I swear I remember reading on a now extinct fan site that Bale said he slimmed down for TDK to look like more a “normal” guy, which I don’t get because of what he’d previously said before BB that Batman was a “beast” and “tank”.
He is noticably smaller between the 2 movies.
[quote]d1chet wrote:
I swear I remember reading on a now extinct fan site that Bale said he slimmed down for TDK to look like more a “normal” guy, which I don’t get because of what he’d previously said before BB that Batman was a “beast” and “tank”.
He is noticably smaller between the 2 movies.[/quote]
Agreed. I heard the same. Bale looked to be up to 20 or 30lbs lighter between the two movies in scenes with his shirt off…and yes, I am expecting the “steroid witch hunt” because it can’t be avoided. It isn’t like the media won’t make the connection anyway. The ONLY way Nolan could avoid that is if he didn’t focus on the size of Bane at all and “venom” is now his computer sidekick or some bullshit like that.
As long as Venom makes big muscles and crazy people, expect the witch hunt to begin.
Oh, and God forbid the actor playing Bane actually looks big enough to have used steroids.
How about the guy that played Michael Myers as Bane? He’s a natural giant. Tyler Mane or something?
[quote]sardines12 wrote:
Watch batman the animated series with Bane or the last “Young Justice” episode that had him in it. BTAS really featured his tactical side more. He was only in one episode I believe, but it was a good characterization.[/quote]
I agree with this, his role in the BTAS was a calculating criminal who wanted to maneuver Batman into a vulnerable position to eventually crush him. I also see where X is coming from any tiny hint at the venom being used to instantly enhance his physical strength and appearance will result in a anti steroid witch hunt.
On a side note, Young Justice is jumping out of the gate as a damn good successor to Justice League Unlimited. The story line is coming together very well and the time they are taking to show how the characters are finding themselves in the group is impressive. A definite must watch for any comic fan.
[quote]d1chet wrote:
I swear I remember reading on a now extinct fan site that Bale said he slimmed down for TDK to look like more a “normal” guy, which I don’t get because of what he’d previously said before BB that Batman was a “beast” and “tank”.
He is noticably smaller between the 2 movies.[/quote]
That’s exactly my point. It doesn’t make sense. If he’d said specifically that he did it to outwardly show the effects ‘escalation’ had on Batman, then fine. More than fine - fantastic.
I’d be far more satisfied with that than the way I interpreted it.
But to say that he just wanted to look normal after a deliberate move to look battle-ready in BB is too much of a narrative jump between the movies. And it certainly doesn’t support the idea that Wayne is crumbling under the pressure. In fact, it works against it.
I feel like I’ve got both feet planted in nitpicking territory now, so I’ll leave it at that.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
expect the witch hunt to begin.
[/quote]
Hasn’t the witch hunt began already man ?
It’s not like the average population doesn’t frown on bodybuilding or people with good muscularity.
[quote]DeltaOne wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
expect the witch hunt to begin.
[/quote]
Hasn’t the witch hunt began already man ?
It’s not like the average population doesn’t frown on bodybuilding or people with good muscularity.[/quote]
There’s a quote from Rippetoe that comes to mind:
“Just because someone is stronger than you doesn’t mean they’re on steroids”
I didn’t understand your post d1chet but what I meant is that there’s already a witch hunt on big people and what X said meant it would only get worse.
[quote]DeltaOne wrote:
I didn’t understand your post d1chet but what I meant is that there’s already a witch hunt on big people and what X said meant it would only get worse.[/quote]
…which is the main point we should be concerned with. Let’s face it, there are quotes from the first two movies that people will be saying into the next 50 years even after they forget what movie they came from. That means any negative commentary about the lifestyle of bodybuilding will be written in PEN with a movie that effects pop culture that much.
Yeah, I would think if you have big muscles, that this might interest you.
But then, seeing some of the responses in that “why don’t you push harder” thread, maybe this is the wrong site for people to care of such things.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]DeltaOne wrote:
I didn’t understand your post d1chet but what I meant is that there’s already a witch hunt on big people and what X said meant it would only get worse.[/quote]
…which is the main point we should be concerned with. Let’s face it, there are quotes from the first two movies that people will be saying into the next 50 years even after they forget what movie they came from. That means any negative commentary about the lifestyle of bodybuilding will be written in PEN with a movie that effects pop culture that much.
[/quote]
Agreed. I find it pathetic that so many people can be influenced by movies.
We can hope people will man up in the future and the anti-big guy trend dies, and I quote that thingy that says most trends walk in circles.
But that’s probably a pipe dream.
[quote]DeltaOne wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]DeltaOne wrote:
I didn’t understand your post d1chet but what I meant is that there’s already a witch hunt on big people and what X said meant it would only get worse.[/quote]
…which is the main point we should be concerned with. Let’s face it, there are quotes from the first two movies that people will be saying into the next 50 years even after they forget what movie they came from. That means any negative commentary about the lifestyle of bodybuilding will be written in PEN with a movie that effects pop culture that much.
