Batsuit Discussion Thread

[Wams]

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

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

Clould be cool new look.

[LuiECuomo]

You know, by the third film I wouldn't mind if that's what it looked like. Very cool!

[The Fallen]

That pic really looks like "The Batman" to me. I'd rather leave the suit the way it is. Why do we need all these different suits? That's one of my major peevs in the Burton/Schumacher franchise... too many different suits.

[DA Harvey Dent]

That pic really looks like "The Batman" to me. I'd rather leave the suit the way it is. Why do we need all these different suits? That's one of my major peevs in the Burton/Schumacher franchise... too many different suits.

I gotta agree, if it works don't mess with it.

[KingOfDreams]

Not bad, though I'm not a fan of the gold. I never liked the yellow on his suit in the comics. If there's any prominant metallic color I think it should be silver. Well, maybe the gold would be okay in the bat crest but not on the utility belt. On the current movie costume I feel it stands out too much and the bat crest doesn't stand out enough.

[warren_sparta27]

the Begins suit is just fine the way it is, they shouldn't mess with it, not yet anyway.
besdies, how would you suppose Bruce got the suit? Fox just happens to have another military survival suit lying around?

[Saint]

No oval, and no bat-thong, please. Otherwise, it's a nice design but I don't really like how slanted everything is, and I would personally make the grey much darker.

[DeFett]

If they where to do the yellow/gold and black logo on the suit that's the way I'd want it to look ...cool design. Kinda reminds me of the new Superman Returns 3D logo.

[Wams]

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i271/nwonknu2k/DECObatman1.jpg

Here is another version..

[KingOfDreams]

and no bat-thong

I've always wondered whose idea it was to put undies on the outside of superheroes' costumes.

[Saint]

I've always wondered whose idea it was to put undies on the outside of superheroes' costumes.
I've got no problem with trunks--they look great in the comics. But those in the image above are too thong like.

[Saint]

http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i271/nwonknu2k/DECObatman1.jpg

Here is another version..
This one I like a great deal more. Of course, I'd drop the oval.

[StorminNorman]

No Golden Oval - it is......pointless. The black on black bat is 100% better IMO.

[Saint]

Great figure construction, by the way.

[Katsuro]

No yellow oval please. I dont care how writers justify it, it's just a bad idea. Batman's goal should be to not be seen as much as possible, it makes no sense for him to wear a giant target on his chest, regardless of any extra protection it may offer. Would you rather run around in front of a bunch of criminals with guns with a small metal plate covering your chest, or just plain not be seen at all? The black bat looks much cooler anyways.

[Thot]

Cool designs....but maybe a bit too artsy-fartsy for the Dark Knight. Heck of an artist though. Nolan should leave the suit pretty much alone. I have some nitpicks I'd like to see changed/modified, but the look as-is is great. It would make sense that Bruce would make some changes but they would have to serve a definite purpose. If I could change just one thing, it would be the ears. I would like to see them straighter and a bit longer. They look odd at certain angles. I think it would help reduce or eliminate the egg-head look as well.

[The-Night]

Like the old saying goes.........if it's not broke, why fix it?

[KingOfDreams]

I've got no problem with trunks--they look great in the comics. But those in the image above are too thong like.

Yeah, I don't mind them in the comics either I'm just wondering when and why the trend started. Is it because the costumes looked too empty or something?

[Saint]

I think it was inspired by wrestlers.

[Saint]

Pardon my hijacking Wams, but your designs inspired me to whip off one of my own. Kind of buggered the body, but oh well. Did a wuit colour mock up, too.
http://img112.imageshack.us/img112/548/batman23hm.jpg
http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/221/batman2b8db.jpg

[Nightwing1977]

Cool arts there. I dig it. But I rather good o' Batty not wear the yellow oval on his chest. He's suppose to be a Dark Knight, so no bright colors like yellow please. And I really dread the underwear on the outside look. That suit Superman fine instead of Batty. :p

[kytrigger]

Yeah, I don't mind them in the comics either I'm just wondering when and why the trend started. Is it because the costumes looked too empty or something?

I remember hearing that it was because of both wrestlers and the "strong man" weight lifters you would see at carnivals. The trunks were what they wore, and it was a symbol of great strength, so they included it on Superman, Batman, etc...

[General_Grievous]

Very cool art, I wonder where it came from? Is there no way of finding out?

Anyway, the Begins suit is perfect for me and requires no further enhancements - the cowl is explained, the way Bruce acquires the suit and the Bat-gadgets is perfectly logical, and even the arm gauntlets used are taken from his days when he trained with Ra's al Ghul.

I never liked the idea of Batman changing his suit every five minutes either, or him having a wardrobe full of spare suits, for example as seen in Batman Returns.

It makes the image of Batman seem more powerful if he has only the one suit.

[LexCorp]

Dont mess with a good thing. It took 4 films about Batman to get that suit right for me.

[Dark Knight88]

Dont mess with a good thing. It took 4 films about Batman to get that suit right for me.

Quite Right, if it's not broke don't fix it!

[LexCorp]

Quite Right, if it's not broke don't fix it!

Indeed Mr Knight

[GoldGoblin]

That pic really looks like "The Batman" to me. I'd rather leave the suit the way it is. Why do we need all these different suits? That's one of my major peevs in the Burton/Schumacher franchise... too many different suits.

^Exactly,keep the suit the way it is,we don't need to go through all that again.

[LexCorp]

^Exactly,keep the suit the way it is,we don't need to go through all that again.

Yes otherwise it will come back to Bat nipples!!

[ROBOCOP CPU001]

Whats wrong with the suit we have now?

nothing..

[LexCorp]

Whats wrong with the suit we have now?

nothing..

Yes everyone is seeing the light!!

[Two-Face]

Maybe we should ask Joel ****maker to came back:rolleyes:

[LexCorp]

Maybe we should ask Joel ****maker to came back:rolleyes:

Location Gotham?? What Gotham??

[Two-Face]

Location Gotham?? What Gotham??


Location Metropolis What Metropolis??:rolleyes:

[LexCorp]

Location Metropolis What Metropolis??:rolleyes:

Argh....damm ......... a great response...........:O

[ROBOCOP CPU001]

Yes everyone is seeing the light!!


junior..i saw the light many years ago.:up:

[LexCorp]

junior..i saw the light many years ago.:up:

Yes sir......:up:

[Wams]

Cool designs....but maybe a bit too artsy-fartsy for the Dark Knight. Heck of an artist though. Nolan should leave the suit pretty much alone. I have some nitpicks I'd like to see changed/modified, but the look as-is is great. It would make sense that Bruce would make some changes but they would have to serve a definite purpose. If I could change just one thing, it would be the ears. I would like to see them straighter and a bit longer. They look odd at certain angles. I think it would help reduce or eliminate the egg-head look as well.

All Batman's costumes are "artsy-fartsy":confused:
I think the oval is cool and kind of makes sense at a point in
Batman's career.
After everyone in Gotham knows at a certain point that
he is a man in a suit the scary costume aspect is gone.
then all he is left with is just a cool suit with a nice graphic.
Don't get me wrong Bat's is still feared....
The oval is a part of the history of Batman.
I tend to think that some of you guys try to make Batman to realistic
and sap out all the cool fun imagery and fun.
Im of the mind set that Batman should not be "realistic" but believable..:up:
The truth is BB suit still has major problems of mobility.
Foam latex tares easy unflexable and folds in joint areas.
Other than them just standing there..they are not what Bats should wear.
They just beautiful works of "artsy-fartsy" art.:up:

Wams

[Horror Business]

i'm not into the suit myself but goddamn that is some beautiful art. please do that again minus the yellow oval!

[lujho]

I may as well post mine here:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v217/lujho/MyDesigns/batmantights.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v217/lujho/MyDesigns/batmantightscolour.jpg

I think a costume change... even a quite radical one, is fine as long as it makes sense and is explained somehow in the film. You don't have to belabour the point, you don't have to explain every little aspect but it could be explained organically.

If you change the suit as radically as the designs in this thread though, I think the one thing you HAVE to retain from the first film is the FACE of the cowl. It doesn't have to be in the same material, it doesn't have to have the same ears or jaw or neck, but the brow and eye area have to be very, very similar to the last one. I think it needs to look like the same "character" and that means the face.

[Rynan]

Cyborg Batman, crime fighter of the future...

heh heh...codpiece..

[Ronny Shade]

I'd do one, but I'm busy.

PS I say no to the yellow oval.

[lujho]

If they ever have the oval back, I'd say make it SILVER. It keeps to the monochromatic scheme of Batman's design, and I think it'd look pretty cool. Maybe even make it a *circle*, rather than an oval, after all it's supposed to be the *moon*.

Still, plain bat it always my preference.

[batman44]

I must admit the I like the designs, even the oval (always like both the oval and plain bat). But I wouldn't change the costume too much from what we have now. Had BB started with that design, I would've been cool with it.

[The Batman]

The Oval is awesome. Since people like to complain about a yellow oval but like a yellow utility belt for some reason, the oval should be brinze or silver instead. Also, get rid of the codpiece/thong and its pretty much perfect...

[lujho]

Here's another of nine, an old one. An evolution of the Begins suit.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v217/lujho/MyDesigns/BatmanSaleAnim_05-newface-shinechest.jpg

[Ronny Shade]

apparently lujho is Tim Sale.

I like that. Looks like Begins w/o the cape clasps.

[El Payaso]

I find these Wan's concepts extremely good. :up: :up: :up:



I've always wondered whose idea it was to put undies on the outside of superheroes' costumes.

I ignore it, but that guy should die once and again.

[Katsuro]

apparently lujho is Tim Sale.

I like that. Looks like Begins w/o the cape clasps.

That's the funny thing about the internet. For all we know, we could have all kinds of famous people on these boards and not even know it. Maybe lujho is Tim Sale... Are you?

[batmaluco]

Dont mess with a good thing. It took 4 films about Batman to get that suit right for me.
:up:

[Ronny Shade]

That's the funny thing about the internet. For all we know, we could have all kinds of famous people on these boards and not even know it. Maybe lujho is Tim Sale... Are you?
It's obviously a Tim Sale drawing he used for the BG and layered his bat-pic on top of it.

[StorminNorman]

That's the funny thing about the internet. For all we know, we could have all kinds of famous people on these boards and not even know it. Maybe lujho is Tim Sale... Are you?

I am really General Norman Schwarzkopf

[lujho]

That's the funny thing about the internet. For all we know, we could have all kinds of famous people on these boards and not even know it. Maybe lujho is Tim Sale... Are you?

Uh-oh, I've been rumbled. :)

Seriously, If I was Tim Sale I wouldn't swipe a pose from my own art and place it over the same background. I wish I could draw like him, but sadly that's not the case.

[El Payaso]

Dont mess with a good thing.

Then why you mess with this?

[Wams]

It aint perfect.

[Dark Knight]

Found this on the Brotherhoodof the Bat board..:up:

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

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

Clould be cool new look.


No yellow oval for me. At least not yet. Maybe in the 3rd film from Nolan. I like the no yellow oval look personally and I always have....

