Batsuit Discussion Thread

[Rynan]

Maybe the BB suit could get a working in the first half of the movie.

Doubt it. You see that suit.
http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/d/d5/200px-Begins_suit.jpg
Your going to have to try pretty hard to damage that sucker enough that it deems replacement. But that is, if you can get your hands on Batman long enough to try.

That suit built to take a lickin' and keep on tickin'.

[DeFett]

Maybe it shrinks in the dryer. :)

[DeFett]

Double post - Sorry not sure what happened there.

[Taiwarriorz21]

All will be well...They will make the suit fit the movie, so i'm not losing any sleep over this! lol

[Duneboy]

:wolverine aslong as the costume changes are subtle like in spidey 2 i won't worry.

[Nepenthes]

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g74/ngorsh01/bat/batsgrey.jpg

Darken the grey a shade and this suit is perfect

-remove silly triangle brooch things
-slim down his head
-straighten the lines on the cowl

I'd also bulk out his belt, but that's too unlikely imo.

[Beelze]

Very good post, Saint. I think they should've used Leslie Thompkins and/or Harvey Dent instead of making up and using Rachel Dawes. Holmes was alright, but her character was, as you said, superfluous.

[Duneboy]

I honestly thought they were gonna go for a new look on the costume for BB instead of the black armor/rubber (which I still love!). What would've been cool may have been like a gray/marble like armor w/ black cowl, cape, boots, & gloves. Kinda like Alex Ross' rendition but w/ the eye slits use some sort of colored lenses like in Daredevil. :daredevil

[Darkest Knight]

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g74/ngorsh01/bat/batsgrey.jpg

I'm a huge "All-Black" fan. And thought the BEGINS suit looked good. But this color combo is very attractive. I could see this working in the next Batman movie, seeing as how he is re-fining everything, and becoming more professional in his approack and everything is more sleek and polished. Like his game as Batman.

[Duneboy]

ya, I'm a huge *all black* fan too. I liked that in BB they didn't use the yellow oval against his insignia too.:ninja:

[Herr Logan]

I think it's been said enough times here, but there are various ways Bruce is interpreted in his early years. So no, I don't really think there's a "definite" route that they can take.


I would say in the beginning, he's focused. Wouldn't go as far as saying obsessed. Something like that....takes time. You'd have to be engulfed in it completely before you even have time to realize this is all that you're living for. So in that regard, it does make sense for him to gradually becomes "lost in the abyss" as Alfred would say. Heck, the whole BTAS series showcased this progression.

The Batman has always been dedicated to his mission. It's not a hobby, it's not a part-time job, it's not a game-- it's his life. Just because he hasn't always been as rigid and unrelenting as he has in his more recent incarnations does not mean he started out on a whim or with anything less than a full dedication to fighting crime.

The man trained himself specifically to be a perfect athlete and the World's Greatest Detective. He's not playing around. There's nothing about those facts that have changed. Not in any real continuity.

Take that "dedication" a little bit further, or portray it in a different light, and it's obsession. In the world of comics, it may seem somewhat common for a man who believes in justice to put on a costume and throw himself into mortal danger in the night, but the fact is, that's an obsession. That's taking it further than any "normal" person would or could. He had the exact same intent in the beginning as he does now, in any incarnation in actual canon.

If the "general public" prefers someone who's more "human" or "relatable," maybe there shouldn't be Batman movies at all, because the Batman has never been very relatable to the average person. At least not in any incarnation you'd want in a movie. Even when he was more "kid friendly," when he was a deputized member of the GCPD, he was still removed from the rest of society in a number of ways, similar to Superman, but even more so.

If people can't handle a Batman who is more concerned with his superheroics than anything else, then they can't handle the Batman, period.

Don't know about that last sentence. Sounds more like a killer to me. :o

How so? The Mission specifically precludes killing. His Mission is to stop criminals without creating more death, and everything else he does is a means to that end. Bruce Wayne is nothing without the Batman, nor is he meant to be.

:wolverine

[Chris Wallace]

Honestly, I really like the idea in the first page of this thread. It's an homage to the '60s series, but would still work within the universe established by Batman Begins.
I disagree in comparing the design in any way to the Adam West suit. Having looked at it & given it some thought, I like it-except I would keep the symbol the way it is in Begins. I'm not overly fond of the oval & the re-shaped bat looks like Batman from the distant future to me. And I would go with a darker grey-barely distinguishable from black.

[Herr Logan]

I usually agree with your posts, Logan, as you know--but I'm afraid I'm going to have to fight you on this one.

I can taste the blood already. ;)


For starters, obviously I agree that Rachel was unnecessary and superfluous--but I have to say you're giving her credit for influence she doesn't actually have. A criticism of Begins I often hear is that Bruce was on "autopilot" throughout the film, which is to say he just bounces from place to place and one of those places happens to be Batman. The truth of the matter is that Bruce's thought process, his character arc, is all there on the screen--it's just not explicit. If you examine the events, you can see it. I think the problem (if you can call it a problem) is that the film isn't told in chronological order, which makes this harder to identify.

Back to my original point: everybody gives Rachel credit for inspiring Bruce to become Batman, but she didn't. The exchange outside Falcone's club may have put Bruce off killing, but it didn't put him on the path to becoming Batman. Had he taken what she said to heart, he would have become a cop or a lawyer. Rachel got angry when Bruce said "your system is broken," but she didn't sway him: he still believes that, or he would not have circumvented the system by becoming Batman.

That argument wasn't written to teach Bruce about justice, it was written to show Bruce the real enemy. Bruce had never thought of anything beyond Joe Chill; to him, Chill was the sum of evil, and evil had to be brought to justice. But Bruce realized that the true evil was much larger. It wasn't even Falcone; it wasn't just crime, it was injustice as a whole.

I don't fully disagree with that. I wasn't saying that Rachel primarily inspired the Batman. I'm saying he cowers in her presence, valuing her concept of him far more than he should. The point is, he wanted her to know he was the Batman and his mind wasn't as much on business as it should have. You know how just a little bit of writing and a little bit of acting can come across as very powerful and effective? Those scenes with Rachel, when Bruce is out of costume-- they had a powerfully destructive effect on the tone and the story. At least they did to me.
Again, I'm not suggesting that Bruce became the Batman to prove something to Rachel. I'm saying that he became ashamed of how he was going about being the Batman. His silly playboy persona is a function of the Batman, even in this story. They got that part right, and they still chose to mess it up by having him say, "I am more." If they wanted to show Bruce feeling uneasy with having friends see him as useless, it should be him saying it to Alfred, in private. His secrets belong in the Manor and in the cave, not in front of Rachel. No, he didn't reveal his identity right there and then, but he hinted, and that was wrong. Rachel was superfluous, and therefore should never even have an inkling, at any time, who the Batman is. Hell, it was taking it too far to have Lucious Fox know about him (and yes, he knew about him), much less some fabricated, needless would-be girlfriend.


The next question, then is why did Bruce walk in and confront Falcone? There was nothing to be accomplished here. The reason is that Bruce simply had nothing else to do: he had no tools, no skills, no plan, only a vague desire to oppose injustice. Now the enemy has been identified, but he can't fight it because he knows nothing about it. Falcone tells him this outright; that he doesn't understand, and that's why Bruce goes abroad: the find the next piece of the puzzle, to understand crime.

Which goes to support people's claim that he goes where people tell him to. Falcone specifically said, "You'd have to go 1000 miles just to find someone who doesn't know your name." So he ditches his wallet and jumps on a ship. Yeah, real independent thinking. Every single piece of the Batman was fed to him by others in quotable, spelled-out terms, and yes, Rachel did feed him a few pieces. Rachel tells Bruce that Falcone is the enemy and that good people are afraid of him, so he goes inside the club and tells Falcone that he's not afraid of him. Falcone tells Bruce that he doesn't understand desperation and the criminal underworld and would have to go 1000 miles just to find someone who didn't know his name, travels thousands of miles, lives on the streets, and learns about the criminal mind. R'as Al Ghul tells him that deception and theatricality are powerful agents in the fight against injustice and that fear is the ultimate power, so he goes back to Gotham intending to become the bogeyman of Gotham. He needs crimefighting gear, and every single piece of his primary equipment, other than the bat-shuriken (which are inappropriately colored gold), is handed to him on a silver platter by Lucious Fox and Alfred. No need to innovate or custom-design a suit when it's all just lying in a drawer, right? Sergeant Gordon, who so conveniently was the officer who comforted Young Bruce after the murders, tells Ski Mask Bruce that what he needs to take Falcone down is leverage (see: blackmail) on Judge Faden (who, because of the childish plot design happens to be the only judge who could possibly give Falcone a free pass) and a dedicated D.A., so he takes incriminating photos of the former and gives them to the latter. Alfred tells Bruce that the typical billionaire playboy drives sports cars, dates supermodels and buys things that aren't for sale, so he drives up in a sports car with two supermodels on his arms and buys a hotel on a whim. This pattern, while satisfying on some level to a number of people, makes this character almost completely devoid of ideas that don't come in nice, neat sound bites that fit into overly revealing scenes. God forbid he actually pick up some skills off screen or read a book or something. God forbid he begin his training as teenager, showing the amazing initiative the real Batman had.

Yes, this is a character who bounces off one character, receives orders and heads straight to the next, repeating the process. This is not how the Batman works. He's supposed to have enough mentors over the years that you can't fit them into a movie, but one of the biggest things that they missed is what I said in the last paragraph: Bruce Wayne didn't need anyone to tell him who the enemy was or to look beyong his own pain, and he didn't need anyone to get him motivated enough to leave the country. The real Bruce Wayne was training since childhood and went off on his own at age 14. Of course they won't go that direction in a movie, because that makes him "unrelatable," because we all want to see someone who's just like us but with more athletic skills and more money, right? The real Batman assembled his arsenal out of his own planning and research. He didn't just pull it out of a drawer and tell the official custodian of the gear not to tell anybody. The real Batman is smarter than that and smart enough to do it right, in an untracable way. But that's not "realistic" enough, so they dumb it down so the average slack-jawed viewer can follow along without any off-screen goings-on. It's too simplistic and ruins the self-made image the real Batman has always had.

When we find him at the beginning of the film, he's got that piece, but he's still incomplete. He has the knowledge, the tools, and the skills, but he still doesn't know what to do with them--he's still got no plan. He thinks too small, fighting petty thugs, like Ducard says. The time with the league gives him the last thing he needs: a method. A way to put together these things he's been introduced to, and use them to fight injustice. Rachel showed him the enemy, Falcone made him understand it, his time abroad gave him the skills, and his time with Ducard gave him the method...

There we go.

... but none of these people gave him Batman. He had to draw that from himself. That's really my favourite part of the film, when he descends into the cave and you see, right there, that he's building Batman. He was nothing until then, just a man with ideas put in his head by different people. That's where he becomes something greater than the sum of the pieces they gave him.

What, am I supposed to be impressed that they kept the absolute essential piece of the Batman's origin-- that he saw a bat, realized/remembered he had a cave full of them and decided to use its image? No, that's not initiative, that's the only thing that could have happened, considering how they set up the backstory. He had bats on his brain ever since childhood, and he's got hundreds or thousands of bats on the premises. He doesn't get points for choosing a bat costume. If you really wanted to add it all up, you could say that he got that handed to him as well. At a cost, to be sure (the nightmares and bat-phobia), but it was still right there in front of him. I won't count that against the film, though, since that's the only way he could have gotten the idea without further betraying the source material-- something they should have had in Burton's first film.

Rachel was not responsible for that. She didn't motivate that. She was, in my opinion, the most insignificant piece of the puzzle. He didn't become Batman to prove anything to her; he avoided her, in fact. She comes to him, he doesn't come to her. While I certainly think he did want to impress her, that's not why he became Batman--that's just why he ultimately told her about it.

I agree, as I explained earlier. He still felt an undue need to let her know, even without backing it up, that he was something more than Bruce Wayne, and that's not okay. That lowers the tone of the movie, dumbing it down, weakening his resolve and pandering to a more shallow audience.

After he becomes Batman, nobody really affects him ever again. He's still growing, but it's no longer influenced by those around him. Even when he's got the costume on, he thinks he can crush evil and be done with it, and leave Gotham. This changes by the time he faces Ducard, as by this point he's come to realize he'll always be Batman, and his place is in Gotham. Nobody gave him this idea, he came to it himself. He is more of a complete person now, not a child taking direction. Alfred tells him not to ruin his name, and if that had happened years earlier, he would have listened. But he has come to the point where he has only taken from people those things he needs. He ignores Alfred, he ignores Ducard's pleas to join him, he ignores Rachel's defense of the justice system. He used them when he needed them, but he doesn't need them anymore.

Maybe he doesn't need their further guidance, but he acted on what came across as simplistic instruction and followed it to the letter, failing to contribute any significant piece of the Batman (and no, the bat motif doesn't count, like I said earlier).

I won't call the film "psychological" because I think that's a fanboy buzzword that really doesn't mean anything. It's more subtle than that; the film is smart.

Really? Then how do you explain a powerful mob boss who is found at the scene of a drug trafficking incident? The fact that there's only one judge in Gotham City who could potentially let Falcone slide right through court untouched? The microwave emmitter that doesn't affect the humans standing in its effective range directly when it's powerful enough to make underwater pipes burst, and the fact that the steam that comes out of those pipes doesn't scald the people it hits right off the bat? I will not have further conversations with anyone who attempts to justify any of those failures in storytelling, by the way. You can debate whether or not the overexposure of the origin was too simplistic and shallow, but you cannot debate those other issues with any validity. This is a movie that is more intelligent than most other superhero movies overall, but it's still pretty dumb when you think about it.


Oh, one more: Bruce Wayne seemed to receive the implied (yes, it was implied, not actually stated, not that it matters) news that Ducard is actually R'as Al Ghul as meaningful. In the context of the story, it really doesn't make a difference. It just doesn't. Ducard was as fervent about the philosophy of R'as Al Ghul as the man himself (who was actually him, but you know what I mean), so if R'as got taken out, Ducard, who is the #2 guy in the gang, would have naturally stepped forward as the leader and carried on their mission. So, again, who the hell cares what his real name is? For all intents and purposes, he was ready to lead those men in either persona, and since R'as Al Ghul is a title more than it is a name, his real name could still be Ducard, and it could simply be the case that the torch was passed to him, with the previous and actual R'as having been the dead guy in the temple. Bruce seemed pretty surprised that Ducard/R'as was still going about his business after he saved his life. What? Was he supposed to learn some kind of lesson from that incident? The most gratitude he could have gotten, he got: another chance to join up. So why the surprise?
Also, the way they set up the reveal was the absolute dumbest moment of the film. Why show the bald Asian guy first? All of that comes off as dumb (if you're actually analyzing the movie and not simply making excuses for it and telling other people to "just be grateful for what you have") and it lowers the tone of the rest of the story.

Yeah, there are problems. Rachel could have been replaced by Leslie Thompkins (not as a love interest, but as the person to turn Bruce off killing and show him the larger enemy, beyond Chill).

I'm okay with a lecture from Leslie about how killing is a no-no, but I absolutely do not need or want to see Leslie showing Bruce who the real enemy is. What the fans and paying moviegoers deserve is a Bruce Wayne who figured this stuff out on his own by studying crime, both in classes and independently. Hell, the absolute least they could have given us was having him say what his major was in college (hint: it should start with a "c" and end with "riminology"). But this Bruce wasn't meant to be self-motivating in any way other than the "revenge" thing. Bruce in 'Begins' is not meant to be the brilliant tactician or criminal expert that the real Batman is. He's not meant to be the World's Greatest Detective.

Yeah, the technical aspects of the microwave emitter make no sense.

I should probably read entire posts before slicing them up and responding to them point-by-point. My bad.

But the film overcomes these things because it presents a solid and complete version of Batman.

I disagree.

I think it's very clever how they put the title at the very end, because he wasn't really Batman till then. Even after all the components had fallen into place, he wasn't Batman till he understood that he was not, in fact, doing this for the sake of his ego (as Alfred had accused). He didn't need thanks, because it wasn't about him, and when he said that he was Batman.

Fair enough point. I still don't think he's the real Batman, and he's got even less leeway in the sequel to prove it. Nobody can say "he's just starting out" or "it's an origin film" this time. They'll just have to go with "stop whining and enjoy it for what it is." God forbid I should expect superior work when they're spending hundreds of millions of dollars on entertainment instead of something that directly benefits or improves the world. I'm all for throwing big money into art, but you'd better damn well do a good job, and when the subject of the art is directly taken from a previously published work that was successful enough to warrant a movie, they have an obligation to show the real thing, not some watered-down, half-assed (okay, maybe 3.5/5-assed) version of it.

As for the voice, in my opinion the problem was only inconsistency. I think the voice he uses when he speaks to Rachel on his first night out is perfect. I think in every other scene, it's a little weaker. It's best on the first night out, when he interrogates Flass, and when he's at Gordon's house. It's worst when he's on the rooftop with Rachel, and when he first joins Gordon in the Narrows. It must have been hard on the throat, which would explain why it changes. I hope Bale can make it a little more consistent and less exaggerated in TDK.

His voice with Flass was ridiculous. Those were decent lines, but there was no dignity or composure in him during that scene. Kevin Conroy in TAS has done a great job whenever the Batman intimidates someone into talking, and neither he nor the animated image acts like a coked-up maniac while doing it. Michael Keaton did a perfect job of getting his message across in his first scene in 'BATMAN,' although I do prefer a deeper voice. A deeper voice that isn't forced, and Bale's is forced throughout the whole movie. He was using a Wolverine voice for most of it, especially the Flass scene. That's the wrong voice. I know Bale and Nolan love this "rage-filled animal" image of the Batman, but it's just plain wrong. Is he angry? Seeking out criminals and using violence when you aren't a sworn officer means you're angry. We don't need to see him yell to know that. Is he bestial? Yes, but it's supposed to be dignified and cold, not shaky and hotheaded. He was shaking while he was yelling at Flass. Shaking with rage. Oh, how impressive, now we know he's angry and scary. Like he couldn't have done that with a cold, calculating demeanor like the one the real Batman uses. Every notable incarnation of the Batman, outside Frank Miller's Elseworlds tales, has been cold. Does he freak out once in a while? Yes, but he's generally got it together. But again, I'm thinking of the World's Greatest Detective, not the man who needs to wear a bullet-resistant body-tire and always be told what his next move is.


Any anger I've expressed in this post (I think you might find some, if you look hard enough) is not meant to be directed at you, Saint. It's provoked by the filmmakers and apologists who defend this movie without actually thinking about it.

:wolverine

[Herr Logan]

I disagree in comparing the design in any way to the Adam West suit. Having looked at it & given it some thought, I like it-except I would keep the symbol the way it is in Begins. I'm not overly fond of the oval & the re-shaped bat looks like Batman from the distant future to me. And I would go with a darker grey-barely distinguishable from black.

