Batsuit Discussion Thread

[Noir]

http://www.comicsvf.com/scans/vodc/batmanhauntedgotham/2.jpg


...Why is there a Skull on his belt?

[kenellard]

http://www.epcc.edu/nwlibrary/borderlands/09_11_1.jpg
Too late.

that ba**ard

[Muziko]

Ah, Kelly Jones. So many covers, so little talent.

LoL - I remember the first time I read the name "Kelley Jones" was on the cover of the ridiculous Batman/Dracula "Red Rain"... what a waste of ink and paper - I'm all for darkness with Batman (he is, after all, the "Dark Knight") but that book/series was a little on the ridiculous. Maybe if Batman were a character in the Hellboy series - that look (4 ft. long ears on the cowl) would fit, but other than that: :down

[itsthebatman]

I had first seen his work on the covers to Knightfall. I thought they looked pretty good, if over the top. It was when I read the issue of the Contagion storyline that he drew that I realised he couldn't do full comics - it was just too grotesque and uhly. I bought the last in that Batman /Dracula series (Crimson Mist?) when it saw it going cheap in a bookstore I happened to wander into. Absolutely awful.

[Saint]

dude you're hilarious- in a very lame way. you seriously think we 'not observing the film correctly'? No I think we're noticing that his eyes *appear* blank, because they do, because his pupils are almost invisible. oh my god, so unobservant!!!!!!!!!!
They never appear blank--it's always obvious that his eyes are simply turned to the side. They appear to be eyes turned to the side, because that's what they are. Anyone who sees something different must be either A) unobservant, or B) imagining things. You pick.

[Saint]

http://www.comicsvf.com/scans/vodc/batmanhauntedgotham/2.jpghttp://www.comicsvf.com/scans/vodc/batmanhauntedgotham/1.jpg

that was basically it (except for the skull on the belt) . around this time his cape was also longer and blowy and he was generally more creepy looking

Not quite. The Post-Knightfall suit also ditched the briefs, gloves and boots in favour of a one-piece, full bodysuit. Also, the scallops he has on his forearms were also added to each calf. It was a pretty awful costume, actually.

[Saint]

LoL - I remember the first time I read the name "Kelley Jones" was on the cover of the ridiculous Batman/Dracula "Red Rain"... what a waste of ink and paper - I'm all for darkness with Batman (he is, after all, the "Dark Knight") but that book/series was a little on the ridiculous. Maybe if Batman were a character in the Hellboy series - that look (4 ft. long ears on the cowl) would fit, but other than that: :down

Kelley Jones is an excellent artist, often slammed by comic book fans who hate everything that isn't pretty and generic, in the realm of Jim Lee or Michael Turner (Michael Turner, now there's some bad art). Jones brought a level of horror and macabre to Batman that had never been seen before, and hasn't been seen since. Every single one of his panels and covers was absolutely saturated with atmosphere and mood. Wonderfully dramatic compositions and compelling off-beat stylizations makes him superior to most modern Bat-artists, and I say that without even preferring his style.

[itsthebatman]

Yeah, didn't really like it at all.

[itsthebatman]

Kelley Jones is an excellent artist, often slammed by comic book fans who hate everything that isn't pretty and generic, in the realm of Jim Lee or Michael Turner (Michael Turner, now there's some bad art). Jones brought a level of horror and macabre to Batman that had never been seen before, and hasn't been seen since. Every single one of his panels and covers was absolutely saturated with atmosphere and mood. Wonderfully dramatic compositions and compelling off-beat stylizations makes him superior to most modern Bat-artists, and I say that without even preferring his style.

I have to completely disagree here. Everything is too exaggerated and grotesque, Gothic to an immeasurable degree. The atmosphere he created was not suited to Batman. Sure, he's a creature of the night, but not to that degree. As i said earlier, I liked his Knightfall covers, but after reading whole issues he had illustrated, did not consider his style suited to whole issues - it's too distracting.

[Noir]

Kelley Jones is an excellent artist, often slammed by comic book fans who hate everything that isn't pretty and generic, in the realm of Jim Lee or Michael Turner (Michael Turner, now there's some bad art). Jones brought a level of horror and macabre to Batman that had never been seen before, and hasn't been seen since. Every single one of his panels and covers was absolutely saturated with atmosphere and mood. Wonderfully dramatic compositions and compelling off-beat stylizations makes him superior to most modern Bat-artists, and I say that without even preferring his style.
you like Rob Liefeld?

[Octoberist]

how is jim lee generic?

Okay...whatever you say, Saint. To eacht their own.
And honestly, Michael Turner is not that bad. THere are some pieces of art that he has done that were great. Unlike Rob Liefield, yuck.

[Saint]

you like Rob Liefeld?
No, because Rob Liefeld can't draw his way out of a paper bag. Jones can. The fact that Jone's work is not pretty (hint: it's not supposed to be) does not at all make him comparable to Liefeld.

how is jim lee generic?
Image nineties style. He's gotten much better since then, and there are fewer people using the style now, but nevertheless.

Okay...whatever you say, Saint. To eacht their own.
And honestly, Michael Turner is not that bad.
His cover compositions are absolutely stellar, but the drawings themselves come out poorly. His biggest problems are terrible line quality and generic faces/body types.


I have to completely disagree here. Everything is too exaggerated and grotesque, Gothic to an immeasurable degree.
Well, yeah, that's the point.

The atmosphere he created was not suited to Batman.
I cannot see how anyone can possibly believe this.

Sure, he's a creature of the night, but not to that degree.
Why not? A great deal of 90's comics seem to disagree. Batman goes through phases like everything else; he had his James Bond 70's phase, his gritty eighties phase, and his macabre 90's phase.

As i said earlier, I liked his Knightfall covers, but after reading whole issues he had illustrated, did not consider his style suited to whole issues - it's too distracting.
Some people are just allergic to awesomeness.

[Muziko]

Kelley Jones is an excellent artist, often slammed by comic book fans who hate everything that isn't pretty and generic, in the realm of Jim Lee or Michael Turner (Michael Turner, now there's some bad art). Jones brought a level of horror and macabre to Batman that had never been seen before, and hasn't been seen since. Every single one of his panels and covers was absolutely saturated with atmosphere and mood. Wonderfully dramatic compositions and compelling off-beat stylizations makes him superior to most modern Bat-artists, and I say that without even preferring his style.

He may be an "excellent" artist, but I don't like what he put together for his run on Batman... and I definitely wouldn't categorize him as "superior" to other Bat-artists. I think his art fits better in another verse (hence the comment: "maybe if he were part of the Hellboy world"). The fact that Mr. Jones "brought a level of horror and macabre to Batman that had never been seen before" doesn't make him superior. I personally don't think Batman needs any element of horror. Darkness? Yes. But "dark" doesn't always mean "horrific" and "different" doesn't always mean "better"

[Saint]

He may be an "excellent" artist, but I don't like what he put together for his run on Batman...
Liking or disliking is, of course, your right.

and I definitely wouldn't categorize him as "superior" to other Bat-artists.
To clarify, I hardly meant all artists. There are plenty I prefer over Jones. I am only defending him against the legions of fans who bleat that he has no talent, along with other falsehoods.

The fact that Mr. Jones "brought a level of horror and macabre to Batman that had never been seen before" doesn't make him superior.
No, but it makes him special. Doing it well is what made him good.

I personally don't think Batman needs any element of horror. Darkness? Yes. But "dark" doesn't always mean "horrific" and "different" doesn't always mean "better"
I never said it did. You see, unlike so many here I do not feel the need to brand all my posts with "IMO," because I assume readers are intelligent enough to realize that what I'm saying is, in fact, my opinion.

[regwec]

Kelly Jones has a style that I appreciate but don't particularly like. But to call him a bad artist is, I think, incorrect.

[Benstamania]

He's a horrid Batman artist.

[Saint]

Kelly Jones has a style that I appreciate but don't particularly like. But to call him a bad artist is, I think, incorrect.

That's what I've been saying, but less civil and with more words (oh, and also minus the "don't appreciate" part).

[Muziko]

I agree with you Saint: the fact that Kelley could translate that mood so well onto paper does make him a good artist.

As far as opinions go... well, everybody has one, and we're all here to share ours. The fact that I say something (such as "I personally don't think Batman needs an element of horror") doesn't mean that you said the opposite - I'm not trying to create an argument, I'm just making that comment based on what you said ("he brought a level of horror etc..." ) but it's not to argue.

[Jokers_wild_18]

Here's a link to the all black post-Knightfall suit he wore during the late 90s. I loved how Howard Porter drew it for Morisson's JLA series.
http://www.icicom.up.pt/blog/take2/batman_superman.JPG

[itsthebatman]

triple post. Sorry.

[itsthebatman]

[edit

[itsthebatman]

Well, yeah, that's the point.


I cannot see how anyone can possibly believe this.


Why not? A great deal of 90's comics seem to disagree. Batman goes through phases like everything else; he had his James Bond 70's phase, his gritty eighties phase, and his macabre 90's phase.


Some people are just allergic to awesomeness.

That may be the point, doesn't mean I like it, or think it suits the character. Funnily enough, I do believe what I write, and no matter how many times you tell me I'm allergic to awesomeness, you won't convince me that Jones's style is unsuited to Batman. Adams, Rogers, Mazzuchelli, Miller/Janson, Graham Nolan, Sale - a wide variety of artists there, with a wide variety of styles, all of which I admire. All of which suited the character. Jones may be a good artist at what he does, but that doesn't mean he's good for Batman. What other artists depicted Batman during the 90's in anything near as macabre a style? It sticks out like a sore thimb in my eyes. Certainly don't recall any of the Knightfall work (Breyfogle/Aparo/Nolan) being anything similar at all, or the artists in Legacy (Nolan and Janson among others). I can also tell you that I formed these opinions long before I ever heard of the Hype, so you cannot stereotype me as one of the sheep afraid to go against popular opinion.

[Saint]

That may be the point, doesn't mean I like it, or think it suits the character.
No s*it? I'm pretty damn sure I already had the "opinion" conversation with somebody here.

no matter how many times you tell me
One time?

I'm allergic to awesomeness,
Yeah, because I meant that allergy line seriously. o_O

Adams, Rogers, Mazzuchelli, Miller/Janson, Graham Nolan, Sale - a wide variety of artists there, with a wide variety of styles, all of which I admire.
All favourites of mine (chief among them, Mazzuchelli, who is my favourite bat-artist). I rank Jones among their number.


All of which suited the character.
As does Jones--he merely suits a different aspect of the character.

Much in the same Jones may be a good artist at what he does, but that doesn't mean he's good for Batman.
That's right: it's the fact that he's good for Batman that makes him good for Batman.

What other artists depicted Batman during the 90's in anything near as macabre a style?
None--but by the same token, I can say that nobody draws Batman like Frank Miller did, or like David Mazzurchelli did, and that doesn't mean they're versions were inapproprioate--it means they were unique.

It sticks out like a sore thimb in my eyes.
I think it sticks out like an awesome thumb. A shiny gold thumb of power!

Certainly don't recall any of the Knightfall work (Breyfogle/Aparo/Nolan) being anything similar at all, or the artists in Legacy (Nolan and Janson among others). I can also tell you that I formed these opinions long before I ever heard of the Hype, so you cannot stereotype me as one of the sheep afraid to go against popular opinion.
What do I care whether you like him or not? I've already said dislike is fine. I just want people to think twice before blurting out that Jones has no talent.

[itsthebatman]

I think it sticks out like an awesome thumb. A shiny gold thumb of power!



http://fyicorpuschristicom.siteprotect.net/images/goldenthumb_med-2.jpg

Like this?

As for everything else, we'll agree to disagree. Opinions are like a**holes, everybody's got one.

[Lead Cenobite]

Here's a link to the all black post-Knightfall suit he wore during the late 90s. I loved how Howard Porter drew it for Morisson's JLA series.
http://www.icicom.up.pt/blog/take2/batman_superman.JPG

Hmm. To me that shows that the all-black suit and the yellow oval go together perfectly. Ok, so yellow ovals are shiny and they attract gunfire, but look at it this way. A cape has to make fighting pretty clumsy in the real world, and those long ears give Batman's opponents something to grab onto. I don't see anyone wanting to get rid of those elements of his suit. If you did, he wouldn't look like Batman.

[Noir]

Exactly, but I don't want to see the yellow ovals anytime soon I like the giant bat stretched across the chest.

[Agentsands77]

Ok, so yellow ovals are shiny and they attract gunfire, but look at it this way. A cape has to make fighting pretty clumsy in the real world, and those long ears give Batman's opponents something to grab onto. I don't see anyone wanting to get rid of those elements of his suit. If you did, he wouldn't look like Batman.
Yeah, but the difference is that Batman has always had the ears and the cape. He's been on-and-off with the yellow oval.

[Saint]

http://fyicorpuschristicom.siteprotect.net/images/goldenthumb_med-2.jpg

Like this?

Yes, exactly like that. I'm disturbed so accurate an image exists.

[Nepenthes]

Wow I never knew there was this kind of hate for Kelly Jones. I think he's great. He did alot to draw me into Batman comics when I was younger, was my favorite visual style for a long time.

Jim Lee, I've *never* been impressed with him. Even when I was seven I wished someone else drew X-Men. Hush is a turd every which way if you ask me.

[cryptic name]

i have a friend named kelly jones...she's a chick though. that's all.

[COMPO]

i have to say Kelly Jones' remdition of Batman looks quite good. Not as bad as this colour scheme though. Pink and Green. TOGETHER!!

[itsthebatman]

I read some more Kelley Jones stories over the weekend and have changed my mind. He's actually pretty good.

April Fool!

[Ryan227]

^ HAHAHAHA :oldrazz: :woot:

[Brian Braddock]

Kelley Jones isnt' my favorite artist by any means and stylistically, I'll always dislike his rendition of Batman (and the fact that he gives him about a million-and-one obliques!! - see below pic)

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b64/SUPERBENITEZ/141_4_000000531.jpg

............but to label him as a bad artist is dumb - anyone thinking as much only has to see his work on Deadman to see he can produce good work - in my view he's one of the best horror/macabre artists this side of Bernie Wrightson.

Anyone who put's him in with the likes of Liefield seriously has to look at it again.

And I totally get what Saint is saying about Lee's work seeming generic - his style (along with Turner's and Finch's) will always remind me of the whole 90's Image comics thing. Not that there's anything wrong with that you understand,, Lee's work is technically fantastic and there's no denying his talent -it's just that some folk like their art to have a little more 'identity' stylisically.

That's why I did Quietly's art so much.

[Saint]

Kelley Jones isnt' my favorite artist by any means and stylistically, I'll always dislike his rendition of Batman (and the fact that he gives him about a million-and-one obliques!! - see below pic)

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b64/SUPERBENITEZ/141_4_000000531.jpg

............but to label him as a bad artist is dumb - anyone thinking as much only has to see his work on Deadman to see he can produce good work - in my view he's one of the best horror/macabre artists this side of Bernie Wrightson.

Anyone who put's him in with the likes of Liefield seriously has to look at it again.

And I totally get what Saint is saying about Lee's work seeming generic - his style (along with Turner's and Finch's) will always remind me of the whole 90's Image comics thing. Not that there's anything wrong with that you understand,, Lee's work is technically fantastic and there's no denying his talent -it's just that some folk like their art to have a little more 'identity' stylisically.

That's why I did Quietly's art so much.
Quietly is impossibly awesome.

[Brian Braddock]

And yet some people bashed his art on ASS, saying Lee's work on ASB was superior.

Go figure.:whatever:

To each their own I guess.

[jimmy]

Hah, Kelley Jones. He did covers for Knightfall. His Bane seemed fitting, but Batman just looked ridiculous.

[Wams]

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b64/SUPERBENITEZ/141_4_000000531.jpg

.


Why are people talking and posting this Kelly Jones CRAP in here?
That aint the topic here!

Stop....please...my eyes are bleeding.

:batman:
:supes:

[lujho]

Okay, back on topic though... this whole talk of "macabre" brings up the issue... how many different aesthetics can a real-life Batman costume have? We've seen about 2 in the major films (discounting Adam West) - or 1 with 2 different flavours. Black sculpted rubber man, either tending toward the organic or slightly mechanistic.

