This is an archive of Batman-News.com from 2010 to 2025. For the latest news, check out BatmanNews.com
15 Years of Coverage (2010-2025)
The 2017 Licensing Expo is currently underway in Las Vegas, and Warner Bros. has put several costumes from Justice League on display -- including Batman's new Batsuit!
In the photos below, we get our best look yet at Batman's new armored costume. The armor has a silver and gold tint to it, on top of his traditional grey Batsuit. The Justice League costumes for Wonder Woman, Aquaman, The Flash, and Cyborg were also on display. Check them all out in the gallery below.
This is an archive of Batman-News.com from 2010 to 2025. For the latest news, check out BatmanNews.com
Shades of Grey Batman? #rimshot
What even...?
I'll accept it... 👏👏👏
Still not feeling the goggles...
They were actually worn by batman in a comic book.
he already gave batman white eyes in BvS while he wore the mech suit. it works for deadpool not so much the bat.
and in the dark knight it didn't look good or intimidating or even remotely close to how it should look a la deadpool.... and again just because it works for deadpool doesn't mean it does for Batman.
Maybe its not just about fan service. It's abut practicality. The goggles have a much more practicality than the white eyes. It may not a universal pardon but fans shouldn't complain about it when they had no problem with it in the original source.
They have much useful rpoerties than lenses and can do a lot more things.
Like providing protection for the eyes or ricin ding a heads up dis play, or providing more vision modes. So yeah very useful.
1. It depends both on material of obstruction and surface area of the material. Google have much greater surface area than lenses.
2. The lenses and the cowl would provide limited tech and vision modes. The goggles isby as limited as them, so can provide more tech.
1. The gogaps ate less like to be damaged than the lens, which will easily be damaged. The goggles can be made of a much more resilient material than the lens.
2. No you don't have the needed space for that much circuitry.
1. Both the goggles and the lens require different types of materials. The lenses need to be flexibe and durable and strong. Difficult combination of properties to get, not to mention, it has to be transparent. The goggles don't need that much flexibility, so they can have the strength and durability without having to focus on the flexibility and it can have transparency.
2. The image that you have posted is a prototype. There is no gurantee that it will work and if it does, no gurantee it will be efficient. Alfred was still working on it.
1. Cause the lenses need to be flexibe and very thin while still be tough and durable. The goggles just need to be durable and strong. And not all materials maintain their strength when they are thin or flexible.
2. Yes the filmmakers have that ability bur whether it will be effective is another matter entirely.
1. yes cause they have to be flexible and lighter and smaller.
2. would it work efficiently in battle ?
I keep telling you, dude. Not worth it. Hamani just refuses to listen.
1. Cause the lenses have to accommodate the eyes and move with them, not to mention that it shouldn't irritate the eyes or affect its fluidity.
2. Or maybe in real life, it's not effective.
1. I'm talking about lenses in general.
2. Well Technically alot of things about the suit are effective in real life. Not all but many.
1. Yes they have fixed lenses and ones that aren't extremely close to the eye.
2. We didn't see much of the tech of the suit. All we know is that it has body armor which isn't that overstated and stretched.
1. Not the cowl. The goggles have fixed lenses. The lenses are much closer than the goggles. They need to give complete peripheral vision.
2. The mech suit is a completely different story to the tech cowl. Those weren't magnetic firearm disables. They were mini explosives that disable guns. The body armor looks like a textile material covering heavy poece of armor. Something more resilient and thicker than your usual body armor which is why it can take bullets point blank.
Even though the design looks more in line with Nite Owl II and Blue Beetle. Yes, Batman has worn something similar. Doesn't change the fact of what it looks like is very similar in design to Nite Owl II.
Yes but many goggles look like that as well.
Its still looks more like Nite Owl II than it does Batman. That's why people make that reference.
Also I don't care if this is a nitpick. Why does Batfleck have the mech robot from the LEGO Batman movie when the whole point of that thing was a deconstruction on bloated, exaggerated designs of giant mechs? Its like taking the same stuff from another movie and then trying to do it in your own except without understanding what made the other work.
Oh wait, DCEU already did that when they tried to make Suicide Squad basically Guardians of the Galaxy
Well nite owl was based in batman.
Batfleck doesn't have the mech robot fron lego batman. Where did he have the mech robot ? Are you talking about the flying fox or the nightcrawler ? Or his mech suit ? And you're right it is a nitpick. A ridiculous one.
And again what does this and ss have to do with what we are talking about ? And again ss is nothing like gotg. Apparently anything with humor and pop music is ripping off gotg cause gotg owns humor and pop music.
Also BvS and Amazing Spider-Man 2 are terrible movies that are somehow eerily similar. If you say the similarities are superficial, then you are full of shit.
What do those movies have to do with what we what talking about ? Bvs and asm 2 were far from being terrible. They had minor similarities. That's it. And the so called similarities you are pointing out are subjective and yes, superficial. Anything else is bullshit.
1. They are not superficial.
2. Saying anything else is bullshit is called refuting facts or different opinions. That's called being closeminded.
3. In your opinion, fine. I thought they were terrible movies with weak stories thanks to poorly written scripts, characters that lack any depth or dimension to them, constant setup for future films without building solid foundations on themselves, visually ugly to look at and really bad effects and insults the audience's intelligence by thinking they are so smart and treat them as if they are stupid. The audience is not stupid.
