Your top 5 things that needs to be "fixed" for the Batman reboot

[Shikamaru]

Looking exactly like the comics is what matters most besides a director being able to give his vision, eh?

If the suit from the comics can be and is well adapted into live-action, then that is what matters the most. In the TASM 2 case, they adapted the suit from the comics and they adapted it well so that is all that matters. No need to insert someone's "vision" where there is no need for it .

I'm certainly glad Nolan wasn't boggled down with that "fact" when he had his TDK suit.

I'm personally not because I haven't liked any of the costumes Batman has had in live-action so far including the TDK suit. I would've preferred if Nolan went with the suit in the comics.

I get that TDK was supposed to be realistic but that's exactly why I wanted the suit from the comics. If you think about it, it is actually a lot more realistic than any of the suits in live-action. Not only is Batman able to move more fluidly and isn't restricted by heavy armor but he can also camouflage in the dark better because blue on gray and black on grey are proven to be the best colors for camouflaging in the dark allowing him to blend in the dark a lot easier. On top of that, it also makes him look and feel more like a supernatural creature of the night as opposed to just a guy in an armored suit (especially with the white eyes) which is what Bruce was trying to accomplish in both the comics and the Nolan movies.

As for protection from gun/knives, there is such thing as fabric armor and liquid armor which still offer protection and weigh a lot less than the TDK armor. They're just a lot more expensive, which I'm assuming wouldn't be a problem for someone like Bruce.

 

[Sharkboy]

Yeah a true unique version is how we get Ang Lee's Hulk and fanboy checklist is how we ended up with Iron Man and Avengers.

Which one worked out better?

Hmmm the answer is Batman Begins.

You have a point with Hulk but Ang Lee just didn't get it, that doesn't mean every director with a strong interpretation should be bypassed for some talking head who panders to fanboys. Comic books don't even work that way why should comic book movies? Avengers wasn't good because it had all the fanservice moments, and had an improved captain america costume...it was good because Joss Whedon is a fantastic writer who knows how to write great characters and he filled these great characters with a fantastic cast. This is all stuff that no comic book fan could tell him to do, he did that because he had talent and vision.

The day comic book movies have no input whatsoever from actual directors trying to make a great film and instead are held hostage by a group of fans with endless nitpicks over superficial crap is the day that comic book movies as an industry jumps the proverbial shark.

You know what classic superhero film felt 100% the vision of the director rather than some pastiche of ideas and nitpicks from fans? Superman: The Movie and i still think that film should be the blueprint for every comic book film.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Hmmm the answer is Batman Begins.

You have a point with Hulk but Ang Lee just didn't get it, that doesn't mean every director with a strong interpretation should be bypassed for some talking head who panders to fanboys. Comic books don't even work that way why should comic book movies? Avengers wasn't good because it had all the fanservice moments, and had an improved captain america costume...it was good because Joss Whedon is a fantastic writer who knows how to write great characters and he filled these great characters with a fantastic cast. This is all stuff that no comic book fan could tell him to do, he did that because he had talent and vision.

The day comic book movies have no input whatsoever from actual directors trying to make a great film and instead are held hostage by a group of fans with endless nitpicks over superficial crap is the day that comic book movies as an industry jumps the proverbial shark.

You know what classic superhero film felt 100% the vision of the director rather than some pastiche of ideas and nitpicks from fans? Superman: The Movie and i still think that film should be the blueprint for every comic book film.

Alot of what made Avengers work well was Whedon's slavish loyalty to the source material. These characters have endured for many decades because the comics had the right formula. Yes there's always room for improvement but understanding why the fans love the story and characters doesn't hurt. In fact, it's much wiser to understand the appeal of the comics than start from scratch and try to redesign the wheel with a bunch of Hollywood execs who never liked comics and think they're silly.

and I bet good money that Nolan and Goyer had their own "fanboy checklist" after they watched Batman (89). It shows in Batman Begins which has plenty of Year One and other comic book influences.

 

[Sharkboy]

Alot of what made Avengers work well was Whedon's slavish loyalty to the source material. These characters have endured for many decades because the comics had the right formula. Yes there's always room for improvement but understanding why the fans love the story and characters doesn't hurt. In fact, it's much wiser to understand the appeal of the comics than start from scratch and try to redesign the wheel with a bunch of Hollywood execs who never liked comics and think they're silly.

and I bet good money that Nolan and Goyer had their own "fanboy checklist" after they watched Batman (89). It shows in Batman Begins which has plenty of Year One and other comic book influences.