I agree with that disagreement. There's nothing in that picture that reasonably evokes images of the 60's TV series any more than images of the comics or animated series over the years.

Again, I really like this design. The one in Post #9 (http://www.superherohype.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8424749&postcount=9), that is.

:wolverine

[kenellard]

Herr Logan, you're my hero :woot:

[Darkest Knight]

Herr Logan, this ninja must have no life to have the ability and willingness to type all that out, over Batman on a message board. God damn son, get a job / girlfriend / degree ... something.

[Saint]

I can taste the blood already. ;)
I don't fully disagree with that. I wasn't saying that Rachel primarily inspired the Batman. I'm saying he cowers in her presence, valuing her concept of him far more than he should. The point is, he wanted her to know he was the Batman and his mind wasn't as much on business as it should have. You know how just a little bit of writing and a little bit of acting can come across as very powerful and effective? Those scenes with Rachel, when Bruce is out of costume-- they had a powerfully destructive effect on the tone and the story. At least they did to me.
Again, I'm not suggesting that Bruce became the Batman to prove something to Rachel. I'm saying that he became ashamed of how he was going about being the Batman. His silly playboy persona is a function of the Batman, even in this story. They got that part right, and they still chose to mess it up by having him say, "I am more." If they wanted to show Bruce feeling uneasy with having friends see him as useless, it should be him saying it to Alfred, in private. His secrets belong in the Manor and in the cave, not in front of Rachel. No, he didn't reveal his identity right there and then, but he hinted, and that was wrong. Rachel was superfluous, and therefore should never even have an inkling, at any time, who the Batman is. Hell, it was taking it too far to have Lucious Fox know about him (and yes, he knew about him), much less some fabricated, needless would-be girlfriend.




Which goes to support people's claim that he goes where people tell him to. Falcone specifically said, "You'd have to go 1000 miles just to find someone who doesn't know your name." So he ditches his wallet and jumps on a ship. Yeah, real independent thinking. Every single piece of the Batman was fed to him by others in quotable, spelled-out terms, and yes, Rachel did feed him a few pieces. Rachel tells Bruce that Falcone is the enemy and that good people are afraid of him, so he goes inside the club and tells Falcone that he's not afraid of him. Falcone tells Bruce that he doesn't understand desperation and the criminal underworld and would have to go 1000 miles just to find someone who didn't know his name, travels thousands of miles, lives on the streets, and learns about the criminal mind. R'as Al Ghul tells him that deception and theatricality are powerful agents in the fight against injustice and that fear is the ultimate power, so he goes back to Gotham intending to become the bogeyman of Gotham. He needs crimefighting gear, and every single piece of his primary equipment, other than the bat-shuriken (which are inappropriately colored gold), is handed to him on a silver platter by Lucious Fox and Alfred. No need to innovate or custom-design a suit when it's all just lying in a drawer, right? Sergeant Gordon, who so conveniently was the officer who comforted Young Bruce after the murders, tells Ski Mask Bruce that what he needs to take Falcone down is leverage (see: blackmail) on Judge Faden (who, because of the childish plot design happens to be the only judge who could possibly give Falcone a free pass) and a dedicated D.A., so he takes incriminating photos of the former and gives them to the latter. Alfred tells Bruce that the typical billionaire playboy drives sports cars, dates supermodels and buys things that aren't for sale, so he drives up in a sports car with two supermodels on his arms and buys a hotel on a whim. This pattern, while satisfying on some level to a number of people, makes this character almost completely devoid of ideas that don't come in nice, neat sound bites that fit into overly revealing scenes. God forbid he actually pick up some skills off screen or read a book or something. God forbid he begin his training as teenager, showing the amazing initiative the real Batman had.

Yes, this is a character who bounces off one character, receives orders and heads straight to the next, repeating the process. This is not how the Batman works. He's supposed to have enough mentors over the years that you can't fit them into a movie, but one of the biggest things that they missed is what I said in the last paragraph: Bruce Wayne didn't need anyone to tell him who the enemy was or to look beyong his own pain, and he didn't need anyone to get him motivated enough to leave the country. The real Bruce Wayne was training since childhood and went off on his own at age 14. Of course they won't go that direction in a movie, because that makes him "unrelatable," because we all want to see someone who's just like us but with more athletic skills and more money, right? The real Batman assembled his arsenal out of his own planning and research. He didn't just pull it out of a drawer and tell the official custodian of the gear not to tell anybody. The real Batman is smarter than that and smart enough to do it right, in an untracable way. But that's not "realistic" enough, so they dumb it down so the average slack-jawed viewer can follow along without any off-screen goings-on. It's too simplistic and ruins the self-made image the real Batman has always had.



There we go.



What, am I supposed to be impressed that they kept the absolute essential piece of the Batman's origin-- that he saw a bat, realized/remembered he had a cave full of them and decided to use its image? No, that's not initiative, that's the only thing that could have happened, considering how they set up the backstory. He had bats on his brain ever since childhood, and he's got hundreds or thousands of bats on the premises. He doesn't get points for choosing a bat costume. If you really wanted to add it all up, you could say that he got that handed to him as well. At a cost, to be sure (the nightmares and bat-phobia), but it was still right there in front of him. I won't count that against the film, though, since that's the only way he could have gotten the idea without further betraying the source material-- something they should have had in Burton's first film.



I agree, as I explained earlier. He still felt an undue need to let her know, even without backing it up, that he was something more than Bruce Wayne, and that's not okay. That lowers the tone of the movie, dumbing it down, weakening his resolve and pandering to a more shallow audience.



Maybe he doesn't need their further guidance, but he acted on what came across as simplistic instruction and followed it to the letter, failing to contribute any significant piece of the Batman (and no, the bat motif doesn't count, like I said earlier).



Really? Then how do you explain a powerful mob boss who is found at the scene of a drug trafficking incident? The fact that there's only one judge in Gotham City who could potentially let Falcone slide right through court untouched? The microwave emmitter that doesn't affect the humans standing in its effective range directly when it's powerful enough to make underwater pipes burst, and the fact that the steam that comes out of those pipes doesn't scald the people it hits right off the bat? I will not have further conversations with anyone who attempts to justify any of those failures in storytelling, by the way. You can debate whether or not the overexposure of the origin was too simplistic and shallow, but you cannot debate those other issues with any validity. This is a movie that is more intelligent than most other superhero movies overall, but it's still pretty dumb when you think about it.


Oh, one more: Bruce Wayne seemed to receive the implied (yes, it was implied, not actually stated, not that it matters) news that Ducard is actually R'as Al Ghul as meaningful. In the context of the story, it really doesn't make a difference. It just doesn't. Ducard was as fervent about the philosophy of R'as Al Ghul as the man himself (who was actually him, but you know what I mean), so if R'as got taken out, Ducard, who is the #2 guy in the gang, would have naturally stepped forward as the leader and carried on their mission. So, again, who the hell cares what his real name is? For all intents and purposes, he was ready to lead those men in either persona, and since R'as Al Ghul is a title more than it is a name, his real name could still be Ducard, and it could simply be the case that the torch was passed to him, with the previous and actual R'as having been the dead guy in the temple. Bruce seemed pretty surprised that Ducard/R'as was still going about his business after he saved his life. What? Was he supposed to learn some kind of lesson from that incident? The most gratitude he could have gotten, he got: another chance to join up. So why the surprise?
Also, the way they set up the reveal was the absolute dumbest moment of the film. Why show the bald Asian guy first? All of that comes off as dumb (if you're actually analyzing the movie and not simply making excuses for it and telling other people to "just be grateful for what you have") and it lowers the tone of the rest of the story.



I'm okay with a lecture from Leslie about how killing is a no-no, but I absolutely do not need or want to see Leslie showing Bruce who the real enemy is. What the fans and paying moviegoers deserve is a Bruce Wayne who figured this stuff out on his own by studying crime, both in classes and independently. Hell, the absolute least they could have given us was having him say what his major was in college (hint: it should start with a "c" and end with "riminology"). But this Bruce wasn't meant to be self-motivating in any way other than the "revenge" thing. Bruce in 'Begins' is not meant to be the brilliant tactician or criminal expert that the real Batman is. He's not meant to be the World's Greatest Detective.



I should probably read entire posts before slicing them up and responding to them point-by-point. My bad.



I disagree.



Fair enough point. I still don't think he's the real Batman, and he's got even less leeway in the sequel to prove it. Nobody can say "he's just starting out" or "it's an origin film" this time. They'll just have to go with "stop whining and enjoy it for what it is." God forbid I should expect superior work when they're spending hundreds of millions of dollars on entertainment instead of something that directly benefits or improves the world. I'm all for throwing big money into art, but you'd better damn well do a good job, and when the subject of the art is directly taken from a previously published work that was successful enough to warrant a movie, they have an obligation to show the real thing, not some watered-down, half-assed (okay, maybe 3.5/5-assed) version of it.


I don't disagree on any particular point--I knew the day they release the plot synopsis, mentioning a "discovered" suit of armour that Batman wouldn't be quite right. However, there are compromises I am prepared to accept. The Batman presented in Batman Begins is one of them.

That said, improvements must be made. They need to build on the things they got right, the instances where Batman wasn't being a sponge--for example, burning the enclave of his mentor to the ground upon discovering his true goals.

His voice with Flass was ridiculous. Those were decent lines, but there was no dignity or composure in him during that scene. Kevin Conroy in TAS has done a great job whenever the Batman intimidates someone into talking, and neither he nor the animated image acts like a coked-up maniac while doing it. Michael Keaton did a perfect job of getting his message across in his first scene in 'BATMAN,' although I do prefer a deeper voice. A deeper voice that isn't forced, and Bale's is forced throughout the whole movie. He was using a Wolverine voice for most of it, especially the Flass scene. That's the wrong voice. I know Bale and Nolan love this "rage-filled animal" image of the Batman, but it's just plain wrong. Is he angry? Seeking out criminals and using violence when you aren't a sworn officer means you're angry. We don't need to see him yell to know that. Is he bestial? Yes, but it's supposed to be dignified and cold, not shaky and hotheaded. He was shaking while he was yelling at Flass. Shaking with rage. Oh, how impressive, now we know he's angry and scary. Like he couldn't have done that with a cold, calculating demeanor like the one the real Batman uses. Every notable incarnation of the Batman, outside Frank Miller's Elseworlds tales, has been cold. Does he freak out once in a while? Yes, but he's generally got it together. But again, I'm thinking of the World's Greatest Detective, not the man who needs to wear a bullet-resistant body-tire and always be told what his next move is.
I've spoken on this several times in the past, so I'll try to keep it brief, but I think the manner of Batman in the film is accurate within the timeframe. As a young man, with the murder fresh in his mind and his persona new to him, he would have been emotional and explosive. Excited, even, because at this point he genuinely believes that he can defeat evil. This is the Batman who, in Year One, jumps into a group of criminals and literally growls at them.

The cold, collected Batman of Keaton's performance was older and nolonger optimistic. This is the Batman following the death of Jason Todd in the comics, who has accepted the mission will never be completed. Now he can take his time, be methodical. He's more mature.

That being the case, yes, I think Bale should incorporate these things in the sequel--he should follow Keaton's lead.

[Maxwell Smart]

That being the case, yes, I think Bale should incorporate these things in the sequel--he should follow Keaton's lead.

I agree with this, except I think it should happen over the course of the next two films. We should see the more methodical, hard-boiled Batman emerge by the end of the third film- replacing the more emotional and purely aggressive Bats we saw in Begins who as you pointed out was a lot like what we saw in Year One, he would just jump right into the action without the kind of careful planning and prep work we tend to see from the more established Batman of the comics. An example in Begins similar to the scene in Year One you were talking about IMO would be where the Scarecrow gases him, that could have been avoided.


Anyway, as far as a 'new look'. I'd like to see a more streamlined and refined cowl, the clasps go(the cape should connect in front, dammit!), a dark charcoal gray color for the suit and a more flexible suit, form-fitting suit(which I think is definitely doable now that they have that liquid kevlar stuff, its believable).

[cryptic name]

I can taste the blood already. ;)




I don't fully disagree with that. I wasn't saying that Rachel primarily inspired the Batman. I'm saying he cowers in her presence, valuing her concept of him far more than he should. The point is, he wanted her to know he was the Batman and his mind wasn't as much on business as it should have. You know how just a little bit of writing and a little bit of acting can come across as very powerful and effective? Those scenes with Rachel, when Bruce is out of costume-- they had a powerfully destructive effect on the tone and the story. At least they did to me.
Again, I'm not suggesting that Bruce became the Batman to prove something to Rachel. I'm saying that he became ashamed of how he was going about being the Batman. His silly playboy persona is a function of the Batman, even in this story. They got that part right, and they still chose to mess it up by having him say, "I am more." If they wanted to show Bruce feeling uneasy with having friends see him as useless, it should be him saying it to Alfred, in private. His secrets belong in the Manor and in the cave, not in front of Rachel. No, he didn't reveal his identity right there and then, but he hinted, and that was wrong. Rachel was superfluous, and therefore should never even have an inkling, at any time, who the Batman is. Hell, it was taking it too far to have Lucious Fox know about him (and yes, he knew about him), much less some fabricated, needless would-be girlfriend.




Which goes to support people's claim that he goes where people tell him to. Falcone specifically said, "You'd have to go 1000 miles just to find someone who doesn't know your name." So he ditches his wallet and jumps on a ship. Yeah, real independent thinking. Every single piece of the Batman was fed to him by others in quotable, spelled-out terms, and yes, Rachel did feed him a few pieces. Rachel tells Bruce that Falcone is the enemy and that good people are afraid of him, so he goes inside the club and tells Falcone that he's not afraid of him. Falcone tells Bruce that he doesn't understand desperation and the criminal underworld and would have to go 1000 miles just to find someone who didn't know his name, travels thousands of miles, lives on the streets, and learns about the criminal mind. R'as Al Ghul tells him that deception and theatricality are powerful agents in the fight against injustice and that fear is the ultimate power, so he goes back to Gotham intending to become the bogeyman of Gotham. He needs crimefighting gear, and every single piece of his primary equipment, other than the bat-shuriken (which are inappropriately colored gold), is handed to him on a silver platter by Lucious Fox and Alfred. No need to innovate or custom-design a suit when it's all just lying in a drawer, right? Sergeant Gordon, who so conveniently was the officer who comforted Young Bruce after the murders, tells Ski Mask Bruce that what he needs to take Falcone down is leverage (see: blackmail) on Judge Faden (who, because of the childish plot design happens to be the only judge who could possibly give Falcone a free pass) and a dedicated D.A., so he takes incriminating photos of the former and gives them to the latter. Alfred tells Bruce that the typical billionaire playboy drives sports cars, dates supermodels and buys things that aren't for sale, so he drives up in a sports car with two supermodels on his arms and buys a hotel on a whim. This pattern, while satisfying on some level to a number of people, makes this character almost completely devoid of ideas that don't come in nice, neat sound bites that fit into overly revealing scenes. God forbid he actually pick up some skills off screen or read a book or something. God forbid he begin his training as teenager, showing the amazing initiative the real Batman had.

Yes, this is a character who bounces off one character, receives orders and heads straight to the next, repeating the process. This is not how the Batman works. He's supposed to have enough mentors over the years that you can't fit them into a movie, but one of the biggest things that they missed is what I said in the last paragraph: Bruce Wayne didn't need anyone to tell him who the enemy was or to look beyong his own pain, and he didn't need anyone to get him motivated enough to leave the country. The real Bruce Wayne was training since childhood and went off on his own at age 14. Of course they won't go that direction in a movie, because that makes him "unrelatable," because we all want to see someone who's just like us but with more athletic skills and more money, right? The real Batman assembled his arsenal out of his own planning and research. He didn't just pull it out of a drawer and tell the official custodian of the gear not to tell anybody. The real Batman is smarter than that and smart enough to do it right, in an untracable way. But that's not "realistic" enough, so they dumb it down so the average slack-jawed viewer can follow along without any off-screen goings-on. It's too simplistic and ruins the self-made image the real Batman has always had.



There we go.



What, am I supposed to be impressed that they kept the absolute essential piece of the Batman's origin-- that he saw a bat, realized/remembered he had a cave full of them and decided to use its image? No, that's not initiative, that's the only thing that could have happened, considering how they set up the backstory. He had bats on his brain ever since childhood, and he's got hundreds or thousands of bats on the premises. He doesn't get points for choosing a bat costume. If you really wanted to add it all up, you could say that he got that handed to him as well. At a cost, to be sure (the nightmares and bat-phobia), but it was still right there in front of him. I won't count that against the film, though, since that's the only way he could have gotten the idea without further betraying the source material-- something they should have had in Burton's first film.



I agree, as I explained earlier. He still felt an undue need to let her know, even without backing it up, that he was something more than Bruce Wayne, and that's not okay. That lowers the tone of the movie, dumbing it down, weakening his resolve and pandering to a more shallow audience.



Maybe he doesn't need their further guidance, but he acted on what came across as simplistic instruction and followed it to the letter, failing to contribute any significant piece of the Batman (and no, the bat motif doesn't count, like I said earlier).



Really? Then how do you explain a powerful mob boss who is found at the scene of a drug trafficking incident? The fact that there's only one judge in Gotham City who could potentially let Falcone slide right through court untouched? The microwave emmitter that doesn't affect the humans standing in its effective range directly when it's powerful enough to make underwater pipes burst, and the fact that the steam that comes out of those pipes doesn't scald the people it hits right off the bat? I will not have further conversations with anyone who attempts to justify any of those failures in storytelling, by the way. You can debate whether or not the overexposure of the origin was too simplistic and shallow, but you cannot debate those other issues with any validity. This is a movie that is more intelligent than most other superhero movies overall, but it's still pretty dumb when you think about it.


Oh, one more: Bruce Wayne seemed to receive the implied (yes, it was implied, not actually stated, not that it matters) news that Ducard is actually R'as Al Ghul as meaningful. In the context of the story, it really doesn't make a difference. It just doesn't. Ducard was as fervent about the philosophy of R'as Al Ghul as the man himself (who was actually him, but you know what I mean), so if R'as got taken out, Ducard, who is the #2 guy in the gang, would have naturally stepped forward as the leader and carried on their mission. So, again, who the hell cares what his real name is? For all intents and purposes, he was ready to lead those men in either persona, and since R'as Al Ghul is a title more than it is a name, his real name could still be Ducard, and it could simply be the case that the torch was passed to him, with the previous and actual R'as having been the dead guy in the temple. Bruce seemed pretty surprised that Ducard/R'as was still going about his business after he saved his life. What? Was he supposed to learn some kind of lesson from that incident? The most gratitude he could have gotten, he got: another chance to join up. So why the surprise?
Also, the way they set up the reveal was the absolute dumbest moment of the film. Why show the bald Asian guy first? All of that comes off as dumb (if you're actually analyzing the movie and not simply making excuses for it and telling other people to "just be grateful for what you have") and it lowers the tone of the rest of the story.



