Premium Format Batman Keaton Premium Format Figure

[bnagra32]

put it up for pre order now please...hehe..

 

[BurningRage]

What is the Ex? Just the grappling gun?

Yup.......

 

[DarkMagic]

Not sure if there is a ton of crossover between these two groups of people, but to everyone complaining about film accuracy with the head turn and whatnot, while at the same time wishing the ex was a Keaton sculpt/ripped cowl, he was never shown in the film in his bat suit sans cowl. And he tore his cowl off in returns. Also, why would he have ripped his cowl off in the bat cave anyways? I think a Keaton sculpt would be badass but if you're overly concerned about accuracy that wouldn't be the best way to go

I don't think there is any overlap--no one is asking for a ripped away cowl on the 89 suit as an exclusive, but an alternate unmasked (not ripped-away cowl, but completely unmasked) would have been a very cool exclusive, that also makes sense considering the setting is the Batcave. Sure we never see him suited up sans mask in the Batcave in the film, but we also never see him use the grapple gun in the cave either. So both the actual EX (grapple) and the hypothetical EX (unmasked) fail in terms of scene specific film accuracy, but an unmasked head would have been much cooler I think.

 

[sallah]

I don't think there is any overlap--no one is asking for a ripped away cowl on the 89 suit as an exclusive, but an alternate unmasked (not ripped-away cowl, but completely unmasked) would have been a very cool exclusive, that also makes sense considering the setting is the Batcave. Sure we never see him suited up sans mask in the Batcave in the film, but we also never see him use the grapple gun in the cave either. So both the actual EX (grapple) and the hypothetical EX (unmasked) fail in terms of scene specific film accuracy, but an unmasked head would have been much cooler I think.

We also never see him descend stairs like this in the suit either. I would totally be down with an unmasked portrait, but I would never display him with it anyway so it is a moot point for me really...

And just for the record- I consider myself a hardcore fan of Burton's Batman.... to the point where I run a website and facebook fan page based on it, a room in our house is devoted to it, and I have a kid named "Keaton". Even with the slight nitpicks I have, that is exactly the reason I am preordering this. I never in a million years thought I would have the opportunity to buy so much great merchandise based on this film (the Hot Toys stuff, NECA, and even the upcoming Mattel figures) 25 years after it hit theaters.. So when a 26" tall imposing piece like this PF comes along, it is like a unexpected blessing to my 11-year-old self.

Putting this on display at my house? Thoughts about slight head turns and not-quite-pouty enough lips won't be in my head- Realizing that I have a freaking 2 foot tall kick arse statue of Keaton's Batman will.

Sallah

 

[BurningRage]

Once you get your first pf you'll be hooked

 

[morphosis]

because his head is slightly turned people think its inaccurate?

 

[brucecamblzchin]

Because they a girly men who like HT they want to hate this fig

 

[Cocoboloboy]

because his head is slightly turned people think its inaccurate?

Yep. Many people do. It's like getting a statue of a Reeve Supes and his hair is parted on the wrong side or he has brown eyes instead of blue or getting an ANH C3PO PF sculpted with his arms straight at his side.

 

[franpincho]

Yep. Many people do. It's like getting a statue of a Reeve Supes and his hair is parted on the wrong side or he has brown eyes instead of blue or getting an ANH C3PO PF sculpted with his arms straight at his side.

That's a very stupid comparison.

But to each its own.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Cocoboloboy]

That's a very stupid comparison.

But to each its own.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Why is that stupid?

 

[morphosis]

Yep. Many people do. It's like getting a statue of a Reeve Supes and his hair is parted on the wrong side or he has brown eyes instead of blue or getting an ANH C3PO PF sculpted with his arms straight at his side.

well hair parted wrong or brown vs blue eyes is more of a mistake in the details of the product. Turning head is not the same thing because it was just a flaw of the screen used suit, it wasnt written in the story that he couldnt turn his head or that it was some kind of weakness of Batmans. Its just a flaw of the suit the movie makers had to make.

Your not really supposed to think he can't turn his head. Because if that was the case, it would be a ridiculous weakness.

 

[DarkMagic]

because his head is slightly turned people think its inaccurate?

The head turn is inaccurate. That's not really an opinion/debate. Keaton could not turn his head nearly this much in this cowl, a fact that has come up a few times and it is evident just from watching his movements in the film.

The issue is not whether the PF headturn is accurate or not, most agree it's inaccurate. The issue is whether or not that blatant inaccuracy is a dealbreaker. For some it is, and for some, it's simply artistic license on SideShow's part that does not take away from the overall presence of this PF.

Just like there are those who would defend and buy any licensed Nolan Bats product, there are those who would do the same for any Burton Bats product. I'm a big fan of both series, and still, I've passed on items I could easily afford from both whenever they disappoint me. I guess each person just has to decide for themselves what is acceptable.

Your not really supposed to think he can't turn his head. Because if that was the case, it would be a ridiculous weakness.

I agree, it is a ridiculous weakness, and it even affected the Begins suit to an extent. One of the reasons Wayne asks Fox to redesign the suit in TDK is because he didn't see the wall that Scarecrow used to shave him off of the van until it was too late.

 

[franpincho]

Why is that stupid?

You are comparing a freaking head being turned to stupid mistakes.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Josh-A-Tron]

well hair parted wrong or brown vs blue eyes is more of a mistake in the details of the product. Turning head is not the same thing because it was just a flaw of the screen used suit, it wasnt written in the story that he couldnt turn his head or that it was some kind of weakness of Batmans. Its just a flaw of the suit the movie makers had to make.

