First Avenger Captain America's Costume - Part 3/41

[Tacit Ronin]

Wait, Fox news bothered to cover this? They are gonna be sorely disappointed when they watch this, expecting a flag waving Cap.

 

[DACrowe]

Captain America shouldn't strive for "visual authenticity" other than to the comic. It's pure fantasy. How is a guy allowed to have a red skull for a head? Where's the "visual authenticity in that? Yet. Cap can't wear something more literal to his iconic garb?

You keep bringing up "spandex" but not a person in here is arguing for that, which is the gaping hole in your straw man argument. This boils down to personal taste of Joe Johnston and nothing else IMO. In some ways he forgot what kind of movie he was making.

The movie takes place when WWII occurred. Alas, Cap is not fighting in WWII. He bolts to take on a fictitious faction called Hydra that has stolen a cosmic cube which can open up portals and they've created crazy weaponry with it. Ya, real authentic lemme tell you. Cap is by nature supposed to be a fish out of water. I don't understand the self-induced necessity to attempt to blend him in.

That's where you're wrong. The movie's first priority is to strive at being good...well actually no. A movie of this size and budget's first priority is to strive to be a hit with mainstream audiences for Marvel and Disney, THEN be a quality picture after that. These two can be inversely related though, so they're both vital (though Michael Bay, among many others, has shown us the latter is not crucial for the former).

....In any case, the movie is set during WWII and with that comes a certain level of expected versimilitude from audiences and the filmmakers alike. A superhero wearing a comic-replica suit in that setting just would look out of place. Now you can argue all you want that it is not spandex but lycra or some other form fitting material (similar to Raimi's Spidey suit, which I did mention as "scuba suit material" in my previous post). However, imagine Saving Private Ryan for just a second. Now imagine Tobey Maguire's Spider-Man swinging around Normandy in that movie.

Even if you take a more tongue-in-cheek (but brilliantly campy fun) rendition of that period in Inglourious Basterds, you still have things like "the Bear Jew," a for-laughs Hitler and Brad Pitt with a thick, bad Southern accent speaking even worse Italian. It ends with Hitler getting blown away and The Third Reich getting burned alive in a movie theater to the image and sound of a laughing head on celluloid being projected onto the smoke of death around them.

But guess what? It still looks like 1944 Nazi-occupied Germany. Shossanna did not dress like Uma Thurman in Kill Bill. The Basterds did not pull out katana swords and do kung-fu. Because that is a bridge too far and takes the audience out of the movie. How do you think Raimi's Spidey swinging into the theater and punching Hitler would have looked like?

In putting Cap in a WWII setting he needs to look like he is of the era or people are just going to laugh. Comic fans may be satisfied. But if the movie sucks who cares? Not the general audience and then, consequentially, not the Marvel or Disney CEOs and boards.

So, in actuality, making Cap look authentic to WWII is quite important.

 

[Rock Sexton]

That's where you're wrong. The movie's first priority is to strive at being good...well actually no. A movie of this size and budget's first priority is to strive to be a hit with mainstream audiences for Marvel and Disney, THEN be a quality picture after that. These two can be inversely related though, so they're both vital (though Michael Bay, among many others, has shown us the latter is not crucial for the former).

Being good doesn't exclude being more faithful to the costume translation.

....In any case, the movie is set during WWII and with that comes a certain level of expected versimilitude from audiences and the filmmakers alike. A superhero wearing a comic-replica suit in that setting just would look out of place. Now you can argue all you want that it is not spandex but lycra or some other form fitting material (similar to Raimi's Spidey suit, which I did mention as "scuba suit material" in my previous post). However, imagine Saving Private Ryan for just a second. Now imagine Tobey Maguire's Spider-Man swinging around Normandy in that movie.

Set during WWII, but not fighting in WWII. That's why he can get away with a little something more with his costume. That's also why they can get away with a guy with a red skull for a head, a cosmic cube, and on and on and on. Saving Private Ryan is not Captain America. Apples to Oranges. Saving Private Ryan was "expected" to be more accurate in it's portrayal. Captain America is a COMIC BOOK SUPER HERO MOVIE.