4. You refuse to accept subjective opinions or be openminded. That's a fact.
1. Yes they are superficial.
2. They are bullshit and that's not being close minded.
3. It didn't think the audience is stupid. It thought the audience is smart but apparently many people didn't use their heads.
4. I do accept subjective opinions and I am open minded and that is a fact.
Is the real one that blue ?
This is basically a few armor plates on top of the BvS Bat-suit albeit with a slightly different cowl. Nice!
I just love Cyborg's design! The Motherbox-influence is clearly evident.
I could as well. I think the idea of the goggles is cool but I'm just not a fan of how large they are. Seems like they could have gone with some that are more streamlined and don't look out of place. Looking forward to how they look in action though.
Agreed
Yea I thought the classic lenses/white eyes could still make sense in the films. It sounds and looks like Batman will be operating a few vehicles in JL so maybe they're going for a pilot look
Maybe they are just like Niteowl's ones? I mean, some kind of Google-goggles for interaction and all that. At least that's how I think they work
I know I know, maybe they don't want to ditch what is now a staple of Batman's look on films? Honestly I think a Batman with white eyes would look weird on film after all this time. Even the Arkham games kept it. Dunno, just how I see it
Yep, that would do the trick. Well, we'll have to wait until we see how the goggles come into play, maybe it's no that big of a issue ;)
haha! Don't need of that, the Arkham games are some of my favourite. I know quite well how that is made ;p
I know but I'm thinking the goggles will have a HUD for feedback and what not
Funny thing is that he already has lenses in the regular BVS batsuit cowl
The tech cowl under the regular batsuithttps://www.google.c...
Missed opportunity, it was shown a little bit in the ultimate cut
No Superman's?
http://cdn.collider.com/wp-...
http://cdn.collider.com/wp-...
I always liked all the (new) suits, as the films always bothered to give them context in universe. Something DC sometimes struggled with in the past. The noticeable battle damage on Batman´s "tech suit" is the cherry on top. Well done costume department, you deserve to win an award or two.
Maybe one day. Make-up already got to win big.
No Superman suit? Interesting
I really like Flash's suit, particularly the wires holding the armor together so it doesn't fly off while he's running.
The only suit I'm interested in seeing at this point is Flash's second suit. I just hope Batman's goggles have a real purpose that makes sense in the movie other than just selling toys for WB.
I like the characterization of the Flash's suit, but there are 3 things I'd do with it:
1) Make the undersuit match the coloring of the plates
2) Get rid of the fingerless gloves
3) Have the wiring be the same shade of yellow as the other parts of the suit.
is nice but it way too detailed, this is a norm in superhero movies, look at Iron Man suits, in the comic books they work because they are simple, no need of overcomplicate things
Very Arkham Knight-y... I dig it. https://uploads.disquscdn.c...
Maybe not temporary
All of them look terrific! Can't wait to see them on the big screen!
Freaking Beautiful
I haven't been the biggest fan of what I've seen of the Flash design up to this point, but in these pictures the suit actually looks pretty cool. My bad first impression might just have been from the sort of weird look at it just after the Knightmare sequence.
Anyway, I'm definitely getting more and more excited about Justice League!
To me, that looked like some sort of Speed Force suit that went over his regular suit. Didn't the helmet pop open when he showed up?
Yeah, I think that's right. I agree—at the time, I didn't realize there was something on top of the base suit, and I think the additional armor, etc. is what threw me off. Now that I'm seeing more of the basic suit in action, I'm liking it more and more.
i really hope they explain the moustache in that scene ,and also gets his hair dyed red
its probably just to show a difference in time...
He deserves like 10 of this https://uploads.disquscdn.c...
To think that he was nominated for American Hustle and that´s it. The film is alright but i also looked like a premium cable tv pilot. The hairdos were frankly more memorable.
Love all these suits. Michael Wilkinson never disappoints ! :) https://uploads.disquscdn.c...
looks awesome. cyborg looks very cyborgy :D love. it
i am just not a fan of the big bat symbol chest piece.
Zack is such an artist...such intricate details in all of them...outstanding work..
Zack has nothing to do with that, he isnt the costume designer. next thing you will also praise Zack for the music ?
It's not a one man job at all. It's a complete collaboration. So no, Zack didn't completely design and hand stitch the costumes or whatever by himself but he is who tells Michael Wilkinson and the team what he wants and from there it's a joint process.
You don't think the director has a say in the costume design? Are you high?
Go look up who designed all of this....including the costumes.
def not an artist of filmmaking.
What was wrong with the B v S suit? I thought it looked really cool
so obvious the "muscles" were just styrofoams
that isn't even ben affleck...
agreed--it was great--this one looks like the Owl from Watchmen
Considering the suit is mostly bullet-proof, fireproof and more flexible than any Batsuit we've seen on screen, and on top of that is the most comicbook accurate version (that you don't like it is your opinion, most CB fans do), this is something Bruce Wayne would totally wear. As for the 'muscles', they make him look bigger and are for aesthetic purposes. We are, after all, talking about a man who wears a Bat costume.