I've supported for years another aesthetic... I don't know what I'd call it but I guess I'd say it was a more basic, gritty, natural version with some more real-world looking equipment and materials (leather, pouches etc) but still with an underlying bit of refinement and high tech.

You could go even MORE basic and down to earth and "street" with a Paul Pope style with more store-bought looking stuff and simpler design, lace-up combat boots etc... really bring it down to basics.

But on the other hand you could really push the "macabre"/horror/creature element. The Vampiric Batman. That is, after all, the image he's trying to push. We've never seen anything like that before. I mean, we've seen the demonbats costume but I'm not talking about anything that extreme. I'm talking about something that still retains the basic design of the comic, but puts an organic spin on every element. The suit could look like a rubber wetsuit but with a skin-like texture, very organinc in shape but NOT ridiculously defined and striated - and the bat-logo could look like some kind of tattoo/brand/scarring. Gloves would be again organic looking, claw-like. Make everything look less like armour and equipment as possible and more like something alive. Make the cowl less geometrical and mroe organic (not so much as the dead-end cowl though)... something like the Demonbats cowl with the mouth-bit cut out, and not with quite so much detail, but the sam basic shape - and a prosthetic. Longer ears than we've seen before, maybe flaring outwards this time. Go back to some leathery wing material (presuming it was as light as possible) and maybe push the bat wing-structure thing a bit more... crikey, even have the cape maybe be slightly transparent when stretched out with a decent light behind it? Also have the cape be a bit more ragged at the edges?

Also, the back of the cape would have a bit of a vertebrae thing going on - moulded in or whatever. Or perhaps that would just be the back of the suit with spine-bumps, and they show through when the cape's resting against it. Imagine Bats hunched up, crouching on a rafter in a dilapidated building, cape dangling right down below him , rain dripping through the wrecked roof and falling in rivulets down his back... kind of a Simon Bisley type image.

I don't mean push it ridiculously far, not to the point of being a full-on creature suit, but something that really could believably, in the heat of the moment be mistaken by someone as really being a creature and not a guy in a costume - even if you DID get a fairly decent close-up look at him.

I'm not saying this should be done... I'm more pointing out how little of the various possibilities have been explored so far - how safe and conventional and frankly ****ing boring Nolan's approach to the costume was. But the crature look I describe would be something I'd like to see in the kind of Batman movie/story that would suit it. Possibly a supernatural tale, or at least something very gothic and macabre, maybe an Arkham Asylum type tale. I think it would be cool to use the movies as an opportunity to explore various looks as it suits the tale being told.

[D.P.]

No.

[fabman]

Come on, D.P. You don't have a better answer? I'd say...

No.

[itsthebatman]

His answer was a bit... meh.

[lujho]

His answer was a bit... meh.

Are you kidding? That brilliant counter-argument is what debate's all about!

[D.P.]

Gasp.

I thought this was the "Batman" forum...You come in with a :super: on your chest ready to save the day...smh.

I'm sure he can speak for himself...:o

I respect his opinion, But vertebrae? transparent cape/batwings? Leathery "Bat" skin? Protruding "Bat" ears? A little over-the-top...In MY opinion.

http://www.comicsvf.com/scans/vf/semic/justimaginestanlee/batman.jpg

That you Stan?

[D.P.]

Double post...But yea..."No." is a great counter argument...:ninja:

[lujho]

Gasp.

I thought this was the "Batman" forum...You come in with a :super: on your chest ready to save the day...smh.

I'm sure he can speak for himself...:o

I respect his opinion, But vertebrae? transparent cape/batwings? Leathery "Bat" skin? Protruding "Bat" ears? A little over-the-top...In MY opinion.

http://www.comicsvf.com/scans/vf/semic/justimaginestanlee/batman.jpg

That you Stan?

Come on. I did make pains to point out that it would be nothing that extreme, and very much in keeping with the traditional Batman look. The transparent (translucent, really... damn near opaque but not quite) wings thing was just an idea I threw out there - not exactly the key element of the whole concept. Like I said - I'm not talking a creature suit - I'm talking a very traditional Batman costume where the surface details/textures just happen to be more organic.

The absolute last thing I want to see on a Batman costume are veins, wrinkles, muscle sinews and striations, etc. Or heaven forbid, fur, or anatomically accurate bat-ears or nose (when I say ears that flare out , I mean Justice Leage or Paul Pope or Steve Rude - NOT Stan Lee). I'm not talking about a Movie-Spawn type monster here. I'm talking subtle but definite organic approach - as organic as as the Begins suit is mechanistic/robotic/geometric. Taking the traditional Batman look and adding an organic veneer to it.

[Agentsands77]

An "organic" Batman look would be interesting. It's never really been explored... I'd like to see some work done on it.

[D.P.]

Come on. I did make pains to point out that it would be nothing that extreme, and very much in keeping with the traditional Batman look. The transparent (translucent, really... damn near opaque but not quite) wings thing was just an idea I threw out there - not exactly the key element of the whole concept. Like I said - I'm not talking a creature suit - I'm talking a very traditional Batman costume where the surface details/textures just happen to be more organic.

The absolute last thing I want to see on a Batman costume are veins, wrinkles, muscle sinews and striations, etc. Or heaven forbid, fur, or anatomically accurate bat-ears or nose (when I say ears that flare out , I mean Justice Leage or Paul Pope or Steve Rude - NOT Stan Lee). I'm not talking about a Movie-Spawn type monster here. I'm talking subtle but definite organic approach - as organic as as the Begins suit is mechanistic/robotic/geometric. Taking the traditional Batman look and adding an organic veneer to it.

It would be hard to walk that tightrope....Urban ninja and strange man-bat like creature...

The whole premise is that criminals are a cowardly and superstitious lot ( did I say that right? ) So Bats doesn't need to go out of his way too much to literally look like a creature of the night...

The criminals are already scared *****less of him...And his presence breeds rumors and myth..."You heard about the Bat-guy? bullets go through him! :wow:"

Stories like that get passed on and altered...It's folklore...Urban legend...

I think he's scary enough as is...Give him some white lenses ( maybe retractable ) and a more streamlined suit and he's good to go.

What do you suggest for an "organic veneer"?

[xanberkeley]

Is pink the new SHH makeover?

Its hurting my eyes.

[Katsuro]

Is pink the new SHH makeover?

Its hurting my eyes.

Dude... look at your calendar.

[Ryan227]

I actually like the idea of Bats having the leather pouch belt rather then the metal one, idk I've always liked the leather belt.

[Nepenthes]

But on the other hand you could really push the "macabre"/horror/creature element. The Vampiric Batman. That is, after all, the image he's trying to push. We've never seen anything like that before. I mean, we've seen the demonbats costume but I'm not talking about anything that extreme. I'm talking about something that still retains the basic design of the comic, but puts an organic spin on every element. The suit could look like a rubber wetsuit but with a skin-like texture, very organinc in shape but NOT ridiculously defined and striated - and the bat-logo could look like some kind of tattoo/brand/scarring. Gloves would be again organic looking, claw-like. Make everything look less like armour and equipment as possible and more like something alive. Make the cowl less geometrical and mroe organic (not so much as the dead-end cowl though)... something like the Demonbats cowl with the mouth-bit cut out, and not with quite so much detail, but the sam basic shape - and a prosthetic. Longer ears than we've seen before, maybe flaring outwards this time. Go back to some leathery wing material (presuming it was as light as possible) and maybe push the bat wing-structure thing a bit more... crikey, even have the cape maybe be slightly transparent when stretched out with a decent light behind it? Also have the cape be a bit more ragged at the edges?

Also, the back of the cape would have a bit of a vertebrae thing going on - moulded in or whatever. Or perhaps that would just be the back of the suit with spine-bumps, and they show through when the cape's resting against it. Imagine Bats hunched up, crouching on a rafter in a dilapidated building, cape dangling right down below him , rain dripping through the wrecked roof and falling in rivulets down his back... kind of a Simon Bisley type image.


I like this description. If only they made Elseworlds type movies.


If there's fear gas in TDK I wonder if the demon bat will return as well. Would be nice to get a better look, with some new changes maybe ^

[Nepenthes]

Why are people talking and posting this Kelly Jones CRAP in here?
That aint the topic here!


Because I posted some pics a few pages ago...quite innocently i might add :csad: didn't expect this kinda reaction!


His stuff on Sandman is some of the best art of the series though. And I always loved his Batman :batty:



What do you suggest for an "organic veneer"?

Search HR Giger on Google if you're unfamiliar, anything he draws would look nice on Lujho's 'organic Batman' I think. Designed the Alien from the movies.

You're right tho - he is scary enough. This kind of costume on screen would just confuse tone and genre. I do think it should be in more comic books tho.

[D.P.]

Search HR Giger on Google if you're unfamiliar, anything he draws would look nice on Lujho's 'organic Batman' I think. Designed the Alien from the movies.

Yikes.

Might have to sleep with the night light on after that...:csad:

That was "out there" to say the least...lol

As far as Kelly Jones, I don't think the Rob Leifeld comparison is completely inaccurate...I mean, Neither one of those guys work is exactly anatomically correct...

But I think it's disrespectful to him to say he has zero talent...His style is unorthodox...He's not everybody's cup of tea, Which I can understand.

[Paste Pot Pete]

Wasn't there a rumor back in Begins pre-production that the suit would have a "Spawn" type texture?

Sort of reminds me of what you're talking about Lujho (correct me if I'm wrong).

I was actually digging that idea back then. Spawn - lousy movie, GREAT costume. Lenses, even!

[Saint]

As far as Kelly Jones, I don't think the Rob Leifeld comparison is completely inaccurate...I mean, Neither one of those guys work is exactly anatomically correct....
You're mistaken. Whereas Jones can draw anatomically correct, but makes a point of distorting his figures (because he's a horror artist), Liefeld is actually incapable of drawing correct anatomy.

I had an art professor who always used to say that in order to distort and stylize the human figure, you have to learn to draw it properly first--otherwise, the stylization will be poor and it will be obvious in the final result that you don't know what you're doing. That's Leifeld.

Jones, on the other hand, obviously does know what he's doing. Yes, his figures are ugly, but they're supposed to be--Liefeld's figures are ugly because he can't draw. Furthermore, Liefeld has no eye for composition or drama, both of which Jones has in spades.

[Paste Pot Pete]

http://members.aol.com/ddv106/dark/liefeld_cap.gif

I don't know what you're talking about! That's the human body right there.

[Saint]

http://members.aol.com/ddv106/dark/liefeld_cap.gif

I don't know what you're talking about! That's the human body right there.

Ah, the classic corner-turning chest.

[Dark Knight]

...IS HE GOING ****ING PAINTBALLING!?


yeah....i still can't believe how Raimi could ruin the Goblin suit twice!?? Unreal!

[Paste Pot Pete]

yeah....i still can't believe how Raimi could ruin the Goblin suit twice!?? Unreal!

It's certainly a curious choice, but here's my guess for the rationale -

Possible (speculative?) spoilers

Harry will help Peter in the end, against Sandman & Venom. Instead of giving him two diffferent suits (one for attacking Peter, one for helping him) or have him wear a sinister looking costume like the Goblin's while being a good guy, Raimi decided to give him a neutral looking suit that's acceptable for a hero or a villain.

[Octoberist]

http://members.aol.com/ddv106/dark/liefeld_cap.gif

I don't know what you're talking about! That's the human body right there.

This is one of my favs of Rob's work.

I mean, how can you go "Wow, that looks good."

It's not abstract or modern art; it's just bad art. At the sametime, Rob is such a novelty that it would be boring without him around.

[Dark Knight]

It's certainly a curious choice, but here's my guess for the rationale -

Possible (speculative?) spoilers

Harry will help Peter in the end, against Sandman & Venom. Instead of giving him two diffferent suits (one for attacking Peter, one for helping him) or have him wear a sinister looking costume like the Goblin's while being a good guy, Raimi decided to give him a neutral looking suit that's acceptable for a hero or a villain.



Thats what I guessed also. That Harry will help Peter in the end to defeat Sandman or Venom. Harry will die doing so as well. My guess....

[lujho]

You're mistaken. Whereas Jones can draw anatomically correct, but makes a point of distorting his figures (because he's a horror artist), Liefeld is actually incapable of drawing correct anatomy.

I had an art professor who always used to say that in order to distort and stylize the human figure, you have to learn to draw it properly first--otherwise, the stylization will be poor and it will be obvious in the final result that you don't know what you're doing. That's Leifeld.

Jones, on the other hand, obviously does know what he's doing. Yes, his figures are ugly, but they're supposed to be--Liefeld's figures are ugly because he can't draw. Furthermore, Liefeld has no eye for composition or drama, both of which Jones has in spades.

All true. I think the main thing is the difference between really learning to draw properly - from LIFE - rather than learning to draw ONLY from copying comic books, where the thing you're learning from is already a step or two removed from reality.

I can't imagine Liefeld has ever looked at an anatomy book or drawn from a model or even photo.

[lujho]

I like this description. If only they made Elseworlds type movies.


If there's fear gas in TDK I wonder if the demon bat will return as well. Would be nice to get a better look, with some new changes maybe ^

AARGH! The look I'm talking about is SOOOO not elseworlds. It is, in fact, just about as "elseworlds" as the Begins suit is - about as different from the traditional drawn version, or less so. HR Giger is the farthest thing from my mind.

I'm talking about something very, very traditional. Just a subtle, organic theme to it, more of a textural thing than anything.

For example, look at Batman's gloves from the Burton/Schumacher films. They're all basically motorcycle gloves with ribbed knuckes and fingers and stuff. I'm saying, remove any element that looks too man made or, well, just non-natural. Just have a nice, smooth, nicely textured leather glove, with maybe some subtley pointed fingers (not meticulously detailed sculpted monster claws). Maybe some seams that slightly mirror musculature? And not all wrinkly liek the Dead End gloves... Something smoother and tauter. The glove spikes would be sculpted elements but not so geometrical.

Basically look at the existing movie costumes and remove any line or element that's hard, straight or geometrical, remove most or all metallic elements (brown/tan or black) leather pouch belt instead of metal. Remove elements that look overly "engineered" - the entireity of the Begins suit apart from maybe the cowl look very engineered/machined/moulded.

Then, the parts that aren't actually leather would have a leathery/skin texture. Say, have the bodysuit like the Superman or Spider-Man ones (over "armour" padding, of course), but use a material with a texture. I'm sure it must be possible to have a thin rubber moulded texture backed by a stretch fabric.

This hypothetical suit I'm talking about, if you took a photo of it and traced over it, you'd end up with a picture that resembled a drawing of Batman from the comic - all the same lines and elements. The look is far from radical. It'd be about as radical as the Spidey movie costume - the same basic lined but greatly enhanced texturally.

Seriously, if people don't understand that I'm NOT talking about the Spawn movie costume or HR Giger or Demonbats from Begins then I don't know what else to say. You're (not you specifically, Nepenthes, but anyone) either willfully misinterpreting me, or just so unimaginibly close-minded that you think the precision engineered, sculpted, machined look of Begins is somehow the only viable interpretation of the costume in a serious, "realistic" movie. Or perhaps people on the internet are just really bad at reading comprehension.

As for your remark about the Demon bat - I agree, it would be nice to see him again. And any changes would reflect the new suit. I really loved the Demonbat that Crane saw in Begins (in fact I'm dissappointed we didn't get a better look at him, what with Nolan's persistant close-up framing, and I'm disappointed there wasn't any cool merchandise based on it). But I thought the flying demon bat we saw later in the movie was crap, especially the cape/wings. I think they really should have gone for a CG creature, something that could have proper wings. I'd like to see something akin to a hairless, black/grey manbat like creature. Something that was scary enough that it didn't need some odd and inexplicable glowing mouth efefct to jazz it up.

[Paste Pot Pete]

Seriously, if people don't understand that I'm NOT talking about the Spawn movie costume or HR Giger or Demonbats from Begins then I don't know what else to say. You're (not you specifically, Nepenthes, but anyone) either willfully misinterpreting me, or just so unimaginibly close-minded that you think the precision engineered, sculpted, machined look of Begins is somehow the only viable interpretation of the costume in a serious, "realistic" movie. Or perhaps people on the internet are just really bad at reading comprehension.


Chill the hell out. Maybe you should explain your idea better before blaming every member of these boards of being an idiot.

[Rynan]

Chill the hell out. Maybe you should explain your idea better before blaming every member of these boards of being an idiot.

