The Dark Knight Rises Batman´s new vehicle in TDKR II

[KalMart]

It also looks like the 'rotors' criss-cross.....kinda' like...

...but upside-down and below.

 

[dreamliner]

In this photo you can even see how the blades get attached to the rotors.

They must be tiny blades because the attachment is not that big. Yes, the blades "criss-cross".



Original photo: http://i.imgur.com/YlCfy.jpg

 

[KalMart]

Good pic. Strange design, but I guess that was the 'realistic' choice, instead of a tilt-vent setup like on a Harrier.

Any word on whether this is a single-purpose vehicle in and of itself, or does it 'turn into' that from some other vehicle, like the Batpod coming out of the Tumbler?

 

[AnneFan]

The Batwing looks so damn awesome .

Yeah. Most unique and striking Batman vehicle on film so far.

 

[dreamliner]

If you look at the GIF you can see that the Batwing's right rotor (to your left) has no attachment and no blades so maybe they didn't have time to finish the CGI for the trailer and they only could add the blades for the left rotor, which we see in the GIF. (I do not believe that)

I believe the Batwing loses the right rotor blades on the chase and it can fly anyway with
only one rotor/blade but not so smoothly as before so Batman will have a hard time
controlling it and finally will crash it.

No batwing, tumbler, batpod or HEMTT truck will survive at the end.

 

[KalMart]

It looks like it's attached in that pic/GIF, just seen directly side-on so we don't see the movement of the rotors as much. And the ends of the blade seem to be obscured buy the cockpit. But anyway, the design is clearer with those underside pics.

 

[dreamliner]

No, it looks like it's attached in that pic/GIF, just seen directly side-on so we don't see the movement of the rotors as much. And the ends of the blade seem to be obscured buy the cockpit. But anyway, the design is clearer with those underside pics.

You probably are right.

But comparing the rotor attachment in this photo:

To how it looks on this GIF:

It looks more like this rotor end:

I really don't know what to think.

Anyway, it will be great! t:

 

[KalMart]

I see what you're saying with the tip, but it also looks like there's a moving perpendicular attachment on the end of it as well. Or it could just be one of the supporting members in front of it, and it is actually broken off. Who knows? It's still had to get a definite/clear look at its full glory at this stage.

At least we know know that it's supposed to have two crossing underside rotors at the start. I still thinks it's an odd choice, but looking at it more now makes at least a bit more sense out of it.

 

[Gianakin_]

Since it doesn't alter the Bat's design, I don't mind them.

 

[dark_b]

f

i am not going to complain until the movie is out. but this shot makes it very obvious that the batwing is on a car rig. when a car is driving its shaking because of the road. a flying vehicle doesnt move or shake up and down like that.

huge respect for filming this in imax for real. but its an example where a CGI flyign vehicle would look 100% real in the shot. Double Negative and modern CGI studios can do this in 2011.

 

[dark_b]

i thought i saw every set pic from this movie. but this is the first time i am seeing this. this is proof that there are rotors under the batwing. and they have red dots for DN.

 

[The_Raganork]

i am not going to complain until the movie is out. but this shot makes it very obvious that the batwing is on a car rig. when a car is driving its shaking because of the road. a flying vehicle doesnt move or shake up and down like that.

huge respect for filming this in imax for real. but its an example where a CGI flyign vehicle would look 100% real in the shot. Double Negative and modern CGI studios can do this in 2011.

or maybe it's movement is consistent with that of a helicopter?

 

[SuperSoldier985]

I would think that anything that large flying that low would be bobbling quite a bit anyway. It doesn't look like anything out of the ordinary and it seems really nitpicky, especially for an imaginary piece of equipment.

 

[Duuude]

It has 4 turbines: 2 front and 2 rear. And 2 blade rotors on the belly. It will sound like 1 million bats screaming in a cave.

Plus when it starts to fire to the tumblers and the explosions and the score! OMG!!!

