That would be Reality Is Unrealistic, not Aluminum Christmas Trees.
Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.
The Combat Stilettos quote isn't how I remember it. Wasn't it closer to, "Don't those make it hard to walk?" She gives a witty comeback along the lines of, "You tell me," before kicking him.
Hide / Show Replies
What really bothers me is that we have the ridiculous nuclear physics failures listed under "artistic license." WE really need to change it back to "you fail at x forever". because calling every case of not doing research "artistic license" validates the mistakes and makes pariahs out of those that would point it out.
^As to the nuclear fusion point, I have to agree that it seems more like a serious case of "Did Not Do Research" rather than Artistic License. Nolan made a nuclear fusion reactor behave like a fission reactor. I did a project comparing the basic workings of the JET, the European fusion power project, so I can tell you that I don't think there's a nuclear core to remove like fission, and there certainly isn't an explosion.
Artistic license would be more like saying the reactor would cause a giant fireball with the heat of the Sun that would burn out every living thing. THAT is more reasonable to a fusion reaction, since reactors like the JET do have to heat the hydrogen isotopes to way more than the surface temperature of the Sun to fuse them, in order to compensate for not being able to reproduce the pressure. Of course in reality a real reactor shuts down rather anticlimactically if any little thing is off in the reaction but that would be far more adherent to the principles of reality than a nuclear blast. Exaggerations of that nature are more in line with artistic license, like how Angels and Demons exaggerated the amount of antimatter that CERN produced.
And the fusion bomb theory doesn't really work because such things use the free neutrons as triggers for fission. And besides, if the plan was to use a fusion bomb of that sort, why not just bring one of their own instead of rewiring a fusion REACTOR, which is not exactly small. It would be much more efficient.
We never did hear the technical details of the fusion reactor or what the Dr. does to it. As for the nuclear bomb question, it seems even the League has limits on what it can get. My guess is that since Talia couldn't acquire a bomb years earlier, she got Bruce and the doctor to do the work for her.
You know, the Sun is a fusion reactor. It's entirely possible that that's the kind of fusion reactor they meant. And when the sun (or any star) has combined all its fuel it explodes quite spectacularly (with the sun, in about 6 billion years, being predicted to engulf the earth when it goes up). In fact, it's far more plausible that it's this kind of fusion reactor as it's frequently mentioned that the reactor was intended to be "green" energy, meaning not nuclear powered.
The only real trouble is that, based on the size of the sun and the comparative size of the fusion reactor, the reactor should have destabalized in days, not weeks.
I dont mean to cause any kind of fuss, but why is Bane regarded as the Dragon to Talia? I know the film showcases her reveal as the daughter of Ra's after Batman defeats Bane in a climactic fight, but she never describes him as a loyal henchmen whose antics are all inspired by her plans. Maybe its just me, but I feel the movie portrays Bane and Talia as more of a last minute Big Bad Diumverate than any kind of Big Bad and loyal stooge combo. I have given it a lot of thought, and here are my reasons for this conclusion.
The very first scene of the movie has Bane himself being targeted by the CIA as the Leader of what we learn later is the League of Shadows. I understand that Talia using Bane as an active "cover up" leader would make sense to obscure her involvement as the "true mastermind" of the League.
However, when the plane goes down and Bane tells one of the League members to stay behind for the sake of leaving a body to cover their trail, why would they obey a mere dragon? Even one as intimidating as Bane? If Bane was such a fanatically devoted "servant" who had no personal investment in the evil plot except to serve Talia, why wouldnt he be the one who volunteers to sacrifice himself for the mission of Ras Al Ghul? Why would the man so happily volunteer to die in the place of someone who isnt their leader, but instead a fellow cog in the machine of "Talias master plan"?
It kind of ruins the idea that Banes sole motivation is staking his life for Talias wishes alone when a) its clear that him sacrificing his own life would help her cause by leaving behind an authentic corpse for the authorities to find and b) the henchmen would be just as expendable as Bane in that scenario. If Bane were just a henchmen of Talia, the man he tells to die in his own place wouldnt smile and proudly accept this. He would get indignant and say "why does Talia think YOU are so special?", and resist.
And seeing as how the man was clearly getting to leave the plane before it crashed when Bane stopped him, it would indicate that Banes word alone is enough to make him stay there and die, not as part of any "premeditated plan" on the part of anyone smarter than Bane.
