Movie Masters Bane addendum

It's ill-advised to pass judgment on a movie before it's even been released, so I won't say The Dark Knight Rises is undoubtedly going to be a great film. Of course, if one were to make an educated guess based on history, you might assume that the third installment of the Batman franchise helmed by director Christopher Nolan is going to be a good movie, since Batman Begins completely redefined the superhero movie genre, and The Dark Knight gave us one of the most memorable performances in film history in the late Heath Ledger's Joker. But until I see it for myself, I can't say for sure if it's going to be a good film or not.

That doesn't stop fanboys across the internet from jumping at every chance to proclaim that the movie's gonna suck. Indeed, with such a universally enjoyable franchise there's bound to be a bit of a backlash, but the consensus that DKR is going to suck based on what information we've seen so far seems a bit premature to say the least, especially given that it's really unfair to pass judgment on unfinished material. For example, let's look at Bane.

When it was announced that Tom Hardy was going to play the hulking Bane, many were quick to shout that Hardy wasn't known for being much of a hulking brute. But then pictures of Hardy in costume emerged, and he had indeed packed on the pounds. Bane was quite intimidating. So now that fanboys couldn't really bellyache about Hardy's lack of muscle, they moved on to bitching about Bane's voice.

See, at some point some extras in the nosebleed seats of a football stadium recorded some poor quality footage with their cell phone cameras. It was supposed to be Bane addressing the crowd, but it was very hard to understand and the voice was admittedly quite strange.

However, as Bane is a masked character, you'd be a fool to assume that his voice wasn't going to get redubbed in post-production, so judging the voice by this alone would be foolish indeed. But that didn't stop people from endlessly parodying and mocking the voice...

...until some actual footage surfaced. This time, the voice had indeed changed, but now everyone was complaining that they couldn't understand what Bane was saying. Now, just because some footage had been released didn't mean the film was in the can, but the internet was once again abuzz with chatter about Bane's voice. In what may have been the best bit of director trolling since the last time Michael Bay opened his mouth, Chris Nolan stated that Bane's voice wouldn't be changed, and what audiences heard in the preview footage was the way he would sound in the movie.

Now, it's ridiculous to think that a movie would ever get released in which the central antagonist's voice was unintelligible, but don't tell fanboys that. The nerdrage continued, until finally some actual trailers came out with a lot of Bane dialogue, and it was all perfectly understandable. For anyone with a modicum of forethought, this came as absolutely no surprise, but for the fanboys who had been following the genesis of Bane's voice on the intarwebz, it was a sign that all their bitching had paid off and some of them actually claimed responsibility for getting the voice changed. Yeah, right.

It's kinda like the lead-up to the 2012 U.S. Republican Presidential nomination. Remember how in the beginning, everyone knew it was going to be Mitt Romney, but since there was a lot of time to kill, news outlets all manufactured interest in a series of "candidates" who never stood any chance of actually getting the nomination? Remember how we had to suffer through Michelle Bachmann, Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry, and Rick Santorum, until finally it ended up being Romney, just like every sane person ever knew it was going to be? Same thing with Bane's voice.

[Except obviously The Dark Knight Rises is way more important than the 2012 U.S. Presidential election. --ed.]

Share
This entry was posted in addendums, commentary and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Movie Masters Bane addendum

  1. Yven says:

    The fanboy bashing of unreleased movies on the internet gets more and more unnerving to me. I did not notice it on TDKR, cause I did not read much about that movie. I always thought it would be as good as both other Nolan Batmans (though I still love Burton's more ;)), so I wasn't that interested in news, other than photos or trailers. But I really noticed it on Amazing Spider-Man, a movie I hope to surpass Raimi's visions and finally bring me a likeable moviepresentation of Peter Parker. I like Raimis movies, but I'm not a fan of Maguires interpretation. He is good in costume, as long as he don't pulls off the mask, which is about 5 minutes in SM3, but I don't like his Pete. But despite that, the bashing of ASM really hit my nerves. One of the highlights was that someone complained Garfield was to thin in costume, because Maguire AND the Spider-Man from the 90es cartoon were bulkier... Don't let me start about the lizzards human face or that the movie is simply going to suck because it's a reboot. As if SM3 was a masterpiece... Really, really unnerving. Good thing I don't read much commentaries on moviesites anymore.

    • monkey boy says:

      I'm a little torn about ASM, but honestly I lean more toward not expecting it to be that good. I loved SM1 and SM2, but SM3 was pretty awful, and I just think people need to back off the franchise for a while. Plus a reboot so soon after the previous installment seems like a grab for Sony to keep the rights. But who knows, maybe it'll be good.