They did, I'm sure they did, but there is a huge difference between respecting the source material and blatantly using it as a crutch. If Batman 89, S:TM and the Nolan films taught us anything it's that directors can be both respectful to comics while bringing their own vision and interpretation of the story and it will prove to be both critically and commercially viable.

That's all i want something new and fresh, not a film version of Hush

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Get used to it Sharky. There are a considerable amount of people that weren't content with Nolan's Batman and want their needs heard and fulfilled. More and more will come out of the woodworks as a possible reboot approaches reality. They've been lying dormant too long.

 

[Human Torch]

His parent's murder gives direction, dedication and drive to Bruce's life.(this includes his training and the oath.)

A more classic approach to the suit. The suits primary function is to connect him to the bat. It's protective nature is a secondary concern........read.... no obvious armor plating!

Sherlock Holmes level detective skills. And I'm not talking forensics, but observational skills ala Jason Bourne in the diner scene, and they are always functioning. Forensics provide evidence, but first and foremost his observations and intuition point him to solutions.

Fear, primal fear, which the bat represents, is his greatest weapon. Criminals are a cowardly lot, after all. The Batman is the method of creating the fear.

No spilit personality, no madness implied. He has dedicated his life to preventing criminals from causing pain to innocents. He is driven to that end, obssession is as far as his mental profile should ever go.

Yeah,this is an important one for me too.That's where I think Burton missed the mark.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

They did, I'm sure they did, but there is a huge difference between respecting the source material and blatantly using it as a crutch. If Batman 89, S:TM and the Nolan films taught us anything it's that directors can be both respectful to comics while bringing their own vision and interpretation of the story and it will prove to be both critically and commercially viable.

That's all i want something new and fresh, not a film version of Hush

A Batman movie that is slavish to the source material would be new and fresh because nothing like that has ever been done in cinema.

Television has done it with BTAS and video games have done it with the Arkham games but it hasn't been achieved in movies. Not yet.

 

[Shikamaru]

They did, I'm sure they did, but there is a huge difference between respecting the source material and blatantly using it as a crutch. If Batman 89, S:TM and the Nolan films taught us anything it's that directors can be both respectful to comics while bringing their own vision and interpretation of the story and it will prove to be both critically and commercially viable.

That's all i want something new and fresh, not a film version of Hush

"Anyone who knows me knows that I would never read a comic book".

-Tim Burton

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Yeah,this is an important one for me too.That's where I think Burton missed the mark.

I think it's good when the audience questions Batman's sanity without having a clear answer.

He is not crazy like his rogue gallery but he is far from "normal". He is so driven, obsessed, focused, and methodical it borders on superhuman. Nolan suggested anyone could take Batman's place with noble intent but nothing could be further from the truth. Not only does it take incredible genes (physically/mentally), training, money and nobility but it takes a mind so scarred by tragedy that the mind focuses like a laser on self-perfection to repair the past that can never be repaired. So yeah it takes an abnormal mind to achieve what Batman achieves.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Can I add fanboy nitpickiness?

Oh who am I kidding? That will never change.

Yah...90% of these choices are complete jokes. It's as if someone wants to complain about almost everything in Nolan's trilogy with no reason when something such as the Bat growl will not show up in a reboot, lol.

"Different from Nolan" doesn't mean Warner Bros will automatically move closer to the comics or even acknowledge them.

But yet it won't have anything close to how Nolan did his trilogy which makes up for most of your choices anyways on what Nolan didn't do "right".

This is the same studio that orchestrated such "classics" as Batman and Robin and Superman Returns.

I'll give you Batman & Robin, but every studio makes mistakes(Spider-Man 3, for example) and as for Superman Returns...that was a legit try on rebooting Superman and tying it to the first two films. No mistake at all, just bad luck on the script.

Something closer to the comics could be done well in a movie. The Batman suit doesn't need black rubber to work on screen. It's probably the biggest reason why the Nolan fight scenes are so weak.

Not saying something closer to the comics couldn't be well done, but blindly thinking a more classic suit is the best option is also blindly being a fanboy when there are other ways a suit can go about and people would still love, as, for example, the first TAS-M suit...people actually liked that suit. I thought you did too at a time.

Neither will blind Nolan worship.

Who's blindingly worshipping Nolan and who's nitpicking at everything about the trilogy on here with the poll choices?