"What you're basing that statement on is that Batman in the comics has a grey batsuit with (usually) black cape and cowl, boots, gloves, trunks (until recently), and so on. "
No, it's not just that. The biggest reason why the BvS suit is the most comicbook accurate version is that unlike the previous suits, it isn't armor (in which Batman had limited movement). This is made of some strong, flexible material. Also, the color matters a lot too.
And what was going through the artists' minds back in 1939 that made them design batman the way they did is of no significance here. Batman was created in the comics and his movie version should be based on them as well. Zack Snyder and co managed to do that and they did it better than anyone else before them.
"They had to remove the arms of the suit to perform bits of the choreography according to Affleck"
He was talking about the mech suit when he said that because no where in the behind the scenes footage do they show him in the regular suit without the arms parts but you do see him like that in some scenes where he's wearing the mech-suit.
And if we go by your rule of judging flexibility based on behind the scenes then Bale's suit didn't even allow him to move his head! They had to detach the cowl for him to do it whereas Ben's cowl had a lot of effort put into it so he could move easily. Also, Bale's suit was basically armour and a lot harder to move in compared to Affleck's. So either way it's a win-win for the latter.
But we're not even talking about what happened behind the scenes. We're talking about which suit is more flexible in their respective cinematic universe and Affleck's suit is clearly the winner.
" Batman has been wearing body armor in the comics for a while"
He has...OCCASIONALLY. Most of the time he wears his regular cloth suit which is what Affleck's suit is a live-action version of. The other movie suits including Nolan's have basically just been armor and all-black.
"Okay, body armor IS STRONG. That's the point of it."
Yes, but the actual point is that the suit has to be strong AND easy to move in as well. it should be flexible, which none of the previous suits were no matter how much you deny it.
"constructed of strong materials as well which would still bend"
Bend only at the joints and plate boundaries, which isn't even close to the flexibility provided by an all-cloth suit.
You have THE most trashy, rubbish arguments when it comes to desperately trying to prove nolan's anything is better than Snyder's and you're simply wrong.
He was asked about both the suits and he clearly talked about the Mech suit first:
"as noted by our use of the massive and very symbolic battle armor. They’re pretty heavy and cumbersome in the end. The challenge was to create fight scenes where I could move with ease, which is tough. The suits have to look cool and be functional at the same time. One thing that couldn’t be done before but is finally possible now is to wear the suit without the arms...."
Sure he said "suits" but no where in the behind-the-scenes footage do you see Batman without the arms part of the suit and that warehouse scene is the only part of the film where he fights in his regular suit, but you do see that with the armoured version which further proves my point. Could they have removed the arms for the regular suit and not released that footage? Maybe, but there's no reason for them to have deliberately done that, and since you see Affleck/the stuntman wearing the complete suit at all times, that should tell you how easy to move-in it is.
"The last thing I'd imagine they would do is to release pics of the batsuit without the arms, it kinda gives away the magic of it. "
Why the hell wouldn't they? They released loads of motion-capture suit photos. And ever heard of behind-the-scenes footage? Where they actually DO "give away the magic", if that's how you put it.
Bale suit didn't allow him to turn his neck unless they detached the cowl from the rest of the suit. The Batman suit Zack and Wilkinson designed had complex technology inside it which allowed Batman to turn his head whenever he wanted and with more motion and ease. You saying " the same sort of technology" has NO basis. You came up with that out of nowhere.
You keep saying Affleck's suit looks like a halloween costume simple because you think it's not realistic'. But there's nothing realistic about a man dressing up as a Bat, dressing up as a superhero created in the comics. Then why did Bale's Batman have ears? And why didn't he just cover his entire head if it's all about armor and protection and all that baseless BS you're talking about?
Do you even realize how much trash you write in your comments when it comes to defending Nolan's batman? Clearly not.
"You can't really justify the logic there in a real world setting. "
As i said before, the BvS suit is mostly bullet- and knife-proof. Bruce even used his titanium armor underneath the cowl during his warehouse scene which gave bullet-proof protection to his head as well. Then you have bale's batman who got his broken by a few punches from Bane.
"There's a min/max. Is being able to do backflips more important than stopping a bullet..? No. You're not gonna backflip or somersault away from a bullet"
Affleck's suit was bulletproof and also gave him much more flexibility than bale's suit. Don't know what that has to do with backflips and bullet-dodging though. He's still fast enough to dodge a lot of attacks, faster than bale's Batman.
"And, yeah, I'd bet that the TDK batsuit is actually more flexible than the BvS suit."
And you would lose that bet. http://heroes.direct/wp-con...
Compare Bale's suit to Ezra's:
http://s-media-cache-ak0.pi...
and notice in the latter, adjacent plates are further apart than in bale's suit.
a) If bale was asked to bend over while wearing that suit, he would struggle because the plates would overlap. And that's just the top part. The bottom part of his suit just messes up when he bends in them.
b) Even aside from that, the plates are on top of some skin-tight spandex.....just like Affleck's suit. Only difference (in terms of flexibility) is the fabric on Affleck's suit literally has creases which allows him to move easily.
Bale's suit falls behind in both points. You just lost your bet.
"What you seem to not believe is that they fake a lot of what we see the BvS batsuit "do". I put "do" in quotations there because it doesn't actually do the stuff that you want to attribute to it... It can't break the laws of physics..."