Edited by Danster18 Hide / Show Replies
Furthermore, if Talia was the real power and mind behind everything Bane does, with her goal being the destruction of Gotham and vengeance on Batman, it seems to me she could have personally stabbed him, incapacitated him, find a way to use the nuclear device to destroy Gotham while Batman watched LONG before Bane did anything.
Heck, when Bane bankrupted Bruce and drove him into her arms, culminating in a scene where he sleeps with her, she could have CLEARLY either killed him or strung him up somewhere with a TV to watch as she remotely detonates the bomb, destroying Gotham and letting Bruce PERSONALLY know that it was because he let HER father die to make the personal vengeance complete.
It just doesnt seem like she is the master architect of this plan to blow up Gotham/break Batmans spirit if she could have technically done all this herself before Bane set the plot in motion. And if she was in the one who thought of the plan, why wouldnt she give herself the personal satisfaction of letting Batman know of the pain he caused her. Yes I get that she explained these motivations at the end, but she didnt make a move to hurt him until it was clear that Bane had lost the 2nd fight and Batman was essentially torturing him.
All she did was watch as Bane made his last stand, and it made her seem like more of an benefactor watching to see if Bane would succeed in his own goals than someone who thought her Dragon getting beaten was part of the plan.
Edited by Danster18
Well, the big plan and ultimate motivation were Talia's, which at the very least puts her as the more significant of the pair, to say nothing of her being the final villain. That's why I'd think of her as Big Bad, and I imagine I'm not alone there. But I think you're definitely selling the importance of a good Dragon short- the best Dragons aren't just favored henchment, but powerful leaders and villains in their own right. No one second-guesses Darth Vader just because he's Supreme Commander of the Imperial Starfleet rather than the man on the throne, and the same goes for Bane- just because he's not the ultimate string-puller, doesn't mean his men don't regard him as their leader and don't have loyalty born of a combination of respect, fear, and even a little awe at what he can do.
Besides, Talia's undercover, and Bane wouldn't want some random grunt blowing it. I doubt any but his most trusted henchmen know that he's working for someone else at all, and even for those that do, he's the one who trained them, leads them, and quite possibly recruited them. Most of these men are probably loyal to Bane first, irregardless of the fact that he's in turn loyal to someone else.
And if you seriously think The Dragon is as expendable as Mook #473, I have to wonder what you think The Dragon is. The only time Talia's plan called for Bane to sacrifice his life, she planned to die at the same time.
I hope this explanation of my thought process makes sense, but to sum it up- Bane's men are loyal to him, he's loyal to Talia. They both lead the Lo S, but the Evil Plan is her plan and accomplishes goals that are important to her personally.
EDIT:^ to the immediately above, Bane getting beaten was never part of the plan. Bruce escaping from the Pit at all was never part of the plan. However, the plan did seem to call for Batman to get overpowered and broken in hand-to-hand combat, which is Bane's specialty. Sure, Talia could have slipped the knife in Bruce's back after sleeping with him, but that wouldn't have been satisfying to her. He loses everything he owns, then he gets physically broken and sent to the Pit, then he watches his city fall apart and be destroyed, then he dies. Had he not escaped, I do imagine Talia would have left Gotham just before it blew and come to the Pit to reveal herself and finish Bruce off in person when he's at his lowest; his escape forced some improvising on both Bane and Talia's part.
Edited by MasterGhandalf ''All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us..."
It just seemed like a) if she was a Big Bad, she didnt seem willing to lift a finger to complete her end goals, in spite of clearly having the resources to do so, until Bane actively deconstructed Gotham on his own merit.
I'm not trying to be critical but there seems to be doubt over Bane's position in the scheme of the League of Shadows, and I know the reveal of Talia as Ras's daughter complicates this moreso than the movie lead us to believe, but i still dont think the movie confirms her as being "superior" in rank and cunning than Bane at any point, which the YMMV section on the film here s seems to confirm.
Indeed, I recall Alfred himself early in the movie outlining both Bane's position as their leader and his origin as a man born and raised in prison. He even mentions that Ras Al Ghul trained him personally, which i recall from "Batman Begins" as an honor he only bestows to possible future heirs of the League (such as Bruce). I understand that Ras progeny is eventually revealed to be Talia, and not Bane, but nothing in the film indicates that this biological status makes her the "Mastermind and Leader" of everything the League does when he dies by default.
