SuperMike335!!
Sidekick
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2004
- Messages
- 2,462
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 31
Hi all,
Not new to the boards, but have been lurking for a very long time. I read posts a lot, and I am of the group that does NOT like the way Routh looks as superman, or the costume changes.
At age 25, I am a life long superman fan, and comic collector as well, and this is far and away my favorite comic book character, so admittedly I am hard to please.
I am also an Iraq war vet with about 5 years in the army, and I have been an avid natural bodybuilder for a long time too, and have a good grasp on what bodyweights at certain bodyfat% look like, for given heights.
There seems to be a lot of argument on what build a superman actor should have. Some people here consider any muscular body a muscle bound freak, and think that 225 at 63 is skinny (not true at all). Others seem to favor a more Arnold Schwarzenegger type build for superman.
So what is muscle bound? The definition of muscle bound, is when a skeletal structure has so much muscle that is has lost a degree of movement to the point where it can no longer be athletic.
Let my say first off that only the most massive of bodybuilders are truly muscle bound. Guys like Ronnie Coleman 511 300 pounds current Mr.Olympia, Jay Cutler 59 300 pounds, Gunter Schlierkamp 62 320+ pounds, Markus Ruhl 510 300+pounds, are big time muscle-bound.
Lou Ferrigno, when he was on TV as the Hulk, although muscular, was only mildly muscle bound, and had the ability to still be athletic, so was Arnold S. Back in this time bodybuilders where not nearly as massive as they are to day.
For the most part, only bodybuilders, and some powerlifters, tend to be muscle-bound.
So by now you may be thinking that I would prefer a bodybuilder, like Mike Ohearn, to play superman? Absolutely NOT.
Remember Boagrius from the movie Troy (the giant guy Pitt kills in the beginning scene)? That was 611.5 360+ pound bodybuilder, and WSM competitor Nathan Jones. That kind of build is WAY too massive for a role like superman, but would not be bad for a Juggernaut doomsday type character.
I think that bodybuilders tend to look way too muscular and especially the steroid using ones would just look cartoonish as Superman, on top of that they tend to be under 6 foot (not always the case, but many of them are), and even the taller ones these days still tend to be too built for the role of superman.
One thing we do agree on is that superman is ripped. He may not be a bodybuilder, but he can be very lean. No one wants a fat superman.
Then there is the logical argument that superman should be skinny because he could not lift weights to increase his muscular size. Nothing in the known galaxy would give him that type of resistance training. Not unless he was working out with planets, right?
WRONG, that is applying human physiology to him too much. If that were the case by the same logic superman would look sickly atrophied as everyday life would not give him the resistance his muscles need to maintain themselves!
Clark is an ALIEN, he can simply have whatever build that a Kryptonian has when under a yellow sun. No need to put logic to it, a strong lean muscular build (but NOT super-heavyweight bodybuilder), at a height of 63. He can look like a guy who lifts weights even though he does not actually have to in order to maintain his body.
Then there is the Clark Kent argument, seriously, you think if a guy looked well built in a suit, that people would just assume he is a superhero? Absurd, it is well known that millions of men in the US. Lift weight to stay in shape, be muscular and healthy, and any one who knows him would just think well he was a big farm kid, and he must work out.
Also the real reason no one find his secret identity is that no one is looking for it! He does not wear a mask, so most people in the DC universe might just assume he does not have an identity he is trying to protect.
Now, officially, according to DC comics superman is 63 and 225 pounds. Sometimes it is printed as 235, like in the DC encyclopedia, but I will go with the 225 just to be conservative.
I happen to know what a lean 225 at 63 should look like. I know that some magazines have printed that Routh is 220 (even one typo that he was 250) yeah right!
Bull*****, Routh is not even 210, unless his bodyfat is >15%, and that IMHO is not lean enough to be superman if that is the case.
Some people may be thinking; I have a friend who is 220 at 62, and he does not look very muscular at all, to be muscular you got to be like 250, well if that is the case your friend has a lot of bodyfat making up his weight%, or he is padding his weight to sound bigger.
I know several guys in my company who do work out, lift weights and who are lean by army standards, and weigh between 220-230, and are 62-64, and they all look way bigger than Routh does.
There are several guys who are the same weight as the guys who work out a lot, but who do not work out as much, and the difference is huge. The guys who work out minimally still are in half ways decent shape, and although they are not as lean as the better shape guys, even though they weigh similar, the visual difference in muscular size is huge. It all has to do with the bodyfat %. 6% fat vs. 18% at the same weight the 6% will look far more muscled.
63 at around 225 pounds, ripped, is actually more like an in-between Vin Diesel, and the Rock build. Vin only weighs about 210, and the Rock in the Run Down, and Walking tall weighed about 245 pounds at 65.
So what Singer should have done was found a guy of that build with a face that resembled the current comic superman, and who can act, and I am sure that lots of guys can fit that bill.
That is just the way it is. Physically, IMHO Routh does just not look like a "superman", at all.
Reeve I think could have been about 15-20 pounds more muscular for his superman portrayal; and that still would not have been bodybuilder or muscle-bound proportions, or even closely resemble a Schwarzenegger look at all.
His face also does not look right, he looks too young. His face lacks the masculine qualities that Christopher Reeves had. Sure he may resemble Reeves, when Chris was 16 years old, but Routh does not look like superman to me. Not at all.
I think that the costume has also been changed too much. All the small changes add up to being a big change, and the hair cut on him is too long. Superman does not have a buzz cut, and sure his hair should be long enough to be wavy as Superman, but still look like a conservative business haircut on Clark.
Also the portrayal of Clark in modern day comics is much more head strong and less nerdy than it was during the Reeve era. More like the Bruce Tim animated Superman cartoon than the previous Superman movies.
