Bat Man 1939
Moderators: Scott Sebring, Ben Bentley
Re: Bat Man 1939
“BTW, as evident in Andy's avatar, the '39 cowl creates a really cool "wedge" or "V" shape, moving down from ear tip to the point of the nose and back up to the other ear tip. It conveys a certain sleekness as well as a sense of threat. I dig it“
I was wondering if it worked in practice, as in the 1943 serial. I always disliked the 1943 and 1949 “ears”, same with the 2022, but for slightly different reasons. 2022, set too far back and too narrow. 43/49 are too much like devil horns, not devil ears. The 66 was totally satisfying, but the screen test version fell into the 40’s serial style.
That 39’s ears are substantial. That will be tough to capture for real.
Here’s Chuck’s Bust for a private collector
I was wondering if it worked in practice, as in the 1943 serial. I always disliked the 1943 and 1949 “ears”, same with the 2022, but for slightly different reasons. 2022, set too far back and too narrow. 43/49 are too much like devil horns, not devil ears. The 66 was totally satisfying, but the screen test version fell into the 40’s serial style.
That 39’s ears are substantial. That will be tough to capture for real.
Here’s Chuck’s Bust for a private collector
Some days you just can't get rid of a ... SHARK!
Re: Bat Man 1939
Fan-made glimpse of what a 1939 Batman movie might look like. The costume looks pretty legit.
Re: Bat Man 1939
]Back in the day, a guy on eBay was taking Wolverine Busts and converting them to a ‘39 Batman. I may have a picture somewhere. This would have been between Spider-Man 2 and 3.
Something like this
from this bust
Something like this
from this bust
Some days you just can't get rid of a ... SHARK!
Re: Bat Man 1939
Love to see a side shot of all these illustrations so we can “agree” how far the ears extend for and aft
Some days you just can't get rid of a ... SHARK!
Re: Bat Man 1939
By the way as soon as Chuck and Lynne finish my Black 70’s cowl, you can commission anothe Bust from Chuck. I pulled that image from their web page. We have that Mrs Potts statue
It arrived today!
It arrived today!
Some days you just can't get rid of a ... SHARK!
Re: Bat Man 1939
A couple of thoughts, fellow 39'ers: In later comics, the utility belt IS referred to as being Gold and the outfit, Black.
While I have yet to find a true color of the '43 utility belt, the B/W pictures make the belt look like silver. I agree that the gold or silver belt makes little sense.
I think, imho, what one has to do is to decide whether or not one wishes to duplicate the way the suit looks in the comic/movies, or reality.
It's up to the individual...
While I have yet to find a true color of the '43 utility belt, the B/W pictures make the belt look like silver. I agree that the gold or silver belt makes little sense.
I think, imho, what one has to do is to decide whether or not one wishes to duplicate the way the suit looks in the comic/movies, or reality.
It's up to the individual...
Larry
Re: Bat Man 1939
I would but I have them working on a cowl for me too. I'm also out of room for statues and busts, but it's very tempting.
Artist-Writer
http://WWW.ANDYTFISH.COM
http://WWW.ANDYTFISH.COM
Re: Bat Man 1939
Some days you just can't get rid of a ... SHARK!
Re: Bat Man 1939
I have this same figure. that I got at a Toy Jumble shop in Fairborn. It didn't come with the book, but did have the Bat-a-rang. I only paid $25.00 for it. Quite a steal imho. Only the ankles looked odd. The other rather odd looking part of the figure is that unless You have the figure on a high shelf looking down, the figure looks like it is looking at its feet.
Larry
- BATWINGED HORNET
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 5:32 am
Re: Bat Man 1939
Yeah, that is not a variant, but the figure included with the Batman Masterpiece Edition released in 2000. I've seen sellers try to pass that off as some "rare" or "new" figure, but its been around for some time, and not as aesthetically pleasing as Hasbro's DC Silver Age 99-inch action figures) from that same era.Larry A. wrote: ↑Sat Jun 18, 2022 10:51 pm I have this same figure. that I got at a Toy Jumble shop in Fairborn. It didn't come with the book, but did have the Bat-a-rang. I only paid $25.00 for it. Quite a steal imho. Only the ankles looked odd. The other rather odd looking part of the figure is that unless You have the figure on a high shelf looking down, the figure looks like it is looking at its feet.
Beneath Wayne Manor
Re: Bat Man 1939
I think that You mean 9 inch, don't You? 99" would be HUGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!BATWINGED HORNET wrote: ↑Mon Jun 20, 2022 10:17 amYeah, that is not a variant, but the figure included with the Batman Masterpiece Edition released in 2000. I've seen sellers try to pass that off as some "rare" or "new" figure, but its been around for some time, and not as aesthetically pleasing as Hasbro's DC Silver Age 99-inch action figures) from that same era.Larry A. wrote: ↑Sat Jun 18, 2022 10:51 pm I have this same figure. that I got at a Toy Jumble shop in Fairborn. It didn't come with the book, but did have the Bat-a-rang. I only paid $25.00 for it. Quite a steal imho. Only the ankles looked odd. The other rather odd looking part of the figure is that unless You have the figure on a high shelf looking down, the figure looks like it is looking at its feet.
Larry
- BATWINGED HORNET
- Posts: 0
- Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 5:32 am
Re: Bat Man 1939
Ha! Yes--thanks for spotting that. Yeah, I meant 9 inch figure!Larry A. wrote: ↑Mon Jun 20, 2022 11:29 amI think that You mean 9 inch, don't You? 99" would be HUGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!BATWINGED HORNET wrote: ↑Mon Jun 20, 2022 10:17 amYeah, that is not a variant, but the figure included with the Batman Masterpiece Edition released in 2000. I've seen sellers try to pass that off as some "rare" or "new" figure, but its been around for some time, and not as aesthetically pleasing as Hasbro's DC Silver Age 99-inch action figures) from that same era.Larry A. wrote: ↑Sat Jun 18, 2022 10:51 pm I have this same figure. that I got at a Toy Jumble shop in Fairborn. It didn't come with the book, but did have the Bat-a-rang. I only paid $25.00 for it. Quite a steal imho. Only the ankles looked odd. The other rather odd looking part of the figure is that unless You have the figure on a high shelf looking down, the figure looks like it is looking at its feet.
Beneath Wayne Manor