I'm okay with a lecture from Leslie about how killing is a no-no, but I absolutely do not need or want to see Leslie showing Bruce who the real enemy is. What the fans and paying moviegoers deserve is a Bruce Wayne who figured this stuff out on his own by studying crime, both in classes and independently. Hell, the absolute least they could have given us was having him say what his major was in college (hint: it should start with a "c" and end with "riminology"). But this Bruce wasn't meant to be self-motivating in any way other than the "revenge" thing. Bruce in 'Begins' is not meant to be the brilliant tactician or criminal expert that the real Batman is. He's not meant to be the World's Greatest Detective.



I should probably read entire posts before slicing them up and responding to them point-by-point. My bad.



I disagree.



Fair enough point. I still don't think he's the real Batman, and he's got even less leeway in the sequel to prove it. Nobody can say "he's just starting out" or "it's an origin film" this time. They'll just have to go with "stop whining and enjoy it for what it is." God forbid I should expect superior work when they're spending hundreds of millions of dollars on entertainment instead of something that directly benefits or improves the world. I'm all for throwing big money into art, but you'd better damn well do a good job, and when the subject of the art is directly taken from a previously published work that was successful enough to warrant a movie, they have an obligation to show the real thing, not some watered-down, half-assed (okay, maybe 3.5/5-assed) version of it.



His voice with Flass was ridiculous. Those were decent lines, but there was no dignity or composure in him during that scene. Kevin Conroy in TAS has done a great job whenever the Batman intimidates someone into talking, and neither he nor the animated image acts like a coked-up maniac while doing it. Michael Keaton did a perfect job of getting his message across in his first scene in 'BATMAN,' although I do prefer a deeper voice. A deeper voice that isn't forced, and Bale's is forced throughout the whole movie. He was using a Wolverine voice for most of it, especially the Flass scene. That's the wrong voice. I know Bale and Nolan love this "rage-filled animal" image of the Batman, but it's just plain wrong. Is he angry? Seeking out criminals and using violence when you aren't a sworn officer means you're angry. We don't need to see him yell to know that. Is he bestial? Yes, but it's supposed to be dignified and cold, not shaky and hotheaded. He was shaking while he was yelling at Flass. Shaking with rage. Oh, how impressive, now we know he's angry and scary. Like he couldn't have done that with a cold, calculating demeanor like the one the real Batman uses. Every notable incarnation of the Batman, outside Frank Miller's Elseworlds tales, has been cold. Does he freak out once in a while? Yes, but he's generally got it together. But again, I'm thinking of the World's Greatest Detective, not the man who needs to wear a bullet-resistant body-tire and always be told what his next move is.


Any anger I've expressed in this post (I think you might find some, if you look hard enough) is not meant to be directed at you, Saint. It's provoked by the filmmakers and apologists who defend this movie without actually thinking about it.

:wolverine

the only problem with this take is how to cinematically let an audience know that bruce if figuring these things out for himslef without some lame expository dialogue between him and alfred.
i agree with you about most of your points, and while the batman presented in begins is not 100% comic book accurate, and the story has its problems, i still immensely enjoy it.

[Maxwell Smart]

Some people can't be pleased. Christ. :rolleyes:

[Walks Unseen]

Some people can't be pleased. Christ. :rolleyes:

Yeah I know. Can't people be just be content. Batman Begins was a perfect Batman movie IMO. The Dark Knight will be equally as good or hopefully better.

[Substance D]

If Batman was real, he'd have to adapt to the situation. A calm, dignified intimidation method wouldn't work. The criminal would have a gun pointed at him, Batman wouldn't have time to act that way. He used the over the top voice on Flass to keep him jolted and confused. If he suddenly started talking to him in a reserved, clear manner, it would have given Flass time to get his senses together.

This isn't the comicbook version where he can basically go around and do whatever he wants. He has to use caution, and strategize his method of attack. I really can't imagine this version of Batman just randomly patrolling the rooftops. He's more of a one man swat team, not a police on duty.

[Chris Wallace]

I for one, have always thought a person making demands in a calm tone would be way scarier than someone screaming at me; (like the way those cops backed down against Denzel in Malcolm X.) the calm person has thought this through, & knows what his next move will be.

[Chris Wallace]

I agree with that disagreement. There's nothing in that picture that reasonably evokes images of the 60's TV series any more than images of the comics or animated series over the years.

Again, I really like this design. The one in Post #9 (http://www.superherohype.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8424749&postcount=9), that is.

:wolverine
As steadfast as I was against deviating from the all-black design, I like this one. I would embrace this batsuit. Hell, w/the right lighting I could probably forget about the trunks. I'm sorry-I HATE trunks. Always have. No matter what costume they were a part of. They're such a horrendous accessory. I'm happier than a pig in $*** that Cap & Wolverine have ditched theirs. Were it up to me, everyone would follow suit & they'd be abolished.

[Herr Logan]

Herr Logan, you're my hero :woot:

Thanks, kenellard.

:wolverine

[Herr Logan]

Herr Logan, this ninja must have no life to have the ability and willingness to type all that out, over Batman on a message board. God damn son, get a job / girlfriend / degree ... something.

What's the purpose of this statement? Is that supposed to be a counter-argument? How does ability and willingness in any possible way indicate "[having] no life?" How long do you think it took me to write all that?

Maybe you should stick to discussing things you might actually know about instead of speculating on my personal life, "son."

:wolverine

[Chris Wallace]

For all we know, you're typing this from work-at a business you own, & your wife is feeding you tips.

[Herr Logan]

Some people can't be pleased. Christ. :rolleyes:

This from someone who wants three whole movies to be just origin, and doesn't want the Batman-- known as the World's Greatest Detective-- to actually be a competent detective. Ouch.

Yeah I know. Can't people be just be content. Batman Begins was a perfect Batman movie IMO. The Dark Knight will be equally as good or hopefully better.

Yeah, this is the type of childish, unreasoning statement I was talking about earlier, Saint. "Shut up and eat what's on you plate."

:wolverine

[Herr Logan]

I don't disagree on any particular point--I knew the day they release the plot synopsis, mentioning a "discovered" suit of armour that Batman wouldn't be quite right. However, there are compromises I am prepared to accept. The Batman presented in Batman Begins is one of them.

If it had been a better costume-- meaning more faithful to the comics, more designed for full agility and acrobatics and less ugly overall-- I'd have accepted that as a compromise as well. But that's not what we got.



That said, improvements must be made. They need to build on the things they got right, the instances where Batman wasn't being a sponge--for example, burning the enclave of his mentor to the ground upon discovering his true goals.

There was no need for that entire plot, truthfully. Nolan and Goyer likely only chose to change the Batman's origin and bring R'as Al Ghul into the beginning of his costumed career because other filmmakers hadn't done it, yet. Same goes for the Scarecrow, who was a joke in this movie for the most part.

I've spoken on this several times in the past, so I'll try to keep it brief, but I think the manner of Batman in the film is accurate within the timeframe. As a young man, with the murder fresh in his mind and his persona new to him, he would have been emotional and explosive. Excited, even, because at this point he genuinely believes that he can defeat evil. This is the Batman who, in Year One, jumps into a group of criminals and literally growls at them.

The way he talked to people in 'Year One' was not the same way he growled during battle. When he talks to Jefferson Skeevers in the hotel room, he's not yelling, he's either whispering or simply talking in a low tone of voice. He forced a hardened criminal with ties to the corrupt GCPD and Carmine Falcone to turn state's evidence, just by holding him down and whispering to him. That's what I want to see, not this out of control, childish yelling.

The cold, collected Batman of Keaton's performance was older and nolonger optimistic. This is the Batman following the death of Jason Todd in the comics, who has accepted the mission will never be completed. Now he can take his time, be methodical. He's more mature.

Well, like I pointed out, this version of the Batman isn't nearly as smart or self-driven as any other incarnation of the Batman at that age (and that absolutely includes 'Year One'... just because he tripped up a few times doesn't make him the pliant piece of clay that 'Begins' Bruce was), and he also isn't as mature. You haven't justified the fact that he wasn't as mature, only explained it. I know he wasn't mature, and that's part of the problem. Again, I couldn't care less if the average person can't relate to a man who grew up faster than anyone else when he lost his childhood and became obsessed with crimefighting. This isn't a relatable character and was never supposed to be, other than some of the regretable changes that occurred during the comic book witch-hunts of the 50's. The Batman has been more mature in every way but emotional since he was 8 years old, and that's included in every version of him in canon. The only thing he gets a pass on in terms of not being superior to his peers at any time in his life is when he's screwing up an honest attempt at any kind of interpersonal relationship. Other than that, he's got no excuses for being lazy, unmotivated or out of control (unless Robin just got killed, or something similarly distressing).

That being the case, yes, I think Bale should incorporate these things in the sequel--he should follow Keaton's lead.

It's not up to Bale. Ultimately, it's the director and the screenwriter who make or break a film's quality, since the script and plot are the most important piece and the director gets the final say on what the actors do with their role. Anyone who qualifies for being hired on a multi-hundred-million film can likely do what's expected of them. If the director wanted Bale to do it properly, he would have done it properly. The same goes for everything Keaton did or didn't do right. I'm not saying Bale isn't a good actor, but the fact is, all actors are primarily tools to be weilded by other members of the filmmaking team. Even if they come up with something on their own, it's the director who gives the approval if it stays in. That's why I don't blame Bale for his crappy Batman voice(s).

:wolverine

[Herr Logan]

I for one, have always thought a person making demands in a calm tone would be way scarier than someone screaming at me; (like the way those cops backed down against Denzel in Malcolm X.) the calm person has thought this through, & knows what his next move will be.

Exactly, and good example.

I've always loved seeing the power of cold, calm menace used to intimidate someone on screen, and that's one of the things the Batman is best at. I regret that we didn't see much more of it from Burton's Batman and absolutely none of it from Nolan's version. Well, we did see it from Nolan's version, but never with a criminal. The only people that Batman scared while speaking calmly were Gordon and Dawes, and that's not supposed to be the point.

For all we know, you're typing this from work-at a business you own, & your wife is feeding you tips.

Yes, that's right. *achem* My lovely wife practically writes my posts for me. It's my reward for working so hard and being self-employed. *cough* :o

:wolverine

[Herr Logan]

the only problem with this take is how to cinematically let an audience know that bruce if figuring these things out for himslef without some lame expository dialogue between him and alfred.
i agree with you about most of your points, and while the batman presented in begins is not 100% comic book accurate, and the story has its problems, i still immensely enjoy it.

I believe a certain amount of exposition is necessary to stay true not only to the style of Batman comics, but more importantly the defined relationship between Bruce and Alfred. Alfred has always been the Batman's sounding board, and there's no reason to exclude that when showing it also serves other purposes. If the Batman in that movie was a real detective (I don't mean by profession, I mean by skill), then it would have been great to see him consulting Alfred and Alfred, who I believe is not experienced in criminology or criminal justice, having suggestions or at least following along perfectly.

One thing every Batman movie has been missing is a voiceover monologue. That matches the style of the comics and also hard-boiled detective fiction, a combination which should be the goal of any Batman story. I don't care if some people think it's cheesy; if they can't see how it can work smoothly, they simply don't have enough imagination, and therefore probably have little valid input when it comes to fantasy stories like the Batman. And yes, it's a fantasy story, no matter how much cowards ashamed of their comic book fandom want to believe this is "realistic." The Batman has never and will never be "realistic." Not without becoming a completely different character.

:wolverine

[Chris Wallace]

Exactly, and good example.

I've always loved seeing the power of cold, calm menace used to intimidate someone on screen, and that's one of the things the Batman is best at. I regret that we didn't see much more of it from Burton's Batman and absolutely none of it from Nolan's version. Well, we did see it from Nolan's version, but never with a criminal. The only people that Batman scared while speaking calmly were Gordon and Dawes, and that's not supposed to be the point.



Yes, that's right. *achem* My lovely wife practically writes my posts for me. It's my reward for working so hard and being self-employed. *cough* :o

:wolverineThe Malcolm X incident is my favorite example of "cold, calm menace". Some people just don't scream. They feel they don't have to. Batman should be one of them.

As for the self-employed getting help from the wife bit, I was trying to illustrate the folly of making such assumptions about some anonymous poster's private life.

[Darkest Knight]

What's the purpose of this statement?
The purpose is of shock and awe that you wrote that much. I rarely see people type out short essays for message board posts.

Is that supposed to be a counter-argument?
Not at all. We weren't disagreeing on anything.

How does ability and willingness in any possible way indicate "[having] no life?" How long do you think it took me to write all that?
Because that post sure took more than a few seconds to write.

Maybe you should stick to discussing things you might actually know about
That's what we're doing.

instead of speculating on my personal life, "son."
It is not that serious. I was just busting your balls. Don't catch feelings and cry on me now.

:wolverine[/quote]

[Saint]

There was no need for that entire plot, truthfully. Nolan and Goyer likely only chose to change the Batman's origin and bring R'as Al Ghul into the beginning of his costumed career because other filmmakers hadn't done it, yet. Same goes for the Scarecrow, who was a joke in this movie for the most part.
I'm going to have to fight you one this, too. Normally I don't go for that sort of history mix-up, but I think the use of Ra's Al Ghul as one of Bruce's mentors is very potent. I would be absolutely thrilled if this was retconned into the comics, where I think it would fit even better than it did in the film. I think it enhances the pseudo-familial relationship between Batman, Ra's, and Talia, and it's just a fantastic idea. If anything, I think they could have taken better advantage of this change in the film.

As for Scarecrow, I have to disagree again--he was played very much to my liking. But then, I have never seen Scarecrow as a center stage villain--I have always seen him as a supporting player, someone who steps in when he can make gains, and then steps out.

The way he talked to people in 'Year One' was not the same way he growled during battle. When he talks to Jefferson Skeevers in the hotel room, he's not yelling, he's either whispering or simply talking in a low tone of voice. He forced a hardened criminal with ties to the corrupt GCPD and Carmine Falcone to turn state's evidence, just by holding him down and whispering to him. That's what I want to see, not this out of control, childish yelling.

Well, like I pointed out, this version of the Batman isn't nearly as smart or self-driven as any other incarnation of the Batman at that age (and that absolutely includes 'Year One'... just because he tripped up a few times doesn't make him the pliant piece of clay that 'Begins' Bruce was), and he also isn't as mature. You haven't justified the fact that he wasn't as mature, only explained it. I know he wasn't mature, and that's part of the problem. Again, I couldn't care less if the average person can't relate to a man who grew up faster than anyone else when he lost his childhood and became obsessed with crimefighting. This isn't a relatable character and was never supposed to be, other than some of the regretable changes that occurred during the comic book witch-hunts of the 50's. The Batman has been more mature in every way but emotional since he was 8 years old, and that's included in every version of him in canon. The only thing he gets a pass on in terms of not being superior to his peers at any time in his life is when he's screwing up an honest attempt at any kind of interpersonal relationship. Other than that, he's got no excuses for being lazy, unmotivated or out of control (unless Robin just got killed, or something similarly distressing).
Again--I don't disagree on any particular point (except one, which I will speak of in a moment), but these are the compromises I'm talking about. Obviously I would prefer Batman be correct to the letter, but I'm prepared to see that not happen. That said, I think you are giving young Batman too much credit. He erred frequently. He erred several times in Year One, and for the most part it's because he was acting impulsive and immature. To quote Alfred in Denny O'Neil's Knightfall novelization (fantastic book, by the way), Batman in his first year erred "sometimes nightly." He just never made the same mistake twice.

It's not up to Bale. Ultimately, it's the director and the screenwriter who make or break a film's quality, since the script and plot are the most important piece and the director gets the final say on what the actors do with their role.
Obviously. I don't recall refuting this.

[Darkest Knight]

In Batman: Year One it says Batman growls. Bale, taking artistic liberty just accentuated this. There is no template or concrete thing to base Batman's voice off of. Either you buy it, or you don't. Kind of polarizing. Just how Batman is to the citizens of Gotham. Either you love him, or you think he is a total nut ball who causes just as many problems as he solves.

[kenellard]

In Batman: Year One it says Batman growls. Bale, taking artistic liberty just accentuated this. There is no template or concrete thing to base Batman's voice off of. Either you buy it, or you don't. Kind of polarizing. Just how Batman is to the citizens of Gotham. Either you love him, or you think he is a total nut ball who causes just as many problems as he solves.

Template or no template, Bale's voice in begins actually jolts the viewer out of the experience, IMO of course, every time I watch it I'm thinking "ok, there's the batman, and, and what the hell's wrong with his voice? someone get that guy a lemsip and a coughdrop!". It simply does not work, If some people buy into the contrived notion of this "animalistic" batman that's their thing, but none of that is batman, it's all NOLANMAN

[Darkest Knight]

Bale's voice in begins actually jolts the viewer out of the experience
You can only speak for your experience.

IMO of course, every time I watch it I'm thinking "ok, there's the batman, and, and what the hell's wrong with his voice? someone get that guy a lemsip and a coughdrop!".
It plays to the whole "theatricality" angle. You don't like it obviously, but that doesn't make it wrong. Kudos to Bale for having the balls to do something different. What would you have liked? A soft whisper, where it sounds like Batman is trying to hit on you? Where there is no distinction from his Bruce Wayne voice? And where he isn't channeling his childhood rage into a beast he is using to take down corruption? Seriously, tell us, how it "should have been".

It simply does not work
Actually, it did. Not one critic hammered him for his Batman voice. It's just the occasional fan with the discrepency. It fit the whole thematic and tone of the film, perfectly. He isn't screaming 24/7, so please enough with the exaggerations. It sounded unique, and matched the describe Batman voice from Year One.

If some people buy into the contrived notion of this "animalistic" batman that's their thing, but none of that is batman, it's all NOLANMAN
And what exactly IS Batman, then? The comics describe him in animalistic fashion. That why he dresses up as an animal, I.E. a BAT!!! Miller certainly described him as a growling beast. If that is sumply Nolan-Man, then we have: Burton-Man, Miller-Man, Loeb-Man, O'Neil-Man.

So please, get off it. Don't tell us what is, and what isn't Batman. You are no judge, jury, and executioner of the concept and mythology of Batman. Animalistic is one of the many definitions of Batman. A "urban creature". With the myth as to being an actual giant Man-Bat type creature. The persona of Batman is the clarity and pure form of the rage and un-just punishment Bruce faced as a child. When he puts on the mask, he can act and re-act using the rage he felt as a child.

Do your homework before you make idiotic arguments.

[kenellard]

You can only speak for your experience.


It plays to the whole "theatricality" angle. You don't like it obviously, but that doesn't make it wrong. Kudos to Bale for having the balls to do something different. What would you have liked? A soft whisper, where it sounds like Batman is trying to hit on you? Where there is no distinction from his Bruce Wayne voice? And where he isn't channeling his childhood rage into a beast he is using to take down corruption? Seriously, tell us, how it "should have been".


