The Batsuit Master Thread

[cryptic name]

Adam West's was...and I'm not totally joking, either.

What about in the '66 movie when he thinks the rogues had done something to "Ms. Kitka" and he loses his ****, threatening to "rend them limb from limb"?

 

[Jochimus]

What about in the '66 movie when he thinks the rogues had done something to "Ms. Kitka" and he loses his ****, threatening to "rend them limb from limb"?

Hence why I said "not totally" - keep in mind this is the same man who, in the SAME movie, is convinced that he's just defused the concerns of the press even when the "answers" he gave them are clearly runaround B.S., doesn't raise his voice to a military authority who just sold a weapon-capable submarine to a known super-criminal, and just nonchalantly Batropes out of the UN Building without bothering to address the fact that the nine Security Council members he just rehydrated have their personalities all scrambled.

Back OT...something about all these manips that are "comics-accurizing" the suit just puts me off. Many of them are very well done, I'll grant you that, but I cringe at the thought of a live-action Batsuit that looks like that. Maybe it's just me.

 

[darklord1967]

Hence why I said "not totally" - keep in mind this is the same man who, in the SAME movie, is convinced that he's just defused the concerns of the press even when the "answers" he gave them are clearly runaround B.S., doesn't raise his voice to a military authority who just sold a weapon-capable submarine to a known super-criminal, and just nonchalantly Batropes out of the UN Building without bothering to address the fact that the nine Security Council members he just rehydrated have their personalities all scrambled.

Back OT...something about all these manips that are "comics-accurizing" the suit just puts me off. Many of them are very well done, I'll grant you that, but I cringe at the thought of a live-action Batsuit that looks like that. Maybe it's just me.

Understood. And it isn't just you.

But MANY others of us cringe at the fact the we HAVEN'T EVER gotten the comics accurate Bat-suit in a post-modern big-budget major motion picture. We cringe at the sight of these mono-chromatic, robotic-looking armored monstrosities that we have gotten up until now. To us, it's been a nightmare on the order of Kenner Toys producing all Batman films since 1989... each time rolling out another new "Tiger-Shark" or "Fractal-Tech Gear" Bat costume for the big screen... and all for the purpose of selling their action figures.

 

[Caekzor]

I can take the spandex look in the comics or animated series, but it looks really cheesy and lame in real life and I couldn't take it seriously on film unless it was something like a classic period piece.

I wouldn't mind something along the lines of Captain America's suit in a future incarnation.

Yeah. Really hoping for a Batsuit along the same lines. In dark grey and black. Those manips are the best I've seen.

Visually similar to the comics and the animated series while still looking like it gives adequate protection.

 

[darklord1967]

I can take the spandex look in the comics or animated series, but it looks really cheesy and lame in real life and I couldn't take it seriously on film...

I think it ultimately depends upon the tonal context it is placed in, and how it is lit, and photographed.

Spiderman and Superman BOTH wore (slightly textured and/or decorated) spandex in each of their previous screen adventures (Spiderman 3 / Superman Returns, respectively), and it worked just fine. No one had an issue with it at all.

Spandex is a garment like any other. It is NOT (in and of itself) "cheesy" just by virtue of being spandex. A spandex garment worn by a flabby, out of shape actor, or an actor that is too thin with no muscular definition might come off as cheesy, but that is a presentational issue... not necessarily a garmentry issue.

I've seen plenty of spandex hero outfits worn by brilliantly cast actors (especially in the world of fan films) that are lit and photographed to look AMAZING.

Likewise, I've seen some rubber muscle suits, padded latex, or plastic overly-sculpted armor nonsense suits (even in big-budget superhero films or TV programs) that look horrible even under the best lighting and photographic conditions.

I just think that ultimately it is the costume's TONAL TREATMENT and PRESENTATION that makes it cheesy or great... not the material that it is made of.

Those manips are the best I've seen.

Visually similar to the comics and the animated series while still looking like it gives adequate protection.

If you are referring to the 3D rendering by Achim Loobes, which I then manipulated into the Batman's classic comic book costume, then I thank you for your compliment.

My goal with this manip was to show that The Batman of the big screen need not be a monochromatic, stiff, robocop in a cape.

His costume could still resemble the classic outfit from the comics (with muted and darkened color tones, and a protective mesh textured bodysuit that wasn't ridiculously over-sculpted), and still appear dark, gothic, and menacing.

I'm tired of going to Batman movies and getting Darth Vader instead.