WTF. Of course the suit isn't actually bullet or fire proof, neither is Bale suit. Are you fucking kidding me??!!! That doesn't change the fact that they are in the movie universe. That's like saying "the hobbits in LotR aren't really that short!!!" Obviously they're not, but they were made to look like that BECAUSE IT'S A MOVIE. Tom hardy is 5'9 but his Bane was made to look 6 foot. It's not REAL.
"Nolan's approach to Batman is better than Snyder's"
That's not true literally any way you look at it. Nolan had not read a Batman comicbook his entire life before he did batman begins. David goyer had to tell him Batman needs to have a utility buit Lmfao. He put Batman in a realistic world, and he created great movies, but that was far from what Batman's supposed to be. Just because YOU prefer his style doesn't change the fact that Affleck's Batman is simply better in every way. How much CG was used in the warehouse scene? The explosions, and the cape. Yeah, that's about it. Nolan used CGI for the cape as well. And when you put Batman with Doomsday and Superman OF COURSE there will be CGI. That complaint is just pathetic and lame. Watchmen and TDKR were realistic in terms of the themes they tackled, which is something Snyder did as well in his movies.
You complained about Zack using CGI, and then said Watchmen and TDKR were realistic in the same paragraph. They were realistic in terms of the themes they tackled. There's nothing realistic about Dr Manhattan or Superman or Batman's mech-suit, all of which required CGI to be adapted on screen. I don't recall him using special affects for Nite Owl or the Comedian or Ozymandius.
Again your arguments are just terrible. Just stop.
I'm curious, what do you think of the new Tactical suit? Since that one has actual armor. I do understand where you're coming from though, concerning the original BvS suit.
"Further, they don't photograph everything they do, they still keep some of the magic under their hat. So assuming that they didn't take the arms off of the batsuit just because you haven't seen a picture of it is pretty silly."
No it's not. If they really wanted to keep the magic under wraps Affleck would never have mentioned them using CGI for the arms. There's nothing special or more magical about them using CGI for the arms compared to say...them using CGI for any other character. There's no reason for them to not have released any photographs or footage of him without the arms considering they gave away most of the other stuff like any other Superhero movie. They gave away them using mocap suit for the armoured- version, and also the armless armoured batman which Affleck mentioned in that interview.
"They didn't release a photo album of every day of shooting and every shot they did for fuck sake, so that's a meaningless statement."
Then that just goes to show that even IF they shot any scenes of Batman without the arms in his regular suit, it was VERY little footage. And that is a big IF because there's no proof of it.
I never said they release behind the scenes footage of the entire production. You're taking this way too far unnecessarily.
Not that it matters what they did behind the scenes, as i said before because in the DCEU Batman is just as fast and agile in his suit as was shown on screen. Period.
"If your headpiece is attached to the shoulder, then you can't turn your head without pulling the cowl off the shoulder. "
Speak for bale's suit. I don't recall Snyder or co ever saying that whenever they explained their batman's cowl.
""Complex technology", please explain to us the complexities of the technology that allows you to attach the head to the shoulder"
Please show me proof where anyone who worked on BvS said that's how the cowl works, it detaching from the shoulders or whatever it is you're saying.
Michael Wilkinson said this about the cowl: "There’s a lot of engineering in the cowl of the Batsuit. We did many, many prototypes with different materials, different shapes./i>"
"What do Halloween costumes have? Fake muscles. Same as the BvS suit."
The only fake muscles are in the abdomen part of the suit, and even that doesn't look "fake". Nothing like a cheap halloween costume.
"Okay, so Affleck's batsuit was bulletproof but it's cloth? Not armor? Makes a whole helluvalot of sense"
Wow. You've never heard of bullet-proof fabrics?
"Bale's suit achieves less restricted crumple zones by removing materials along the body's natural lines of motion."
Love how you simply ignored my statement about Bale's suit having a skin-tight material underneath the armor just like Affleck's but without the creases for easy movement. The only thing not present along the 'body's natural lines of motion' is the armor. But he still has the skin-tight suit underneath which would hinder his movement in addition to the closely spaced armor plates.
"We don't have to imagine what Bale's batsuit would be like if he leaned over because they actually filmed the suit as is, even had the cape on."
Just as they filmed Michael keton's stiff Batman or the Batman Begins suit: just as the way it was. That doesn't in any way imply the suit is flexible or easy to move in, and obviously they wouldn't highlight such a limitation.
" As opposed to taking the arms off of "the most flexible batsuit ever" and CGI'ing the thing."
Also love how you dragged in that weak point without any proof of it. Literally all the behind the scenes footage of batfleck in the warehouse has him in his entire suit (sometimes without the cape) and that's how they filmed the scenes. They were successfully able to show us the most flexible, agile and fast Batman in cinematic history regardless of how they did it.
I am sure I saw either a pic or a video of them using the mech-suit without the arms but I can't seem to find it.
"he mentions wearing the suit without the cape for the first time ever."
No he doesn't. i read that comment again and he doesn't say anything about the cape.
"And I'm sating that whether or not you can see the articulation of the headpiece is irrelevant, it exists. They covered it up."
No, you were basically saying both cowls had the same type of articulation which required them to detach from the shoulders without having any proof to back that up.
Obviously the bvS cowl is much more complicated and as Wilkinson said, had a lot of engineering in it.
