BvS The Batsuit Thread - Part 8

Status
Not open for further replies.
Why do they need to be explained?

The whole point of discussion is that if one side presents an argument, that the other side should as well. Otherwise, some of the pro-trunks/pro-white eyes in this thread failed to provide a counterargument, and simply just sought to silence the anti side.

Not to mention, I gave you examples of heroes and comics where white-eyes and trunks didn't apply, so that calls into question whether it's really necessary to have them.
 
I consider the following image to be a good explanation for why the eyes should be white for at least some of the film
tumblr_mr6cpk2xvf1qer8czo5_500.gif


:woot:
 
The whole point of discussion is that if one side presents an argument, that the other side should as well. Otherwise, some of the pro-trunks/pro-white eyes in this thread failed to provide a counterargument, and simply just sought to silence the anti side.

Not to mention, I gave you examples of heroes and comics where white-eyes and trunks didn't apply, so that calls into question whether it's really necessary to have them.

But we have done so, and quite a few times, people like you just choose to ignore them or declare the reasons not good enough, because it doesn't fit your view of what should and should not be a part of the suit. As far as necessity goes, there are plenty of things about superhero costumes that are totally unnecessary, yet those are not called into question. It's selective reasoning at best.
 
Last edited:
Yeah,I've seen a ton of arguments for the white eyes.
Just because you don't agree with them doesn't mean they're any less valid.

Ignoring the opposing argument=Victory I guess. :whatever:
 
Last edited:
But we have done so, and quite a few times, people like you just choose to ignore them or declare the reasons not good enough, because it doesn't fit your view of what should and should not be a part of the suit. As far as necessity goes, there are plenty of things about superhero costumes that are totally unnecessary, yet those are not called into question. It's selective reasoning at best.

Except I know people like you who have provided an argument (I can understand your selective reasoning argument, and even then, one can counter and say that the logo is far more iconic and acts as a signifier for the reader as well as the internal audience, such as the city's population etc. Of course, there are heroes in which a logo isn't necessary and rather redundant: Batman and Spiderman come to mind as their bodies are evocative of a symbol). Without naming names, I said "some" because that's all they do. They negate without providing reasons as to why they're negating to begin with. Heck, I even played the devil's advocate and argued against anti-white eyes when people said that white eyes = no emotion.
 
Out of curiousity, to those who are antitrunks, would you be angry if they featured the trunks on the Batman suit, and brought them back on the Superman suit?
 
If they worked with the costume, instead of looking out of place, I wouldn't mind.
 
Out of curiousity, to those who are antitrunks, would you be angry if they featured the trunks on the Batman suit, and brought them back on the Superman suit?


It's such an unlikely situation regardless. I would be upset in this unlikely scenario because I liked the aesthetics of MoS costume the way it was.
 
Out of curiousity, to those who are antitrunks, would you be angry if they featured the trunks on the Batman suit, and brought them back on the Superman suit?

Well personally I don't see myself as anti-trunks as such, but I do prefer them without. I wouldn't be mad if they looked good. I just think they're better off without. But at the end of the day if it works, it works.
 
Can we please stop saying things won't work on film…when they have actually never been tried?
Trunks won't work on film? Based on what? This is the first time a big budget film is attempting a comic faithful bat suit.
White eyes won't work on film? Again based on what? Because Sony is making a killing with a superhero with white eyes.

I know. I can only imagine how terrified their ancestors must have been.by the discovery of fire, the wheel or agriculture. One can visualise shaken fists and cries of "it can't work, it can't work!'

Except I know people like you who have provided an argument (I can understand your selective reasoning argument, and even then, one can counter and say that the logo is far more iconic and acts as a signifier for the reader as well as the internal audience, such as the city's population etc. Of course, there are heroes in which a logo isn't necessary and rather redundant: Batman and Spiderman come to mind as their bodies are evocative of a symbol). Without naming names, I said "some" because that's all they do. They negate without providing reasons as to why they're negating to begin with. Heck, I even played the devil's advocate and argued against anti-white eyes when people said that white eyes = no emotion.

There is either too much or too little punctuation here. Can't tell which.
 
I know. I can only imagine how terrified their ancestors must have been.by the discovery of fire, the wheel or agriculture. One can visualise shaken fists and cries of "it can't work, it can't work!'
:funny:
 
I think Batman should have white eyes when he's in the shadows or in action sequences. They should show his eyes only when Clark meets him face to face or during close up shots.
 
The Arkham: Origins cinematics have done a very good job of selectively giving Batman all-white eyes. His eyes are normally visible, but every now and then his eyes will appear all white when he needs to be particularly intimidating (probably retractable lenses). The effect is awesome, and definitely something Snyder should take inspiration from.
 
The best example is the evocative feeling of catharsis that Christian Bale shows as he takes the bomb outside of Gotham's radius. He realizes that he wants to live. And he elicits that by manipulating his eyes as to give a feeling of comfort, and release.

ogHunai.png

I'm pretty sure that was just the music and the lighting.

Bale looked pretty much bored to me in that sequence. He's pretty much just looking at the camera doing next to nothing, even with his eyes.
 
I'm pretty sure that was just the music and the lighting.

Bale looked pretty much bored to me in that sequence. He's pretty much just looking at the camera doing next to nothing, even with his eyes.

Is it just me or that's how Bale pretty much looked in TDK and TDKR. :dry:
Now that I look back at those movies, there isn't really any sense of magic or mysticism regarding his costume and his posture as Bats. The result is a bland impression that is not on par with the true spirit of the character of The Batman.
 
I think it's because he's trying to breath more than he is act.
 
:whatever:

Aaaaaaaand we are back to the boring Bale bashing.
I loved him in the role and think he did more acting than any of the other Batmen combined.
 
Marion Cotillard's death as Talia sums up the third film's acting :hehe:
 
It's not Bale bashing for some people to not think that his performance is the be all end all.

I haven't been interested enough to watch Rises again but maybe I should because people keep talking about that Death scene. In general I though Marion's performance was nothing to write home about but that's more Nolan's fault than hers.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,435
Messages
22,105,259
Members
45,898
Latest member
NeonWaves64
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"