The Dark Knight Batcycle

[mystory64]

Well, the most accurate shooting position is the prone position, so I'd imagine that's the purpose.

-Matchbox

You hit it right on the money cat

 

[Clerk]

what is that?

Let the wind flow through his hair.

 

[3 Dev Adam]

There was zero undercranking for the Tumbler.

Okay, now tell me how can you be so sure, and I'll point you the scenes on the films where the Thimbler is undercranked like hell or completely CGI.

 

[MacLeod]

I think anyone who adamantly says that the Tumbler is a tank is reaching. A lot. Sure, it's stocky and heavily armored much like a tank is, but that's where the similarities end. If you see the Tumber out of context, you may assume that it's some monstrous vehicle, when in reality, it's not much larger than a normal car; just a little wider. I think the Tumbler fit what Batman might actually use were he looking for a main mode of transport in his war on crime. It's powerfull, fast, and intimidating while also being stealthy.

-Matchbox

Doesn't one of the cops in the movie describe it as a black tank? The batman begins vehicle, as impressive as it is, is too big and tank-ish for a Batman car. The creators could have made something more stylish and powerful both in movement and weapons without making that wide monstrosity. The only way I would like it is if he modified it to make it more Batman-ish for the new movie but that doesn't look like it will happen.

 

[sasquatchs]

This Batman isn't about style, he doesn't have the luxury of it. At least not yet

 

[ultimatefan]

I'm not sure if you missunderstood me or if you're adding a whole new point.

-Matchbox

Just addressing the notion that the car is sometimes perceived as slow.

 

[360sculptguy]

There was zero undercranking for the Tumbler.

And about the 220 mph quote, the fictional car is supposed to do that. In reality, the car for the movie topped out at over 100 mph during filming. As I recall, it was outrunning the tracking helicopter at some points.

I agree with what I believe you are alluding to. The actual speed of the vehicles built for movies isn't usually an issue. 80 miles an hour can look ridiculously fast on film and pretty damn fast IRL when something blows by you at that speed. As long as the bike has the low end power to screetch some tires and take off from a stand still relatively fast the high end doesnt need to be ridiculous. In distance shots a sense of Speed is kind of lost anyway and can be manipulated by the relative speed of the vehicles around the subject. If the bike can do 100 mph that'd be way more than enough. Close up bumper shots a foot off the pavement look screaming at 50 miles an hour and I'm sure we'll see a few of those. Of course its cooler if the fans can actually say that the bike does 220 or something similarly astronomical. Either way I'm sure someone will find a way to use the actual speed of the bike in the contentious "realism" debate.

My guess is the bike will have a couple different set ups. Sometimes for reaching top end speeds, sometimes geared to the low end power for close ups, and maybe sometimes with modified suspensions for jumping. I believe the Tumbler had heavier and practical lighter configurations as well, yes?

 

[360sculptguy]

Doesn't one of the cops in the movie describe it as a black tank?

Yes. Its amusing because when trying to describe it all he can come up with is "tank" when he knows there isn't really a word for what this thing is.

The Batman Begins vehicle, as impressive as it is, is too big and tank-ish for a Batman car.

That would be because it wasn't created for Batman nor is it a car. The storyline tells you that it was built for the military, like tanks, for running bridge lines.

The creators could have made something more stylish and powerful both in movement and weapons without making that wide monstrosity.

More powerful? Jeebus, shy of actually being a tank, I'm not sure how it could be more powerful. Everything about the shape, power and armament supports the script with 100% believability. More "stylish" wouldn't have supported the script and if forced would have been unbelievable as a vehicle built for the military..

The only way I would like it is if he modified it to make it more Batman-ish for the new movie but that doesn't look like it will happen.

Perhaps your issue is with Nolan and his writers as they are the ones that believe the Bat vehicles and indeed Batman's universe should be less flash and more utilitarian. Flash is for selling toys, not fighting crime.

 

[dark_b]

Doesn't one of the cops in the movie describe it as a black tank? The batman begins vehicle, as impressive as it is, is too big and tank-ish for a Batman car. The creators could have made something more stylish and powerful both in movement and weapons without making that wide monstrosity. The only way I would like it is if he modified it to make it more Batman-ish for the new movie but that doesn't look like it will happen.

maybe. but thank god it is not to long and to low
burton and scumacher?

 

[Muziko]

That's why I loved the Tumbler so much. It fit so well in that movie. Did it fit well in the comics Batman? Maybe not (especially compared to TAS) But it fit oh so very well in the Nolan Batman Universe. Let's keep in mind that the current franchise is someone else's (other than the comic book writers) vision of the Bat. He's not re-writing it, just doing it with a twist. Personally, I think he's following the comics better than Shumacher OR Burton did... even with his "realistic" take on the subject. But I don't want to start things up (I think I just did... whatever.)

 

[cryptic name]

Suuuure. It was nicknamed "Tankman Returns" just for kicks.

that's one of the dumbest arguments i've read on these boards, and that's saying something.

a tank is a large, slow, armoured, heavily armed assault vehicle.
the tumbler is small, fast, agile, amroured and lightly armed. it's more of a stealth car than a tank. hell, Burton's batmobile was way more resiliant than the tumbler, and nowhere near as fast.

but maybe this will make it easier for you.

tank

tumbler

 

[MacLeod]

Showing a picture of a tank actually just makes me dislike the tumbler more as a Batman car. I like the vehicle but not as a Batmobile. I won't discuss the Forver or the 4th movie batmobiles because I don't believe they are effective at all, they are all for show. However, the 89 batmobile is bullet proof but I would imagine so is the tumbler. The only reason the 89 car isn't as fast is because it was made 18 years ago. Now, realizing that it is a movie only it doesn't have to be fast, that's the beauty of it. You can say anything you want on screen and it becomes automatically believable as long as the writers come up with an explanation. It's not about realism, if it were the tumbler wouldn't be able to race across rooftops, it's about look and creation. The tumbler could have been created differently, and/or modified, to be more sleek and less tank-ish.

