BvS The Batsuit Thread - Part 3

[Bathead]

Respectfully, Shika, I see NO reason why they wouldn't work. I certainly hope you're not going to say "Well Superman doesn't wear them here so Batman shouldn't either" as I think that's nonsense.

 

[Majik1387]

Simple answer; because the trunks look stupid.

 

[Shikamaru]

Respectfully, Shika, I see NO reason why they wouldn't work. I certainly hope you're not going to say "Well Superman doesn't wear them here so Batman shouldn't either" as I think that's nonsense.

I was about to say just that. It would look ridiculous for Superman to not wear them and for Batman to wear them. Batman is seen as darker and edgier than Superman and also as a much bigger badass (for the record, being more badass =/= being a better character so calm down, Superman fans). It would be ridiculous to portray Batman as just that with the trunks while the superhero who is more of a boyscout lacks them. If both of them had the trunks, it would work. If both didn't, it would work. Heck, even if Superman had them and Batman didn't, I still think it would work to an extent. But I don't think most people will be able to take things seriously if Batman has them but Superman doesn't.

Keep in mind that if you give Batman the trunks, Batman and Wonder Woman will be the only superheroes by the time JL rolls around to wear their briefs on the outside. The latter has them on the outside because her superhero outfit lack long pants in the first place. Then it would get worse when/if they characterize Batman as a demon in human form and the least human JL member at heart, which is what he is often portrayed as in comics. People will question it and find it a bit silly.

This is all just my opinion, of course.

 

[A&W]

Batman should have trunks in this inverse. Your picking it apart way too much. Superman will probably have them in the JL film

 

[The Shape]

Wrong. There are plenty of fans that like the trunks that have been a part of the costume for over seventy years.

Your title of "The Oldest Geek" leads me to believe you have been a Batfan for several decades. I think I once saw you mention something about your age, and if my memory serves me correctly, you might really be the oldest Batman fan here?

If so, I just want to say that I'm sorry you will most likely never see Batman's trunks on a live action version of the character before the end of your lifetime (not counting West's).

You say there's no reason trunks wouldn't work, and maybe you're right. There is no legitimate way to discredit them, and if a filmmakers really wanted to, he/she might be able to make the trunks work. But let's just be logical here. It's probably not going to happen this go-around. Does not seem likely at all, so the trunk supports should once again brace themselves for a lack of trunks on this new Batman.

 

[D.P.]

I mean, Arkham gets it right...right?

Due to the psuedo-realistic art style/graphics, I think the best bet is to use Arkham as a source of inspiration moving forward.

Not anything that hasn't been suggested before, but isn't it pretty obvious?

I mean, we'll always debate this until the end of time due to preference, but if we all can't agree on this, then something is wrong.

In conjunction with this (Which has been posted a million times):

Quote from artist:

THIS IMAGE: I wanted Batman to be composed of triangular shapes to emphasize how dangerous he is. I also didn't want to draw him big and bulky because in my version he's primarily an acrobat, not a bodybuilder. He's constantly doing flips and jumping off rooftops, so he'd be extremely lean. I also gave him the more armored costume because

1) It looks cool

2) Having an outfit that looks more like protective gear while everyone else is wearing more "costume-y" outfits visually reinforces the fact that he's human and mortal. It reminds us that he NEEDS this to protect him and that's a trait that I (and I think most people) like about batman.

I also made Batman's skin even more pale here than in the Bruce Wayne pic to further emphasize the lack of warmth in Batman, and it also helped to add more contrast against the darkness of his suit. I like the idea of his face being that one little speck of pale, cold, humanity peeking out from this huge enveloping shroud of darkness.

 

[Bathead]

Simple answer; because the trunks look stupid.

No, they don't.

 

[Bathead]

Your title of "The Oldest Geek" leads me to believe you have been a Batfan for several decades. I think I once saw you mention something about your age, and if my memory serves me correctly, you might really be the oldest Batman fan here?

If so, I just want to say that I'm sorry you will most likely never see Batman's trunks on a live action version of the character before the end of your lifetime (not counting West's).

You say there's no reason trunks wouldn't work, and maybe you're right. There is no legitimate way to discredit them, and if a filmmakers really wanted to, he/she might be able to make the trunks work. But let's just be logical here. It's probably not going to happen this go-around. Does not seem likely at all, so the trunk supports should once again brace themselves for a lack of trunks on this new Batman.

