The Dark Knight AICN: Costume change happens ON camera?

[Showtime]

but then who will give cock to you jhimmy rhaods Timmy Dalton when you would like to have it so much? aaaeeeehheheeeeeeeyaaaaaaa sethu

That was the most jumbled and worst joke in history.

 

[Wams]

 

[X-Rated]

Costume change don't really bother me, because it will be subtle, like Spiderman's suit was between SM & SM2. I just hope they add a little Dark Charcoal Gray around the chest like the classic suit, just not that lite of Gray.

 

[echostation]

Showtime of the yonder Composer Sachet, the great Composer Baron of Boston.. tis narry a joke, but a need for further adew into the pointum farsh (note not the FARCE but FARSHS.. like pashtu Farshi) of wanting to ask for giving cock but no one to give, I simply pose the necessary fortitude aspired based query into the meaning of malayali's understanding of how the dock's cock fits with wanting to give cock in Batman's costume change...

YESH SALLSL GOOD mumaaaaa yaaaaaaahhhh

 

[The Riddler]

awesome news.

the old suit was ok, but definitely not the best it could've been.

so long as there is no yellow oval, i have high hopes for this new suit. t:

 

[LostSon88]

 

[The Only Woj]

I want a yellow rectangle

 

[jimmy]

Showtime of the yonder Composer Sachet, the great Composer Baron of Boston.. tis narry a joke, but a need for further adew into the pointum farsh (note not the FARCE but FARSHS.. like pashtu Farshi) of wanting to ask for giving cock but no one to give, I simply pose the necessary fortitude aspired based query into the meaning of malayali's understanding of how the dock's cock fits with wanting to give cock in Batman's costume change...

YESH SALLSL GOOD mumaaaaa yaaaaaaahhhh

Did you just smoke some crystal meth?

 

[Darkest Knight]

No, I said black and grey manip with the BEGINS chest symbol in the oval.

 

[The Riddler]

I want the yellow oval.

no one cares what you want.

 

[X-Rated]

God no. No yellow oval.

 

[BrollySupersj]

Yellow Oval or not it doesn't matter to me...but I do want longer ears for the suit.

 

[lujho]

As for the cowl I am not sure. Does Bruce want to order ten-thousand of more of those things? I want it to be sleaker as well but who is going to make it?

He's got 10,000 of the graphite shells (the thing Alfred smashes), not 10,000 full cowls. Any new cowl design could theoretically incorporate the same shell, which covers the upper face and top of the head.

Or he could just go with all-new stuff. It's not like he can't afford it and he'd do it if the new stuff was significantly better.

 

[The Guard]

This could go several ways. Bruce may realize that in the armored version of the suit with a gold belt, he really doesn't look that much like an actual creature of the night and move to make himself look more frightening and eerie (lenses, less plating, etc). However, I imagine the change in Batsuits has more to do with thematic elements found in the story than just a physical change (acid destruction, etc). I'm betting that we see a Gotham divided on whether Batman is good for it or not. I'm thinking perhaps Batman dons the "oval", to cement his symbolic nature as Gotham's protector. If the movie deals with trust issues between him and Gordon and the police, or him and the people of Gotham, I could see this happening.

But it may just be a new suit. Who knows?

 

[Boom]

"The next ten thousand will be up to specifications."

Remember, it was the first shipment of graphite shells that were defective. And from what I could tell in Batman Begins, Bruce only had one cowl, which was using one of the problematic shells. It's not unreasonable to say that he uses the corrected shells in the sequel, and they just happen to look sleeker.

I still say that a prosthetic cowl could work very well. It'd offer a much wider range of motion, and it would fit tightly to the head without creasing and buckling. If they had to offer an explanation, they could say the cowl was made of a new, memory alloy material that absorbs pressure and external force.

 

[kenellard]

With all this talk of new suits I'm beginning to veer more towards a change in the cowl as much as anything else, I hadn't really thought about it before but the mouth opening looks pretty ridiculous compared to pretty much any previous one on film, other than that they just need to sort out "el puffy" in the neck area and they're set. I could go either way on the lenses, but if I had a choice I'd probably say yeah to them, it would be more REALISTIC afterall....