This pic makes me wonder if people who thought that it looks like a bat have ever seen one. If that isnt a flying lobster, i dont know what is.

This was going to be my point. If they didn't want it to bob it wouldn't. The machine is consistent with a helicopter.

The movement from the rig may be the reality but it's perfectly fine in the lore because it moves like a helicopter. So to say its an error of theirs doesn't seem very prudent or necessary.

It doesnt matter what it's based on, all that matters is that looks cool. Its a batman vehicle, who cares how real choppers fly?

Good pic. Strange design, but I guess that was the 'realistic' choice, instead of a tilt-vent setup like on a Harrier.

Yes Harriers are unrealistic. They dont exist in real life.


As for the rotor bases, they might be where the bat is bolted on the crane that makes it fly, and not rotors.

 

[Duuude]

i am not going to complain until the movie is out. but this shot makes it very obvious that the batwing is on a car rig. when a car is driving its shaking because of the road. a flying vehicle doesnt move or shake up and down like that.

huge respect for filming this in imax for real. but its an example where a CGI flyign vehicle would look 100% real in the shot. Double Negative and modern CGI studios can do this in 2011.

Do you dare question THE NOLAN? THIS IS REALISM WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. It shakes because Nolan specifically wanted it to shake!
HOW DARE YOU!

NOLAN NOLAN CHRIS CHRIS NOLAN NOLAN!

In all seriousness though, like you said CGI could easily have been used and no one would have been able to tell the difference but people like us that spent their time spying on the production. I am sure that if we didnt and we just walked in the theatre unaware of any of this, we would have trouble distinguishing what's real and what isnt. Needless to say it would have to be a good company and not the one that did the effects for Green Lantern. I am sure that ILM would make an even more real looking Lobster if that is even possible. Both techniques have drawbacks though.

 

[The_Raganork]

You don't think that if Nolan saw it shaking and thought: "It shouldn't look like that" he would say: "hey CGI guys and gals...stop the shaking"

You're suggesting one of two things:

Nolan doesn't realize it's shaking

Nolan does notice its shaking but is too timid/stupid/aloof to ask for it to be changed.

OR what I'm suggesting:

He's aware of the shaking and will probably modify it a bit but, keep it in because it's consistent with how something like that would move close to the ground.

And perhaps you should calm down your idiotic rebuttal of Nolanism. It's not my fault I can how an issue in production can be turned into a practical answer in the film and you can't.

You're lack of reasoning and imagination is not a constricting factor to everything in the film just as my ability to reason that the director looks over his film and can notice huge issues like the shaking and would change them if he wanted it is not Nolanism.

It just feels like you're trying so hard to find something wrong with the film to discredit it because you have a chip on your shoulder about something.

 

[Duuude]

Yes i am insecure about my appearence. If TDKR fails i will feel better about myself. Just so you know, i only hate the batsuit and the lobster. Everything else seems fine to me. I just cant take this nolanism that some posters show in here. Like how i cant say that i dont like how that thing looks without you coming out and defending it. "Its what Nolan wanted". Sure it is, but unless he plans to make the movie for himself, it should be what the rest of us want too. Same goes for the batsuit. Its **** and no fake realism or movie logic is going to make me like that turd.

And about the way it flies, perhaps they didnt anticipate that it would shake like that. Perhaps it wont be visible in the final cut, who knows. But it is now and since this thread is about the "bat" we're discussing it. Is it ok if we discuss its flaws or should we only post praising comments?

 

[The_Raganork]

Like how i cant say that i dont like how that thing looks without you coming out and defending it. "Its what Nolan wanted". Sure it is, but unless he plans to make the movie for himself, it should be what the rest of us want too.

No. Here is your issue:

You said it should be different and I said: No it's what Nolan wanted. It is HIS story and he's sharing it with you. You don't have any dominion over the story whatsoever. If you don't like it that's cool, if you don't like some parts of it that's also cool but in no way, no where will you ever have any sort of say into what happens and what doesn't happen in this film. If you did then everyone else would and we would have Riddler as the main villain.

