BvS The Batsuit Thread - - - - Part 20

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]479141[/split]

 

[John-An]

I'm in shock right now, so I made this poll to see what people think about the new beastsuit I mean batsuit

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

No one generally cares about the costumes looking alike cuz they have always looked alike.

 

[Marvin]

No, putting down an element of the character that has tradiontally been a part of their aesthetic for 75 and that is no more or less "realistic" or "tactically advantageous" in a comic book world, in favour of building up a new one, is what I take exception with. Seems you misunderstood when I explained that in my last post.

Yea I know what you said, that's why I disagreed. 75 years of history suggests that the belt has had different interpretations for one. Liking one thing over another and then specifying why you like that thing vs what the other didn't offer..."I like the tumbler because this element of it(...traction and tactical so forth) is much better than the 89car which I like for it's various offerings, mostly aesthetic." I still think darker gear is more advantageous to this point than lighter gear.

Please remind me of that scene from TDK when Batman is caught because of the reflectivity of his belt. I mean, it must have happened for you to have some basis for your complaint concerning "improvement".

Glad we are on the same page as to what color bronze is. I would assume you would agree that the Begins belt that isn't. As for scenes in any batman film where he's exposed due to his belt exposing him..never said it's happened, the 97 batmobile never ran out of gas either, doesn't mean it shouldn't have a high capacity gas tank though. That's not what the stories were about however. The issue is that of design vs premise.
"I can't wear a brightly-colored costume that makes me a target... " -jla
The (internal)logic speaks for itself, without needing to see it happen to make the point. If the character wore a golden cape and boots in the comics I'd be saying the same about this photo reveal. "I prefer this direction in regards to the premise/character"

Why I asked you about the symbol
You said the onus is on me to prove the yellow belt is a liability over the black(dark) belt. Then went on to say how the symbol on chest and other accessories serve no practical purpose. Seeing as how you won't accept my answer to your inquisition I decided to look at the issue at it's root. Why you have any onus in this at all is because you took it upon yourself to assert that if one is going to complain about choosing a yellow belt over a black one, then various other aspects of batman are worth complaining as well and not worth accepting on the premise of not 'tactically disadvantageous'. I simply asked: if someone who thinks batman wearing yellow stuff comprises the point, why he should also think batman wearing a dark symbol on his chest is also worth complaining lest be called a hypocrite?

My point has always been that when it comes down to the practicality being undermined, it is when the design decision itself works against that goal. Not everything needs a purpose but it's when things work against said purpose that they become worthy of criticism on an 'impractical' level. Yellow belt vs black, see interchangeable navy gear being all black. If you put a dark grey US flag on the seals backs that will warrant no complaints from me; But a giant yellow one....

Your description of what batman is and what he drives and such comes down to the interpretation. Nolan for example didn't call things the 'bat car/bat plane bat themed costume' he called them things like military grade armored fire proof suit with a built in glider, a detachable 'pod', the tumbler didn't seem bat themed to me personally, then there is ideas of mutation, genetic modification and psychosis all pretty real...etc. Point being you can take the premise and make it sound as silly as you need, you can interpreted as fantastical as you want, but calling an interpretation(such as nolan's) some desperate need to make sense...I don't agree. If anything that's where the language takes on the role of belittling. The premise is what it is, how fantastical it is, is upto the creator and his audience in kind. imo.

On Robin
I never said anything about the various improvements the robin or batman associates could use when it comes to their costumes. Only that there are several. I tend to try not to speak on that for unlike batman and his various coloured belts, you really run the risk of crossing the line of adaptation/tradition if you change those other characters however drastically. The issue however being is robin all that tactical, the answer being no he could be far moreso...the design could be 'improved' if you will. I personally recall Damian showing up and with the hoodie only to have that questioned in book when it comes to how exposed it would leave him to certain types of attacks(go figure). Robin serves another type of purpose when it comes to the story as far as I'm concerned(robin in particular) such as was the case in DKR. As does batman taking on any partners in his mission. But it has it's place. I would argue Arkham city begins to address the robin costume issue in a way i would appreciate.