Or maybe we could ignore it, and avoid the tedious process of reading more drawn-out explanations.

[D.P.]

You're mistaken. Whereas Jones can draw anatomically correct, but makes a point of distorting his figures (because he's a horror artist), Liefeld is actually incapable of drawing correct anatomy.

I had an art professor who always used to say that in order to distort and stylize the human figure, you have to learn to draw it properly first--otherwise, the stylization will be poor and it will be obvious in the final result that you don't know what you're doing. That's Leifeld.

Jones, on the other hand, obviously does know what he's doing. Yes, his figures are ugly, but they're supposed to be--Liefeld's figures are ugly because he can't draw. Furthermore, Liefeld has no eye for composition or drama, both of which Jones has in spades.

Def. makes sense

[thedarks0ldier]

AARGH! The look I'm talking about is SOOOO not elseworlds. It is, in fact, just about as "elseworlds" as the Begins suit is - about as different from the traditional drawn version, or less so. HR Giger is the farthest thing from my mind.

I'm talking about something very, very traditional. Just a subtle, organic theme to it, more of a textural thing than anything.

For example, look at Batman's gloves from the Burton/Schumacher films. They're all basically motorcycle gloves with ribbed knuckes and fingers and stuff. I'm saying, remove any element that looks too man made or, well, just non-natural. Just have a nice, smooth, nicely textured leather glove, with maybe some subtley pointed fingers (not meticulously detailed sculpted monster claws). Maybe some seams that slightly mirror musculature? And not all wrinkly liek the Dead End gloves... Something smoother and tauter. The glove spikes would be sculpted elements but not so geometrical.

Basically look at the existing movie costumes and remove any line or element that's hard, straight or geometrical, remove most or all metallic elements (brown/tan or black) leather pouch belt instead of metal. Remove elements that look overly "engineered" - the entireity of the Begins suit apart from maybe the cowl look very engineered/machined/moulded.

Then, the parts that aren't actually leather would have a leathery/skin texture. Say, have the bodysuit like the Superman or Spider-Man ones (over "armour" padding, of course), but use a material with a texture. I'm sure it must be possible to have a thin rubber moulded texture backed by a stretch fabric.

This hypothetical suit I'm talking about, if you took a photo of it and traced over it, you'd end up with a picture that resembled a drawing of Batman from the comic - all the same lines and elements. The look is far from radical. It'd be about as radical as the Spidey movie costume - the same basic lined but greatly enhanced texturally.

Seriously, if people don't understand that I'm NOT talking about the Spawn movie costume or HR Giger or Demonbats from Begins then I don't know what else to say. You're (not you specifically, Nepenthes, but anyone) either willfully misinterpreting me, or just so unimaginibly close-minded that you think the precision engineered, sculpted, machined look of Begins is somehow the only viable interpretation of the costume in a serious, "realistic" movie. Or perhaps people on the internet are just really bad at reading comprehension.

As for your remark about the Demon bat - I agree, it would be nice to see him again. And any changes would reflect the new suit. I really loved the Demonbat that Crane saw in Begins (in fact I'm dissappointed we didn't get a better look at him, what with Nolan's persistant close-up framing, and I'm disappointed there wasn't any cool merchandise based on it). But I thought the flying demon bat we saw later in the movie was crap, especially the cape/wings. I think they really should have gone for a CG creature, something that could have proper wings. I'd like to see something akin to a hairless, black/grey manbat like creature. Something that was scary enough that it didn't need some odd and inexplicable glowing mouth efefct to jazz it up.
I am very courious to see what that would look like. I wonder what the mask would look like.

One of my personal favorite costumes was the Dare Devil movie costume. I had my nitpicks with the costume but overall I really liked it, I liked it more then the X2 costumes, (I hated the X1 costumes). When I read your descriptions of the costume I start picturing some of the Daredevil elements for the mask and gloves. I think that would be cool, but I personally would have loved for an all leather or mostly leatheresque costume.

[TheBat812]

Thats what I guessed also. That Harry will help Peter in the end to defeat Sandman or Venom. Harry will die doing so as well. My guess....
hahaha

[Nepenthes]

AARGH! The look I'm talking about is SOOOO not elseworlds. It is, in fact, just about as "elseworlds" as the Begins suit is - about as different from the traditional drawn version, or less so. HR Giger is the farthest thing from my mind.

I'm talking about something very, very traditional. Just a subtle, organic theme to it, more of a textural thing than anything.

For example, look at Batman's gloves from the Burton/Schumacher films. They're all basically motorcycle gloves with ribbed knuckes and fingers and stuff. I'm saying, remove any element that looks too man made or, well, just non-natural. Just have a nice, smooth, nicely textured leather glove, with maybe some subtley pointed fingers (not meticulously detailed sculpted monster claws). Maybe some seams that slightly mirror musculature? And not all wrinkly liek the Dead End gloves... Something smoother and tauter. The glove spikes would be sculpted elements but not so geometrical.

Basically look at the existing movie costumes and remove any line or element that's hard, straight or geometrical, remove most or all metallic elements (brown/tan or black) leather pouch belt instead of metal. Remove elements that look overly "engineered" - the entireity of the Begins suit apart from maybe the cowl look very engineered/machined/moulded.

Then, the parts that aren't actually leather would have a leathery/skin texture. Say, have the bodysuit like the Superman or Spider-Man ones (over "armour" padding, of course), but use a material with a texture. I'm sure it must be possible to have a thin rubber moulded texture backed by a stretch fabric.

This hypothetical suit I'm talking about, if you took a photo of it and traced over it, you'd end up with a picture that resembled a drawing of Batman from the comic - all the same lines and elements. The look is far from radical. It'd be about as radical as the Spidey movie costume - the same basic lined but greatly enhanced texturally.

Seriously, if people don't understand that I'm NOT talking about the Spawn movie costume or HR Giger or Demonbats from Begins then I don't know what else to say. You're (not you specifically, Nepenthes, but anyone) either willfully misinterpreting me, or just so unimaginibly close-minded that you think the precision engineered, sculpted, machined look of Begins is somehow the only viable interpretation of the costume in a serious, "realistic" movie. Or perhaps people on the internet are just really bad at reading comprehension.

As for your remark about the Demon bat - I agree, it would be nice to see him again. And any changes would reflect the new suit. I really loved the Demonbat that Crane saw in Begins (in fact I'm dissappointed we didn't get a better look at him, what with Nolan's persistant close-up framing, and I'm disappointed there wasn't any cool merchandise based on it). But I thought the flying demon bat we saw later in the movie was crap, especially the cape/wings. I think they really should have gone for a CG creature, something that could have proper wings. I'd like to see something akin to a hairless, black/grey manbat like creature. Something that was scary enough that it didn't need some odd and inexplicable glowing mouth efefct to jazz it up.


I think I understood you the first time. I said Elseworlds because it would be nice if we could get different versions of Batman on screen like we do in comics because that costume ^ is what I'd like to see up next. I do think it's important that the suits in this series look man-made.

With HR Giger I was mostly reffering to the texture and the smaller organic details. Everything is sleek and lethal and the machines look like living flesh.


http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a275/twrm/hr_giger_theredeemer.jpg

the arm right here ^ is a good example. The face and ribs look nice but they're probably too detailed for what you're talking about. ???

I've have seen Batman illustrations similar to what you're talking about I think. Wish i could remember where.

[itsthebatman]

http://images.darkhorse.com/covers/300/b/bal2.jpg

Batman and Giger don't mix.

[Antonello Blueberry]

Batman and Giger don't mix.
http://www.chicksdigthecar.com/images/BatmanForever07big.jpg
Probably not

[itsthebatman]

Is that real? WTF is it?

[fabman]

HG Giger's design for the Batmobile in 'Batman Forever.' They didn't have the budget or time to make it, though.

[Antonello Blueberry]

Is that real? WTF is it?
http://www.giger.com/Home.jsp?middleURL=/FilmDesign/BatmanForever.jsp

[itsthebatman]

http://images.darkhorse.com/covers/300/b/bal2.jpg

Batman and Giger don't mix.

'testing, testing, 1-2-3. Can you hear me Manchester?'


http://www.christophernolan.net/images/batman_fanart_batsuit_design.jpg
I like this design. Quite Year One to me, and not too bulky looking. Also the standard cape and cowl.

[Brian Braddock]

^^^^^^Bernie Wrightson rocks.

[itsthebatman]

Oh, aye, Bernie Wrightson is great. Just the idea of Batman vs Aliens is a bit... meh.

[Sandman138]

Okay, back on topic though... this whole talk of "macabre" brings up the issue... how many different aesthetics can a real-life Batman costume have? We've seen about 2 in the major films (discounting Adam West) - or 1 with 2 different flavours. Black sculpted rubber man, either tending toward the organic or slightly mechanistic.

I've supported for years another aesthetic... I don't know what I'd call it but I guess I'd say it was a more basic, gritty, natural version with some more real-world looking equipment and materials (leather, pouches etc) but still with an underlying bit of refinement and high tech.

You could go even MORE basic and down to earth and "street" with a Paul Pope style with more store-bought looking stuff and simpler design, lace-up combat boots etc... really bring it down to basics.

But on the other hand you could really push the "macabre"/horror/creature element. The Vampiric Batman. That is, after all, the image he's trying to push. We've never seen anything like that before. I mean, we've seen the demonbats costume but I'm not talking about anything that extreme. I'm talking about something that still retains the basic design of the comic, but puts an organic spin on every element. The suit could look like a rubber wetsuit but with a skin-like texture, very organinc in shape but NOT ridiculously defined and striated - and the bat-logo could look like some kind of tattoo/brand/scarring. Gloves would be again organic looking, claw-like. Make everything look less like armour and equipment as possible and more like something alive. Make the cowl less geometrical and mroe organic (not so much as the dead-end cowl though)... something like the Demonbats cowl with the mouth-bit cut out, and not with quite so much detail, but the sam basic shape - and a prosthetic. Longer ears than we've seen before, maybe flaring outwards this time. Go back to some leathery wing material (presuming it was as light as possible) and maybe push the bat wing-structure thing a bit more... crikey, even have the cape maybe be slightly transparent when stretched out with a decent light behind it? Also have the cape be a bit more ragged at the edges?

Also, the back of the cape would have a bit of a vertebrae thing going on - moulded in or whatever. Or perhaps that would just be the back of the suit with spine-bumps, and they show through when the cape's resting against it. Imagine Bats hunched up, crouching on a rafter in a dilapidated building, cape dangling right down below him , rain dripping through the wrecked roof and falling in rivulets down his back... kind of a Simon Bisley type image.

I don't mean push it ridiculously far, not to the point of being a full-on creature suit, but something that really could believably, in the heat of the moment be mistaken by someone as really being a creature and not a guy in a costume - even if you DID get a fairly decent close-up look at him.

I'm not saying this should be done... I'm more pointing out how little of the various possibilities have been explored so far - how safe and conventional and frankly ****ing boring Nolan's approach to the costume was. But the crature look I describe would be something I'd like to see in the kind of Batman movie/story that would suit it. Possibly a supernatural tale, or at least something very gothic and macabre, maybe an Arkham Asylum type tale. I think it would be cool to use the movies as an opportunity to explore various looks as it suits the tale being told.

This organic/macabre approach to the Batman suit is what I'd really like to see. Especially because this quasi-mystical totemesque mentality is supposed to be what motivates Bruce to create the motif in the first place, according to these films.

[BatScot]

Chill the hell out. Maybe you should explain your idea better before blaming every member of these boards of being an idiot.Given those choices the odds favor the latter.

[BatScot]

This organic/macabre approach to the Batman suit is what I'd really like to see. Especially because this quasi-mystical totemesque mentality is supposed to be what motivates Bruce to create the motif in the first place, according to these films.This is usually this time when:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v434/Anthropod/temp/Banewraith.jpg
original art by Bane

... makes an appearance.

[D.P.]

http://www.christophernolan.net/images/batman_fanart_batsuit_design.jpg

I like this.

[odiin]

http://www.christophernolan.net/images/batman_fanart_batsuit_design.jpg

I like this.

Me too, it's like a stealth suit or something, like Batman meets Solid Snake. Exactly the kind of thing I'm hoping for. Less "dude walking around in ridiculous looking tights" and more "guy about to sneak up behind you and snap your neck."

[BatScot]

If a guy snuck up behind you and snapped your neck would you be less dead if he were wearing tights?

[Saint]

Actually, the Solid Snake comparison is an interesting one, particularly considering his design from the GameCube remake of MGS:
http://document.nintendo-difference.com/1723/artworks/01.jpg

[Orko Is King]

This is usually this time when:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v434/Anthropod/temp/Banewraith.jpg
original art by Bane

... makes an appearance.

I dig it. It looks like a less bondagey version of Lee Bermejo's.

[IamtheBatman]

http://members.aol.com/ddv106/dark/liefeld_cap.gif

Who ever drew this pic of captain america must have saw him as a steroids user. Look at the chest there's no doubt that's steroids.

[BatScot]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v434/Anthropod/Saint/BaldasseroniBatmanDE3.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v434/Anthropod/Saint/BaldasseroniBatmanDE2.jpg

^ While I’m not prepared to endorse this look completely* it does retain the ‘wraith’ appearance and is closer to the grittier style I would have preferred the film version to have gone.

* The cowl in particular is in need of a redo.

[Saint]

Well, technically Captain America is a steroids user, haha (super soldier serum). That picture, however, has nothing to do with steroids and everything to do with Rob Liefeld being incompetent. He started the drawing with one perspective and finished it with another, and thusly it appears as if Captain America's chest is turning away from his body.

Aside from being a terrible artist, Liefeld is also guilty of repeated plagiarism.

[Saint]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v434/Anthropod/Saint/BaldasseroniBatmanDE3.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v434/Anthropod/Saint/BaldasseroniBatmanDE2.jpg

^ While I’m not prepared to endorse this look completely* it does retain the ‘wraith’ appearance and is closer to the grittier style I would have preferred the film version to have gone.

* The cowl in particular is in need of a redo.

Too thin for my tastes; I prefer something with more weight to it.

[trustyside-kick]

Was toying around with that DC Character GIFs site and put together my own lil verson of Bats that would be pretty cool. It could fit the realistic aspect since he is supposed to be somewhat well protected afterall:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v643/dhunter22/batsforJRK.gif

These two are probably my favorite things I added though:
- Tried to go for the old school looking cowl.
- Created a whole different kind of Bat emblem for the chest.

Course, that is just a little GIF. I'm sure though that if someone actually made a suit like that, it would look awesome for TDK.

[BatScot]

Too thin for my tastes; I prefer something with more weight to it.I agree, but one can easily imagine how it might look given a fuller figure underneath.

[BatScot]

http://www.kolbyjukes.com/images/work/batman/batman-2.jpg

^ Again... I don't necessarily agree with the execution of each of the parts, but the sum projects the street feel that I prefer.

[BatScot]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v434/Anthropod/Saint/BermejoStyle.jpg

^ I’m not fond of the Bermejo cape/logo but other than that I like where this is going.

[Agentsands77]

The problem I have with some of those looks is that they're a little too cloth-looking. I want it definitely to seem armored, even if it's armor sown into a harder cloth sort of thing.

Anyway, the below image is really cool. It maintains an armor look, but doesn't look like rubber. I'm not keen on the brownish/dirty look, or the white eyes, but otherwise I think it would be an interesting place to go.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v434/Anthropod/temp/Banewraith.jpg

[Sandman138]

This is usually this time when:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v434/Anthropod/temp/Banewraith.jpg
original art by Bane

... makes an appearance.

Still wish they would go with that look. But, as you implied, this argument ends up going nowhere.

[Infinity9999x]

The problem I have with some of those looks is that they're a little too cloth-looking. I want it definitely to seem armored, even if it's armor sown into a harder cloth sort of thing.

Anyway, the below image is really cool. It maintains an armor look, but doesn't look like rubber. I'm not keen on the brownish/dirty look, or the white eyes, but otherwise I think it would be an interesting place to go.

I was thinking the same thing. I've wanted something that's more traditional looking, but still gives the appearance of armor.

I would keep the white eyes, just because for me personaly, I'd be more freaked out if I saw a guy looking like the picture posted above staring at me, then if he had normal eyes, because if he had normal eyes then I'd be able to associate him with a human. The white eye look just makes him look that much more otherworldy, in my opinion.