" well there's not a durable material that readily bends, so showing it deflecting bullets at point blank range does again add to what I was saying that they don't actually depict those materials with the properties which would actually exist in the physical world."
Are you kidding me with this BS again? They used different materials to design the cowl. Whether or not it was bullet-proof in the movie universe is a different matter entirely and can be explained as Bruce having used some special material. You do realize if Bale was actually shot while wearing hhis suit, he would fall over dead instantly because it's not bullet-proof in REAL life? But it is in the movie and that's the only thing which matters here.
"I can pretend that my shirt is bullet proof in a movie, doesn't make it some great bit of engineering."
You can pretend whatever you want (including pretending that nolan's Batman is better than Snyder's) but it has to have an explanation, or it has to make sense. If Superman gets his powers from the Sun's energy, that's the only explanation required for the movie. You can't go around complaining about Henry Cavill not being invulnerable in real life.
You're seriously complaining that because the BvS cowl isn't bullet-proof in real life it's not a "great bit of engineering"? You make me want to face palm myself through my head. Wow. I'm having a hard time believing you said that seriously.
Not only does the engineering Wilkinson talked about have nothing to do with the cowl being bullet-proof (he was talking about Batman being able to turn his head), but Batman's cowl is bullet-proof only when he wears the titanium armor underneath it (which was shown near the start of the movie).
"Bulletproof fabrics are body armor, dude."
Okay then. You can call fabric like DCEU Batman's bullet-proof suit 'armor' all you want. A different use of words/definition makes literally no contribution to this discussion.
"The TDK plates were hardened kevlar, with the undersuit being titanium dipped, triweave fibers"
I did not know that, but you did, and you still bet that it's more flexible than the bvS suit.
"chain mail-like construction. This makes it ligter and more flexible"
Titanium chain mail is lighter and more flexible than the elastic,thin, skin-tight suit with creases from BvS? Makes so much sense.
"greater crumple zones for Batman."
It obviously allowed more motion than the BB suit, but it was still adhered to the wearer's body with no creases, and it being chain-mail, that should b obvious it's not as flexible as Batfleck's suit.
Michael Wilkinson: "it was quite a thin fabric that stretched to show underneath, so it showed his incredible anatomy. That was important, to show our Batman really battle-worn"
You're under the impression that his entire suit was fake muscles and latex and you're wrong. They might have added some of that in the abdomen region as i said before, but the rest of the suit was just fabric that was designed and shaded in ways to highlight the ACTUAL muscles of the wearer, similar to Superman's suit.
" Because not turning the head was always a defining characteristic until TDK."
In the movie universe, yes, but irl they had to detach the cowl for him to be able to do that. What Affleck meant is that it was the first time a Batman actor/stuntman could turn his head (without detaching the cowl) and also be so flexible in it at the same time.
"You can't turn something that is attached to something else without also turning that when both things are hardened. "
Except the cowl wasn't that hardened. You could tell that easily when Superman took it off and when batman did it himself after the batmobile chase. He only wears the titanium armor underneath when he has to fight.
"or they made it out of soft materials, which is what I'm talking about when I say that the materials don't well-represent the supposed function of the suit."
What part of 'he wears titanium armor underneath the cowl for bullet-proof protection' do you not understand? Most likely the cowl too is bulletproof/extremely durable, but it alone won't stop an impact to the head from a bullet. Bale's cowl on the other hand, will break apart after a few hits from anything hard.
"But, uh huh, explain this "complicated engineering" to me."
I would if i had worked on the suit and knew how it functioned, but it obviously is more complicated than any other Batman cowl. It is most likely made of some latex material or something similar that can be bent but it must have been designed in a manner so it wouldn't get creases when Batman turns his head and still maintains its muscular shape while allowing easy motion. if it was so easy to do, it would have been done before in Nolan's Batman films.
" I like the physical validity that goes into designing something so that it actually looks like it has those properties. "
And yet the BvS Batsuit doesn't even look like normal cloth. You don't even need to look at it closely to notice that. Superman's suit in Superman returns or the old Superman movies looks like cloth.
Open this image in another tab and zoom in:
http://www.startfilm.ru/ima...
Also, google bullet proof fabric and you'll see it's not supposed to look like anything special but it is. You can't get over the fact that something can be bullet-proof without having armor-plates.
Dude, titanium is still a metal and it's not as light as aluminium. I never said what Bale wore was a "solid piece" but there's still metal in it and titanium isn't known for its flexibility.
"Which is why they based the design on chain mail. Ever seen it?"
Yes, and it doesn't stick so close to the body like Bale's skin-tight suit, that's what makes it easy to move in. Look at all the chain-mail armour ever used and you won't see it adhered to the body as tight as Bale's suit.
There's literally no argument you can give me to say Bale's tight titanium chain-mail and closely-spaced armor plates is more flexible than flexible fabric with creases....especially as an engineer. You're in denial.
Also, that picture you posted doesn't prove anything. They made it on a mannequin, big deal. They shaded and designed it to highlight the muscles like with Superman's suit:
http://akns-images.eonline....
Affleck has larger body proportions, so his suit looked bigger, and that's the look they wanted with their Batman.
Whoops, I think I got on the wrong response.
"And there's not an intuitively protective material which would connect the mask to the cowl and allow for such supple head movement as in the BvS cowl. "
Jesus fucking Christ you're dense. How many more times do i have to say these materials are not ACTUALLY bullet-proof. Not only that but you're pretending like they just moulded a simple cowl and Batman can move his head because the material simply bends like rubber.
