The Batman trailer is here

[Piscian]

Only read it once over a decade ago, but I still remember the tension in Year One, where Batman needed to do his best to avoid bullets and barely came out of that church alive. Likewise, that scene where he's hunted by the police in Mask of the Phantasm. They can think of reasons for him only wearing textiles, like stealth, speed and aerodynamics. Or set it in the past, when machine guns and semi-automatic pistols weren't so easily acquired yet. In the movie The Friends of Eddie Coyle, selling machine guns illegally gets you life in prison. Similar laws in Gotham would make the bad guys want to carry fewer machine guns. They can put a yellow bullet-proof bat symbol on his chest to draw the enemy's aim. But when it gets to the point where Batman takes bullet after bullet, shotgun pellets at point blank range and even (what looked like) high-powered sniper rounds, that's boring.

It didn't really bother me because they took pains to show that he wasn't particular nibble or athletic. They showed him getting hit as much as he gave, almost being overwhelmed by thugs, which in turn gave me the impression he's wearing excessive amounts of armor which makes it difficult to move. You see every shot bouncing off his armor. I thought in a way it made it more realistic than Nolans batman who becomes a martial arts expert and ninja long before hes batman. It would bother me more if they portrayed him as invincible or superhuman, but to me he just looked like he was walking armor in an armored suit similar the villain in Rampage (2009). I got the impression hes covered from head to toe in Kevlar and plates which would explain why he stumbled around quite a bit in his fights.

I think when it comes to suspension of disbelief it's all in the eye of the beholder. They gave me enough excuse to ignore his near invulnerability. I think the only scene that made me blink was when he injects himself with adrenaline. Thats not exactly superpower inducing so it annoyed me when he just goes about his business. In reality I think it would give him a brief second wind, but probably a heart attack if he kept going like he did. I'm not the biggest fan of that kind of mcguffin, but I got over it.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

I didn't like Logan that much, because I don't care for X-Men, and, while I was somewhat unimpressed and disappointed with Joker and The Batman, I wouldn't go as far as to call them bad, but I still, overall, agree with you.

I call them bad because I don't think either movie's theme stays consistent and earns its ending. There's lots of good in both movies, I'd say at least like 80% of the scenes taken on their own are really well down and Phoenix's performance is really good but they just don't add up / work together to make a good film in the end IMO. Both come off as pretentious to me as they're trying to be really important movies and the biggest failures of both is that they don't come close to sticking that landing. Whereas Watchmen stuck the landing with a theme far darker than The Batman or Joker.

 

[Bob_McMillan]

I think when it comes to suspension of disbelief it's all in the eye of the beholder. They gave me enough excuse to ignore his near invulnerability. I think the only scene that made me blink was when he injects himself with adrenaline. Thats not exactly superpower inducing so it annoyed me when he just goes about his business. In reality I think it would give him a brief second wind, but probably a heart attack if he kept going like he did. I'm not the biggest fan of that kind of mcguffin, but I got over it.

I couldn't tell whether that was meant to be adrenaline or maybe some proto-Venom. Considering the grounded nature of the film I was leaning towards adrenaline, but then they very blatantly teased the Joker at the end so I wouldn't put it past it being the latter.

 

[Cicada 5]

But every Batman movie does.

We had four Batman movies from the 80s to 90s that weren't like this. It's just changing with the times.

 

[BrawlMan]

We had four Batman movies from the 80s to 90s that weren't like this. It's just changing with the times.

Don't mind him; he likes wangsting and going oveboard, because it's not "1000% Comic Book Accuracy".

View attachment 5699

You must have forgotten about Batman Forever and Batman & Robin in between your little rant. Cry me a river, dude. I don't mind a lighter Batman if given the chance, but you're going way overboard. Plus, each movie your talking about ain't that dark (The dark and gritty of '89 & Returns don't look at that special nowadays) and has levity in each of their respective movies of the time. The Dark Knight Trilogy, despite being dark has plenty of moments of calm and knew when to have fun. And these movies are supposed to be more "realistic". At this point, if you want something not dark with Batman, you might as well go to HBO Max or grab box sets, and starting watching all of the Batman cartoons. BTAS, The Batman (2004), and Brave and the Bold. Lego Batman too, if you're in to that. Yet most likely no, coming from you.