  2. Nazgul says:

    I just don't see what about any of the trailer says "Batman" ? An armored vigilante playing political espionage games with an Eastern European (!?) terrorist. He also drives a tank.

    I think everyone is setting themselves up for a fall. "Batman Begins" was pretty good, but not nearly as good as it looks through everyone's rose tinted glasses, "Dark Knight" got super lucky with Heath Ledger carrying the whole movie, and now Chris Nolan is on an ego-trip that nothing good can come of. I've never really been a fan of the casting, I don't really buy Christian Bale as a lovable playboy or a hard boiled detective, and the villains always outshine him.

    I just hope after this set is done, we can get a Batman movie that really feels like Batman. Less armor, less philosophy and christ-complex, more actual detective work and the real freaks that deserve screen time.

    • monkey boy says:

      I think Nolan's films are an excellent TAKE on Batman, but that's what they are - a take. They're an interpretation, not THE ONLY interpretation. So I like when they go off in directions that may not be what we're used to, because unlike many previous attempts at Batman films, Nolan's are done WELL.

      I've seen Batman Begins recently, and to me it holds up. For better or for worse, it definitely showed that superhero movies can be "real" movies as well. And saying they got "lucky" with Heath Ledger's Joker is a bit of an overstatement. It's not like he just walked off the street with make-up and they cast him. There's a process involved, and it involves the director, actors, writers, and casting directors...it's not so much "lucky" as "they all did their jobs well". So with such a good track record, I would be inclined to give the movie the benefit of the doubt. For me, at this point, there's no real reason to doubt the film, other than the Bane voice thing which has been resolved and, in my very humble opinion, was blown way out of proportion by grumpy fans. It just seems like people are TRYING to find reasons to hate this movie, and I just don't get it. It might end up being the Spider-Man 3 of the trilogy but I don't think you can make that call at this point by any means.

  3. AJ says:

    The complaints about Bane's voice in the preview weren't complaining for the sake of complaining. When Christopher Nolan was maintaining for the longest time that he wouldn't change the voice, even though everyone from hardcore comics fans to the mainstream press was saying they couldn't understand his dialogue in the preview footage, that really rubbed people the wrong way. We had no guarantee that Nolan would alter the voice at all; note how the article you linked had Nolan stressing the creative independence the studio gave him, and by all accounts Warner Bros. have been pretty hands-off in the past with his work. So it was a legitimate concern.

    • Monkey boy says:

      And yet here we are with a perfectly understandable Bane, and I just have a really hard time believing Internet bitching has anything to do with it. Keep in mind that the complaining had already started when all we had was crappy cell phone audio from 1000 feet away with no post production whatsoever. Even with Nolan's comments I never really thought we were actually going to get a Bane we couldn't understand. And here we are.

      • AJ says:

        "And yet here we are with a perfectly understandable Bane, and I just have a really hard time believing Internet bitching has anything to do with it."

        It wasn't simply "Internet bitching"--everyone was complaining about it (the audience, the press, etc.) And the studio obviously took note of it. I know it can tempting to frame this as a "fanboys bitching about nothing" situation, but it really wasn't that at all. I have no vested interests in who deserves "credit" if anyone in this situation, but there seems to be a pretty clear causation here between opinions expressed and changes implemented.

        • monkey boy says:

          i can see where you are coming from, and i don't have a problem with audience and press voicing their displeasure (as well as anyone else who heard it and wanted to)...even though "press" has become a nebulous term that means any jackass with a blog.

          but voicing displeasure is one thing. absolutely flipping out and saying the movie's going to suck is another. and, as i said, the whining (not the genuine complaints, but whining) and mockery and cries of "WORST BATMAN MOVIE EVAR!!!!111" were already circulating after the initial grainy extra footage on the football field, which is just ridiculous.

          the main thing is, people had just seemed to resign themselves to the movie sucking...like they wanted it to suck in the first place and just sat back and threw up their hands and said "yep! see? sucks!" which is what i dont' get...did people actively want a poor quality batman movie? obviously, if people voice displeasure during press and audience screenings, the studio takes note...that's what those screenings are for, as much as everyone complains about them. so the point i'm trying to make it, there was never really a substantial likelihood that the movie would get released with bane sounding completely unintelligible. but that didn't stop people from whining on the internet. i'm not talking about genuine press and audiences who actually attended screenings and previews, i'm talking about any nerd with a blog who suddenly proclaims that the dark knight rises will suck and he/she always knew it would suck. because that's what i was seeing. but lo and behold, bane sounds fine.

