The BATSUIT Thread

[BatsAndNights]

You base your argument on this "one shot", while Batman for the most part will be seen like this in motion and darkness and white lenses would be more visible both in motion and darkness.

Besides... Battinson eyes would still be visible even with lenses.

Actor emotes with many things, Charlie Cox give this performance and we didn't saw his eyes at all.

>White lenses would be visible in darkness

Not how lighting works. It's just...not. That's like saying a white T-Shirt would be perfectly visible in a completely dark room.

>Battinson eyes would still be visble

Visible sure, but there's a lot of intricate details you lose by making the eye less exposed.

>Other examples

Charlie literally lifts the mask up to give the final stinger so you can see his eyes. When he's playing a blind man. That's how powerful the eyes can be for expressing emotion. Obviously you can still convey emotion without showing the eyes, Darth Vader is the greatest example on Earth of that. But the eyes are a damn powerful tool in acting and to not use them when you can is just silly.

 

[CadeSkywalker28]

>White lenses would be visible in darkness

Not how lighting works. It's just...not. That's like saying a white T-Shirt would be perfectly visible in a completely dark room.

>Battinson eyes would still be visble

Visible sure, but there's a lot of intricate details you lose by making the eye less exposed.

>Other examples

Charlie literally lifts the mask up to give the final stinger so you can see his eyes. When he's playing a blind man. That's how powerful the eyes can be for expressing emotion. Obviously you can still convey emotion without showing the eyes, Darth Vader is the greatest example on Earth of that. But the eyes are a damn powerful tool in acting and to not use them when you can is just silly.

The light in the film depends on what light the director wants, you set the light source and the actor to get the shot you want, and the contact lenses reflect the light.

Did you see the clip with Charlie? Yes?

What is the most important moment in this scene? Charlie taking off his mask? Where he does not show emotions with his eyes because he is blind.

Or is it everything else he does before that, when he has a mask on his face and screams that he has defeated Fisk? Because for me the best part is before he take off the mask. That's my point.

I already proved that even with white lenses, the eyes are still visible and actor can still emote so why are you saying as if lenses we're hiding eyes altogether?

 

[BatsAndNights]

The light in the film depends on what light the director wants, you set the light source and the actor to get the shot you want, and the contact lenses reflect the light.

Did you see the clip with Charlie? Yes?

What is the most important moment in this scene? Charlie taking off his mask? Where he does not show emotions with his eyes because he is blind.

Or is it everything else he does before that, when he has a mask on his face and screams that he has defeated Fisk? Because for me the best part is before he take off the mask.

>Contact lenses reflect the light

Thing is, what's also worth mentioning that can be damn useful is actually the absence of eyes. And that is very easily done with lighting (the lenses would not be, if anything they'd be a massive pain in the butt to actually light well along with having everything else look good. It's not as simple as you think it is). As seen here (thanks Kane as always for your amazing gifs, doing God's work)


I'd argue that actually looks scarier than having the white lenses.

Also to reiterate, on the Daredevil scene and other tools of acting

Obviously you can still convey emotion without showing the eyes, Darth Vader is the greatest example on Earth of that. But the eyes are a damn powerful tool in acting and to not use them when you can is just silly.

 

[BatsAndNights]

I already proved that even with white lenses, the eyes are still visible and actor can still emote so why are you saying as if lenses we're hiding eyes altogether?

I'm not saying they hide eyes altogether. All I've been saying since my first comment is that while still visible and still somewhat conveying emotion, it's a lot more muted. It isn't as vivid. Reread my previous comments.

 

[Enriquespy]

For what it's worth, I'd prefer white mask lenses over white contact lenses.
What's important about the mask lenses is the shape, too big or too almond shaped can make them loose appeal.