[Agentsands77]

I was thinking the same thing. I've wanted something that's more traditional looking, but still gives the appearance of armor.
Well, I don't want it to be more traditional, per se - I'm just looking for something that's a little less bulky.

The white eye look just makes him look that much more otherworldy, in my opinion.
I think it removes all intensity from his gaze. That picture is a perfect example - there's no focus. He looks like a mindless zombie.

[Infinity9999x]

Well, I don't want it to be more traditional, per se - I'm just looking for something that's a little less bulky.


I think it removes all intensity from his gaze. That picture is a perfect example - there's no focus. He looks like a mindless zombie.

Oh yes, I wouldn't have it for the whole film. I'd have him have a kind of retractable lense or kind of protective contact that could go white and have a faint glow, which he would only use in certain situations, interogation scenes being one. I know for me personaly I'd be much more unnerved if it appeared Batman had some kind of strange eyes, adding to the myth that he's not human. And the lack of his eyes wouldn't really matter in an interogation scene, because Bale could easily convey anger through his movements and voice.

But other scenes where he's talking to Gordon or Dent, where he's needs to display a wider range of more subtle emotions, I'd have him keep the white eyes out.

[BatScot]

I have no problem with the idea of cloth per se, for example:

Kevlar Sweatshirt (K-Shirt )
A Draggin Kevlar® Sweatshirt (K-Shirt) is made completely from 100% soft knitted Kevlar®.

http://www.dragginjeans.com.au/images/products/kShirt/f2w_013.jpg

THE MITHRIL KEVLAR sweater has the same construction as the regular Mithril sweater but is made of a heavier Kevlar reinforced material.

http://www.klattermusen.se/km_Images/produkter/Mithril_Kevlar.jpg

Natural Leather Ballistic Protection – Level IIA, II, IIIA or Stab Protection

http://www.miguelcaballero.com/cms/upload/2006/Gold/Grandes/4005004-1.jpg

... once you get over the limiting and incorrect belief that cloth-must-equal-spandex a myriad of possibilities present themselves.

[BatScot]

He looks like a mindless zombie.And that's a problem because... ?

[Cronus]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v434/Anthropod/Saint/BaldasseroniBatmanDE3.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v434/Anthropod/Saint/BaldasseroniBatmanDE2.jpg

^ While I’m not prepared to endorse this look completely* it does retain the ‘wraith’ appearance and is closer to the grittier style I would have preferred the film version to have gone.

* The cowl in particular is in need of a redo.
nice work.. but didn't like the long spikes(!) on the head!!

[Agentsands77]

... once you get over the limiting and incorrect belief that cloth-must-equal-spandex a myriad of possibilities present themselves.
But they still look like cloth. It's one thing to have certain kinds of alien-looking, unique cloth. But that stuff looks like everyday cloth, and that's problematic. I want the look to communicate the armor of it all, regardless of whether it needs to or not.

And that's a problem because... ?
Because then there's no intelligence behind his eyes - no intensity. Looking scary is one thing. Looking brain dead is another.

[Cronus]

Blast from the Past..... lol....:woot:

http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i169/vizor64/BobKaneBatman.jpg

[Agentsands77]

Blast from the Past..... lol....:woot:

http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i169/vizor64/BobKaneBatman.jpg
Eeesh.

[Saint]

http://www.kolbyjukes.com/images/work/batman/batman-2.jpg

^ Again... I don't necessarily agree with the execution of each of the parts, but the sum projects the street feel that I prefer.

This would need only a few adjustments to be viable for me. Darker, warmer grey, reworked cowl, re-worked gloves, and a thicker, slightly more form fitting material for the bodysuit--a middle-ground between what he's wearing and Bane's suit. Something that's almost a wet-suit, but not quite.

Also, I'd have to say replace the briefs (which I like in the comics but personally find a little awkward in live action execution) and replace them with harness straps (like in the picture of snake I posted). Alternatively, I suppose the briefs could remain so long as the straps were added over top.

I love the square shoulders on the cape--I've always wanted that to be done on film.

[itsthebatman]

Do you not think the square shoulders on the cape would be restrictive for fight scenes? Not that we got a clear view of what was happening last time.

[BatScot]

^ You need to keep in mind that these images are but suggestive of an overall idea that does not exist in a single picture: they are bits and pieces that present a general sketch… you need to look at the whole picture with the presumption that no single image is absolute and that certain adjustments to each would be needed in order to approximate that final idea.

[Saint]

Do you not think the square shoulders on the cape would be restrictive for fight scenes? Not that we got a clear view of what was happening last time.

They would need a different cape set up for fight scenes, I suppose--much like the shorter fight-cape they gave him in Begins. Seeing as this is their job, I expect they are capable of devising a method by which Batman can fight and have a square-shouldered cape.

[BatScot]

But they still look like cloth.They are cloth.

It's one thing to have certain kinds of alien-looking, unique cloth. But that stuff looks like everyday cloth, and that's problematic.I've lobbied for the 'miracle fabrics' and 'liquid armor' angles myself, but armor is armor and if it looks like everyday cloth… well isn't that kinda the point? It's like this: I accept that there's a reasonable explanation for why the Begin's suit is as it is but that doesn't mean a more conventional approach is "problematic" in and of itself.

I want the look to communicate the armor of it all, regardless of whether it needs to or not.Armor does not need to appear as armor in order to be armor and if Batman's modus operandi is to 'not be seen' (except as a shadow or creature of the night) then why would he concern himself with 'communicating' an armored look? Don't get me wrong, I accept without question that Batman BE armored, but that he appear armored is of no particular concern.

Because then there's no intelligence behind his eyes - no intensity. Looking scary is one thing. Looking brain dead is another.Again, it goes back to Batman's m/o: for a man whose primary objective is to operate in and from the darkness why would he concern himself with how his eyes appear to his quarry? On the other hand… the idea of protective eyewear would be a wholly practical thing for Batman to consider. Now I'm not suggesting that lenses must be used but there's no reason why they shouldn't be used… and as far as the "dramatic" argument goes, well that's the actor's problem not Batman's.

But what I find most interesting in this "lenses" argument is the odd fact that those who most favor an all-Black costume—presumably on the grounds that Batman should not be seen—are the same ones who argue most strongly that 'the bad guys' should be able to see his eyes.

Well if you’re getting that good a look at him he might as well dress like this:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v434/Anthropod/Finger/kanebat.jpg
"I'm the goddamn Bird... err, Batman"

Anyway, you are unlikely to find a more brain dead Batman than Nolan's ;)

[Saint]

I'm going to post this again:
http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/5204/batformulazl2.jpg

I think the plain cloth approach is a mistake, because Batman has always taken aesthetics into consideration--otherwise he wouldn't bother dressing like a bat at all. However, for me, the suit isn't designed to make him look like a creature, like so many people say, but simply to make him look like more than just a guy. What exactly he's supposed to look like, I think, is irrelevant to Batman (beyond that thing being bat-themed). If somebody thinks he's a bat-monster, okay. A ninja? Great. A superhero? Fine. A ghost? Cool. And urban commando? Sure.

I think when people want him to look like something specific, it begins interfering with the classic aesthetic of the costume. With your cloth suggestions, BatScot, you're moving too close to the street aesthetic for my tastes, and too far away from some of the other areas. By contrast, the Begins suit has strayed too far into armoured commando realm, and the B/S era suits were too superheroic.

My ideal is somewhere in between all of these. I want the armour to be there if you look (the gold/brown armour above is a good example), but thin and not so obvious. I want a big pouch belt and a harness instead of briefs, but I want it executed in such a way that there are still some obscure, supernatural vibes coming from the costume, because the way I see it that's what the suit has always tried to blend. It's not just a creature suit--if it was, the belt would be hidden, and the suit would look seamless and organic; no gloves or boots or cut out mouth opening. At the same time, it's not just a functional combat garb--it incorporates the creature elements and motif. For good measure, it has a dash of superhero tossed in as well.

If--after Nolan's franchise--we were to get a darker, horror-themed Arkham Asylum type franchise, then I would love to see a vaguely organic suit as Luhjo has suggested. Likewise, if we were to get a hyper-stylized, Sky Captain type film, then a more super hero themed costume would be great. For the purposes of this film, though, I think the most suitable approach is the middle ground as I've explained it, especially given what Wayne is trying to accomplish--not to specifically appear as a monster, or a guy in a suit, but simply as an abstract symbol that willbe interpreted in different ways. The public might see him as a superhero, the superstitious as a monster, and the high-end criminals simply as an extremely dangerous vigilante. I personally find it important that he appear as all these things, because it makes him mythical, in his own way.

[Rynan]

One thing I liked about Batman Begins batsuit is that it made him look "bigger" than he was.
http://img164.imageshack.us/img164/7582/batsuitsf5.jpg
See the sculpted chest? The large neck? The abs? Those create an illusion of size and strength, defining his muscles and giving him an strong, intimidating look. Without them, no matter how buff Bale is, he wouldn't nearly as intimidating as he does with them. This is the same reason that Superman in "Superman Returns" looked like sissy. His suit didn't give him the illusion of strength.

This illusion is an important factor if they are going to do any changes to the batsuit.

[BatScot]

One thing I liked about Batman Begins batsuit is that it made him look "bigger" than he was.On the other hand, a man who wishes to appear ‘bigger’ when operating in darkness and shadow would not outfit himself in black.

[BatScot]

I think the plain cloth approach is a mistake.It depends on how you do it, but ultimately I believe the basic concept is workable.

The suit isn't designed to make him look like a creature, like so many people say, but simply to make him look like more than just a guy.On this point I am in absolute agreement.

With your cloth suggestions, BatScot, you're moving too close to the street aesthetic for my tastes, and too far away from some of the other areas.It was not my intent to argue that the batsuit be adapted strictly along those lines—but to illustrate that the very existence of materials such as, for example, knitted Kevlar, not only shows that something other than the ‘rubber armor’ concept is possible but suggests that it is in fact probable given certain parameters.

I want the armour to be there if you look…You know we are not that far apart (and that I’ve been receptive to such “in between” concepts and that I was an early proponent of them) its just that I don’t need to see the armor or need there to be a ‘super-suit’… the point I was attempting to make was that the ‘appearance of cloth’ does not preclude the suit’s ability to provide a protective function.

[Dark Knight]

Do you not think the square shoulders on the cape would be restrictive for fight scenes? Not that we got a clear view of what was happening last time.


Yeah. That suit would be way to restrictive for fight scenes IMO. Cool suit...but the shoulder pads are no bueno. I also think the belt should be a dirty and dark yellow color instead of grey.

[Rynan]

On the other hand, a man who wishes to appear ‘bigger’ when operating in darkness and shadow would not outfit himself in black.

Wrong. Black is an intimidating color, which also keeps him concealed until he is ready to strike. And when he strikes, appearing bigger and stronger than your opponent becomes a great tactic, seeing as the crook might think twice about fighting you, piss themselves then try escape. Frightened, escaping hoods are easier to catch and interrogate than not-so frightened hoods armed with crowbars starring at your wimpy looking suit.

[Saint]

It depends on how you do it, but ultimately I believe the basic concept is workable.

On this point I am in absolute agreement.

It was not my intent to argue that the batsuit be adapted strictly along those lines—but to illustrate that the very existence of materials such as, for example, knitted Kevlar, not only shows that something other than the ‘rubber armor’ concept is possible but suggests that it is in fact probable given certain parameters.

You know we are not that far apart (and that I’ve been receptive to such “in between” concepts and that I was an early proponent of them) its just that I don’t need to see the armor or need there to be a ‘super-suit’… the point I was attempting to make was that the ‘appearance of cloth’ does not preclude the suit’s ability to provide a protective function.

I agree, generally speaking, save for the points I already made.

[Saint]

Wrong.
No, not wrong. Your point was that Batman should appear physically larger, and by way of optical illusion, black shapes naturally appear smaller than they are. This is why people look slimmer than they are when wearing black.

[Nepenthes]

I'm going to post this again:
I think the plain cloth approach is a mistake, because Batman has always taken aesthetics into consideration--otherwise he wouldn't bother dressing like a bat at all. However, for me, the suit isn't designed to make him look like a creature, like so many people say, but simply to make him look like more than just a guy. What exactly he's supposed to look like, I think, is irrelevant to Batman (beyond that thing being bat-themed). If somebody thinks he's a bat-monster, okay. A ninja? Great. A superhero? Fine. A ghost? Cool. And urban commando? Sure.

I think when people want him to look like something specific, it begins interfering with the classic aesthetic of the costume. With your cloth suggestions, BatScot, you're moving too close to the street aesthetic for my tastes, and too far away from some of the other areas. By contrast, the Begins suit has strayed too far into armoured commando realm, and the B/S era suits were too superheroic.

My ideal is somewhere in between all of these. I want the armour to be there if you look (the gold/brown armour above is a good example), but thin and not so obvious. I want a big pouch belt and a harness instead of briefs, but I want it executed in such a way that there are still some obscure, supernatural vibes coming from the costume, because the way I see it that's what the suit has always tried to blend. It's not just a creature suit--if it was, the belt would be hidden, and the suit would look seamless and organic; no gloves or boots or cut out mouth opening. At the same time, it's not just a functional combat garb--it incorporates the creature elements and motif. For good measure, it has a dash of superhero tossed in as well.

If--after Nolan's franchise--we were to get a darker, horror-themed Arkham Asylum type franchise, then I would love to see a vaguely organic suit as Luhjo has suggested. Likewise, if we were to get a hyper-stylized, Sky Captain type film, then a more super hero themed costume would be great. For the purposes of this film, though, I think the most suitable approach is the middle ground as I've explained it, especially given what Wayne is trying to accomplish--not to specifically appear as a monster, or a guy in a suit, but simply as an abstract symbol that willbe interpreted in different ways. The public might see him as a superhero, the superstitious as a monster, and the high-end criminals simply as an extremely dangerous vigilante. I personally find it important that he appear as all these things, because it makes him mythical, in his own way.

This is one of the best posts I've ever read on this subject :up: :up: :batty:

[Agentsands77]

Armor does not need to appear as armor in order to be armor and if Batman's modus operandi is to 'not be seen' (except as a shadow or creature of the night) then why would he concern himself with 'communicating' an armored look? Don't get me wrong, I accept without question that Batman BE armored, but that he appear armored is of no particular concern.
Because asthetic appearance is arguably more important than the suit being practical. I strongly feel that way. If we wanted an entirely plausible suit, the horns would be gone, etc. and so forth. Frankly, I just don't think plain cloth looks all that great, and makes him appear to be much less imposing. There has to be a certain grandeur to his appearance.

On the other hand… the idea of protective eyewear would be a wholly practical thing for Batman to consider. Now I'm not suggesting that lenses must be used but there's no reason why they shouldn't be used…
There's a great reason lenses shouldn't be used. It just doesn't look good, and I have yet to see a picture that convinces me it does. And I'm not even taking into the equation the "dramatic" argument (but I do think visible eyes give Batman a much more intimidating presence than if they're hidden).

But what I find most interesting in this "lenses" argument is the odd fact that those who most favor an all-Black costume—presumably on the grounds that Batman should not be seen—are the same ones who argue most strongly that 'the bad guys' should be able to see his eyes.
Not really, because sometimes Batman does get up and close (ala the Flass interrogation in BEGINS, or other such moments). It's not all about secrecy. But I don't argue for an all-black suit because of stealth. I argue for an all-black suit because I prefer the look.

[BatScot]

Wrong. Black is an intimidating color, which also keeps him concealed until he is ready to strike. And when he strikes, appearing bigger and stronger... Have you ever wondered why so few nocturnal predators in the natural world have black coloring?

[BatScot]

No, not wrong. Your point was that Batman should appear physically larger, and by way of optical illusion, black shapes naturally appear smaller than they are. This is why people look slimmer than they are when wearing black.Ahem, well that's a good point also LOL!

[itsthebatman]

This is one of the best posts I've ever read on this subject :up: :up: :batty:

Agreed. A very well argued post.

[Nepenthes]

Have you ever wondered why so few nocturnal predators in the natural world have black coloring?