Even if you take a more tongue-in-cheek (but brilliantly campy fun) rendition of that period in Inglourious Basterds, you still have things like "the Bear Jew," a for-laughs Hitler and Brad Pitt with a thick, bad Southern accent speaking even worse Italian. It ends with Hitler getting blown away and The Third Reich getting burned alive in a movie theater to the image and sound of a laughing head on celluloid being projected onto the smoke of death around them.

But guess what? It still looks like 1944 Nazi-occupied Germany. Shossanna did not dress like Uma Thurman in Kill Bill. The Basterds did not pull out katana swords and do kung-fu. Because that is a bridge too far and takes the audience out of the movie. How do you think Raimi's Spidey swinging into the theater and punching Hitler would have looked like?

Inglorious Basterds was not a COMIC BOOK SUPER HERO MOVIE. They would have no reason to deviate from the look of the period. If Spidey was filmed with the era being in the 40's and he punched Hitler I would acceptt it because ..... wait for it ..... it's a COMIC BOOK SUPER HERO MOVIE ..... and a man shooting webs from his palms (especially organically) is fish out of water no matter what time period.

In putting Cap in a WWII setting he needs to look like he is of the era or people are just going to laugh. Comic fans may be satisfied. But if the movie sucks who cares? Not the general audience and then, consequentially, not the Marvel or Disney CEOs and boards.

So, in actuality, making Cap look authentic to WWII is quite important.

According to you it is. Does the Red Skull look "authentic" to a former Nazi soldier with his deformed face? Is it "authentic" for Skull to be able to wear a mask that looks like a real human face? Do the Hydra guys walking around with futuristic flame throwers look accurate to Nazi soldiers? It's funny to me how "selective" your argument is with this need to fit the confines of the WWII setting only to Cap, when the 90% of the film is pure fantasy outside of the fact that it takes place when WWII did. Look at the pics of the Hydra soldiers riding the motorcycles ..... look at the motorcycles too ..... look at that car we've seen in pictures ..... Everything else is exaggerated and more comic book flair, but yet we just HAD to have Cap wear more authentic 1940's garb. It makes literally no sense.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Inglorious Basterds was not a COMIC BOOK SUPER HERO MOVIE. They would have no reason to deviate from the look of the period.

So you could deviate from a set time and space as it is a comic hero movie? Everything is up for laughs huh?

 

[Wolvieboy17]

This whole discussion, which has been going on for months and months, is completely useless. By this stage the people who like the authentic WWII angle have their solid reasons for liking it and the people who don't have their own solid reasons for disliking it. No one is going to change someone elses mind. What does this endless debate actually achieve other than frustrating all parties?

The fact of the matter is, the costumes have been chosen, we've seen them and like them or hate them, thats what they are. Now all you can do is see the movie and judge whether you think in the grand scheme of things whether or not the costumes worked.

 

[BigThor]

This whole discussion, which has been going on for months and months, is completely useless. By this stage the people who like the authentic WWII angle have their solid reasons for liking it and the people who don't have their own solid reasons for disliking it. No one is going to change someone elses mind. What does this endless debate actually achieve other than frustrating all parties?

The fact of the matter is, the costumes have been chosen, we've seen them and like them or hate them, thats what they are. Now all you can do is see the movie and judge whether you think in the grand scheme of things whether or not the costumes worked.

This is soooo true, even though I'm on the side that likes Cap's costume being adjusted to the WWII time period. Arguing about it doesn't make any sense at this point, everybody has their own opinions on the matter.

 

[Rock Sexton]

This is soooo true, even though I'm on the side that likes Cap's costume being adjusted to the WWII time period. Arguing about it doesn't make any sense at this point, everybody has their own opinions on the matter.

I have no problem with people liking it. The issue I have is the defense of the costume because it fits the time period better. It's a bogus excuse. There are so many aspects of the movie that are not "within the confines of WWII" and yet for some reason Cap is the only element that couldn't possibly deviate.

 

[Rock Sexton]

So you could deviate from a set time and space as it is a comic hero movie? Everything is up for laughs huh?

What would be their motive in Inglorious Bastards to deviate from the "look" of the period? There really isn't any. There are no super heroes. There are just normal soldiers with a blood lust for Naaahhhhzi's.