[/quote]
Agreed. I find it pathetic that so many people can be influenced by movies.
We can hope people will man up in the future and the anti-big guy trend dies, and I quote that thingy that says most trends walk in circles.
But that’s probably a pipe dream.
[/quote]
People aren’t influenced by movies. It’s a political parlor trick. What’s pathetic is that people allow themselves to be influenced. If movies appear to influence people, you’ll usually find that something has already happened in real life to prompt the making of a movie. Most people can’t tear themselves away from their mobile phone or internet long enough to be influenced by them anyway.
Natural Born Killers? For its time, it was highly controversial and blamed for a spate of high-profile copy cat killings. Now, we hardly hear anything about it.
Edit: NBK is a good example of what I’m talking about because it’s a far more intelligent movie than people give it credit for. Critics in politics and the media at the time derided it for needlessly glamorizing violence, but that’s exactly what they do when they blame movies for influencing things like Columbine.
NBK is unique in that held a mirror up to the media: they acted more or less exactly like their movie counterparts. It’s very easy to blame movies because it’s comforting to most of the world to know that a murder can be traced back to a movie…even if it’s not true.
The truth is, nobody wants to believe that evil shit happens in the world, sometimes for no reason. They need a reason to make sense of it all. That’s what civilization is all about. Movies are a very convenient scapegoat. Acts of brutality can be just explained away.
People are increasingly reliant on the media to give them an opinion on what they’re seeing. That influences the votes of the modern generation.
To paraphrase Karl Marx : “The media is the new opiate of the people”.
I say this here because Christopher Nolan is probably the least likely director to pander to expectations. Ledger’s Joker was unpredictable because he had no motivation. He was, in Nolan’s words “an absolute”. Nobody could predict what he did with The Joker. Why would Bane be any different?
I don’t think he’d include Bane if he didn’t already have some kind of fresh take on the character. I’m confident that Nolan will not play up the steroid angle. He is too smart to allow people to exploit it and it would cheapen what he did with the first two movies.
Besides, Tom Hardy doesn’t need venom. His performance in The Take miniseries from Sky 1 is proof enough. The trailer doesn’t do him justice. He plays a genuinely unpredictable character:
Who the fuck cares anyway, the last two batman movies were awesome and this new one will probably kick ass too.
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
Who the fuck cares anyway, the last two batman movies were awesome and this new one will probably kick ass too. [/quote]
The short answer is that superhero movies only kick ass in the first place if someone cares.
Another clip of Tom Hardy in The Take:
This is probably his least scary scene. His character is a total loose cannon; a completely irredeemable shit, but likeable as well. To explain further would be spoiling it. He’s that good - better than in Bronson and Inception, even.
Best Bane physically: Batman & Robin. (Honorable mention: Batman: TAS
Best Bane portrayl: Young Justice. It was one of the newer episodes.
[quote]roybot wrote:
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
Who the fuck cares anyway, the last two batman movies were awesome and this new one will probably kick ass too. [/quote]
The short answer is that superhero movies only kick ass in the first place if someone cares.
[/quote]
Only if comic fans care.
I still think there are superhero movies that suck.
[quote]RSGZ wrote:
[quote]roybot wrote:
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
Who the fuck cares anyway, the last two batman movies were awesome and this new one will probably kick ass too. [/quote]
The short answer is that superhero movies only kick ass in the first place if someone cares.
[/quote]
Only if comic fans care.
I still think there are superhero movies that suck.[/quote]
Nolan cares. Trying to explain why a billionaire dresses up like a bat at night to fight crime, or taking the concept “a dream within a dream within a dream” seriously is rare. He pulls it off. That makes him special.
I hope he will care about Bane as well. There’s potential in that character and I don’t think he picked him to have a “meathead”.
[quote]kakno wrote:
[quote]RSGZ wrote:
[quote]roybot wrote:
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
Who the fuck cares anyway, the last two batman movies were awesome and this new one will probably kick ass too. [/quote]
The short answer is that superhero movies only kick ass in the first place if someone cares.
[/quote]
Only if comic fans care.
I still think there are superhero movies that suck.[/quote]
Nolan cares. Trying to explain why a billionaire dresses up like a bat at night to fight crime, or taking the concept “a dream within a dream within a dream” seriously is rare. He pulls it off. That makes him special.
I hope he will care about Bane as well. There’s potential in that character and I don’t think he picked him to have a “meathead”.[/quote]
I agree - but Nolan is far from the “enemy” here - if anything, here is doing a hell of a lot of good for the industry by bringing his genius into it.
[quote]RSGZ wrote:
[quote]roybot wrote:
[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
Who the fuck cares anyway, the last two batman movies were awesome and this new one will probably kick ass too. [/quote]
The short answer is that superhero movies only kick ass in the first place if someone cares.
[/quote]
Only if comic fans care.
I still think there are superhero movies that suck.[/quote]
Right. The ones that suck did so because nobody cared about turning out a quality adaptation.