Boom said:
just barely recognizable as Batman.
Which is a HUGE, laughable over exaggeration. Show an image of Batman from any of the films in TDK trilogy to a random casual and he's instantly recognizable as being the Batman.
Which is the whole crux of your ... no offense ... but dumb, and inaccuract point that the Batman suit in TDK trilogy isn't "faithful" ... it sounds absurd.
Bat Ears
Cowl
Cape
Chest Symbol
Utility Belt
FAITHFUL ...
The Joker?
Wears Purple
Wears a Suit
White Face
Green Hair
Red Lips
Looks like a Clown
Some form of a deformed hideous or permanent Grin
FAITHFUL
You didn't like it? Sure. Doesn't mean it's not faithful to the essence of the overall look of the characters. You prefer a LITERAL exact translation from the page. There is a difference in what you're saying though. Do you consider the Man of Steel suit faithful? Or is just the Donner Suit faithful?
Boom said:
Meh, I disagree. We got a cowl that was separate from the neck piece thus allowing him to totally turn his head. This is now a bad thing? Bale was thinnest in TDK, to fit the story he needed to quicker, but also to show the wear / tear of being Batman. In RISES he was a happy medium size wise between how big he looked in BEGINS and how athletic he was in TDK. And this DOES NOT look like a bobble head.
Boom said:
(complete with koala nose and Doberman ears)
There was no Koala nose, more exaggeration.
Boom said:
the visually obscured chest emblem
This I actually agree with. BEGINS it was more prominent, then in TDK(R) it was smaller, more streamlined, but lost in the complex armor design. I prefer a more eye grabbing chest symbol too.
Boom said:
the all-black color scheme
While it isn't in the comics. What's wrong with all black? It's probably a more logical improvement over the source material. It's menacing, and always has made the most sense. Black and Grey makes sense too, but all black is probably a better sell.
Meanwhile back at the sizzler, Batman in the source has wore BRIGHT BLUE and grey. Which makes absolutely, positively no sense for a) someone pretending to be a giant bat or b) a creature of the night or c) intimidating, or d) a living gargoyle.
Boom said:
the excessive rigid plating, a cape that flows down the back and not around the body.
Agree here too, I prefer the organic, Dracula esque cape drapping or engulfing his body making him a living silhouette.
Boom said:
There has never been an established and recurring precedent in the comics for the kind of suit we got in TDK.
Source material can be improved upon. Things get tweaked from page to screen with real people, and real settings. Why? Everything doesn't work as well in real life.
After TDK trilogy the bat suit is drawn as being visibly armored. I take it you prefer the armor to be hidden within the design to make it more organic looking?
That's preference, not an issue of faithfulness. You're playing mental gymnastics to fit your bias.
Batman may not have been visibly armored in the source material prior to TDK trilogy, but it's always been insinuated he was wearing body armor. Usually underneath his cloth / pajama thin costume material. He's had numerous different colored costumes in the comics too.
I take it you wish to see Batman in cloth thin costume? Because based off your definition of "faithful" that's what he should be wearing. It's not the comic book itself on screen, it's called an adaptation.