Did you go to school? Nocturnal prey have night vision. 'Blending into the darkness' won't work. :whatever: :cwink:

[Paste Pot Pete]

I think the plain cloth approach is a mistake, because Batman has always taken aesthetics into consideration--otherwise he wouldn't bother dressing like a bat at all. However, for me, the suit isn't designed to make him look like a creature, like so many people say, but simply to make him look like more than just a guy.

This reminds me of the scene where he gets "shot down" by Joker's goons, and they poke at his chest.

"What is that? Some kind of body armor? He's human, after all."

In that context, it makes the idea of a rubber suit far less ludicrous than you might think. It just as an odd, otherworldy aesthetic. Like, that's not his skin, and it's not like a knight's armor, and it's definitely not a shirt.

At this time, I'd like to say that I found the texture (not the sculpt) of the B89 to be the best. It seemed rougher and tougher than anything after it.

[itsthebatman]

Of all the suits, B89 is my favourite so far. Just something about it that is iconic and and timelessly classic.

[BatScot]

Frankly, I just don't think plain cloth looks all that great, and makes him appear to be much less imposing. There has to be a certain grandeur to his appearance.I can accept that... but I think that is a different sort of argument than the one at hand: to say you don't like something is one thing, to say it is unworkable is another.

There's a great reason lenses shouldn't be used. It just doesn't look good...Actually, and I'm not trying to be facetious here, but I think that's a relatively bad reason to discount lenses.

Not really, because sometimes Batman does get up and close (ala the Flass interrogation in BEGINS).Are you saying that Flass, for example, while dangling from twenty odd stories up and having his face chewed off by some a*hole in a costume would have felt less intimidated having a pair of soul-less white orbs staring back at him rather than a set of pupils?

[Agentsands77]

I can accept that... but I think that is a different sort of argument than the one at hand: to say you don't like something is one thing, to say it is unworkable is another.
Not really. They're both based on very similar subjective judgments. For me, it would never be workable from an asthetic perspective. You just couldn't get me to like a cloth suit. Likewise, you couldn't get me to like lenses.

Actually, and I'm not trying to be facetious here, but I think that's a relatively bad reason to discount lenses.
Actually, isn't that the best reason to discount them? If they look awkward, clunky, or silly, that's the best reason not to use them. Aesthetics over practicality. Batman's suit isn't practical on the whole, and while BEGINS gave the suit some explanation, we don't need to overthink this and try to make the most realistic suit ever.

Are you saying that Flass, for example, while dangling from twenty odd stories up and having his face chewed off by some a*hole in a costume would have felt less intimidated having a pair of soul-less white orbs staring back at him rather than a set of pupils?
I only used the Flass example because it was the only one we've had in the franchise. But there are plenty of examples... the "I'm Batman" scene in BATMAN 1989, or the many more reserved, dialogue-based interrogation moments that we've seen in the comics... all of those work (IMO) better with visible eyes, purely because of the piercing look actual eyes can give.

Glazed over eyes can't really give off the impression of someone looking into you because of the lack of focus, but an intense gaze can. And I value that aspect, that Batman isn't just a glassy-eyed monster, but someone whose gaze peers right into you. That there's a clear intelligence behind those eyes. For comparison:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v112/Agentsands77/comparison.jpg

Some people prefer the top image. I prefer the bottom image - I like the intensity too much to let it go.

[Paste Pot Pete]

I'd agree, despite usually being a lenses advocate.

There's an intensity there, in interrogation scenes like that, which I think would be lost behind lenses. I like the idea of him using them during recon missions, as nightvision or something, or just to give a creepy effect of staring from the shadows.

But up close, in your face, uncovered eyes work best. That intensity was missing in say, Daredevil.

[itsthebatman]

I'd agree, despite usually being a lenses advocate.

There's an intensity there, in interrogation scenes like that, which I think would be lost behind lenses. I like the idea of him using them during recon missions, as nightvision or something, or just to give a creepy effect of staring from the shadows.

But up close, in your face, uncovered eyes work best. That intensity was missing in say, Daredevil.
Absolutely. Along with atmosphere, a script, decent acting, direction...

[Muziko]

Absolutely. Along with atmosphere, a script, decent acting, direction...

LoL... yeah, I was going to say that there were many more things missing from that movie other than the intensity in DD's eyes. That picture of Bale in the Batsuit provides further back up as to why I think Batman shouldn't have lenses covering up his eyes (even though I sincerely doubt they'd do that...at least in this current run of Batman movies) As a side note: Maybe it's just me...but I think Bale played the most intimidating/menacing Batman out of all actors that have played the Dark Knight. The way he looks in the above posted picture just screams "I'm about to throw you a major beating"

Cambio y Fuera,
Muziko

[Infinity9999x]

I disagree on the whole lenses hurting the intensity thing. Like I stated above, I would have him use the lenses during an interrogation to further freak whoever he was interrogating out. Bale could still quite easily convey teh anger and rage he did in the flass scene with the lenses, and I don't think he'd suffer from it.

Now, I'm not advocationg that the lenses be used the entire movie, but I find it a little far fetched that the lenses would hinder Bale's ability to convey what he's feeling that much. I mean, one of the best comic movies to date in my opinion (V for Vendetta) had it's main protagonist completley masked and he was still able to convey anger, sadness, and even happiness.


Also, The white eye look has always looked scarier to me, and how many people could honestly say that if they saw a huge batlike creature with white unhuman eyes staring at them, they would be more frightened if they could see human eyes instead?

[trustyside-kick]

I'd agree, despite usually being a lenses advocate.

There's an intensity there, in interrogation scenes like that, which I think would be lost behind lenses. I like the idea of him using them during recon missions, as nightvision or something, or just to give a creepy effect of staring from the shadows.

But up close, in your face, uncovered eyes work best. That intensity was missing in say, Daredevil.

You cannot make the comparison of Daredevil having lens in the movie and Batman having the lens in the movie.

Daredevil actually does have lenses or at least something that covers his eyes. Also, you mean to tell me that someone who is blind is going to look intimidating when interrogating someone? Their eyes could be in a whole different direction.

That is an incredibly poor way to prove your point on the lenses. Daredevil actually has those red lenses; not an artist suggestion. You want to argue? You can even look at the first Daredevil design to see what I'm talking about. The dude had a yellow costume and cowl...but red eyes. That was not the artist's preference cause it wouldn't and doesn't make nearly as much sense as when artists makes superheroe's eyes white when wearing a costume.

Absolutely. Along with atmosphere, a script, decent acting, direction...

No the problem was only the acting and the version they presented:

1) Ben Afleck and Jennifer Gardner shouldn't have been casted. That was the only flaw in the acting and cast choices.

2) The director's cut of Daredevil is a whole other movie almost and should've been the one put in theatres. Granted, some of the things removed were for the better, but overall the director's cut is far better and makes the movie overall very good. The director's cut involves a whole sub-plot that shouldn't have been removed for one.

[itsthebatman]

Haven't seen the Director's Cut, so can't comment on that. But the version I saw was very poor, and I did feel it to be lacking a well-written script, and to be poorly directed, lacking in tension or any real narrative drive. I love Daredevil comics, which I have admittedly only started reading seriously, and felt a better version of this character could have been put up on screen.

[trustyside-kick]

You should check out the director's cut. It really is a lot better.

While it doesn't make as much of a difference as this...it is similar in a sense. Look at Kingdom of Heaven...with the director's cut it was a whole other movie. People say it would've been best picture of the year had they put the director's cut in theatres instead.

Daredevil's director's cut doesn't have the same effect, but an effect none the less. I love that film only cause of the director's cut. And story-wise, the Director's cut does add a whole lot. Like I said, a whole sub-plot was removed from the theatre's version. I don't see how the story was bad either and it greatly reflected the comics. I know. I've read all the Daredevil stuff from the Marvel Knights Series and he is the only Marvel character I read.

[lujho]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v434/Anthropod/Saint/BaldasseroniBatmanDE3.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v434/Anthropod/Saint/BaldasseroniBatmanDE2.jpg

^ While I’m not prepared to endorse this look completely* it does retain the ‘wraith’ appearance and is closer to the grittier style I would have preferred the film version to have gone.

* The cowl in particular is in need of a redo.

I dislike a lot about this but like a lot also. The texture is the sort of thing I'm talking about for an organic approach. The bosysuit is much to thin and clingy looking though, and it definitely looks like there's nothing underneath. It needs to be thicker and/or tighter (tauter, letting *less* muscle definition through). And darker in colour, of course.

[lujho]

Well, technically Captain America is a steroids user, haha (super soldier serum). That picture, however, has nothing to do with steroids and everything to do with Rob Liefeld being incompetent. He started the drawing with one perspective and finished it with another, and thusly it appears as if Captain America's chest is turning away from his body.

Aside from being a terrible artist, Liefeld is also guilty of repeated plagiarism.

Hey man, it's cubism! Maybe not intentional, but still...

I've seen an image that shows what that Liefeld picture would look like from a bird's eye view, but can't for the life of me find it again.

[Rynan]

Have you ever wondered why so few nocturnal predators in the natural world have black coloring?

Like Black Panthers?
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v513/Rynan/Black_Jaguar.jpg

Black Wolves?
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v513/Rynan/blackwolves.jpg

Or Black Bears?
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v513/Rynan/blackbear_bold.jpg

Maybe some species of bats?
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v513/Rynan/molossusmolossus1.jpg

[lujho]

http://www.kolbyjukes.com/images/work/batman/batman-2.jpg

^ Again... I don't necessarily agree with the execution of each of the parts, but the sum projects the street feel that I prefer.

Why do people (this guy, the other CG one, Dead End etc) just plop the cowl over the cape like that? It looks so boring and simple and, I don't know, amatuerish, or lacking in style. At the very least, the cape (I really think we should start calling it a cloak, anyhow) could be over the cowl, as if you took the 2 areas where the clasps are on the Begins cape and brought them together in the middle.

Like this:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v217/lujho/BatmanSuperman.jpg

[lujho]

This illusion is an important factor if they are going to do any changes to the batsuit.

I think they can help the size thing by slimming down the cowl, so that the smaller head and thinner neck (but still proportionaly thick compared to a normal guy's) make his shoulders look broader.

Any cloth/fabric type suit is still going to have padding underneath it anyway (preferably acting as "armour") and so the suit's probably going to have about the same amount of bulk to it anyway. I don't want a sleeker suit that is actually smaller - by sleek I mean smoother surface contours, not a significantly thinner Batman.

[lujho]

Not really. They're both based on very similar subjective judgments. For me, it would never be workable from an asthetic perspective. You just couldn't get me to like a cloth suit. Likewise, you couldn't get me to like lenses.


Actually, isn't that the best reason to discount them? If they look awkward, clunky, or silly, that's the best reason not to use them. Aesthetics over practicality. Batman's suit isn't practical on the whole, and while BEGINS gave the suit some explanation, we don't need to overthink this and try to make the most realistic suit ever.


I only used the Flass example because it was the only one we've had in the franchise. But there are plenty of examples... the "I'm Batman" scene in BATMAN 1989, or the many more reserved, dialogue-based interrogation moments that we've seen in the comics... all of those work (IMO) better with visible eyes, purely because of the piercing look actual eyes can give.

Glazed over eyes can't really give off the impression of someone looking into you because of the lack of focus, but an intense gaze can. And I value that aspect, that Batman isn't just a glassy-eyed monster, but someone whose gaze peers right into you. That there's a clear intelligence behind those eyes. For comparison:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v112/Agentsands77/comparison.jpg

Some people prefer the top image. I prefer the bottom image - I like the intensity too much to let it go.

I really think you can have your cake and eat it too with lenses that aren't fully opaque. Many mirrored sunglasses are like this - the degree of opacity can be as much as you want, meaning that some allow you to see the person's eyes through them in the right light.

That allows close-up shots where you can see his actual eyes, and long-distance shots (allthough you could do it in close-up too) where they can appear as bright points of light against a dark background. Kind of like Kevin's (Elijah Wood's) glasses in Sin City - that effect was faked with digital effects and exaggerated, but you could do it in a more natural way simply with lighting.

[Nepenthes]

Have you ever wondered why so few nocturnal predators in the natural world have black coloring?

Wolves, bears, panthers it doesn't matter. I'll say it again in case you missed it. Nocturnal prey have NIGHT VISION, so there's no point hiding in darkness if you're trying to catch them. Don't forget your commonsense eh :whatever: :cwink:

Batman's prey cannot typically see in the dark, so there is a reason for him to dress in black. On the other hand, military experiments reveal...........blah blah blah

[Saint]

Wolves, bears, panthers
None of those animals are nocturnal.

Batman's prey cannot typically see in the dark, so there is a reason for him to dress in black. On the other hand, military experiments reveal...........blah blah blah
Blah blah blah? How is a technical study "blah blah blah?" If anything, the uninformed speculations of forumers are "blah blah blah."

[Saint]

Like Black Panthers?
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v513/Rynan/Black_Jaguar.jpg

Black Wolves?
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v513/Rynan/blackwolves.jpg

Or Black Bears?
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v513/Rynan/blackbear_bold.jpg
These animals are not nocturnal.

Maybe some species of bats?
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v513/Rynan/molossusmolossus1.jpg
Bats aren't actually black. They are typically brown, and exotic bats often have orange or gold fur.

[Rynan]

None of those animals are nocturnal.

Black Panthers are nocturnal hunters.

They also live in jungles, dark environments with little light. Their melanism helps them camouflage.

Maybe your the uninformed speculator.

[Rynan]

Bats aren't actually black. They are typically brown, and exotic bats often have orange or gold fur.

What color is that bat?

[Saint]

Black Panthers are nocturnal hunters.

They also live in jungles, dark environments with little light. Their melanism helps them camouflage.

Maybe your the uninformed speculator.

Actually, black panthers aren't anything. "Black panther" actually refers to black variants of Cougars, Jaguars, and Leopards, and only the leopard is technically nocturnal. So, out of the six animals you posted (black panther referring to three), you were right about one while I was right about five. So, who's uninformed?

[Paste Pot Pete]

You cannot make the comparison of Daredevil having lens in the movie and Batman having the lens in the movie.

Daredevil actually does have lenses or at least something that covers his eyes. Also, you mean to tell me that someone who is blind is going to look intimidating when interrogating someone? Their eyes could be in a whole different direction.

That is an incredibly poor way to prove your point on the lenses. Daredevil actually has those red lenses; not an artist suggestion. You want to argue? You can even look at the first Daredevil design to see what I'm talking about. The dude had a yellow costume and cowl...but red eyes. That was not the artist's preference cause it wouldn't and doesn't make nearly as much sense as when artists makes superheroe's eyes white when wearing a costume.


Ugh, I knew someone was going to bring this up, so much that I wanted to p.s. my post with it.

I KNOW Daredevil is blind. And I'm well aware that he's supposed to have lenses; I'm not an idiot. And nowhere did I fault MSJ for giving DD lenses. The cowl (and the rest of the costume) I've always found to be very slick, one of the best designed suits in comic movies. There was no way MSJ could've not given him lenses, so he was fighting an uphill battle to begin with. Being blind is irrelevent, since Daredevil (in costume) is never noticeably blind. He pulls of the illusion that all his senses work just fine.

There is a huge difference between lenses/blank eyes in comics and film. It's called the brow. In comics, it moves with emotion. Batman's eyes narrow when he's angry, open wide when he's shocked. The only way to get this effect in film is to make the mask more of a prosthetic so it could move with the actor's expressions (an idea I would not be against, in fact). But making them stationary at all times? No way.

[Saint]

What color is that bat?

Please look up the definition of "typically."

[Rynan]

So, who's uninformed?

I will acknowledge my partial fault, but still. The variants, as you say, still live in the dark jungles of the world(central Asia, South America). The black variation still allows them to blend into this darkness, making them more effective hunters and is a form protection. This also applies to Black Bears in the western American forests. The color black helps camouflage them.

Why can't Batman have this same protection?

[trustyside-kick]

Ugh, I knew someone was going to bring this up, so much that I wanted to p.s. my post with it.

I KNOW Daredevil is blind. And I'm well aware that he's supposed to have lenses; I'm not an idiot. And nowhere did I fault MSJ for giving DD lenses. The cowl (and the rest of the costume) I've always found to be very slick, one of the best designed suits in comic movies. There was no way MSJ could've not given him lenses, so he was fighting an uphill battle to begin with. Being blind is irrelevent, since Daredevil (in costume) is never noticeably blind. He pulls of the illusion that all his senses work just fine.