[lujho]

Does anyone here think that maybe... maybe the designs posted in this thread by Wams are by whoever did those Year One designs for the Aronofsky project.

There's a strong similarity in the cowl details - could be that whoever drew it (and as far as I know we don't know who that wa) was just imitating that look, but there's something to the images overall that really reminds me of those earlier versions.

[batman44]

^ I noticed that myself.

[Mr. Socko]

I wouldn't mind the costume evolving to an oval yellow symbol later on in the 3rd maybe, but if not, it wouldn't bother me.

[Bathead]

I'm sorry, but I can't help it. Any black-grey Bat-costumes I've ever seen (even the short-lived ones in the comics) without the trunks looked wrong to me. The bodysuit looked too much like long underwear. An all black suit like in the movies looks fine without them, though.

[Saint]

I'm sorry, but I can't help it. Any black-grey Bat-costumes I've ever seen (even the short-lived ones in the comics) without the trunks looked wrong to me. The bodysuit looked too much like long underwear. An all black suit like in the movies looks fine without them, though.
Agreed. The only remedy I've seen is when they make the belt V-shaped; it seems to compensate for the lack of trunks. But I much prefer the trunks.

[The Kid]

Where's robins costume?

[lujho]

^ I noticed that myself.

They were actually first posted on the BOTB forum, by the same guy who posted all those mega-huge high-res studio shots of Batman on the white background.

The guy obviously has connections to the production, and that, combined with the fact that it looks like the same artist who did the Year One Designs (maybe the same guy worked on both projects?) AND the fact that the first design is very much approaching some of the concept art we did see for the Begins suit... well, I have a feeling these could be actual unseen production art from Begins - the stuff they didn't want to show us so it'd look like that came up with the final design right off the bat.

[Two-Face]

Where's robins costume?


It's in the bin...

[batman44]

They were actually first posted on the BOTB forum, by the same guy who posted all those mega-huge high-res studio shots of Batman on the white background.

The guy obviously has connections to the production, and that, combined with the fact that it looks like the same artist who did the Year One Designs (maybe the same guy worked on both projects?) AND the fact that the first design is very much approaching some of the concept art we did see for the Begins suit... well, I have a feeling these could be actual unseen production art from Begins - the stuff they didn't want to show us so it'd look like that came up with the final design right off the bat.

I believe there is alot of stuff they aren't showing. I was reading my Art of Batman Begins book the other day and found that they had multiple designs for Scarecrow's mask; said to have resembled a skull or leathery gas mask. I would love to see the all designs that were made for BB.

[Mr. Vice]

Just give the suit a black bat insignia and I'm satisfied:up:

[Dark Knight]

Where's robins costume?


is that Rosario Dawson from RENT in that avatar of yours?? :eek:

[StorminNorman]

is that Rosario Dawson from RENT in that avatar of yours?? :eek:

I think thats Jessica Alba.

[Wams]

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

Darker looks cool.:up:

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Not exactly what I would like to see on film, but those are some nicely drawn concept costumes. Great art guys.

[darknight7]

Here is the new look for Batman :cool: hehe. Just did this for fun and noticed there was one of these threads on here, so I figured I would post it. It is pretty much the progress I went through to get the mask to its final form (as you can see with the white eyes and square mouth opening) I was going for a HUSH BATMAN look. I don't think we will get this in the movie, but I thoguht it looked cool :)


GOPHERBOY (as my brother calls it) VS. BATMAN (hush style)
*edit*
http://img129.imageshack.us/img129/7715/gofermanvsbatman9gn.jpg

--dk7

[Mr. Socko]

The one in the top right and bottom left are perfect. I hate the old puffy jaws.

Is there a reason why they can never give Batman white eyes like in the comics...

[eXperiment]

Found this on the Brotherhoodof the Bat board..:up:

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

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

Clould be cool new look.

That is some fantastic artwork.

[Mr. Socko]

I agree, nice yellow oval.

[darknight7]

The one in the top right and bottom left are perfect. I hate the old puffy jaws.

Is there a reason why they can never give Batman white eyes like in the comics...

Batman wearing contacts isn't realistic. They would move around and possibly irritate(se) his eyes. If they were to build the lense into the cowl, you would not be able to see Batman's expression from his eyes. Which would take away from the character. :down: unfortunately those are the reasons. (in my opinion)

But I was wondering, you would rather see a bigger mouth hole? and spread apart ears? For Batman in the sequal.

--dk7

[darknight7]

GOPHERBOY (as my brother calls it) VS. BATMAN (hush style)
*edit*
http://img129.imageshack.us/img129/7715/gofermanvsbatman9gn.jpg

The more I look at this picture, the tougher the right image looks. SQUARE JAW ALL THE WAY:cool: WOOT!

--dk7

[StorminNorman]

The one in the top right and bottom left are perfect. I hate the old puffy jaws.

Is there a reason why they can never give Batman white eyes like in the comics...

Taking away an actors eye's takes away one of his most powerful tools. This case is especially true in the case of Christian Bale who almost speaks more through his eyes than his mouth.

[Ronny Shade]

Taking away an actors eye's takes away one of his most powerful tools. This case is especially true in the case of Christian Bale who almost speaks more through his eyes than his mouth.
Exactly. I would have been in support of white lenses for Keaton, Kilmer or Clooney, but Bale's eyes are so expressive and really a very powerful part of his Batman. Don't take them away from him.

[Ronny Shade]

http://img114.imageshack.us/img114/2623/lenses4ir.jpg
(With lenses instead of contacts)

Watch Batman: Dead End. Contacts look terrible.

[ToddIsDead]

I think thats Jessica Alba.
It was Rossario Dawson from Clerks 2.

[StorminNorman]

It was Rossario Dawson from Clerks 2.

Darn, wrong again......atleast they were in the same movie at one point :( :o

[Ronny Shade]

Since when is there a Clerks 2?? :confused:

[ToddIsDead]

There are already two trailers out. I believe the movie is being released this summer.

[Ronny Shade]

Hm. Intriguing. I had no idea. Kevin Smith to direct?

[Mr. Socko]

Batman wearing contacts isn't realistic. They would move around and possibly irritate(se) his eyes. If they were to build the lense into the cowl, you would not be able to see Batman's expression from his eyes. Which would take away from the character. :down: unfortunately those are the reasons. (in my opinion)

But I was wondering, you would rather see a bigger mouth hole? and spread apart ears? For Batman in the sequal.

--dk7

Bigger mouth hole, Yes. The ears are fine the way they are.

http://img114.imageshack.us/img114/2623/lenses4ir.jpg
(With lenses instead of contacts)

Watch Batman: Dead End. Contacts look terrible.

Who said anything about contacts? If they were to make the eyes white then it should be professionally done in postproduction by blending the pupil to the white color of the rest of the eye.

Kinda like how Tion Midion's eyes were done.

Yeah, the contacts looked bad in Dead End because white contacts on black pupils only make the pupils look light grey.

[ToddIsDead]

Hm. Intriguing. I had no idea. Kevin Smith to direct?
Yep. Written and directed. I think it's been wrapped for awhile. He promissed that he'd make the movie if Jason Mewes cleaned himself up, and he did, so they made the movie. There's a thread for it in the Misc. Film section.

[Mr. Socko]

Click here for Dead End close-up (http://fp.ignatz.plus.com/images/Batman%20Dead%20End%20Bats%20mugshot%20still_24lr. jpg)

Click the link and see how bad it looks, the eyes just look grey. But the Sandman gets credit for atleast trying to make it look the most like the comic book Batman. But sometimes making everything exactly like the comic can be bad.

[Ronny Shade]

Who said anything about contacts? If they were to make the eyes white then it should be professionally done in postproduction by blending the pupil to the white color of the rest of the eye.

Kinda like how Tion Midion's eyes were done.

Yeah, the contacts looked bad in Dead End because white contacts on black pupils only make the pupils look light grey.
I don't know who Tion Midion is.

How would you explain white eyes then? Magic?

[Mr. Socko]

I don't know who Tion Midion is.

How would you explain white eyes then? Magic?

Tion Midion is a guy from Star Wars and his eyes are completely black.

Lol idk, how is it explained in the comics? But some choices are...

1. No explination

2. MAGIC!

[Ronny Shade]

No matter how realistic they get, the comics are still an inherently symbolic and stylistic medium.

[Mr. Socko]

No matter how realistic they get, the comics are still an inherently symbolic and stylistic medium.

Unless you're talking about Sin City which is just as inherently symbolic and stylistic, actually even more, then the comics.

[Threshold]

They should go the Spider-Man/Spider-Man 2 route and just make minor adjustments and tweaks to the costume to enhance it, but to the mass majority of the the viewers, it'd look like the same costume.

[lujho]

GOPHERBOY (as my brother calls it) VS. BATMAN (hush style)
*edit*
http://img129.imageshack.us/img129/7715/gofermanvsbatman9gn.jpg

The more I look at this picture, the tougher the right image looks. SQUARE JAW ALL THE WAY:cool: WOOT!

--dk7

Wow, love the mouth-hole, that's great - much cooler looking than the real one - that's how it's *supposed* to look. Ears are better too.

Another thing about the cowl though - a lot of people including myself feel the "jaw bone" is too wide, but another thing I feel is that the jaw goes too far back - from the looks of it it goes back much farther than a person's jaw actually would.

I want the whole jaw in the next film to conform much more closely to Bale's - sure, square it up a bit, but just a bit. Don't bulk it so much up and deform it from real human anatomy.

[ragdus]

The jaw bone on that cowl is about as spot on as you can get. feel with your fingers when your head is in a similar orientation how far back into your neck your jaw actually goes. that's not deforming anatomy at all.

you gotta remember they make those masks by molding his face and head. sure, they can goof with things like the eyebrows to over exaggerate them. but you can't in the neck/jaw area because it would crease in extremely odd areas when he moved and talked.

personally, i like the the look of the cowl in the film as opposed to this new photomanip. they both look good, but to me the original looks more like how a real functional cowl would need to be practically shape.

[Super_Ludacris]

What I dont think some people get is, the suits are gonna change. Because as Bruce comes up with new gadgets and gear (well Fox will) your gonna see changes. Obviously the tumbler will evolutionise into the batmobile and as new innovative things are found the suit may change too.
But that first pic aint so bad

[not_a_victim]

I know (or at least think) that ONE of the reasons for the white lenses is to make Bats seem less human, but if that is the case, the cowl could be made to better resemble a bat.
I like all the art here, but almost all the full-body shots seem to be progressing towards Star Wars Stormtroopers, with armor plates and all.
However, I do appreciate the art, I wish I was as talented as the posters who do this stuff

[regwec]

They could pretty much make the existing suit perfect with just a scalpel and some spray paint. It needs only a trim here and some colour definition there.

[Darkred]

i hope they dont change the tumbler much.

[darknight7]

Wow, love the mouth-hole, that's great - much cooler looking than the real one - that's how it's *supposed* to look. Ears are better too.