 

[Piscian]

I couldn't tell whether that was meant to be adrenaline or maybe some proto-Venom. Considering the grounded nature of the film I was leaning towards adrenaline, but then they very blatantly teased the Joker at the end so I wouldn't put it past it being the latter.

I did not try to fantasize too much because they were really going for a no hightech Batman, so I'm guessing it was Surge Cola or some combination of adrenaline and ephedrine like controlled substances. I can personally confirm Ephedrine is crazy shit, like you can go from dead tired to running a marathon with a 25mg dose. They had to ban Ephedra because athletes kept dying from heart attacks.

I was actually disappointed with the eye gadget. Yes it's a thing that exists that military is testing, but it really broke the atmosphere of this Batman being realistic

I found the the Joker kinda cringe. Supposedly that was going to put a cap on a scene they cut out earlier in the film, but I think if theres one thing all fans are united on is that X needs a break. I groaned past it, it didn't take away anything from the quality of the film for me.

 

[Ezekiel]

It didn't really bother me because they took pains to show that he wasn't particular nibble or athletic. They showed him getting hit as much as he gave, almost being overwhelmed by thugs, which in turn gave me the impression he's wearing excessive amounts of armor which makes it difficult to move. You see every shot bouncing off his armor. I thought in a way it made it more realistic than Nolans batman who becomes a martial arts expert and ninja long before hes batman. It would bother me more if they portrayed him as invincible or superhuman, but to me he just looked like he was walking armor in an armored suit similar the villain in Rampage (2009). I got the impression hes covered from head to toe in Kevlar and plates which would explain why he stumbled around quite a bit in his fights.

I think when it comes to suspension of disbelief it's all in the eye of the beholder. They gave me enough excuse to ignore his near invulnerability. I think the only scene that made me blink was when he injects himself with adrenaline. Thats not exactly superpower inducing so it annoyed me when he just goes about his business. In reality I think it would give him a brief second wind, but probably a heart attack if he kept going like he did. I'm not the biggest fan of that kind of mcguffin, but I got over it.

I'm not saying he should be invincible, but they can put him in situations where instead of several men with military grade weapons, there are maybe only two that he has to take out first, before fighting hand to hand or hand to blunt instruments with the others.

Armor also takes away from the theatricality of those characters and doesn't show off their forms so well, makes them look so ordinary. The creator of Aeon Flux said it pretty well, when explaining why he chose to cover his protagonist in so skimpy, tight attire. It allowed him to be more expressive with her movements. I think he compared it to a ballet dancer or figure skater; can't remember exactly. I'm not gonna pretend he didn't also want to sexualize her, but it's obvious that he was speaking the truth when you see the way she moves and stretches, especially in those first two seasons where she doesn't speak.

It's annoying that every single live action version of Batman has to wear armor, from Burton to this, with Affleck (who is in the DCEU, so I don't care to watch) being the only exception.

 

[Ezekiel]

We had four Batman movies from the 80s to 90s that weren't like this. It's just changing with the times.

Even with his take on Penguin and the whole look of Gotham, especially in Returns, there is still some realism in Burton's movies that wouldn't have allowed for villains like Ivy, Clayface, immortal Ra's al Ghul, Killer Croc, Freeze, Man-Bat or a comic-accurate Bane. He never really delved into the more fantastic aspects of the comics. Schumacher's movies were just too badly made. But, while he shat on Batman, Nolan likely doomed it forever, or at least for a very long time. The Watchmen picture isn't mine and is probably not meant to be taken completely seriously, but it does ring some truth.

 

[BrawlMan]

Schumacher's movies were just too badly made. But, while he shat on Batman, Nolan likely doomed it forever, or at least for a very long time.