A. Yes you're right, I am an old fart Batfan, been a fan since BEFORE Adam West came around. And, I suppose that's part of the reason I prefer the trunks, I'm just so used to seeing them after about 50 years of being a Bat-fan, that the suit just looks really odd to me without them.
B. Yes you are probably right, I have my doubts as to whether I'll ever see a live-action Batsuit with the trunks and I'm actually OK with that, as long as the suit is well designed otherwise. (I kinda like the new "52" design) It just bothers me when I see people saying such things like the trunks "won't work" in a movie ,whatever the hell that's supposed to mean, or such monumentally childish reasons like they "look stupid".

 

[Senator Pleasury]

Has anybody ever tried a Batman suit manip based on Nite Owl?

 

[Bathead]

I was about to say just that. It would look ridiculous for Superman to not wear them and for Batman to wear them. Batman is seen as darker and edgier than Superman and also as a much bigger badass (for the record, being more badass =/= being a better character so calm down, Superman fans). It would be ridiculous to portray Batman as just that with the trunks while the superhero who is more of a boyscout lacks them. If both of them had the trunks, it would work. If both didn't, it would work. Heck, even if Superman had them and Batman didn't, I still think it would work to an extent. But I don't think most people will be able to take things seriously if Batman has them but Superman doesn't.

Keep in mind that if you give Batman the trunks, Batman and Wonder Woman will be the only superheroes by the time JL rolls around to wear their briefs on the outside. The latter has them on the outside because her superhero outfit lack long pants in the first place. Then it would get worse when/if they characterize Batman as a demon in human form and the least human JL member at heart, which is what he is often portrayed as in comics. People will question it and find it a bit silly.

This is all just my opinion, of course.

I still don't see it as logical that because Supes doesn't have the trunks, it would look out of place if Batman did. Superman is an alien with alien designed clothing and Batman is about as "down to earth" as you can get. Small differences in their uniform makes more sense. I would think one of the major themes in the movie would be the differences between the two characters both stylistically, thematically, and psychologically. Having Batman wear his trunks would be one small way of adding to that theme. And if when they do the JL movie, so what if its only Bats and Diana have the trunks (unless they go old school and give Aquaman his black trunks for a third trunks wearer)? And the only ones I see finding it silly are those that already hate the trunks anyway.
Anyway, as I said in my other post, I understand that it's highly unlikely the trunks will make it to the screen, and I'm OK with that. But at least I would like to think there is no legitimate reason why they couldn't at some point. And, up to now I have yet to see anyone come up with truly compelling reason why the trunks could not work in a live-action film.

 

[SpideyFan866]

Simple answer; because the trunks look stupid.

Not really, No.

They CAN look stupid, but it really depends on the execution.

 

[SpideyFan866]

I mean, Arkham gets it right...right?

Due to the psuedo-realistic art style/graphics, I think the best bet is to use Arkham as a source of inspiration moving forward.

Not anything that hasn't been suggested before, but isn't it pretty obvious?

I mean, we'll always debate this until the end of time due to preference, but if we all can't agree on this, then something is wrong.

In conjunction with this (Which has been posted a million times):

Quote from artist:

Recent reports (which seem to hold weight do to the timing of DC's announcements) said that prior to the Batman/Superman movie being announced, WB planned to have a new Batman film in 2016 based heavily on the Arkham games, but when it was decided to have MOS2 feature Batman , they decided to do an Arkham movie still, but in animated form (Batman: Assault on Arkham) and for 2014 instead.

My point is, if that is true, we could see some Akrham game influence moving forward.

 

[Gianakin_]

Now, I really hate the trunks, but I find it funny that Singer (who's being blamed for the X-outfits) actually used the trunks in a post-BB world. Love it.

 

[Uroboric Forms]

There are plenty of believable reasons you can conjure up in favour of the trunks on Batman (crotch protection, a harness for if he attaches the grapnel to his belt to reel himself up, etc) and and black against grey is far less jarring in a modern, live-action sense. I have nothing against Superman wearing the trunks, but it wouldn't have worked with the MOS suit. With Batman, I don't think this is the case.

 

[D.P.]

Recent reports (which seem to hold weight do to the timing of DC's announcements) said that prior to the Batman/Superman movie being announced, WB planned to have a new Batman film in 2016 based heavily on the Arkham games, but when it was decided to have MOS2 feature Batman , they decided to do an Arkham movie still, but in animated form (Batman: Assault on Arkham) and for 2014 instead.