 

[Mr.?]

My goal with this manip was to show that The Batman of the big screen need not be a monochromatic, stiff, robocop in a cape.

His costume could still resemble the classic outfit from the comics (with muted and darkened color tones, and a protective mesh textured bodysuit that wasn't ridiculously over-sculpted), and still appear dark, gothic, and menacing.

I'm tired of going to Batman movies and getting Darth Vader instead.

A perfect suit for me would be a combination of both those manips. The cowl, boots, gauntlets of the blue one mixed with everything else on the black one would be spot on for me.

Edit: Actually the bat symbol on the black one could be bigger and darker too.

 

[Boy Scout]

I'm still waiting on someone to manip the MOS suit.

 

[Caekzor]

Spiderman and Superman BOTH wore (slightly textured and/or decorated) spandex in each of their previous screen adventures (Spiderman 3 / Superman Returns, respectively), and it worked just fine.

I have absolutely no problem with Spider-Man wearing spandex. Superman in spandex was alright back then, but I don't think it would have worked for MoS. He's an alien. I expect more out of his costume than something anyone can put together at home. And SR just looked bad.

I have not liked any of the costumes I've seen in fan films. They may be very accurate to the comics, but they just don't work for me in live-action. It looks goofy.

I agree that they do need to get away from the rubber suits. I know opinions on the design (mostly the look) of TDK's suit is very split for fans, but I think it was a step in the right direction.

If you are referring to the 3D rendering by Achim Loobes, which I then manipulated into the Batman's classic comic book costume, then I thank you for your compliment.

I was referring to the manips of Captain America's Avengers costume. Similar to what I said about Superman. Bruce Wayne is a billionaire playboy. I expect more out of his suit.

 

[Mr.?]

I'll say I would like the actor who plays Batman next to look as big as Cavill does in the MoS suit. That's the best build for Batman imo.

 

[darklord1967]

A perfect suit for me would be a combination of both those manips. The cowl, boots, gauntlets of the blue one mixed with everything else on the black one would be spot on for me. Actually the bat symbol on the black one could be bigger and darker too.

How's this?


.

 

[Boy Scout]

Nice.

 

[darklord1967]

Bruce Wayne is a billionaire playboy. I expect more out of his suit.

Interestingly enough, I expect LESS... especially if he does not wish to draw a connection between his public billionaire playboy persona and The Batman. It always puzzled me why the average person was never able to deduce that The Batman MUST be some sort of billionaire when he wears these ultra high-tech anti-ballistic suits, drives military Sherman tanks, and flies experimental military air-craft in the movies.

I would think that the LOWER The Batman's profile, the LESS likely he is connected to high-profile Bruce Wayne... a man who (as it is) is PUBLICALLY KNOWN for being the victim of a horrendously traumatizing crime as a child with the murder of his parents (and who, therefore, has the ample motive and means to become The Batman).

But that's just me.

 

[Boy Scout]

It always puzzled me why the average person was never able to deduce that The Batman MUST be some sort of billionaire when he wears these ultra high-tech anti-ballistic suits, drives military Sherman tanks, and flies experimental military air-craft in the movies.

He's done all that (and more) in the comics. Suspension of disbelief, man. Suspension of disbelief.

I would think that the LOWER The Batman's profile, the LESS likely he is connected to high-profile Bruce Wayne... a man who (as it is) is PUBLICALLY KNOWN for being the victim of a horrendously traumatizing crime as a child with the murder of his parents (and who, therefore, has the ample motive and means to become The Batman).

To the general public, Bruce Wayne is a brainless playboy who rarely, if ever, thinks about his parents. They have absolutely no reason to suspect he's Batman.

 

[The Batman]

Hence why I said "not totally" - keep in mind this is the same man who, in the SAME movie, is convinced that he's just defused the concerns of the press even when the "answers" he gave them are clearly runaround B.S., doesn't raise his voice to a military authority who just sold a weapon-capable submarine to a known super-criminal, and just nonchalantly Batropes out of the UN Building without bothering to address the fact that the nine Security Council members he just rehydrated have their personalities all scrambled.

I gotta disagree with some things here:

1. There's nothing to suggest that the press DIDNT buy Batman's B.S. In fact, they probably did buy it in all likelyhood due to Batman's reputation.

2. You missed the end of Batman's conversation with the millitary man. The millitary man notes that Batman sounds grim, causing Batman to sternly inform the man that he casually sold a submarine to someone who didnt even leave credible information. Batman is clearly pissed about it.