"So either Batman articulated the cowl in some manner (it deflected bullets so it's obviously supposed to be hard as opposed to, like, a kevlar mesh which would disperse the projectile and contain the fragments). But are you suggesting that Batman specifically puts on pieces of armor underneath the suit if he thinks he's gonna be in a fight..?"
No, you thick-head, I know you've seen the tech cowl (which IS the protective titanium armor I have been talking about) yet you're unnecessarily extending this argument because you know you're wrong. 'it's obviously supposed to be hard'? 'Batman puts on pieces of armor underneath the suit'? WTF, where did you even smoke that up from?
"making the suit into a suit of armor is not some big disgrace like y'all try to make it out to be. Nor is having it in all black."
No, it's not, but just because its been done a few times in the comics doesn't mean it's okay to do it over and over again in live action. How's that for a little taste of your own medicine? Everyone knows the iconic grey-and-black fabric suit is the definitive version, and it hadn't been done since Adam West's campy show.
"The comic book design is a function of the medium. Think about an artist working in 1939, being asked to work on a tight schedule for pennies...."
Stop digging up old arguments now that you barely anything to say for the current ones. I don't CARE why those artists didn't do black on black for Batman, the way it turned out IS Batman's comicbook history whether or not you like it. If Nolan (who had never read a Batman comic his entire life) wanted to do his own version while not caring about comicbooks, that's okay as long as it works out as a good movie. But STOP trying to defend it by telling me BS about how comicbook artists didn't want to do black-on-black back in 1939 or that he shouldn't be limited by CBs. Zack Snyder managed to bring the comic-book Batman to life successfully, unlike nolan, and all you can do is call it a 'Halloween costume'. This isn't about facts anymore, I'm arguing against your biased opinions..
"Bale's undersuit was dipped in titanium, not constructed from it. It was a coating on the fibers. So there may only be a couple ounces of titanium on that mesh."
Where has it been confirmed that it was 'dipped in titanium' and that it only has a couple of ounces?
You're ignoring the fact that titanium isn't very flexible nor very light, and clearly the end product wasn't all that strong since it got penetrated by Talia's simply knife easily.
I said the medieval chain mails were loose to highlight the fact that that was the reason they were easy to move in. You sure do know how to ignore my points. In contrast, Bale's chain mail is adhered to his suit.
"they didn't have that capability, this was an evolution of that."
*devolution, considering it had much lesser protection as well as restricted movement, both in exchange for an aesthetic look.
"The BvS suit is one thick, solid piece of body armor. It's going to restrict movement more than the reduced design of the TDK suit in actuality."
No, it wouldn't. You keep repeating the same old bullshit and throwing around baseless statements. The BvS suit was made of a flexible material that also had creases all over it to allow movement. Calling it "one thick, solid piece of body armor" isn't going to do shit. I don't care Bale's underlying suit was based on chainmail; it was adhered to his body with no creases and was made of titanium (a meshwork of which would allow lesser flexibility than a fabric meshwork). Not only that, but it had closely-spaced armor plates all over it and the straps to hold them together further reduced flexibility. And that's just the torso. The part of his suit covering the legs was poorly designed and would get f*cked up every time he bent. Lol.
"You're in denial if you think anything other than body paint will show that degree of musculature... It's a molded, sculpted suit, dude."
Jesus fucking CHRIST. Everything i've been saying went over your head. The musculature doesn't show in a suit like this, THAT is the reason why I said it has to be SHADED (coloured) and designed in a way to highlight the muscles. That's why i posted the Superman pic because it's easier to tell:
http://akns-images.eonline....
" Anyway, we see Batman remove the cowl in 2 instances. Where's the tech cowl..? Doesn't appear to be wearing it."
That's why i said he only wears it when he he's planned to engage in a fight, troll. You're literally throwing stupid questions at me that I already clarified. (and just in case you're all like "but...but he fought in the knightmare sequence!!! It was a trap. He wasn't expecting it)
"Didn't use the comics to defend the armor look. I don't need comic book precedence to like things unlike BvS fans"
Yes, you did. "Secondly, Batman has been wearing body armor in the comics for a while. He was always been on the cutting edge of technology." You sure do know how to backtrack to suit your arguments.
"What I said is that there is a cinematic version of things. And there's no reason to design a movie suit around the limitations and rewuirements of a completely different medium."
And I've repeatedly said that Nolan designed his batman for his own universe. So STOP fucking spinning this argument whatever way you like. This started out as a "Batfleck is the most comic-book accurate Batman ever" to which you replied "the armored look has been done in the comics too" (and are now backtracking) and after continuously getting your points dismantled, you keep shifting the argument.
"Don't fucking lecture anyone on a director not knowing the comics."
Telling you Nolan hadn't read a Batman comic his entire life and had to be told Batman has to wear a utility belt and he isn't "100% all black" is hardly a "fucking lecture". Lmao.