While not perfect (turning Two Face & Riddler into Joker & Ace Ventura expies respectively), Batman Forever is a fine movie. In some cases, I actually like it and prefer it more over Returns. Returns gets too full of itself and drags on for too long. Plus, it's clear Batman and Bruce are not even the main focus and it gets distracting after a while. Out of those four Batman movies, I've actually watched Returns the least and I figured out why when I was about 18 years old.

Also, Schumacher never "shat on" Batman, nor did he hate the character and mythos. Some decisions were his fault, mainly in Batman & Robin, but the studio pretty much told him just to go Goofy and over the top as possible so they could sell toys. You basically have to blame Warner Brothers on that one. Forever had it's light moments too, but they kept it with more reasonable restraint and knew how to balance the two together. WB basically stepped in for the fourth movie in double down on everything more than they should have. We need to sell toys!

 

[BrawlMan]

I found the the Joker kinda cringe. Supposedly that was going to put a cap on a scene they cut out earlier in the film, but I think if theres one thing all fans are united on is that X needs a break. I groaned past it, it didn't take away anything from the quality of the film for me.

Everyone went nuts and started clapping when he showed up. I didn't mind either, but I myself am tired of the "you know who". Don't worry, Reeves does not plan on using him as the next villain. He wants to use Mr Freeze next. Fine by me.

 

[Ezekiel]

Everyone went nuts and started clapping when he showed up. I didn't mind either, but I myself am tired of the "you know who". Don't worry, Reeves does not plan on using him as the next villain. He wants to use Mr Freeze next. Fine by me.

I think that will be dictated by the studio. He won't use Freeze. Even if he does use him, he won't really be Freeze. Won't be able to instantly freeze things with an ice gun. He'll probably just be in a hazmat suit or some shit and use a virus that very gradually crystalized cells. "Grounded version of everything," he said. Most live action Batman movies have two villains. I'm certain Joker will be in the next one.

 

[BrawlMan]

I think that will be dictated by the studio. He won't use Freeze. Even if he does use him, he won't really be Freeze. Won't be able to instantly freeze things with an ice gun. He'll probably just be in a hazmat suit or some shit and use a virus that very gradually crystalized cells. "Grounded version of everything," he said.
Most live action Batman movies have two villains. I'm certain Joker will be in the next one.

You had Arnold Schwarzenegger making a whole bunch of ice related puns and carrying a freeze gun. You can't get any better than that.

On second thought....Take it away Doug.

​

As far as this version of Mr Freeze goes, I don't mind as long as it's done well. We'll see about the Joker, but I have a feeling that he won't have a big part to play. Considering Warner Brothers & DC are giving a majority of the directors free reign to go where they want, I'm not worried.

 

[immortalfrieza]

Well not perfect (turning Two Face & Riddler into Joker & Ace Ventura expies respectively), Batman Forever is a fine movie. In some cases, I actually like it and prefer it more over Returns. Returns gets too full of itself and drags on for too long. Plus, it's clear Batman and Bruce are not even the main focus and it gets distracting after a while. Out of those four Batman movies, I've actually watched Returns the least and I figured out why when I was about 18 years old.

Also, Schumacher never "shat on" Batman, nor did he hate the character and mythos. Some decisions were his fault, mainly in Batman & Robin, but the studio pretty much told him just to go Goofy and over the top as possible so they could sell toys. You basically have to blame Warner Brothers on that one. Forever had it's light moments too, but they kept it with more reasonable restraint and knew how to balance the two together. WB basically stepped in for the fourth movie in double down on everything more than they should have. We need to sell toys!

I don't understand what everybody's problem is with Batman and Robin. It's clearly a throwback to the 1960s Batman show, it's campiness, Batman having a gadget for everything, the pun spouting over the top villains... Forever did most everything Batman and Robin did and isn't looked on anywhere near as badly. It gets way more hate than it really deserves and I think if B&R had come first there wouldn't really be a problem rather than having to follow the much darker Batman and Returns.