 

[Mercurius]

I have no problem with people liking it. The issue I have is the defense of the costume because it fits the time period better. It's a bogus excuse. There are so many aspects of the movie that are not "within the confines of WWII" and yet for some reason Cap is the only element that couldn't possibly deviate.

Precisely.

 

[wobbly]

I have no problem with people liking it. The issue I have is the defense of the costume because it fits the time period better. It's a bogus excuse. There are so many aspects of the movie that are not "within the confines of WWII" and yet for some reason Cap is the only element that couldn't possibly deviate.

Well that isn't true.
1) Bucky: Also changed, he is older and will not be wearing his blue and red comic book tights & domino mask either.
2) The Red Skull: Another change. In the books he wore a skull mask and a plain green jumpsuit with a huge swastika on the chest during the war. For the movie he is deformed and wearing an SS officers style variation.

 

[JAK®]

So they changed costumes which were drawn in comics released in World War II to make them look like they would fit in World War II.

Because people in the 1940's didn't know what World War II should look like.

Is that what people are saying?

 

[wobbly]

It's far more about preconceptions, what people today think works best in a WW2 setting rather than what the people in the 40's actually did.

Thing is there were no costumed heroes running around WW2 so there's no authentic frame of reference for us now to judge how a genuine hero suit of the War would have looked if Cap had actually existed.

The 'Minutemen' 40's suits they made for Watchmen, or the woollen suits Hollywood did make in the 40's for the early Batman/Superman films, Flash Gordon, etc, are more authentic in that regard as they are examples of what people in the 40's thought worked best and what they (presumably) thought looked good (and I imagine the USO suit we see will not look unlike these).

However, times, tastes and perceptions, change though. Nowadays those kind of costumes are considered horrible, and the idea of someone running around WW2 in those kind of tights crosses the line for many between being able to take the thing in any way seriously or just thinking it's too damn silly to bother. As there is no real life reference to show one way or another what a WW2 superhero suit would have really looked like, Johnson & Marvel have opted for a design they think both works for the period and looks good.

And if we break it down, Johnson has admitted that is the reason they have gone this way for the film. He believes the GA won't be accepting of a literal suit in WW2 and will think it is too silly, with his alternative taking it's cues from existing military attire of the time.

Whether he is right or wrong I guess will remain a subjective thing until someone makes an alternative that proves the matter one way or another.

 

[Rock Sexton]

It's far more about preconceptions, what people today think works best in a WW2 setting rather than what the people in the 40's actually did.

Thing is there were no costumed heroes running around WW2 so there's no authentic frame of reference for us now to judge how a genuine hero suit of the War would have looked if Cap had actually existed.

The 'Minutemen' 40's suits they made for Watchmen, or the woollen suits Hollywood did make in the 40's for the early Batman/Superman films, Flash Gordon, etc, are more authentic in that regard as they are examples of what people in the 40's thought worked best and what they (presumably) thought looked good (and I imagine the USO suit we see will not look unlike these).

However, times, tastes and perceptions, change though. Nowadays those kind of costumes are considered horrible, and the idea of someone running around WW2 in those kind of tights crosses the line for many between being able to take the thing in any way seriously or just thinking it's too damn silly to bother. As there is no real life reference to show one way or another what a WW2 superhero suit would have really looked like, Johnson & Marvel have opted for a design they think both works for the period and looks good.

And if we break it down, Johnson has admitted that is the reason they have gone this way for the film. He believes the GA won't be accepting of a literal suit in WW2 and will think it is too silly, with his alternative taking it's cues from existing military attire of the time.

Whether he is right or wrong I guess will remain a subjective thing until someone makes an alternative that proves the matter one way or another.

Wobbly, for the last time .... nobody is asking for the tights. Nobody. Johnson was stubborn. He went from one extreme (poking fun at the spandex in the USO) to the other in the actual uniform. There was no faithful attempt at middle ground ..... He's trying to be faithful to a WWII piece when they do nothing in the WWII context. The entire mission, characters, etc. etc. is fiction

 

[JAK®]

When people assume that we want tights reminiscent of the Minutemen costumes I wonder just how much faith those people have in others.