If anything, Talia doesnt seem trained by Ras at all, and displays none of the tactical or combat process afforded to Bane. In fact it would make more sense for Ras to NOT make her inherit the League, given how much he is pained over her time in the pit and wishes to protect her from a life of potential violence. Why wouldnt he choose Bane as the leader, given that Talia herself mentioned that she did not care for his goals until his demise and the fact that Bane risked his own life to stop criminals from destroying his own daughter.
Continuing this train of thought, Bane back story of being a blameless man who was born in prison (as was Talia) may seem irrelevant since Talia is revealed to be the one who escaped, it would actually make more sense that Ras select him over anyone else, given that he is an innocent man who lived among real criminals (sound familiar?) Some people claim that Talias reveal robs Bane of his back story and thus any motivations aside serving Talia, and i think thats why his status as a "red herring" or "dragon" remains unchallenged on this site. Yet no one denies that Bane was ALSO born in the prison. Alfred confirms it, Bane himself even talks about being "born in darkness", and Talia herself, POST-REVEAL, tearfully states that "his only crime was that he loved me."
Given that Ras entire motivation for starting the League was the knowledge that criminals killed his wife in the pit, why would he personally train someone with a criminal background as a member of his Knight Templar Criminal killing League? It would make more sense for Ras, a man who asked Bruce to murder a criminal as initiation, would select Bane as the "heir" of the League. He is a man who is both born innocent and terrorized by criminals himself enough to be a willing and promising candidate for Ras own agenda.
Edited by Danster18
Ah, thank you for the clarification, i suppose your enterpretation does make sense.
I just think that the whole "put Batman in the impossible pit" thing makes more sense as a personal plan on the part of Bane, even during the post reveal. Considering that Bane himself has a scene in the pit where he describes his plan to use "hope" to destroy Gotham being based off his own time being tortured by false hope in the pit, it would make more sense for Bane rather than Talia to have thought of putting him in there.
Considering that Talia knows first hand that it is possible to get out, while Bane never had the chance to leave due to his injury, it seems like a cruel personal touch in hindsight to give BATMAN a horrible injury, then strand him in the pit as a "mirror experience" of his own life in the pit. Since Talia sustained no such injury, i dont understand what personal motivation she would have had for that little extra touch since the obstacle preventing Batman from leaving would be the pit itself, which she knows first hand is possible to climb through desperation and overcoming ones fear of death.
Bane himself proved not to possess these two things, as he never was able to climb out himself.
Edited by Danster18
In response to your thoughts on what makes a Dragon, yeah i suppose i am kind of selling the dragon status short, and its not like the film itself makes him out to be just a scary Mook after she reveals herself.
However, considering that she claims to love him enough (in some way) to care about his feelings and welfare, (she even adjusts the mask) and that he was excommunicated from the League by Ras himself, i dont get why she would be mad enough to distance herself from her father for this act, and yet when her father dies, she starts a master plan that would end in the death of the man who saved her from being raped and killed as a child.
If she was the sole orchestrator of every event that would end in Gothams destruction as well as her own, couldnt she leave her childhood protector out of the blast radius? Why rope him into something that would end in his death if she loved him so much? He wasnt even part of the League without her hypothetical say so. If he was intent on leaving the city, (which I suppose you could argue he could have, with his underground entrance into the city) wouldn't the fact that the plan ending in his survival and her death exclude him from Dragon status if he is the Leader of the League of Shadows? It would certainly ruin the argument that he is acting as her secret protector for the whole movie. Either argument wouldn't make him the Dragon at all.
Yes i know you could argue that she needed him to "break" Batman and send him away, but couldnt she send hordes of league members to jump Batman by surprise and break his spine themselves? If Bane is solely a dragon to everything Talia says alone, why get him involved? If you made the argument that he is just THAT loyal to her every plan, what would his stake be in her vengeance plot if he was too "radical" for Ras's plan, and excommunicated?
We have established that Bane is not Ras's child, and he owes getting out of the prison more to Talias affection for him than Ras's vision. It just seems like Bane is every bit the collaborator in the "plan" for Gotham. If Talia were in charge of everything behind it, she would have left out the man she genuinely loves if the plan ended with everyone involved exploding...
...especially since Alfred and Talia both confirm that Ras actually grew to detest Bane and personally threw him out of the league while he was the League mastermind.