 

[cryptic name]

lets just forget the whole thing. the tumbler is what it is, if anyone wants to call it a tank, fine. this is the batcylce thread, let's get back to that.

 

[The Kid]

tumbler looks like a hoth snow speeder. batcycle looks like a speeder bike.

is nolan a star wars fanboy?

 

[cryptic name]

tumbler looks like a hoth snow speeder. batcycle looks like a speeder bike.

is nolan a star wars fanboy?

holy crap it does look like a snowspeeder...cool

 

[MacLeod]

As much as I didn't like the Tumbler I saw the reason for having tires in the front when it crashed through things. However, the new Bat "pod" (hate that name) has long guns coming out the end of the front wheel. Personally, I think it's another attempt to urbanize Batman rather than trying to make it real and a comic book movie at the same time. I know I'll get slack for that.

 

[Monstera]

tumbler looks like a hoth snow speeder. batcycle looks like a speeder bike.

is nolan a star wars fanboy?

Still wasting your days talking about a franchise you don't even like I see.

 

[The Kid]

Still wasting your days talking about a franchise you don't even like I see.

The movie's an ok flick.

What i don't like is the fans of it who insist everyone must step in line and slobber over it or be branded a heretic.

Actually. I know what to expect. The dark knight will show fights, will be better written, and better acted, and people will spit on begins as a result.

 

[Matchbox]

stupid double posting...

 

[Matchbox]

Doesn't one of the cops in the movie describe it as a black tank? The batman begins vehicle, as impressive as it is, is too big and tank-ish for a Batman car. The creators could have made something more stylish and powerful both in movement and weapons without making that wide monstrosity. The only way I would like it is if he modified it to make it more Batman-ish for the new movie but that doesn't look like it will happen.

You're perfectly entitled to you're opinion of it not looking "Batman" enough. However, I don't think it's fair to call it a "wide monstrosity". As I've said before, the Tumbler really isn't much bigger than an ordinary car. And yes, the officers in the movie called it a "black...tank". However, I think that had more to do with the way it ran over that cruiser. (Also, the way the Tumbler fired explosives into the concrete pediment--which would be easy to remind one of tank weaponry) But again, the whole "tank" comparisons mostly stem from the Tumbler's power and weaponry and NOT it's size/shape, in my opinion.

-Matchbox

 

[Agentsands77]

However, I don't think it's fair to call it a "wide monstrosity". As I've said before, the Tumbler really isn't much bigger than an ordinary car.

Yeah... it isn't that big. Just look at some pictures with people standing near it. It just appears bigger in the film.

 

[Katsuro]

Actually. I know what to expect. The dark knight will show fights, will be better written, and better acted, and people will spit on begins as a result.

Are you serious? When does that ever happen? When does a sequel cause the fans to actually dislike the first one, because they like the sequel more? I'm sorry, I just cant imagine that happenening. "Man! TDK was so awesome! Bale was great in it, unlike BB where his performance sucked!!! Nolan is a much better director now!!!" Sorry, I dont see it happening.

 

[Matchbox]

Are you serious? When does that ever happen? When does a sequel cause the fans to actually dislike the first one, because they like the sequel more? I'm sorry, I just cant imagine that happenening. "Man! TDK was so awesome! Bale was great in it, unlike BB where his performance sucked!!! Nolan is a much better director now!!!" Sorry, I dont see it happening.

Just using the SHH! boards as an example, right after Spider-Man 2 came out, a lot of people started to nit-pick the first A LOT. It was very odd. However, public opinion seems to have changed sides several times over since then.

-Matchbox

 

[El KnightoDarko]

Are you serious? When does that ever happen? When does a sequel cause the fans to actually dislike the first one, because they like the sequel more? I'm sorry, I just cant imagine that happenening. "Man! TDK was so awesome! Bale was great in it, unlike BB where his performance sucked!!! Nolan is a much better director now!!!" Sorry, I dont see it happening.

Well, u have to admit that no matter how good Begins was, it had its fair share of flaws. So theoretically, if Nolan produces a sequel that irons out these flaws found in Begins, while doing something REALLY fresh and original that has never been done in comic book movies before (again, I stress THEORETICALLY), then it could lead people to think "Wow! And I thought Batman Begins was the greatest comic book movie ever!"

Although I agree that people won't start hating on Begins just because of the (theoretical) superiority of TDK. At least I hope not.

 

[Katsuro]

Well, u have to admit that no matter how good Begins was, it had its fair share of flaws. So theoretically, if Nolan produces a sequel that irons out these flaws found in Begins, while doing something REALLY fresh and original that has never been done in comic book movies before (again, I stress THEORETICALLY), then it could lead people to think "Wow! And I thought Batman Begins was the greatest comic book movie ever!"

Although I agree that people won't start hating on Begins just because of the (theoretical) superiority of TDK. At least I hope not.

Well if that's all he meant by people bashing Begins, then sure, that coud happen. But i highly doubt TDK will make us turn on Batman Begins the way Begins made us turn on Burton's films.