The BATSUIT Thread

[AndrewGilkison]

I am pretty sure those actors in the 40s wore tights. Spandex was invented much later.

I dont think Batman having his eyes showing with the eye paint look dated at all. I think the best option would be doing it like it has traditionally been done, mixed with him having lenses in some scenes.

At one point this was what live action Batman looked like. It was acceptable back then when that was what the technology allowed.

But time changes the world and its technology. Would it be "the best option" to present a Batman in live action this way now? Then neither is continuing to use black shoe polish to hide the flesh color of the actor and having Batman run around with his eyes exposed for no real logical reason beyond "that's how he's always looked so why change it".

 

[Black Narcissus]

Eh, I'm cool either way. I also feel it depends on how the cowl looks. I for one think the white lense would look awful in Bales' cowl, at least from Dark Knight to DKRises, maybe could've made them work with the BB cowl. Batfleck's cowl looked much better with white lenses. I also feel like it comes down to a studio marketing decision with a bit of an ego from the actors. I have no legit proof, but it does seem to me like they want to remind the audiences who is underneath the suit, that type of thing.

 

[BattleAngel]

Batfleck's cowl looked much better with white lenses.

That’s just so much better. You put those lenses on there and it’s like the comic leapt into life. And the green goblin footage proves that you can do this practically.

 

[Boom]

A reminder that when Affleck has his big emotional moment at the climax of the fight in BvS, the cowl is damaged so you can see his eye. Even Snyder knew the importance of that.

Retractable lenses for certain situations is fine. I don't want them all the time.

 

[Marvel united]

A reminder that when Affleck has his big emotional moment at the climax of the fight in BvS, the cowl is damaged so you can see his eye. Even Snyder knew the importance of that.

Retractable lenses for certain situations is fine. I don't want them all the time.

That's a fair compromise.

 

[hafizbat]

A reminder that when Affleck has his big emotional moment at the climax of the fight in BvS, the cowl is damaged so you can see his eye. Even Snyder knew the importance of that.

Retractable lenses for certain situations is fine. I don't want them all the time.

I wonder though how much of that is just appeasing the actors, who likely want as much face time as possible and especially so during the big moments.

I appreciate it when the actor gives up that spotlight to maintain the image of the character, like Weaving in V for Vendetta and Urban in Dredd.

Just musing here, not saying the face or eyes should be covered all the time.

 

[Boom]

I wonder though how much of that is just appeasing the actors, who likely want as much face time as possible and especially so during the big moments.

I appreciate it when the actor gives up that spotlight to maintain the image of the character, like Weaving in V for Vendetta and Urban in Dredd.

Just musing here, not saying the face or eyes should be covered all the time.

I do not believe that scene works nearly as well if we don't see Affleck's eye. To each their own.

 

[7heBoss]

I see a lot of people always talking about the white lenses for batman. I've never really thought it would translate well to live action. Deadpool's isn't bad though.

But I was thinking that if they did do it. They could do something like in Mission Impossible where Bruce had some sort of tech built into contact lenses that he just wears all the time. Maybe it provides a HUD so that he has an information feed or whatever and no one around him would realize it. And then when he Batmans up they can shift the color of his eyes to further hide his identity.

 

[Nemeres]

I suspect a design somewhat outside the norm. "He's got a cool idea for it" doesn't sound like Reeves just asked his designer to adapt the costume right out of a comic cover.

 

[Jekecy]

I suspect a design somewhat outside the norm. "He's got a cool idea for it" doesn't sound like Reeves just asked his designer to adapt the costume right out of a comic cover.

Let's just hope it's not as "clever" as Catwoman's goggles popping up to resemble cat-ears. That one still irks me.

 

[Boom]

Let's just hope it's not as "clever" as Catwoman's goggles popping up to resemble cat-ears. That one still irks me.

Bland as fuuuuuck.

 

[craigaat]

Let's just hope it's not as "clever" as Catwoman's goggles popping up to resemble cat-ears. That one still irks me.

I thought that was cool!

 

[Marvel united]

I suspect a design somewhat outside the norm. "He's got a cool idea for it" doesn't sound like Reeves just asked his designer to adapt the costume right out of a comic cover.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

A reminder that when Affleck has his big emotional moment at the climax of the fight in BvS, the cowl is damaged so you can see his eye. Even Snyder knew the importance of that.

Retractable lenses for certain situations is fine. I don't want them all the time.

To me that is not enough to justify Batman running around in a live action movie coming out in 2021 with his eyes exposed the same way Keaton's Batman did in a movie that came out in 1989 (30 years ago). How is that not antiquated and out of date at this point?

At some point we have to update how this character is done in a live action movie. There is no logical reason he wouldn't have lenses on as much as possible in today's world, because his secret identity would get immediately blown by the same type of retina scanning algorithms the FBI uses to identify possible suspects.

 

[Boom]

See this is one of those things where I honestly don't give a **** about logic. You'll have to forgive me for being blunt about it.