Another thing about the cowl though - a lot of people including myself feel the "jaw bone" is too wide, but another thing I feel is that the jaw goes too far back - from the looks of it it goes back much farther than a person's jaw actually would.

I want the whole jaw in the next film to conform much more closely to Bale's - sure, square it up a bit, but just a bit. Don't bulk it so much up and deform it from real human anatomy.

Smaller Jaw...
http://img454.imageshack.us/img454/8502/jawfix4kp.jpg
--dk7

[Two-Face]

I don't like the lenses on Bale. :down:

[darknight7]

HOW ABOUT!?!?! Angelic BATMAN! lol. OBVIOUSLY, this would never happen, and I am joking. But I always have liked Batman in white, it is SOO different that it is cool in a way.

http://img473.imageshack.us/img473/4607/angel3cd.jpg

--dk7

[darknight7]

I don't like the lenses on Bale. :down:

Not lenses TwoFace...

...Contacts. :)

Okay, I am being a smartass. But you know what I mean. Contacts, you can see his emotion. Lenses you can't. That is why contacts look cool to me. (even though they are not realistic for a man fighting crime).

--dk7

[Two-Face]

Edit

[lujho]

Smaller Jaw...
http://img454.imageshack.us/img454/8502/jawfix4kp.jpg
--dk7

Yeah, that's definitely closer to reality.

I have to respectfully disagree with ragdus - the actual cowl's jaw is *definitely* way further back than Bales actual jaw, it almost goes past his ear.

You can tell by comparing profile shots of him in and out of the cowl - if anyone can find a straight-on profile of Bale in the cowl that's well-lit, I'd love to have it so I demonstrate this. I've got a good shot of Bale cowl-less, which I can then overlay on the cowl - unfortunately there are no direct profile shots where you can see the jaw that I can find.

[darknight7]

http://img114.imageshack.us/img114/2623/lenses4ir.jpg
(With lenses instead of contacts)

Watch Batman: Dead End. Contacts look terrible.


I know that you probably did that rendering of the mask pretty quick. So I don't mean to be a jerk and try to outstage it or whatever. But in my opinion, if they were going to make Batman with lenses, they would be shaped to Batman's eyes from the comics (just like Spiderman's were shaped to resemble his comics). They would be slits, to make him more intimidating. Sort of like this:

**IN NO WAY IS THIS COOL BY ANY MEANS.lol. I did it really quickly, just to get an idea of what they would look like, shaped like Batman eyes. lol. It looks pretty bad lol.**

http://img130.imageshack.us/img130/3452/angel2qx.jpg

--dk7

[lujho]

I know that you probably did that rendering of the mask pretty quick. So I don't mean to be a jerk and try to outstage it or whatever. But in my opinion, if they were going to make Batman with lenses, they would be shaped to Batman's eyes from the comics (just like Spiderman's were shaped to resemble his comics). They would be slits, to make him more intimidating. Sort of like this:

**IN NO WAY IS THIS COOL BY ANY MEANS.lol. I did it really quickly, just to get an idea of what they would look like, shaped like Batman eyes. lol. It looks pretty bad lol.**

http://img130.imageshack.us/img130/3452/angel2qx.jpg

--dk7

I don't think they're quite the right shape, but the smaller size is definitely closer to what lenses would have to be. The certainly can't be big round things like the existing eyeholes on the Begins cowl.

[darknight7]

I don't think they're quite the right shape, but the smaller size is definitely closer to what lenses would have to be. The certainly can't be big round things like the existing eyeholes on the Begins cowl.

Exactly! I know that is a crap job, I am feeling pretty lazy right now. lol. I know they are too square-ish looking, but I was trying to make them practicle, and easy to see out of. (That is another thing, if the mask had lenses, I think it would mess with his peripheral vision.

--dk7

[lujho]

Okay... this is a work in progress, only one eye is done... I don't know if I'll do the other, or make any other changes to other parts of the cowl, but... here is, if I do say so myself, the best lens manip I've seen (best I've done, certainly).

Not perfect, but gives a better idea of how I'd like to see lenses done at least.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v217/lujho/MyDesigns/Batlensescool.jpg

And for those who need to see the eyes - semi-transparebt lenses, with different methods of lighting, will allow that when it's neccessary - close-ups etc.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v217/lujho/MyDesigns/Batlensescooltrans.jpg

In long wide shots, you'll just be able to see the glowing reflections... OR, with different lighting, you could not have any reflection at all for a hooded, empty socket look.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v217/lujho/MyDesigns/Batlensescoolnoeyes.jpg

Add some prosthetic-like brow movement and the possibilities for various iconic cinematic looks and ways to express emotion FAR outweigh any other way of doing it.

Eat that, lens-haters.

Thanks to darknight7 for the original manip - hope you don't mind me using that as a basis, but I though it was a pretty good alteration.

[Super_Ludacris]

I dont think we need white lenses/contacts on Bale.

[Two-Face]

Yes I agree Super.

[Super_Ludacris]

Besides as people have said like Keaton, Bale's eyes strike are meant to show an intensity and fear (well meant to)

[Ronny Shade]

I know that you probably did that rendering of the mask pretty quick. So I don't mean to be a jerk and try to outstage it or whatever. But in my opinion, if they were going to make Batman with lenses, they would be shaped to Batman's eyes from the comics (just like Spiderman's were shaped to resemble his comics). They would be slits, to make him more intimidating. Sort of like this:

**IN NO WAY IS THIS COOL BY ANY MEANS.lol. I did it really quickly, just to get an idea of what they would look like, shaped like Batman eyes. lol. It looks pretty bad lol.**

http://img130.imageshack.us/img130/3452/angel2qx.jpg

--dk7

Yeah I did do it pretty quickly. Looks like you did too. I don't think either of us have the right shape down.

I say think the Daredevil lenses, but white. Don't have time to do another crappy manip.

[Boom]

GOPHERBOY (as my brother calls it) VS. BATMAN (hush style)
*edit*
http://img129.imageshack.us/img129/7715/gofermanvsbatman9gn.jpg

The more I look at this picture, the tougher the right image looks. SQUARE JAW ALL THE WAY:cool: WOOT!

--dk7
The one on the right is so much better that it sickens me.

[Super_Ludacris]

He looks like he's possesed

[Seen]

Does anyone here think that maybe... maybe the designs posted in this thread by Wams are by whoever did those Year One designs for the Aronofsky project.

There's a strong similarity in the cowl details - could be that whoever drew it (and as far as I know we don't know who that wa) was just imitating that look, but there's something to the images overall that really reminds me of those earlier versions.

I think the Aronosfky designs were a bit more amatuerish than these.

[darknight7]

The one on the right is so much better that it sickens me.


agreed:O lol

--dk7

[Two-Face]

Not lenses TwoFace...

...Contacts. :)

Okay, I am being a smartass. But you know what I mean. Contacts, you can see his emotion. Lenses you can't. That is why contacts look cool to me. (even though they are not realistic for a man fighting crime).

--dk7

Ok then I do NOT want to see contacts, I'm not big fan of them on Batman.

[nogster]

the begins suit was near perfect. near..
the cape should wrap all the way around him. not have those clasps.
i hope in the sequel we see a wrap around cape. thats the way batman is supposed to look like.

[darknight7]

He looks like he's possesed

I think it makes him look badass. The lenses would hide his emotion, but contacts definately wouldn't. They would just make him scarier. More of a creature. But it will never be done because it is too unrealistic. Although he does take the time to paint around his eyes, he is not going to take the time to put in contacts. Plus, they are dangerous. If his eyes get itchy, or if his contact falls out, or slips up under his eyelid. That is why we will never see contacts. And that is fine, but as for the look, I think it is super bad ass monster-ish. :)

--dk7

[darknight7]

Lujho, if you don't mind. I took the honours of adding in the second lense. You said it was work in progress and that you MIGHT not complete it, so I just copied and pasted the one you had done and added to the other side, just to see what it would look like, and figured I would show everyone on here as well. And I am sure if you decide to complete it that it will look much better, but it is a rough idea, and looks great (thanks to you).

So this is for the LENSE fans and the EYES fans. lol.

LENSES vs BARE EYES
http://img56.imageshack.us/img56/5293/batlensescool28gx.jpg

(if they decided to upgrade the mask, without lenses, I would want it to look like that image on the right)

--dk7

[Mr. Socko]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v217/lujho/MyDesigns/Batlensescool.jpg

That right(our left) eye looks amazing! Just do the other. Oh and really just noticed the ears lol, they look pretty good too. But the first thing to be changed should be those huge side jaws Bale has in the suit.

But changes will definitely be made, hopefully they change the jaw, take off the clasps and make it a part of the suit, Some cool lenses would be nice but not needed, put the beginning of the cape under the end of the cowl like in the comics and kinda like in Batman '89. I like the industrial bodysuit look so I think they should keep it, maybe modify it a bit.

But Batman will definitely have a new costume, they never take out the same costumes(especially Bat-suits) from the previous films and use them in the sequel. New ones are always made.

Edit: Oh and make the mouth-piece Bigger, Batman's mouth piece has never been small in the comics like that.

[Mr. Vice]

Lujho, if you don't mind. I took the honours of adding in the second lense. You said it was work in progress and that you MIGHT not complete it, so I just copied and pasted the one you had done and added to the other side, just to see what it would look like, and figured I would show everyone on here as well. And I am sure if you decide to complete it that it will look much better, but it is a rough idea, and looks great (thanks to you).

So this is for the LENSE fans and the EYES fans. lol.

LENSES vs BARE EYES
http://img56.imageshack.us/img56/5293/batlensescool28gx.jpg

(if they decided to upgrade the mask, without lenses, I would want it to look like that image on the right)

--dk7

I agree. I think it would be hard to make the lenses serve a purpose in Nolan's bat universe(except maybe for night vision).

[Boom]

I agree. I think it would be hard to make the lenses serve a purpose in Nolan's bat universe(except maybe for night vision).
EYE.PROTECTION.

[Mr. Vice]

EYE.PROTECTION.

:( I still don't buy it...

[Boom]

:( I still don't buy it...
Suit yourself.

But if I were a vigilante, going up against knives, bullets, and poisonous substances, I'd want my eyes safe. Can't fight much crime when you're BLIND, can you?

[Mr. Socko]

Suit yourself.

But if I were a vigilante, going up against knives, bullets, and poisonous substances, I'd want my eyes safe. Can't fight much crime when you're BLIND, can you?

Genius!

Another great reason. The only part un-protected then would be mouth which Batman could just put his arm/cape across his mouth to cover when being blasted with bullets. But would someone wearing all the armor really block their eyes with their hands, not to mention they wouldn't be able to see.

[Super_Ludacris]

He already would look blind with those lenses lol

[Mr. Vice]

:mad: The lenses would be even more harmful for Batman while fighting crime. Those oh so shiny lenses would make him a easier target for his enemies to shoot at or stab at. And I know DAMN well that some lenses are not indestructible.:o

[darknight7]

Suit yourself.

But if I were a vigilante, going up against knives, bullets, and poisonous substances, I'd want my eyes safe. Can't fight much crime when you're BLIND, can you?

