Yeah i read that in Superman The Complete HistorySteelsheen said:that's exactly the artwork that came to my mind. they said the original artwork hung at the DC offices for decades.
The s from the original inspiration would not have looked good on the Routh costume belt.kakarot069 said:if they actualy did the belt like that, I wouldn't have a problem
I think thats the Art of Superman Returns.kalelinri said:what book is that from
Retroman said:Yeah i read that in Superman The Complete History
The s from the original inspiration would not have looked good on the Routh costume belt.

Then we agree to disagree.kakarot069 said:i think it would of...
Thanks.kakarot069 said:and yes its from The Art of Superman Returns
Wesyeed said:Exactly. That's the problem with purists. The fact is that a film like Catwoman could very well lead to better things for the character but they didn't accept it, and some didn't even see the film. I saw it as an opportunity to explore a different interpretation on the character that might allow her to grow into something greater than what she was. Cino my azz. And in some ways the hulk movie by brokeback mountain director Ang lee brought a lot of fresh ideas to the hulk story that many purist viewed as too unnecessary or whatever. i don't remember. But as we all know nothing's going to change for the sequel. The studio was happy with their film and although Ang lee won't be back, the story established in the first will continue despite whatever it is purists want.
Some purists want faithful adaptations and nothing more, while i think others who are purists but not too purists, are more open-minded to changes that are actually good. i like those purists.
There are good changes that enhance the character as he evolves throughout his very long career. And conversly crap changes that purists, fans, all humans didn't like, like those red and blue supermen. It really depends on what's best for the character, i think, whether a change is considered a good change or not. And that can be subjective.
buggs0268 said:God I wish she would get her story straigt. In the interveiw with her a few months ago on SHH she said that Bryan came in and said "I want a small S" Now It was her pushing it on Bryan to go smaller. Also, Bryan said he at first wanted a big S when the suit first came out. Why dont they come out and say "Bryan wanted a big S, but the 3D made it where this is as big as we could go." Which is the truth. At least Tom Bronson said it when he said "we could not make it bigger and still have it be 3D without folding." Thank god Dayus wasn't costume designer or we would have had a shield the size of a stamp.
I am talking about the Guci belts where th bucke is just a G. That is what this is.Retroman said:Gucci Belt? That s on the belt was in the comics long before Gucci was even a major label.
As for S&M costume as you describe. If you were talking about Juggernaut's costume i'd understand but not the Superman.
I bet if Singer had approved Juggernaut's look in X3 it would be because he's gay.![]()
I was leaning more towards Dolce & Gabbanna actually.buggs0268 said:Superman Returns belt
![]()
Guci woman's belt
![]()
Hmmmm. buckle is logo and see through to the back of belt. HMMMMM.
Showtime029 said:The belt buckle had a huge effect on the box office and the storyline.

The buckle wasn't even that noticable in SR unless you were looking for it..I didn't notice it once actually...but I wasn't looking at the part of Routh.kakarot069 said:it's too busy looking, and the belt buckle makes it look even worse.
considering what they wanted to do with it, it does take away fom it, because there were similar design out there that were much better design wise...Venom71 said:The buckle wasn't even that noticable in SR unless you were looking for it..I didn't notice it once actually...but I wasn't looking at the part of Routh.
kakarot069 said:if you compare Jim Lee's work to this new guy, I'll take Lee's version any day of the week.
Timstuff said:The \S/ belt buckle is still stupid and redundant. The second \S/ should be on the back of the cape, or no-where.