My point is, if that is true, we could see some Akrham game influence moving forward.

I think it would be a smart move considering the Arkham-verse seems to toe the line between fantasy and reality.

You can satisfy both sides of the fanbase. The realists and those who want to see rogues like Croc and Freeze.

In terms of the Batsuit though, I think they've nailed it.

 

[regwec]

I mean, Arkham gets it right...right?

No, it doesn't. That looks absolutely hideous. It is even more ugly and bulky than the TDKR suit, but with the added insult of those extraneous Robocop style gauntlets.

I feel sure that the AA design is reposted so much because, apart from those seen in the Nolan movies, it is the only one that people know. There has to be an explanation like that for the continued advancement of something so foul.

 

[D.P.]

No, it doesn't. That looks absolutely hideous. It is even more ugly and bulky than the TDKR suit, but with the added insult of those extraneous Robocop style gauntlets.

I feel sure that the AA design is reposted so much because, apart from those seen in the Nolan movies, it is the only one that people know. There has to be an explanation like that for the continued advancement of something so foul.

How do you feel about the design minus the bulk?

 

[Uroboric Forms]

Hey what's wrong with Robocop

 

[regwec]

How do you feel about the design minus the bulk?

Minus the bulk and the crappy proportions, it is the comicbook suit, with ugly gauntlets. There is nothing specific in its favour. We might as well just say that we want the comicbook suit. Which is a pretty good idea, really.

Hey what's wrong with Robocop

He isn't Batman. That's reason enough for anyone to feel ashamed of themselves.

 

[D.P.]

Minus the bulk and the crappy proportions, it is the comicbook suit, with ugly gauntlets. There is nothing specific in its favour. We might as well just say that we want the comicbook suit. Which is a pretty good idea, really.

Well, it executes the segmentation and texture well, so there's that. Trying to make a 1 of 1 comic book suit could easily end up looking like cheap spandex if it isn't handled properly. The cowl is one of the better cowls I've seen outside of the pages of a comic.

As far as the guantlets, I don't hate them, but I think they could be justifiable in order for Batman to carry more gadgets on his person. I don't think the belt is enough. Extra 'rangs, etc.

I don't aim to change your mind in regards to the guantlets though, as you've demonstrated time and time again how much you hate them on the forums. Just offering some rationale for them.

 

[Bathead]

Well, it executes the segmentation and texture well, so there's that. Trying to make a 1 of 1 comic book suit could easily end up looking like cheap spandex if it isn't handled properly. The cowl is one of the better cowls I've seen outside of the pages of a comic.

As far as the guantlets, I don't hate them, but I think they could be justifiable in order for Batman to carry more gadgets on his person. I don't think the belt is enough. Extra 'rangs, etc.

I don't aim to change your mind in regards to the guantlets though, as you've demonstrated time and time again how much you hate them on the forums. Just offering some rationale for them.

Well, that rationale would still work, even if you greatly reduce the bulk on both the gauntlets and boots, and give the body more realistic proportions. At that point he Arkham suit would indeed actually be the comics suit, which would be fine with me also, but the thing about the Arkham suit I find compelling is the material the body suit is made of looks like a material that could be highly protective, and yet flexible enough that Batman could pull off the gymnastic moves he's famous for, which has never really been properly portrayed on screen before.

 

[regwec]

Yes, the use of something implies to be tough fabric is fine.

Batman has a large area to stow gadgets, between his back and the cape. Anything could be there- he could pull a trombone out from behind his back. I am against cluttering his costume up with pouches, or bulking it out, in a Rob Liefeld style.

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

No, it doesn't. That looks absolutely hideous. It is even more ugly and bulky than the TDKR suit, but with the added insult of those extraneous Robocop style gauntlets.

I feel sure that the AA design is reposted so much because, apart from those seen in the Nolan movies, it is the only one that people know. There has to be an explanation like that for the continued advancement of something so foul.

Thank you.

I can't stand the art direction / costume design in these games.

 

[Gianakin_]

Anything could be there- he could pull a trombone out from behind his back.

Ah, the way the Highlander TV series of ole did it.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

Thank you.

I can't stand the art direction / costume design in these games.

I don't have a problem with any of the costumes, except Bane. The real problem was using Wildstorm to copy Jim Lee's art style, but only as a halfway point.

Still it works in the established world contextually.