Very very very VERYYYYYY well said. It is true that the contacts would not work in Nolan's world. BUT, lenses would definately be something a hero would want to wear for protection. Not just knives, bullets, and poison. But think about when he is gliding, or on top of a moving vehicle. It is not easy to keep your eyes open without them watering. And if he was to fight some dirty fighter, the guy could try to throw stuff in his eyes. The lenses, in my opinion, are a great idea. I am now all for the lenses.:)

PS: if this is suposed to be different than Burton's films, than add the lense:)

--dk7

[Boom]

He already would look blind with those lenses lol
At least he WOULDN'T be.

[Super_Ludacris]

But then people would argue that the lense thing had never been mentioned before. Besides it seems like in cartoons and comics characters in masks just seemed to be drawn without eyes lol

[darknight7]

:mad: The lenses would be even more harmful for Batman while fighting crime. Those oh so shiny lenses would make him a easier target for his enemies to shoot at or stab at. And I know DAMN well that some lenses are not indestructible.:o

Make them glare-free. My glasses are glare-free. Therefore they don't reflect light. As for making them indistructible. I am sure there is clear substance out there that can stop knives (bullet proof glass).

--dk7

[Mr. Socko]

He already would look blind with those lenses lol

He also LOOKS like a bat, but is he one?

:mad: The lenses would be even more harmful for Batman while fighting crime. Those oh so shiny lenses would make him a easier target for his enemies to shoot at or stab at. And I know DAMN well that some lenses are not indestructible.:o

But Batman's are...

Very very very VERYYYYYY well said. It is true that the contacts would not work in Nolan's world. BUT, lenses would definately be something a hero would want to wear for protection. Not just knives, bullets, and poison. But think about when he is gliding, or on top of a moving vehicle. It is not easy to keep your eyes open without them watering. And if he was to fight some dirty fighter, the guy could try to throw stuff in his eyes. The lenses, in my opinion, are a great idea. I am now all for the lenses.:)

PS: if this is suposed to be different than Burton's films, than add the lense:)

--dk7

I concur after looking at those cool manip lenses

[Super_Ludacris]

He'd be blind as a bat

[Mr. Vice]

Don't take this the wrong way. I love the lenses in the comic book, they look magnificant and give Batman a cold stare. But I just think it would be odd to see that translated to live action picture and it would be difficult all around(Like do you really think you could see well with some lenses in the EXACT same shape of your eyes? Bale would kick the costume designer's a$$ for making even harder to play the greatest of all time.)

[Mr. Socko]

Thats why they shouldn't be EXACTLY the same shape as his eyes.

[Mr. Socko]

He'd be blind as a bat

And he looks like one too!

[darknight7]

Here is why we didn't get a square mouth cut. because Bale has a thin face, not a square jaw. Just incase no one knew that already...lol

http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/1205/christian20bale23nh.jpg


--dk7

[Mr. Socko]

Here is why we didn't get a square mouth cut. because Bale has a thin face, not a square jaw. Just incase no one knew that already...lol

http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/1205/christian20bale23nh.jpg


--dk7

Good point but the cowl jaw still shouldn't be so wide

[darknight7]

Good point but the cowl jaw still shouldn't be so wide

Exactly. I actually came to a conclusion while on photoshop, I will post the pic in a minute. The mask could not have a square mouth opening because Bale has a thin face. AND, because they didn't want the mask to open up when Bale turned his head (Like Keaton in Batman Returns, his mask opened up so much when he turned). PLUS, it conceles his identity more. So in my opinion, if the mask wasn't so ROUND, and had straighter ears (not so much behind his head like a gopher) than he would look much better. Although I like the square jaw look, it cannot be done with Bale. But the ears and roundness off the head could be worked on. I shall post.:)

--dk7

[Mr. Socko]

I hate when Keaton's mask would open up like that. It looked cheap.

[darknight7]

Here, this is about as much as they could cut open the mouth on Bale, due to his face being thin. And the pic on the left, is what the mask would look like if they changed the ears, and made the mask a little less round.
http://img45.imageshack.us/img45/7757/batman18hm.jpg


*EDIT*
Look at the left picture. I erased the shine on the cowl that made it look round. Just to give it a more straight look.
http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/1133/batman18oo.jpg


--dk7

[Mr. Socko]

Great work! I love your ears, mouth piece, and erasing the shine worked very well.

I also think they should slightly change the facial expression on the cowl.

[Super_Ludacris]

lol@ the surgery game on the cowl

[darknight7]

Im done for the night, this stuff is tiring. :)lol. Nah, I'm just lazy.

Take care everyone.

--dk7

[Mr. Socko]

lol@ the surgery game on the cowl

Lol, good way to put it.

[Mr. Socko]

Im done for the night, this stuff is tiring. :)lol. Nah, I'm just lazy.

Take care everyone.

--dk7

Bye, "See ya soon."

Edit: Another thing is the Bat-symbol. It's dumb that Batman has the old Bat-symbol on his suit but everything else is the new Begins symbol including the Bat-signal. They should put the new Begins symbol on the chest.

[GothicPowerMix1]

Hell ****ing No

Keep The Costume The Same

[Mr. Vice]

Edit: Another thing is the Bat-symbol. It's dumb that Batman has the old Bat-symbol on his suit but everything else is the new Begins symbol including the Bat-signal. They should put the new Begins symbol on the chest.

The official "BEGINS" bat-logo wouldn't work on his chest. That's why they went with the Jim Lee-esque bat insignia.:up:

[explode7]

Hell ****ing No

Keep The Costume The Same

:up:

[Mr. Socko]

The official "BEGINS" bat-logo wouldn't work on his chest. That's why they went with the Jim Lee-esque bat insignia.:up:

Yeah, I heard that before too but why couldn't it work?

I thought I saw early photos of the bat-suit with the Begins logo on it but it might have been just a good manip.

[Mr. Socko]

Hell ****ing No

Keep The Costume The Same

Sorry to burst your bubble but it won't be the same. Even if it's just a slight color change in the cape to match it exactly as the kevlar.

[Mr. Vice]

Yeah, I heard that before too but why couldn't it work?


Find a manip with the "BEGINS" logo on Batman and you'll know why...;)

[trustyside-kick]

Found this on the Brotherhoodof the Bat board..:up:

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

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

Clould be cool new look.

Interesting look. But the current one that was used in Batman Begins is good to stick with. Only thing I would like to see changed as a "new" look for him would be the cowl...the neck and everything.

[not_a_victim]

I know that you probably did that rendering of the mask pretty quick. So I don't mean to be a jerk and try to outstage it or whatever. But in my opinion, if they were going to make Batman with lenses, they would be shaped to Batman's eyes from the comics (just like Spiderman's were shaped to resemble his comics). They would be slits, to make him more intimidating. Sort of like this:

**IN NO WAY IS THIS COOL BY ANY MEANS.lol. I did it really quickly, just to get an idea of what they would look like, shaped like Batman eyes. lol. It looks pretty bad lol.**

http://img130.imageshack.us/img130/3452/angel2qx.jpg

--dk7

Now this is what I am talking about. I love the shape of the "eyes" here. And in all actuality, it could easily be accomplished by having Bats but on a sort of visor under the cowl. the visor would hold the white lenses. I could even be like a cloth visor tied in the back, or on a string like swimmers' goggles.
Awesome

[SINISTER SMILE]

i think with the lenses it makes him look alot less recognizable as bruce wayne which is the whole purpose of the mask in the first place...so the lenses have my vote..and it can be explained in a realistic fashion..chris nolan didnt refresh the franchise with a team of idiots, these ppl know what there doing..so yea ALL FOR LENSES PLEASE WARNER BROTHERS

[lujho]

I think the Aronosfky designs were a bit more amatuerish than these.

They were less refined, but that just means there's more effort put in to these. The resemblance in the cowl (especially the brow and lenses) is quite uncanny.

I brought up my theory that these were real concept art from Begins on the thread on the BOTB forum where these first appeared. The guy who posted them didn't deny it, all he said was that there was more to come. The fact that he had access to some amazing quiality Batman photos that only someone connected to the production would have and the fact that he's keeping mum about my theory, leads me to think I'm pretty close to the mark. Christ, the guy may be the artist for all I know - he's a very mysterious poster on the BOTB - all he does that I've seen is post pictures no-one else would have, unless he was "connected" to the production somehow.

If they are real concept designs, I hope we see a lot more of that kind of stuff on the HD-DVD version of Begins, which will hopefully be a much more exhaustive look at the film than the existing 2-disc DVD (which wasn't all that "meaty").

[lujho]

EYE.PROTECTION.

This is the only required justification, BUT there's also eye concealment - not a huge issue, but it makes eye colour one less thing witnessess could say about Batman.

Plus there's the psychological aspect - from a distance the eyes would often appear demonic and inhuman - and up close, when he's staring you in the eye, blank, shining slits would be very un-nerving - you could see only yourself.

Honestly, it's not a case of either option (lenses or no lenses) being better than the other, but there is a lot to say in favour of the lenses option - originality being another big thing - it'd be another way the suit significantly different from the previous ones.

I think just adding a thin goggle-like eyemask under the cowl (instead of paint, basically) would be one way to add lenses to the current cowl without modifying it - not-a-victim brought it up, and it has been mentioned before.

Smallish lenses, if close enough to the face, would not hamper vision in any way that mattered - I never heard of Affleck being unable to act* or fight in his DD mask.

* yeah, maybe he can't act, but it had nothing to do with his vision.

[Super_Ludacris]

Seriously guys, no lenses. Let it go

[lujho]

Seriously guys, no innovation, no creativity...

[regwec]

And no opinions, dammit! :mad:

[Super_Ludacris]

Come on, let's call a spade a spade. This ideas is corny. This is almost as bad as the discussions back in the day on whether Batman should have a Grey and Blue outift (2003)

[regwec]

There is nothing wrong with either discussion, other than that you are satisfied with the status-quo.

[lujho]

Come on, let's call a spade a spade. This ideas is corny. This is almost as bad as the discussions back in the day on whether Batman should have a Grey and Blue outift (2003)

What a load of utter crap. It's no more corny than the entire concept of the Batsuit itself (which is not alltogether un-corny - it's inherently silly).

Batman is portrayed as having scary piercing white eyes - it started out as just a stylistic choice with no explanation, and later has been explained by lenses - But in any case what's wrong with attempting to find a way to replicate that? What's wrong with wanting to make Batman look more like Batman?

[Super_Ludacris]

There's nothing wrong with discussing but it's gonna look stupid. And knowing the flip-flop style of people here, I gaurntee half the dudes here who are pushing for the idea will be like sheep if the general audience goes "what the hell?" at the lenses and say "Oh you know Nolan didnt have to do that". It happens but if you wanna dwell on something that aint gonna happen, do it.

[Super_Ludacris]

What a load of utter crap. It's no more corny than the entire concept of the Batsuit itself (which is not alltogether un-corny - it's inherently silly).