On Strawman
I said you pulled out a strawman cause you all of a sudden think I or anyone ever said two words about the yellow belt being 'The Most Tactical Disadvantageous Aspect To Batman' when really, the point was that a Dark Belt is far more advantageous and tactical than a yellow one. Saying I am arguing the former would be 'strawman'. fun or otherwise. I actually think the traditional batman costume has various other flaws that could be improved in film, such as the combat boots(looks like they got to that already) and few other things.

Not sure if the point was made properly but I pulled the reference of that military gear to convey the simple fact that practical/tactical gear can still be described as such in spite of 'mouth openings' or even 'yellow belts'. It's about seeing where things can improve. maybe polarized water goggles for the seals next time..

Okay. Apparently my statement on artist/creative decision taking precedence over actual logistical concern or "real world" application went over your head.

When it gets to the point that posters start with the subtle ad hominem, however indirect...you know things have ran their course.

In closing, I also think a batman with short ears enables for far more effective combat than if he has really long ears. Another improvement in practical design I like, without compromising on various tradition. Glad it's 'finally' happened. That goes double for the spandex vs body armor.


Bowing out.

 

[HUMANIMAL]

No one generally cares about the costumes looking alike cuz they have always looked alike.

in comics or in movies?

 

[Mr. Finger]

No one generally cares about the costumes looking alike cuz they have always looked alike.

Well, at least until they started making Batman movies.. Then it all changed.
Prior to that? Everything was spandex, and it was fine.
No matter the stories..
No matter the weapons..
For 50 years, no one worried about Bats needing any armor..

Then came Burton.. And they chose to protect the small man Keaton..
And nothing was every the same.

Getting back on track I say...

 

[HUMANIMAL]

well its like that times changeing and the try to explain more and more ..as why does superman is able to fly how he changes during his childhood...and so on on ...
no one cared back then because writers didnt thought about that yet...
later on they felt the need to develop it even further and explain how it must feel having such power and or responsibility..
thats the psychoanlysis aera..
and thats why such movies are getting darker and edgier...cause they search for the ground in characters...

 

[Mr. Finger]

Sorry man...
batman books were darker and edgier prior to these darn movies ever being made..
Killing Joke came out before Burton's movie.. And we wanted that type of feeling.
Instead we got a hyena for a joker, and Prince singing songs.

The books have been dark for a while..
IMO... The change reflects society, and what they are willing to expose kids to these days.

Violence used to be filtered..
Blood used to be filtered..
But now? It makes money.. And they will make as much of it as they can in order to sell it to those that are buying it.

This is why, older folks like me are happy...
I have been reading these books for 40 years, and always new the story was a dark one.. His parents were murdered right before his eyes..

Doesn't get darker than that..

It also comes back to the younger folks these days as well..
They want everything explained to them..
They can use their phone to find out the answer to almost any question in a minute or two..

Gone are the days of a 30 minute walk up to the library, and 2 hours going through it and many books to get that same answer, if you found it at all.

You say that no one cared back then? You were not here I suppose?

We, the fans of the books, have cared for a while..
Dark stories hit hard in the '80's.. And we sat through 4 movies and waited even longer to see what we knew would work.. And came from the books..

The writers thought about it, but didn't find it necessary to have to explain everything... They let the reader use their own imagination..
Something that I feel is diminishing these days..

All that I know is..
We have a Black and Grey Batman, without it looking like plated armor coming our way.. And it is glorious..

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

Sorry to be harsh (really, not F-ing with ya'lll) but most just don't give a crap. The post Burton Batmen suits are the exception. From comic, poster art, animated programming and going back to their various older live action outings, most would say the suits have had a very similar look and design. No matter the real world explanation (Batman WAS copied to a certain extent from Supes. They did create the costumes for live action out of similar materials.) I'd say most fans (especially those whose first exposure to the character is neither Burton or Nolan's) just accept it, have a Coke and a smile and move on to other matters of concern. Feel free to disagree but that's my view.

