Rank the suits.

[The Caped Knight]

I agree about the nod to the white eyes of the comics and TAS.

Funny about the sonar though, because when it was introduced to Wayne from Fox, he said it uses sonar "Like a submarine"
Was that an intentional joke or? Because shouldn't it be "...like a bat"? Maybe they played it off too smoothly that it went over my head, or maybe it was intentional, but I like to think it's a joke anyways.

Bruce was about to say Bat, but Fox cut him off . It's mention in the novel .

 

[Chris Wallace]

I'm still in the middle of the novel. They just revealed that Gordon was alive.

 

[Chris Wallace]

I do believe that Batman is one of the few heroes who could could make the spandex look work... and yet take him seriously.

Lighting is everything when it come to Batman... all the movies have proven that...!

I've never liked his tights. I mainly focus on the cape & cowl. To me, that's what makes Batman. His bodysui is ridiculous in the comics.

 

[the_scream]

To me, this:

Is much more like Batman than this:

The first suit is bulky but the cape and cowl look better. Plus, the bat symbol isn't some massive "superhero" logo. It's a subtle black bat. The second suit isn't the worst of the batsuits but it looks garish, and lumpy. Keaton doesn't appear to fill the suit and it looks like he can't move. I don't get why people prefer this one.

The Batman Returns suit is much better than 89 and doesn't have crappy molded abs either. Like the Nolan suits, it is a suit of armour not molded muscles. Batman shouldn't have to have the suit for cosmetic reasons. It should be utilitarian. That's why TDK suit makes more sense IMHO. It looks designed for fights not for looks.

 

[Chris Wallace]

I agree with you on that. Nothing says "I'm a scrawny little wimp" like a suit with built-in muscles.

 

[the GRIN Reaper]

That was one of my only gripes with the film. Comic book / TAS fanboy nuts begged for lenses for years and how cool they would look on screen with the Bat-suit. They actually looked ****ing ******ed, almost took me out of the intensity of the movie, and I was clamoring for when he'd take the damn things off. Bale's eyes in the cowl are more intimidating and thought provoking than any contact lenses or corny ass shield lenses.

 

[Chris Wallace]

I didn't mind the lenses. Especially not in the context in which they were used. I do, however, think he'd look stupid if they were used full time. "Dead End" convinced me of that more than anything. He's not Spider-Man or Iron Man.

 

[the_scream]

That was one of my only gripes with the film. Comic book / TAS fanboy nuts begged for lenses for years and how cool they would look on screen with the Bat-suit. They actually looked ****ing ******ed, almost took me out of the intensity of the movie, and I was clamoring for when he'd take the damn things off. Bale's eyes in the cowl are more intimidating and thought provoking than any contact lenses or corny ass shield lenses.

Good point. I kind of like the lenses but I agree that sometimes giving us fans what we want doesn't always work. Shoe-horning Venom into Spiderman 3 is a good example.

The lenses weren't in the film enough to annoy me but I prefer Bale's eyes to the lenses. Imagine how crap the film would be if he wore them throughout. It would just look really odd.

 

[the GRIN Reaper]

Yeah they didn't annoy me enough to ruin anything or even dwell on it ... luckily Nolan knew not to feature them too much. But what I didn't get was why he even needed them? Bruce manipulated Fox's concept to find the Joker? Fine, awesome. Fox was watching everything and relaying information to Bruce inside his ear piece in the cowl? Cool. Why would he need the lenses? It really didn't make sense. Fox was directing him where to go and what to do ... what was going on each floor, w/o Bats really needing to use them. But lenses / contact lenses for future films? CORNY. Don't even get ahead of yourselves. Eyes are always more important, and can easily be more intimidating.

 

[MrQuinn]

I agree with you on that. Nothing says "I'm a scrawny little wimp" like a suit with built-in muscles.

while I'm not trying to fully defend the idea of the etched muscles in the suit, I think it's just there to make him appear more menacing (in the eyes of villains, I mean)
The armor look still works as to be menacing as well, so either way. I think the muscle carving in the 89 suit isn't as dominant and eyesore-ish as in later films, where they put so much detail into the muscles for some reason. and it's even worse on the Robin suit because of the colors and the fact that he's supposed to be a teen (with huge bulging muscles, apparently).

but I dunno, it doesn't bother me all that much anyways.