Batman is portrayed as having scary piercing white eyes - it started out as just a stylistic choice with no explanation, and later has been explained by lenses - But in any case what's wrong with attempting to find a way to replicate that? What's wrong with wanting to make Batman look more like Batman?


Cause he already looks like Batman lol. I dont get why animators draw masked heroes with no eyes but in there live action adaptations it never happens and explaining it like that sounds so forced. Then wouldnt he need to protect the rest of his face? Not just the eyes? Uh oh then there goes the mouth part.
It aint really a Batman mask then. You draw all the manips of it you want....it aint gonna happen you know that right? lol

[Milkman95]

I wouldn't mind lenses, but I'd rather have them black, with him having night-vision with the kind of lenses they are..........

I'd make very minimal upgrades to the suit, but overall, keep it the same.

[regwec]

There's nothing wrong with discussing but it's gonna look stupid.
We have already seen that it doesn't look stupid.

[darknight7]

LENSES DAMMNIT:cool:

hehe:)

--dk7

[lujho]

Cause he already looks like Batman lol.

But he could look MORE like it.

I dont get why animators draw masked heroes with no eyes but in there live action adaptations it never happens and explaining it like that sounds so forced.

Was it forced with Spider-Man? Daredevil?

Then wouldnt he need to protect the rest of his face? Not just the eyes? Uh oh then there goes the mouth part.

Do swimmers wear full-face masks, or just goggles? Do you need your whole face covered to protect your eyes from wind, or being poked in the eye, or spashed? The eyes are a more vital area to protect, which is why in real life, there are many, many examples where the eyes are protected (from wind, water, projectiles, chemicals) and not the rest of the face.

It aint really a Batman mask then. You draw all the manips of it you want....it aint gonna happen you know that right? lol

Probably not. That doesn't mean I can't talk about how I want it to be.

Honestly, the whole lens issue, for me... it's all about this. I want this:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v217/lujho/BatmanEyes02.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v217/lujho/BatmanEyes03.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v217/lujho/BatmanEyes04.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v217/lujho/BatmanEyes05.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v217/lujho/BatmanEyes06.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v217/lujho/BatmanEyes07.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v217/lujho/BatmanEyes01.jpg

Now what is wrong with wanting something that looks as good as that? Why not try to achieve something so cool? Don't trot out the old "what works in a drawing..." claptrap either. Film is a medium to be visually creative in - especially comic-based films. I'm just glad the people making films like Sin City and 300 don't think like some of you guys. I'm not asking for something cartoony or superstylised... but you CAN emulate/approximate this look in live action, and it saddens me that no-one has the creative spark or guts to try. It's dead boring, especially after 5 films.

[darknight7]

In my opinion, there are more reasons to ADD the lenses; than there is to not add them. Because the positives outway the negatives.

1.) As much as peopl say it would look stupid, it wouldn't. These guys are professional and know what they are doing, and would make it cool. (or maybe not because they would have gotten the mask right the first time, hehe jokes)

2.) Protection, ya there is his mouth, but that was Bob Kane's doing (the man is a genius). It is how he started Batman's mask. But Batman DID have lenses in the comics, in the cartoons. THIS IS A COMIC BOOK MOVIE PEOPLE:)

3.) From far distance, his appearance of having no eyes would be horrific. It would make him even more intimidating.

4.) Up close, even scarier. It will scare the crap out of people even more, looking into these blank eyes, where there is nothing, but cold, and darkness.

5.) Obviously the identity factor. It will conceal his identity better. Make him less recognizable as a human being also.

6.) The night vision could be added, which would give him an up on his oponents even more than he already has.

7.) The fact that it would make it even more original than the Burton films.

It all adds up guys. It is more original, more true to the comics, scarier, safe, and helpful. There are so many positives to the lenses if done correctly. :) They could work, they would work, they SHOULD WORK!

Lenses... ...Dammnit!

--dk7

[darknight7]

But he could look MORE like it.



Was it forced with Spider-Man? Daredevil?



Do swimmers wear full-face masks, or just goggles? Do you need your whole face covered to protect your eyes from wind, or being poked in the eye, or spashed? The eyes are a more vital area to protect, which is why in real life, there are many, many examples where the eyes are protected (from wind, water, projectiles, chemicals) and not the rest of the face.



Probably not. That doesn't mean I can't talk about how I want it to be.

Honestly, the whole lens issue, for me... it's all about this. I want this:


Now what is wrong with wanting something that looks as good as that? Why not try to achieve something so cool? Don't trot out the old "what works in a drawing..." claptrap either. Film is a medium to be visually creative in - especially comic-based films. I'm just glad the people making films like Sin City and 300 don't think like some of you guys. I'm not asking for something cartoony or superstylised... but you CAN emulate/approximate this look in live action, and it saddens me that no-one has the creative spark or guts to try. It's dead boring, especially after 5 films.



VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY well said, and presented. I like your thinking. :up::cool:

--dk7

[ragdus]

here's why you don't have huge white lenses:

when fighting in the dark, which batman does A TON of, you can't easily pick out his eyes, thus can't easily go after them. He might as well paint huge bulls-eyes so every jag thug goes straight for them.

You don't do the white lenses for the same reason thousands of critters on this planet have spots that look like eyes... so you don't draw attention to your REAL eyes.

[Ronny Shade]

The bottom line is in the animated series and in the comics, Batman's white eyes can be expressive. He shows emotion with them...narrow for anger or determination, wide for surprise, etc. RIGID LENSES CAN'T DO THIS. White contact lenses will either look bad (see Batman: Dead End) or if they are blended in post will make no sense.

[Super_Ludacris]

Was it forced with Spider-Man? Daredevil?

The guy whose mask has always covered his entire face and it was never implied he had eyeholes and the guy who's blind?......god your clever with your arguments. lol


Do swimmers wear full-face masks, or just goggles? Do you need your whole face covered to protect your eyes from wind, or being poked in the eye, or spashed? The eyes are a more vital area to protect, which is why in real life, there are many, many examples where the eyes are protected (from wind, water, projectiles, chemicals) and not the rest of the face.

I didnt realise he was swimming in chrlorine for the entire sequel. He wants to protect himself from chemicals, Sheild himself with the cape.Besides the eyeholes are cut so short it would take a really, really accurate small speck of dust to blind him


Probably not. That doesn't mean I can't talk about how I want it to be..

Sure but in retrospect its just not needed. Dont worry even you'll see it would such a forced placement no matter how well the explination is. Your forcing it right now :)


Honestly, the whole lens issue, for me... it's all about this. I want this:
Now what is wrong with wanting something that looks as good as that? Why not try to achieve something so cool? Don't trot out the old "what works in a drawing..." claptrap either. Film is a medium to be visually creative in - especially comic-based films. I'm just glad the people making films like Sin City and 300 don't think like some of you guys. I'm not asking for something cartoony or superstylised... but you CAN emulate/approximate this look in live action, and it saddens me that no-one has the creative spark or guts to try. It's dead boring, especially after 5 films.


I'm pretty sure after 3 tv series and 5 movies, the idea of giving him the "White out animated look" was considered but the idea that in the comics the cowl is shown to have eyeholes and not lenses it's been scrapped. What's the point it's just random then. Besides trying to make something more animated/comic kinda goes against Nolan's vision of realism. What makes the movies have the sense of connection to the comics is the feel, story and sharp dialouge not forcing it to look more like it's literally from the pages.

[Super_Ludacris]

The bottom line is in the animated series and in the comics, Batman's white eyes can be expressive. He shows emotion with them...narrow for anger or determination, wide for surprise, etc. RIGID LENSES CAN'T DO THIS. White contact lenses will either look bad (see Batman: Dead End) or if they are blended in post will make no sense.


That's real. What works in animation doesnt work when trying to express the same thing in live action. Again Bale's eyes like Keatons need to show intensity, something that's hard in animation to do but great in the movies and vice versa with the lenses.

[Krug3r]

bad boots... bad weist line

[Mr. Socko]

Plus there's the psychological aspect - from a distance the eyes would often appear demonic and inhuman - and up close, when he's staring you in the eye, blank, shining slits would be very un-nerving - you could see only yourself.

That would be awsome :up:

There's nothing wrong with discussing but it's gonna look stupid. And knowing the flip-flop style of people here, I gaurntee half the dudes here who are pushing for the idea will be like sheep if the general audience goes "what the hell?" at the lenses and say "Oh you know Nolan didnt have to do that". It happens but if you wanna dwell on something that aint gonna happen, do it.

Ok, Luda. Sometimes you can be a very good poster. But other times, like now, what you're writing is completely idiotic with no thought put into it. On paper, it might seem corny and silly. But a man dressed in a black rubber costume, long black ears, and a yellow belt ALSO seems very corny and silly. But when you see it, it's completely different.

The bottom line is in the animated series and in the comics, Batman's white eyes can be expressive. He shows emotion with them...narrow for anger or determination, wide for surprise, etc. RIGID LENSES CAN'T DO THIS. White contact lenses will either look bad (see Batman: Dead End) or if they are blended in post will make no sense.

Atleast Ronny makes a very strong point. But did eye lenses affect Daredevil or either Spider-Man movie in anyway because you couldn't see them show emotions with their eyes? And the only emotion Batman will ever need with his eyes is fear.

In my opinion, there are more reasons to ADD the lenses; than there is to not add them. Because the positives outway the negatives.

1.) As much as peopl say it would look stupid, it wouldn't. These guys are professional and know what they are doing, and would make it cool. (or maybe not because they would have gotten the mask right the first time, hehe jokes)

2.) Protection, ya there is his mouth, but that was Bob Kane's doing (the man is a genius). It is how he started Batman's mask. But Batman DID have lenses in the comics, in the cartoons. THIS IS A COMIC BOOK MOVIE PEOPLE

3.) From far distance, his appearance of having no eyes would be horrific. It would make him even more intimidating.

4.) Up close, even scarier. It will scare the crap out of people even more, looking into these blank eyes, where there is nothing, but cold, and darkness.

5.) Obviously the identity factor. It will conceal his identity better. Make him less recognizable as a human being also.

6.) The night vision could be added, which would give him an up on his oponents even more than he already has.

7.) The fact that it would make it even more original than the Burton films.

It all adds up guys. It is more original, more true to the comics, scarier, safe, and helpful. There are so many positives to the lenses if done correctly. They could work, they would work, they SHOULD WORK!

Lenses... ...Dammnit!

--dk7

Very well said. :up:

[Ronny Shade]

Atleast Ronny makes a very strong point. But did eye lenses affect Daredevil or either Spider-Man movie in anyway because you couldn't see them show emotions with their eyes? And the only emotion Batman will ever need with his eyes is fear.
Think about Bale's Batman. Emotion is a very strong part of how he functions. That "Swear to me" scene? Wouldn't have worked with lenses. Spider-Man relies on flash and wit to make an impression. Even for the old franchise's Bat-men, it may have worked. They played Batman as a coldly distant and uncaring...which is effective in its own way (That's how Conroy plays him on TAS and I love it) It worked pretty well in DD. Affleck didn't play DD as intensly as Bale plays Batman. If I had to make a comparison, Afflecks DD was was more like the Conroy Batman. But it's not how Bale does it. Bale puts so much raw emotion and anger into the character that he NEEDS his eyes. Eyes are one of an actor's most important tools for expressing emotion. For a badassly emotionless Conroy Batman? The lenses would work. And they would work very well, but they wouldn't work for Bale.

