious ultimate goal then terrorizing the city and ruining batman. he perfectly compliments batman's character, and forces him to make moral choices with no obvious right answer, causing him to question what he is fighting for.

then again i  have read a lot of comics so this opinion might be less about comparing the characters in the actual movies and more about them in general + i am familiar with joker's backstory and character already so while the movie may have not given him a certain amount of depth, i was familiar enough to kind of refer to that knowledge when judging the character/ i still really really liked bane and it was more about how he fared against the previous film that has prompted me to be critical of him. had i just seen this movie on its own, i would have had nothing to say.

[DrRumack]

i aint even seen either of these movies but i have a joker tshirt and bane looks like some gross ridiculous thing from mortal combat so you can probably see where my opinion lies

[psi43]

um guys stop giving your opinions without attaching 10 qualifiers it is mean and scary to me

No.

like i said, your opinions are alright, even if you didn't back them up; after all it's an opinion
what i can't stand is when people claim that their opinion is the only right opinion because of idiotic reasons

[funzop]

well you dont have to preface every statement you make with "it is my personal belief that" to have it be an opinion

[funzop]

didnt your 8th grade teacher ever get pissed at you for putting in a bunch of "i think"s in your persuasive essays

[DrRumack]

hell yeah they did