My argument for Bane being a co big bad is based on Nolans insistance that Bane is meant to be a "brilliant tactician character" in this film, and the idea his actions are not planned by him kind of undermine this. Im not saying Talia is stupid, a dragon, or has no say in the plan. I just think that Nolan makes it clear that Bane derives his own personal pleasure from upending society "his way" so that he has power over the "false hope" society gives to the oppressed, and that he appreciates the irony of promising them salavation in spite of knowing the city will die.
It just happens that his end game fulfills Talias wish to fulfill her fathers dream AND get revenge on Batman. My train of thought is, they BOTH want to get revenge on Batman. Talia wants to avenge her father, and Bane wants to prove that HE was the better successor for Ras, as Ras had excommunicated him and chosen Bruce instead to carry out justice. With Ras gone, it would make sense for Bane to take control of the league.
It would give him the power to destroy Gotham in a more sadistic way influenced by the life he lived full of "false hope" in the Pit, while Talia wouldnt object because his end game involves giving her the trigger to personally fulfill her fathers wishes. And they both get their wish to sadistically break Batman. And Talia would be fulfilling the wishes of her childhood savior.
I just think that they are more of a Big Bad Diumverate in this sense. I think they can both want the same thing. Its just that they have different reasons for doing so and work together to accomplish it. Im sorry if im rambling but its cool to talk stuff like this out with somebody, so i can get other opinions in case im over thinking it.
Edited by Danster18
Yup, i definitely too obsessed with this, cuz i checked out the novelization in the bookstore. I know novelizations can deviate a little from the original script, but hear me out.
In the climactic scene where the police attack Bane's forces and Batman approaches Bane, the writing switches to Banes own internal narration. He himself muses that when he destroys Gotham and kills Batman once and for all, he will be cemented as Ra's Al Ghuls TRUE successor in front of the whole world. He then looks up at a window to see Talia watching him. He blithely thinks, "Well good, this time she can watch me destroy the Dark Knight if she wants to."
He then enters the final battle will Batman. The novelization differs a little bit in that it is Bane who kicks Batman into the Hall of Justice before Batman attacks his mask. He has Batman on the ground, and Talia and a group of her mercenaries approach him. Bane actually turns around to scream at her "NO! HE IS MINE!" Talia and Co. actually back off at his command. Then Batman hits his mask and the novel proceeds essentially as the movie did, Reveal and all.
Now i know a novelization doesnt count as Word of God in the strictest sense. However, it does adapt the script very well, and the way Bane is written not only defies Dragon categorization, it goes one step further and implies that TALIA is his dragon. When the novel switches to his POV in her presence, it seems to confirm the characterization of a deceitful manipulator and mastermind who uses Talias resources without really caring about her wishes, rather than an Undyingly Loyal lovesick puppy dog who did everything as per her command for her cover.
The former is the impression i got in the movie, thats all. Its just that when people both inside and outside this site refer to him as the "secretly brainless lovesick henchman that is Hilariously in Hindsight like his incarnation in Batman And Robin," they seem to forget two critical scenes.
The scenes in question would be where Commissioner Gordon escapes from the sewers and Bane inspects his final speech. He later uses this same speech as part of the plan to break open Blackgate prison and ensure chaos. It seems unlikely that he contacted Miranda between these two scenes, given what a police state Gotham has been established to be, the fact that the CIA is after him, the fact that he cant take off his signature mask, etc.
The other scene would he where he flagrantly disobeys Talias (presumably) last wishes and tries to execute Batman on the spot. If Nolan intended everything Bane ever did to be in utter service of Talias machinations, then that scene makes no sense what so ever.
Given that Talia never asserts herself as his superior, nor he her inferior, i just dont understand why he is the dragon. Especially in light of the argument that he was willing to blow up 12 MILLION MEN WOMEN AND CHILDREN because he just decided to follow a little girl entirely dependant on him for the rest of his natural life.
I just don't think that motivation makes sense when the movie itself offers other ones, such as during the scene with him fighting Batman, or when he is talking to Batman in the pit.
Edited by Danster18
Furthermore, the Foil section of the movie's main page here describes Bane as a possible foil of Alfred, in that "they are both older British men who served a child whoses parents death encouraged them to fight evil." Aside from the fact that we have no idea what his nationality actually is (word of God indicates Caribbean heritage) this seems like a generalization of their relationship.
Besides, think back to Batman Begins if you will. What was the Big Bad's plan in that movie? To recruit a vengeful philanthropist whose painful backstory would make them want to serve the League of Shadows, get them to use their resources to create a weapon disguised as a helpful object directly in the city, then show up with his men to facilitate the destruction of the city personally to ensure it goes as planned. Sound familiar?