[Super_Ludacris]

Why the hell are people using Daredevil and Spiderman to support this argument? One was blind and the other one always had his face covered. He dont have eyeholes he got a full on mask and it wasnt intended to give the white eye look (Ninja Turtles, Phantom, Robin, Nightwing, Flash sometimes, Green Arrow etc)

[Mr. Socko]

Well Ben wasn't blind when he played Daredevil, now was he? And love how you avioded my post quoting you, Luda.

[Mr. Socko]

Think about Bale's Batman. Emotion is a very strong part of how he functions. That "Swear to me" scene? Wouldn't have worked with lenses. Spider-Man relies on flash and wit to make an impression. Even for the old franchise's Bat-men, it may have worked. They played Batman as a coldly distant and uncaring...which is effective in its own way (That's how Conroy plays him on TAS and I love it) It worked pretty well in DD. Affleck didn't play DD as intensly as Bale plays Batman. If I had to make a comparison, Afflecks DD was was more like the Conroy Batman. But it's not how Bale does it. Bale puts so much raw emotion and anger into the character that he NEEDS his eyes. Eyes are one of an actor's most important tools for expressing emotion. For a badassly emotionless Conroy Batman? The lenses would work. And they would work very well, but they wouldn't work for Bale.

Very true, can't say much against that:up:

edit: Oh and here's a great pic to manip if anyone wants to:

http://tinypic.com/5zgv1g

I hope they match the color of the cape to the costume

[Super_Ludacris]

Well Ben wasn't blind when he played Daredevil, now was he? And love how you avioded my post quoting you, Luda.

Go back and read that statement and think about how stupid that is.

[Mr. Socko]

Go back and read that statement and think about how stupid that is.

Just how is it stupid? Him being blind is no excuse to wearing lenses as you are using for your piss poor excuse.

Lets refer back to an earlier post of mine.

Ok, Luda. Sometimes you can be a very good poster. But other times, like now, what you're writing is completely idiotic with no thought put into it. On paper, it might seem corny and silly. But a man dressed in a black rubber costume, long black ears, and a yellow belt ALSO seems very corny and silly. But when you see it, it's completely different.

[Two-Face]

Think about Bale's Batman. Emotion is a very strong part of how he functions. That "Swear to me" scene? Wouldn't have worked with lenses. Spider-Man relies on flash and wit to make an impression. Even for the old franchise's Bat-men, it may have worked. They played Batman as a coldly distant and uncaring...which is effective in its own way (That's how Conroy plays him on TAS and I love it) It worked pretty well in DD. Affleck didn't play DD as intensly as Bale plays Batman. If I had to make a comparison, Afflecks DD was was more like the Conroy Batman. But it's not how Bale does it. Bale puts so much raw emotion and anger into the character that he NEEDS his eyes. Eyes are one of an actor's most important tools for expressing emotion. For a badassly emotionless Conroy Batman? The lenses would work. And they would work very well, but they wouldn't work for Bale.

Couldn't say much better myself:up: I agree his eyes are his tools for acting.

[Super_Ludacris]

Just how is it stupid? Him being blind is no excuse to wearing lenses as you are using for your piss poor excuse.

Lets refer back to an earlier post of mine.


He had no eyeholes...........because he's blind.

[Mr. Socko]

He had no eyeholes...........because he's blind.

He could have worn goggles for that matter...Or wrapped a rag around his head lol

But back on topic, someone make a manip of that Batman pic I posted!

[The Dark Guybrush]

someone with video editing software (and decent skills in using them) should manip a short scene from batman begins- and make his eyes glow white. it's really the only way to see if it's even worth arguing over.

[Super_Ludacris]

He could have worn goggles for that matter...Or wrapped a rag around his head lol

But back on topic, someone make a manip of that Batman pic I posted!


Wow your just a bag of ideas aint ya? lol

Ok if that was the case then why didnt he? Because that would be stupid. A dark mask with horns and no eyes isnt a bad.

Besides if you want to take a step further, his blind glazed-over eyes show weakness and how lost he looks, whereas Batman's eyes show his intensity.
And far as your argument that a guy dressed as a Batman would look stupid, that is the essential make of Batman and has been shown in all the live-action adaptions, the eye lense hasnt. They do it in cartoons cause artistically it looks more intimidating but in a live action movie where actors expressions are the best way to show depth beyond words eyes are central.

Creating this whole angle about his eyes is just silly. Why dont more fighters cover there eyes in combat? They dont really. The comics have never implied that when the illustrators drew them like that they had lenses did they? No. So it's a moot point and therefore that's why giving him "Lenses" to make him look more like the comic book/animation versions sounds and feels forced. How can you not see that........are you wearing lenses?

[Mr. Socko]

The comics have never implied that when the illustrators drew them like that they had lenses did they? No.

The comics have never implied that when the illustrators drew them like that they had rubber suits did they? No.

And I have plenty ideas, ofcourse the best being Daredevil wearing a rag on his head

[Two-Face]

Why are you two talking about DD?

[Mr. Socko]

Because he should be wearing a red rag around his head :D


ok back on topic, someone post more manips!

[Super_Ludacris]

The comics have never implied that when the illustrators drew them like that they had rubber suits did they? No.

And I have plenty ideas, ofcourse the best being Daredevil wearing a rag on his head

Because no one can just naturally have a "Comic Book physique" they mold it.

and there's a reason why your the only one who came up with the idea and not the writers of the comic and the filmmakers.

[darknight7]

here's why you don't have huge white lenses:

when fighting in the dark, which batman does A TON of, you can't easily pick out his eyes, thus can't easily go after them. He might as well paint huge bulls-eyes so every jag thug goes straight for them.

You don't do the white lenses for the same reason thousands of critters on this planet have spots that look like eyes... so you don't draw attention to your REAL eyes.


Lenses don't neccessarly have to be white, and you are not going to see them in the dark? Because if it is in the dark, then there will be no LIGHT! It takes light to reflect off something in order for you to see it. Plus his movements and hiding/stealth techniques would help. THINK! Yes Batman is dressed in all black, but he is still a 6'2, 210lbs man. So you think just because he has 2 small little lenses on his face, they are going to see him now? Think about it.

--dk7

[darknight7]

Go back and read that statement and think about how stupid that is.

It actually wasn't stupid. (no need for name calling here). You guys are mixed up. YOU Luda, are talking about THE CHARACTER, the COMIC, how it looks and why. Mr. Socko is talking about the actor, and how it is possible, because Afleck COULD see out of his mask. Get your head straight, it is a discussion forum. Everyone has there own opinion. (obviously yuo are going to get harped on if you don't state your opinion properly. OR if you don't make any sense)

So how about everyone stops acting like a bunch of 5 year olds and actually discuss the ifs, ands or buts about the lenses. There are (+) and there are also (-). Everyone has there own opinion. In my opinion it can go either way, I just think it would be cooler to do it more like the comics. Because they CAN, and because it will be even more different than the original Batman movies.

--dk7

[Keyser Sushi]

It actually wasn't stupid. (no need for name calling here). You guys are mixed up. YOU Luda, are talking about THE CHARACTER, the COMIC, how it looks and why. Mr. Socko is talking about the actor, and how it is possible, because Afleck COULD see out of his mask. Get your head straight, it is a discussion forum. Everyone has there own opinion. (obviously yuo are going to get harped on if you don't state your opinion properly. OR if you don't make any sense)

So how about everyone stops acting like a bunch of 5 year olds and actually discuss the ifs, ands or buts about the lenses. There are (+) and there are also (-). Everyone has there own opinion. In my opinion it can go either way, I just think it would be cooler to do it more like the comics. Because they CAN, and because it will be even more different than the original Batman movies.

--dk7

I think you've oversimplified things a little.

What Super Ludacris is saying is that, because Daredevil is a blind character, he doesn't emote with his eyes. Because he doesn't emote with his eyes, Ben Affleck could have his eyes covered and it woudln't hurt his performance as Daredevil.

Likewise, Spider-Man always has a covered face in the comics, so we're not accustomed to seeing his face. They wind up having to do things, cinematically, that the comics have also historically done - subtle camera work and physical acting on the part of Tobey (and the stuntmen, real and CGI) in order to convey emotion on the part of Spider-Man.

But, Batman in the comics has a full range of emotion in his mask. His eyes change shape to show surprise, fear, anger, intensity, etc. In practice, the mask does not move with the actor's face as it does in the comics. So the only way to keep Batman from looking like a mannequin is to allow the actor's eyes to show through.

Personally, like Mr. Socko, I have always loved the idea of lenses in the Batman cowl - until the past few months, when I gave it deeper thought than I had before. I understand now how the lenses would severely detract crom Bale's performance.

[darknight7]

I think you've oversimplified things a little.

What Super Ludacris is saying is that, because Daredevil is a blind character, he doesn't emote with his eyes. Because he doesn't emote with his eyes, Ben Affleck could have his eyes covered and it woudln't hurt his performance as Daredevil.

Likewise, Spider-Man always has a covered face in the comics, so we're not accustomed to seeing his face. They wind up having to do things, cinematically, that the comics have also historically done - subtle camera work and physical acting on the part of Tobey (and the stuntmen, real and CGI) in order to convey emotion on the part of Spider-Man.

But, Batman in the comics has a full range of emotion in his mask. His eyes change shape to show surprise, fear, anger, intensity, etc. In practice, the mask does not move with the actor's face as it does in the comics. So the only way to keep Batman from looking like a mannequin is to allow the actor's eyes to show through.

Personally, like Mr. Socko, I have always loved the idea of lenses in the Batman cowl - until the past few months, when I gave it deeper thought than I had before. I understand now how the lenses would severely detract crom Bale's performance.

I am not disagreeing with you or trying to be ajerk. But Spiderman's eyes moved in the comics too.

You know what you be sooo cool, a prostetic mask. :cool:

Like you would see the cowl in the vault and when he wears it, it will look like a cowl. BUT REALLY, behind the scenes it is applied to his face peice by peice (like the Grinch), than we could get a cool cowl WITH EXPRESSION! It is suuuuuch a long shot, and probably people here would hate it. But in a way, it would be soo cool to see the emotion.

--dk7

[Mr. Vice]

I am not disagreeing with you or trying to be ajerk. But Spiderman's eyes moved in the comics too.

You know what you be sooo cool, a prostetic mask. :cool:

Like you would see the cowl in the vault and when he wears it, it will look like a cowl. BUT REALLY, behind the scenes it is applied to his face peice by peice (like the Grinch), than we could get a cool cowl WITH EXPRESSION! It is suuuuuch a long shot, and probably people here would hate it. But in a way, it would be soo cool to see the emotion.

--dk7

You mean something kind of like the "fear gas Batman"?