There is a huge difference between lenses/blank eyes in comics and film. It's called the brow. In comics, it moves with emotion. Batman's eyes narrow when he's angry, open wide when he's shocked. The only way to get this effect in film is to make the mask more of a prosthetic so it could move with the actor's expressions (an idea I would not be against, in fact). But making them stationary at all times? No way.

The point of me saying that was because you tried to use an example of the lenses being a problem cause it took away the intimidation factor. You used a poor example of stating Daredevil even when, appearently, you yourself knew he was supposed to have lenses.

I was merely stating that your way of "defending" your views was very poor with that comparsion. DD having lenses is completely different than Bats having them, I agree with you on that. I was merely pointing out something that made me go "what the...".

[Saint]

I will acknowledge my partial fault, but still. The variants, as you say, still live in the dark jungles of the world(central Asia, South America). The black variation still allows them to blend into this darkness, making them more effective hunters and is a form protection. This also applies to Black Bears in the western American forests. The color black helps camouflage them.
How fortunate, then, that BatScot did not pose a question on daytime predators.

Why can't Batman have this same protection?
I never said he couldn't; I have only been pointing our your faulty examples, and refuting the idea that black is more effective than grey for urban night camouflage, a notion that has been defeated by sources more credible than forumers.

[Jager X]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v112/Agentsands77/comparison.jpg


IMO The reason why there's so much intensity in the bottom pic is not because of the eyes but the expression on the cowl. If you were to have Bale make that same expression while wearing a cowl that has the puss n' boots :csad: expression then then whole atmosphere would be a lot less intimidating. What I'm basically trying to say is, the white eyes can definately work with some creativity and help from the cowl which has more to do with intimidation than the eyes themselves.

[Agentsands77]

There is a huge difference between lenses/blank eyes in comics and film. It's called the brow. In comics, it moves with emotion. Batman's eyes narrow when he's angry, open wide when he's shocked. The only way to get this effect in film is to make the mask more of a prosthetic so it could move with the actor's expressions (an idea I would not be against, in fact). But making them stationary at all times? No way.
Exactly. And a more prosthetic-type Batman cowl would be interesting, though I wonder how well it would work.

IMO The reason why there's so much intensity in the bottom pic is not because of the eyes but the expression on the cowl.
But the only difference between the pictures is the eyes, so the greater intensity must be due to the eyes' visibility.

[Ming]

I never said he couldn't; I have only been pointing our your faulty examples, and refuting the idea that black is more effective than grey for urban night camouflage, a notion that has been defeated by sources more credible than forumers.

So, are you stating that you are in the gray suit supporters category?

[Paste Pot Pete]

The point of me saying that was because you tried to use an example of the lenses being a problem cause it took away the intimidation factor. You used a poor example of stating Daredevil even when, appearently, you yourself knew he was supposed to have lenses.

I was merely stating that your way of "defending" your views was very poor with that comparsion. DD having lenses is completely different than Bats having them, I agree with you on that. I was merely pointing out something that made me go "what the...".

I think you misunderstood me. Again, I never criticized the movie Daredevil for having lenses. It made sense, since anything else would've been a.) illogical and b.) unfaithful to the source. I simply noted what I consider to be their ineffectiveness in the medium of film.

But here's the thing. MSJ didn't have a choice. He had to deal with the inherent "handicap" of Daredevil's covered eyes, and I think succeeded as far he could. The brow of the cowl was sculpted to a good, angry expression. But the blank look (which has nothing to do with the character behind the mask being blind) still persists. It looks good in some shots (Daredevil in the rafters of Josie's Bar), and bad in others ("staring" down Bullseye)

Nolan has a choice, as Batman's cowl isn't definitively dictated to require lenses. The white eyes are a comic aesthetic, unlike the necessary feature of Daredevil. Having this choice, I think going without the lenses is the better option, ultimately.

I think the ultimate compromise might be retractable lenses. Like Daredevil, I think the lenses could look cool sometimes, but not in others. Fortunately, Batman doesn't need the lenses all the time like Daredevil does, so he'd be able to make this switch when appropriate. I like bright, white lenses for glaring out from the shadows, and open eyes for piercing into someone's soul during an interrogation.

I think an opinion on this has a lot to do with how you like your Batman. Me, I like a little bit of both. The inhuman monster, and the driven man beneath it. I'd like to see some of both.

[Logan Howlett]

In all honesty I prefer to see Batman in black, but after being a Student of Ninjutsu for years I can tell you that all styles of Ninjutsu, be it from Koga, Iga, or anywhere in between, all beleived grey to work much better than black for camoflauge at night. It is only by stereotype that you see Ninjas in film sporting black all of the time.

[lujho]

In all honesty I prefer to see Batman in black, but after being a Student of Ninjutsu for years I can tell you that all styles of Ninjutsu, be it from Koga, Iga, or anywhere in between, all beleived grey to work much better than black for camoflauge at night. It is only by stereotype that you see Ninjas in film sporting black all of the time.

Well, thanks for that tidbit.

I'm honestly baffled why people would think black is better camouflage anyway. Do they think shadows are black, or that they literally make the things in shadow look completely black (in which case the suit could be any colour anyway)?

Things in shadow are a darker version of the colour they are (that's why we call it a darker shade). If a man in a dark grey suit is standing in shadow, it'll look black anyway. If a man in a grey suit is standing in front of a grey wall, and the shadow is making both the suit and the wall darker, well, he'll be hard to see. In a black suit in front of a grey wall, he may actually stand out more.

The thing is, it's the SHADOWS that make you hard to see, not the colouring of your clothes, to a certain extent anyway. Of course darker will be hidden better, and lighter will stand out more - but that's because urban surfaces aren't clean and bright. In a city that's just been entirely painted white, a white suit would be best - EVEN in shadows, because shadows only make things a darker shade of what they are - they don't make them black. You want your clothes to match your surroundings, not any imaginary black shadows. green/brown camo would still be effective camo at night in a forest, probably more than black would.

The kind of grey that most grey-supporters are asking for will not increase your visibility in low light any more than black, and as you say, may in fact reduce it. The difference in brightness between black and the grey we're talking about is just not significant.

It would be different if people were asking for a really light grey - more white than black - that would definitely make Batman easier to see. But we're talking about a grey that's more black than white - mostly black in fact. All we want is a bit of definite but subtle visual contrast on the suit to make it look more interesting. It'll still blend in to shadows perfectly well when story demands it - it's all down to cinematography.

[Nepenthes]

None of those animals are nocturnal.

Yeah, and they're 'not really black' either. Doesn't matter. I was replying to Batscot when he asked why don't more nocturnal predators wear black. Why? their colour makes no difference because, being nocturnal, they all have night vision. Forget the animals we're talking about Batman, whose prey does NOT usually have night vision, so therefore they're NOT gonna see a black costume in the night.


Blah blah blah? How is a technical study "blah blah blah?" If anything, the uninformed speculations of forumers are "blah blah blah."

I was referring to military experiments that showed black and grey are both equally invisible in the dark. This has been mentioned many times here before and I thought you'd know what I'm talking about. Blah blah blah means there's no point discussing it from a practical 'reality' standpoint it's all aesthetics.

[Saint]

Yeah, and they're 'not really black' either. Doesn't matter. I was replying to Batscot when he asked why don't more nocturnal predators wear black. Why? their colour makes no difference because, being nocturnal, they all have night vision.
Sigh. Nocturnal animals actually have colourless, low resolution night vision--so it's a good thing the animals aren't black, lest they stand out against a field of blurry greyscale forest.

Forest animals are coloured in earth-tones--browns and warm greys, mostly--because because those are the dominant colours of the earth, especially at night. Being black would not protect them because black does not blend in with browns and greys (hint: browns and greys blend in with browns and greys).

By the same token, rainforest animals are coloured brightly because that is the colour of their environment. Being bright green doesn't make the poison dart frog stick out at night, because those are the colours of his environment--he is as difficult to see at night as he is during the day.

Following from this, Batman should be the colour of his surroundings, no? And, even more so than the forest, a city at night contains very little black; it contains lots of grey. Also, as Lujho pointed out, since you guys want him to be hiding in shadow, it doesn't really matter if he wears grey or not: because it's shadow. If the shadow is heavy enough to block out other colours (such as the colours of buildings), then it would block out the colour of Batman just as easily. However, suppose the shadow is not that thick, and the dilluted colour or details of the building can be seen. Which would be harder to see: a big black silhouette, or something the same dilluted greyscale tones as the building?

The truth is, I don't really care about whether grey is camouflage or not. It's fiction, and it's believable enough not to matter. I just like grey. The point of all this is that I find it rather annoying when people make up phony reasons to say this or that (like a two-tone suit) can't be done. If you prefer a blacvk suit, that's great--but don't waste your time with this camouflage crap that has already been defeated by sources more credible than we forumers.

[regwec]

It's amazing that the same people who maintain that black is inherently more "realistic" than grey (or blue) often make the argument that it would be "unrealistic" for The Joker to wear purple. It's as if they somehow think that much of the visual spectrum is a myth invented by the 'liberal media'.

[Johnny Drama]

It's amazing that the same people who maintain that black is inherently more "realistic" than grey (or blue) often make the argument that it would be "unrealistic" for The Joker to wear purple. It's as if they somehow think that much of the visual spectrum is a myth invented by the 'liberal media'.

Bwahahahaha! That made my day! :D

[Muziko]

It's amazing that the same people who maintain that black is inherently more "realistic" than grey (or blue) often make the argument that it would be "unrealistic" for The Joker to wear purple. It's as if they somehow think that much of the visual spectrum is a myth invented by the 'liberal media'.

I noticed that same thing from the people making the argument about the unrealistic look for Joker (wearing purple) Of course, I'm just observing from the sidelines because the arguments really amuse me. It's just funny to see the lines of reasoning for some of these arguments.

[Johnny Drama]

Seriousley, the guy is a pyschotic clown, but him wearing purple is just plain silly? W-T-F Ever!
It's like people would rather see Joker stripped of his over the top theatrics and then have turn him into an evil version of The Crow. Jeez.

[Nepenthes]

Sigh. Nocturnal animals actually have colourless, low resolution night vision--so it's a good thing the animals aren't black, lest they stand out against a field of blurry greyscale forest.

Forest animals are coloured in earth-tones--browns and warm greys, mostly--because because those are the dominant colours of the earth, especially at night. Being black would not protect them because black does not blend in with browns and greys (hint: browns and greys blend in with browns and greys).

By the same token, rainforest animals are coloured brightly because that is the colour of their environment. Being bright green doesn't make the poison dart frog stick out at night, because those are the colours of his environment--he is as difficult to see at night as he is during the day.

Following from this, Batman should be the colour of his surroundings, no? And, even more so than the forest, a city at night contains very little black; it contains lots of grey. Also, as Lujho pointed out, since you guys want him to be hiding in shadow, it doesn't really matter if he wears grey or not: because it's shadow. If the shadow is heavy enough to block out other colours (such as the colours of buildings), then it would block out the colour of Batman just as easily. However, suppose the shadow is not that thick, and the dilluted colour or details of the building can be seen. Which would be harder to see: a big black silhouette, or something the same dilluted greyscale tones as the building?

The truth is, I don't really care about whether grey is camouflage or not. It's fiction, and it's believable enough not to matter. I just like grey. The point of all this is that I find it rather annoying when people make up phony reasons to say this or that (like a two-tone suit) can't be done. If you prefer a blacvk suit, that's great--but don't waste your time with this camouflage crap that has already been defeated by sources more credible than we forumers.

Chill the fu*k out. I wasn't talking Batmans black VS grey I was simply pointing out to BATSCOT that the colour of nocturnal animals doesn't matter. Which is something you just stated yourself (see the bold^, sorry I'm just trying to assist your reading comprehension) and you've admitted this after challenging my posts with inane sidetracking comments.

BTW you also failed to quote my second paragraph in which I said I'm NOT CONCERNED WITH PRACTICAL REALISM it's all about aesthetics, after which you continue to harp on about why Batman would or wouldn't grey. Are you thick or what?

[thedarks0ldier]

Chill out compa, it wasn't a bash on you personally, Saint aint like that. It was more bashing the people that ARE CONCERNED WITH PRACTICAL REALISM.

btw, I say gray all the way. (ninja's use to wear gray too, if that matters, they also would wear blue, but I prefer black.)

[regwec]

Of course he isn't thick. Can't you tell?

[Saint]

Chill the fu*k out. I wasn't talking Batmans black VS grey
Don't waste my time with crap, please. We both know damn well that the only reason you were responding to BatScot in the first place was to debunk his support of the grey costume.
Which is something you just stated yourself (see the bold^, sorry I'm just trying to assist your reading comprehension) and you've admitted this after challenging my posts with inane sidetracking comments.
Here's a secret tip: if you read the whole of my post, you will see that nowhere did I support your contention that colour is irrelevant because of night-vision. Quite the contrary: what I did was point out the weaknesses of night vision meaning colour (specifically, shade) camouflage is effective in evading it, because it is not as accurate as you seemed to believe.

BTW you also failed to quote my second paragraph in which I said I'm NOT CONCERNED WITH PRACTICAL REALISM it's all about aesthetics, after which you continue to harp on about why Batman would or wouldn't grey. Are you thick or what?
I am fairly certain--in fact, completely certain--that I have echoed this sentiment more times than I can count, and I have repeatedly explained that my "harping" is for the benefit of everyone under the mistaken impression that black is more effective than grey, be it you or some other person reading my post.

It was more bashing the people
I don't believe I was bashing anyone.

[Saint]

In all honesty I prefer to see Batman in black, but after being a Student of Ninjutsu for years I can tell you that all styles of Ninjutsu, be it from Koga, Iga, or anywhere in between, all beleived grey to work much better than black for camoflauge at night. It is only by stereotype that you see Ninjas in film sporting black all of the time.

I am adding this to my signature for the sake of all the poor souls who believe black needs to be used for the sake of stealth.

[thedarks0ldier]

I don't believe I was bashing anyone.
Believe it!!:ninja:




:oldrazz:

[Warhammer]

For the suit change, they should keep the color. No blue or gray.
Just change the suit's general appearance and features. Also, slim the cowl so it looks comfortable. The cowl is one of the MAJOR things that bothered me about Batman Begins.

[Infinity9999x]

Exactly. And a more prosthetic-type Batman cowl would be interesting, though I wonder how well it would work.


But the only difference between the pictures is the eyes, so the greater intensity must be due to the eyes' visibility.

I too had been wondering if they could make a cowl that could move with the actors expressions, it would be interesting.

And like I said before, I really can't see how lenses would inhibit Bale that much if he used them a few times in the movie. If they can make a whole movie where one of their main character's face is completley covered at all times, and he can still manage to convey his emotions, what makes people think Bale couldn't do it while wearing lenses for a few scenes in the movie?

[Logan Howlett]

I am adding this to my signature for the sake of all the poor souls who believe black needs to be used for the sake of stealth.


Lol, I feel honored.

[BatScot]

Chill I was simply pointing out to BATSCOT that the colour of nocturnal animals doesn't matter.But it does matter, especially if one maintains the erroneous belief that melanism enables a nocturnal creature to appear larger in a dark environment when in fact such melanistic coloring would only serve to mask the creature’s size as it blends into the surrounding darkness.

I'm NOT CONCERNED WITH PRACTICAL REALISM it's all about aesthetics... I am... and no it is not.

[Nepenthes]

Don't waste my time with crap, please. We both know damn well that the only reason you were responding to BatScot in the first place was to debunk his support of the grey costume.

Here's a secret tip: if you read the whole of my post, you will see that nowhere did I support your contention that colour is irrelevant because of night-vision. Quite the contrary: what I did was point out the weaknesses of night vision meaning colour (specifically, shade) camouflage is effective in evading it, because it is not as accurate as you seemed to believe.

I am fairly certain--in fact, completely certain--that I have echoed this sentiment more times than I can count, and I have repeatedly explained that my "harping" is for the benefit of everyone under the mistaken impression that black is more effective than grey, be it you or some other person reading my post.


I don't believe I was bashing anyone.