I'm just saying that, instead of the idea that Bane is a foil to Alfred, wouldnt the fridge brilliance plot parallels between Begins and Rises indicate that Banes true foil is RAS AL GHUL, the former Big Bad??
Both men inspire awe, serve as eloquent and malicious father figures to their proteges, and truely believe that destroying Gotham is an act of justice? Also, Bane CLEARLY stated that he WAS the League of Shadows directly before members of the League itself, and no one contradicts him on this during the whole movie.
Talia herself said she wasnt close enough to her father to share his ideals when he was alive, and left the League and shunned him solely because BANE was excommunicated. It sounds to me like Bane is her surrogate father figure and thus the mastermind big bad, if not an equal in a diummverate.
Let me put it this way, if Bruce Wayne in the first movie went along with making that Fear gas dispensing device in the first movie, would you think of him as THE big bad in that situation?
Edited by Danster18
Anyway, I'm sorry that i have been ranting about this for so long. I dont want to take apart this wiki brick by brick (i love you guys!) I just wanted to see if there was anything i was missing from this movie that i didnt understand.
I'm new to posting and i just wanted to show that i did my homework. I noticed that in the character page, someone mentioned in the Bane section that he could possibly be part of part of a big bad diummverate. If that was because of what i wrote here, i am really humbled and thank you very much.
I haven't edited the main page because I don't want to write anything that can't be confirmed or agreed with by other more experienced tropers. That's all. Anyway, thank you!
Edited by Danster18
Good God, people. Paragraph breaks. Huge walls of text are a pain in the ass to read.
Ah yikes. Sorry! I thought it would paragraph break on my device. I guess not. Hold on a sec.
EDIT: I just did some editing. Does that make it a little easier to read?......if not just as long-winded and at the utter mercy of my stream-of-consciousness?
Edited by Danster18
To be honest, while it does leave room for interpretation, most people in the modern world can't see a duo of one manipulative, almost seductive Magnificent Bastard Non-Action Person and one Badass Dreaded Genius Bruiser with Undying Loyalty to the above and NOT see the Emperor and Darth Vader in their mind's eye. Hence the Big Bad-and-The Dragon interpretation trumping the Big Bad Duumvirate one to most people
Although it's perfectly understandable to not want to bring The Joker back after Heath Ledger left us with such an incredible performance under his belt, I'm not sure Christopher Nolan's show of "respect" was as respectful as it could have been. It's one thing to not want to replace him with someone else (though many think Scott McClure could believably fill his shoes), but it seemed irresponsible from a writing standpoint to to pretend The Joker never existed and give zero closure in-story as to his fate, especially in what's supposed to be the Grand Finale of such a major trilogy.
Would it have killed them to have a throwaway line about things getting quiet after The Joker being put in the Electric Chair? Or perhaps Bruce glimpsing a newspaper article on his trial and imprisonment and/or execution while doing research on Catwoman? Yes, I've heard of the novelization, but the problem with that is (as Mr. Plinkett once pointed out) that it's not in the movie proper.
Was there a bit of actor allusion when Gordon orders all police officers into the sewers the same way he calls upon 'everyone' in Leon the professional?
Hide / Show Replies
Nah, I'd say that was more of a coincidence.
Ceterum censeo Morbillivirum esse eradicandum.
About "Foreshadowing To Miranda Tate being Talia al Ghul": There is another small detail - when Gordon is trying to mark the truck with the bomb and later finds out that he marked the wrong truck, Talia was the one that held the radiation detector and tells him that it's the right truck.
Google "Bane Talia". I think to say Bane qualifies for "Draco in Leather Pants" is kind of an understatement. Also might be part of a fan-preferred couple, if the number of Tumblrs, fan-art and fan-fiction about the two characters that have been created within weeks of the movie's indicate anything.
Edited by Danster18
I think we should add a The Mole tropes as a result of Talia, especially since she was the key reason they were able to for the most part stay one step ahead of any internal attempts to sabotage the overall plan.
Saint of Asakuraism
Although it might be a bit of a stretch, does Bane qualify for the From Nobody to Nightmare addition? I thought I'd ask before just throwing it both on the movie page and his character page. It's very, very subtle, but there are a couple of hints throughout the film.