Its not about what the rest of "us" want. Does this even make sense to you? Do you think the director is making the film to appease what everyone wants? No. He's making the film from a story he wrote with things that fit the series and will please the audience in his opinion but there's nothing in there that says he has to be constricted to what the audience is going want.

If every film was made that way there would be ZERO surprises and nothing to learn, enjoy in these films, just things we wanted and expected. You have to learn your place as a fan and as an audience member. He wants to please you but if you want a Batman film to be made that is 100% what you want then you have to make it yourself.

And about the way it flies, perhaps they didnt anticipate that it would shake like that. Perhaps it wont be visible in the final cut, who knows. But it is now and since this thread is about the "bat" we're discussing it. Is it ok if we discuss its flaws or should we only post praising comments?

I'm not saying you have to praise it, I'm asking you to use some common sense. You keep ignoring the meat of my post, I urge you to READ THIS:

When Nolan shot the thing on the truck, it shook. when he sat down to help edit the scene, it shook on camera. If he didn't think the shaking was acceptable don't you think something that obvious, something he's seen from day one, would have been changed during the CGI post production stage of the film?

It's not a questioning Nolan as a God or not but rather if Nolan is an idiot or not. I do not think Nolan is an idiot, or surrounded by idiots. If They all saw it shaking and thought: "Damn..it's shaking because of the truck..." don't you think they would go through CGI effects to make it fly smoothly if that's what they really wanted?

You don't think Nolan can take lemons and make lemonade?

What gets be ticked off is that people like you are so ready to jump on this as a flaw and haven't even thought of the possibility that a flaw this huge would be concurrent with someone whose never made a film before. If you enjoy Nolan's work then you know he has some degree of professionalism in him. That doesn't make him perfect but that does make him good at what he does.

To think the bobbing up and down is some flaw he refused or forgot to fix is thoughtless and insulting. Then when someone tries to explain to you that helicopters and other craft that low to the ground make similar motions you turn and tell us we're idiots cause we're just sticking up for Nolan cause we praise him as some kind of messiah?

OBVIOUSLY the shaking is from the truck rig and OBVIOUSLY it was kept in (and probably toned down) to simulate the movement of a craft of that make and size flying at that altitude.

 

[dark_b]

or maybe it's movement is consistent with that of a helicopter?

you know very good that a helicopter is not moving up and down . parts of the helicopter are shaking and vibrating.but the whole helicopter is not going up and down .

look i am not complaininig. i am just saying that it looks obvious that its on a car rig. big respect to WB by using a big machine on a road .

 

[Eggyman]

I haven't really noticed the shaking. It's moving, seems to be changing its trajectory, and the gif is a second in length so you cannot see what comes before or after. No biggie.

 

[The_Raganork]

you know very good that a helicopter is not moving up and down . parts of the helicopter are shaking and vibrating.but the whole helicopter is not going up and down .

A helicopter moving forward at a high speed low to the ground will have its nose pivot up and down. I've seen it 1,000 times.

look i am not complaininig. i am just saying that it looks obvious that its on a car rig. big respect to WB by using a big machine on a road .

I understand what you're saying but you're not thinking it through 100%.

It looks like it moves naturally and not like a space ship.

Watch the set videos again, it moved a lot more than that and shook, they've toned it down, this movement is consistent to how they want it to move

 

[dark_b]

A helicopter moving forward at a high speed low to the ground will have its nose pivot up and down. I've seen it 1,000 times.



I understand what you're saying but you're not thinking it through 100%.

It looks like it moves naturally and not like a space ship.

Watch the set videos again, it moved a lot more than that and shook, they've toned it down, this movement is consistent to how they want it to move

they had no control about this. no road in a big city is straight . when the car rig was driving it bounced because of the road.

