The BATSUIT Thread

[Jekecy]

First off, I've seen several actors in heavy prosthetics in the past complain about colour contacts bother their eyes and interfering with their performance. In particular, the sort of contacts you are mentioning interfere with an actor's vision and as we all know how much actors complain about green screen acting, being able to take in the set and other actors affects the performance.

Second, our irises and pupils change based on stimuli. It may not be a big thing, but I wouldn't want to take that away. Your pupils move and follow things around. Actually, one of the greatest parts of Schwarzenegger's performance in The Terminator is the way his pupils turn and scan before moving his head. It did a great job conveying a sense of artificial movement and perception.

Also, contacts are notorious for causing eye dryness, etc., I would hate to interfere with subtle things like how Pattinson made his eyes water slightly in sadness.

The contacts I'm referring to are in-universe. Rob doesn't actually have to put on anything.

This effect is easily achievable solely through VFX, which is even more advantageous as they can tune it literally on a frame-by-frame basis if they were so inclined.

Look, if they never do it this series, I'm perfectly fine with it. All I'm saying is the door has been left open with Bruce's existing tech. There's nothing actually prohibitive to the actor that should immediately dismiss the idea. Done sparingly and with care, I'm confident most fans would prove very receptive to it once they see it executed.

 

[MurkeNyou]

Reading comments in threads like this make me kind of lose my faith in people's taste when it comes to superhero costuming. It is outright depressing.

I just don't get how after 30 years, people will still go with a "realistic" adoption, over faithful & accurate adoption.

That is how you get a flying Squirrel suit and not a Batsuit.

 

[blaberskite]

Ahhh, as sure as there are death and taxes in life, the debate about lenses in the batsuit is raised again
In all seriousness with all the previous suits there was probably a better argument for not having them as the suits were already so restrictive, adding lenses would have almost completely cut the actors off from the outside world, and further limited any chance of giving an actual performance.
Pattinson suit is already very similar to daredevil's so just look at that to get an idea of how it would actually work/look.
My personal preference is to not have them, mainly because I think Pattinson did so much subtle acting with his eyes that would have been lost behind lenses. I thought the contact lenses was a nice touch, and something like a 'detective mode' or night vision in a future film would be ok for me.
Also with what can be conveyed in comic like shock or anger is easy to achieve, add lenses in live action and that goes out the window. Obviously they found a clever way round that in the new spidey movies (which I thought worked really well) but it just wouldn't work for a character like batman, a similar solution would come across as too silly.

 

[Marvel united]

As captivated as I was by Pattinson's performance (and yes, the use of his eyes), I still wholly and vehemently reject the notion that white eyes/lenses simply "wouldn't work" on film for any of the number of arguments raised against them, because it's so easily disprovable by so many other performances, some of which are staples in cinema (Claude Rains in 'The Invisible Man').

While the eyes, more specifically the pupils, are useful in connecting a character's humanity to audience, they are not a NECESSITY. The eyes are merely one part, one tool in an actor's arsenal for executing a performance. You're discounting so many other things, like voice, mouth, physicality, physique and even wardrobe. There are entire genres in theatre dedicated to the human form, to body language alone (Black Light Theatre). To say that the eyes are where a performance begins and ends, is dismissive of the craft itself, and how varied and diverse a "performance" can be defined.

I think what's happening here is a simple case of imaginative laziness mixed with blind loyalty/commitment to a filmaker's choices. The choice to exclude white eyes is exactly that, an aesthetic choice, not a necessity of performance.

 

[WayneMB]

Just gonna leave this here

 

[Boom]

Pupil dilation and focus also play a part in using eyes to express and emote. You just get more depth and soulfulness when you have the sclera, iris and pupil all working together in unison.

I just don't think those shots work nearly as well with white eyes or opaque contacts. You lose the depth and the subtle nuances and ultimately you're left with something that looks more zombie-ish. To each their own.

 

[chintai80]

i have not seen a good case for white eyes so far.
all the manips of it i see people do online just provide a good argument of why we shouldn't do the white lenses, imo.
lol

 

[Eddie Dean]

White lenses will never happen! Sorry losers!

 

[Invader Joker]

I still think BVS suit is the best. It looks good even in non-movie lighting and unflattering angles. This suit and cowl looks pretty good in carefully lit scenes but can look pretty goofy in normal settings.

I thought Affleck's suit looked stupid even in the promo material.