Actually, it did. Not one critic hammered him for his Batman voice. It's just the occasional fan with the discrepency. It fit the whole thematic and tone of the film, perfectly. He isn't screaming 24/7, so please enough with the exaggerations. It sounded unique, and matched the describe Batman voice from Year One.


And what exactly IS Batman, then? The comics describe him in animalistic fashion. That why he dresses up as an animal, I.E. a BAT!!! Miller certainly described him as a growling beast. If that is sumply Nolan-Man, then we have: Burton-Man, Miller-Man, Loeb-Man, O'Neil-Man.

So please, get off it. Don't tell us what is, and what isn't Batman. You are no judge, jury, and executioner of the concept and mythology of Batman. Animalistic is one of the many definitions of Batman. A "urban creature". With the myth as to being an actual giant Man-Bat type creature. The persona of Batman is the clarity and pure form of the rage and un-just punishment Bruce faced as a child. When he puts on the mask, he can act and re-act using the rage he felt as a child.

Do your homework before you make idiotic arguments.

I did state these were my opinions, so no need to get all riled up there fella. My response to your arguments is simply that I didn't want Nolan's reimagined vision for this bat-series, though I like Burtons movies and to an extent BF I'm pretty tired of directors chopping and changing everything in the batman mythos, Herr Logan has made some excellent points on this topic in another thread which I won't attempt to re-hash here. But basically I don't buy it, I've tried to like begins as a bat-film and as a film in itself, for me it just doesn't work. In the same way that Schumacher went too far with B&R, Nolan has gone too far in the opposite direction with BB, giving a movie which is too serious for its own good, striving too much for so-called "realism", and worst of all, Begins is a movie which thinks it is much smarter than it really is.

In my humble opinion of course!

[kenellard]

Oh and another thing, just because you can justify the existence of bale's growly voice from a previous batman comic does not mean it's a good idea to put it in a batman movie

[kenellard]

edit

[Darkest Knight]

Dude, if you don't want "adaptations" and new stories, with different imagery and character takes ... simply stick to reading the comics, since that is the only interpretation you get off on. How can you hate on Nolan for his creative choices, and then say you're a fan of Burton and Schumacher? The only character that truly was out of perception and reality of Batman that you could make an argument for, is Batman in Batman Returns. That is the only character out of all 5 movies you can state a claim that the story, characters, etc. weren't "Batman".

You think these artists and directors are just going to copy word for word, vision for vision an image from a comic book and make it into a movie? That is what some of you hardcore geek fanboys won't take anything less than. Is it good to have nods and refrences to the comics? Abso-****ing-lutely. But why should we get a copy and past job? Some of us actually want different interpretations, looks, and visual style. But let me get this straight, you can as a batman fan, justify and like Batman Forever? But can't like BEGINS as a batman movie, or just a film? If so, that is kind of ridiculous. Especially since Batman Begins tone and essence, is spot on with the most praised stories and interpretations of the character from the source material. Books like Year One, Long Halloween, Dark Knight Returns, Dark Victory, Man who Falls, Demon Head, etc. Batman has been potrayed as a realistic character many a time. He is for the most part, one of the most realistic heroes of the bunch. But to say Nolan's Batman movie is a complete realistic snooze fest is a lie. In Batman Begins we got some of the most fantastical, serious comic book scenes yet.

- "Bat From Hell". A vivid scene of what Batman looks like on fear gas.
- Batmobile chase. A vicious batmobile chase all through out Gotham, including rooftop to highway jumps from a car.
- Scarecrow on a fire breathing horse.
- Batman interrogating criminals.
- Bruce Wayne spying during the day, in disguise.
- Batman being attacked by dozens of zombie like citizens.
- Batman being dragged across the city on his grappling hook, which is attatched to an elevated train.
- Batman escaping GPD SWAT officers by using a cloud of thousands of Bats to disguise his precense.
- Batman brutally kicking the **** out of multiple league of shadows assasins.
- First ever on screen rooftop meeting between Batman and the actual Jim Gordon. A scene where we are promised further escelation (basically of the fantastical type stuff), and where Batman subtely declares his mission, before victoriously jumping off a sky scraper and gliding over Gotham.

All are scenes ripped straight off a comic page. So this talk of "too much realism" is an excuse made by people who are just looking to put down Batman Begins. They take the word realism, but don't actually acknowledge all the fantastical elements of the movie. The concept itself is fantastical. But the whole point of the verisimilitude was to get the audience to believe, and invest into the characters. Mainly Bruce Wayne, and not just to "buy time till Batman shows up". That way you can actually have a story, and character development. And not just mindless action flicks. Establishing the first movie in reality, is nothing but a positive. Because then, in future movies (which the point of BEGINS was just as a setup) is that with the crazy stuff that happens, will seem more believeable b/c you already believe in this word of Gotham, and as an audience member you have a pre-text of what happened prior to make things so looney in Gotham.

You're a Batman fan, and can't get into this movie?

That is okay and all, but something might be wrong with you. (j/k)

From the acting, to the directing, the artistic vision and story. This wasn't just a good Batman flick, it was a damn good motion picture.

Nothing but quality here.

[Goddamn_Batman]

Dude, if you don't want "adaptations" and new stories, with different imagery and character takes ... simply stick to reading the comics, since that is the only interpretation you get off on. How can you hate on Nolan for his creative choices, and then say you're a fan of Burton and Schumacher? The only character that truly was out of perception and reality of Batman that you could make an argument for, is Batman in Batman Returns. That is the only character out of all 5 movies you can state a claim that the story, characters, etc. weren't "Batman".

You think these artists and directors are just going to copy word for word, vision for vision an image from a comic book and make it into a movie? That is what some of you hardcore geek fanboys won't take anything less than. Is it good to have nods and refrences to the comics? Abso-****ing-lutely. But why should we get a copy and past job? Some of us actually want different interpretations, looks, and visual style. But let me get this straight, you can as a batman fan, justify and like Batman Forever? But can't like BEGINS as a batman movie, or just a film? If so, that is kind of ridiculous. Especially since Batman Begins tone and essence, is spot on with the most praised stories and interpretations of the character from the source material. Books like Year One, Long Halloween, Dark Knight Returns, Dark Victory, Man who Falls, Demon Head, etc. Batman has been potrayed as a realistic character many a time. He is for the most part, one of the most realistic heroes of the bunch. But to say Nolan's Batman movie is a complete realistic snooze fest is a lie. In Batman Begins we got some of the most fantastical, serious comic book scenes yet.

- "Bat From Hell". A vivid scene of what Batman looks like on fear gas.
- Batmobile chase. A vicious batmobile chase all through out Gotham, including rooftop to highway jumps from a car.
- Scarecrow on a fire breathing horse.
- Batman interrogating criminals.
- Bruce Wayne spying during the day, in disguise.
- Batman being attacked by dozens of zombie like citizens.
- Batman being dragged across the city on his grappling hook, which is attatched to an elevated train.
- Batman escaping GPD SWAT officers by using a cloud of thousands of Bats to disguise his precense.
- Batman brutally kicking the **** out of multiple league of shadows assasins.
- First ever on screen rooftop meeting between Batman and the actual Jim Gordon. A scene where we are promised further escelation (basically of the fantastical type stuff), and where Batman subtely declares his mission, before victoriously jumping off a sky scraper and gliding over Gotham.

All are scenes ripped straight off a comic page. So this talk of "too much realism" is an excuse made by people who are just looking to put down Batman Begins. They take the word realism, but don't actually acknowledge all the fantastical elements of the movie. The concept itself is fantastical. But the whole point of the verisimilitude was to get the audience to believe, and invest into the characters. Mainly Bruce Wayne, and not just to "buy time till Batman shows up". That way you can actually have a story, and character development. And not just mindless action flicks. Establishing the first movie in reality, is nothing but a positive. Because then, in future movies (which the point of BEGINS was just as a setup) is that with the crazy stuff that happens, will seem more believeable b/c you already believe in this word of Gotham, and as an audience member you have a pre-text of what happened prior to make things so looney in Gotham.

You're a Batman fan, and can't get into this movie?

That is okay and all, but something might be wrong with you. (j/k)

From the acting, to the directing, the artistic vision and story. This wasn't just a good Batman flick, it was a damn good motion picture.

Nothing but quality here.

Damn skippy.

[Darkest Knight]

Oh and another thing, just because you can justify the existence of bale's growly voice from a previous batman comic does not mean it's a good idea to put it in a batman movie
Ok, but by saying this, you do realize it completely negates every validating reason for what Batman Begins "did wrong"? Just because you can justify the existence of something in the comics doesn't mean it is a good idea to be in a Batman movie, correct? That is what you just said to me. So it completely shuts down yours, and Herr Logan's entire argument.

But do explain, why is Batman's voice "wrong" in Batman Begins? Yes it is wrong to you, because you don't like it. That is understandable. But why is it "wrong" for the rest of us, and for the movie itself?

You can't back this claim up, because it isn't true. The voice was unique, and it fit perfectly into the movie. It didn't subtract from my viewing experience. It didn't lessen the quality of the movie. It was a perfect fit. Bale's potrayal of Batman was the first unique one since Michael Keaton bust onto the scene.

[Anguissette1979]

I did state these were my opinions, so no need to get all riled up there fella. My response to your arguments is simply that I didn't want Nolan's reimagined vision for this bat-series.

I think everyone needs to take a deep breath, count to 10 and read that first line again. :o

I think BB (for Kenellard) was like asking for Chocolate cake for your birthday and getting strawberry instead. It's not horrible... just not what you wanted.

At the same time, within a single "series" of movies, if you will, I'd like to see continuity. Themes, trends, and moods they set up in one should in some sense carry to the next. I feel like there was a little continuity within the Burton films and a little in the Schumacher films but nothing linking either. I'll be happy if we get a three-movie run with continuity in plot, casting, and costume/setting... regardless of whether or not the movie itself is a fanboy's wet dream. :up:

[cryptic name]

I believe a certain amount of exposition is necessary to stay true not only to the style of Batman comics, but more importantly the defined relationship between Bruce and Alfred. Alfred has always been the Batman's sounding board, and there's no reason to exclude that when showing it also serves other purposes. If the Batman in that movie was a real detective (I don't mean by profession, I mean by skill), then it would have been great to see him consulting Alfred and Alfred, who I believe is not experienced in criminology or criminal justice, having suggestions or at least following along perfectly.

One thing every Batman movie has been missing is a voiceover monologue. That matches the style of the comics and also hard-boiled detective fiction, a combination which should be the goal of any Batman story. I don't care if some people think it's cheesy; if they can't see how it can work smoothly, they simply don't have enough imagination, and therefore probably have little valid input when it comes to fantasy stories like the Batman. And yes, it's a fantasy story, no matter how much cowards ashamed of their comic book fandom want to believe this is "realistic." The Batman has never and will never be "realistic." Not without becoming a completely different character.

:wolverine

oh, it can certianly be done, but it's a razor thin line to walk. alfred is and should be the only person with whom bruce can share his true thoughts, and i always thought his discussions with alfred could take the place of thought captions in comics if done right.
another way to go about it that i liked was in Miller and Arronofsky's Year One script, where Bruce's inner monologue is presented through his letters to his dead father. i think that worked very well in the script and could have been brought into more faithful story.

[Dark Knight]

Doubt it. You see that suit.
http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/d/d5/200px-Begins_suit.jpg
Your going to have to try pretty hard to damage that sucker enough that it deems replacement. But that is, if you can get your hands on Batman long enough to try.

That suit built to take a lickin' and keep on tickin'.



Thats such classic pissed off Batman pose! Freakin great! :word:

[Herr Logan]

The purpose is of shock and awe that you wrote that much. I rarely see people type out short essays for message board posts.

Not at all. We weren't disagreeing on anything.

Then why even comment? If you have no relevant input, why even post here?

Because that post sure took more than a few seconds to write.

Okay, so that suggests that you have a lesser attention span than I do when it comes to writing arguments. I still don't understand how that can reasonably be interpreted in such a way that I seem inferior in some way. You consider it a special event when a person puts more time into a post than the average poster. That speaks far more about you than about me.

That's what we're doing.

I'm still confused. You're obviously literate enough to use a keyboard. Even though your reading comprehension skills are sorely lacking, I can't imagine how you could possibly think that what you posted counted as real information. Your rather small imagination has provided you with the common stereotype that people who put effort into something that isn't absolutely essential for living have "no lives." Again, that says far more about you than it does about me. You didn't use any facts and weren't on topic, and therefore your post was useless. Mine was on topic. Well, it was on the topic of the Batman, at the very least.

It is not that serious. I was just busting your balls. Don't catch feelings and cry on me now.

I can imagine what you were like in grade school. Probably not a whole lot different than you are right now.

Bottom line: you don't strike me as smart enough, mature enough or interested enough to play in my sandbox, so go find someone who communicates on your level and is impressed by your nonsense.
If you start flaming me, I'll make sure you're put in your place by someone else, since even I don't have enough time to deal with both you and the people who are on topic. Put whatever childish label on that you want.

:wolverine

[Herr Logan]

I'm going to have to fight you one this, too. Normally I don't go for that sort of history mix-up, but I think the use of Ra's Al Ghul as one of Bruce's mentors is very potent. I would be absolutely thrilled if this was retconned into the comics, where I think it would fit even better than it did in the film. I think it enhances the pseudo-familial relationship between Batman, Ra's, and Talia, and it's just a fantastic idea. If anything, I think they could have taken better advantage of this change in the film.

There's not much to say about this. I greatly disagree, and hate such retcons. That's a matter of preference, for the most part, but I feel confident that my position against retcons should take priority over those who support messing with characters' origins for the purposes of cross-promotion or cheap publicity stunts (see: Marvel Universe of the past few years). Then again, you said you don't normally support this, so I suppose I can forgive you. With time, and therapy.

As for Scarecrow, I have to disagree again--he was played very much to my liking. But then, I have never seen Scarecrow as a center stage villain--I have always seen him as a supporting player, someone who steps in when he can make gains, and then steps out.

No sale. The Scarecrow is a complete psychotic who wears a full costume and primarily acts on his own initiative. Just because he's been written into team-ups frequently over the past few years (as have plenty of other previously solo Batman villains) doesn't mean he never stood on his own. There is no way to argue that this was an accurate representation of the Scarecrow. They left out his origin, his appearance (no, a burlap sack over the head doesn't count as a costume) and his actual personality. That's not anything close to the real Scarecrow.

Again--I don't disagree on any particular point (except one, which I will speak of in a moment), but these are the compromises I'm talking about. Obviously I would prefer Batman be correct to the letter, but I'm prepared to see that not happen. That said, I think you are giving young Batman too much credit. He erred frequently. He erred several times in Year One, and for the most part it's because he was acting impulsive and immature. To quote Alfred in Denny O'Neil's Knightfall novelization (fantastic book, by the way), Batman in his first year erred "sometimes nightly." He just never made the same mistake twice.

Fair enough about his propensity for mistakes. However, it's one thing to make mistakes while still being a genius with an abundance of preparation, and another to be 'Begins' Batman. He wasn't up to par to begin with. No, he wasn't a terrible version, but he wasn't good enough, and I have high standards when it comes to throwing huge amounts of money and resources into art, especially adaptations of classic superheroes.

Obviously. I don't recall refuting this.

Just sayin', is all.

:wolverine

[Saint]

There's not much to say about this. I greatly disagree, and hate such retcons. That's a matter of preference, for the most part, but I feel confident that my position against retcons should take priority over those who support messing with characters' origins for the purposes of cross-promotion or cheap publicity stunts (see: Marvel Universe of the past few years). Then again, you said you don't normally support this, so I suppose I can forgive you. With time, and therapy.
It's not about cross-promotion--I don't care about cross promotion (the non-fans won't pick up a comic regardless of how good the film is). I just think it's a great idea.

No sale. The Scarecrow is a complete psychotic who wears a full costume and primarily acts on his own initiative. Just because he's been written into team-ups frequently over the past few years (as have plenty of other previously solo Batman villains) doesn't mean he never stood on his own. There is no way to argue that this was an accurate representation of the Scarecrow. They left out his origin, his appearance (no, a burlap sack over the head doesn't count as a costume) and his actual personality. That's not anything close to the real Scarecrow.
I've really said all I can on this. Obviously we see it differently.

Fair enough about his propensity for mistakes. However, it's one thing to make mistakes while still being a genius with an abundance of preparation, and another to be 'Begins' Batman. He wasn't up to par to begin with. No, he wasn't a terrible version, but he wasn't good enough, and I have high standards when it comes to throwing huge amounts of money and resources into art, especially adaptations of classic superheroes.
Agreed. This again falls into my "acceptable compromises" field. For the first film, at least.

[Herr Logan]

oh, it can certianly be done, but it's a razor thin line to walk. alfred is and should be the only person with whom bruce can share his true thoughts, and i always thought his discussions with alfred could take the place of thought captions in comics if done right.
another way to go about it that i liked was in Miller and Arronofsky's Year One script, where Bruce's inner monologue is presented through his letters to his dead father. i think that worked very well in the script and could have been brought into more faithful story.

I personally would definitely would prefer a running voiceover monologue to seeing letters to Thomas Wayne. Again, I like the idea because it fits both comics books and hard-boiled detective fiction perfectly. A lot of classic hard-boiled books are written in first person narrative, and some of the movies associated with that genre have the voiceover. That's what I want from the Batman. Also, I think that's necessary for a Spider-Man movie, but with a different style, obviously.

Alfred should be the only person the Batman talks to about serious stuff, until Robin comes along, anyone. I realize a lot of people with small-imaginations and vast insecurity about their superhero fandom are going to start up with the "No Robin, he's cheesy" arguments, but I couldn't care less. Robin can be done both well and faithfully if the screenwriter, director and costume designer really want him to. Anyway, in an ideal Batman franchise that starts from Year One (based heavily on that story's plot, but with some changes and additions), I'd have Robin come in during the third movie, and he'll hear expository dialogue about crimefighting in general from the Batman that he didn't cover in the first two movies. It's one thing to talk to the audience and a civilian aid, but when training another crimefighter, there's more concrete content to be passed on.


:wolverine

[Herr Logan]

I just want to say in general, in case nobody caught it before, that I did enjoy 'Batman Begins' very much, saw it several times in the theater and watched it several times after buying the DVD. I suppose my opinion of it has dropped after months of imagining a better, more faithful Batman movie and catching plot holes I didn't catch before (and there are lots and lots of those). I still think it's the best superhero movie in recent years. Still, I expect better. Expecting better, in general, is the only way anything in human society has ever improved, so don't give me that "be content" and "stop whining" crap. If everybody just settled for less, things would just remain stagnant or turn to crap. Yes, this is just art and entertainment, but anybody who is defending this movie has no right to tell me or anyone else criticizing the movie that I'm taking it "too seriously." Some people prefer to stretch their mental muscles instead of taking everything at face value. Anyone who resents that comes off like the fabled lazy grasshopper taunting the hard-working ant for actually doing something instead of leaving things as they are. It's pathetic. If you like the movie, you've got every right, and nobody can criticize you with any validity simply for a preference (and I never have), but taking criticisms toward the movie as personal attacks is childish and borderline psychotic. Think before you post.