[Keyser Sushi]

I am not disagreeing with you or trying to be ajerk. But Spiderman's eyes moved in the comics too.

What comics were these?

You know what you be sooo cool, a prostetic mask. :cool:

So you've said repeatedly. :)

Like you would see the cowl in the vault and when he wears it, it will look like a cowl. BUT REALLY, behind the scenes it is applied to his face peice by peice (like the Grinch), than we could get a cool cowl WITH EXPRESSION! It is suuuuuch a long shot, and probably people here would hate it. But in a way, it would be soo cool to see the emotion.

As I think about it, the main thing this would effect is the eye area, since it would mean his eyebrows and stuff could move, like in the comics.

On the other hand, it would totally negate any possibility of lenses. It seems like a lot of trouble to go through when the ony net benefit is him being able to move his eyebrows. The cowl having eyeholes accomplishes nearly the same thing.

[Ronny Shade]

Personally, like Mr. Socko, I have always loved the idea of lenses in the Batman cowl - until the past few months, when I gave it deeper thought than I had before. I understand now how the lenses would severely detract crom Bale's performance.
Amen brother.

Now back to killer death homework round seven.

[Bathead]

The idea you need to see the pupils for the eyes to show emotion is overrated. It's not the eyes themselves that show emotion, it's the eyebrows. Any actor would be able to show emotion even with lenses (or contacts for that matter). And really, Batman is not known for showing a great range of emotions, it seems to me that he is a supposed to be in a constant state of "pissed-offedness" (!?), which I assume is meant to intimidate the bad guys. However, even though I thoroughly believe that Nolan et al, could convincingly pull off the pupilless look, and as much as I would prefer it, it would not bother me in the least if they didn't. It's not a deal breaker for me.

[Ronny Shade]

The idea you need to see the pupils for the eyes to show emotion is overrated. It's not the eyes themselves that show emotion, it's the eyebrows. Any actor would be able to show emotion even with lenses (or contacts for that matter). And really, Batman is not known for showing a great range of emotions, it seems to me that he is a supposed to be in a constant state of "pissed-offedness" (!?), which I assume is meant to intimidate the bad guys. However, even though I thoroughly believe that Nolan et al, could convincingly pull off the pupilless look, and as much as I would prefer it, it would not bother me in the least if they didn't. It's not a deal breaker for me.
Lenses can't move.

[The Fallen]

I don't really see the big deal with lenses, they are such a small thing. Wouldn't they hinder Bale's vision, and decrease his ablility to emote through this eyes? Plus how would they be explained? Just leave the damn suit the way it is.

[Masut]

http://img238.imageshack.us/img238/4593/batmanbegins226ee.jpg

Just did this pretty quickly, someone do an awesome one because I can't be stuffed. I think lenses would look cool as. In certain scenes Bales eyes go completely white for a split second (because of the direction he looks in) and it looks sweet. I definately remember it happening in the train fight sequence.

[Katsuro]

Please, no lenses. They look awesome in comics and cartoons, but not in live action. What works in animation doesn't always work in live action. I see no practical reason why he would need them. I know people always talk about realism in this franchise, but it's not actually about realism, it's about practicality. Everything he had in Begins was practical. His tools, his suit, his car (a freakin' tank is far more useful than a flashy sports car with fins). Glowing white eyes are far from practical.

Personally, I was content with the scene on the train where you can only see the whites of his eyes. It was a nice nod to the fanboys, and that's about all we need.

[ragdus]

those lenses would have totally ruined that scene. when she hits him with the taser everybody chuckled at the stare he gave her. the first thing everybody looks to in that scene is his eyes to see what kind of reaction he was having to what she'd just done.

no to lenses. leave them for cartoons and comics.

[lujho]

The guy whose mask has always covered his entire face and it was never implied he had eyeholes and the guy who's blind?......god your clever with your arguments. lol

No-one knows Daredevil is blind, and the actor and stuntmen who played him aren't blind, they had to see through the mask. The fact that he is blind doesn't affect the argument at all. The lenses were there, they looked good, the actors COULD see through them, everyone in the film ASSUMED Daredevil could see through them.

Also... why is it people who say that not being able to see his eyes will hinder his ability to emote, do not seem to care that his eyebrows are completely static?

Here's a newsflash - eyes don't act - at least not all by themselves. Eyebrows do - a HUGE amount of the expressiveness of the eyes actually comes from the eyebrows.

Eyes blink, squint and look from side to side. Eyebrows make you happy, sad, angry, and everything else. I'd rather have the expressiveness that eyebrows bring than simply being able to see the eyes. Not that you can't have lenses AND eyes, as I've stated before.

[lujho]

The comics have never implied that when the illustrators drew them like that they had lenses did they?

Uh, yeah. Often and explicitly. Depends on the writer-artist, but it's been done, a lot.

[lujho]

You know what you be sooo cool, a prostetic mask. :cool:

Like you would see the cowl in the vault and when he wears it, it will look like a cowl. BUT REALLY, behind the scenes it is applied to his face peice by peice (like the Grinch), than we could get a cool cowl WITH EXPRESSION! It is suuuuuch a long shot, and probably people here would hate it. But in a way, it would be soo cool to see the emotion.


I don't think it'd even need to be a complicated prosthetic. It might not even have to be glued on. If it was made from the right material it could just be sculpted and moulded like any other cowl, but if it had the right consistency it would stick to the face well enough and move with the eyebrows. And there's no reason a cowl with moveable brows couldn't have lenses in it either - why would they neccessary preclude eachother?

[Katsuro]

I don't think it'd even need to be a complicated prosthetic. It might not even have to be glued on. If it was made from the right material it could just be sculpted and moulded like any other cowl, but if it had the right consistency it would stick to the face well enough and move with the eyebrows. And there's no reason a cowl with moveable brows couldn't have lenses in it either - why would they neccessary preclude eachother?

It just doens't make any sense. Why would Batman have a cowl that's supposedly a hard, solid peice, and can yet somehow move along with his real face? Would they somehow explain it in the film, or are you hoping people just wont notice this?

[ragdus]

spider-man and DD are terrible examples, because in spidey's case the big white eyes are a huge part of the look of the costume (not so with batman) and with DD if anyone could see his eyes they'd know immediately he was blind.

white lenses aren't part of batman's costume, and he doesn't need to hide blind eyes. maybe they might seem intimidating, but I think he gets the point across by being a 6ft+ bulletproof superninja that kicks the **** out of everyone

[Super_Ludacris]

Uh, yeah. Often and explicitly. Depends on the writer-artist, but it's been done, a lot.


Gimme an example then in the comics where it was stated that Batman has white eyes because he's wearing lenses. And if its true why aint it a popular implication?

[ragdus]

Thug 1) "Hey look! It's Batman"
Thug 2) "Big friggin deal."

Thug 1) "We better get out of here quick. He took down the Falcone crime family, we'll be cake compared to that."
Thug 2) "Big friggin deal."

Thug 1) "Dude, and his eyes are covered with intimidating white lenses!"
Thug 2) "OMFG RUN DUDE!!!!!!!!!!" *scurries off*

[Super_Ludacris]

Lol!

[lujho]

Gimme an example then in the comics where it was stated that Batman has white eyes because he's wearing lenses. And if its true why aint it a popular implication?

God, you've never seen in the comics where the cowl has a heads-up display, or some kind of nightvision (often shown by the eyes changing colour)? Obviously, there have to be lenses for this.

[Super_Ludacris]

God, you've never seen in the comics where the cowl has a heads-up display, or some kind of nightvision (often shown by the eyes changing colour)? Obviously, there have to be lenses for this.

Eyes change colour because THAT is night vision but that still doesnt show the white part being lenses. Show me some examples, still aint done that.

[Two-Face]

Off topic:

Super, I love your avatar BTW.

[Super_Ludacris]

Two-Face never lies

[lujho]

It just doens't make any sense. Why would Batman have a cowl that's supposedly a hard, solid peice, and can yet somehow move along with his real face? Would they somehow explain it in the film, or are you hoping people just wont notice this?

But the cowl never neccessarily had to be solid. It never HAD to be armoured. Its main purpose was always just as a mask, not a helmet.

I'll admit, in the context of this series, going from solid to not solid would be odd, but that wouldn't have been a problem had the cowl not explicitly been shown to be graphite in the film. Besides, it's can be solid in some parts and not in others.

I've said it before... if realism and practicality stop you from doing something visually cool, then bend reality a bit. You don't have to apply "realism" completely rigidly to *everything*. If you did, you'd have to get rid of the cape gliding and grapple gun, for a start.

[Super_Ludacris]

You sound Shumacher when he had to explain the neon lights and the "Organic bodysuit" (Nipples) talking about "visually cool" lol. I see what your saying and how certain illustrated things can stand out, but when it sticks out adversly (as expemplified from even the best looking manips here) it wont work and people will keep on going on about saying "if its never been done before". You can be creative but there's a difference between creative good and creativiley dropping some hot garbabge.

So you know how it goes.

[lujho]

Eyes change colour because THAT is night vision but that still doesnt show the white part being lenses. Show me some examples, still aint done that.

So you're saying the lenses are only there when nightvision's activated? Fair enough, that's an idea some people have proposed.

But I'm not just making this stuff about lenses up.

Anyone got a scan from the DK Ultimate Guide to Batman where it talks about lenses in the cowl?

Anyway, there are plenty of times where Batman has a HUD in the cowl and it's obvious there must be lenses (and there's no difference between the way the eyes are drawn when the HUD is being used and when it's not).

Also:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v217/lujho/Reference/superman-batman-7_04.jpg

Besides, the point in lenses is to replicate the look whether it's explicitly stated to be lenses in the comic or not (sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't, sometimes there are explicitly NOT lenses - it varies). Even if lenses had never been mentioned in the comics, it would be a valid idea to create an approximation of that look. I believe the first I ever heard anyone mention the idea was in Tom Mankiewics' Batman script back in the late 70s (not that I read it then, but that's when it was written).

[Super_Ludacris]

He had nightvision lenses in Batman Forever too over eyeholes, but the comics STILL dont say the white look was lenses so as I said before it sounds FORCED and will stick out as looking too "Cartoony" in live action.

[lujho]

I see what your saying and how certain illustrated things can stand out, but when it sticks out adversly

Well this is where we'll just have to disagree. I don't think it sticks out adversely, and neither do many others here.

[lujho]

He had nightvision lenses in Batman Forever too over eyeholes, but the comics STILL dont say the white look was lenses

But some *do*. I posted one example, it's not the only one (again, the HUD thing). I'm sure there must be written examples too (dialogue, captions etc). Someone care to back me up here, preferably with examples?

[Super_Ludacris]

That image doesnt say his white eye look is lenses. He's clearly wearing nightshades there that's something else.

[ragdus]

if we really wanted to keep it faithful he'd be wearing light grey tights and bright blue undies.

no blue, no white.

[lujho]

That image doesnt say his white eye look is lenses. He's clearly wearing nightshades there that's something else.