 

[Marvel united]

Pupil dilation and focus also play a part in using eyes to express and emote. You just get more depth and soulfulness when you have the sclera, iris and pupil all working together in unison.

A lack of pupils doesn't automatically make for a "soulless" performance where audiences aren't able to connect to Batman or tell how he's feeling. The eyelids are also important in conveying emotions like fear, anger or confidence, and they would be wholly preserved with lenses. Something like this is totally achievable

I just don't think those shots work nearly as well with white eyes or opaque contacts. You lose the depth and the subtle nuances and ultimately you're left with something that looks more zombie-ish. To each their own.

You say this like it's a bad thing Like this isn't the entire point of the effect that Batman is SUPPOSED to be having on the criminals of Gotham.


The sad thing about it is, this argument is going to persist until a filmaker finally comes along, and easily dispels many of the "myths" surrounding white eyes. Much like Snyder did with the black & grey suit

Nothing is impossible.

 

[DKDetective]

A lack of pupils doesn't automatically make for a "soulless" performance where audiences aren't able to connect to Batman or tell how he's feeling. The eyelids are also important in conveying emotions like fear, anger or confidence, and they would be wholly preserved with lenses. Something like this is totally achievable
View attachment 54061



You say this like it's a bad thing Like this isn't the entire point of the effect that Batman is SUPPOSED to be having on the criminals of Gotham.
View attachment 54062

The sad thing about it is, this argument is going to persist until a filmaker finally comes along, and easily dispels many of the "myths" surrounding white eyes. Much like Snyder did with the black & grey suit

Nothing is impossible.

It's not impossible, but it is far less effective in live action than showing the actual actor's eyes. Marvel has replicated the effect you described in the MCU, but they still have Tom Holland rip off his mask in big emotional scenes because it just is more effective to have his actual eyes to convey real emotion.

And Snyder didn't dispel anything. The Dark Knight suit already incorporated a two tone black/grey colour scheme. I'm not a fan of that suit but it definitely moved us away from the pure black Batsuits of the Burton/Schumacher films. With respect to the rest of the suit, Snyder set us back to the same old rubber muscles and foam latex construction we have had since Keaton in 1989. All he did was add the basketball texture from The Amazing Spider-Man suit.

The crazed, unhinged look in Pattinson's eyes during the skull gang beatdown, as well as the third act final setpiece is far more intimidating and interesting than some CGI white eyes or contact lens.

 

[Captain Tired]

I'd have thought the power of someone acting with their eyes had already been proven with Keaton back in '89 tbh.

 

[moviedoors]

Reading comments in threads like this make me kind of lose my faith in people's taste when it comes to superhero costuming. It is outright depressing.

I just don't get how after 30 years, people will still go with a "realistic" adoption, over faithful & accurate adoption.

That is how you get a flying Squirrel suit and not a Batsuit.

You had me with those first couple of sentences.

Then you completely lost me with the third.

 

[moviedoors]

I don't even want a detective mode. Following his eyes in all the investigative scenes is one of the joys of this movie. How lifeless and lame would the

Spoiler

thumb drive

or the

Spoiler

carpet tucker

scenes be with blank eyes? The interrogation scene loses so much character if you can't follow when he does and doesn't make eye contact.

Spoiler

The part at the end on the rooftop when he calms the young girl being life flighted out goes from a scene that makes me choked up to just a pretty tableau.

It's inconceivable to me that someone could watch this movie and prefer we not see his eyes.

Even Snyder got that he needed at least one eye visible in BVS for his big emotional "Martha" moment.

 

[Mani-Man]

View attachment 54062

See, this is why im not fully against the white eyes.
If you have such stylised scenes, action scenes in the dark, predator scenes where he picks thugs off one by one...im absolutly for white eyes.

Its just a cool visual thing, but only in such scenes...otherwise, 95% of the movie i want to see his eyes, i want an actor like Pattinson giving me the full depth with his eyes.

Yeah Deadpool showed how the white eyes can still work with emotion...but when the character needed absolute depth, he had to take off the mask because it still limits what you can do.

For stylish action scenes, for scenes that are done from the perspective of thugs...im all for white eyes, but otherwise, nope and pattinson strenghtened my opinion on that.

 

[Spoonman]

I'd have thought the power of someone acting with their eyes had already been proven with Keaton back in '89 tbh.

You would think, right? But yeah to me Keaton was always my biggest argument againts white eyes, and Pattinson pretty much cemented it.