 

[Anno_Domini]

If the suit from the comics can be and is well adapted into live-action, then that is what matters the most. In the TASM 2 case, they adapted the suit from the comics and they adapted it well so that is all that matters. No need to insert someone's "vision" where there is no need for it .

No need to insert someone's vision at all when the director had a great suit and dumbed it down to please the fanboys that hated the first suit or to please the studio

I'm personally not because I haven't liked any of the costumes Batman has had in live-action so far including the TDK suit. I would've preferred if Nolan went with the suit in the comics.

I get that TDK was supposed to be realistic but that's exactly why I wanted the suit from the comics. If you think about it, it is actually a lot more realistic than any of the suits in live-action. Not only is Batman able to move more fluidly and isn't restricted by heavy armor but he can also camouflage in the dark better because blue on gray and black on grey are proven to be the best colors for camouflaging in the dark allowing him to blend in the dark a lot easier. On top of that, it also makes him look and feel more like a supernatural creature of the night as opposed to just a guy in an armored suit (especially with the white eyes) which is what Bruce was trying to accomplish in both the comics and the Nolan movies.

As for protection from gun/knives, there is such thing as fabric armor and liquid armor which still offer protection and weigh a lot less than the TDK armor. They're just a lot more expensive, which I'm assuming wouldn't be a problem for someone like Bruce.

The idea of Batman looking like a modern knight was something I love. That kind of out of the box thinking works for CBMs, but that out of box thinking probably quickly died down after The Avengers and Whedon showing a true and true geekfest of comic book proportions.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Yah...90% of these choices are a complete joke. It's as if someone wants to complain about almost everything in Nolan's trilogy with no reason when something such as the Bat growl will not show up in a reboot, lol.

Which options are a joke and why.

But yet it won't have anything close to how Nolan did his trilogy which makes up for most of your choices anyways on what Nolan didn't do "right".

How do you know the trilogy will be totally different from Nolan (who will likely be the producer) and that it will "make up" for any concerns the fanbase might have?

I'll give you Batman & Robin, but every studio makes mistakes(Spider-Man 3, for example) and as for Superman Returns...that was a legit try on rebooting Superman and tying it to the first two films. No mistake at all, just bad luck on the script.

No, Superman Returns was a prime example of writers, directors, and producers thinking they copy and improve upon the success of Donner's Superman without cracking open a comic book.

Not saying something closer to the comics couldn't be well done, but blindly thinking a more classic suit is the best option is also blindly being a fanboy when there are other ways a suit can go about and people would still love, as, for example, the first TAS-M suit...people actually liked that suit. I thought you did too at a time.

No, I always hated the ASM costume. It broke my heart when I first saw it because it moved away from the comics and was a complete eyesore. Not sure what's blind about wanting a costume closer to Spider-man comics when most people love the new ASM2 costume upgrade.

Who's blindingly worshipping Nolan and who's nitpicking at everything about the trilogy on here with the poll choices?

You call it nitpicking. I call it addressing things Bat-fans might want from the reboot that was missing in Nolan's trilogy. I know some people take incredible offense from the idea that Nolan's Batman-world could be lacking in any way but I care more about Batman than preserving Nolan's reputation. Sorry.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

No need to insert someone's vision at all when the director had a great suit and dumbed it down to please the fanboys that hated the first suit or to please the studio

Who complained about Raimi's suit and suggested it should look like a basketball and have yellow lenses and silver slippers before ASM finished production???

Show me the posts.

Nobody asked for those details. Don't blame fanboys for that costume. We had nothing to do with it.

The idea of Batman looking like a modern knight was something I love. That kind of out of the box thinking works for CBMs, but that out of box thinking probably quickly died down after The Avengers and Whedon showing a true and true geekfest of comic book proportions.

Out of the box thinking?

You do realize Batman has been called The Dark Knight for decades, right?

 

[Shikamaru]

No need to insert someone's vision at all when the director had a great suit and dumbed it down to please the fanboys that hated the first suit or to please the studio

Dumbed it down? It's straight from the comics.

I liked the first suit too but the suit from the comics (aka the new one) is better and looks a lot more professional. Nothing against the first suit though. It makes sense too for Peter's first suit to be not exactly the best product and for his next/final product to be an amazing suit.