Your not really supposed to think he can't turn his head. Because if that was the case, it would be a ridiculous weakness.

"I'm Batman, and my weakness is my huge blind spot!"

Sent from my LG-MS770 using Tapatalk

 

[Uncle Bingo]

Yep. Many people do. It's like getting a statue of a Reeve Supes and his hair is parted on the wrong side or he has brown eyes instead of blue or getting an ANH C3PO PF sculpted with his arms straight at his side.

This is the stupidest analogy I have ever heard. First off it is never said in the movie at any point that he can not turn his head. Not once. The only reason that anyone knows that the cowl itself can not turn a lot is because of cast/crew interviews that said the cowl was stiff. This is something that is only discussed outside of the movie and never directly in Batman 89's Universe so therefor it is entirely possible the cowl can turn in the movie's Universe itself, it just is not shown.

 

[morphosis]

The head turn is inaccurate. That's not really an opinion/debate. Keaton could not turn his head nearly this much in this cowl, a fact that has come up a few times and it is evident just from watching his movements in the film.

The issue is not whether the PF headturn is accurate or not, most agree it's inaccurate. The issue is whether or not that blatant inaccuracy is a dealbreaker. For some it is, and for some, it's simply artistic license on SideShow's part that does not take away from the overall presence of this PF.

Just like there are those who would defend and buy any licensed Nolan Bats product, there are those who would do the same for any Burton Bats product. I'm a big fan of both series, and still, I've passed on items I could easily afford from both whenever they disappoint me. I guess each person just has to decide for themselves what is acceptable.



I agree, it is a ridiculous weakness, and it even affected the Begins suit to an extent. One of the reasons Wayne asks Fox to redesign the suit in TDK is because he didn't see the wall that Scarecrow used to shave him off of the van until it was too late.

It's a Begins weakness but not an 89 weakness. It's a flaw of the screen used suit. It was not part of the story and you were not supposed to fixate on it.

But whatever if people are upset by it that's their issue. I see no problem with it. It's a posed statue of the character. It's not a screen used prop. That's the way I see it.

 

[DarkMagic]

This is the stupidest analogy I have ever heard. First off it is never said in the movie at any point that he can not turn his head. Not once. The only reason that anyone knows that the cowl itself can not turn a lot is because of cast/crew interviews that said the cowl was stiff. This is something that is only discussed outside of the movie and never directly in Batman 89's Universe so therefor it is entirely possible the cowl can turn in the movie's Universe itself, it just is not shown.

Well, it's never said that he (Batman, not Keaton) is wearing modified Nike boots, or that he (the character, not actor) can't do something like fly in the movie's universe. So was SS trying to emulate the "in universe" reality of the character, or the "real world" reality of the actor in a very detailed (right down to the swooshes on his boots) suit? Besides, do you really want everything the character can and can't do to be explicitly "told" to us in the movie, or "shown" to us? Sometimes telling is fine, but most often, showing is a better method of storytelling. We are "shown" that Keaton Bats (and practically every movie-suit Bats until TDK-suit) can't turn his head much at all.

 

[morphosis]

Actually i just thought of a better example. The suit was made of foam latex which is very bendable soft fabric. It feels like a nerf ball. He could certainly turn his head but i think it would have made the cowl look weird if he turned his head. you would have seen folds & creases in the cowl on screen. would have looked very fake. So they kept him looking straight as much as they could.

if you really want screen accurate the cowl should be foam latex. But they shouldn't use that fabric because foam latex disintegrates over time. Foam latex vs the head turn is the same thing. its not something your supposed to think about in the film. Your supposed to think his armor is indestructible. But in reality a cat could scratch his claws through it very easily.

Same with all the TDK suits...all made of foam latex. A very weak fabric, but looks amazing on screen and is light weight for the actor to be as comfortable as they can make him. HTs attempted the foam latex with the Toy Fair Begins, but it has its issues, mainly it can peel & disintegrate over time.

 

[Cocoboloboy]

Regardless of whether or not it was a design weakness, blatantly stated in the movie or purposely made that way, it's well known by 1989 Batman fans and even very evident in the movie that Keaton was extremely limited in neck movement in any direction. It's just a fact. Like DarkMagic stated, the head turn is inaccurate. That's true no matter how you slice it.

Now, how many inaccuracies you can allow for before a collectible becomes unappealing is completely a matter of taste. Many Star Wars fans would want a totally accurate ANH Vader, silver and black tusks included, despite the flaws being a budget concern and not specific design choices. The same applies to a Keaton Batman for me and quite a few others as I've read.

 

[morphosis]

Regardless of whether or not it was a design weakness, blatantly stated in the movie or purposely made that way, it's well known by 1989 Batman fans and even very evident in the movie that Keaton was extremely limited in neck movement in any direction. It's just a fact. Like DarkMagic stated, the head turn is inaccurate. That's true no matter how you slice it.

Now, how many inaccuracies you can allow for before a collectible becomes unappealing is completely a matter of taste. Many Star Wars fans would want a totally accurate ANH Vader, silver and black tusks included, despite the flaws being a budget concern and not specific design choices. The same applies to a Keaton Batman for me and quite a few others as I've read.

its a behind the scenes fact, but not part of the story. Its become something fans know, but has nothing to do with Batman himself. its like Yoda was a puppet. But in the film he was a creature. Its just part of movie making. the turning head had nothing to do with the story.

but whatever...