 

[The_Raganork]

they had no control about this. no road in a big city is straight . when the car rig was driving it bounced because of the road.

This is getting exhausting.

They could have removed the movement by using post CGI effects! them keeping it is an admission they like that it moves that way.

YES, it moves that way because of the rig but, it is ALSO consistent with the movement of a ship that size at that altitude!

 

[dark_b]

This is getting exhausting.

They could have removed the movement by using post CGI effects! them keeping it is an admission they like that it moves that way.

YES, it moves that way because of the rig but, it is ALSO consistent with the movement of a ship that size at that altitude!

as big CGI fan on SHH i know that there is no way to use CGI to get rid of the bouced movement. if they would wanted to remove it they would have to seperate the whole batwing with 2D tools frame by frame.they would seperate it from the imax footage. then they would use a 3D tracking software for stabilization. then on top they would have to use a CGI batwing. so basically they would replace it with a computer generaed vehicle. which would be a waste of time.

is there any vehicle on this planet with rotors that is bouncing up and down? if there is is there a youtube link? thanks

 

[Duuude]

No. Here is your issue:

You said it should be different and I said: No it's what Nolan wanted. It is HIS story and he's sharing it with you. You don't have any dominion over the story whatsoever. If you don't like it that's cool, if you don't like some parts of it that's also cool but in no way, no where will you ever have any sort of say into what happens and what doesn't happen in this film. If you did then everyone else would and we would have Riddler as the main villain.

Its not about what the rest of "us" want. Does this even make sense to you? Do you think the director is making the film to appease what everyone wants? No. He's making the film from a story he wrote with things that fit the series and will please the audience in his opinion but there's nothing in there that says he has to be constricted to what the audience is going want.

But he does take the audience into account because his script has to be approved by the WB board of directors who only care about money. He cares about money too because the huge success of his batman movies made him a big director with a higher salary and the ability to shoot pet projects like Inception.

And another thing you should know is that the huge whining on the internet about Bane's voice (even Cameron Stewart, the acclaimed artist currently drawing batman comics joked about it) has put pressure on WB and they did the same to Nolan who will try and fix it. See our voice can be heard.

As for me, i am not trying to dictate how the movie will play out. The shooting is already finished. I am just posting on an internet forum about the movie. Among the thousands of "omg this movie is epic" you might hear a few complaints. Like how when you buy a video game, say... Assassins Creed, you might say "well i liked it, but i didnt like this, this and this. That's my opinion on this game and my thoughts on what could have been done better for a better gaming experience."

I'm not saying you have to praise it, I'm asking you to use some common sense. You keep ignoring the meat of my post, I urge you to READ THIS:

When Nolan shot the thing on the truck, it shook. when he sat down to help edit the scene, it shook on camera. If he didn't think the shaking was acceptable don't you think something that obvious, something he's seen from day one, would have been changed during the CGI post production stage of the film?

It's not a questioning Nolan as a God or not but rather if Nolan is an idiot or not. I do not think Nolan is an idiot, or surrounded by idiots. If They all saw it shaking and thought: "Damn..it's shaking because of the truck..." don't you think they would go through CGI effects to make it fly smoothly if that's what they really wanted?

You don't think Nolan can take lemons and make lemonade?


What gets be ticked off is that people like you are so ready to jump on this as a flaw and haven't even thought of the possibility that a flaw this huge would be concurrent with someone whose never made a film before. If you enjoy Nolan's work then you know he has some degree of professionalism in him. That doesn't make him perfect but that does make him good at what he does.

That's a good point but then again Nolan did give us those awful fight scenes in Begins, the silly one liners, as well as that horribly staged fight scene in Hong Kong. I've seen kids on youtube fake fights better than that. So maybe if fans call him out when he makes a mistake, maybe he'll hire a better martial arts team next time. Just like i'm sure if they make a sequel for GL, they will have better CGI after the fan and critical reaction to that film.