Bane is not a Luchador

This is a Luchador.

This is Bane.

Please take a moment to read this as well, from the wonderfully titled blog, “”

Bane is not a luchador.


(Update: Bane, canonically, wears a luchador mask. Does this make sense? No. Not at all.)

12 thoughts on “Bane is not a Luchador

  1. I stand corrected. I really thought he wrestled while he was incarcerated, to train and test the limits of Venom.
    I mean, his signature move was a back breaker.

  2. The way I see it, if Bane is only wearing a luchador mask, then that makes sense. It’s an easy if flashy disguise. If he were actually a luchador he would be a fantastic athlete and an acrobat, but no fighter.

    So, if Nolan is making a Batman where Bane is actually a luchador he’s making a movie where, effectively, Batman is fighting a more talented Rowdy Roddy Piper. It’s not interesting.

    Not that Bane is all that great of a character in the first place.

  3. And Wil, I have to call your methods into question. You show a clip of B:TAS as your example of non-Luchador Bane, but in the article that you also cite it is stated:
    “He also appeared in Batman: The Animated Series voiced by Henry Silva. He did not appear until very late in the series. Reportedly, the producers did not feel that he fit well in their vision of Gotham City, but eventually decided to take a stab at him. They re-imagined Bane as an assassin hired by a local Gotham mobster to take out Batman. He retained the luchador mask and the venom habit, but though he posed a real threat, Batman is eventually victorious.”

    I’m not going to say this is contradictory, but I am worried it is not comprehensive. Batman and all of his correlatives are fodder for the vision of individual writers. The question remains: is there a quintessential Bane? And if not, is Bane an arguably relevant character?

  4. I think I’ve left a few points out of my argument. The clip I chose was, in my opinion, as good as Bane gets.

    I don’t think Bane is a relevant or interesting Batman villain. He seems to represent no philosophical or psychological counter point to Batman. He lacks depth of motive.

    The best Bane I’ve seen is when he shows up as some completely un-necessary muscle working for Lex Luthor in the “No Man’s Land” series. (Bane is such a 90’s villain.)

    The reason I gripe about this in the context of Nolan’s Batman is that, throughout Batmovie history, the villains have really been the stars of the films. The only reason that the last Batmovie was at all enjoyable or coherent was Heath Ledger’s very interesting interpretation of the Joker. In that film, Batman fights against an idea. And that’s good. When Batman fights Bane, he is fighting either a mercenary or a crazy pro-wrestler. But really the former. How is that compelling? Why do you need a symbol (Batman has been carefully set up as a symbolic figure in the film canon) to fight Bane?

    And why make Bane an actual luchador? How does that improve his depth or weight, dramatically or narratively?

    I apologize for my shoddy postmanship. I should have opened with a full explanation. Hell, I should have explained my choices.

    I wonder at Hans Zimmer’s choice of method for his crowd-sourcing. I wonder at Nolan’s choice of villain (if indeed it was Nolan’s choice at all.) I wonder at the thought process behind the decision to make Bane more theatrical.

    But hell, none of this is important. The movie won’t be very good. I’ll see it anyhow.

  5. I wasn’t trying to knock your postmanship. However, the greater context is appreciated. Timmy always speaks of Bane (his favorite villain) as being very intelligent, and he laments the lack of that intelligence in the more modern iterations.

    In a sense, Bane could be the perfect Batman villain. I’ll try to explain…

    On a purely ideological level, you have the three main bad guys:
    Joker is an agent of malice. Riddler is an agent of chaos. Penguin is an agent of corruption.
    They are punchable, but their deeds are not. They create whirlpools of crime in their wake (eck, too metaphory, sorry).

    On a human level, you have the two anti-heroes, or anti-villains:
    Catwoman is Batman without the mid-century-industrial-American-family-man moralism and mama’s boy sentimentality.
    Two-Face is “the wretched figure,” the broken man, the loss of hope; there, but by the grace of acid, go I.

    All of these are highly symbolic villains. But Batman, like Superman, needs a villain to PUNCH!

    When he started out, what were his goals? Why the military drills and chemical study? Why not just study law? Clearly with his resources, both mental and financial, he could have been an attorney far greater than Dent or a police officer far more resilient than Gordon.

    What did he want to do? Where did he go? He went to the alleys and the under-served neighborhoods. And what did he seek when he first went into the darkness of Gotham nights?


    Not symbols. Not figures. Not ideas. He went to stop thugs.

    Batman punches thugs right in the mouth and ties them up for Gordon to arrest. Bane, in his purest form, is a hyper-intelligent, hyper-active thug. This one is a lot harder to hit and when you do, he takes a lot more hits.

    Bane represents the purest battle of Batman’s will to cease the violent crime that took his parents’ lives; a worthy antagonist in the paint-by-numbers tragedy of the Batman fable.