 

[Alchemyst]

here's my list

1. TDK Batsuit - seemed more real world and tactical.

2. Batman Returns suit - had more of an aromor look, not too different from Batman 89

3. Batman 89 - Honestly, the suit fit for the time period and the direction, Batman was more like an urban legend in the films, therefore his suit had a somewhat monstrous look to it with the muscles being carved in. I for one, am one of those who saw Batman 89 in the theater and was scared ****less when they first showed him.

3. Batman Forever suit - way too much muscles, IMO, Val Kilmer looked weird with the cowl on

4. B & R suit - I just didnt like the design, and plus Clooney looked like he wanted to bust out laughing in every scene.

 

[MrQuinn]

4. B & R suit - I just didnt like the design, and plus Clooney looked like he wanted to bust out laughing in every scene.

haha yeah he always has a kind of **** eating grin in all his roles.

and Kilmer does look kinda weird in the cowl...his lips are too pouty or something.

 

[Chris Wallace]

Clooney was also smirking in every publicity still, like he just knew he looked like an idiot.

 

[Chris Wallace]

while I'm not trying to fully defend the idea of the etched muscles in the suit, I think it's just there to make him appear more menacing (in the eyes of villains, I mean)
The armor look still works as to be menacing as well, so either way. I think the muscle carving in the 89 suit isn't as dominant and eyesore-ish as in later films, where they put so much detail into the muscles for some reason. and it's even worse on the Robin suit because of the colors and the fact that he's supposed to be a teen (with huge bulging muscles, apparently).

but I dunno, it doesn't bother me all that much anyways.

The muscle detailing was designed to give the illusion of a nude torso-hence the nipples.
To be honest, I could've done without some elements of the DK suit, like the straps & all the plating. Mainly b/c it's difficult to draw. But the suit was still effective.

 

[DACrowe]

To me, this:

Is much more like Batman than this:

The first suit is bulky but the cape and cowl look better. Plus, the bat symbol isn't some massive "superhero" logo. It's a subtle black bat. The second suit isn't the worst of the batsuits but it looks garish, and lumpy. Keaton doesn't appear to fill the suit and it looks like he can't move. I don't get why people prefer this one.

The Batman Returns suit is much better than 89 and doesn't have crappy molded abs either. Like the Nolan suits, it is a suit of armour not molded muscles. Batman shouldn't have to have the suit for cosmetic reasons. It should be utilitarian. That's why TDK suit makes more sense IMHO. It looks designed for fights not for looks.

Again based on looks, i see what you're saying, but the B'89 suit looks more iconic. The thing that really stands apart and makes BB arguably better is the cape which is very fluid and almost like a lquid flowing over him and is very comfortable. In B'89 it just looks like a cape and only gets that iconic look once in that amazing shot of Batman falling through the skylight at the museum.

I just think though the B'89 suit looks wise is pretty badass looking and while I like the utilitarian design, I think the industrial streamlined like of BR is the best one, hence it was my top pick. BB looks a little too plain when the cape recedes and it looks WAY overdone in TDK. BR kept it simple. B'89 may have fake muscles but it still looks badass when lit right and when Keaton stares there and just glares. I also prefer the ears in the Burton movie as opposed to the shorter more inward pointing ones in the Nolan pictures.

But I think looks wise the BB suit is awesome, especially the cape. The suit in TDK I think is actually pretty ugly in full light when it is standing or sitting still, luckily that is only like two scenes in the movie so I can ignore that and it still looks better than the nipple suits.

P.S. I like the yellow oval as that is what I grew up with.

Also, in those two pictures it might help B'89 that Keaton is standing behind the more awesome than awesome Furst Batmobile and Bale is standing behind...a tumbler painted black. The tumbler grew on me, but I didn't exactly shed a tear when it went boom. I was much sadder to see the Batmobile in BR destroy itself into the Bat Missile. The Batpod was an upgrade from the tumbler.