The idea of Batman looking like a modern knight was something I love. That kind of out of the box thinking works for CBMs, but that out of box thinking probably quickly died down after The Avengers and Whedon showing a true and true geekfest of comic book proportions.

That's completely irrelevant. My point was that the suit from the comics was more realistic and made more sense for Bruce to wear due to its functions and due to visually fitting better with what Bruce was trying to do, which was strike fear into the criminals and the corrupt. The fact that you prefer a modern knight look is an entirely different topic altogether.

And it wasn't thinking outside the box. It was simply being scared of the costume from the comics which was normal prior movies post TDK and Iron Man so I'm not trying to make Nolan & WB bad by saying this since pretty much everyone had that same belief (other than Raimi and Donner, who respectively adapted the Spider-Man and Superman costumes straight from the comics).

 

[Anno_Domini]

Which options are a joke and why.

Ahem...*clears throat*

More impressive fight scenes - that's obviously going to change when a director brings up a Batman that won't be all about brawling as Nolan's was.

More iconic imagery - again, something else that you seem like it won't be different form Nolan so you're only pin-pointing at Nolan's trilogy. Burton/Schumacher obviously went VERY different from what Nolan did and it's silly to bring up nitpicks you have of a series of films when the chance is 0% with the next reboot not having a different Batmobile and feeling more like Gotham City(but I assume you mean the earlier days of what Gotham looked like as it does resemble a modern day city in many different mediums).

No growling Bat-voice - really? You believe the Bat-growl will stick? Lol.

No Lucius Fox - again, a choice by Nolan which I doubt will be used again.

More memorable theme music - very much opinion when Zimmer's theme is as classic as Elfman's.

No love interest - the one thing that actually should be more comic-y and you're having a choice of having no love interest whatsoever, lol.

How do you know the trilogy will be totally different from Nolan (who will likely be the producer) and that it will "make up" for any concerns the fanbase might have?

To even think a reboot will be no different is the most ridiculous thing ever. Why on Earth would Warner Brothers reboot Batman but keep it feeling exactly the same, bat-growl and all?

No, Superman Returns was a prime example of writers, directors, and producers thinking they copy and improve upon the success of Donner's Superman without cracking open a comic book.

Superman Returns could have been a fine film if only they just tinkered a bit with certain ideas in the film and in no way feels like they could copy and improve on something. And as much as I liked the TAS-M suit, I'd advise you to look at the entire TAS-M film on a studio, writers and director on trying to copy and improve on something.

No, I always hated the ASM costume. It broke my heart when I first saw it because it moved away from the comics and was a complete eyesore. Not sure what's blind about wanting a costume closer to Spider-man comics when most people love the new ASM2 costume upgrade.

Could have fooled me. I thought you were one of the many "Webbheads" that liked the first suit.

I think it's fairly opinionated to say "most people" love the new TAS-M 2 suit change, but think what you want. Something fairly different is always nice if you ask me and the one thing I actually supported the first film besides the stellar cast even with how much I dislike the film.

You call it nitpicking. I call it addressing things Bat-fans might want from the reboot that was missing in Nolan's trilogy. I know some people take incredible offense from the idea that Nolan's Batman-world could be lacking in any way but I care more about Batman than preserving Nolan's reputation. Sorry.

Then why not address ANYTHING from the Burton/Schumacher films? I call it nitpicking when I can't figure out anything of the choices that's because of the Burton/Schumacher era, only Nolan's trilogy.

Who complained about Raimi's suit and suggested it should look like a basketball and have yellow lenses and silver slippers before ASM finished production???

Show me the posts.

Nobody asked for those details. Don't blame fanboys for that costume. We had nothing to do with it.

Lol, did I say anyone complained about the change from Raimi's suit to the first TAS-M suit? No, I did not. I said the director actually had an idea of making something quite new that went up in flames with the new suit now and I blame that on fanboys.

Out of the box thinking?

You do realize Batman has been called The Dark Knight for decades, right?

**** you're dense.

Batman hasn't had a suit that LOOKED like a modern day knight. That's what I said genius.

Dumbed it down? It's straight from the comics.

I liked the first suit too but the suit from the comics (aka the new one) is better and looks a lot more professional. Nothing against the first suit though. It makes sense too for Peter's first suit to be not exactly the best product and for his next/final product to be an amazing suit.

The idea that you think I meant it was dumbed down because it looks more like the comics is baffling. I meant Webb dumbed down the look of what he was trying to go for with something that I found very interesting, but then he ends up giving a more Raimi-based suit only with bigger eyes.