"You don't want what I want, so what you want must be stupid"

 

[wobbly]

Wobbly, for the last time .... nobody is asking for the tights. Nobody. Johnson was stubborn. He went from one extreme (poking fun at the spandex in the USO) to the other in the actual uniform. There was no faithful attempt at middle ground ..... He's trying to be faithful to a WWII piece when they do nothing in the WWII context. The entire mission, characters, etc. etc. is fiction

I was referring to tights in regards the examples I noted of actual 40's costumes that were made then (that in turn was a response to JAK questioning what people of the 40's would have thought the costumes should look like). Those things were tights (Btw, Spandex didn't exist in the 40's. They would have been made from woven cotton & wool).

Could Johnson have done something closer to the books without using tights? Sure he could. I have stated before I think he could. But obviously he didn't. He opted for more a soldierish look that is not so faithful but does fit fine within a WW2 context

And when you say 'nothing to do with a WWII context'? Totally disagree (Cap would not exist in the first place but for the War).

Seriously, a story being fiction does not mean no effort should be made to make it fit the the period or conflict it takes place in. You can push this to a certain degree (the Nazi's fascination with the Occult expanded for the Indy movies and Hellboy, or the Hydra tech we will see in Cap), but it still has to look like it fits, even if we know full well it doesn't.

 

[wobbly]

When people assume that we want tights reminiscent of the Minutemen costumes I wonder just how much faith those people have in others.

"You don't want what I want, so what you want must be stupid"

I'm not assuming you want Minutemen costumes, that's yours and Rocks own assumptions at work there I'm afraid.

I was pointing out those costumes, and the others I noted, are more authentic to the period if we are to go by what the people of the 1940's thought the things should look like.

Today (and yes, that will include both you and Rock), we have different tastes as to what looks good, and different expectations for what works well in the costumes.

Like I said before but I'll repeat it as this seems to have been missed: "It's far more about preconceptions, what people today think works best in a WW2 setting rather than what the people in the 40's actually did".

 

[DACrowe]

Being good doesn't exclude being more faithful to the costume translation.



Set during WWII, but not fighting in WWII. That's why he can get away with a little something more with his costume. That's also why they can get away with a guy with a red skull for a head, a cosmic cube, and on and on and on. Saving Private Ryan is not Captain America. Apples to Oranges. Saving Private Ryan was "expected" to be more accurate in it's portrayal. Captain America is a COMIC BOOK SUPER HERO MOVIE.



Inglorious Basterds was not a COMIC BOOK SUPER HERO MOVIE. They would have no reason to deviate from the look of the period. If Spidey was filmed with the era being in the 40's and he punched Hitler I would acceptt it because ..... wait for it ..... it's a COMIC BOOK SUPER HERO MOVIE ..... and a man shooting webs from his palms (especially organically) is fish out of water no matter what time period.



According to you it is. Does the Red Skull look "authentic" to a former Nazi soldier with his deformed face? Is it "authentic" for Skull to be able to wear a mask that looks like a real human face? Do the Hydra guys walking around with futuristic flame throwers look accurate to Nazi soldiers? It's funny to me how "selective" your argument is with this need to fit the confines of the WWII setting only to Cap, when the 90% of the film is pure fantasy outside of the fact that it takes place when WWII did. Look at the pics of the Hydra soldiers riding the motorcycles ..... look at the motorcycles too ..... look at that car we've seen in pictures ..... Everything else is exaggerated and more comic book flair, but yet we just HAD to have Cap wear more authentic 1940's garb. It makes literally no sense.

I get that it's a COMIC BOOK SUPERHERO MOVIE, but that doesn't mean that as long as it is faithful it is a good one. Daredevil (other than the costumes) was very faithful to the comics, but it still sucked.

And saying "just because" does not mean it will work. Captain America's costume would look ridiculous in a WWII setting. That has always been the movie's biggest hurdle for setting it in that period. And this will keep people from snickering? It may not matter to you, but to the filmmakers who want to make a good movie that is financially viable, it is extremely important.

