Worst Picture Ever Of Batman In The Dark Knight
May 27, 2008 by Vic HoltremanWhat is up with the nose on Batman’s cowl?
Now from previous articles you guys know I’m totally looking forward to this summer’s next blockbuster The Dark Knight, but Empire Magazine just released a cover image that is the worst ever of Batman from the movie. All I could think of when I saw it was “look at that NOSE!”
Damn thing reminds me of Foghorn Leghorn from the old Warner Bros. cartoons…
IESB.net has more pics of the full article from Empire, which will be putting out two versions: A Batman and a Joker. the Joker version is appropriately defaced within.
Around the web:
Loading ...
yeah that looks terrible but it doesn’t mean that the movie is bad actually i’m looking for this one
Looks like he’s got a freakin broken nose! There are so many better images out there and they pic that one for the cover…fire the person that picked that now
Also his right eye looks like it’s about to close. Who pays these guys to choose this stuff? SHEEEESH!!
Karl Malden as The Batman.
Heh, or maybe Jimmy Durante for us way older folks.
Vic
Older? How about Cerano?
)
I could not agree with you more, Vic. This pic is horrible. But it’s not really the photographer’s fault, there are only so many ways to make a crappy costume look good. Yes, I’m saying the batsuit in TDK sucks. It’s almost tied with Shumacher’s for being the worst Batman costume of all time, IMO. Despite my love for Batman and The Dark Knight being my most anticipated film of the year after Iron Man, it frustrates me that the movies can’t seem to get Batman’s costume right. The whole “armor” thing is ridiculous. How much damn armor does he need? Look at the friggin’ shoulders on that thing! Ninjas, Zorro, V from V for Vendetta, the Spirit, Dick Tracy, all of those guys who basically do the same thing that Batman does and are also human don’t wear any armor and get along fine. The Batman in the comics never needed as much armor or whatever as the Batman in the movies does, the costume is a disguise as opposed to someone like Iron Man whose suit is all about armor and practicality. The Batman in the comics costume was bullet, flame, and shock proof to a degree without compromising Batman’s manuverability (like a bullet proof vest), it was flexible. It wouldn’t stop a knife, but Batman never let anyone get that chance of stabbing him. Batman isn’t Iron Man, his shtick is that he’s HUMAN doing all these things, with nothing to make him that much different from you or me, to over armor Batman/make him into an Iron Man prototype is to take away from his character. The film suits are ridiculous, there isn’t anything realistic about a guy in an unmanuverable, black plastic/rubber costume (with a yellow belt), doing the things he’s supposed to be doing. The suits are not that way because they’re trying to be “realistic”, they’re that way because Tim Burton thought it’d be cool and ever since his film, WB has been afraid to do anything else with the Batman costume other than variations of the Burton suit. Iron Man looks like Iron Man in his movie, same for Spider-Man, Superman, and even Fantastic 4, why can’t Batman look like Batman in his movies? We have yet to see a big budget adaptation of the black and gray comics style suit. Black and gray would look fine, camoflauge even, hell, even soldiers wear those color (shade) schemes, I don’t get why people think that’s so “unrealistic”. If the movie batsuits were really about being realistic then they would have a cowl that covered Batman’s face completely, no yellow utility belt, and would probably even ditch the cape. That would be “realistic”. But it wouldn’t really be Batman then. There’s a way to do the comics suit and keep it believable, it’s been done with plenty of other superheroes before, I don’t see why Batman should be an exception. So until the suit is black, gray, and flexible (like the comics suit) I will continue to complain about it.
END RANT
HOLY LA HEIM, BATMAN!
At least there aren’t nipples.
But good point comparing to the others, but, in the cartoon, Spiderman in the symbiot didn’t have the lines, he was just smooth black.
@KEL: I couldn’t agree more! They HAVE to stick to what the comic books say he looks like. Otherwise no votes from me or any other hardcore batman fan.
I completely agree that Batman looks ridiculous in the movie. I came to watch the movie so that I can get a thrill out of seeing the guy I already love out there. Not some puny little jerk with a hilarious voice.
That’s right. Puny. Why are ALL the Batmans in the movies so tiny? Bruce Wayne in BIG. Muscular. This little twit just looks funny. If someone like that dropped in on me in the night (knight?), speaking that in that wannabe voice, with his mouth squished by that ‘helmet’, and having his size, I wouldn’t be scared. I would laugh outright.
Batman in the movie is not scary enough.
I didn’t come to watch a superhero movie that is ‘realistic’. I came to watch the comic books in motion. The Batman in the movie is not Batman. Neither is his car. Neither is his suit. Neither is his voice.
And how is it that SO MANY PEOPLE find out Batman’s identity? Since when does Lucius Fox know who the bat is? And how does a WOMAN know? Sheesh!
Bhagwad