 

[Tony Stark]

Well, at least until they started making Batman movies.. Then it all changed.
Prior to that? Everything was spandex, and it was fine.
No matter the stories..
No matter the weapons..
For 50 years, no one worried about Bats needing any armor..

Then came Burton.. And they chose to protect the small man Keaton..
And nothing was every the same.

Getting back on track I say...

Yeah..... no. In Batman issue 1 it was described that he had a ballistics suit sewn into his costume.

I don't know that that was paid attention to for a long time, but that wasn't Burton's invention.

 

[Tony Stark]

FTR, I like the new suit, and I think it may bode well for this series. I'm glad they are going away from the hyper realism.

 

[HUMANIMAL]

i see and i agree. sure some fans cared but not the bright media as today.
and the similarities where only there because it was a bit of a rip off like most of the following superheroes. but today you could figure out what makes the one more superman and whats more batman like. i think nolans or burtons batman would work pretty well with this kind of superman which isnt the same as it was back then.

 

[Shikamaru]

Generally speaking, Batman has only worn spandex in the Silver Age, which was understandable.

One of the biggest misconceptions surrounding Batman comics is that he wears spandex, when he is considered to wear a fabric/kevlar-like material. Thicker than spandex, but also durable enough to prevent damage while still being lightweight enough for Bats to move in. The reason it's drawn like spandex is for stylistic choices. Giving the suits the same level of detail the material would have in real life wouldn't look as good visually.

 

[Mr. Finger]

Yeah..... no. In Batman issue 1 it was described that he had a ballistics suit sewn into his costume.

I don't know that that was paid attention to for a long time, but that wasn't Burton's invention.

I was speaking more about the "image" of the suits..
The idea of some sort of protection has been there for a looong time.
I agree with you..
But it didn't come of like a Robo-Cop wanna be until '89..
At least in my eyes..

 

[Mr. Finger]

FTR, I like the new suit, and I think it may bode well for this series. I'm glad they are going away from the hyper realism.

Yep

 

[HUMANIMAL]

Yeah..... no. In Batman issue 1 it was described that he had a ballistics suit sewn into his costume.

I don't know that that was paid attention to for a long time, but that wasn't Burton's invention.

and thats where explanations began...whats diffrent about the two is that batman needs some sort of protection...so the new suit is either a hightech super bulletproofcloth..which we all know exists. (even though its all fiction)
or he is in the business for so long that he just doesn't care anymore.

 

[Mr. Finger]

i see and i agree. sure some fans cared but not the bright media as today.
and the similarities where only there because it was a bit of a rip off like most of the following superheroes. but today you could figure out what makes the one more superman and whats more batman like. i think nolans or burtons batman would work pretty well with this kind of superman which isnt the same as it was back then.

Yep.. And that makes me happy..

 

[Nathan]

I hope we get to see the suit's durability in action. I want to see someone stab him with a knife, and he simply shrugs it off like nothing. I still hate how Talia was able to easily stab him in the Movie. That **** should not have happened. He should have worn a layer of nanofibers beneath the kevlar, that would have been completely stab proof.

 

[Mr. Finger]

I think that seeing the marks on the suit gives me hope that the suit is durable, and will be tested..

 

[John-An]

I wonder what's the design of the NEW batarang....

 

[HUMANIMAL]

Sorry to be harsh (really, not F-ing with ya'lll) but most just don't give a crap. The post Burton Batmen suits are the exception. From comic, poster art, animated programming and going back to their various older live action outings, most would say the suits have had a very similar look and design. No matter the real world explanation (Batman WAS copied to a certain extent from Supes. They did create the costumes for live action out of similar materials.) I'd say most fans (especially those whose first exposure to the character is neither Burton or Nolan's) just accept it, have a Coke and a smile and move on to other matters of concern. Feel free to disagree but that's my view.

no don't worry...we probably should just look at a certain artist who has certain style of drawing things. which i certainly fine with yet my question is that these two come from diffrent angles and other wordls where they have diffrent aproaches and to me its just abitof a headscrach when they appear wearing some similar styled suits...maybe it'l be explained. maybe i look to much into it...i dont know...but cool to see diffrent oppinions on that.. thats all what i asked for ;-)

 

[HUMANIMAL]

Yep.. And that makes me happy..

you mean to have all the diffrent incarnations of the characters, right?