 

[CadeSkywalker28]

>Contact lenses reflect the light

Thing is, what's also worth mentioning that can be damn useful is actually the absence of eyes. And that is very easily done with lighting (the lenses would not be, at all). As seen here (thanks Kane as always for your amazing gifs, doing God's work)
View attachment 50999

I'd argue that actually looks scarier than having the white lenses.

Also to reiterate, on the Daredevil scene and other tools of acting

Dude...

I'm not saying they hide eyes altogether. All I've been saying since my first comment is that while still visible and still somewhat conveying emotion, it's a lot more muted. It isn't as vivid. Reread my previous comments.

I read them and yet you wrote that "But the eyes are a damn powerful tool in acting and to not use them when you can is just silly." as if suggest something otherwise.

Anyway, I'm done, I said what i wanted to said and that's it.

 

[BatsAndNights]

For what it's worth, I'd prefer white mask lenses over white contact lenses.
What's important about the mask lenses is the shape, too big or too almond shaped can make them loose appeal.

My take on it, as I said in a previous comment, is that the best bet would be something that allows you to have it both ways. Something like transparent lenses that go white when light is shined directly at them or transparent lenses that turn white when Batman enters some sorta combat mode. That way, you keep the emotive eyes in the scenes that need it but also can take them away when the absence of eyes would be more effective

 

[BatsAndNights]

I read them and yet you wrote that "But the eyes are a damn powerful tool in acting and to not use them when you can is just silly." as if suggest something otherwise.

Anyway, I'm done, I said what i wanted to said and that's it.

What I'm suggesting there is that to not use the eyes to the fullest extent you can, when you can and there's no necessary reason to hide them, is silly. That doesn't automatically mean I think the lenses would 100% hide the eyes. But it dilutes the effect you'd get in the same way that adding water dilutes alcohol. The alcohol is still there, it's just not as strong.

 

[cryptic name]

I remember being so into the idea of lenses/white eyes and figuring out a cool way to do them, especially in the era pre-Begins when we were speculating so hard about the suit. But I’ve really swung back the other way. I love seeing Batman’s eyes, especially with an actor like Pattinson.

 

[BattleAngel]

Just to re-cap a years’ old summary of my pro-lens stance, and bring it up to speed with The Batman trailers.

1) Straight up, iris scanning is a present-day technology - it’s a fool-proof methodology for biometric identification way more accurate than voice recognition. Law enforcement can ID someone from a photograph with this technology - the US Government has an enormous iris scan database. A serious, tech savvy Batman (one who didn’t have a death wish, so maybe not Battinson) would never allow their eyes to be scanned or photographed in the field. We’ll have to see how the film treats reality - the sub machine gun tanking scene seems to indicate that we are not “in reality.” Battinson not caring about his fate also goes against this first point - but that motivation will likely change.
2) The brow region and overall movement around the eyelid is what gives an eye expressiveness - NOT the iris. I like the shots of Pattinson’s eyes, but if we had a sweet comic accurate white eye slit, we’d all be losing our minds.
3) The technology to make this work in a way that looks amazing and super emotive absolutely exists and the arguments that it doesn’t are flat out wrong. Both in terms of costuming and CG. Matt Reeves is arguably the best director on earth for character CG - the apes movies are flawless. If he chose to, he could execute it flawlessly.
4) Returning to in-world reasoning, eye protection is nearly second to brain/spine protection. The real-world tech exists to make ballistic and explosion proof (virtually) lenses work, and a Batman who planned on a long career would absolutely prioritize this. But he wouldn’t use milky contact lenses (well, he’d keep them on hand, just in case, for iris scanning) - they would be armor for his eyes.

My favorite take on the comics Batsuit is from Scott Snyder - there are some awesome shots of how the cowl tech works there that shows that it’s not just an illustration choice but actual tech that Batman has designed to serve protective (identity/physical) and aesthetic (intimidation/emotion) purposes.

long story short, if Batman goes from kamikaze vigilante to career guardian and symbol (which it seems he will) in a cinematic world that respects physics and technology (a really big TBD - and evidence points to this being as far from reality as any Marvel movie, or hell, Halloween), expect retractable lenses to be considered for the inevitable, bigger budget sequels.

but yeah, kamikaze vengeance deathwish Batman, seemingly wearing an unprotected leather cowl wouldn’t and shouldn’t have lenses, and they would be totally out of place for the current iteration.