:wolverine

[Walks Unseen]

I just want to say in general, in case nobody caught it before, that I did enjoy 'Batman Begins' very much, saw it several times in the theater and watched it several times after buying the DVD. I suppose my opinion of it has dropped after months of imagining a better, more faithful Batman movie and catching plot holes I didn't catch before (and there are lots and lots of those). I still think it's the best superhero movie in recent years. Still, I expect better. Expecting better, in general, is the only way anything in human society has ever improved, so don't give me that "be content" and "stop whining" crap. If everybody just settled for less, things would just remain stagnant or turn to crap. Yes, this is just art and entertainment, but anybody who is defending this movie has no right to tell me or anyone else criticizing the movie that I'm taking it "too seriously." Some people prefer to stretch their mental muscles instead of taking everything at face value. Anyone who resents that comes off like the fabled lazy grasshopper taunting the hard-working ant for actually doing something instead of leaving things as they are. It's pathetic. If you like the movie, you've got every right, and nobody can criticize you with any validity simply for a preference (and I never have), but taking criticisms toward the movie as personal attacks is childish and borderline psychotic. Think before you post.

:wolverine

I really think that you are asking too much. Batman Begins was pretty much as faithfull as it gets. You cant have a 100% translation of the books. It just will not work. Batman Begins was a great film that nailed the characters and got the tone right. It was realistic, just like I think Batman should be. I'm not saying you haven't got the right to criticize or anything but come on! Batman Begins is the best comic book film ever made, hands down, bar none. Not even the Spider-Man films, which are great as well, come close to how good Begins is. So yeah, I think maybe you are being a bit too picky.

[Cats]

On my first viewing, I acted harsher than the harshest film critic, because of how much I had hyped myself up to watching the film. It was odd because I didn't like it while everyone else in the theatre did. Made me reflect and realise that I had unrealistic expectations for the film. And on the second viewing, I decided to go in with fresh eyes and take a step back from my fan-girl nit-picking. It was then that I saw it for what it really is, and now I love it more than any other comic book film (save for Phantasm :)).

[bunk]

I love Begins, but I think Spiderman is still more faithful and has less plot holes.

[Chris Wallace]

One of these posts just doesn't belong here...

[bunk]

^^^I love the irony of this post.

[Ronny Shade]

I love Begins, but I think Spiderman is still more faithful and has less plot holes.
That's completely wrong

It's fewer plot holes

[bunk]

Ah, I'll remember that.

[kenellard]

I really think that you are asking too much. Batman Begins was pretty much as faithfull as it gets. You cant have a 100% translation of the books. It just will not work. Batman Begins was a great film that nailed the characters and got the tone right. It was realistic, just like I think Batman should be. I'm not saying you haven't got the right to criticize or anything but come on! Batman Begins is the best comic book film ever made, hands down, bar none. Not even the Spider-Man films, which are great as well, come close to how good Begins is. So yeah, I think maybe you are being a bit too picky.

This is such an odd argument in favour of begins, why is it that a faithful adaptation of the material we've religiously followed and loved for years doomed to failure? I can't understand why people just accept and expect that the comic batman wouldn't work in a big budget film, I mean, it's not like anyone's ever tried it before?

[Beelze]

Which goes to support people's claim that he goes where people tell him to. Falcone specifically said, "You'd have to go 1000 miles just to find someone who doesn't know your name." So he ditches his wallet and jumps on a ship. Yeah, real independent thinking. Every single piece of the Batman was fed to him by others in quotable, spelled-out terms, and yes, Rachel did feed him a few pieces. Rachel tells Bruce that Falcone is the enemy and that good people are afraid of him, so he goes inside the club and tells Falcone that he's not afraid of him. Falcone tells Bruce that he doesn't understand desperation and the criminal underworld and would have to go 1000 miles just to find someone who didn't know his name, travels thousands of miles, lives on the streets, and learns about the criminal mind. R'as Al Ghul tells him that deception and theatricality are powerful agents in the fight against injustice and that fear is the ultimate power, so he goes back to Gotham intending to become the bogeyman of Gotham. He needs crimefighting gear, and every single piece of his primary equipment, other than the bat-shuriken (which are inappropriately colored gold), is handed to him on a silver platter by Lucious Fox and Alfred. No need to innovate or custom-design a suit when it's all just lying in a drawer, right? Sergeant Gordon, who so conveniently was the officer who comforted Young Bruce after the murders, tells Ski Mask Bruce that what he needs to take Falcone down is leverage (see: blackmail) on Judge Faden (who, because of the childish plot design happens to be the only judge who could possibly give Falcone a free pass) and a dedicated D.A., so he takes incriminating photos of the former and gives them to the latter. Alfred tells Bruce that the typical billionaire playboy drives sports cars, dates supermodels and buys things that aren't for sale, so he drives up in a sports car with two supermodels on his arms and buys a hotel on a whim. This pattern, while satisfying on some level to a number of people, makes this character almost completely devoid of ideas that don't come in nice, neat sound bites that fit into overly revealing scenes.
At least he didn't come up with the idea of dressing up as a bat because of an actual bat crashing through the window to the room he was sitting in, at the precise moment he was thinking of what image to create for himself. :oldrazz:

[kenellard]

At least he didn't come up with the idea of dressing up as a bat because of an actual bat crashing through the window to the room he was sitting in, at the precise moment he was thinking of what image to create for himself. :oldrazz:

woah, well in begins I'm surprised alfred didn't inadvertently tell him what to do;

"Master Bruce, forgive an old army gent for saying so, But with all your training lately you've developed quite an odour, you really need a bath, man"

"wait, what did you say?! Of course! a bathman! I shall become a bath!"

"Um, sir, perhaps a BAT would be more frightenning?"

"oh, yeah whatever..."

[Crooklyn]

At least he didn't come up with the idea of dressing up as a bat because of an actual bat crashing through the window to the room he was sitting in, at the precise moment he was thinking of what image to create for himself. :oldrazz:
That scene could've still made it into the film and not be as "coincedental".

[kenellard]

yeah, seriously there are thousands of bats on the wayne manor grounds, it's not too farfetched

[Substance D]

At least he didn't come up with the idea of dressing up as a bat because of an actual bat crashing through the window to the room he was sitting in, at the precise moment he was thinking of what image to create for himself. :oldrazz:

Good thing it wasn't a mouse or a cochroach crawling up his leg.

[cryptic name]

I personally would definitely would prefer a running voiceover monologue to seeing letters to Thomas Wayne. Again, I like the idea because it fits both comics books and hard-boiled detective fiction perfectly. A lot of classic hard-boiled books are written in first person narrative, and some of the movies associated with that genre have the voiceover. That's what I want from the Batman. Also, I think that's necessary for a Spider-Man movie, but with a different style, obviously.

Alfred should be the only person the Batman talks to about serious stuff, until Robin comes along, anyone. I realize a lot of people with small-imaginations and vast insecurity about their superhero fandom are going to start up with the "No Robin, he's cheesy" arguments, but I couldn't care less. Robin can be done both well and faithfully if the screenwriter, director and costume designer really want him to. Anyway, in an ideal Batman franchise that starts from Year One (based heavily on that story's plot, but with some changes and additions), I'd have Robin come in during the third movie, and he'll hear expository dialogue about crimefighting in general from the Batman that he didn't cover in the first two movies. It's one thing to talk to the audience and a civilian aid, but when training another crimefighter, there's more concrete content to be passed on.


:wolverine

i believe the letters are an interesting way to insert narration while also presenting to the audience without beating them over the head just how damaged buce is and how his parents have absolutely everything to do with why he's doing what he's doing. i guess the problem i have with classic, noir style narration is it i don't want to hear batman talk too much. he should be a man of action and few words, cinematically as well as character wise. but that's just my opinion.
and i fully expect robin at some point. a real robin who's around thirteen. all the arguments against him won't change that, because it' Batman and Robin. i mean, come on.

[cujo66]

Hey is 105 pages later to late to weigh in on this. I didn't go through every page, but the art work in post #1 is awesome, as well as the other posted on the first page.
I know I'm new here and my opinion doesn't carry any weight, but I've never liked the all black look, I'm a fan of the comic look, and mostly the Jim Lee version. If something like the first post can be achieved they'll finally get it right. Grey and Blue, but I'll settle for Grey and Black.

[bunk]

woah, well in begins I'm surprised alfred didn't inadvertently tell him what to do;

"Master Bruce, forgive an old army gent for saying so, But with all your training lately you've developed quite an odour, you really need a bath, man"

"wait, what did you say?! Of course! a bathman! I shall become a bath!"

"Um, sir, perhaps a BAT would be more frightenning?"

"oh, yeah whatever..."



Ha! That's good.

[Maxwell Smart]

This from someone who wants three whole movies to be just origin, and doesn't want the Batman-- known as the World's Greatest Detective-- to actually be a competent detective. Ouch.

Thats because in the comics Batman becomes the legend we know him to be over time, just look at Year One, hes obviously a rookie in it. I think of Year One as the story that establishes the character, however its the TLH story arc where he really comes into his own. I was just saying that I see Begins as like Year One, its just the character's introduction. Its going to be the next two films where we really see him come into his own and become the legend.

Survey says: Herr Logan is an ass.

[Chris Wallace]

If you look at a lot of these complaints across these boards, it's the die-hard purosts who can't be happy. And it's like they want everything in the movie to be what THEY love about the comics. Most of all, they want the characters in the movies-whose stories take place over the course of a few months-to be the same people that they took 30-40 years real time to become in the comics.

[lujho]

And it's like they want everything in the movie to be what THEY love about the comics.

Well ****ing duh. Why wouldn't they? That's a perfectly logical, reasonable desire. Why would they want a Batman movie that WASN'T what they love about the comics?

[Maxwell Smart]

If you look at a lot of these complaints across these boards, it's the die-hard purosts who can't be happy. And it's like they want everything in the movie to be what THEY love about the comics.

Well ****ing duh. Why wouldn't they? That's a perfectly logical, reasonable desire. Why would they want a Batman movie that WASN'T what they love about the comics?

lujho, brotha, what I think he means is that these types ***** and complain and say they don't like the movie because particular aspects of the comics that they like weren't in it which is arrogant and self-centered. Yeah I can understand being dissappointed with certain things(who wasn't? No movie is perfect, especially adaptations from another medium) but it seems like these people are just flat out flopping on the floor, kicking and screaming like 5 year olds because the movie wasn't EXACTLY what they wanted. Its annoying and immature.

Most of all, they want the characters in the movies-whose stories take place over the course of a few months-to be the same people that they took 30-40 years real time to become in the comics.

Exactly. Thats what I was trying to get across to Herr Logan. Its not realistic, nor faithful to the comics for Batman to just start out as the badass, hard-boiled legend we know him to be. Bruce always knew he wanted to fight injustice in the comics, thats true, but just because he did that didn't make him The Dark Knight in and of itself. He had to train and find that within himself, and then he had to go out and actually do what he was planning and get some experience at it. We saw a rookie Batman in Year One, not Batman the legend.

[Chris Wallace]

Well ****ing duh. Why wouldn't they? That's a perfectly logical, reasonable desire. Why would they want a Batman movie that WASN'T what they love about the comics?
My point is, everybody comes away from these comics w/different impressions, just like everybody comes away from the movies w/different impressions. Sometimes being a purist & being well versed in the folklore can be a liability.

[Chris Wallace]

lujho, brotha, what I think he means is that these types ***** and complain and say they don't like the movie because particular aspects of the comics that they like weren't in it which is arrogant and self-centered. Yeah I can understand being dissappointed with certain things(who wasn't? No movie is perfect, especially adaptations from another medium) but it seems like these people are just flat out flopping on the floor, kicking and screaming like 5 year olds because the movie wasn't EXACTLY what they wanted. Its annoying and immature.
That's what I was getting at.



Exactly. Thats what I was trying to get across to Herr Logan. Its not realistic, nor faithful to the comics for Batman to just start out as the badass, hard-boiled legend we know him to be. Bruce always knew he wanted to fight injustice in the comics, thats true, but just because he did that didn't make him The Dark Knight in and of itself. He had to train and find that within himself, and then he had to go out and actually do what he was planning and get some experience at it. We saw a rookie Batman in Year One, not Batman the legend.

[Maxwell Smart]

^Yup. Just because Begins wasn't what you wanted 100%, is no reason to say it sucks as a whole and not appreciate the movie.

[Miranda Fox]

lujho, brotha, what I think he means is that these types ***** and complain and say they don't like the movie because particular aspects of the comics that they like weren't in it which is arrogant and self-centered. Yeah I can understand being dissappointed with certain things(who wasn't? No movie is perfect, especially adaptations from another medium) but it seems like these people are just flat out flopping on the floor, kicking and screaming like 5 year olds because the movie wasn't EXACTLY what they wanted. Its annoying and immature.



Exactly. Thats what I was trying to get across to Herr Logan. Its not realistic, nor faithful to the comics for Batman to just start out as the badass, hard-boiled legend we know him to be. Bruce always knew he wanted to fight injustice in the comics, thats true, but just because he did that didn't make him The Dark Knight in and of itself. He had to train and find that within himself, and then he had to go out and actually do what he was planning and get some experience at it. We saw a rookie Batman in Year One, not Batman the legend.
Just...word!

[Saint]

Well ****ing duh. Why wouldn't they? That's a perfectly logical, reasonable desire. Why would they want a Batman movie that WASN'T what they love about the comics?
Yeah. I've occasionally encountered this mindset that we comic fans are being selfish for wanting a faithful Batman film. Why? We're the ones who care about the source material--not the non-fans--so if there's anyone that should be catered to, it's us. The rest of the audience won't care either way, because they don't read, don't know, and don't give a damn about Batman.

[The Batman]

I love how herr logan hates the film supposedly because he didnt get what he wanted, even though hes said constantly that batman begins was one of the better comic movies to come out. If you guys are whining over how he nitpicks BB, you guys will probably be in tears over his thoughts on the spider-man and x-flicks.

All i can say is this: If one Superman movie, STM, captured all the important aspects of superman's character, and that superman was in his first year as well, theres no reason that what herr logan wants is unattainable. Being a rookie batman does not mean he aint a genius, does not mean he needs other people to steer him in the right direction. If the comic batman, at the age of ten, knew what kind of menace to fight, he's got his ***** together. Not to mention that excuse aint valid, as there wasnt anything rookie like in BB.

and I gotta say, waiting three films for Batman to become the character we all know is ridiculous...

[DorkyFresh]

who says we're waiting 3 films? Christopher Nolan said himself that in "the Dark Knight" Batman will be much more comfortable being Batman.

[The Batman]

who says we're waiting 3 films? Christopher Nolan said himself that in "the Dark Knight" Batman will be much more comfortable being Batman.


Apparently, someone stated that bats should only become the bats we know in the third film

[Maxwell Smart]

All i can say is this: If one Superman movie, STM, captured all the important aspects of superman's character, and that superman was in his first year as well, theres no reason that what herr logan wants is unattainable. Being a rookie batman does not mean he aint a genius, does not mean he needs other people to steer him in the right direction. If the comic batman, at the age of ten, knew what kind of menace to fight, he's got his ***** together. Not to mention that excuse aint valid, as there wasnt anything rookie like in BB.

What? Thats obvious B.S. What do you think the scene with him and Gordon before he finished the Batsuit(when he was just wearing the ski mask) was meant to illustrate?

Its right there in Year One, which I've read about a thousand times. Batman becoming the legend he is over time is part of his story. The world of Batman doesn't just come together all at once. Its been built upon tons of stories. The character of The Joker is built upon tons of stories. No matter how good a certain one is, such as The Killing Joke, its the totality of that character development over the years thats woven him into the character we all know. Expecting Bruce to now suddenly inhabit every single characteristic of Batman just because hes put on the cape and cowl is a childish way to go about character development. You forget that the general audience, who this film is mainly aimed at(whether you like it or not) is not going to know the character in and out going into the movie like we will. Its a different medium and they have to take the time to establish all those elements, and I think it definitely takes more than one film in this case because all BB did was introduce Batman into Gotham. Now with these next two films we can watch that world come alive, piece by piece.

[Saint]

These might interest anyone looking for a better approach to the batsuit:
http://www.moma.org/images/collection/FullSizes/80413003.jpg
http://www.itc-prodive.com/images/OCEANIC%20DIVE%20SUITS-G-1.jpg

[DorkyFresh]

These might interest anyone looking for a better approach to the batsuit:
http://www.moma.org/images/collection/FullSizes/80413003.jpg

that's cool. i wouldn't mind if they went along the lines of something like that.

[Saint]

That's exactly what I thought. Tweak it a little and it even hints at the shape of the trunks, without actually having trunks.

[Angelus88]

Yeah...I was bored, so....

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/vaderules/Pho19D.jpg

Sorry...

[Crooklyn]

Indeed..

[Angelus88]

Mmhmm...:(

[Black Panther]

What? Thats obvious B.S. What do you think the scene with him and Gordon before he finished the Batsuit(when he was just wearing the ski mask) was meant to illustrate?

Its right there in Year One, which I've read about a thousand times. Batman becoming the legend he is over time is part of his story. The world of Batman doesn't just come together all at once. Its been built upon tons of stories. The character of The Joker is built upon tons of stories. No matter how good a certain one is, such as The Killing Joke, its the totality of that character development over the years thats woven him into the character we all know. Expecting Bruce to now suddenly inhabit every single characteristic of Batman just because hes put on the cape and cowl is a childish way to go about character development. You forget that the general audience, who this film is mainly aimed at(whether you like it or not) is not going to know the character in and out going into the movie like we will. Its a different medium and they have to take the time to establish all those elements, and I think it definitely takes more than one film in this case because all BB did was introduce Batman into Gotham. Now with these next two films we can watch that world come alive, piece by piece.

Owned. :up:

[Frico]

I love how herr logan hates the film supposedly because he didnt get what he wanted, even though hes said constantly that batman begins was one of the better comic movies to come out. If you guys are whining over how he nitpicks BB, you guys will probably be in tears over his thoughts on the spider-man and x-flicks.

Funny your bashing Herr like everyone else, considering you kiss his ass all the time.


And no, I don't think anyone will be in "tears." :whatever:

[Black Panther]

Funny your bashing Herr like everyone else, considering you kiss his ass all the time.


And no, I don't think anyone will be in "tears." :whatever:

Double owned. :up::up:

[Crooklyn]

I'm pretty sure he wasn't trying to bash Herr at all, just stating facts. :confused:

[The Batman]

I'm pretty sure he wasn't trying to bash Herr at all, just stating facts. :confused:

Luke Cage has long had a reading problem.