 

[obiwan]

To me, this:

Is much more like Batman than this:

.

no way. i dont agree with that at all. B89 suit looks waaay more batman-ish then any of the weirdly shaped nolan suits. the suits from nolans movies look way more "fake" then the older ones with the muscles. and the comic books have real musculature, thus the B89 suit looks more accurate.

 

[MacLeod]

no way. i dont agree with that at all. B89 suit looks waaay more batman-ish then any of the weirdly shaped nolan suits. the suits from nolans movies look way more "fake" then the older ones with the muscles. and the comic books have real musculature, thus the B89 suit looks more accurate.

I completely agree, especially for the 89 suit. For me it's not which one is more realistic or looks more realistic because let's face it, none of them will work in the real world no matter how much you want to pretend they will. To me, it's which one looks like Batman and the two newer ones do not. Batman should look like a very muscular person or even animalistic in my opinion. Having him in a straight lined armor looking costume or strapped on overlappping plates is very far from what he should be. Also, since it's a movie I think the costume should look good first and then, and only then, worry about practicality. Batman should look the part first and the storline, director, lighting, and editor should make it work on screen. Making a costume that is the closest thing to the real world is pointless, if I wanted to see a real world costume work I would watch riot gear police officers on the news. I'm not here to start an argument, although there is a possibility it will, but since it's a movie and you have to pretend that Batman exists in the first place he should look like Batman. Pretending that everything else is real but trying to wrap your head around a "real" costume is counterproductive for me, it ruined the movie. Batman should have muscles, whether they be real or fake, the symbol should be noticable, whether it be yellow or black on grey, and the cape should be part of the costume some how, not attached with cape clips. I'm not a Burton devotee but the 89 suit came close, or at least started, what I would hope to see on screen. I would like to see something other than the uber-reality costume in the future and see something that I think is more Batman-esq, and no, I don't mean spandex, just something closer to my vision of Batman.

 

[obiwan]

maybe if they didnt introduce lucious fox into the franchise and had bruce wayne make all the gear himself, then maybe we would have a more classic version of batman. but because they had bruce wayne get all his gear from fox, everything had to be already made, which meant no bat-shapes on the cars, suits, etc. the only batsymbols were the ones bruce added on himself, tyhe ears, symbol and baterangs. everything was kind of taken as is, no modifications. if bruce wayne made everything himself, like he does in the comics and older films, then i think we would have seen more batmotifs because hes supposed to be obsessed.

 

[MacLeod]

That's fine but the costume still could have been dark grey and black. The car was painted black it could have easily been batified too with something simple. Maybe if that was done I would take it as more of a Batman movie and not a normal vigilante movie like I do see it as. It was a good movie just not Batman to me.

 

[Chris Wallace]

no way. i dont agree with that at all. B89 suit looks waaay more batman-ish then any of the weirdly shaped nolan suits. the suits from nolans movies look way more "fake" then the older ones with the muscles. and the comic books have real musculature, thus the B89 suit looks more accurate.

I'm quite fond of the suit. But the problem I think a lot of people have is the knowledge that the muscles are in the suit. When he moves, they don't. Thankfully his movement was kept to a minimum or the illusion would've quickly fallen apart.

 

[Chris Wallace]

I completely agree, especially for the 89 suit. For me it's not which one is more realistic or looks more realistic because let's face it, none of them will work in the real world no matter how much you want to pretend they will. To me, it's which one looks like Batman and the two newer ones do not. Batman should look like a very muscular person or even animalistic in my opinion. Having him in a straight lined armor looking costume or strapped on overlappping plates is very far from what he should be. Also, since it's a movie I think the costume should look good first and then, and only then, worry about practicality. Batman should look the part first and the storline, director, lighting, and editor should make it work on screen. Making a costume that is the closest thing to the real world is pointless, if I wanted to see a real world costume work I would watch riot gear police officers on the news. I'm not here to start an argument, although there is a possibility it will, but since it's a movie and you have to pretend that Batman exists in the first place he should look like Batman. Pretending that everything else is real but trying to wrap your head around a "real" costume is counterproductive for me, it ruined the movie. Batman should have muscles, whether they be real or fake, the symbol should be noticable, whether it be yellow or black on grey, and the cape should be part of the costume some how, not attached with cape clips. I'm not a Burton devotee but the 89 suit came close, or at least started, what I would hope to see on screen. I would like to see something other than the uber-reality costume in the future and see something that I think is more Batman-esq, and no, I don't mean spandex, just something closer to my vision of Batman.