 

[moviedoors]

A lack of pupils doesn't automatically make for a "soulless" performance where audiences aren't able to connect to Batman or tell how he's feeling. The eyelids are also important in conveying emotions like fear, anger or confidence, and they would be wholly preserved with lenses. Something like this is totally achievable
View attachment 54061



You say this like it's a bad thing Like this isn't the entire point of the effect that Batman is SUPPOSED to be having on the criminals of Gotham.
View attachment 54062

The sad thing about it is, this argument is going to persist until a filmaker finally comes along, and easily dispels many of the "myths" surrounding white eyes. Much like Snyder did with the black & grey suit

Nothing is impossible.

It's telling that your two examples are CARTOONS, and one of them even has an articulated brow.

 

[Captain Tired]

To play devil's advocate, there are still many notable instances of people projecting feelings onto iconic emotional inhibitors throughout cinema, e.g., Darth Vader's mask, Michael Myers' mask, etc.

In the case of Vader especially, fans have been known to read so much hesitation, guilt and regret into that mask's blank expression when Luke is being tortured by the Emperor. Arguably, it wouldn't be as great a moment if you were able to see Vader's actual eyes emoting during that scene. It's probably the same reason that so many people cringe at the needless insertion of James Earl Jones saying 'No...'

I'm still totally in favour of the eyes being shown, but I don't think blanking them out would be quite as bad as some think. At least not for that reason. A better reason would be that the whited eyes just look ****. Which they do.

 

[moviedoors]

To play devil's advocate, there are still many notable instances of people projecting feelings onto iconic emotional inhibitors throughout cinema, e.g., Darth Vader's mask, Michael Myers' mask, etc.

In the case of Vader especially, fans have been known to read so much hesitation, guilt and regret into that mask's blank expression when Luke is being tortured by the Emperor. Arguably, it wouldn't be as great a moment if you were able to see Vader's actual eyes emoting during that scene. It's probably the same reason that so many people cringe at the needless insertion of James Earl Jones saying 'No...'

I'm still totally in favour of the eyes being shown, but I don't think blanking them out would be quite as bad as some think. At least not for that reason. A better reason would be that the whited eyes just look ****. Which they do.

I don't think Michael Myers works as a counter. The point of his mask is to make him blank and unreadable. It's supposed to distance you from him.

I think a better example than Vader would be the Mandalorian, since he's the protagonist. That show has plenty of examples of getting an audience to connect with an expressionless mask...

...but when it comes time for the BIG emotional beats, that mask comes off. Same for Vader.

 

[Captain Tired]

All I can say is that I've seen so many people read wry amusement into Myers' mask during certain scenes throughout those first two films. One such instance being when he's looking down at the corpse of a woman he's just murdered via a needle to the eye in HII.

I don't watch The Mandalorian, so I can't speak to any of that. But the sole instance of Vader's mask coming off for a BIG emotional beat is when he's literally dying in Luke's embrace.

Every other time (e.g., watching Luke throw himself off the gantry in TESB, listening to Luke's attempts to sway him in ROTJ), the mask is obviously left on. And yet still people read so much conflicting emotion into it during those scenes.

 

[Pennywise]

The Batman Has A Suit Inspired By Vietnam, Adam West, And The Grim Reaper [Interview]

 

[Deck Rickard]

For the sequel, do you want to see a new Batsuit? If so, would you prefer subtle changes or a dramatic overhaul?

For me personally, if they go with the same look, I’m fine with it. The suit looked great. But I would tweak two things. First, the nose piece was a little weird. It looked like it wasn’t part or the mask and was added later. I would also remove the collar. I know his suit only mildly resembles a bat but the collar kind of ruins the “bat silhouette” concept.

Now, if we’re talking more radical changes… it’s interesting that they had a blue and gray suit in the initial concept art. Could we see him finally don his classic colors on film? It’s not something I necessarily NEED to see but… the prospect of it intrigues me.

 

[Sawyer]

I’d be willing to accept certain changes (very rarely does exactly the same suit carry over from one film to the next), but at this point I’m willing to physically fight anyone who says to get rid of the collar.

 

[WayneMB]

collar will go down as iconic, if it isn't already.

 

[Rick190293]

I'd change only:
- Chest symbol being cleaner and not removable;
- Cape with the ability to close on the front (partially);
- Remove the gauntlet's darts.