And do newbs know the meaning of being owned anymore? All he did was prove my point about the stupid whining that happening here.

[Beelze]

My point is, everybody comes away from these comics w/different impressions, just like everybody comes away from the movies w/different impressions. Sometimes being a purist & being well versed in the folklore can be a liability.
Another thing is that rarely does a Batman story capture all elements of Batman, and many elements have also changed over time. In The Killing Joke we follow a very experienced Batman, yet his expertise at various martial arts, his masterful deduction skills, his Bruce persona, etc. are not shown. Hell, I wouldn't even say that we saw "The World's Greatest Detective" in The Long Halloween, which was very much a mystery tale. It seems to me that the label, "The World's Greatest Detective" is quite an exaggeration. He's certainly no Sherlock Holmes in any story I've read. And then there's his stance on killing... I've begun reading some of the earlier stories (from the Joker's first appearance in Batman No. 1 and on from there), and he had no qualms about, say, pushing the Joker off a roof or leaving him to die, and was only slightly hesistant about shooting one of Hugo Strange's henchmen in the head to quickly prevent a minor catastrophe. Heh, he even helped "The Cat"/Catwoman to escape him and Robin, even though he knew she was a thief. This because he was seemingly falling in love with her, and he was acting all peurile in front of Robin because of it, too. So, Batman's a changing character... but should a product of any medium other than comics change the character, the heads of those responsible must roll!

[The Batman]

How hard is it to portray Batman as a competent, very smart detective with a knack for inventing things? Its not hard, if you think about it

[Ronny Shade]

no.

[The Batman]

What? Thats obvious B.S. What do you think the scene with him and Gordon before he finished the Batsuit(when he was just wearing the ski mask) was meant to illustrate?

Its right there in Year One, which I've read about a thousand times. Batman becoming the legend he is over time is part of his story. The world of Batman doesn't just come together all at once. Its been built upon tons of stories. The character of The Joker is built upon tons of stories. No matter how good a certain one is, such as The Killing Joke, its the totality of that character development over the years thats woven him into the character we all know. Expecting Bruce to now suddenly inhabit every single characteristic of Batman just because hes put on the cape and cowl is a childish way to go about character development. You forget that the general audience, who this film is mainly aimed at(whether you like it or not) is not going to know the character in and out going into the movie like we will. Its a different medium and they have to take the time to establish all those elements, and I think it definitely takes more than one film in this case because all BB did was introduce Batman into Gotham. Now with these next two films we can watch that world come alive, piece by piece.

Once Bruce officially Becomes Batman in BB, he makes no mistakes that i make of,unlike YO, where he still makes mistakes even when hes batman.

So, because Batman's only in his first year, he's gonna conviently forget the detecive and analytical skills he had when he came back to gotham after years and years of training? Yeah....sure. Casino Royale did it perfectly. He's already going to be the character we know by the next film...whereas with batman we have to wait? Obviously, Nolan didnt want to focus much on Batman being a novice in crimefighting if the only mistake he made was slipping when he was running from the cops....So...why should we wait two more films to see Batman as the detective, the inventor, etc?

And guess what? Superman didnt fly when he first began, but he clearly flies in the first movie. Perry White and the Daily Planet werent there until the 1940's, and they were in the first movie. So was kryptonite. So was Jimmy Olsen. So before lackeys who havent really contributed anything to this conversation scream "owned", maybe people should take the time to notice that...other comic movies have included the elements people wanted.

[Beelze]

Batman did detective work in Begins (separated the trustworthy from the unstrustworthy, spied/eavesdropped on various people, gathered information on Falcone's drug shipments, interrogated Gordon and Flass, provided the necessary evidence to land Carmine and his thugs in jail, provided leverage to keep Judge Faden out of the picture, found Crane's stash in the Narrows, realized the details of Ra's plan, etc.) and worked on his equipment (constructed a well-working skeletal shape for the memory cloth [and though Lucius provided the material, it was Bruce's idea and effort that resulted in the glider], crafted shurikens that apparently worked well, may have made the bat-caller, etc.) Just saying it was there, not that I didn't want more of it. I hope the next one has a good deal more of both aspects of the character.

My original point was that few Batman stories capture all the elements of the character, and some of the best ones, like The Killing Joke and Arkham Asylum, just manage to capture a few of them. That and many people's disgust at people changing things in a medium other than that of comics.

[Octoberist]

yeah, Batman's a very versitile charcter. It's hard to capture all of his aspects in one story, you know?

[The Batman]

Batman did detective work in Begins (separated the trustworthy from the unstrustworthy, spied/eavesdropped on various people, gathered information on Falcone's drug shipments, interrogated Gordon and Flass, provided the necessary evidence to land Carmine and his thugs in jail, provided leverage to keep Judge Faden out of the picture, found Crane's stash in the Narrows, realized the details of Ra's plan, etc.) and worked on his equipment (constructed a well-working skeletal shape for the memory cloth [and though Lucius provided the material, it was Bruce's idea and effort that resulted in the glider], crafted shurikens that apparently worked well, may have made the bat-caller, etc.) Just saying it was there, not that I didn't want more of it. I hope the next one has a good deal more of both aspects of the character.

My original point was that few Batman stories capture all the elements of the character, and some of the best ones, like The Killing Joke and Arkham Asylum, just manage to capture a few of them. That and many people's disgust at people changing things in a medium other than that of comics.

Seperating the trustworthy from the untrustworthy wasnt much detective work...as he knew even before he left for gotham

he knew he could trust rachel, and distrust faden since he was the guy who allowed chill's trial to be in a open court, where falcones thugs could kill him. Gordon is a little more complicated, as it depends on whether you think bruce remembered gordon or not.

He did detective work, I'll give you that, but it was lucious that made the antitoxin, and the gadgets were already made for him for the most part, where as in the comics he makes most of the modfications. Like others have said, the main problem is....Bruce isnt really in control in the movie. There's probably a better term for what i just claimed, but Bruce isnt the guy who creates the idea that theatrics will get you noticed. Until Rachel points it out to him, Chill is the only form of crime he wants to fight. He dosent deisgn most of his vehicles and weaponry. The Bruce of BB is a smart guy, but he cant hold a candle to the tactical and mental prowess of Comic Bats, and thats been my problem with all of these films. They highlight the fighting, not the mind. and if you doubt me, just look at the training sequences. Mostly fighting and fear tactics, not about the mind. They talk about the criminal mind, but dont go into much detail.

My post wasnt attacking you, but the idea that people that want more are nitpickers who cant be satisfied. Most of the details wanted can be done and dont need to take up the entire movie. You dont have to capture the comic stories themselves, but when it comes to certain characters, you got to capture most of the basics, which the movies lack. To say "Joker wasnt always the joker we know" isnt relevant, unless the movies were being made in the 1940's before jokers character was even defined.

[The Batman]

yeah, Batman's a very versitile charcter. It's hard to capture all of his aspects in one story, you know?

Not really, but thats just my opinion.

[Saint]

The Batman is correct. I see no great challenge in portraying Batman as a detective and inventor in one film, in addition to what he's portrayed as in Begins.

[lujho]

^Yup. Just because Begins wasn't what you wanted 100%, is no reason to say it sucks as a whole and not appreciate the movie.

Yeah, but the problem is when it's not even 50% of what you wanted.

[Chris Wallace]

Luke Cage has long had a reading problem.

And do newbs know the meaning of being owned anymore? All he did was prove my point about the stupid whining that happening here.
Let's not get personal. I don't see any whining happening here.

[Chris Wallace]

Another thing is that rarely does a Batman story capture all elements of Batman, and many elements have also changed over time. In The Killing Joke we follow a very experienced Batman, yet his expertise at various martial arts, his masterful deduction skills, his Bruce persona, etc. are not shown. Hell, I wouldn't even say that we saw "The World's Greatest Detective" in The Long Halloween, which was very much a mystery tale. It seems to me that the label, "The World's Greatest Detective" is quite an exaggeration. He's certainly no Sherlock Holmes in any story I've read. And then there's his stance on killing... I've begun reading some of the earlier stories (from the Joker's first appearance in Batman No. 1 and on from there), and he had no qualms about, say, pushing the Joker off a roof or leaving him to die, and was only slightly hesistant about shooting one of Hugo Strange's henchmen in the head to quickly prevent a minor catastrophe. Heh, he even helped "The Cat"/Catwoman to escape him and Robin, even though he knew she was a thief. This because he was seemingly falling in love with her, and he was acting all peurile in front of Robin because of it, too. So, Batman's a changing character... but should a product of any medium other than comics change the character, the heads of those responsible must roll!
If the comics can't agree, how can a movie be all the things all fans want them to be?

[M.O.Steel]

edit

[M.O.Steel]

nvm

[M.O.Steel]

....

hey man, that's my avatar

[Saint]

If the comics can't agree, how can a movie be all the things all fans want them to be?
The comics agree plenty. Try reading them.

[Darkest Knight]

Batman did detective work in BEGINS. It wasn't a crime novel, but he certainly was a detective. And seriously, I doubt some of you actually know what you're talking about. Whether or not Bruce came up with the antidote, or got passed information via other sources is irrelevant. THAT is detective work. He recieves all these other nuggets, and then puts them together. Detectives don't find out every detail of a case for themselves. They find others, and piece together what happened. To say Batman wasn't a detective in BEGINS would be a bold face lie.

[The Batman]

uh, yes...we know. We're talking about Bruce the inventor. Comic Bruce wouldnt have needed lucious to make an anitdote for him

[Substance D]

Seperating the trustworthy from the untrustworthy wasnt much detective work...as he knew even before he left for gotham

he knew he could trust rachel, and distrust faden since he was the guy who allowed chill's trial to be in a open court, where falcones thugs could kill him. Gordon is a little more complicated, as it depends on whether you think bruce remembered gordon or not.

He did detective work, I'll give you that, but it was lucious that made the antitoxin, and the gadgets were already made for him for the most part, where as in the comics he makes most of the modfications. Like others have said, the main problem is....Bruce isnt really in control in the movie. There's probably a better term for what i just claimed, but Bruce isnt the guy who creates the idea that theatrics will get you noticed. Until Rachel points it out to him, Chill is the only form of crime he wants to fight. He dosent deisgn most of his vehicles and weaponry. The Bruce of BB is a smart guy, but he cant hold a candle to the tactical and mental prowess of Comic Bats, and thats been my problem with all of these films. They highlight the fighting, not the mind. and if you doubt me, just look at the training sequences. Mostly fighting and fear tactics, not about the mind. They talk about the criminal mind, but dont go into much detail.


Okay, so you want Batman to make mistakes, but then you want him to be in control as well?

[Saint]

The two are not mutually exclusive.

[Darkest Knight]

uh, yes...we know. We're talking about Bruce the inventor. Comic Bruce wouldnt have needed lucious to make an anitdote for him
Oh ok, gotcha. Just checking, cause some are acting like he did none. But what does Brice "invent" usually in the comics? I mean, I saw Bruce "invent" the entire concept of a Batman, I saw him "invent" a costume to fit his vision. Or are you more antsy to see Bruce create a remedy to something?

[Katsuro]

uh, yes...we know. We're talking about Bruce the inventor. Comic Bruce wouldnt have needed lucious to make an anitdote for him

No, it probably would've been Alfred.

Seriouslly, the dude was out cold for two days. This isn't the 60s series where he would readily have whatever he needed for a situation in his utility belt. I doubt he carried around antitoxins for every possible toxin known to man. And as for whether comic book Batman would've been gassed in the first place, in his first year? probably yes.

[Beelze]

I don't even recall Year One Bruce having such a penchant for chemistry, nor do I recall him having a proper laboratory in the cave. However, he proved to be quite skilled in Batman No. 1, from the 40's, when he whipped up an antidote for Hugo Strange's "monster serum" just like that, under stress and with only a few minutes to do it. Then again, a lot of people seem to prefer to see the modern-day Batman in movie adaptations, and the Batman of old beats today's Batman when it comes to certain things.

[afan]

No, it probably would've been Alfred.

Seriouslly, the dude was out cold for two days. This isn't the 60s series where he would readily have whatever he needed for a situation in his utility belt. I doubt he carried around antitoxins for every possible toxin known to man. And as for whether comic book Batman would've been gassed in the first place, in his first year? probably yes.


The will power of Bruce Wayne is second to none. He regularly subverts physical pain resulting from injury that would disable an ordinary psyche. His mastery of mind over matter is unparallelled.

He also because of his training is a competent and knowledgeable chemist.

Now that being said could he not have carried out his own research, all be it hampered somewhat by the poison in his system necessitating some assistance form Alfred, and develop an antidote to the fear gas on his own.

[Darkest Knight]

I don't even recall Year One Bruce having such a penchant for chemistry, nor having do I recall him having a proper laboratory in the cave.
He didn't even have a batmobile.

[The Batman]

I don't even recall Year One Bruce having such a penchant for chemistry, nor do I recall him having a proper laboratory in the cave. However, he proved to be quite skilled in Batman No. 1, from the 40's, when he whipped up an antidote for Hugo Strange's "monster serum" just like that, under stress and with only a few minutes to do it. Then again, a lot of people seem to prefer to see the modern-day Batman in movie adaptations, and the Batman of old beats today's Batman when it comes to certain things.


Lets not forget that YO isnt the only source for creating a flick like BB.

In Batman's original origin, it shows him working with chemicals.

[Darkest Knight]

Yes, learning how to.

[The Batman]

Okay, so you want Batman to make mistakes, but then you want him to be in control as well?


personally, i'd like it if he were in control for the most part. most comic movies with the origin dont show the hero making mistakes.

[The Batman]

Yes, learning how to.


Yes....but its a flashback. Before he becomes batman....who knows how much he learned since that tiny panel? He wouldnt be a master after that, but who knows?

[Beelze]

Lets not forget that YO isnt the only source for creating a flick like BB.

In Batman's original origin, it shows him working with chemicals.
And one of my on-going points is just that: the comics don't always agree on the specifics, or highlight the same aspects.

[Saint]

And one of my on-going points is just that: the comics don't always agree on the specifics, or highlight the same aspects.
And yet the 2003 Hush-era origin by Jim Lee and Jeph Loeb also shows him working competently with chemicals during his training.

Despite your apologist attitude that it can't be done right because there is too much variation, the reality is that there are simple truths about Batman that have been consistent in every significant version. His competency in the areas of science, engineering, and chemistry are examples of this.

You cannot seriously mean to tell us that a film would have any difficulty highlighting these skills. In B89, Batman decoded the Joker's toxin. In Batman Returns, we saw him working on the guts of the batmobile. Hell, in the crap-fest Batman Forever he deduced the operating method of Nigma's machine simply by looking at it. To say these skills could not be featured in The Dark Knight is ludicrous. He's Batman, for Christ's sake.

[The Batman]

And one of my on-going points is just that: the comics don't always agree on the specifics, or highlight the same aspects.


Yes...but theyve always agreed on one crucial thing....Batman...is a genius and master tactician

[Beelze]

Yes...but theyve always agreed on one crucial thing....Batman...is a genius and master tactician
He improvised a distraction to help the prisoner escape the League of Shadows, escaped from the GPD in a quite elaborate manner, foiled Ra's plan, and was very succesful in pretty much all the battles he engaged in, so they didn't do too bad on the master tactician part (especially given the fact that he had little to no prep time). He didn't really prove to be a genius in Begins, but he was clearly way above average.

Despite your apologist attitude that it can't be done right because there is too much variation, the reality is that there are simple truths about Batman that have been consistent in every significant version. His competency in the areas of science, engineering, and chemistry are examples of this.
You're putting words in my mouth and attributing a false characteristic to me. It can definitely be done right, and Begins, while a very good film, is far off from being THE Batman film it could've been. The way they handled their blockbuster story, regrettably, took away from the origin story. Sure, this way, Batman started out with more of a bang, but with less finesse. A longer script/more screentime could've given us both. I'm hoping that they will, through sequels, remedy this by touching more on the aspects of the character that weren't prominently showcased in Begins. Amongst other things, I wish for a greater display of knowledge in the fields of chemistry and physics, applied to inventions and deductions.


Here's our master chemist at work:

http://img178.imageshack.us/img178/4795/battychemem3.jpg

I would say they've toned down some of his skills over the years. The scene above is a little too much, IMO, and not how I would've wanted the fear gas problem solved. BTW, this is on the same page that Batman decides to kill one of Hugo Strange's henchmen, when he could've easily (being Batman) have handled the situation in a much more peaceful manner. And yet people complain about him letting Ra's die. At least he didn't shoot Ra's in the head!

[Saint]

You're putting words in my mouth and attributing a false characteristic to me. It can definitely be done right, and Begins, while a very good film, is far off from being THE Batman film it could've been. The way they handled their blockbuster story, regrettably, took away from the origin story. Sure, this way, Batman started out with more of a bang, but with less finesse. A longer script/more screentime could've given us both. I'm hoping that they will, through sequels, remedy this by touching more on the aspects of the character that weren't prominently showcased in Begins. Amongst other things, I wish for a greater display of knowledge in the fields of chemistry and physics, applied to inventions and deductions.
Then I am baffled as to why you made the point in the first place.


Here's our master chemist at work:

http://img178.imageshack.us/img178/4795/battychemem3.jpg

I would say they've toned down some of his skills over the years. The scene above is a little too much, IMO, and not how I would've wanted the fear gas problem solved. BTW, this is on the same page that Batman decides to kill one of Hugo Strange's henchmen, when he could've easily (being Batman) have handled the situation in a much more peaceful manner. And yet people complain about him letting Ra's die. At least he didn't shoot Ra's in the head!
I am aware of what happens in that story--it's inside a volume sitting on the shelf behind me.

[Kritish]

Those aren't "new looks" stick with the current BB suit.

[lujho]

back to costume talk... I found this design where the torso armour evokes what I've tried to get across in some of my designs. Simpler... smoother, more organic, with lines to evoke musculature.

If you imagine something a similar shape with similar seams, as a thick wetsuity-type material, maybe with a skin/leather texture, or maybe just a nice textured cloth weave (like the Fantastic Four costumes) or something smooth and matte like the exposed neoprene bits on the Begins suit's elbow joints and knees/legs. It would be, as I've said before, a tailored suit over some armour. The armour would give it the slightly stylized shape.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v217/lujho/Reference/ajihad.jpg

[Saint]

back to costume talk... I found this design where the torso armour evokes what I've tried to get across in some of my designs. Simpler... smoother, more organic, with lines to evoke musculature.

If you imagine something a similar shape with similar seams, as a thick wetsuity-type material, maybe with a skin/leather texture, or maybe just a nice textured cloth weave (like the Fantastic Four costumes) or something smooth and matte like the exposed neoprene bits on the Begins suit's elbow joints and knees/legs. It would be, as I've said before, a tailored suit over some armour. The armour would give it the slightly stylized shape.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v217/lujho/Reference/ajihad.jpg
Damn straight; that's the sort of look Batman would have. As I've said in the past, the Fantastic Four suits are perfect for Batman.