 

[OnLeatherWings]

My only real complaint about the suit is how antennae-y the ears look. They're very slim and when you see him from the front, they dip in a bit.

Just a bit bug-like.

Width at the bottom to a slim top always looks better than thin from top to bottom.

 

[The Lazarus Pit]

The only thing is that I hope that for the next film they change the nose on the cowl to make it pointy and they make the ears less antenna-like; fix those two issues and this cowl is perfect.

This. The bodysuit is clearly the best we’ve ever gotten as well

I will say that the logo is not good. I know it serves a purpose but I don’t like it. The bottom center needs to come to a point, and the ears need to be added to the chest emblem. As it stands, it is the worst cinematic Batman logo yet.

The costume could become my favorite if it fixes these issues.

 

[BatsAndNights]

This. The bodysuit is clearly the best we’ve ever gotten as well

I will say that the logo is not good. I know it serves a purpose but I don’t like it. The bottom center needs to come to a point, and the ears need to be added to the chest emblem. As it stands, it is the worst cinematic Batman logo yet.

The costume could become my favorite if it fixes these issues.

I'm reserving judgement until I watch the movie. We already know that the pieces can come out from the shot of Batman covered in dirt and the flare shot. I'm fine with the symbol looking a little odd so long as it serves a purpose that makes sense for it to look like that

 

[The Lazarus Pit]

We know it serves a purpose, I just don’t think it is aesthetically pleasing. Same with the Challenger looking ass Batmobile. Hope that gets upgraded in the sequel

 

[Robbypattypats]

I've always been indifferent about the white lenses in live action. even during TDK trilogy days, I felt like the white lenses, while cool, probably wouldn't translate well. And now, this shot right here gives me even more reasons why. You can't do this with white lenses.

So humanizing.

 

[Robbypattypats]

No... It isn't, Batman mask/suit just looks cool and that's it. And if we follow the rule of cool than white lenses would have only add more to that.

This edit proves that even with white lenses you can feel different emotions from the actor.

Seriously, that kind of lenses would be awesome and totally in the spirit of this new Batman, because he want to hide his identity as much as possible.

This looks horrible to me lol, Batfleck I mean

 

[shauner111]

White lenses only works for actors who can not express their intensity with their eyes. Like Affleck could have used them because his eyes in that cowl to me looked like a puppy who stole your last 3 crackers and got caught. If your eyes lack the intensity, you probably shouldn't be cast in the role in the first place. That goes for Clooney as much as Affleck.

With an intense actor like Rob, it would be a damn shame to mask his eyes with lenses. It's the main thing that excites me about Rob being cast. His eyes look tormented.

 

[Sawyer]

 

[WatchProtect]

Favorite Batsuit shifts from Keatons to Pattinsons, I wonder how far this suit will transition throughout the trilogy.

 

[Boom]

Good time to bump this thread to remind everyone that the new suit is straight fire.

 

[Rick190293]

I went from "ew" to "freakin' best suit ever". Maybe not the best haha, but I'm loving it.

 

[Boom]

It's pretty much perfect for the type of suit that it is. Literally the only change I'd really like to see in the sequel is sharpening the nose of the cowl instead of it being so rounded. Maybe refine the ears a bit.

 

[BatsAndNights]

It's definitely my favorite suit we've ever gotten. The only main 4 changes I'd want is readding the blades onto the gauntlets, sharpening the nose, adding the more conventional bat symbol and draping the cape over the shoulders Arkham style. Do that and the suit's basically perfect, far as I'm concerned

 

[Lencho01]

 

[Boom]

Bruh.