Regarding the spoiler...

if that's accurate, that's kind of lame to me.

but I suppose

How is it lame? As fumanstan said it's

From Wikipedia regarding her origin (spoilerized since it could relate to her origin in the movie):

I expected something to indicate that she was Catwoman and not just a generic burglar. There are plenty of versions of Catwoman out there that accomplish just that without looking ridiculously tacky.

But I guess since everyone prefers Catwoman without ears, they'd also prefer Batman without the cowl, Joker without the green hair and makeup, and Two-Face without the scarring?

Couldn't resist:

Lame because

Doesn't matter what we prefer. Batman did have a cowl, Joker had green hair and makeup (the big fanboy issue was that he wasn't "permawhite" with bleached skin) and Two-Face didn't just have scars, his face was burnt right off.

It's too soon to tell what we'll actually get. There are rumors abound that she will indeed have ears, and we just haven't seen that yet. It's nice though, that Nolan and Co. have been pretty damn great with the character designs so far, Scarecrow included.

I could argue that the ears might look dumb, but when one considers the fact that our hero has a bat-cowl on his head, it kind of nullifies such an argument.

Huh? I think you missed my point entirely.

I'm saying it isn't Batman without a cowl; it isn't Joker without green hair and makeup; and it isn't two face without some sort of facial deformity (not sure why you're drawing a distinction between scars and face being burnt right off).

Along those same lines, it isn't Catwoman unless she actually resembles, in some way, a cat. Thus far Nolan has done a great job of portraying the characters, so I don't see why he wouldn't have Catwoman look like Catwoman in this movie. Assuming what we've seen is the complete and final version of the costume, I don't see why people are okay with it, when if the same thing was done to other characters it would cause an uproar.

Joker has only ever used makeup in the movies. In the comics his skin was permanently bleached white from the acid bath.

I know indeed what you are saying, and what I was saying is we got everything the characters were expected to have, and in the case of Two-Face and why I made the distinction with him, was because not only did we get what the character was expected or "supposed" to have, but we got that and then some. It went even further. Joker was a step back from the expected and worked out beautifully. Or beautifully messy.

Ditto the 1989 Batman film.

Also, to settle this ridiculous argument about the cat ears, Hathaway is playing Selina Kyle in the movie. It's been made explicitly clear. Maybe she'll be "Catwoman" by the end, but I'm guessing for the bulk of the movie she'll be Selina. In other words, what you're seeing is not a "Catwoman" costume.

There's probably a really, really, REALLY good reason why she doesn't look anything like a "Catwoman": the movie Catwoman.

Yeah, you're right, I misspoke when I said makeup, but my point remains the same.

Hines Ward on some kind of vehicle for the movie:

Bane speaks at Heinz Field:

<object width="640" height="390"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/kR4hVwDhbIg&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/kR4hVwDhbIg&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></embed></object>

hmmm he sounds weird

I really think this will be Nolan's "Cars 2" but I hope I'm wrong.

<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/TdrayNEAQW4?version=3"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/TdrayNEAQW4?version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></object>

<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/0_KZPbzMUf8?version=3"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/0_KZPbzMUf8?version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></object>

<iframe width="425" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/BL13Wr4tegY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="560" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/E1gpyrg8FFc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Bane sounds like Emo Phillips

I think that's far from what we will see in theaters. They will definitely dub Bane over again; there's a possibility that's not even Tom Hardy's voice but someone else. However, it would be interesting if Nolan just said screw it turned this in as the final product, complete with people mumbling in the background and the word graphics saying what is supposed to be happening!

oh shit...IMAX cam got hit.

<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/lXbdotM9JxQ?version=3"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/lXbdotM9JxQ?version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></object>

Damn. I remembber they dropped an IMAX cam whilst filming the prologue of TDK. It survived. I wonder if this one was as lucky.

Not the IMAX cam! *worried* Talking about the cams...soooo how much better are these new IMAX cams in terms of what they film w/ it now? How much quieter is it?