3. He does address the situation. He tells robin that "This strange mixing of minds may be the greatest service ever performed for humanity".

 

[Mr.?]

How's this?


.

I like it but I like the belt placement/color of the black one better.

 

[Majik1387]

I don't care for that manip personally. Too Adam West trying to be gritty.

 

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

I agree with you, thats the farthest thing id like to see in the next series.

 

[Majik1387]

I especially hate the granny panties with the overly bulky and high-waisted belt.

 

[Mr.?]

I especially hate the granny panties with the overly bulky and high-waisted belt.

Thats why I don't like the high belt, and I would rather the color scheme be black/gray.

 

[darklord1967]

He's done all that (and more) in the comics. Suspension of disbelief, man. Suspension of disbelief.

"Suspension of Disbelief", huh? That's what I say, every time someone tells me that it is necessary to dress The movie Batman in armor because it is more "realistic" than a man who is un-protected and relys on his martial arts training. As for the character in the comics, with the exception of Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns, the comic book Batman does NOT go around driving a big, clumsy Sherman tank that is incapable of going two blocks without completely destroying everything in its path. It's kinda tough to suspend disbelief when this non-official vigilante creates that much property damage throughout the city... all while driving a vehicle that is undoubtedly incredibly expensive... and yet no one surmises that the driver must be incredibly wealthy.

At least in the comics, it is established that Wayne has very carefully established himself as an un-official "sponsor" of sorts to The Batman.

To the general public, Bruce Wayne is a brainless playboy who rarely, if ever, thinks about his parents. They have absolutely no reason to suspect he's Batman.

Fair enough. But I think the general public starts to get a pretty big clue when The Bat is seen utilizing these INCREDIBLY expensive, ultra high-tech toys in such a highly visible way.

I like it but I like the belt placement/color of the black one better.

Fair enough. That type of placement seems overly "fem" to me, but, fair enough.

I don't care for that manip personally. Too Adam West trying to be gritty.

There is nothing "Adam West" about that manip except maybe the costume's color scheme... as well it should be since West's costume color design was actually somewhat faithful to the comics at the time. In this 3D image rendering, the cowl design , the length and designs of the cape, boots, and gauntlets, the mesh texture of the bodysuit, the muscular physique of the character... ALL of it is a major departure from Adam West's suit and basic appearance.

I agree with you, that's the farthest thing id like to see in the next series.

Well I wouldn't worry too much. This is Hollywood we're talking about here. I doubt very much we'll get something as classy and elegantly simple as this. We'll more than likely get another butt-ugly armor-clad action figure from Hasbro or whatever.

I especially hate the granny panties with the overly bulky and high-waisted belt.

These are not "granny panties". To my eyes, the character looks like he is walking around wearing long-johns without the trunks in place to visually break up the design. There's a reason why the design remained basically unchanged and "classic" for over 70 years, and why the character wears them to this day... even in the "New 52" armored costume configuration and video games.

It is the classic circus strongman configuration, and it works.

The original artist of this 3D rendering actually got the bulkiness of this belt correct. It is a UTILITY belt, after all. It should look bulky, functional, slightly military, and ruggedly masculine.

The only thing I did NOT agree with was the belt's original positioning upon the lower waist of a figure that was rendered to have the feminine outward curving hips and over-sized upper thighs of a woman. The pouches on the belt originally even fanned outward slightly at the bottom because of this anatomical (big hips) discrepancy. I corrected that too.

To my eyes, if The Batman wears his bulky utility belt in a way where his navel is peeking out over the top of the center buckle (as in the original 3D rendering), then that is way too low.

Batgirl wears her utility belt on her lower waist / upper hips too, but I wouldn't want to see it for The Batman.

 

[Majik1387]

They look like granny panties.

And Circus strongmen's undies rode up their asses all the time. It's outdated underwear that should stay in the past, no questions asked, no arguments.

It's a horrible manip of an okay render. I get it's your touches, so you're protective of your vision, but your vision is too old school.
Also, as an artist, it's a pretty big insult to washout the watermark of the original artist.
Plus the cowl is overly bulky; and you all complain about Batman turning his head, it's not gonna happen with that render.

 

[darklord1967]

They look like granny panties.

The only thing your posted photo demonstrates is how much the superhero shorts DO NOT look like granny panties... definitely not the ones I rendered. t:

And Circus strongmen's undies rode up their asses all the time.