That's completely irrelevant. My point was that the suit from the comics was more realistic and made more sense for Bruce to wear due to its functions and due to visually fitting better with what Bruce was trying to do, which was strike fear into the criminals and the corrupt. The fact that you prefer a modern knight look is an entirely different topic altogether.

The idea that the suit had a knight look is relevant when it gave Bruce a suit to function correctly and kept that realistic look for Nolan's universe. Something thick and blocky like leather was obviously going to be slow and it was explained. What's irrelevant is that you don't think the TDK could strike fear into criminals when it still did.

And it wasn't thinking outside the box. It was simply being scared of the costume from the comics which was normal prior movies post TDK and Iron Man so I'm not trying to make Nolan & WB bad by saying this since pretty much everyone had that same belief (other than Raimi and Donner, who respectively adapted the Spider-Man and Superman costumes straight from the comics).

The idea was indeed outside the box. Making Batman look like a knight, making this Bat-pod his steed...it was a very brilliant idea from Nolan and has nothing to do with being "scared" in using a suit from the comics. Nolan tried that approach in BB....why would Nolan be "scared" when he started the series with the BB suit? Plus, there's also a difference from being "scared" to just trying something different.

 

[jonathancrane]

Top 6 Narrative/Artistic Components That I Want to See Corrected

1. No dead villains. Keep them alive and save them for future installments; it would be refreshing to have villains whose arcs develop over the course of multiple films (such as Mr. Freeze.) And it would also be nice to see an Arkham Asylum that becomes slowly populated over the course of the series.
2. Structure the films like the first series of Bond films. In addition to # 1, build up the mythology, one film at a time. But, this also means not using clfifhanger endings, which are cheap.
3. Along with # 1, build up the Batcave.
a Have the Batsuits evolve over the series.
a1) Have them on display.
b. Have trophies from villains on displays.
c. Have all of the vehicles on display.

4. Limit the origin story to less/equal ten minutes. Everyone knows Batman's origin, and there is no need to retell it.

5. Build up characters for spinoff films. I want to see films for Batwoman, Batgirl, and Nightwing.

6. Don't reuse villains/use existing side characters.

a. Don't reuse villains from the Nolan trilogy; sure, the Joker is required, but, there is no need to reuse R'as, Bane, or Scarecrow; use ones who have not been represented in the live action medium before.

b. Use side characters such as Bullock, Leslie Thompkins, and Montoya, if possible. If it is a rights problem - as alleged for Nolan's use of the not-Holly Robinson in TDKR - create characters as he did who represent them, in everything but name.

 

[Shikamaru]

The idea that you think I meant it was dumbed down because it looks more like the comics is baffling. I meant Webb dumbed down the look of what he was trying to go for with something that I found very interesting, but then he ends up giving a more Raimi-based suit only with bigger eyes.

That's what you implied in your post. You said the director dumbed down his suit to please the fanboys. I'm assuming you're talking about the fanboys that didn't like the suit from the first movie.

First, how do you know Webb didn't intend to have the same suit from the beginning? The Raimi suit is the same suit from the comics. Maybe Webb intended to have the same suit from the beginning but wanted to visually establish that it's a reboot by having a different suit and also wanted to show that Peter has to first learn how to make a good suit by screwing up with his first suit. Hence why the new one will be more like the comics and look more professional.

Second, even if Webb had a different suit in mind but Sony or the fanboys put pressure on him and decided to change it to one that looks more like the Raimi suit, where is the problem in that? Like I said, the Raimi suit is straight from the comics and I don't think you would argue that you can make a better suit than the one in the comics. Thus even if what you're suggesting is true, we ended up with a better suit than the suit Webb intended to use. So where is the problem in that?

The idea that the suit had a knight look is relevant when it gave Bruce a suit to function correctly and kept that realistic look for Nolan's universe. Something thick and blocky like leather was obviously going to be slow and it was explained. What's irrelevant is that you don't think the TDK could strike fear into criminals when it still did.

I already talked about this in my last post. The suit from the comics would realistically function better and would also realistically make him look less human and more scary in the shadows, which was his intention.

Batman doesn't wear something thick and blocky like leather in the comics. He wears fabric. And thick leather would make him just as look as thick armor, realistically speaking.

Never said he can't look scary without armor. But a suit more similar to the one in the comics would make him seem more like a shadow/demon of the night and less human. It would have a bigger impact IMO. Something I want to see in the reboot.