[lujho]

Damn straight; that's the sort of look Batman would have. As I've said in the past, the Fantastic Four suits are perfect for Batman.

As I've always thought, but don't think I've ever expressed here - the actual bodysuit should be considered the base - the blank canvas - upon which a batsuit should be build. It doesn't need to be that detailed or fancy. The bodysuit is important but it isn't the focus.

It's all the other elements that make the suit - the boots, gloves, belt, cape, cowl and symbol (and optional trunks/harness/groin armour whatever) should look great enough that even even on the plainest bodysuit the whole suit looks amazing.

I've not yet seen any suit where that is the case - the fact that if you put the Begins boots, belt, cape, cowl and gauntlets on a totally plain bodysuit it doesn't actually look that great, highlights, IMO, the weaknesses of those elements.

[kenellard]

As I've always thought, but don't think I've ever expressed here - the actual bodysuit should be considered the base - the blank canvas - upon which a batsuit should be build. It doesn't need to be that detailed or fancy. The bodysuit is important but it isn't the focus.

It's all the other elements that make the suit - the boots, gloves, belt, cape, cowl and symbol (and optional trunks/harness/groin armour whatever) should look great enough that even even on the plainest bodysuit the whole suit looks amazing.

I've not yet seen any suit where that is the case - the fact that if you put the Begins boots, belt, cape, cowl and gauntlets on a totally plain bodysuit it doesn't actually look that great, highlights, IMO, the weaknesses of those elements.

that's a really good point, I've always had a problem with the cowl in that I can't believe in the 17 YEARS since B89 the couldn't find a way to make it more form fitting, more movable and generally less puffy. the fact is that they could have just rented spiderman on dvd, the shell idea with fabric over it would've been perfect for batman too, but then, this series is looking alot less about the batman and alot more about "nolans vision"

[Darkest Knight]

this series is looking alot less about the batman and alot more about "nolans vision"
Where do you get this crap? How do you even remotely see this? You can't even make an argument for your troll-ish agenda driven propaganda. Chris Nolan is making a movie less about Batman? huh? That's why the last 1/3rd of BEGINS steadily got more and more like classic Batman stuff. Why he specifically went out, and hired a script writer who was well versed in the lore of Batman, and had him right a story arc that spans out across 3 movies?!?! Yeah, you're right, this is about "nolan's vision". Get out of here with this crap. Seriously. If you have such a dis-interest in Chris Nolan's Batman film, why do you feel the incessant need to talk about it? Threatned, much?

[Walks Unseen]

This is such an odd argument in favour of begins, why is it that a faithful adaptation of the material we've religiously followed and loved for years doomed to failure? I can't understand why people just accept and expect that the comic batman wouldn't work in a big budget film, I mean, it's not like anyone's ever tried it before?

The comic book Batman is Batman from Batman Begins. They nailed the character. That is one of the many reasons why the film is the best comic book film ever.

As for the suit, I only want slight modifcations from the BB suit. I know a lot of people want a more Fantastic Four suit type material rather than the body armour he had in BB but I dont want them to go in that direction. I mean if I was a guy going around fighting crime by myself with no superpowers, I think I'd want to wear some kind of body armour. I think it makes sense that he wears body armour. I mean would you go around in skin tight clothing if you didnt have superpowers and were running around a city fighting crime? I dont think so.

[Rynan]

I can't believe we're arguing about a wetsuit with pieces of latex glued on it. :whatever:

Unflexable? Bulky? Gimme a break.

[DorkyFresh]

what the heck is that picture from?

[Crooklyn]

Eragon

[James Bond 007]

The only modification I think the suit should have is give him more classic gloves, in other words, make the scalloped gauntlets part of the gloves, rather than just bracelets, otherwise, leave him alone, he looks great.

[James Bond 007]

The only thing I think they should change about the suit is the gloves. Lose the bracelets, integrate them into the gloves.

EDIT: Sorry about the double post, didn't think the first one had gone through, the site seemed to freeze on me.

EDIT: OK, gonna stop posting for a while. Something's gone seriously wrong with this site, for me anyway, I think.

EDIT: OK, forget that, site seems to be ok now, I think.

[lujho]

I know a lot of people want a more Fantastic Four suit type material rather than the body armour he had in BB but I dont want them to go in that direction. I mean if I was a guy going around fighting crime by myself with no superpowers, I think I'd want to wear some kind of body armour. I think it makes sense that he wears body armour. I mean would you go around in skin tight clothing if you didnt have superpowers and were running around a city fighting crime? I dont think so.

Wow. No-one's EVER said anything along those lines before in the several years this board's existence. Batman needs armour? Brilliant! Absolutely brilliant observation, which utterly rules out anything other than a sculpted rubber suit. Can't think HOW I'd never thought of that before. Jeez, I guess all this time supporting a fabric-based suit, I've been a damn fool wasting my time. If only I'd realized that Batman needs some kind of armour.

Oh, wait a minute, I just thought of something else no-one's ever, ever thought of before which counters the above... what if you had a sleeker "Fantastic Four" type suit that had armour underneath it, rather than have the sculpted armour on the suit's exterior? That would allow for a different, new, sleeker and more traditional look, whilst still being "realistic". Phew, I'm glad I just thought of that - for a moment there I thought I'd have to accept that the kind of Rubber suit we've had for 5 films was the only possible way to go.

Or in other words - dropping the sarcasm - a suit with a non-sculpted, non-rubber rubber exterior does NOT mean it's an un-armoured suit.

[CristiMAN]

Damn straight; that's the sort of look Batman would have. As I've said in the past, the Fantastic Four suits are perfect for Batman.

I cant agree more... NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's painful to point ANYTHING from that pile of crap and relate/sugest in a Nolan Batman movie. I thought we were over the Shummycrappy movies...

[Cats]

Batman should use a steel woven fabric that would prevent certain potential injuries, although not all. No matter what, he has to be agile. His skills are in stealth, not tanking.

[Saint]

I cant agree more... NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!
Are you thirteen?

[ROBOCOP CPU001]

everybody has there fav way of what Bats looks like..at the end of the day..its what chris nolan likes Batman to look like..not what we think.

[kenellard]

everybody has there fav way of what Bats looks like..at the end of the day..its what chris nolan likes Batman to look like..not what we think.

I'd be very worried if any bat-fans absolute favourite look for bats is the one seen in begins. I just dunno why they didn't try something even remotely different from the last 4 movies. The deal with batman's costume is that it's light armour covered by fabric, so why not try that? I'd assume with the many millions of dollars at their disposal the production crew could've come up with something amazing, it just feels like laziness to me, copying a method that wasn't even 100% successful in the first place

[Walks Unseen]

Wow. No-one's EVER said anything along those lines before in the several years this board's existence. Batman needs armour? Brilliant! Absolutely brilliant observation, which utterly rules out anything other than a sculpted rubber suit. Can't think HOW I'd never thought of that before. Jeez, I guess all this time supporting a fabric-based suit, I've been a damn fool wasting my time. If only I'd realized that Batman needs some kind of armour.

Oh, wait a minute, I just thought of something else no-one's ever, ever thought of before which counters the above... what if you had a sleeker "Fantastic Four" type suit that had armour underneath it, rather than have the sculpted armour on the suit's exterior? That would allow for a different, new, sleeker and more traditional look, whilst still being "realistic". Phew, I'm glad I just thought of that - for a moment there I thought I'd have to accept that the kind of Rubber suit we've had for 5 films was the only possible way to go.

Or in other words - dropping the sarcasm - a suit with a non-sculpted, non-rubber rubber exterior does NOT mean it's an un-armoured suit.

I cant believe you wasted two huge paragraphs on sarcasm.

[kenellard]

I cant believe you wasted two huge paragraphs on sarcasm.

sometimes it takes that much :woot:

[Myrddin_Emrys]

I cant believe you wasted two huge paragraphs on sarcasm.
Very bad sarcasm at that. Wowee Kazowee folks, if you need to use sarcasm to the best of effectiveness, then make it subtle... or be british.. like me ;)

[kenellard]

Very bad sarcasm at that. Wowee Kazowee folks, if you need to use sarcasm to the best of effectiveness, then make it subtle... or be british.. like me ;)

Brittish-Shmittish, everyone knows the Irish are funniest! :oldrazz:

“I can't swim. I can't drive, either. I was going to learn to drive but then I thought, well, what if I crash into a lake?” - Dylan Moran

[NolGoyHater]

That pic of the black dude in Eragon, a couple of you guys said it should resemble that a bit. All I can think is Batman Returns. I mean look at it, the sheild-Abs and smooth "automotive" look, resembles BR quite a bit.

As for changing the BB costume, just reshape the cowl. It has a diamond shaped cheeks and forehead look. Get rid of the cape clasps and make it more of a one peice with the cowl. Make the belt wear more like a belt and less like a bikini. And change the gloves from puffy-balloonish dish gloves to leather gloves. And I really do miss the yellow oval Batsymbol. It was really classy and part of Batman's costume for over 60 years. I understand it wasn't in the early years or even now. But to those that say no on the yellow symbol and yes to the black large bat symbol, I ask why does he even need one on his chest? The yellow symbol was more of a target to get the criminals to shoot at his armoured chest. The big black bat is more of just a styling thing.

[lujho]

Very bad sarcasm at that. Wowee Kazowee folks, if you need to use sarcasm to the best of effectiveness, then make it subtle... or be british.. like me ;)

I was deliberately belabouring the point, simply because he was making a point that had already been made and countered a million times before on these forums, as if no-one had ever thought of it before.

I know I went overboard, but man, I'm sick of hearing the "Batman absolutely has to wear as suit that is externally visible sculpted rubber armour, because obviously the only other alternative is gossamer thin nylon tights (so light a grey as to be more of an off-white, of course... with sky blue cape and cowl), which would not protect him" line.

[lujho]

That pic of the black dude in Eragon, a couple of you guys said it should resemble that a bit. All I can think is Batman Returns. I mean look at it, the sheild-Abs and smooth "automotive" look, resembles BR quite a bit.

True, but it's still more organic than the Returns chest and what I'd like to see would be more organic still. And it wouldn't have overlapping plates, just indented seams. Wouldn't be "automotive" at all.

As for changing the BB costume, just reshape the cowl. It has a diamond shaped cheeks and forehead look.

True. The diamond shape absolutely ruins it. Batman's head should be shaped more like a... head. A Batman head. You know, like in Batman comics.

Get rid of the cape clasps and make it more of a one peice with the cowl. Make the belt wear more like a belt and less like a bikini. And change the gloves from puffy-balloonish dish gloves to leather gloves.

Yes, the leather gloves he wore at Ra's temple were much nicer, had more "character", and looked cooler with the hand-guard.

And I really do miss the yellow oval Batsymbol. It was really classy and part of Batman's costume for over 60 years. I understand it wasn't in the early years or even now. But to those that say no on the yellow symbol and yes to the black large bat symbol, I ask why does he even need one on his chest? The yellow symbol was more of a target to get the criminals to shoot at his armoured chest. The big black bat is more of just a styling thing.

He had the black bat for the first 25 years. And for the last... 7-ish? He's had it almost as long as the yellow one - he certainly never had the yellow for "over 60 years" - it's was introduced barely 40 years ago.

He needs one on his chest because he's a superhero. The target explanation is silly. They're both a "styling thing" - one just had a retroactive explanation by Frank Miller to somewhat justify an element he thought was silly and eventually got rid of later in the story anyway.

I just think it's a better, cleaner, more integrated design - and still striking, when against a contrasting shade of shark grey anyway.

Blue, light grey and yellow never made sense on Batman's costume, despite that being the traditional look that evolved.

If they ever introduced the oval, I'd rather see it on a silver background, because it fits in with the monochromatic colour scheme.

[Miranda Fox]

I like the idea of a silver background for the symbol. They'll probably keep it as is though.

Anyway, Jett posted an update on the costume:

Our guy tells us to look for a suit that’s “athletic” and be more “fabricky” -- if I can use that as a description. There will still be an element of the sculpted “body armor” on the suit, so don’t expect something totally rubber-free.

My take is that the suit is not going to look drasticly different from the one seen in BATMAN BEGINS. But one would expect Bruce Wayne to tweek and improve the suit, so we'll see that in TDK.
I know some of you don't like the rubber, but something more fabricky is good IMO.

[Cats]

the sheild-Abs and smooth "automotive" look, resembles BR quite a bit.
The suit shouldn't have a sheen at all, for practicality's sake. Batman is all about the job at hand - everything he owns should be logical and very operational. Metallic gleams off his suit is only going to serve to alert the enemy.

[bunk]

I'm just afraid they're gonna make changes to the material of the suit and some other minor things but leave the cowl exactly the same.

[Comic Book Boy]

I'm just afraid they're gonna make changes to the material of the suit and some other minor things but leave the cowl exactly the same.
The cowl rocks!

[Cats]

The cowl rocks!
Except when it makes Bale's face teh puffy.

[bunk]

The cowl rocks!

No, it's not bad really. It looks better than any of the past ones, I just think they can improve on it. I'd like to see them give Bats a more overall boxy look. A more square shaped head and even fit his cape so his shoulders look more angular. I like that whole animated series look as far as his silouette.

[lujho]

I'm just afraid they're gonna make changes to the material of the suit and some other minor things but leave the cowl exactly the same.

That would be extremely disappointing, yes. I've a much bigger problem with the cowl than the suit. It's a afr bigger, more obvious flaw. The bodysuit isn't even a flaw - it's a cool design - it's just a style I'm absolutely sick of. But the cowl really does look consistently awful... more often than not, in my opinion.

Make the cowl sleeker, change the ear shape, and open up the mouth-hole to expose more of his jaw and make the top of the hole/bottom of the nose a flattened V-shape. And lower those surprized-looking brows a bit too.

The suit news is great though. But it's hardly the first thing that needs fixing.

[Saint]

Here's an old piece from a former member of the boards. Potentially interesting fabric ideas.

http://img296.imageshack.us/img296/6937/batmanintimidationgamezn7.jpg

[Super Kal]

It's a cool manip, but I'm not too big on the symbol connecting to the cowl.

[Saint]

http://img348.imageshack.us/img348/8003/batformulauw0.jpg

[Boom]

http://img348.imageshack.us/img348/8003/batformulauw0.jpg
GAME OVER.

Saint wins.

[Saint]

GAME OVER.

Saint wins.
Damn right.

[Boom]

It doesn't need to be foam latex in order to convey realistic body armor.

[Super Kal]

http://img348.imageshack.us/img348/8003/batformulauw0.jpg
do you have a bigger version of the bottom pic?

[Abe Rush]

The mask doesn't look that great on the bottom pic though...

[Saint]

do you have a bigger version of the bottom pic?
http://www.comicus.it/images/specials/bermejo/bgk53.jpg

[Super Kal]

thanks

[Crooklyn]

The mask doesn't look that great on the bottom pic though...
Besides the overly drawn seams...what's so bad?

[Abe Rush]

Besides the overly drawn seams...what's so bad?

Wait a sec... I didn't say it was "so bad" I just said it wasn't "that great" and it's exactly because it has overly drawn seams... I could really do without them.

[Taiwarriorz21]

I hope that batman doesnt some kung fu fight and woops up on the bad guys a bunch.

[Crooklyn]

Wait a sec... I didn't say it was "so bad" I just said it wasn't "that great" and it's exactly because it has overly drawn seams... I could really do without them.
Ah, understood. I agree. :up:

I hope that batman doesnt some kung fu fight and woops up on the bad guys a bunch.
Translation for us American folks, please.

[Wams]

I already posted this in another thread but it must be said again

Here is my vote...

http://www.moma.org/images/collection/FullSizes/80413003.jpg

http://www.bodyglove.com/feature/vaporWetsuit.jpg

http://www.peloton-cycles.com/images/wetsuitarm.gif

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i271/nwonknu2k/Decobat-1.jpg

It should be a printed image with a slight undersuit for effect.

:spidey:
:supes:

[lujho]

I already posted this in another thread but it must be said again

Here is my vote...

http://www.moma.org/images/collection/FullSizes/80413003.jpg

http://www.bodyglove.com/feature/vaporWetsuit.jpg

http://www.peloton-cycles.com/images/wetsuitarm.gif

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i271/nwonknu2k/Decobat-1.jpg

It should be a printed image with a slight undersuit for effect.

:spidey:
:supes:


Eh, I know it's your design but I don't see why any printing would need to be involved. Those lines should be seams to separate the different panels. I don't think you need any shading, personally.

I still think a skin-like leathery texture would look absolutely amazing.

[Ronny Shade]

GAME OVER.

Saint wins.
I agree.

I actually really am starting to like the attatched cape symbol. I think it would work.

[Saint]

My adjustments on a manip by Lujho:
http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/1686/ultimatebatsuitsf7.jpg

[Wams]

Eh, I know it's your design but I don't see why any printing would need to be involved. Those lines should be seams to separate the different panels. I don't think you need any shading, personally.

I still think a skin-like leathery texture would look absolutely amazing.


The printing would be the effect of separating the individual muscle groups to
give the body a graphic look.
The lines could be seams but it would be easier to make it a silkscreen print and
better for mobility. Seams constrict movement if there are to many.
The shading could help if need be.
Say if the suit is dark gray but it needs to be darker in certain muscle groups.
Im in the process of producing this suit.
It's coming out great.
Im looking forward to sharing some pics with everyone when
Im done.
It's sure costing me enough.


:spidey:
:supes:

[Jackasscoley15]

Here's an old piece from a former member of the boards. Potentially interesting fabric ideas.

http://img296.imageshack.us/img296/6937/batmanintimidationgamezn7.jpg

Damn, I haven't seen that manip in a LONG time. :up:

[DorkyFresh]

Damn, I haven't seen that manip in a LONG time. :up:
holy cow...i remember that thing.







i have the original psd file buried in my hard drive somewhere...:woot: it looks so "bleh" to me now, haha.

[Saint]

http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/4064/superbatsuitqg3.jpg

And here's an all-black version:

http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/8005/superbatsuitblackti9.jpg

[Two-Face]

Great work BTW, how tried putting different Batman symbols?

[Saint]

With the begins symbol:
http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/9660/superbatsuit2pn6.jpg

With a belt:
http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/4572/superbatsuit3eu3.jpg

[Saint]

Commandeered a cowl from on of Lujho's manips:

http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/3302/superbatsuit3maskxj3.jpg

[The_Dark_Knight]

Commandeered a cowl from on of Lujho's manips:

http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/3302/superbatsuit3maskxj3.jpg

:wow:

WOW!!

Thats awesome!! Its better then the Begins costume! :up:

[Crooklyn]

That suit is waaaaayyy too light...

[Saint]

That suit is waaaaayyy too light...
Next time you'd me to adjust something, ask instead of b**ching.