Okay-help me out here; are you saying that this

looks animalistic?
Again, I agree that Batman should be muscular, but Keaton, Kilmer & Clooney were not. Bale is. If the man has muscles, the suit doesn't need to. I don't need an illusion if I know they're there.

 

[obiwan]

all 6 film suits had fake muscles, none of the outfits were skin tight, athough i think the BB suit came the closest. all of them though had fake musculature, whether it be anatomically correct or armor looking.

 

[MacLeod]

Okay-help me out here; are you saying that this

looks animalistic?
Again, I agree that Batman should be muscular, but Keaton, Kilmer & Clooney were not. Bale is. If the man has muscles, the suit doesn't need to. I don't need an illusion if I know they're there.

That looks good in my opinion, not because it's spandex but because it's the look of Batman I would hope to see. You can make the blue go to black and take away the trunks and yellow oval and I'd still like it. As far as being animalistic I mean it in the sense that when you look at him you don't know if he's a man or a monster, that and I like a leather type cape for a more animal look. In Begins and TDK I never, not once, got the impression that he was anything more than a man. Eventhough Begins had lines of, "I heard he can fly" etc. I didn't feel it. I miss the myth aspect of Batman.

As for the illusion of muscles, EVERY costume gives the illusion of definition no matter how built the actor is. Just because Bale is big should mean the costume should suffer. I believed Keaton as Batman because of the costume and movie not because of the size, or lack of size, of Keaton. If the actor was very muscular than no extra help would be needed but that isn't the case in any of the actors, even Bale. Bale's Batman isn't big because Bale is, Bale's Batman is big because he's wearing a rubber suit. Wearing that rubber suit takes away all need for real muscles. Bale was the biggest true, but he still wore a rubber suit that gave extra padding to make him look bigger in certain areas like the shoulders, chest, and definition in the abs. The illusion was made that he was muscular even if it wasn't made to be that obvious. Every superhero movie adds padding to give the actors a better look, all the Batman movies have done is make the padding visible for eight times in a row. Anyone could have worn a Begins or TDK suit fitted for them and looked the same, we really only know Bale is bigger because of the other scenes not the necessarily the Batman scenes.

Now, if he should be muscular I would like to actually see muscles not straight lines or straped on rubber. People don't like fake rubber muscles and that's fine but I can't stand a fake design that is supposed to resemble muscles on rubber. It's really the same arguement since he still wears something that's visible. The solution in my opinion is to give the appearance of muscles under a costume. No actor they choose is going to be big enough to pull off just wearing a costume without padding, but it would be a good change to not see the padding for once in my opinion. Also, can we please get away from making him monochromatic so the symbol stands out and the mask and cape match in color and look connected.

 

[MacLeod]

all 6 film suits had fake muscles, none of the outfits were skin tight, athough i think the BB suit came the closest. all of them though had fake musculature, whether it be anatomically correct or armor looking.

Good points. Keaton was probably the smallest and Bale was probably in the best shape and yet in costume they both looked big. Granted one costume is an obvious muscular shape while the other is more armor looking but they were both designed to make the actor look bigger and more defined. That is why I dislike the Begins costume and the TDK ones because they, in my opinion, are trying to get away from looking muscular while still attempting to resemble muscles and both were done with rubber again. I see no difference in costumes from movie to movie except for the fact that I've disliked each one more and more in succession.

 

[Bubastis]

Anybody who saw the scene where Batman interrogates the Joker knows how effective Bale's eye contact was. His eyes were so brilliantly lit too, it was like they were just a little white light peeking out, staring into the joker. But without being soulless. You could tell he was thinking about what the Joker was saying.