The idea was indeed outside the box. Making Batman look like a knight, making this Bat-pod his steed...it was a very brilliant idea from Nolan and has nothing to do with being "scared" in using a suit from the comics. Nolan tried that approach in BB....why would Nolan be "scared" when he started the series with the BB suit? Plus, there's also a difference from being "scared" to just trying something different.

I want to clarify something. I didn't mean that Nolan was necessarily scared of doing the suit from the comics but that he was under the belief that it cannot work in live-action and that it wasn't realistic enough which I disagree with.

The BB suit was less armory than the TDK suit but it was still nowhere close to the fabric suit Batman should wear.

As for wanting to try something different, there was nothing different about Nolan did. Batman has been wearing nothing but heavy rubber or heavy armor in live-action for over 70 years except for the Adam West show and the 1940's serials which don't count for obvious reasons. I would like to see someone actually try something different by giving Batman a suit more unique from all the ones we go so far AKA one more like the fabric suit from the comics.

One thing I will compliment Nolan on is for giving Batman a suit where he can move his head and neck. Prior to TDK, we haven't had a suit that could do that other than the Adam West suit. Though it would've never been a problem to begin with if we had a fabric suit like the comics from the beginning.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Anno,

So because I pointed out it wasn't wildly innovative to make Batman look like a knight because the concept of Batman being a knight is decades old you call me dense?

Don't bother responding to my post if you can't make a point without resorting to childish insults. It just makes you look desperate.

I didn't insult you, don't insult me.

 

[Anno_Domini]

4. Limit the origin story to less/equal ten minutes. Everyone knows Batman's origin, and there is no need to retell it.

Yes. I think after one origin film of Batman, every Batman film since then with reboot after reboot, we should just quickly skim over the origin, same with Spidey after the '02 film.

6. Don't reuse villains/use existing side characters.

a. Don't reuse villains from the Nolan trilogy; sure, the Joker is required, but, there is no need to reuse R'as, Bane, or Scarecrow; use ones who have not been represented in the live action medium before.

Wouldn't you agree Scarecrow needs a vast improvement though?

b. Use side characters such as Bullock, Leslie Thompkins, and Montoya, if possible. If it is a rights problem - as alleged for Nolan's use of the not-Holly Robinson in TDKR - create characters as he did who represent them, in everything but name.

The biggest failure in Nolan's trilogy is that the only mainstay in his version of the GCPD was Commissioner Gordon, but that is for Burton/Schumacher as well. It's like the directors only believed Gordon to be the only important character for Gotham's police force while only creating characters that's only inspired by the comic characters such as Bullock.

That's what you implied in your post. You said the director dumbed down his suit to please the fanboys. I'm assuming you're talking about the fanboys that didn't like the suit from the first movie.

First, how do you know Webb didn't intend to have the same suit from the beginning? The Raimi suit is the same suit from the comics. Maybe Webb intended to have the same suit from the beginning but wanted to visually establish that it's a reboot by having a different suit and also wanted to show that Peter has to first learn how to make a good suit by screwing up with his first suit. Hence why the new one will be more like the comics and look more professional.

Second, even if Webb had a different suit in mind but Sony or the fanboys put pressure on him and decided to change it to one that looks more like the Raimi suit, where is the problem in that? Like I said, the Raimi suit is straight from the comics and I don't think you would argue that you can make a better suit than the one in the comics. Thus even if what you're suggesting is true, we ended up with a better suit than the suit Webb intended to use. So where is the problem in that?

Didn't imply any of the sort on a more comics suit being the reason it's "dumbed down".

No need to insert someone's vision at all when the director had a great suit and dumbed it down to please the fanboys that hated the first suit or to please the studio

This is nothing about the comics. I am saying he had to dumb down his vision because the fanboys and/or Sony had him change because of all the flack the first suit received.

But, you bring up a point on Webb wanting a more comics accurate suit in the first place...if that was the idea, then what explains the first suit being so different and then all of a sudden all the different intricate pieces on the first suit is gone? Everything is different except for the spider logos on the front and back. Besides that and different eyes, it's Raimi's suit.

I already talked about this in my last post. The suit from the comics would realistically function better and would also realistically make him look less human and more scary in the shadows, which was his intention.

Batman doesn't wear something thick and blocky like leather in the comics. He wears fabric. And thick leather would make him just as look as thick armor, realistically speaking.