 

[Crooklyn]

I'm betting that we see a Gotham divided on whether Batman is good for it or not. I'm thinking perhaps Batman dons the "oval", to cement his symbolic nature as Gotham's protector.

 

[Keyser Sushi]

With all this talk of new suits I'm beginning to veer more towards a change in the cowl as much as anything else, I hadn't really thought about it before but the mouth opening looks pretty ridiculous compared to pretty much any previous one on film, other than that they just need to sort out "el puffy" in the neck area and they're set. I could go either way on the lenses, but if I had a choice I'd probably say yeah to them, it would be more REALISTIC afterall....

Except that lenses would severely hamper his ability to see, which would not be... realistic

Also add to that the fact that Batman's eyes are important to his ability to look threatening. Even in the comics, where he supposedly has lenses, his eyes change shape to reflect his emotions or his thoughts. They can go wide for "oh ****," or narrow for "you're going down, beeyatch." And normal for, "yeah, whatever." On a movie cowl, if you add lenses you lose the expressiveness of his face.

Also, on the neck thing... real men have thick necks.

 

[Boom]

Also, on the neck thing... real men have thick necks.

Then Bale's not a real man, since his neck doesn't fill out the cowl's.

 

[kenellard]

I'm taking that thick neck thing as a joke!

And about the lenses, that is pretty much the crux of the argument, does it hamper the actors ability to show emotion, or rather does it negatively affect the action, I don't think anyone can answer that for sure as yet

 

[Keyser Sushi]

Then Bale's not a real man, since his neck doesn't fill out the cowl's.

Shh.

It was a joke, of course, but I do the think the big neck makes him look more Batmannish. Since, Batman has a big neck.

 

[kenellard]

I disagree, it makes him look like he's suffering from acute gigantism

 

[Mr. Socko]

YES YES YES Oh happy day!

This is gonna be great, thank God They're changing that cowl!

 

[batman7289]

fantastic

 

[Keyser Sushi]

I'm taking that thick neck thing as a joke!

As it was intended, though I do like the big neck look.

And about the lenses, that is pretty much the crux of the argument, does it hamper the actors ability to show emotion, or rather does it negatively affect the action, I don't think anyone can answer that for sure as yet

I think it's obvious that the lenses would hamper the ability to show emotion. Let's look at some examples.

1.) RoboCop. Okay, so he doesn't have much emotion anyway. But look at the end battle, where he took the helmet off for his big showdown with Clarence Boddicker. Why do that? Cinematically, it's more powerful when you can see Peter Weller's face, the expressiveness in his freakishly large eyes. It gives him the ability to communicate pain better, and it makes his up-close and personal fight scenes with Kurtwood Smith play much more dramatically than the earlier one, when he threw him through several plate-glass windows (which is still an awesome scene).

How about 1989's BATMAN, where Michael Keaton effectively used his eyes to make you believe he would peel your ribcage open and eat your heart.

LeVar Burton in Star Trek: The Next Generation. Geordi LaForge was blind, and wore something like a girl's hair clip wrapped around his eyes. Did it hinder his expressiveness? Maybe a little, but he had the rest of his face exposed so you could see him furrow his brow in frustration, and it pretty well made up for the fact that his eyes were covered. Like a man wearing sunglasses.

How about Willem Defoe in Spider-Man? He wore that full-face mask, but in order to keep the expressiveness in place, they made the lenses retractable and the mouth hole filled with a thin fabric screen that allowed you to see his teeth flashing inside. Because the eyes and mouth were necessary if nothing else was to be seen.

So, my conclusion is that with Batman, the cowl being rigid (unlike in the comics) necessitates something else being visible. His mouth is a given; the only other option is eyes. It worked brilliantly for Keaton. Bale was pretty effective with it too, I thought, if not quite as scary as Keaton.

With his eyes covered he's left in Ben Affleck territory - Daredevil, of course - and that just... looked cool but didn't really work too well. Of course with DD you have to cover his eyes; he's blind. LOL. So that's a lose-lose situation. With Batman you have the option to leave the eyes visible.