InArt - The Batman 1/6th Figure

r0cket147 said:

Lucky you. I can‘t even tell the difference.

Click to expand...

Nor can I actually.

DiostaR said:

I actually prefer the unedited one personnally.

r0cket147 said:

Lucky you. I can‘t even tell the difference.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

It’s only the faceplate less wide than the original. Thats the main thing haha. Most people would love the stock inart anyways. But this was referring to the older discussion why his face shape looked “off.”

I see the difference, it looks more like the JND cowl like that.
I don't like the JND cowl/likeness so my vote goes for the stock headsculpt.

DiostaR said:

I see the difference, it looks more like the JND cowl like that.
I don't like the JND cowl/likeness so my vote goes for the stock headsculpt.

Click to expand...

Cap'n Cook said:

Nor can I actually.

Click to expand...

I see, yes it was slightly edited to be more JND like. To each and their own at the end of the day. Just messing around how the cowl would look with a slightly different faceplate. Nothing else was changed, cowl proportions was left as it is.

I wish someone could shrink this Prime 1 sculpt.

Waiting on those reviews...

potatocorner4life said:

I see, yes it was slightly edited to be more JND like. To each and their own at the end of the day. Just messing around how the cowl would look with a slightly different faceplate. Nothing else was changed, cowl proportions was left as it is.

Click to expand...

Oh but I enjoy seeing everyones take and edits of the cowl, It's always super interesting !

DiostaR said:

Oh but I enjoy seeing everyones take and edits of the cowl, It's always super interesting !

Click to expand...

Same here. I just honestly couldn’t see what had been altered but not saying it hasn’t been.

BrooklynWolf X said:

I hate everything about the Flash movie and don’t give a rats @$$ about it…

But I read somewhere that Keatons Batman universe wasn’t EXACTLY the 89 Burton film universe and more of a “well it’s so damn similar it can be considered the Burtonverse”

But if it is exactly the burtonverse…that movie and the people that greenlit that stupid @$$ decision can burn in hell.

What a STUPID way to end that universe. You bring back a beloved version of the character only to unceremoniously kill him??

Click to expand...

I never viewed the Burton and Schumacher movies taking place in “the same universe”. Hell, I don’t even consider Batman and Batman Returns to be in the same universe.

They filmed ‘89 Batman in England, most of the filmmakers were English. Gotham looks different, Wayne Manor and the Batcave look different, it’s a completely different movie. Then Returns comes along with Burton and Co. throwing all of that out of the window. It was filmed in LA, the crew is predominantly American, Gotham, Wayne Manor, the Batcave, are all completely redesigned.

“Reboot” wasn’t a thing in 1995, but Batman Forever was definitely advertised as “new”, “fresh”, “a different direction”, “a new Batman” etc. etc. Keaton’s Batman was never depicted as the hero Schumacher’s was and he definitely wouldn’t stand and pose for pictures or be at a Galla fundraiser at some botanical garden. This is the same guy that ripped Vicki Vale’s pictures out of her blouse because she snapped a few pics of him, dude lives in the shadows, no way is he letting himself be seen in public. Even as Bruce Wayne, he walks around the city in sunglasses, unrecognizable.

Everything is of their own time. Even the Nolan Batman films change things up that break up the idea of a universe. Batman Begins has a very specific looking Gotham. Yes, it’s small and sound stagey and the Narrows feels like a separate entity all together but it really feels and looks like a comic book movie with Arkham, the monorail, and taking inspiration from Frank Miller like Year One with Gordon having a baby. Dark Knight throws all of that out of the window. Gotham is now solely Chicago, Batman’s suit is completely revamped, closer to what the film crew wanted from the beginning. Gordon has two kids now and they’re like 10 despite the movie being a year apart, etc etc.

Matt Reeves will do the same thing Burton, Nolan and Schumacher did with The Batman: Part II. Probably look and feel a lot different.

Cap'n Cook said:

No thanks to white lenses and the ears are way too short on that for my liking.

Click to expand...

I was thinking they could keep the long ears but with that bermajo style suit. The cowl could also stay somewhat the same shape albeit with a cleaner look as opposed to the stitching.

potatocorner4life said:

View attachment 698416

Found the main problem with the cowl, it's really the jawline width making his whole face shape off. The nose actually is okay, could be longer but it's pretty similar to JND's. I tweaked the proportions and it makes a significant difference in the headsculpt. If there's a way to heat up the sides to push it inward and have a custom faceplate that would look amazing.

Click to expand...

Yeah man. It's very subtle but makes all the difference. I get laughed at trying to point this to people.

DiFabio said:

I never viewed the Burton and Schumacher movies taking place in “the same universe”. Hell, I don’t even consider Batman and Batman Returns to be in the same universe.

Click to expand...

You make a strong argument, but you could say the same thing for comics which will change things dramatically from storyline to storyline, or even comic to comic depending on the writer, artist, and other factors (even the same person can shift things up over time). Is the 1950s Batman a different character than early 1980s Batman? Yes, but what about 1987 Batman vs. 1988 Batman? Even at the same time, the way Batman was portrayed in Justice League International was way different than how he was portrayed in Detective Comics, but at least I considered it to be the same character in the same universe. There is some point at which differences are dramatic enough to make something a "different universe," but we will all have a different threshold for accepting this.

Personally, I think the intention was to make this new Keaton Batman from that original universe of the '89 film, but even the way he fights is so different and more dynamic (at a much more advanced age) that it is hard for me to reconcile those things. Of course, when a movie is as bad as the Flash it's just easier in general for me to write that whole movie off.

Also, having seen the film again, I paid close attention to the cape, and I agree with @Hologram AI's observations. The length tapers at the sides, giving it the impression that it's shorter. But it does fall lower in the middle. Regardless, The cape is not accurate.

To those that think it looks like the JND cowl... and as someone who owns the JND, the InArt isn't even remotely like it in any way shape or form: the "ears" are bigger and the shape is completely different on the InArt; it has got a blocky, wide shaped head, and the area from the top of his "eyebrows" to where the cowl runs under his nose looks too squashed - let alone the over exaggerated skull features...

Aybaig said:

I wish someone could shrink this Prime 1 sculpt.

Click to expand...

Absolutely beautiful.
That's not their final sculpt though is it? Prime 1/Blitzway always has a downgrade in quality from what I've seen.

Mandible said:

To those that think it looks like the JND cowl... and as someone who owns the JND, the InArt isn't even remotely like it in any way shape or form: the "ears" are bigger and the shape is completely different on the InArt; it has got a blocky, wide shaped head, and the area from the top of his "eyebrows" to where the cowl runs under his nose looks too squashed.

Click to expand...

I don't care which is nicer looking. I care about accuracy. And Inart's has its misses.

Scout Trooper said:

Absolutely beautiful.
That's not their final sculpt though is it? Prime 1/Blitzway always has a downgrade in quality from what I've seen.

Click to expand...

Yes bro, sadly it's not just saw their final production piece. It's nothing like this

Scout Trooper said:

I don't care which is nicer looking. I care about accuracy. And Inart's has its misses.I

Click to expand...

I agree - just saying that some said it looks like the JND, and when you put it side by side it doesn't. But if I was getting a 1/6 - it'd be InArt all the way.

I actually don't think any iteration on any scale yet has nailed it 100% yet.

Scout Trooper said:

I don't care which is nicer looking. I care about accuracy. And Inart's has its misses.

Click to expand...

Agree with mandible JND also has its misses

Question- what specifically are people hoping to get from the reviews that they haven’t already got from black’s photos? Just want to know what the articulation is like ? Or how to move the eyes? Function related questions ?