"Snyder's adaptation of Batman shows the extent of his knowledge is flipping through and looking at the artwork and paneling. He completely left the character behind and solely focused on aesthetic"
I love how, after you lost 75% of these arguments, you keep bringing up new ones so you're not left in the dust. The look of the character, the batcave, alfred, the technology he uses, the martials arts, knowledge, detective skills, his vehicles all matter and Snyder nailed all of it. He completely left the character behind because he killed a few people? Booooohooooooo Him killing some thugs was part of the character development shown: him having deviated from his no-kill rule after seeing everything around him turn to shit and him realizing everything he's done has been for 'nothing'. By the end of the movie, Superman's sacrifice brought him back on track and made him realize he was wrong.
This is literally the only point you can ever bring up because it's the controversial one, but is justified too (as I did above). Everything else about Snyder's Batman was spot on, better than Nolan's, and you can't shove it all aside by telling me rubbish about how "snyder flips through pages for an aesthetic look' Gtfo
What you haters don't realize is that DC is doing something different with these characters. We have had so MANY Batman and Superman movies until now, so why not explore something new (also from the comics) for a change? Like showing the reaction of a realistic world to someone like Superman. Or showing a world-weary Batman having deviated from his path. These characters are going to end up as they are in the mainstream comics obviously. You don't get that, and then go around whining "Not muh Superman!".
I don't CARE more people like Nolan's batman more. This is a comicbook character and people who have actually read comics and realize this is the most accurate version get to have a proper say.
" A chainmail currass is made from steel, which is inflexible, yet it flexes to any extent required because it is composed of thousands of interlocking pieces. It's not a solid steel shirt. No idea why you're still hung up on this."
There's limited movement when the suit is adhered to his body. But if it was made of JUST fabric with no metal, the individual pieces would bend as well, allowing more flexibility than something dipped in titanium. No idea why you're still hung up on this.
"The more material at the body's points of motion, the less those joints can be flexed. There's a bunching of material at the joints in the BvS batsuit. "
If you're talking about the 'creases' when you say 'extra material' then that would allow more flexibility at the joints as I've been saying all this time. TDK suit has no creases.
"TDK batsuit because the material at the joints is much thinner, and tge armor paneling is separated which allows for greater stretching of material than in a solid piece of body armor"
And yet you have no proof the material at the joints is "thinner". If anything it looks the same everywhere. And i love how you threw in "tge armor paneling is separated which allows for greater stretching" LOL wtf. If anything the closely-spaced armor plates restrict motion. And calling the BvS suit "a solid piece of armor" is nothing more than a clever use of words, also baseless.
"And, yeah, the BvS suit is a thick rubber musclesuit in actuality. I'm still flabbergasted that you think that's the wearer's actual physique."
Also love how now you're just flat out telling me "No, no, no it's a muscle suit" after all your attempts failed, and even after I copy-pasted direct quotes from the costume designer himself saying it's thin fabric which shows the anatomy underneath. You refusing to accept the suit was shaded to highlight the muscles is your problem. You know what, go watch CosplayChris's youtube videos where he made his own Batsuit to get an idea of what I'm saying.
At this point 90% of this debate is you repeating the same points from the last 5 comments, or you being in denial. The rest of the 10% is you bringing up new arguments because you just love doing that (but end up losing most of them here).
You're blind to anything other than Nolan's Batman and i actually feel sorry for you, that you have to come to these sites solely to do what you're doing.
I don't have any more time to waste with you, got better things to do. Don't expect me to read your reply.
Also gonna be honest: I don't like the mech suit nor the Dark Knight Returns suit on Ben Affleck. In the mech suit, he looks more silly than intimidating and the other one makes him look so uncomfortable. You're having him dressed as this big, fat, muscular guy, but the cloth looks so tight to the point that he looks like he can barely breathe in it.
That and the movement looks kinda stiff based on the muscle and how uncomfortable Ben looks in it.
Also I'm sorry, but when someone says BvS isn't goofy, that's kinda wrong. Hell, they used a jar of piss as a dumb plot point, Batman running away from Doomsday despite the film going on and on about how Batman was this amazing person, Batfleck hangs from the ceiling like he's Spider-Man, he hits Superman with a sink (huh, now it is like a Frank Miller adaptation) and swings Superman around to hit pillars or walls. Lol
yea nothing looked natural with batmans movement in BvS...especially with the suit he wore during the warehouse sequence...
You really don't know much about armor, do you?
I know quite a bit about armor; I work in that industry. I just find it funny all the "technical" aspects being discussed without any type of idea how it works.
There are 3 types of armor. Soft armor ("Kevlar"), Ceramic, and Steel.
Soft Armor is great because it is thin, light, and can absorb multiple shots. However, it generally will only work against pistol caliber threats. The goal is to keep the bullet from penetrating. If the bullet is "caught" by the material, then damage is severely limited. Some Soft Armor is thin enough that it can be made into suits, but trauma padding is still best.
Ceramic Body Armor Plates are most common. They can generally stop a few shots from just about any pistol or rifle threat and are very lightweight. They shatter when hit, but absorb the blow. They also have to be a larger size generally to distribute force, and are usually worn over a soft armor system. Once shot (or dropped) they are useless. X Rays are used to check for fractures if dropped.