Sheesh, a bit graphic there, huh? I'm almost afraid to ask exactly how YOU would know this little nugget of information.

It's outdated underwear that should stay in the past, no questions asked, no arguments.

Riiiight. There should be "no questions asked and no arguments" because you say so. Get over yourself, dude! This is a place to express opinions and to debate. You seem to be getting overly touchy. And not YOU nor any one person on this message board has the right nor authority to declare a topic un-arguable.

Clearly, we disagree. But I can disagree with you agreeably. Can you?

It's a horrible manip of an okay render. I get it's your touches, so you're protective of your vision, but your vision is too old school.

A "horrible" manip? Wow. Well, several people on this message board would strongly disagree with you that my work is "horrible". Of course you are always perfectly welcome to demonstrate YOUR far superior skills.

Of course, that is your opinion, and you're undoubtedly entitled to it. But I think you're being un-necessarily rude, once again. Seems to be a pattern with you.

Yes, they're my touches. But I'm not being protective of my "vision" so much as I'm expressing a preference for a costume design that has been a part of this character for over 70 years. What you call "old school" I call "classic". Perhaps that is why despite the character's costume upgrade in the comics during the recent "New 52" reboot of DC Comics, he still maintains his basic classic costume configuration, including the "granny panties" that you hate so much.t: You seem to forget that less than one year ago, The Batman of the comics still looked the way I prefer, despite your classification of his look as "old school".

Also, as an artist, it's a pretty big insult to washout the watermark of the original artist.

Oh for... Give me a break! While I removed the website's (NOT the artist's) watermark from my manip, you will note that I left it intact on the original rendering. You will also note, smart guy, that wherever possible, all throughout this message board where I have posted this image, I have always given the original artist Achim Loobes noted credit for his work. I removed the website watermark from my manip:

A) to differentiate my version of the image from the original artist's version

AND

B) to avoid confusion for anyone looking for my manip on the original website, expecting to find it there.

Plus the cowl is overly bulky; and you all complain about Batman turning his head, it's not gonna happen with that render.

I see nothing "overly bulky" about this cowl. And whether or not The Batman could turn his head wearing a cowl like the one rendered by Mr. Loobes is purely a matter of the materials that the final actual cowl would be made of. If it were a solid urethane or rubber cowl (like the ones used in the live action films) then turning his head would be difficult if not impossible.

However, if this same cowl were cast, instead, of liquid latex (ensuring flexibility of the neck and face sides with a thinner casting), then mobility of the head would be completely un-hindered. I know a little bit about this. I've poured several bat-cowls before.

 

[regwec]

Majik is the guy who declared you had nothing to do with the costumes you made, just in case you had forgotten.

I don't think he has ever said anything very constructive.

 

[darklord1967]

Majik is the guy who declared you had nothing to do with the costumes you made, just in case you had forgotten.

I don't think he has ever said anything very constructive.

No, believe me. I haven't forgotten, buddy. LOL!

 

[Boy Scout]

"Suspension of Disbelief", huh? That's what I say, every time someone tells me that it is necessary to dress The movie Batman in armor because it is more "realistic" than a man who is un-protected and relys on his martial arts training.

There's nothing wrong or illogical about Batman wanting to protect himself.

I am not for or against armor. What I want is for Batman to look protected. And if that look can be achieved using more flexible materials, then by all means.

As for the character in the comics, with the exception of Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns, the comic book Batman does NOT go around driving a big, clumsy Sherman tank that is incapable of going two blocks without completely destroying everything in its path.

Because a Batmobile that can turn itself into an aeriel vehicle is a lot more inconspicuous.

It's kinda tough to suspend disbelief when this non-official vigilante creates that much property damage throughout the city

Not really.

all while driving a vehicle that is undoubtedly incredibly expensive... and yet no one surmises that the driver must be incredibly wealthy.

Or a thief.

At least in the comics, it is established that Wayne has very carefully established himself as an un-official "sponsor" of sorts to The Batman.

So...he...made it known to the world that he is, to an extent, connected to Batman and his activities. I'm confused; how does that support your argument in any way?

Fair enough. But I think the general public starts to get a pretty big clue when The Bat is seen utilizing these INCREDIBLY expensive, ultra high-tech toys in such a highly visible way.

Apparently not, because he's been doing it for years now.

I don't get what you're trying to do here. You're (arbitrarily) bashing things that have literally decades of precedence in comics, and for what? To prove tha Batman's cosume should be more low tech?