 

[DACrowe]

P.S. Shouldn't Johnston's vision matter to him more than anything else? It's his job to make this work and if it doesn't work for him, that's a problem. He has a view (that I happen to agree with) that to make audiences buy a superhero in WWII that you have to make everything else, in a heightened sense, feel like it is in WWII so that the superhero doesn't come off as a joke. This is similar to why Nolan thinks Batman should wear armor and The Joker should wear make-up. Neither of those ruined his movies, which are arguably a definitive film version of the Batman character even though he is not in grey fighting a clown in permawhite.

Just a thought.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

What would be their motive in Inglorious Bastards to deviate from the "look" of the period? There really isn't any. There are no super heroes. There are just normal soldiers with a blood lust for Naaahhhhzi's.

No they are not normal soldiers. They are Tarrantino soldiers. Normal soldiers don't speak eloquently in rapid fire dialogue for 20 minutes before unloading.

 

[DACrowe]

And given how Tarantino's heroes have acted in the past (think Kill Bill) he was obviously restraining some of his more absurd tendencies.

 

[Rock Sexton]

And when you say 'nothing to do with a WWII context'? Totally disagree (Cap would not exist in the first place but for the War).

Seriously, a story being fiction does not mean no effort should be made to make it fit the the period or conflict it takes place in. You can push this to a certain degree (the Nazi's fascination with the Occult expanded for the Indy movies and Hellboy, or the Hydra tech we will see in Cap), but it still has to look like it fits, even if we know full well it doesn't.

That's entirely and ironically duplicitous ..... you're given creative leniency when the audience knows the entire film is fantasy fiction, particularly with the comic book genre. The degree to which it's been pushed with other areas of the movie are quintessential examples of why a more faithful design (NON SPANDEX) could've been utilized.

No they are not normal soldiers. They are Tarrantino soldiers. Normal soldiers don't speak eloquently in rapid fire dialogue for 20 minutes before unloading.

Appearances .... talking appearances. Tarrantino took creative liberties with their personalities.

 

[Rock Sexton]

I get that it's a COMIC BOOK SUPERHERO MOVIE, but that doesn't mean that as long as it is faithful it is a good one. Daredevil (other than the costumes) was very faithful to the comics, but it still sucked.

And saying "just because" does not mean it will work. Captain America's costume would look ridiculous in a WWII setting. That has always been the movie's biggest hurdle for setting it in that period. And this will keep people from snickering? It may not matter to you, but to the filmmakers who want to make a good movie that is financially viable, it is extremely important.

What does Daredevil sucking have to do with Captain America? You blame that on the faithfulness of the costume? I would hope not. The movie was just a giant pile of steaming crap.

You have yet to show that it wouldn't work. You have claimed it would look ridiculous and out of place when AGAIN the antagonist of the film has a freaking red skull for a face. How does that work in the context of WWII and the 1940's? Please explain that to me. Practically every element surrounding the movie screams irony when thinking Cap absolutely had to look like another soldier.

I can see it now ....

Audience member: "That guy has a red skull for a head in WWII. Cool, totally buy into that .... and oh my god he's got a cube capable of opening portals, I buy that too ..... but wait, what's with this guy wearing form fitting gear and not looking like a soldier even though he's hopped up on super soldier serum and vita rays? I don't even know what a vita ray is, but that's it, I'm walking out. Worst $10 I ever spent."

 

[lixdexia]

That's entirely and ironically duplicitous ..... you're given creative leniency when the audience knows the entire film is fantasy fiction, particularly with the comic book genre. The degree to which it's been pushed with other areas of the movie are quintessential examples of why a more faithful design (NON SPANDEX) could've been utilized.

you're right, they should have went full on faithful and just drawn the character in 2d in post. i mean it is a comic book superhero movie after all so believability doesn't matter at all.

 

[Rock Sexton]

you're right, they should have went full on faithful and just drawn the character in 2d in post. i mean it is a comic book superhero movie after all so believability doesn't matter at all.

Lix, so lemme guess you believe a man prancing around with a red skull for a head who is harnessing a cosmic cube that opens portals is totally believable right?

Acting and story line has more to do with the success of the film. They buy into the actor playing Steve Rogers, you'd be surprised how much they can get away with. In that regards though, that's a big question mark.

 

[lixdexia]

a deformity that makes your head look similar to a red skull? yes. a cube that opens portals? maybe, i dunno. but i do know that i would take both of those things more seriously than a man running around a battlefield in a leotard.