Forget it. You're impossible. The 3rd panel clearly shows lenses, it's clear from the rest of the book that that is Pat Lee's rationalization for Batman's traditional white-eyed look and that they're there all the time... and it looks totally cool. And you won't admit it, so it's abviously not worth arguing this with you any longer.

[ragdus]

alright but they're clear lenses in that shot, so do we want clear lenses or white now?

either way, lenses = bad because you're just asking to get shrapnel in your eyeball when they bust.

[lujho]

if we really wanted to keep it faithful he'd be wearing light grey tights and bright blue undies.

That would be faithful to one particular look. He doesn't always have a bright blue cape, he doesn't always have light grey tights.

Anyway, I want mirrored lenses, not white. The point is that they can reflect light or not reflect it as and how the director and cinematorapger choose to light their shots. If you don't think talented film-makers could make that look really, really good, then you're not giving them due credit.

[Super_Ludacris]

They show night lenses not white lenses lol

[ragdus]

That would be faithful to one particular look. He doesn't always have a bright blue cape, he doesn't always have light grey tights.

Anyway, I want mirrored lenses, not white. The point is that they can reflect light or not reflect it as and how the director and cinematorapger choose to light their shots. If you don't think talented film-makers could make that look really, really good, then you're not giving them due credit.

I'm certain it could be done to look very cool.

I'm also certain that when looking cool becomes your primary impetus for doing things on film, you end up with Joel Schumacher's Batman films.

[Super_Ludacris]

Hence why I said he sounded like Joel. I understand what's he's saying and I've campaigned for some extreme stuff or explain unfaithful stuff in other adaptations but it just sound forced.

[lujho]

alright but they're clear lenses in that shot, so do we want clear lenses or white now?

either way, lenses = bad because you're just asking to get shrapnel in your eyeball when they bust.

They're partially reflective - at other point in the comic they reflect a lot of light and look white, at others you can see through them. As I've said many times I want mirrored lenses, either opaque or partially tarnsparent (many sunglasses are like this). I NEVER said I wanted opaque *white* lenses. Mirrored lenses (partly transparent or not) will look like white points exactly when the film-makers wish... and won't when they don't. And if they ARE partly transparent they'll show the actor's actual eyes.. again, as the film-makers choose or not choose.

Anyway, no lenses = bad because you're just asking to get a handful of dirt thrown in your eyes when a criminal realizes your eyes are your one major unprotected vital area.

Besides, you never heard of safety glasses? They're impoact-resistant designed precisely so you *don't* get shrapnel in your eyes. I'd rather use a pair of those when operating power-tools than not use them in the off chance something will hit them hard enough to break them (in which case you're probably ****ed anyway).

See, there's pros and cons to either argument... the choice should just boil down to what looks best and presents the most cinematic possibilities.

[lujho]

I'm certain it could be done to look very cool.

I'm also certain that when looking cool becomes your primary impetus for doing things on film, you end up with Joel Schumacher's Batman films.

It shouldn't be the primary impetus, but then I and others have also given plenty of valid, real-life reasons for lenses as well. People are dismissing the idea out of had as having no merit whatsoever - that's what bugs me. It's fine to say "I'd prefer just the eyes", because I think they're BOTH perfectly valid choices and it just comes down to preference. I just think it's stupid to say one idea is exactly right and the other simply should never be done at all.

[ragdus]

Well look if they're mirrored then it's hardly ever going to reflect anything but darkness since batman tends not to fight at night.

If they're mirrored, it's going to look more like a blinking light which will just get annoying and be a nightmare for the editing room.

[BatScot]

...the comics STILL dont say the white look was lenses...Batman's modern white eye 'look' unequivocally equals lenses in the comic book canon:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v434/Anthropod/temp/Batlenses.jpg

from
Batman: The Ultimate Guide to the Dark Knight
Author(s): Beatty, Scott
DK Feb 2005
ISBN 0756611210

[ragdus]

And I never said it didn't have merit, I'm just wondering what the POINT is? IF it's mirrored, he fights in the dark and they'll mostly be black anyway, unless you meticulously design scene after scene to properly light his eyes, which makes no sense if your whole movie has the guy fighting in dark and foreboding places. Nobody wants to set up scene after scene and have to take into account how his eyes are going to reflect the maximum amount of light every time. It's a waste of time and budget.

You could make them white, but at that point you're doing it just to make them white, and the best reason given for that so far is that it might look scary to some guy holding a gun. I'm not buying into that so much.

Or, you could leave it as is, which worked just fine and is also completely practical.

[Super_Ludacris]

Batman's modern white eye 'look' unequivocally equals lenses in the comic book canon:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v434/Anthropod/temp/Batlenses.jpg

from
Batman: The Ultimate Guide to the Dark Knight
Author(s): Beatty, Scott
DK Feb 2005
ISBN 0756611210


But has he said it was lenses?

[BatScot]

lenses = bad because you're just asking to get shrapnel in your eyeball when they bust.Since the mid-1990s, the Army and the Marine Corps have used Special Protective Eyewear Cylindrical System (SPECS). SPEC lenses offer ballistic protection and are capable of defeating a 5.8 grain, T-37 shaped fragment simulating projectile at 650 feet per second.

They do not burst.

And the point is, SPECS provide optimum peripheral vision, and ballistic, laser, and solar protection. In other words, they protect your eyes, and that is not only essential, but extremely practical. So the bottom line is this: Lenses, whether you like them or not—and I'm not particularly keen on them myself—make absolutely perfect sense within the ‘realistic’ Batman argument.

[BatScot]

But has he said it was lenses?Dude... the picture SHOWS the lenses!

[The Dark Guybrush]

To make a long story short:

if Nolan were going to give Batman lenses, he would have had them in Begins.

thank you all, goodnight!

[BatScot]

... the best reason given for that so far is that it might look scary to some guy holding a gun.No, the best reason given is that lenses offer eye protection, which is a perfectly reasonable thing to have. On the other hand, the best reason given for “not having lenses” is so that you can see Batman’s eyes—so it might look scary to some guy holding a gun—which is a rather nonsensical way of looking at things.

[ragdus]

No, the best reason given is that lenses offer eye protection, which is a perfectly reasonable thing to have. On the other hand, the best reason given for “not having lenses” is so that you can see Batman’s eyes—so it might look scary to some guy holding a gun—which is a rather nonsensical way of looking at things.

No, the best reasons for not having lenses is that they're horribly impractical. Those little lenses aren't going to protect his eyes from anything other than allergens. More likely, they're going to cause problems with condensation, light refractions, and the aforementioned shrapnel.

Again, if you're going to make clear lenses, why make any at all? if you're going to have them mirrored, why? it's 90% in the dark anyway and a waste of time and budget to light them or add the reflection in post.

If you're going to white them out, great, but unless they're backlit it's still going to look dark for every shot except the tight face vogue shots.

It's just calling for suit alterations and tons of time spent lighting him on set for what'll amount to less than 1 minute total of eye white. What is the point?

[ragdus]

Since the mid-1990s, the Army and the Marine Corps have used Special Protective Eyewear Cylindrical System (SPECS). SPEC lenses offer ballistic protection and are capable of defeating a 5.8 grain, T-37 shaped fragment simulating projectile at 650 feet per second.

They do not burst.

And the point is, SPECS provide optimum peripheral vision, and ballistic, laser, and solar protection. In other words, they protect your eyes, and that is not only essential, but extremely practical. So the bottom line is this: Lenses, whether you like them or not—and I'm not particularly keen on them myself—make absolutely perfect sense within the ‘realistic’ Batman argument.

You've got to be ****ting me. Post a picture of SPECS please. They're size, thickness and design are integral to their functionality and protective characteristics. You can't simply take the lens in SPECS, cut them to shape and stick them in the cowl's eye sockets and expect them to grant you the same level of protection. It's an invalid argument.

[BatScot]

No, the best reasons for not having lenses is that they're horribly impractical.Military and tactical law enforcement wear protective eyewear on a routine basis—for both day and night operations—are you to have us believe that people who put their life on the line are going to wear something that is “horribly impratical”?

Battle-Tested Ballistic Eyewear for Tactical Situations
http://www.army-technology.com/contractors/personal/revision/press6.html

Go ahead, refute the ARMY.

I dare you.

Oh, but if you try... be so kind as to provide some supporting evidence to support your position.

[Boom]

Christ, we're talking about a goddamn FICTIONAL character here. Anyone who needs every ****ing thing explained down to the most miscule detail needs to be reminded as to what Batman is.

My God.

[ragdus]

I think I already did.

The design characteristics of the eyewear is equally if not more important than the materials used to make them. You can't simply cut triangular lenses out of the materials, stick them in the cowl, and expect any type of similar results.

secondly, saying that the lenses used by these tactical teams means they'll work in a batman world is simply wrong. kevlar stops bullets, so it MUST stop a piddly old knife too, right? Also, despite the very impressive specifications you kindly posted earlier, how many times have SPECS been tested in situations like we saw in Begins? What is their heat tolerance? Will they melt when you're set on fire?

[BatScot]

You can't simply take the lens in SPECS, cut them to shape and stick them in the cowl's eye sockets and expect them to grant you the same level of protection.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v434/Anthropod/temp/3-yellow_sunglasses.jpg

You absolutely could cut them to shape—with relatively minor alteration—and place them in the cowl in such a manner as to offer eye protection. In fact, it would be no more difficult to explain this than Nolan's idea of a protective graphite cowl itself. You see it doesn’t matter what is cut away, it only matters what is left behind.

[Boom]

secondly, saying that the lenses used by these tactical teams means they'll work in a batman world is simply wrong. kevlar stops bullets, so it MUST stop a piddly old knife too, right? Also, despite the very impressive specifications you kindly posted earlier, how many times have SPECS been tested in situations like we saw in Begins? What is their heat tolerance? Will they melt when you're set on fire?
Batman wears a "kevlar biweave nomex survival suit," which stops a knife and repels anything but a straight shot. Did Batman get shot or stabbed even once in Batman Begins?

It's quite simple really. Don't put the lenses in fire. Then the question wouldn't have to be raised, now would it?

[BatScot]

... despite the very impressive specifications you kindly posted earlier, how many times have SPECS been tested in situations like we saw in Begins? What is their heat tolerance? Will they melt when you're set on fire?I hate to be the one to break this to you, but the military gets into worse situations than 'Batman'.

But lets take your argument at face value... do you really believe that Batman's unprotected pupils give him better fire protection than had been wearing some sort of goggle?

Or to put it another way: What is the heat tolerance of Batman’s exposed eyes? Will they melt when set on fire?

Or to put it another another way: If I poked you in the eye with a match would you be better off with or without SPECS?

[Boom]

I hate to be the one to break this to you, but the military gets into worse situations than 'Batman'.

But lets take your argument at face value... do you really believe that Batman's unprotected pupils give him better fire protection than had been wearing some sort of goggle?

Or to put it another way: What is the heat tolerance of Batman’s exposed eyes? Will they melt when set on fire?

Or to put it another another way: If I poked you in the eye with a match would you be better off with or without SPECS?
THANK YOU.

Seriously.