 

[John-An]

With Bats and Supes arms showed..

are we gonna see Supes and Bats big guns doing this?

 

[Par Avion]

Yea I know what you said, that's why I disagreed. 75 years of history suggests that the belt has had different interpretations for one. Liking one thing over another and then specifying why you like that thing vs what the other didn't offer..."I like the tumbler because this element of it(...traction and tactical so forth) is much better than the 89car which I like for it's various offerings, mostly aesthetic." I still think darker gear is more advantageous to this point than lighter gear.

And for the majority of those 75 years, it has been yellow (Now bronze, gold, yellow or some other variation in the Nolan films and New 52). It's fine to prefer one aesthetic over another and provide your reasons, but trying to validate comic book world/fantasy aesthetics and conceits with "real world practicality" or tactical authenticity is ice skating uphill...

Glad we are on the same page as to what color bronze is. I would assume you would agree that the Begins belt that isn't. As for scenes in any batman film where he's exposed due to his belt exposing him..never said it's happened, the 97 batmobile never ran out of gas either, doesn't mean it shouldn't have a high capacity gas tank though. That's not what the stories were about however. The issue is that of design vs premise.
"I can't wear a brightly-colored costume that makes me a target... " -jla
The (internal)logic speaks for itself, without needing to see it happen to make the point. If the character wore a golden cape and boots in the comics I'd be saying the same about this photo reveal. "I prefer this direction in regards to the premise/character"

You find it to look more gold, I find it to look more bronze. Regardless, it obviously presented no obstacle or difficulty for the character in the film- unless you can somehow prove that it was a "tactical disadvantage"...

Then you have no precedent for any tactical advantage or disadvantage. Batman's costume obviously functions optimally even with a yellow/bronze/gold belt. But the character doesn't wear a brightly colored costume or golden cape or boots- only a yellow/bronze/gold belt which has never presented itself as an issue in all 75 years of Batman blending into the shadows. You "tactical advantage" argument holds no weight in this case.

Why I asked you about the symbol
You said the onus is on me to prove the yellow belt is a liability over the black(dark) belt. Then went on to say how the symbol on chest and other accessories serve no practical purpose. Seeing as how you won't accept my answer to your inquisition I decided to look at the issue at it's root. Why you have any onus in this at all is because you took it upon yourself to assert that if one is going to complain about choosing a yellow belt over a black one, then various other aspects of batman are worth complaining as well and not worth accepting on the premise of not 'tactically disadvantageous'. I simply asked: if someone who thinks batman wearing yellow stuff comprises the point, why he should also think batman wearing a dark symbol on his chest is also worth complaining lest be called a hypocrite?

Yes. This is pretty much our back and forth over the last several posts. You ask me to prove that the yellow belt is real world tactical (it's not)- I ask you to prove the insignia is real world practical (again, it's not-aside from theoretical symbolism) If you're going to pick apart one aspect, it's only honest to do it for every aspect.

My point has always been that when it comes down to the practicality being undermined, it is when the design decision itself works against that goal. Not everything needs a purpose but it's when things work against said purpose that they become worthy of criticism on an 'impractical' level. Yellow belt vs black, see interchangeable navy gear being all black. If you put a dark grey US flag on the seals backs that will warrant no complaints from me; But a giant yellow one....

Again deciding context. You again assert Batman to be wearing a "bright yellow belt" (as though it's the only yellow) When that's never been something I've argued...

Again, the Batman universe is a fictional one where one make many leaps of logic and suspends disbelief often for sake of an imaginative story and dynamic aesthetics. If the belt really was such a liability to the character (in universe), I doubt it would have survived so long (see also: Robin).