Not new to the boards, but have been lurking for a very long time. I read posts a lot, and I am of the group that does NOT like the way Routh looks as superman, or the costume changes.
At age 25, I am a life long superman fan, and comic collector as well, and this is far and away my favorite comic book character, so admittedly I am hard to please.
I am also an Iraq war vet with about 5 years in the army, and I have been an avid natural bodybuilder for a long time too, and have a good grasp on what bodyweights at certain bodyfat% look like, for given heights.
There seems to be a lot of argument on what build a superman actor should have. Some people here consider any muscular body a muscle bound freak, and think that 225 at 63 is skinny (not true at all). Others seem to favor a more Arnold Schwarzenegger type build for superman.
So what is muscle bound? The definition of muscle bound, is when a skeletal structure has so much muscle that is has lost a degree of movement to the point where it can no longer be athletic.
Let my say first off that only the most massive of bodybuilders are truly muscle bound. Guys like Ronnie Coleman 511 300 pounds current Mr.Olympia, Jay Cutler 59 300 pounds, Gunter Schlierkamp 62 320+ pounds, Markus Ruhl 510 300+pounds, are big time muscle-bound.
Lou Ferrigno, when he was on TV as the Hulk, although muscular, was only mildly muscle bound, and had the ability to still be athletic, so was Arnold S. Back in this time bodybuilders where not nearly as massive as they are to day.
For the most part, only bodybuilders, and some powerlifters, tend to be muscle-bound.
So by now you may be thinking that I would prefer a bodybuilder, like Mike Ohearn, to play superman? Absolutely NOT.
Remember Boagrius from the movie Troy (the giant guy Pitt kills in the beginning scene)? That was 611.5 360+ pound bodybuilder, and WSM competitor Nathan Jones. That kind of build is WAY too massive for a role like superman, but would not be bad for a Juggernaut doomsday type character.
I think that bodybuilders tend to look way too muscular and especially the steroid using ones would just look cartoonish as Superman, on top of that they tend to be under 6 foot (not always the case, but many of them are), and even the taller ones these days still tend to be too built for the role of superman.
One thing we do agree on is that superman is ripped. He may not be a bodybuilder, but he can be very lean. No one wants a fat superman.
Then there is the logical argument that superman should be skinny because he could not lift weights to increase his muscular size. Nothing in the known galaxy would give him that type of resistance training. Not unless he was working out with planets, right?
WRONG, that is applying human physiology to him too much. If that were the case by the same logic superman would look sickly atrophied as everyday life would not give him the resistance his muscles need to maintain themselves!
Clark is an ALIEN, he can simply have whatever build that a Kryptonian has when under a yellow sun. No need to put logic to it, a strong lean muscular build (but NOT super-heavyweight bodybuilder), at a height of 63. He can look like a guy who lifts weights even though he does not actually have to in order to maintain his body.
Then there is the Clark Kent argument, seriously, you think if a guy looked well built in a suit, that people would just assume he is a superhero? Absurd, it is well known that millions of men in the US. Lift weight to stay in shape, be muscular and healthy, and any one who knows him would just think well he was a big farm kid, and he must work out.
Also the real reason no one find his secret identity is that no one is looking for it! He does not wear a mask, so most people in the DC universe might just assume he does not have an identity he is trying to protect.
Now, officially, according to DC comics superman is 63 and 225 pounds. Sometimes it is printed as 235, like in the DC encyclopedia, but I will go with the 225 just to be conservative.
I happen to know what a lean 225 at 63 should look like. I know that some magazines have printed that Routh is 220 (even one typo that he was 250) yeah right!
Bull*****, Routh is not even 210, unless his bodyfat is >15%, and that IMHO is not lean enough to be superman if that is the case.
Some people may be thinking; I have a friend who is 220 at 62, and he does not look very muscular at all, to be muscular you got to be like 250, well if that is the case your friend has a lot of bodyfat making up his weight%, or he is padding his weight to sound bigger.
I know several guys in my company who do work out, lift weights and who are lean by army standards, and weigh between 220-230, and are 62-64, and they all look way bigger than Routh does.
There are several guys who are the same weight as the guys who work out a lot, but who do not work out as much, and the difference is huge. The guys who work out minimally still are in half ways decent shape, and although they are not as lean as the better shape guys, even though they weigh similar, the visual difference in muscular size is huge. It all has to do with the bodyfat %. 6% fat vs. 18% at the same weight the 6% will look far more muscled.
63 at around 225 pounds, ripped, is actually more like an in-between Vin Diesel, and the Rock build. Vin only weighs about 210, and the Rock in the Run Down, and Walking tall weighed about 245 pounds at 65.
So what Singer should have done was found a guy of that build with a face that resembled the current comic superman, and who can act, and I am sure that lots of guys can fit that bill.
That is just the way it is. Physically, IMHO Routh does just not look like a "superman", at all.
Reeve I think could have been about 15-20 pounds more muscular for his superman portrayal; and that still would not have been bodybuilder or muscle-bound proportions, or even closely resemble a Schwarzenegger look at all.
His face also does not look right, he looks too young. His face lacks the masculine qualities that Christopher Reeves had. Sure he may resemble Reeves, when Chris was 16 years old, but Routh does not look like superman to me. Not at all.
I think that the costume has also been changed too much. All the small changes add up to being a big change, and the hair cut on him is too long. Superman does not have a buzz cut, and sure his hair should be long enough to be wavy as Superman, but still look like a conservative business haircut on Clark.
Also the portrayal of Clark in modern day comics is much more head strong and less nerdy than it was during the Reeve era. More like the Bruce Tim animated Superman cartoon than the previous Superman movies.
I am sooo tired of these guys bashing Routh. Face it he is Superman so dont go see the movie if you feel he isnt!!!!!