Chalk it up to artistic license. I prefer the eyes.

 

[hafizbat]

I suspect a design somewhat outside the norm. "He's got a cool idea for it" doesn't sound like Reeves just asked his designer to adapt the costume right out of a comic cover.

That actually sounds like he might be going for something like retractable lenses or contacts. Could just be wishful thinking on my part.

Not to mention Pattinson said his Batman will be frightening...

 

[AndrewGilkison]

See this is one of those things where I honestly don't give a **** about logic. You'll have to forgive me for being blunt about it.

Chalk it up to artistic license. I prefer the eyes.

There are people who prefer watching their movies on VHS rather then digital or bluray too, if we are talking about preferring things that are hilariously out of date.

 

[rockandrollsoul]

There are people who prefer watching their movies on VHS rather then digital or bluray too, if we are talking about preferring things that are hilariously out of date.

Really? A man runs around punching criminals while wearing a bat costume with a cape, calling himself Batman, but his eyes being exposed is a bridge too far?

 

[AndrewGilkison]

Really? A man runs around punching criminals while wearing a bat costume with a cape, calling himself Batman, but his eyes being exposed is a bridge too far?

So your argument is "why do we need to update how Batman is presented on film when he is just fantasy anyway"?

Its not about 100% realism, its about adapting the character to fit modern times and modern techology. Not changing or updating things is how we get stagnation.

 

[rockandrollsoul]

Its not about 100% realism, its about adapting the character to fit modern times and modern techology. Not changing or updating things is how we get stagnation.

I agree to an extent, I just can't fathom why you perceive a lack of lenses as being "hilariously out-of-date". Nobody is watching TDKT or BvS and saying "I don't buy it: his eyes are exposed."

 

[AndrewGilkison]

I agree to an extent, I just can't fathom why you perceive a lack of lenses as being "hilariously out-of-date". Nobody is watching TDKT or BvS and saying "I don't buy it: his eyes are exposed."

I love the Nolan trilogy and I have no problem rewatching those movies, just like I have no problem rewatching the Burton movies or the 66 TV show.

That doesn't mean those incarnations of live action Batman aren't ultimately a product of their time, and wouldn't look dated if you keep making live action Batman in the same way it was made in 1989 or 2005 or 2008 or 2012 or 2016 (and really, has there been any real meaningful difference in how Batman's cowl has looked in live action since 89?).

At some point technology becomes dated. There is no way I could suspend my disbelief if they made a Batman movie in modern day where he was dressed the same as the Adam West Batman. The 89 Batman movie is just as old now as 66 Batman was in 89 when the Burton movie came out, and lets be honest, we haven't had a meaningful change or evolution in how Batman has been done in live action since then, in terms of how his cowl looks.

 

[rockandrollsoul]

At some point technology becomes dated. There is no way I could suspend my disbelief if they made a Batman movie in modern day where he was dressed the same as the Adam West Batman. The 89 Batman movie is just as old now as 66 Batman was in 89 when the Burton movie came out, and lets be honest, we haven't had a meaningful change or evolution in how Batman has been done in live action since then, in terms of how his cowl looks.

A lack of lenses does not equate to a backwards move. If you were arguing against an immovable neck or a stiff rubber suit, I could understand your point as that would be a regression from modern iterations of the character... However, outside of the comics, no modern version of Batman has permanent lenses (Arkham series, BvS, JL, TDKT). Your whole argument seems to be that a batsuit without lenses cannot be modern, which is frankly obsurd. All of the evidence suggest otherwise.

 

[Micromind]

want them to design Batsuit like Kelley Jones Batman, I want movie to include same Gothic aesthetics too.

 

[Doc Samson]

I can understand both sides of the lens argument. I will say I didn't feel the eyes added that much to any of the performances with Keaton being the exception.

Keaton's Batman is still (minus the body count) the closest to what my personal tastes are. Cold, dark, gothic, detached and silent, his eyes sold it. The way he was shot, especially in B'89, highlighted his eyes in a way that hasn't happened since.

That emotionless gaze made him more menacing than the other actors even though he was the smallest. I don't know how well Pattinson will do, but he has the best "eyes" since Keaton, which I would like to see minus any lens:

"Michael has this explosive side. All you have to do is look in his eyes and you know he's nuts" - Tim Burton

I couldn't agree more....

 

[C Prometheus]

This dude, a friend of Ryan Unicomb is hearing the Batsuit will be a mix between Telltale and Earth one with some new elements.



KC Walsh is hearing the same thing as well.

All scoopers seem to agree on this at least.

Just a reminder, folks, of what the rumored direction of the costume will be. Obviously things can change and the exact specifics of what the Batsuit will borrow from those two designs remains to be seen.

Personally speaking though, I’m all for a costume looking like a blend of these two designs. I guess one could argue that some traces of the old Batman Inc. Batsuit could be present too since that suit always had a ton of similarities with the Earth One Batsuit.