You had Arnold Schwarzenegger making a whole bunch of ice related puns and carrying a freeze gun. You can't get any better than that.

As far as this version of Mr Freeze goes, I don't mind as long as it's done well. We'll see about the Joker, but I have a feeling that he won't have a big part to play. Considering Warner Brothers & DC are giving a majority of the directors free reign to go where they want, I'm not worried.

If they would use Mr. Freeze they should take most of their cues with him from the Batman The Animated Series version that pretty much established the character (really this could be said about all of the villains). Being monotone most of the time, sick wife, being completely serious, having a cold gun of course, etc. Out of all of Batman's villains Freeze is one of the few that is treated completely seriously throughout BTAS and it was good for the character.

 

[BrawlMan]

I don't understand what everybody's problem is with Batman and Robin. It's clearly a throwback to the 1960s Batman show, it's campiness, Batman having a gadget for everything, the pun spouting over the top villains... Forever did most everything Batman and Robin did and isn't looked on anywhere near as badly. It gets way more hate than it really deserves and I think if B&R had come first there wouldn't really be a problem rather than having to follow the much darker Batman and Returns.

I've already heard this excuse before, but that does not excuse the bad writing and the shoddy costumes. The doubled down harder in excess of commercialization, just to sell toys. The movie is this one giant hour and a half toy commercial at the end of the day. Just because it's a throwback of something, doesn't automatically give it a free pass, nor make it good. You know what else is a throwback to 1960s Batman? The two directed DVD Batman animated movies that had Adam West being Batman one last time. Taking place in the 1960s continuity. That is how you do a throwback and do it right. They did it twice. There's also The Brave and The Bold, but that was more of a throwback to the silver age of the 1950s.

they would use Mr. Freeze they should take most of their cues with him from the Batman The Animated Series version that pretty much established the character (really this could be said about all of the villains). Being monotone most of the time, sick wife, being completely serious, having a cold gun of course, etc. Out of all of Batman's villains Freeze is one of the few that is treated completely seriously throughout BTAS and it was good for the character.

Fine by me and I agree.

 

[Ezekiel]

Listened to that Peter Chung commentary again.

"I want to talk a little about about the costume. Æon's costume, why she's dressed like that. It has a lot to do with the fact that she doesn't talk and she really has to use her body to express what she's thinking and feeling. And I did try initially to design costumes which were more realistic and more practical, but what you find out is that to draw more realistic costuming requires a lot of attention paid to things like folds in the clothing, the way the clothes hang on the body, and you end up wasting a lot of time just trying to figure that out, which in the end isn't important, and in the end actually works against what you're trying to do, which is use as much of the body's expressive qualities as possible. It's the reason why artists have always preferred to portray the nude. Because to portray a clothed figure, again, it becomes more about the costume and less about the person. I think that's one of the reasons also why comic book artists draw their characters in skintight outfits, is to reveal different forms that the anatomy takes. It's also true of dancers, actually. The reason why dancers wear skintight outfits or very revealing costumes. It's because they have to use their bodies. And I was really thinking of Æon as a dancer and choreographing her movements in that way."

Some forgotten animator understands comic books better than the people paid millions of dollars to adapt them to film. Batman's trousers just look like trousers. Batgirl's outfit in the upcoming movie is pretty shitty too.

 

[Gordon_4]

Listened to that Peter Chung commentary again.

"I want to talk a little about about the costume. Æon's costume, why she's dressed like that. It has a lot to do with the fact that she doesn't talk and she really has to use her body to express what she's thinking and feeling. And I did try initially to design costumes which were more realistic and more practical, but what you find out is that to draw more realistic costuming requires a lot of attention paid to things like folds in the clothing, the way the clothes hang on the body, and you end up wasting a lot of time just trying to figure that out, which in the end isn't important, and in the end actually works against what you're trying to do, which is use as much of the body's expressive qualities as possible. It's the reason why artists have always preferred to portray the nude. Because to portray a clothed figure, again, it becomes more about the costume and less about the person. I think that's one of the reasons also why comic book artists draw their characters in skintight outfits, is to reveal different forms that the anatomy takes. It's also true of dancers, actually. The reason why dancers wear skintight outfits or very revealing costumes. It's because they have to use their bodies. And I was really thinking of Æon as a dancer and choreographing her movements in that way."

