One of my favorite pics of the new suit. One of the few flattering ones, that doesn't give him an egghead.
you know, all the complaints really have merit. Yet for some strange reason I think that when the film comes out it will be seen as good. And I don't know why..
my sculpt:
![]()


you know, all the complaints really have merit. Yet for some strange reason I think that when the film comes out it will be seen as good. And I don't know why..
my sculpt:
![]()
Look! Even though the lighting is different, it looks exactly the same!
course he does.There's only one problem. Batman doesn't smile!
very niceyou know, all the complaints really have merit. Yet for some strange reason I think that when the film comes out it will be seen as good. And I don't know why..
my sculpt:
![]()
I don't understand how it is possible to make something so inherently cool as Batman look so pathetic.
This is worse than any other Batsuit that has been used since 1989. I would honestly have the nipples back if we could get rid of the bra and jigsaw legs. How the hell did Nolan look at that and think it was a good idea, or even an improvement on the last one?
It's more of an acceptance on my part.I can't believe anyone defends it.
Perhaps it's designed as some sort of armored material, but is broken down to give Batman more freedom? While at the same time, it's broken down in a way to look remotely methodical.I can't figure out who the hell decided jigsaw legs made any sense. Why would the armour be designed like that? It's completely beyond rational explanation. The rest of the suit, despite the fact that it's not Batman, makes some degree of fictional sense, but the legs? What the hell? The pattern doesn't even conform to muscle groups. It doesn't conform to anything. It has no purpose, practically or aesthetically. It doesn't look like armour, it doesn't look realistic, it doesn't represent anatomy, and it doesn't look like Batman--it doesn't serve any goal the costumers could have possibly had. It's just visual diarrhea.
Saint said:I can't figure out who the hell decided jigsaw legs made any sense. Why would the armour be designed like that? It's completely beyond rational explanation. The rest of the suit, despite the fact that it's not Batman, makes some degree of fictional sense, but the legs? What the hell? The pattern doesn't even conform to muscle groups. It doesn't conform to anything. It has no purpose, practically or aesthetically. It doesn't look like armour, it doesn't look realistic, it doesn't represent anatomy, and it doesn't look like Batman--it doesn't serve any goal the costumers could have possibly had.
Segmentation at random areas does not create mobility--segmentation at areas where there is stress or buckling creates mobility. That's not what they've done. Those criteria are met, yes, but then they've added a dozen other superfluous breaks that serve no purpose. After you've made the necessary segmentation, cutting a subway map into his leg isn't going to make it any more mobile than that.Perhaps it's designed as some sort of armored material, but is broken down to give Batman more freedom? While at the same time, it's broken down in a way to look remotely methodical.
That's precisely my point--the only thinking that would make sense does not apply.why don't we try to understand the thinking behind this thing?
I'm not so sure. I mean, it's free at the groins; it's free at the knee-caps; and I assume all of the other breaks are designed to create even more flexibility for the Batman. Sure, there are a few random pieces laying around, but I think that's solely to create as much flexibility as possible, all while maintaining a relatively "cool-looking" and "professional" appearance.Segmentation at random areas does not create mobility--segmentation at areas where there is stress or buckling creates mobility. That's not what they've done. Those criteria are met, yes, but then they've added a dozen other superfluous breaks that serve no purpose. After you've made the necessary segmentation, cutting a subway map into his leg isn't going to make it any more mobile than that.
So you are not willing to broaden your mind a little?That's precisely my point--the only thinking that would make sense does not apply.
I can't believe anyone defends it.
I don't really give a toss about the practicality of the suit, but it is in this regard that the design obviously fails, and there really isn't any excuse.maintaining a relatively "cool-looking" and "professional" appearance.
I don't understand how it is possible to make something so inherently cool as Batman look so pathetic.
This is worse than any other Batsuit that has been used since 1989. I would honestly have the nipples back if we could get rid of the bra and jigsaw legs. How the hell did Nolan look at that and think it was a good idea, or even an improvement on the last one?
Entirely subjective. What looks hideous to you may look cool to others.I don't really give a toss about the practicality of the suit, but it is in this regard that the design obviously fails, and there really isn't any excuse.