Go back and read fella. I was talking about ANIMALS in a harmless remark to which you applied you're own paranoia about people 'debunking support' for your precious grey suit. Too bad I never gave a fu*k. I'm not about to tell other people what they should prefer visually and I already said realism doesn't matter, but surprise surprise you're still talking about it (realism and effectivness).:o :down:

BTW your second paragraph there makes no sense whatsoever and combined with your theories on bright rain forest and 'earthy' forest camouflage I'm convinced you have no idea what you're on about. You're way off on the subject and you can't register or respond to simple statements so maybe you should stop wasting your time posting for 'our benefit' on black VS grey. Seriously is that big a deal? Rhetorical question.

[Saint]

Go back and read fella. I was talking about ANIMALS in a harmless remark to which you applied you're own paranoia about people 'debunking support' for your precious grey suit.
I think it will be clear to anyone who reads this exchange that my statement was no in error. Furthermore, I won't be horribly inconvenienced if the suit is black--I just don't like it when people say things that are stupid and wrong.

surprise surprise you're still talking about it (realism and effectivness).:o :down:
And I will continue to do so.

BTW your second paragraph there makes no sense
It makes perfect sense (though I did miss a comma, which may be confusing you). You said night vision makes camouflage useless, and I explained that statement is not true because night vision is not accurate enough to do that. It is fairly low-quality vision, which means the natural camouflage of animals is effective in evading it.

whatsoever and combined with your theories on bright rain forest and 'earthy' forest camouflage
They are not theories. Forest animals are coloured in earth tones to blend in with their earth-tone surroundings, and jungle animals are coloured brightly to blend in with their surroundings. This is common knowledge.

so maybe you should stop wasting your time posting for 'our benefit' on black VS grey.
No.

[Logan Howlett]

Honestly I gota say Saint has a good point about animals in the wild. Animals more typicaly in terrain with more dirt, mountainside, or general terrain labeled as "earth tones" will naturaly take on those same color patterns. In the rainforest you have a great variety of multicolored fruits and flowers, in this inviornment you will have animals blend in the same way, especialy birds because they tend to nest closer to those brightly colored flora. This is the case anywhere, at anytime.

Honestly I prefer Batman in all black because I think it looks better, makes him more striking, and has a much greater fear factor. However everything I have learned teaches me that as a general rule grey or dark blue are the best options for concealment in an urban or city terrain, and that you should always have differnt shades at hand for differnt inviornments, such as if their is a thick fog, ambeint light, moonlight, or near total darkness. Also for places outside urban inviornment, generaly in a more woodland or countryside area, dark greens are known to work the best. These are simple truths passed down for generations. Now don't get me wrong, black has been used and is a basic uniform for practices of Ninjutsu. However a black Shinobi Shozoku (Ninja Uniform) is no more than a dogi in traditional Karate or Tai Kwan Do, it is meant only to train in, not to active use in stealth or stealth combat. I would love it if it where, but I know that black stands out against shadow, and that if someone sees the shape of a giant bat while Bruce is trying to stay hidden...he's ****ed. So while it may work for the moves, and looks cooler, in real life he would be ****ing killed by anyone with half a brain.

[kenellard]

If there was any doubt about how lame fanboys are, I think it's been answered in the last few pages of this thread. Please, for the love of god, get a grip

[itsthebatman]

I am adding this to my signature for the sake of all the poor souls who believe black needs to be used for the sake of stealth.

I was reading all these posts and something occurred to me. Saint, you are probably right about grey being more effective than black as camouflage (I know bugger all about it, apart from my knowledge of animals colour patterns ususally being adapted to provide camouflag in their natural habitat), so will bow to you on this. However, my first instinct is that this is counterintuitive - WHY would grey be more effective than black as a stealth colour? It doesn't make sense ON FIRST IMPRESSION. And in a two-hour movie, where Batman is going to be regarded as a creature of the night, and especially where Nolan is emphasising the 'strike from the shadows' aspect of the character, black is probably the best colour to go with so as not to throw the audience and to achieve verisimilitude.
That said, I really don't care either way.

[Saint]

It doesn't make sense ON FIRST IMPRESSION. And in a two-hour movie, where Batman is going to be regarded as a creature of the night, and especially where Nolan is emphasising the 'strike from the shadows' aspect of the character, black is probably the best colour to go with so as not to throw the audience and to achieve verisimilitude.
That said, I really don't care either way.
What do I care if the audience is stupid? That doesn't affect my enjoyment of the film (which is all that matters). Moreover, I really don't think anyone would be bothered by it, stupid or otherwise.

[itsthebatman]

Fine, fine. I was just making a point.

[Saint]

So was I.

[BatScot]

I was reading all these posts and something occurred to me. Saint, you are probably right about grey being more effective than black... so will bow to you on this.


http://home.tiscali.dk/8x062175/sp/cartman.gif

GOD DAMMMIT!!!!!

Fine, fine. I was just making a point.In lieu of a point I shall post this:

A new look for Bats? Post #3244 (http://www.superherohype.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11437836&postcount=3244)

[cryptic name]

does this whole grey v. black talk really matter? because in the end, his cape and cowl are still going to be black, and with his cape draped around him, the color of his body suit means dick as far as stealth goes.

[Saint]

Absolutely true. As I've said in the past, I am not really concerned with the practicality of it--I just prefer the black and grey look. I only get into these long-winded debates about the practicality of it because so many people say that's why grey and black should not be used. Such falsehoods should be addressed.

[BatScot]

does this whole grey v. black talk really matter? because in the end, his cape and cowl are still going to be black, and with his cape draped around him, the color of his body suit means dick as far as stealth goes.First off, there's nothing unstealthy about gray, but if you're going to take the 'it doesn't matter' approach then it doesn't matter if its gray ;)

[lujho]

I get the feeling that if the shade of grey that we (or at I, at least) actually want appeared in a film, most of the black supporters wouldn't bat an eyelid. It'd be a slight contrast to act as a "nod" to the comic's colour scheme - not a replication of the comics' (usual) colour scheme itself. It would be obvious that is was plenty dark enough, intimidating, cool looking, etc. They might still prefer all black, but I don't think most would mind black and say "graphite".

It's a medium or light grey they they'd all kick up a stink about, and frankly, so would I.

[BatScot]

I get the feeling that if the shade of grey that we (or at I, at least) actually want appeared in a film, most of the black supporters wouldn't bat an eyelid. It'd be a slight contrast to act as a "nod" to the comic's colour scheme - not a replication of the comics' (usual) colour scheme itself. It would be obvious that is was plenty dark enough, intimidating, cool looking, etc. They might still prefer all black, but I don't think most would mind black and say "graphite".Had Nolan given us that "nod to the comic's colour scheme" I have no doubt whatsoever that the Nolanites would have declared it the definitive representation. Ironically, they would have been right ;)

[itsthebatman]

What do I care if the audience is stupid? That doesn't affect my enjoyment of the film (which is all that matters). Moreover, I really don't think anyone would be bothered by it, stupid or otherwise.

Obviously you don't feel the same way, but I want all Bat-fans, and plenty of non-Batfans, to enjoy this movie, so to me, my enjoyment of the movie, is not ALL that matters. I'm not saying the audience is stupid, I'm saying it does not strike me as immediately obvious that grey is better camouflage than black, and a lot of posters on this board seem to be of the same mind; as the length and breadth of this debate has illustrated, there is a big difference of opinion on this matter. The practicality or otherwise of the colour scheme is not my issue either, it's a movie, not a documentary. I like the black suit best, but show me a black and grey combo that LOOKS better on screen, and I'll go with that.

[itsthebatman]

http://home.tiscali.dk/8x062175/sp/cartman.gif

GOD DAMMMIT!!!!!

In lieu of a point I shall post this:

A new look for Bats? Post #3244 (http://www.superherohype.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11437836&postcount=3244)

Point taken. I give you your proper credit now.

[BatScot]

Point taken. I give you your proper credit now.http://liverpooldfk.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/cartman_ch.gif

AWESOME!!!!!

[Saint]

Obviously you don't feel the same way, but I want all Bat-fans, and plenty of non-Batfans, to enjoy this movie, so to me, my enjoyment of the movie, is not ALL that matters. I'm not saying the audience is stupid, I'm saying it does not strike me as immediately obvious that grey is better camouflage than black, and a lot of posters on this board seem to be of the same mind; as the length and breadth of this debate has illustrated, there is a big difference of opinion on this matter. The practicality or otherwise of the colour scheme is not my issue either, it's a movie, not a documentary. I like the black suit best, but show me a black and grey combo that LOOKS better on screen, and I'll go with that.

You'll forgive me if I'm not concerned with the desire of forumers to see a black costume; I'm fairly certain that sentiment would change the moment a black and grey costume was produced. You see, before the Begins costume was revealed, the large majority on these boards hated the idea of another rubber costume--but the first EW picture landed, and suddenly everybody loved rubber again. By the same token, I think if Christopher Nolan came on here and said "Oh yeah, I'm going with a grey costume," most people would magically change their positions once again and be singing his praises.

Furthermore, I think you may over-estimate the population in favour of a black costume. Perhaps there should be a poll on the matter?

[regwec]

http://www.beaucoupkevin.com/images/jlgl/bestbravebold4.jpg

This is "my" Batman, because it was "my" Batman when I was eight years old (though he was then drawn by Norm Breyfogle rather than Neal Adams). For that reason, I always see these colours in association with the character, and I would love to see them on screen. I'm sure people raised on Frank Miller or Bruce Timm or even the movies have similar reasoning. I can make no practicle arguments for this scheme, but I can argue against objections to it. I suppose we're each bias towards whatever speaks "Batman" to us.

[Saint]

http://www.beaucoupkevin.com/images/jlgl/bestbravebold4.jpg

This is "my" Batman, because it was "my" Batman when I was eight years old (though he was then drawn by Norm Breyfogle rather than Neal Adams). For that reason, I always see these colours in association with the character, and I would love to see them on screen. I'm sure people raised on Frank Miller or Bruce Timm or even the movies have similar reasoning. I can make no practicle arguments for this scheme, but I can argue against objections to it. I suppose we're each bias towards whatever speaks "Batman" to us.
I was first introduced, in 1990 at five years old, to Burton's Batman. My first comic was 1992's "Batman Versus Predator" #3, which featured Batman in a big armoured suit, and when I started reading comics regularly, Jean-Paul Valley was Azbats.

For whatever reason, I never much liked the blue in the costume, and eventually settled on Mazzuchelli's Batman as my personal favourite, though I prefer Kane/JLU style ears.

[BatScot]

http://www.comictreadmill.com/images/SixtiesBatman.jpg

^ I have long since rejected that version in favor of:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v434/Anthropod/WAMS/WAMSY1.jpg
The archetype

[itsthebatman]

http://www.comixconnection.com/uploaded_images/batmonst.jpg
Now this I would love to see.

[BatScot]

^ Nothing wrong with that either.

[Infinity9999x]

I was first introduced, in 1990 at five years old, to Burton's Batman. My first comic was 1992's "Batman Versus Predator" #3, which featured Batman in a big armoured suit, and when I started reading comics regularly, Jean-Paul Valley was Azbats.

For whatever reason, I never much liked the blue in the costume, and eventually settled on Mazzuchelli's Batman (http://Mazzuchelli%27s%20Batman) as my personal favourite, though I prefer Kane/JLU style ears.

The Burton films were my first big Batman influence too, and for the longest time I preferred the all black over anything. Now I wouldn't mind seeing a more comic based suit, but I've never been big on the blue/grey color scheme either. I just don't think it could ever actually look good. When you have too light colors like that it just looks silly.

[SamuraiSon6]

http://www.amazingcomics.it/blackpanther_1.jpg
i dont want to see this in the movie, but i found it and thought it was interesting since some people think they will take a more 'animalistic' approach...

[trustyside-kick]

That's a picture of Black Panther from Marvel Comics.

[SamuraiSon6]

thanks, im not familiar with his character, i just found it searching and it appeared to be a very animalistic batman, sorry guys

[batmanbeginsboy]

Why do people (this guy, the other CG one, Dead End etc) just plop the cowl over the cape like that? It looks so boring and simple and, I don't know, amatuerish, or lacking in style. At the very least, the cape (I really think we should start calling it a cloak, anyhow) could be over the cowl, as if you took the 2 areas where the clasps are on the Begins cape and brought them together in the middle.

Like this:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v217/lujho/BatmanSuperman.jpg
that right there is the definitive batman costume. OMG thats f***** sick

[BatScot]

http://www.superherohype.com/forums/showthread.php?p=11513638&posted=1#post11513638

[itsthebatman]

Reminds me of the Mazzuchelli Batman as well as Wagner's. That thin, not overly muscled look (this ain't Jim Lee's Batman).

[Ibn]

My main thing, I want the damn wings at the ends of the cape. I hate the regular ass cloak **** they have going on. Plus it's kinda nonsensical to have the cape plain one second, then the next second when he's gliding have the cape be pointed at the end.

[regwec]

I agree, Ibn: a more Bat-wing-like cape is a crucial improvement, increasing as it does the forboding of Batman's silhouette.

[Myrddin_Emrys]

that right there is the definitive batman costume. OMG thats f***** sick

Damn straight, but Bats looks like he is sighing wistfully while Supes is angry cos Ma' got the colours wrong in his symbol again.

[trustyside-kick]

that right there is the definitive batman costume. OMG thats f***** sick

Don't like the Bat-emblem though.

[ragdus]

Don't like the Bat-emblem though.

http://www.rageous.us/public/logos/batz.png

[batman44]

My main thing, I want the damn wings at the ends of the cape. I hate the regular ass cloak **** they have going on. Plus it's kinda nonsensical to have the cape plain one second, then the next second when he's gliding have the cape be pointed at the end.

Thankyou, I've said that so many times now. Put the scallops back on the cape:cmad:

[DAVIDYR1]

Thankyou, I've said that so many times now. Put the scallops back on the cape:cmad:


If you mean the Begins cape, it does have scallops. The hero cape has them and the stunt capes have them too. What you see bale walking with in the Behind the Scenes DVD is a test cape that doesnt have the scallops yet. Trust me when I say there is no Begins cape without scallops...they're much different than the previous movie scallops. Those were much deeper....these ones are real subtle...but they're in EVERY cape. :cwink:

David

[afan]

Thankyou, I've said that so many times now. Put the scallops back on the cape:cmad:



My main thing, I want the damn wings at the ends of the cape. I hate the regular ass cloak **** they have going on. Plus it's kinda nonsensical to have the cape plain one second, then the next second when he's gliding have the cape be pointed at the end



I agree, Ibn: a more Bat-wing-like cape is a crucial improvement, increasing as it does the forboding of Batman's silhouette.


Absolutely agree with all of the above:up: and would like to add........
Shorten it so that it does not drag on the ground.
Allow it to completely close in the front enveloping Batman.
Disable the glider.

[Ibn]

Absolutely agree with all of the above:up: and would like to add........
Shorten it so that it does not drag on the ground.
Allow it to completely close in the front enveloping Batman.
Disable the glider.

I thought I was the only one who hated that. Don't get me wrong, there are moments in the movie where they just make it work. But at the same time, I get the sense that if he was fighting someone like Lady Shiva or any other proven martial artist, ****, all theyd have to do would be to step on his cape and just hold it. Imagine if it was Bane. Bats would never be able to friggin get out. Still, I like the glider though. Seeing Batman fly was great. I still think they can find a way to explain it in some military fashion how the cape can extend or something.:woot:

[Ibn]

Also, I think maybe the suit was too tight for him around the neck, hence the high pitched Batvoice. Maybe if they could work something out (god help me after this)......................around the neck

[batman44]

If you mean the Begins cape, it does have scallops. The hero cape has them and the stunt capes have them too. What you see bale walking with in the Behind the Scenes DVD is a test cape that doesnt have the scallops yet. Trust me when I say there is no Begins cape without scallops...they're much different than the previous movie scallops. Those were much deeper....these ones are real subtle...but they're in EVERY cape. :cwink:

David

If that's the case, I hope they make the scallops less subtle and more noticable.:)

[Cronus]

http://www.amazingcomics.it/blackpanther_1.jpg
i dont want to see this in the movie, but i found it and thought it was interesting since some people think they will take a more 'animalistic' approach...

you will never see this on the movie coz this is not batman!!!!! this is BLACK PANTHER....!!!!:huh:

[Nepenthes]

:dry:

[Enriquespy]

you will never see this on the movie coz this is not batman!!!!! this is BLACK PANTHER....!!!!:huh:

In the other side, That suit would ROCK in a Black Panther Movie:oldrazz:

[Fenrir]

Shorten it so that it does not drag on the ground.
Allow it to completely close in the front enveloping Batman.
Disable the glider.

