The Dark Knight Batsuit Discussion Thread

[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]

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.

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:

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.