          • Yven says:

            Hehe, yeah, that's what I mean, too. This "I always knew that movie would suck, and everyone will see I'm right." I don't want to start a thing here, but it totally reminds me of what I experienced on Avatar on the net. People posting weeks before the release that the movie is soooo going to suck and then went to a screening in the first week just to post "Ohhhh maaan, I was so right, it so sucks! Waht have you done , Cameron?" That doesn't mean I don't want anyone to critizise these movies. Of course you can critizise Avatar. I think it's an masterpiece, but I can understand critics on some points. It's that not giving the movie a chance to be good or okay. And that's what I see on ASM, too. I think that even if that movie would be the best SM Movie ever (I hope it will, but like you said, who knows? :)), some people would still hate and bash it just because they "always knew" it would suck. I wasn't aware of that being also with TDKR, because I thought that most people loved BB and TDK and so are happily looking forward to TDKR. Yeah and another point is, here in Germany we don't subtitle foreign movies but rather have german voice actors doing versions for us, so Banes original voice wasn't such a big point here, I think, though a lot german moviefans prefer the original english version. I don't, because my "hear" English sadly isn't as good as my "read" English. XD

            Ah and before I forget, again about ASM: I really can understand that fans of Raimi's (first two) movies are not happy about then reboot and especially about it coming so fast. For me it's just, though I liked the movies, they never really felt to me like the comics I grew up with, and in that case SM is special to me, because those were "my" comics as a kid, I liked other heroes, too, especially the Bats, but I mostly read SM and really loved it, also drawing little SM comics by myself. If I had to name just one geeky thing about my childhood, it would be SM and ASM till now feels more like that to me. That's also the reason why I started hating Marvel comics / Joe Quesada, I bet you know why... XD

          • Savonti says:

            But see, here at OAFE you take legit complaints, and make a case for "awful fanboys". Having a complaint, not liking something, that's not being a fanboy. Cries like "worst movie ever" is just hyperbole and I'd like to think we all know that by now. People are allowed to not like something and people who are fans of a franchise shouldn't be treated like lepers just because they (for example) can't understand Bane.

            But more on point it's as it has been said before, Nolan made if pretty clear he had no intention of changing Bane's voice, a voice that really wasn't understandable to most people. I have a friend who after seeing the trailer claimed he could understand Bane, but it "took a second". I don't think that's what we're looking for when it comes to acceptable.

            As far as the movie sucking, well I've been on that train. You have to keep in mind levels, is it likely to be better than say Fantastic Four, well sure. The problem is that everyone is expecting this to be better than The Dark Knight, that's the bar. There is no way the new movie is going to live up to the hype it's just not possible, not to mention much like Spider-Man 3, they seem to be cramming quite a bit of plot into the movie. Do I want the movie to be good? Of course I do, we all do but we all also know how good the third movie of a franchise usually turns out, we all know how high the pedestal of public perception is for this movie already and we all know about disappointment. There's nothing wrong with looking at things without the rose colored glasses and bracing for impact.

          • yo go re says:

            Legitimate complaint: "Bane's really hard to understand. They'd better clear that up before the movie."

            Fanboy complaint: "I can't understand Bane! This movie is going to suck! It's going to be the worst movie of all time and Christopher Nolan is an ass for not listening to me! I'm going to start a petition to have him barred from the editing bay!"

            The mark of a fanboy isn't having complaints against something, it's the cartoonish hyperbole and underlying sense of entitlement. It's very easy to not like things or to be a fan of a franchise while still being mature about it.

            I agree with you, though, that when Nolan said he had no intention of changing the voice, there was no reason for anyone to believe he was anything but serious. He does have something of a reputation as an "auteur" when it comes to his films, and after the success of Dark Knight - both commercial and critical - it's likely the studio would give him even more leeway this time. Now that the voice has been cleared up, sure, it's easy to say there was no chance that WB would let the film out sounding the way it did, but at the time it was a genuine concern...

  4. Yven says:

    Uh oh, sry for all the wrong grammar, that's what happens, if I don't read my writings again before posting. 😉

  5. Onslaught says:

    I haven't actually seen it yet, bu I bet the voice is just fine. In the grand scheme to things, does it even matter why they changed it? If anything, I was pissed at the name for two reasons: I think the movie is eight years after the last one, so what was that period called? The Dark Knight Hangs out in his Mansion? The Dark Knight Sustains? Just stupid.
    Also, the name has zero creativity. When bane was announced as the villan, I was hoping for a true Knightfall movie, thus it should have been called Knightfall, or Knightsend, not "rises," but I don't really care...

    Sorry for the rant

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.