Are you freakin' kidding me? His cape dragging on the ground has been one of the distinct qualities of his appearance in the comics as well in Timm/Dini TAS. Just go watch the 'Laughing Fish' episode from TAS. Besides, there isn't a single scene in Begins where his cape 'drags' on the ground. The only scene that is close to anything like that is when he walks away from jumping through the horde of bats in Arkham. And even there, his cape doesn't exactly drag, but more like 'hovers' above the ground. For me, it was an amazingly cool visual touch.

And the glider gives the cape a functional purpose and is much more appropriate for someone who uses the symbol of a Bat - wide wingspan used for flight/gliding. It was one of the best ideas ever conceived for the character (Burton gets mad props for that :up: ), as in 'why didn't anyone think of this before? It makes so much sense'.

[Fenrir]

I thought I was the only one who hated that. Don't get me wrong, there are moments in the movie where they just make it work. But at the same time, I get the sense that if he was fighting someone like Lady Shiva or any other proven martial artist, ****, all theyd have to do would be to step on his cape and just hold it. Imagine if it was Bane. Bats would never be able to friggin get out. Still, I like the glider though. Seeing Batman fly was great. I still think they can find a way to explain it in some military fashion how the cape can extend or something.:woot:

Now that's a pretty dumb argument. If someone is retarded enough to try a move like that on a fight, Batman will just pull the cape from underneath their feet with a quick jerk and make them fall on their head. And since the cape has a smooth surface, the stepper will not have any firm grip on the ground (unless of course, he/she has some kind of spikes in their shoe sole) and thus, can be flipped over effortlessly. What you are proposing is only possible if Batman's strength is proportionately much lesser and unable to withstand the weight of the one who steps on his cape like that and we all know that is not the case.

Just try standing on something like a long dining table cloth and have your friend or someone of equal strength pull it from underneath your feet with a snap and then watch what happens.

Besides, the cape used in the fights is significantly shorter than the ones in other scenes, so the point is moot either way.

[Deadpool876]

Now that's a pretty dumb argument. If someone is retarded enough to try a move like that on a fight, Batman will just pull the cape from underneath their feet with a quick jerk and make them fall on their head. And since the cape has a smooth surface, the stepper will not have any firm grip on the ground (unless of course, he/she has some kind of spikes in their shoe sole) and thus, can be flipped over effortlessly. What you are proposing is only possible if Batman's strength is proportionately much lesser and unable to withstand the weight of the one who steps on his cape like that and we all know that is not the case.

--Not really dumb, it can happen. Like you said, "if Batman's strength is proportionately much lesser and unable to withstand the weight of the one who steps on his cape like that." Bane comes to mind. Or some desperate villain can try that and gets lucky. :yay:

Just try standing on something like a long dining table cloth and have your friend or someone of equal strength pull it from underneath your feet with a snap and then watch what happens.

--The difference is, Bats is wearing the damn thing. Try to wear the table cloth as a cape and tell me what happened. :woot:

Besides, the cape used in the fights is significantly shorter than the ones in other scenes, so the point is moot either way.

--That's what I don't like. Switching capes in between scenes. :csad:
I thought Nolan wanted Batman to be "realistish" [I think that was the word used], you know realistic... So I think it's a good idea to shorten the cape but retain the glider. A long cape that drags on the ground at least for me is only appealing in animation but definitely not in live-action.

Also, I wouldn't mind a radical change in the suit in TDK. How about a suit like the one in Batman Beyond, pretty cool don't you think. [Uh-Oh, am gonna get blasted for this :woot: ]. The cape can be hidden and goes out only when he needs to glide... What, no takers? :dry: Come on, it can be cool, after all it's the 21st century, he needs a new suit. Plus, it will benefit him greatly, it can provide with much-improved mobility. So all in favor, say aye! :oldrazz:

[iwalktheline92]

--Also, I wouldn't mind a radical change in the suit in TDK. How about a suit like the one in Batman Beyond, pretty cool don't you think. [Uh-Oh, am gonna get blasted for this :woot: ]. The cape can be hidden and goes out only when he needs to glide... What, no takers? :dry: Come on, it can be cool, after all it's the 21st century, he needs a new suit. Plus, it will benefit him greatly, it can provide with much-improved mobility. So all in favor, say aye! :oldrazz:


This is about the original Batman Bruce Wayne not Terry McGinis.

[Kaizer]

concerning the cape issue, I would imagine he has a safety-feature that enables him to take it off with a single button on his belt or perhaps if it´s pulled hard (by someone) it simply comes off... Just a thought

[iwalktheline92]

This page will tell you all you want to know about the batsuit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batsuit#Origin

[Deadpool876]

This is about the original Batman Bruce Wayne not Terry McGinis.

Duh...:whatever: I know that.

[Fenrir]

--Not really dumb, it can happen. Like you said, "if Batman's strength is proportionately much lesser and unable to withstand the weight of the one who steps on his cape like that." Bane comes to mind. Or some desperate villain can try that and gets lucky.

--The difference is, Bats is wearing the damn thing. Try to wear the table cloth as a cape and tell me what happened. :woot:

--That's what I don't like. Switching capes in between scenes.
I thought Nolan wanted Batman to be "realistish" [I think that was the word used], you know realistic... So I think it's a good idea to shorten the cape but retain the glider. A long cape that drags on the ground at least for me is only appealing in animation but definitely not in live-action.

Look, I just attempted a half-hearted explanation for something that didn't need an explanation in the first place. I'm all for using 'realism' as a crutch to support your aesthetic choices, but not to the extent that one goes as far as to mutilate key identifiable features of the character. Nolan simply tried to make the character believable and plausible in his own universe, which is why anyone with half a brain can easily figure out BB is not 100% real nor it tries to be nor is it supposed to be.

And if you are in agreement with asinine ideas like Batman having a shorter cape or no opening in the cowl or any other such retarded notions that completely changes the character's overall look simply because it is not "realistic enough" ( it's a ****ing COMIC BOOK MOVIE for chrissakes! :rolleyes: ) , then you either don't love the character or completely fail to realize the visual significance of the above elements.

Also, I wouldn't mind a radical change in the suit in TDK. How about a suit like the one in Batman Beyond, pretty cool don't you think. [Uh-Oh, am gonna get blasted for this :woot: ]. The cape can be hidden and goes out only when he needs to glide... What, no takers? Come on, it can be cool, after all it's the 21st century, he needs a new suit. Plus, it will benefit him greatly, it can provide with much-improved mobility. So all in favor, say aye! :oldrazz:

I wish there was some kind of forum chainsaw to hack up heathen members of the fanboy community and play with their innards Patrick Bateman style. :ninja: :cmad: :hyper:

[Infinity9999x]

Actually, I wouldn't mind a radical change in the costume either, but not a Batman Beyond change, more of a change that made the suit simmilar to the comics.

And as to the cape thing, in the comics doesn't he have special clasps that allow him to remove the cape quickly if someone grabs it? In Hush he was able to take it off fairly quickly when he jumped into the water.

That would be a sensible thing to have too, because while I agree that "it's a superhero movie, lets not look into this too far" thing, it's not exactaly that nitpicky to think someone would grab his cape in a fight, and I don't care how slippery or how strong Bat's is, if someone grabs a cape that's connected to your neck region it could seriously throw you off, which is why I think it would be smart for him to have the quick release clasps.

[nightwing07]

yup hush batman
but plz no bat pants
that looks funny not intimidating lol

[iwalktheline92]

but plz no bat pants


bat pants????

[BatScot]

... asinine ideas like Batman having a shorter cape or no opening in the cowl or any other such retarded notions that completely changes the character's overall look simply because it is not "realistic enough"Like, for example, an all-black outfit.

[NoName86]

Are you freakin' kidding me? His cape dragging on the ground has been one of the distinct qualities of his appearance in the comics as well in Timm/Dini TAS. Just go watch the 'Laughing Fish' episode from TAS. Besides, there isn't a single scene in Begins where his cape 'drags' on the ground. The only scene that is close to anything like that is when he walks away from jumping through the horde of bats in Arkham. And even there, his cape doesn't exactly drag, but more like 'hovers' above the ground. For me, it was an amazingly cool visual touch.

And the glider gives the cape a functional purpose and is much more appropriate for someone who uses the symbol of a Bat - wide wingspan used for flight/gliding. It was one of the best ideas ever conceived for the character (Burton gets mad props for that :up: ), as in 'why didn't anyone think of this before? It makes so much sense'.

Yup, remember the part where he is flying up to where Ras Al Ghul is on that platform, and you hear all the screams.....then you see the cape and he lands......by far one of the more awesome scenes in the movie! And the part at the end where he flies out the back of the train with his cape spread....I love that part! Never take that away because it adds so much! I'd actually like to see more of those brooding in the shadow type deals..like he does in the animated series. Walking slowly towards some scared thugs with his cape dragging behind him.

And more scene on rooftops with his cape blowing in the wind. Nolan gave us a taste of that in Begins...and they say Nolan doesn't get it...he gets it more than any other director whose ever portrayed Batman...by far!

[NoName86]

bat pants????
I think he refers to the bat underwear...

[Deadpool876]

Look, I just attempted a half-hearted explanation for something that didn't need an explanation in the first place. I'm all for using 'realism' as a crutch to support your aesthetic choices, but not to the extent that one goes as far as to mutilate key identifiable features of the character. Nolan simply tried to make the character believable and plausible in his own universe, which is why anyone with half a brain can easily figure out BB is not 100% real nor it tries to be nor is it supposed to be.

And if you are in agreement with asinine ideas like Batman having a shorter cape or no opening in the cowl or any other such retarded notions that completely changes the character's overall look simply because it is not "realistic enough" ( it's a ****ing COMIC BOOK MOVIE for chrissakes! :rolleyes: ) , then you either don't love the character or completely fail to realize the visual significance of the above elements.

How is shortening the cape or at least not having it dragging on the ground mutilate key identifiable features of Batman? :huh: I know that even 1/4 of a brain can figure BB is not 100% real. No movie is. I know ''it's a ****ing COMIC BOOK MOVIE for chrissakes'' but I think there is no harm in introducing changes or adding realism to a comic-book movie.

In fact, all kinds of movies do that and recent comic book movies have done that and they were successful! Remember, studios that make comic book films target not just comic fans but casual movie-goers as well-- And to make these films appealing to them; they add some realism. How do you think BB and Spidey movies were successful? Because there were some realism and drama in them; things that normal people can relate to. And I believe adding more changes in Bats' suit will make TDK much more appealing.

And I don't think suggestions on changing the suit are 'retarded notions' If you're worried about non-Batmans not recognizing Bats when he is in a completely different suit, they will! They're not ignorant, they will know. In fact, they will say "Oh he has a different suit, cool!" You want an example of radical changes in suits; The X-Men! Bryan Singer introduce them with dark-colored suits; there were some howls but it turned out fine, CASUAL MOVIE FANS LIKED THE SUITS NOT JUST COMIC FANS! And the X-Men movies were a success! :cwink: So again, in my humblest opinion, I would like a change in the Batman suit even if it is a radical change. :word:

then you either don't love the character or completely fail to realize the visual significance of the above elements.

I don't love the character? Are you kidding? Got Batgirl's face on my underpants. :woot: Look, the bottomline is that I love the Batman so much that I'd love my suggestions on the Batsuit changes introduced in BB, it would be great because I think it would attract more movie-goers -- then it would translate in a bigger box-office so that means the studio will be happy and MAKE MORE BATMAN MOVIES. :cwink:

[Octoberist]

i don't know about the cape. I didn't mind it too much. Just make the suit less bulky and we'll be in biz-Ness

[Johnny Drama]

I wish there was some kind of forum chainsaw to hack up heathen members of the fanboy community and play with their innards Patrick Bateman style. :ninja: :cmad: :hyper:

Hahaha, thats not harsh or anything. :cwink:

I would like to see something similar to "Hush" but with black instead of blue. Say Dead End, but instead of spandex they can use the material they used for Spider-man. I also want the yellow oval. Say what you want but the oval is classic batman...
I also like the idea of having white lenses. They could be retractable, like from the top of his brow underneath the mask. Then the white covers his eyes and he can see in the dark.

[Cobblepot]

Even the Turtles could move, jump, kick, fly turn and much more. Why can't they design a Bat suit that allows for all this movement. I just don't get it...

[Nepenthes]

I've always wondered that. Maybe it's just Turtle Power....

[Cobblepot]

I want an answer dammit.

[dark_b]

who said that in the batsuit you can not movie like in the turtle suit?

[Banshee]

I've always thought the suits from the first turtle movie are vastly superior to all costumes. Not only do they look great but some how they seem really flexible too. As the turtles movie went on though the suits got worse somehow, like by the time they got to 3, the suits looked awful. Anyway, I agree entirely.

[Cobblepot]

Bale said it was hard to move.
That's not the point...the point is The Turtles could move, Bats couldn't.

[DAVIDYR1]

I just dont get this...
The Begins suit has great movement. The TMNT crease, fold and bend too...just that they're more organic in their look I guess we accept that as normal or natural. Heck, stand in front of the mirror topless and move your arm around...look at all the creases your skin makes...
The TNMT costumes are fantastic...Loved them!!! However the Begins suit is equally as flexible and allowing of movement. I dont see where Bale was having any trouble moving.
The real difference with the TNMT is that the head is a helmet and not attached to the neck so yea, head movement will be different there but the Begins cowl had great movement from where I was sitting.

The batsuit was fine...can it be better? Sure...and I'm sure they will look to improve on real issues that it may have had in the first go....real issues...:)

David

[Kleric]

Well in BB he moved pretty well. The only thing that is a hindrance is the mask. It has to form to his head and movement will cause gaps in the open mouth area. Which is why I think they designed it so tight. Unless it is segmented it would be very difficult to replicate the comic look. Remember in the original TMNT the whole head was fake and controlled by small motors to create facial expressions. They did not have the same concerns.

I have to agree with DavidYR1, (great to see you around the boards again, have to support my fellow Canadians!) this man knows his latex .... I meant that in a movie costume way not in a S&M way, although I prefer leather myself...sorry that was an over-share.

"You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, they do not exist." - Friedrich Nietzsche

[Muziko]

The Begins suit seemed to allow greater mobility than previous suits... and I think the torso piece was awesome - especially the symbol. However in some scenes it appears that Bale has/had a hard time moving his head - I'm tellin' ya, it's that extremely thick and bulbous cowl - let's just slim it all down folks, and we're good to go!

By the way... I liked the original TMNT movie... I like the way they gave each of the turtles their own physical features/charectaristics - you can see it in the faces the most. I think after that film, they got cheap and gave everyone the same face but a different color bandana/mask wrap to be able to tell who was who.

I can't wait to see the new BatSuit...

[starfighter]

T-u-r-t-l-e Power!

[Octoberist]

Bale said it was hard to move.
That's not the point...the point is The Turtles could move, Bats couldn't.

The friggin' guy above me already gave you the story: It's turtle power. End of the Story.

[Nepenthes]

Batman wears full body armour, it's like being encased in a complete protective shell. The turtles on the other hand are heroes in a half shell.

[dark_b]

Bale said it was hard to move.
That's not the point...the point is The Turtles could move, Bats couldn't.
two batman suits.
-beauty suit
-stunt suit

where the turtles movie so good are the stunt suits. i bet that bale talked about the beauty suit. i also bet that in the stunt suit(the suit in which bale didnt use a lot of times) they cuold move very good.

[Cobblepot]

Batman wears full body armour, it's like being encased in a complete protective shell. The turtles on the other hand are heroes in a half shell.

I think we got a winner here.

On all the other post above, BB didn't convince me that Bale could move all that great. If he could, why would Nolan cover it up with all those shaky cam fights.
In Turtles you have these four guys encased in full thick rubber, jumping of stuff doing flick flacks, double screws. I wan't to see Batman do that kind of stuff.

Bring it on. :woot:

[Fenrir]

The problem is the stiff neck portion of the cowl. The suit itself is very flexible, but then again, most of that new-found mobility is gone to waste because Bats still can't freely move his head.