Steel Armor (AR500 Steel) is the "toughest" but it is incredibly heavy. In wartime, you see it applied more to vehicles. Police make shields from it. Shooting targets use it. It can be used as body armor though. It's very price friendly as well compared to Ceramic plates. Other than the weight, steel armor can be dangerous. When a bullet hits, it is quite literally stopped (not caught) and generally will ricochet somewhat. Bullets will also shatter and you get "spalling" - tiny pieces. One small fragment can quite easily shoot up to the neck and be fatal. There are some coatings to minimize the chance of spalling, but it is always a risk with steel armor.
All that said, I think the BvS batsuit is the most realistic yet. The grey area is soft armor - it even somewhat resembles a Kevlar weave. The "Halloween costume muscles" would simply be reinforced soft armor and trauma padding - except molded to the human physique. Kevlar is also very cut and stab resistant - so it makes sense as well.
The bat symbol, gauntlets, and boots would all be a synthetic leather (Kevlar infused likely) covering over a base layer or AR500 steel. You see him use the gauntlets to "block" gunfire in the film, he takes shots to the cowl, and the bat symbol is traditionally bullet proof. It's a pretty genius design actually, and not that different than you would see on a Special Operations fighter - just with molded soft armor instead of large panels.
Is it perfect? No.... large square areas would be better (albeit bulkier and more awkward for hand to hand combatives). And I chuckled when Batfleck took two contact distance shots to the cowl without being rendered unconscious. But of all the superhero stuff out there.... I do feel like some thought went into this one. Seeing the skeletonized cowl is a look at the current most advanced helmet technology in a way. Very similar.
I only posted the previous remark because the armor discussion was getting silly, and you are way out of your lane. I've seen a continued arrogance in your posts for months, maybe years, now. While I don't feel like linking my company's name by signing up for an account - I'm here frequently enough to discuss this further if you'd like.
TL:DR - The BvS suit is, in my expert opinion, the best yet.
Also there is a whole methodology of CQB that teaches you to draw fire towards your armor..... so yes, even that is rooted in real life tactics. It's called squaring up to the threat vs blading.
Why in the hell are my comments getting continuously deleted? It's all solid information; no trolling or crap like that.
I don't personally agree with squaring to a target. But there's no denying it's a popular tactic and taught almost universally to LE. I can see where that idea for Batman came from, and it's a popular enough tactic that it's a valid concept for a comic book character. LE doesn't typically paint targets on their armor but there is some semblance to real life.... the placement of chest patches is in that particular spot for a reason.
I don't personally buy into the bladed or squared or any of that. When it comes to Small Unit Tactics, the fight is too dynamic. The best defense is don't get shot. That philosophy is why the Dark Knight / Rises batsuit is irritating. That amount of armor is completely unnecessary and even dangerous.
The BvS suit makes the most sense and is closest to what the modern warfighter wears. Armor the vitals, keep movement high, keep weight low, and focus on making head canoes. On that note, no common criminal will be making headshots on a moving target - especially with a pistol. Training wins fights. It's why our SOF and SRT / SWAT police teams have such a high success rate.
well agree to disagree because there wasn't a single moment in the film where Batman awkwardly bends over or has unnatural movement... movie magic happens in every movie... blame Nolan for cutting his fight scenes like a seizure attack because as far as on film goes... the BvS batsuit had the most movement hands down. but all of this sounds like a complaint for the sake of having something to complain about... the proof is in the puddin'... BvS warehouse scene is the most visceral and brutal of all Batman fights of all time trumping anything before it as far as movement is concerned...
"it doesnt look like anything that a guy like Bruce Wayne would wear in real life"
isnt that the point?
do You read your comments back to yourself while having your eyes closed because that's how I imagine it. anyways I can't continue this argument because it's based on your view of the BvS suit not having a sense of function when I state that because of what we see in BvS, we know the suit has the most function (on screen) of them all. Potatoes potAtoes
What the fuck is up with those stupid ass glasses
Aquaman's costume is just so detailed. Love it.
lol Cyborg looks so fake, like a plastic action figure. The CG version in the trailer also looked pretty bad. Hope that the version in the final movie looks a lot better. Even the last terminator movie had more realistically looking cyborgs.
Loving all of them, but Aquaman is still my favorite! A beautiful blend of what's familiar in the comics and incorporating Jason's Hawaiian culture.
I just wished some golden orange
https://uploads.disquscdn.c...
A little Arkham Origins light grey in there. Not bad. The decision to go with goggles over the cowl, instead of lenses inside the cowl, and over the eyes, is a great example of overthinking it. Why add an accessory, to the most iconic comic book mask ever created? Perhaps he borrowed the goggles from Catwoman. I BETTER get a Catwoman reference in Justice League!😼 https://uploads.disquscdn.c...
Boy, that Batsuit is awesome. Those glasses still bother the hell out of me. I don't mind him having goggles but the design is horrible. They look douchy and quite feminine.
Man i really love the costume designs in the DCEU!
I am in the (apparent) minority that likes the goggles. There, I've said it! Batman has some flair he has to express somehow. Or really, they look right to me. Matter of taste, I suppose. If you don't like them, let's just say Alfred made them.
Cool
While I like that they went for that more strapped together look in Batman like Arkham Origins/Knight, I'm not really digging it. Mostly because of the colors and shades, oh ya and the glasses.
Just doesn't scream Batman to me.
Also not impressed with the Flash, and that's the nicest I can be about that.
Everything else is impressive.
This is an archive of Batman-News.com from 2010 to 2025. For the latest news, check out BatmanNews.com