Your description of what batman is and what he drives and such comes down to the interpretation. Nolan for example didn't call things the 'bat car/bat plane bat themed costume' he called them things like military grade armored fire proof suit with a built in glider, a detachable 'pod', the tumbler didn't seem bat themed to me personally, then there is ideas of mutation, genetic modification and psychosis all pretty real...etc. Point being you can take the premise and make it sound as silly as you need, you can interpreted as fantastical as you want, but calling an interpretation(such as nolan's) some desperate need to make sense...I don't agree. If anything that's where the language takes on the role of belittling. The premise is what it is, how fantastical it is, is upto the creator and his audience in kind. imo.

One- I never called/impled Nolan's version desperate to make sense. Go back and check. I was referring to the need for an explanation for the yellow belt.

Two- Like I already said several times- in universe practicality/internal logic is fine, but once you start nitpicking on details such as a yellow/gold belt (that are obviously not an issue concerning practicality in the film/comics) not being "practical" and requiring "real world plausibility/practicality", then you have passed into the realm of needless nitpicking.

Either you're not really reading my posts or you're just obfuscating the point now.

On Robin
I never said anything about the various improvements the robin or batman associates could use when it comes to their costumes. Only that there are several. I tend to try not to speak on that for unlike batman and his various coloured belts, you really run the risk of crossing the line of adaptation/tradition if you change those other characters however drastically. The issue however being is robin all that tactical, the answer being no he could be far moreso...the design could be 'improved' if you will. I personally recall Damian showing up and with the hoodie only to have that questioned in book when it comes to how exposed it would leave him to certain types of attacks(go figure). Robin serves another type of purpose when it comes to the story as far as I'm concerned(robin in particular) such as was the case in DKR. As does batman taking on any partners in his mission. But it has it's place. I would argue Arkham city begins to address the robin costume issue in a way i would appreciate.

Okay, so tradition/source accuracy is okay in one case of validating aesthetics, but not in another because...? Robin must maintain all impracticalities because tradition... but Batman cannot maintain a tradition that has never proven impractical in any way because...it's suddenly "impractical" according to you. Got it.

On Strawman
I said you pulled out a strawman cause you all of a sudden think I or anyone ever said two words about the yellow belt being 'The Most Tactical Disadvantageous Aspect To Batman' when really, the point was that a Dark Belt is far more advantageous and tactical than a yellow one. Saying I am arguing the former would be 'strawman'. fun or otherwise. I actually think the traditional batman costume has various other flaws that could be improved in film, such as the combat boots(looks like they got to that already) and few other things.

A dark belt IS more tactically advantageous in the real world. Correct. Two issues- no one is arguing for a "bright yellow" belt (as you seem oft to do. In fact this seems like a strawman more than anything...) and Batman does not exist in the real world (he exists in a world where he has used a "yellow" belt or some subdued variation for his entire career without issue)- therefore nullifying this argument.

Not sure if the point was made properly but I pulled the reference of that military gear to convey the simple fact that practical/tactical gear can still be described as such in spite of 'mouth openings' or even 'yellow belts'. It's about seeing where things can improve. maybe polarized water goggles for the seals next time..

When it gets to the point that posters start with the subtle ad hominem, however indirect...you know things have ran their course.

Perhaps when one repeats their point several times over (very clearly and succinctly-in this instance the case for artistic conceit over real world practicality in a fantasy world) for it to be ignored every time, things have run their course...

In closing, I also think a batman with short ears enables for far more effective combat than if he has really long ears. Another improvement in practical design I like, without compromising on various tradition. Glad it's 'finally' happened.


Bowing out.

It's very fair to prefer one aesthetic over the other. Though in the comics, neither short nor long ears seems to have proven an obstacle/issue/practical disadvantage to Batman in any way.

 

[John-An]

Hey for those who might missed it.
Kevin Smith confirmed that the Batsymbol is black.