    So why does Bane always get the short bus home from the Rogue Gallery? Because everything’s too simple, and the simple-minded writers and directors see more in Batman than is there to see.

    Because Batman is a thug.

    He is not a detective, he is not a leader, he is not a reformer, he is not a revolutionary. His battles against Joker, Riddler, Penguin, and Ra’s al ghul (the polar opposite of punchable) are all wastes of his time. His faux-moralistic incapability to murder his enemies is his greatest weakness.

    He is ideologically stunted and that derth of wisdom exacerbates the crime in Gotham.

    When he fights Bane, he puts Bane in jail, who will then escape, to fight Batman again. Bane is a thug. He is only trying to prove his superiority over Bruce Wayne. The others are purposefully goading Batman into battle, and every time they do, dozens of innocent lives are lost in the game of half-wits.

    I’m compelled to write this up as an illustrated essay. I’ll call it: “Batman & Bane: Spy vs. Spy.”

  6. Here’s where our readers are confused: Is Nolan making him a Luchador? Or did Kosmo just think that Bane was a Luchador?

    The shortest possible description for Bane is this: foreigner. Or, I suppose: for’ner. Or, maybe: for’r.

    I know that a lot of Batman’s villains come to Gotham to “do battle” with him, but Bane, more than most, is simply a guy from an invented poor country.

    Ra’s al ghul is also a foreigner. But he’s a wealthy foreigner. Because there are two types.

    Can somebody draw up a list of every Batman villain that is *specifically* not from Gotham?
    (Superman doesn’t count.)

    I didn’t take that into account when I was composing my previous argument. Bane may be the best Batman villain, but Batman still loses that otherwise even balance because he drew Bane to Gotham. Moriarty didn’t fly to London to taunt Holmes. The Hamburglar didn’t travel to McDonaldland to goad Officer Big Mac.

    Joker, Riddler, Penguin, Catwoman, Penny Plunderer and Two-Face are all Gothamites. I apologize for this oversight. Any argument for the proper Batman foe should strongly consider this aspect.

  7. I’m extrapolating wildly in previous posts when I presume, along with the internet, that the chant that Zimmer is crowd-sourcing is a luchador entrance chant.

  8. If I may step in here, I conceded my mistake after reading over Bane’s back story on Wikipedia. The luchador mask wasn’t really discussed, other than changes made as time went on and across media. A bit disappointing.

    I continued reading and realized that I was mixing story lines from the comics and animated interpretations (his appearance is Batman & Robin with Poison Ivy is never talked about in polite society). There was one characteristic that remained constant through most of his stories, he was a brilliant strategist. I also came across a comic story line in which Bane teams up with the League of Assassins.

    Taking into account what I know, despite attempts to avoid spoilers, and Nolan’s inclination to incorporate certain stories from the comic series, Bane’s time with Ra’s’ crew is probably what Dark Knight Rises will revolve around. Both Ra’s and Bane know Batman’s identity. Bane will lead the charge in an attempt to cripple Gotham as Ra’s tried in Batman Begins.

    Now, why use Bane? I have no idea. As you both pointed out, he doesn’t fit into the Bat-mythos of villains. However, a South American arm of the League could easily be incorporated in the real world. Nolan showed that his Batman isn’t afraid to venture to other continents in order to stop corruption and crime in Gotham. Perhaps Bat’s crossed paths with Bane’s operations while stopping a drug or gun running ring. Maybe Bruce Wayne came across it while traveling the world during his disappearance from Gotham before donning the cape and cowl.

    Having Riddler in the film would have been great, but he’s too gimmicky. Penguin is really just a crime boss with a bird fetish and Nolan already used that type of criminal in the last two films with Falcone and Joker’s financiers. Poison Ivy is next to impossible in the world Nolan has set. Mr. Freeze, well I think Schwarzenegger/Schumaker fucked that up, and again, not possible for Nolan. As you continue through the list of villains, they get into the realm of super-powered or falling short of being menacing, ie Mad Hatter.

    So I don’t see this as putting Batman’s morality to the test as far as killing goes. I think this is going to be more about Batman/Bruce Wayne having interfered with the global syndicate of the League of Assassins one too many times and they’re out to break him and use him as an example for other would-be heroes.

    That’s just my attempt at rationalizing it all for the movie.

  9. I guess we’ll see. I’d be fine with the description of Bane that Kos posted above. That’s not a bad villain. I just don’t want him to be a luchador.

    I’ve got several google alerts set up following this film. I’m interested in the development process for the soundtrack and the workflow. (It’s something I’m trying to work up for my classes to coincide with it’s theatric release.)

  10. How does anyone still NOT know Batman’s identity?

    Otherwise, sure. Your prediction sounds about right. Nolan’s Batman is a sloppy Bond.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s