BATMAN STUFF: CATWOMAN’S ASS! BANE SPEAKS ABOUT SPEAKING! ANOTHER EW COVER DELIGHT! - Page 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cylon Baby 

The EW pics are utter shit

That's because it's EW. That's EW's aesthetic and what their readership wants. It's not a nerd mag that makes sales/gets hits off the back of "cool" dark and shadowy imagery. Your average punter likely doesn't understand why so many movies choose to shoot things in an artistic manner when there's perfectly good Walmart level lighting available. It's the same mindset that had people complaining about letterboxing because they were "missing half the picture".

I thought I read that the heels are retractable in order to function as weapons. The fact that they're differently coloured than the rest of her outfit (blade colour) suggests this. Should work somewhat like the knife that came out of The Joker's shoe in "The Dark Knight". I don't know if that would make them any easier to run in, though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Naisu Baddi 

I thought I read that the heels are retractable in order to function as weapons. The fact that they're differently coloured than the rest of her outfit (blade colour) suggests this. Should work somewhat like the knife that came out of The Joker's shoe in "The Dark Knight". I don't know if that would make them any easier to run in, though.

I've heard this too. It would be good if they retracted or something whenever she needed to run. I'd be okay with that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JacknifeJohnny 

Batman (whom, in this incarnation, seems to only be opposed to handguns, not so much WMD-level ordnance on his super hummer and whatnot). 

 

 

This has always been my bone to pick from Burton all the way up to now - the megaton expolsions that look like they greased a whole city block, the crushed cop cars, the trains flying through the air.

As long as you don't expire while Batman's fist is in your face, it doesn't count I guess.

In my mind I justify by positing that Bruce Wayne knows about the collateral damage, and that's part of the reason he thinks he's too far down the rabbit hole to stop.

Batman not killing is never a plot point in the Burton take, though. It's just like any of the versions of the comic where Bats has no problem nullifying some folks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Merriweather 

Batman not killing is never a plot point in the Burton take, though. It's just like any of the versions of the comic where Bats has no problem nullifying some folks.

I think the difference between Burton and Nolan's take is that "Baleman" at least tries to uphold his no-kill policy.  But since this is meant to be a more human interpretation of the character, he doesn't have a problem taking out someone if it comes down to it.

Keaton was just straight up murdering fools left and right.

- I LOVE the still from TDK of Bats on top of the cop car. (It was from a deleted scene showing Batman racing to the Batpod after learning the Joker had kidnapped Rachel and Dent).

- Hathaway looks amazing in the standee still. 

- The heels, from what I've read, function as blades/weapons.

- Prit sure the heels/versions we saw on the stuntwoman driving the Batpod will be digitally replaced to look like it's the boots with the silvered heels.

- Hathaway herself has said the suit has a shitload of functions. 

- WB has done very, very little viral marketing for this. Basically releasing Bane's picture, and then for free tickets to IMAX screenings of the prologue. That's it. They do seem to be following, almost to the date, the marketing calendar for TDK WRT conventional marketing efforts (which is why many folks think Trailer #3 will be in front of THE AVENGERS).

- This thread makes me really, really gay for Sebastian and JKJ. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Rain Dog 

I actually don't understand the thinking at EW at this point - are they shitty on purpose? It can't ba an accident or series of coincidences, so what are they going for?

As a designer, I think I can share some insights on why the covers are always so shitty. First off, the people (or person) who does the bulk of the design work at EW is working under an incredibly tight, weekly schedule. And when you're a designer, you're working with a bunch of people who are not artistically-geared. Just getting photos that are good-looking enough and high enough resolution for print is a chore in and of itself. Imagine trying to get them from a huge Hollywood studio. Try dealing with impatient people who don't know what 300dpi means, and explaining to them why they need to spend an extra five minutes finding a photo you can actually use, when they're already busy as hell. And trying to get through all the clearances that are required in order to print those images. That alone would be a nightmare. Then consider the restrictions and guidelines on using those photos, and having to send out proofs to get the cover approved by the studio.

Then you have to deal with an editor who, I'm 99% sure, is completely out of touch. See that blurb on the left side of the cover that says "Christian Bale & Anne Hathaway in The Dark Knight Rises"? With the fucking arrow pointing at the actors? That is a dead giveaway for an editor who insists on being a control freak, but is completely out of touch with the target audience. How many people who read Entertainment Weekly are going to pick up the latest issue and not know the names of the actors in one of the most hotly-anticipated movies of all time?

I'm sure if the designer had the time and freedom to design covers that didn't look like shit, they wouldn't look like shit. But I'm positive his or her (or their) hands are completely tied.

D.T., I've no problem nodding along with what you're painting there - while I don't work in entertainment, my jobs have all required some level of graphic design understanding and action, and the amount of ignorance out there, even among the folks making the final decisions on how images look, is pretty appalling.

On the flipside, EW is fucking owned by WB. You'd think that would make getting better images slightly less problematic.

And even positing everything you say, EW does some incredibly ugly covers. Bale's pose and facial expression are laughable here - it's not the suit, it's not even the lighting. Whomever picked this publicity still out of likely dozens or hundreds is an idiot.

What MichaelM said. ^

WB is controlling the release of images here. Empire and TotalFilm have/had consistently better cover images. It's gotta be the demographic.

EDIT: And I like the Lee Meriwether-esque outfit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by D.T. 

As a designer, I think I can share some insights on why the covers are always so shitty. First off, the people (or person) who does the bulk of the design work at EW is working under an incredibly tight, weekly schedule. And when you're a designer, you're working with a bunch of people who are not artistically-geared. Just getting photos that are good-looking enough and high enough resolution for print is a chore in and of itself. Imagine trying to get them from a huge Hollywood studio. 

I worked for a small non-profit. Six people. Part of my job was making sure we had 300dpi images available for publication. Are we assuming that Warner Brother's does not?

I do think it would be awesome if, after Nolan left, the WB rebooted with a SUPER realistic take on the character. I.e. he struggles to get into his suit in time, is always late to big criminal events, Harvey Dent dies in surgery, etc. etc.

4am pee breaks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sebastian OB 

No, that was directed at the "I'm sick of the realistic approach!" sentiment that pops up in every thread that revolves around the costumes in the Nolan films.

There are people who still consider Nolan's Bativerse "realistic"?

Weird.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gabe T 

I do think it would be awesome if, after Nolan left, the WB rebooted with a SUPER realistic take on the character. I.e. he struggles to get into his suit in time, is always late to big criminal events, Harvey Dent dies in surgery, etc. etc.

One movie. Running-length 5 minutes.

Bruce tells Alfred his big plan to save Gotham that involves dressing up like a giant black bat and beating up hoodlums every night, blowing hundreds of millions of dollars annually (as opposed to snorting coke outta some whore's ass), making enemies with powerful public officials and their mob muscle and that attracting the attention of even more dangerous psychotics. Cut to Bruce being committed and Alfred inherits the Wayne estate. Fin.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Art Decade 

4am pee breaks.

He wears diapers like the astronauts do.  He pisses in the suit.

So the Batsuit is basically a DUNE Stillsuit with a cape attached & a bendy Bat-straw for drinking recycled pee.

Presumably, the "mushy grinding sound" of the Batsuit would become a warning from the darkness to evil-doers everywhere.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarleyQuinn22 

He wears diapers like the astronauts do.  He pisses in the suit.

Hey! That crazy lady got all Huggies for love!

I'll bet money that somewhere at WB, an exec had to be talked down from ordering the death of Tom Hardy.