Never said he can't look scary without armor. But a suit more similar to the one in the comics would make him seem more like a shadow/demon of the night and less human. It would have a bigger impact IMO. Something I want to see in the reboot.

I want to clarify something. I didn't mean that Nolan was necessarily scared of doing the suit from the comics but that he was under the belief that it cannot work in live-action and that it wasn't realistic enough which I disagree with.

The BB suit was less armory than the TDK suit but it was still nowhere close to the fabric suit Batman should wear.

As for wanting to try something different, there was nothing different about Nolan did. Batman has been wearing nothing but heavy rubber or heavy armor in live-action for over 70 years except for the Adam West show and the 1940's serials which don't count for obvious reasons. I would like to see someone actually try something different by giving Batman a suit more unique from all the ones we go so far AKA one more like the fabric suit from the comics.

One thing I will compliment Nolan on is for giving Batman a suit where he can move his head and neck. Prior to TDK, we haven't had a suit that could do that other than the Adam West suit. Though it would've never been a problem to begin with if we had a fabric suit like the comics from the beginning.

And fabric does not even work well. Go look at Batman: Dead End and fabric would just seem so odd in live-action and I doubt we will ever see that in a Batman film, so that's why leather is really the basis that you see with Batman, as much as it seems that honeycomb fabric is used for Spidey the most.

Anno,

So because I pointed out it wasn't wildly innovative to make Batman look like a knight because the concept of Batman being a knight is decades old you call me dense?

Don't bother responding to my post if you can't make a point without resorting to childish insults. It just makes you look desperate.

I didn't insult you, don't insult me.

The idea of Batman looking like a modern knight was something I love.

Don't make it easy for me to call you dense then. Looking like a knight is new compared to Batman actually being a knight that we all knew.

 

[DACrowe]

Neither will blind Nolan worship.

I have none of that. But a thread about what needs to be fixed which consists, other than of Detective skills (hence the one getting heavy discussion), of nitpicks.

The thing is, every filmmaker will attempt to make the mythos their own in some way. If the next guy "fixes" many of these relatively superficial points, he will make other changes that will just piss off the purists. It is a game that will never be won.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Again, imaginative villains, Batman being shadowy, sidekick inclusion, iconic imagery, revamped Batsuit, Batman being a master planner, Batman, with a broader variety of perfected skills, Batman being the true face, strong BTAS influence, and strong Arkham game influence are NOT NITPICKS!

All these together potentially create a totally different movie from Nolan's with unique storytelling, characters and overall Bat-world.

A nitpick is saying the ears are too short.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Don't make it easy for me to call you dense then. Looking like a knight is new compared to Batman actually being a knight that we all knew.

Dude. If you don't like what I'm saying just ignore it. How is insulting someone who never disrespected you ever justified?

For some one who isn't dense themselves you act like being civil on a superhero forum is rocket science.

 

[afan]

If I may add a few more.......

Cast an actor that is physically imposing.

Alfred is younger than previous incarnations, (late 50s-ish) and is Bruce's ally. He wholeheartedly supports the mission, tho he is a bit cynical about Bruce's methods.

Bruce Wayne thru the Wayne Foundation also carries on a "crime" fight.

Anno_Domini......And fabric does not even work well. Go look at Batman: Dead End

Have you watched "City of Scars"?

 

[Tequilla]

They probably need to think what they shoudnt screw , before fixing...

The only thing they need to do is a good motion picture. Not following checklist aspects of the character. Batman has such a huge history a , thats it's almost impossible to envelope everything in an organic story. So the idea should always be , make a good movie.

Yeah a true unique version is how we get Ang Lee's Hulk and fanboy checklist is how we ended up with Iron Man and Avengers.

Which one worked out better?

Ang Lee's Hulk...by far. So far , they shouldn't ever be compared.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Ang Lee's Hulk...by far. So far , they shouldn't ever be compared.

Wait, why shouldn't it be compared again?

and lets face it, if Iron Man was more like Ang Lee's unfocused and meditative Hulk movie, it would've bombed and Marvel Studios would've went bankrupt and there wouldn't be any Iron Man 3, Thor 2, Captain America 2, GotG, Avengers 2, Ant Man, and Dr. Strange.

Superhero movies would've died a long time ago. I'm not sure how that would be an improvement from Marvel Studio's fanboy-pleasing formula.