Has Batman hurt the genre where costumes are concerned?

[roach]

if Raimi wasnt on it we would have had a less faithful costume....in a documntary he said he had to fight with execs over the costume

[Chris Wallace]

Something like what Ross had in mind maybe? Or were they thinking something other than tights?

[roach]

something like Ross pic but he was adamant about doing the faithful suit

[Chris Wallace]

And fans want to bash & trash him.

[roach]

I find that there is a disconnect between fanbois and the people they hate...like execs at Fox...

[BlackLantern]

I think its just studio execs in general....Jon Favreau said he had to fight with Paramount about casting RDJ as Tony Stark and then again with casting Mickey Rourke

[roach]

studio execs job is to be argued with...they are the money people

[BlackLantern]

they want to make sure they maximize return on the investment, when RDJ was cast, he was just getting back into the Hollywood eye with films like 'Kiss, Kiss, Bang, Bang' and his tv work..but he wasn't a bankable star then and Iron Man wasn't a marquis character and that's where the worry was....he certainly is now

[Chris Wallace]

I can see fighting him on Downey. But why wouldn't they trust Favreau's judgement after he'd already delivered?

[BlackLantern]

because Hollywood is a "what have you done for me lately?" type town...and lots of higher ups still have reservations about Mickey Rourke

[roach]

Originally Posted by Chris Wallace

I can see fighting him on Downey. But why wouldn't they trust Favreau's judgement after he'd already delivered?

thats a Hollywood Axiom...look at what happened with the Spider-man series....Raimi produced hits with Spider-man and Spider-man 2 and still Sony forced him to put Venom in Spidey3.....and still he had to fight them on Spidey4

[E-Man]

I guess we can all agree that studios are stupid. They will never learn from their mistakes, because they've been making the same ones for years.

[BlackLantern]

I wouldn't say stupid....maybe extremely apprehensive and disconnected....mostly disconnected

[E-Man]

Disconnected from intellect is a good way to put it. They want to make money, but when someone does that for them they do whatever to push them away.

[roach]

its not limited to movie studios...sometimes comic companies do the same thing

[E-Man]

Originally Posted by roach

its not limited to movie studios...sometimes comic companies do the same thing

I have no idea what you're talking about, sir.

[Infinity9999x]

Originally Posted by Chris Wallace

30 years ago, we had absolutely no problem whatsoever going to see a movie whose lead character was dressed head-to-toe in colorful spandex. Fast forward to 1989, we see for the first time a Dark Knight type Batman-one whose battle gear, while based on the garb he sports in the comics-is radically changed. The filmmakers deem his grey tights "silly & unrealistic". And we, the fans, buy into this for the most part. But now so many movies & TV shows are taking such drastic liberties & taking characters' looks further and further away from their pulp counterparts. We, the fans, debate these decisions relentlessly-some of us defend it, others are totally against it. But if not for Batman's black rubber, would we all eagerly run to see the colorfully clad characters without any regard for how "silly" they looked?

If you're looking to blame a Batman movie for the absence of Comic accurate costumes, I wouldn't blame B89, TDK or any of the successful batman movies. The fault lies with Batman and Robin.

We all remember the backlash from B&R. It was after that movie that the notion of traditional comic suits became viewed as "silly." We got Cameron's Spider-man script, talks of a Spider-man movie with a drastically altered costume that would be more "realistic." The X-men covered in leather instead of comic accurate costumes.

All this came after B&R. Studious were so afraid of being "comic booky" because of how badly that movie was received, because they viewed that movie as being "comic-booky." That's where the stigma came from.

Of course, movies like Iron Man, Spider-man, Hulk, (and hopefully Thor) have shown us that traditional costumes can and do work as long as they're backed by a good story.

Also, I've really only seen the debate around "realistic" costumes with Batman, (and to an extent Captain America, however the Ultimate Costume is still a red white and blue flag suit, so I don't know how much more "realistic" it is) and that's understandable, because he's a character without super powers. It's understandable why people start going off with him. It doesn't mean I agree, but I can understand the logic.

[Chris Wallace]

WHo in B & R wore a traditional comic suit other than Ivy?

[BlackLantern]

the costumes were very "colorful", I think was the issue

[roach]

Originally Posted by E-Man

I have no idea what you're talking about, sir.

I refer you to Chris Claremont...was given a comic X-men that no one cared about and had been cancelled...took that comic and turned it into the number one comic for 16 years. Now you'd think that a guy who was in the middle of a phenomenal run would have pretty much creative freedom...nope. Claremont and Lee argued about scripts...Lee wanted to coplot the scripts and instead of telling CC they had him rewrite the scripts when he got them. CC got angry and when the editor sided with Lee...he quit

[Chris Wallace]

Wouldn't expect that from Lee.

[Infinity9999x]

Originally Posted by Chris Wallace

WHo in B & R wore a traditional comic suit other than Ivy?

No one really, but it was the entire tone of the movie. The studios associated that with "comic-booky" so they wanted to stay away from anything remotely "goofy." Which meant they went overboard, and we got things like them seriously considering changing Spider-man's suit (when it was in development hell).

[Chris Wallace]

I believe that Batman '89 introduced and was built on the premise that the "goofy comic book" elements were to be avoided, and B&R cemented that mentality.

[BlackLantern]

at least Clooney apologized

[Infinity9999x]

Originally Posted by Chris Wallace

I believe that Batman '89 introduced and was built on the premise that the "goofy comic book" elements were to be avoided, and B&R cemented that mentality.

I wouldn't agree really. B89 still had plenty of comic book elements. Joker's joy buzzer, deadly gas balloons, the laughing deaths. Batman Returns had even more bizarre events, and Batman Forever had plenty of 'comic-booky-ness" to it. And before anyone jumps on me for mentioning Forever, remember that it was actually very successful with the general public.

I honestly think they built the suit in the first movie simply because they had Keaton as Bats. And they carried through the design because it was still the same series.