One of the lines in his opening speech, "No one cared who I was until I put on the mask." is part of my reasoning here. However, it's more focused on the fact that before he helped Talia escape and got beaten so badly that he needed the mask to live free of pain that he was just sort of a regular prisoner, if perhaps one slightly stronger than average.
It was pretty much Ra's and the League of Shadows that elevated him from just some random guy that cared enough to protect a child, into the brutal and cunning villain that we see in Rises.
Again, I'm throwing this out there to see if anyone thinks one way or another about this.
Edited by Grahf Dost Thou Desire the Power ... Glove? It's so bad.
Regarding the Colorado shootings, though tragic, they don't have anything to do with the movie itself. Most of the news I have seen on the topic recently refers to the event as a theater shooting rather than the Batman shooting or whatever other name may apply. Could we at least wait a bit before determining that the movie will predominantly be known for the shooting and adding it to the main description? As an aside, it continues to be referred to as a recent event, and Examples Are Not Recent.
♥ ♦ ♠ ♣ Hide / Show Replies
I'd agree it has nothing to do with the film. And you're right about needing to wait and see if it actually will be forever associated with it. Harsher in Hindsight doesn't mean immediately after all. You need perspective and time to make that judgement. Personally I feel the tragedy has nothing to do with the film and everything to do with the perpetrator choosing a crowded venue. The fact it was a premier for Rises was incidental for me.
The planet is fine. The people are f**ked. - George Carlin
Tolkienist
The exact nature of the relationship between Bane and Talia isn't specified in the movie. Most of the tropes listed for it on the main page and in the character sheet are just interprentations made by the tropers, and thus now there's a whole lot of confusingly contradicting tropes listed for them. Should we move them to the YMMV page? (That is, the tropes that try to define the nature of the relationship in the friend-family-lover axel.)
Any other Occupy supporters a little annoyed that it seems like they are being spun to be nothing but anarchists. I mean who are the heroes in the end? A bunch of rich folks and police, I didn't see any average joes and janes rushing out to help kick ass. They were all cowering or being little anarchists. Just be clear: yes there have been jack asses in the Occupy movement that I would consider anarchists and they aren't my brothers and sisters. I see the movement as wanting to call out corruption that has been allowed to do whatever it wants. I sure as hell don't want to see a bunch of rich folks or police strung on wires but I do want to see more people like Madoff going to jail and police that beat up protesters or spray mace into people that are trapped behind fences. I really dislike Goyer's idea that if you protest or dislike how little the wealthy are taxed you're an evil terrorist. Sorry for the long post. I enjoyed the movie but I'm just uncomfortable that Hollywood might have helped paint the movement in an even worse light. I mean I look at old videos of the blacks protesting and those weren't popular and they were beaten but today we go 'thank god they stood up for themselves!'
Hide / Show Replies
I think Rises portrayed both the 99% and 1% as capable of doing both good and bad, personally.
For example, the Gothamites that followed Bane did give into their worst impulses and commit evil acts. But the League of Shadows also has much money and resources and they were evil as well. Batman is rich, but Catwoman obviously came from a poor background but is also a hero (at least by the climax). Talia al Ghul is also wealthy but very, very evil as well as John Dagget.
Edited by darkclaw I totally hate my avatar. Just saying.
Yeah, maybe I am a little too high strung about ant-Occupy stuff. I kind of think Nolan missed a moment to have the original, non-cops, try to stand up against Bane's anarchy. To help kind of enforce the 'Rossieu was right' theme/trope from Dark Knight.
Still I was a tad miffed they kind of only mentioned once or twice that there was a recession and numerous agents of Bane were more working class people. Eh, just a movie. I got to relax.
I think the meaningful name example is a pretty big stretch, should i remove it? It is as follows:
Meaningful Name: Miranda Tate. It may not seem meaningful at first, but she's referred to several time as Miss Tate, which to these ears sounds like "mistake"; as in it would be a mistake to trust her.
Edited by FlintlockWolfman Hide / Show Replies
That sounds like far too much of a stretch. First two sentences of the trope description: "A name that has a direct, barely-hidden meaning to it. The first, last, or full name says something primal about the character." Feel free to remove it.
That was the amazing part. Things just keep going.
Given what we see of Bane's past, his pain may be considered a case of a Aluminum Christmas Trees trope. This due to the fact it may be a severe case of facial neuralgia, a disorder that can effect the subject in a similar way to what Bane is experiencing.
Hide / Show Replies