Some forgotten animator understands comic books better than the people paid millions of dollars to adapt them to film. Batman's trousers just look like trousers. Batgirl's outfit in the upcoming movie is pretty shitty too.

May also be read as, an expert in the medium of animation is not an expert in the field of designing costumes that have to be worn by real people and stand up to actual wear and tear of use and many other concessions to reality.

 

[Ezekiel]

May also be read as, an expert in the medium of animation is not an expert in the field of designing costumes that have to be worn by real people and stand up to actual wear and tear of use and many other concessions to reality.

Bullshit. There are stronger materials for a very happy middle leaning more towards all textile that can be reached. They don't even want to try. Instead, they make them look as ordinary as possible and hide almost all the shape of the body. Boring.

 

[Ezekiel]

And even if it does occasionally tear, so what? The only thing that matters is what's captured by the camera and printed.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

Listened to that Peter Chung commentary again.

"I want to talk a little about about the costume. Æon's costume, why she's dressed like that. It has a lot to do with the fact that she doesn't talk and she really has to use her body to express what she's thinking and feeling. And I did try initially to design costumes which were more realistic and more practical, but what you find out is that to draw more realistic costuming requires a lot of attention paid to things like folds in the clothing, the way the clothes hang on the body, and you end up wasting a lot of time just trying to figure that out, which in the end isn't important, and in the end actually works against what you're trying to do, which is use as much of the body's expressive qualities as possible. It's the reason why artists have always preferred to portray the nude. Because to portray a clothed figure, again, it becomes more about the costume and less about the person. I think that's one of the reasons also why comic book artists draw their characters in skintight outfits, is to reveal different forms that the anatomy takes. It's also true of dancers, actually. The reason why dancers wear skintight outfits or very revealing costumes. It's because they have to use their bodies. And I was really thinking of Æon as a dancer and choreographing her movements in that way."

Some forgotten animator understands comic books better than the people paid millions of dollars to adapt them to film. Batman's trousers just look like trousers. Batgirl's outfit in the upcoming movie is pretty shitty too.

So your take away from "cloth is hard to draw realistically" is that live action movies and shows where cloth doesn't have to be drawn should still follow the same limitations?

 

[BrawlMan]

Listened to that Peter Chung commentary again.

"I want to talk a little about about the costume. Æon's costume, why she's dressed like that. It has a lot to do with the fact that she doesn't talk and she really has to use her body to express what she's thinking and feeling. And I did try initially to design costumes which were more realistic and more practical, but what you find out is that to draw more realistic costuming requires a lot of attention paid to things like folds in the clothing, the way the clothes hang on the body, and you end up wasting a lot of time just trying to figure that out, which in the end isn't important, and in the end actually works against what you're trying to do, which is use as much of the body's expressive qualities as possible. It's the reason why artists have always preferred to portray the nude. Because to portray a clothed figure, again, it becomes more about the costume and less about the person. I think that's one of the reasons also why comic book artists draw their characters in skintight outfits, is to reveal different forms that the anatomy takes. It's also true of dancers, actually. The reason why dancers wear skintight outfits or very revealing costumes. It's because they have to use their bodies. And I was really thinking of Æon as a dancer and choreographing her movements in that way."

Some forgotten animator understands comic books better than the people paid millions of dollars to adapt them to film. Batman's trousers just look like trousers. Batgirl's outfit in the upcoming movie is pretty shitty too.

And even if it does occasionally tear, so what? The only thing that matters is what's captured by the camera and printed.

This is you by the way.
​