[Saint]

My labour is complete (more of the in-progress manips can be found in the "fabricky" topic). Here are six versions. My favourite is the dark gray.

http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/3847/suitcollection2vq4.jpg

[Sun_Down]

Excellent work, Saint! I would love if he looked like that. :up: :up:

[Crooklyn]

Next time you'd me to adjust something, ask instead of b**ching.
Excuse moi dickwad, but I wasn't asking you to do anything. It was a simple comment.

Would you like me to ask for permission, next time I want to post? Would that please you?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v132/Dex4788/Smilies/Confused/002.gif

[Saint]

Excuse moi dickwad, but I wasn't asking you to do anything. It was a simple comment.

Would you like me to ask for permission, next time I want to post? Would that please you?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v132/Dex4788/Smilies/Confused/002.gif
Yeah, do that. That way people won't be subjected to so many stupid posts.

[Crooklyn]

Nice to see there are some people here that don't take things to heart. :heart:

[The Only Woj]

wow. that does look great. where did that bodysuit originate from?

[Boom]

wow. that does look great. where did that bodysuit originate from?
Fantastic Four. The costumes were one aspect that the production team actually got right.

[Super Kal]

My labour is complete (more of the in-progress manips can be found in the "fabricky" topic). Here are six versions. My favourite is the dark gray.

http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/3847/suitcollection2vq4.jpg
meh...

2 things I don't like though...

1.) The symbol design. It feels really fat and clunky... I'd prefer to see a slimmer symbol
2.)The suit lines. All those lines on that suit give it a kind of rushed feel to it IMO... it takes away from the dynamics of the suit, which should be IMO a flowing suit. The lines distract me and make me lose focus on the rest of the suit.

I do like the bottom right one, besides the symbol... i like that shade of black on Batman, especially on the gloves. It gives it a retro feel to it, but in the end, I still want to see a more comic book inspired suit.

[Darkest Knight]

Cowl is awesome. The rest is disgusting.

[Saint]

1.) The symbol design. It feels really fat and clunky... I'd prefer to see a slimmer symbol
I did a version with the Begins symbol a few posts back.

2.)The suit lines. All those lines on that suit give it a kind of rushed feel to it IMO... it takes away from the dynamics of the suit, which should be IMO a flowing suit. The lines distract me and make me lose focus on the rest of the suit.
I could only do so much with what I had (a Fantastic Four uniform). Obviously when you cobble something like this together on top of such an image, it won't be very cohesive. As I said in the other thread, I believe the problem isn't that there are too many lines (The Begins suit has far more), it's that the lines and other elements aren't arranged in the best way, because I had to work on top of an existing design geared towards another goal.

[Darkest Knight]

Well yeah, the Begins suit has many lines... but they flow, and look good.

[Super Kal]

I did a version with the Begins symbol a few posts back.


I could only do so much with what I had (a Fantastic Four uniform). Obviously when you cobble something like this together on top of such an image, it won't be very cohesive. As I said in the other thread, I believe the problem isn't that there are too many lines (The Begins suit has far more), it's that the lines and other elements aren't arranged in the best way, because I had to work on top of an existing design geared towards another goal.
I understand what you mean... granted, you did a great job on the manip, but, lol, you know me... I'm just a comic book fan. :word:

if you could start from scratch with a blank canvas, would you get rid of the lines?

[Saint]

I understand what you mean... granted, you did a great job on the manip, but, lol, you know me... I'm just a comic book fan. :word:

if you could start from scratch with a blank canvas, would you get rid of the lines?
Some of them, but not all. As I said, I would arrange them in such a way that they would look better.

Well yeah, the Begins suit has many lines... but they flow, and look good.
Please look up "cohesion" in the dictionary, and then re-read my post, because I when I used that word I was explaining why they do not "flow and look good."

[Super Kal]

here's my version... it would be something like this except with more accent on the muscles... plus a cape.
http://img125.imageshack.us/img125/2250/batmanpersonalal7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[batboy99]

Cowl is awesome. The rest is disgusting.can you do better?

[Two-Face]

here's my version... it would be something like this except with more accent on the muscles... plus a cape.
http://img125.imageshack.us/img125/2250/batmanpersonalal7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

I wouldn't mind seening that suit on big screen, I used to hate black and gray suit on screen but I'm kinda looking forward to this if this used by Nolans & co.

Great work BTW! :up:

[batboy99]

make the gloves black and its awesome!

[The Last Meatbag]

I still like Saint's manips the most...

[Saint]

here's my version... it would be something like this except with more accent on the muscles... plus a cape.
http://img125.imageshack.us/img125/2250/batmanpersonalal7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Personally I find that to be way too thick and plain. I think the fabric look can work--otherwise I wouldn't have done all those manips, haha--but it really has to look like heavy, substantial, protective material, possibly with plates underneath.

[Mr. Socko]

I'd love to see a spandex/part rubber suit like in Superman Returns but it ain't gonna happen.

So I'll lower my standards and just say I want the suit to be grey and back.

[Nepenthes]

The main problem with the spandex suit is that he doesn't look so BIG. He'll look less like a demon and more like a man in tights. I know Bale can put on the muscle but he'll still need padding imo.

[Crooklyn]

The rubber suit had padding, I don't get your point...

[Crooklyn]

I know, but the problem he's stating is the same as it is now. No matter what they use, there will still be some padding to add mass and definition.

[Saint]

I don't know why everybody keeps talking about spandex. Nobody wants spandex, we just want something that's better than rubber. And Crooklyn is right; it's going to have padding regardless of what it's made out of.

[Nepenthes]

I know, but the problem he's stating is the same as it is now. No matter what they use, there will still be some padding to add mass and definition.

It just seems that the people who want spandex generally want a slimmer Batman, not so bulky.

I was saying that spandex might be ok as long as Batman keeps his size. The only area where I'd consider less padding is in the neck.

Saint of course no one wants 'spandex' in the literal sense. It's just a term. I should have said 'fabric' instead.

[Mr. Socko]

I don't know why everybody keeps talking about spandex. Nobody wants spandex, we just want something that's better than rubber. And Crooklyn is right; it's going to have padding regardless of what it's made out of.

I want that same s*** that they made the SR costume with.

[Crooklyn]

It just seems that the people who want spandex generally want a slimmer Batman, not so bulky.
It's not that, we just want a more true-to-the-comics suit, as well as a suit that makes for great mobility. Rubber is an outdated material. This is fact.

I was saying that spandex might be ok as long as Batman keeps his size. The only area where I'd consider less padding is in the neck.
Agreed. I don't think we have to worry considering Bale is an absolute workout monster. After all, the padding on the BB suit was only to accentuate what was already there. Fabric will be no problem.

[not_a_victim]

My labour is complete (more of the in-progress manips can be found in the "fabricky" topic). Here are six versions. My favourite is the dark gray.

http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/3847/suitcollection2vq4.jpg



May I make a suggestion?
As a man who wears a "utility belt" daily to work, (a police duty belt with just about as much crap as Bats has) the big pouches in the front should be moved. They would limit mobility, especially for someone who has to move the way Bats does.

EDIT:
btw, this has become my favorite Bats costume ever. Ecellent work
EDIT: do you know who the model is, and where the base photo was taken?


EDIT: how did you get the color on the lowest left costume? It looks slightly...reddish. I like it, I like it alot, just wondering if you filtered the color or what.

[Saint]

May I make a suggestion?
As a man who wears a "utility belt" daily to work, (a police duty belt with just about as much crap as Bats has) the big pouches in the front should be moved. They would limit mobility, especially for someone who has to move the way Bats does.

As I've said before--I only had so much to work with. That was the best belt I could find--obviously if one with a buckle at the front instead of pouches had been available, I would have used it.

EDIT: do you know who the model is, and where the base photo was taken?
It's this (http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/4843/fantastischen20vier2021hr2.jpg) promotional photo of Johnny Storm from Fantastic Four.


EDIT: how did you get the color on the lowest left costume? It looks slightly...reddish. I like it, I like it alot, just wondering if you filtered the color or what.
Colourization in photoshop.

[not_a_victim]

But is it a red tint, or is my monitor going bad?

To me, it's mostly visible on the shoulders.
Irregardless (I love that word) I like the color.

Bravo, BTW

[aroundthefur33]

Commandeered a cowl from on of Lujho's manips:

http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/3302/superbatsuit3maskxj3.jpg
i hate it

[Cobblepot]

I like it!

[regwec]

I like it. I think a plainer, brown leather belt would be a little less fetishistic, but the design is very sound.

[DA Harvey Dent]

i hate it

Me 2. It looks like an adult halloween costume.

[Saint]

But is it a red tint, or is my monitor going bad?

To me, it's mostly visible on the shoulders.
Irregardless (I love that word) I like the color.

Bravo, BTW
Yes, there is some red in it. I know most people prefer blue lighting on Batman, but I go for reds, oranges, and rust shades.

[The Watchman]

I really dig it. It's a nice balance between rubber and fabric, very much along the lines of what I was originally hoping for with Begins.

[Nepenthes]

Good manip. But it looks like something you'd see at a convention.

[Comic Book Boy]

I say keep the BEGINS suit.

[Super Kal]

I want that same s*** that they made the SR costume with.
hell no... that material heavily constricted the muscles, and Routh had to wear padding just for his muscles to show definition. Keep everything SR used out of Batman, and it will already be a much better movie.

I still say to use something more of a Jim Lee style.

[Nepenthes]

It just seems that the people who want spandex generally want a slimmer Batman, not so bulky.

It's not that, we just want a more true-to-the-comics suit, as well as a suit that makes for great mobility. Rubber is an outdated material. This is fact.

Mobility plus a more fabric like texture? Great, perfect. But still every spandex manip I see has Batman all slim looking and alot of people talk about it. Maybe not you though.


the padding on the BB suit was only to accentuate what was already there. Fabric will be no problem

Huh? Yeah much of it was already there but c'mon Batman was friggin HUGE. He had at least 3inches of rubber/padding on each shoulder!

I know fabric would be no problem if they wanted to keep the size, but I'm just hoping they're not using because they've decided he should be less bulky.

I still say to use something more of a Jim Lee style.

You mean like a naked guy with a spray on costume and flat stumpy bat-ears?

[Nepenthes]

This is slightly off topic. but interesting....


The real life Halo suit.

http://www.hamiltonspectator.com/images/hs/hs1558762_1.jpg?GXHC_gx_session_id_=8c54c432473cbf 8b&http://www.hamiltonspectator.com/images/hs/hs1558762_2.jpg?GXHC_gx_session_id_=8c54c432473cbf 8b&

Troy Hurtubise created the suit, dubbed Trojan, in hopes of protecting Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan and US soldiers in Iraq, and considering that it has withstood knives, bullets, light explosives, clubs, and even a round from an elephant gun, it sounds like quite the winner. Proclaimed to be the "first ballistic, full exoskeleton body suit of armor," Trojan is crafted from high-impact plastic lined with ceramic bullet protection over ballistic foam, and features nearly endless compartments, morphine / salt containers, knife and gun holsters, emergency lights, a built-in recording device, pepper spray, ingestible transponder for those "last resort" scenarios, and there's even a fresh air system powered by solar panels within the helmet. Mr. Hurtubise claims the 18 kilograms (40 pounds) suit is comfortable enough to make road trips in (yes, he tried it), and if any major military would take him up on it, they could reportedly be produced for "around $2,000 apiece." Now that's a bargain, folks.http://www.hamiltonspectator.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=hamilton/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1168470616997&call_pageid=1020420665036&col=1014656511815

[Soundwave88]

now that is scary

[The Jengeneer]

My labour is complete (more of the in-progress manips can be found in the "fabricky" topic). Here are six versions. My favourite is the dark gray.

http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/3847/suitcollection2vq4.jpg

Can you take the last black pic and send it to the TDK production office? Will save them from a lot of work :woot:

The last black one with BB's belt (painted black) is exactly as it should be :oldrazz:

GJ:up:

[The Jengeneer]

This is slightly off topic. but interesting....


The real life Halo suit.

http://www.hamiltonspectator.com/images/hs/hs1558762_1.jpg?GXHC_gx_session_id_=8c54c432473cbf 8b&http://www.hamiltonspectator.com/images/hs/hs1558762_2.jpg?GXHC_gx_session_id_=8c54c432473cbf 8b&

http://www.hamiltonspectator.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=hamilton/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1168470616997&call_pageid=1020420665036&col=1014656511815

Give it 10-15 years and all western soldiers will be wearing suits with all those systems and far less bulk :whatever:

[Nepenthes]

ha. I just read on the link that guy ^ went on a 4 day road trip to test the comfort of the suit. He was pulled over by cop! If I was the cop I would have shot him on site.

[Super Kal]

You mean like a naked guy with a spray on costume and flat stumpy bat-ears?
i never said copy it verbatim, but using it as a foundation would IMO be really good.

[Wams]

I still think the oval looks the best as a graphic and a better visual for film.:word:

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i271/nwonknu2k/TheBatSuit2k07BW.jpg

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i271/nwonknu2k/TheBatSuit2k07.jpg

:spidey:
:supes:

[batman44]

^As usual, good stuff.

[Herr Logan]

I still think the oval looks the best as a graphic and a better visual for film.:word:

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i271/nwonknu2k/TheBatSuit2k07BW.jpg

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i271/nwonknu2k/TheBatSuit2k07.jpg

:spidey:
:supes:


While I think the abundance of lines on the bodysuit makes it look far too angular and robotic to be ideal, that's a great picture. Also, I agree with you on the oval thing, with the way you've depicted it. Good job, Wams.


I also want to give a long overdue shout out to The Batman (the Hype user) and thank him for trying to explain my point of view a while back. Sorry for not responding to it sooner.

:wolverine

[The-Dark-Knight]

My labour is complete (more of the in-progress manips can be found in the "fabricky" topic). Here are six versions. My favourite is the dark gray.

http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/3847/suitcollection2vq4.jpg


If im honest its a very good manip, but as a Batman suit? no, it looks very Elseworlds but if that was a press release saying it was the new costume, i'd be very disapointed.

I loved the Begins costume and as the saying goes 'if it aint broke.....'

[The-Dark-Knight]

too many posts of the same thing

[The-Dark-Knight]

too many posts

[The-Dark-Knight]

too many posts

[Wams]

While I think the abundance of lines on the bodysuit makes it look far too angular and robotic to be ideal, that's a great picture. Also, I agree with you on the oval thing, with the way you've depicted it. Good job, Wams.


I also want to give a long overdue shout out to The Batman (the Hype user) and thank him for trying to explain my point of view a while back. Sorry for not responding to it sooner.

:wolverine
Thank you for the compliment...
I can see what you mean buy what seems to be "abundance of lines"..
but you have to realize that it would not be overwhelming when on a
flesh and bone human....The purpose for all the lines are to separate
the muscle groups and also to give him a graphic that would compliment his environment...the Gothic look...like stained glass of a church cathedral.
The suit will be black on black ,although different textures....The drawing was colored brighter for
the benefit to show off the illustration.:word:


:spidey:
:supes:

[Saint]

no, it looks very Elseworlds
If anything has an "Elseworlds" look to it, it's the Batman Begins costume, not my manip. I mean, I understand if you just don't like it, but this "Elseworlds" business simply doesn't fit.

[regwec]

Can everyone please stop quoting the entire image for the sake of a (usually inane) single sentence response?

[Agentsands77]

Of those manips, the all-black is the best. Though I'm not particularly fond of that look on the whole. The collar/cowl connection, the bat-logo, and the belt are all things I'm not particularly fond of.

I honestly prefer the BEGINS costume over that look (heck, I'd be perfectly happy if they just recreated the BEGINS costume for THE DARK KNIGHT). Aside from a few problems, I thought that suit was largely-dead on for what I could ask for.

[The Batman]

I still think the oval looks the best as a graphic and a better visual for film.:word:

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i271/nwonknu2k/TheBatSuit2k07BW.jpg

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i271/nwonknu2k/TheBatSuit2k07.jpg

:spidey:
:supes:


It is, really

[Nepenthes]

who drew these?

I like it ALOTbut he does look very skinny. excellent design and drawing just next he should be beefed up he's the goddamn Batman
but then I guess whoever did that on purpose. if that was the approach, cool

[Super Kal]

that looks really good

[Wams]

who drew these?

I like it ALOTbut he does look very skinny. excellent design and drawing just next he should be beefed up he's the goddamn Batman
but then I guess whoever did that on purpose. if that was the approach, cool


I did.:yay:
I personaly don't think batman should be too "beefed up".
The "shinny" look is only for the purpose to make it an interesting drawing.
When it is finished being made it will not be "shinny".
Im glad you like the drawing....The best is yet to come.:cwink:

[Super Kal]

I would love to see you do a portrait of your custom suit in a flight pose... THAT would look really cool.

[Nepenthes]

The "shinny" look is only for the purpose to make it an interesting drawing.

Nice. It's always good to see fans approach Batman with an alternate take. It does make it look like he'd belong in a different Gotham and entirely different style from what we're used to. would really like to see some other character designs!


and just thought I should mention, I spelt skinny right the first time and I like correct spelling. you checked your eyes lately? :cwink:

[Wams]

Nice. It's always good to see fans approach Batman with an alternate take. It does make it look like he'd belong in a different Gotham and entirely different style from what we're used to. would really like to see some other character designs!


and just thought I should mention, I spelt skinny right the first time and I like correct spelling. you checked your eyes lately? :cwink:

My bad....
I had my shades on...:word:

[Beelze]

Then I am baffled as to why you made the point in the first place.
What I was getting at was this:

In minds of many, Batman is a composition of many different works. I think these people can agree that not everything that is Batman has been covered in one story, ever. Still, a lot of those people take it for granted that an origin story must cover everything that these different sources have attributed to the character, and will sometimes not see the possibility that the character can attain certain attributions after said origin story (say, Batman becoming a great chemist). At the same time, some of these people take it for granted that attributions from certain sources (say, the campy 60's Batman) should be ignored, because they are, in their opinion, not worthy of the character. Also, even some of the most "loyal" Batfans have something they would want to outright change or add, without actually drawing from any Batman story to justify the change. The filmmakers' stance and ideas on these three things may differ from the stance of some Batfans, obviously.

So, when I said above that I thought Begins, while a solid film that I'm glad to own the Deluxe Edition of, was far away from being the "definite" Batman film, I naturally meant that it wasn't a perfect fit with my vision of Batman (what media sources to adapt, what media sources to ignore, what to change or add)... but I really can't fault the filmmakers for their vision. At least they had more of what I would've included, and less of what I would not have included (for example, the film could've been greatly influenced by the 60's era of Batman, an era I don't approve much of). But how are we to say which combination of works is the correct one?

I think I also raised a question one or two times, that I believe I've asked before this thread, and so far it has been ignored: why may comics redefine a character, or parts of a character, while a story presented in another medium (say, film) may not? Not everyone is of this understanding, but for those who are, please answer that one question.

I am aware of what happens in that story--it's inside a volume sitting on the shelf behind me.
But not everyone is aware of what happens in that story.