It's actually a stretch fabric with a screen printed texture over a silver muscle suit, not a rubber suit at all.
Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice
- Thread starter Vivek
- Start date
It's actually a stretch fabric with a screen printed texture over a silver muscle suit, not a rubber suit at all.
Axlotl
Master Member
Well, that changes everything.
I'm joking - that changes nothing. It still looks like a rubber suit.
@Edraven99, that suit was screen printed with tiny S shield everywhere and has a slight texture to it, it's not some plain blue lycra. And it wasn't exactly mind blowing neither ! All in all I'm not that interested in the superman suit, I like it but that's all. The batsuit on the other hand I'm in love. Except for the short ears, but I can give it a pass given how good the rest is.
Last edited by a moderator:
I thoroughly enjoyed Superman Returns, I know I'm one of the few, but HATED the suit in that movie. Did we really need the S a million times on the S emblem with an S belt buckle, S on the back of the boots, multiple S's on the bottom of the boots. Overkill. I didn't like the narrow bodied "swimmer" look that Bryan Singer said he should be. It didn't look like Superman to me. Though it doesn't make sense logically, I prefer the overly muscular Superman. When Cavill has his shirt off a steals the clothes at the beginning of MoS, it was like looking at the comic.
niennumb1
Master Member
Geeze.. Great detail and all, but in the case of Superman I think less is more. I also think some propmaker really wanted to be an a-hole to ensure no one would come close in trying to copy the suit for cosplay and that was the only reason for doing so much detail, haha!
The Wonder Woman suit looks good. The Mannequin wears it better than Gadot from what I've seen so far.
The Wonder Woman suit looks good. The Mannequin wears it better than Gadot from what I've seen so far.
seelsa73
Sr Member
It makes sense that he would, though, considering it was supposed to be a Superman II sequel.
Plus, it makes sense considering how Kryptonian powers work. They aren't tied to the physical stature of the Kryptonian. It's all about how the body processes yellow sun radiation. For example, in Batman/Superman: Apocalypse, Batman analyzes Kara Zor El and determines that her body processes solar radiation more efficiently than Clark, potentially making her more powerful. Using this line of logic, one can deduce that even a Kryptoniaan built like pre-Spiderman Peter Parker could be as strong or stronger than Superman.
seelsa73
Sr Member
I was thinking more along the lines of keeping continuity between II and Returns
Yeah, but my point still stands.
Debatable. Christopher Reeve looked more like a built baseball player than a swimmer.
Mr Mold Maker
Master Member
Sorry to switch back to this topic, but I keep hearing people say regarding the Joker scars, "You're wrong because there is also a hole in his chest. Where is the scar for that one?"
Well, as you can see in this photo, Batman has taken a few shots to his own chest... doesn't look like they go through to me.. where is the blood?
I'm not saying I agree or disagree with the Jason Todd Joker theory, but it makes sense that if he was, his chest would be armored, and his arms may not have been. You see that in most real bullet proof armor.
Well, as you can see in this photo, Batman has taken a few shots to his own chest... doesn't look like they go through to me.. where is the blood?
I'm not saying I agree or disagree with the Jason Todd Joker theory, but it makes sense that if he was, his chest would be armored, and his arms may not have been. You see that in most real bullet proof armor.
JD
Master Member
The theory that some have mentioned is that the chest is more heavily armored; whereas, the shoulder - where the Robin costumes seems to show bullet holes that have penetrated. At the same time the Robin suit also shows a bullet that doesn't seem to have penetrated (like the one's on Batman) on chest/upper abdomen.
JLeezy23
Sr Member
I remember Kevin Smith saying when he got the first look at the batsuit (before we all got to see it) his description was kevlar weaved into the entire suit. Which is what the suit looks like, and also the same for Robin's, I would say if its kevlar then its evenly distributed throughout the entire suit as it would Batman's
Zombie_61
Master Member
As Frank Miller put it in The Dark Knight Rises: "Why do you think I wear a target on my chest--can't armor my head." The same is probably true of the more flexible areas of the suit like the shoulders, elbows, knees, etc.. He has to be able to move, so those areas would likely be thinner and more vulnerable to penetration by knives and bullets. It stands to reason that Robin's suit would have the same vulnerable areas.
Mr Mold Maker
Master Member
That's exactly what I said about one page back. :lol
I was just reiterating for the people that disregard the theory by saying three holes mean three scars... When It doesn't. Batman clearly took shots to the chest and it didn't go through... I'm saying the one that hit Robin in the chest? We can see almost certainly that shot to the chest didn't go through.
JD
Master Member
I replied to the post you made on this page. Not sure why you worded it the way you did, if you were "reiterating for (the) people." :confused
Mr Mold Maker
Master Member
I keep hearing people say regarding the Joker scars, "You're wrong because there is also a hole in his chest. Where is the scar for that one?"
Well, as you can see in this photo, Batman has taken a few shots to his own chest... doesn't look like they go through to me.. where is the blood?
I'm not saying I agree or disagree with the Jason Todd Joker theory, but it makes sense that if he was, his chest would be armored, and his arms may not have been. You see that in most real bullet proof armor.
I don't know how I can be any more clear than that, but OK.
What I'm saying is I said one thing, and you quoted me saying the exact same thing. Redundant is all.....:unsure
Everyone has different levels of disbelief. I can totally suspend disbelief to think that an Alien would come to Earth and have super powers. No problem.
But every time I watch super hero movies now, the question of "Where did they get that?" is unavoidable.
X-men: makes sense. Xavier has nearly unlimited funds. Worse comes to worst, he could always just convince the bank that the loan has already been repaid. We also actually see him at one point make use of government help, then make everyone who knew about it forget.
Stark: also nearly unlimited resources. And the government figures out what he's up to pretty quickly.
Thor: presumably unlimited resources along with lots of minions.
Guardians: thats just what they wear. They are wearing clothes and carrying fairly typical weapons.
Spiderman: we actually see him making it. We have to stretch belief here some to assume that he also got...super...spider...sewing... It could happen. We're good.
And then we come to superman and batman. Michael Keaton Batman actually did well with this. So did Batman begins. Both incarnations went a little off the rails after the first outing. Even with unlimited money, some things just can't be kept secret. Even with Iron man, while the public didnt know until the end of the first movie, everyone else did...his enemy, the government. Some things really can't be done without some help and someone noticing.
And superman...slaving away into the night with his sewing kit. hot press, and rubber molds. Working those details one by one. You have to admit, the man is nothing if not dedicated to the look of his super persona.
edit: this goes with my own general theory of suspension of disbelief: some is needed, but you have a certain amount before the movie becomes silly. You can increase the amount at your disposal if the actors are likable enough, but in the end, you have a certain number of imaginary suspension "credits" before it becomes farce. There's nothing wrong with farce, and farce has nearly unlimited amounts of suspension at it's disposal, but if that's not what you're going for it can be bad.
And I hate to see them waste it, when it's not needed. It's better to use it for things like "Thor can fly because...shut up! He's Thor! Deal with it!" As absurd as that concept is, most people had no problem with it, including me. I'm A-OK with a spinning hammer being the same thing as a helicopter rotor. Because for me at least, they had enough suspension to spare for it. They might not have if they'd used it up giving hawk eye a purple hood.
But every time I watch super hero movies now, the question of "Where did they get that?" is unavoidable.
X-men: makes sense. Xavier has nearly unlimited funds. Worse comes to worst, he could always just convince the bank that the loan has already been repaid. We also actually see him at one point make use of government help, then make everyone who knew about it forget.
Stark: also nearly unlimited resources. And the government figures out what he's up to pretty quickly.
Thor: presumably unlimited resources along with lots of minions.
Guardians: thats just what they wear. They are wearing clothes and carrying fairly typical weapons.
Spiderman: we actually see him making it. We have to stretch belief here some to assume that he also got...super...spider...sewing... It could happen. We're good.
And then we come to superman and batman. Michael Keaton Batman actually did well with this. So did Batman begins. Both incarnations went a little off the rails after the first outing. Even with unlimited money, some things just can't be kept secret. Even with Iron man, while the public didnt know until the end of the first movie, everyone else did...his enemy, the government. Some things really can't be done without some help and someone noticing.
And superman...slaving away into the night with his sewing kit. hot press, and rubber molds. Working those details one by one. You have to admit, the man is nothing if not dedicated to the look of his super persona.
edit: this goes with my own general theory of suspension of disbelief: some is needed, but you have a certain amount before the movie becomes silly. You can increase the amount at your disposal if the actors are likable enough, but in the end, you have a certain number of imaginary suspension "credits" before it becomes farce. There's nothing wrong with farce, and farce has nearly unlimited amounts of suspension at it's disposal, but if that's not what you're going for it can be bad.
And I hate to see them waste it, when it's not needed. It's better to use it for things like "Thor can fly because...shut up! He's Thor! Deal with it!" As absurd as that concept is, most people had no problem with it, including me. I'm A-OK with a spinning hammer being the same thing as a helicopter rotor. Because for me at least, they had enough suspension to spare for it. They might not have if they'd used it up giving hawk eye a purple hood.
Last edited:
