BvS The Batsuit Thread - Part 17

[Brian Braddock]

What possible reason would there be to incorporate them other than fanboy loyalism? It's like you're pushing for something that would obviously be silly to one degree or another simply because that's how it's been drawn in the past. Trunks are absolutely unimportant to the character, and the possible risks definitely outweigh the possible rewards. The things people get attached to, I swear.

This.

'Lois, you'll notice that I'm currently sporting a pair of speedos over my outfit. Why? Well, I read a fashion blog that said I needed some red in there to break up all the blue and you know how seriously I take my appearance.....'

 

[Brian Braddock]

You're absolutely right! While we're at it, we should get rid of Superman's S, and Batman's Bat-emblem. I mean, both of those are silly looking. Why would anybody wear those on a modern suit?

By all means, give us a good reason why Supes would choose to ADD the trunks to his existing outfit (fyi, the 'it doesnt require an explanation doesnt work').

 

[Travesty]

By all means, give us a good reason why Supes would choose to ADD the trunks to his existing outfit (fyi, the 'it doesnt require an explanation doesnt work').

Heh, I love the parameters to your "question".

Look, I'm not advocating the trunks. I like them, but to say that they're unimportant to the character is silly. I guarantee you that if they took the symbol or the cape away, you'd say otherwise. The trunks are apart of the classic look for both these characters, just as much as the cape and symbol. Those things are just as much "fanboy loyalism" as the trunks.

Trunks are for teh silly.

Capes are for teh modern fashion bad ass! Get it straight fanboys!

 

[The Shape]

Look, I'm not advocating the trunks. I like them, but to say that they're unimportant to the character is silly. I guarantee you that if they took the symbol or the cape away, you'd say otherwise. The trunks are apart of the classic look for both these characters, just as much as the cape and symbol. Those things are just as much "fanboy loyalism" as the trunks.

Trunks are for teh silly.

Capes are for teh modern fashion bad ass! Get it straight fanboys!

I'm not a hater of the trunks by any means, but I think you're a little off here.

Yes, the trunks are apart of their classic looks, but to say their just as important as the other visual motifs doesn't ring true, especially not for Batman. If you take away the cape/symbol/cowl from Batman, he is no longer Batman. He won't look like Batman and will certainly lose any resemblance he had to a bat. If you remove the trunks, however, he is very much still Batman as we've seen in countless interpretations and in the New 52.

I'd argue that the trunks are technically the least important aspect of Batman's classic look, behind the boots, gloves, guantlets, belt, symbol, cape, and cowl. I think the trunks have been linked with Superman for longer and more prominently in pop culture, but as we saw with MOS, he can still very much look like and act like Superman without them. Sure, his cape is technically pointless and really just looks cool, but it's arguably more iconic and crucial to his overall look and color scheme than the trunks themselves.

 

[Superherofan123]

Yea I really like the suit pictured above...I'd be ecstatic if we got that!

 

[ЯɘvlveR]

they start shooting next week right? maybe we'll get the suits monday! who am i kidding.

 

[Travesty]

I'm not a hater of the trunks by any means, but I think you're a little off here.

Yes, the trunks are apart of their classic looks, but to say their just as important as the other visual motifs doesn't ring true, especially not for Batman. If you take away the cape/symbol/cowl from Batman, he is no longer Batman. He won't look like Batman and will certainly lose any resemblance he had to a bat. If you remove the trunks, however, he is very much still Batman as we've seen in countless interpretations and in the New 52.

I'd argue that the trunks are technically the least important aspect of Batman's classic look, behind the boots, gloves, guantlets, belt, symbol, cape, and cowl. I think the trunks have been linked with Superman for longer and more prominently in pop culture, but as we saw with MOS, he can still very much look like and act like Superman without them. Sure, his cape is technically pointless and really just looks cool, but it's arguably more iconic and crucial to his overall look and color scheme than the trunks themselves.

Yes, I get what you're saying, and even agree, but that's not the point I was making. I was saying that the trunks are part of the classic look of the character. And to say that they are somehow more silly than a man prancing around in a cape, just doesn't make that much sense to me. Both are silly, but it's part of what made these characters who they are.

But either way, I'm sure we'll be getting a trunk-less Batman. That's the direction that DC has been wanting to go in for the comics, and it seems the movies, too. Which is fine, cause all the live action Batmen haven't had them, except for Adam West.

 

[bluerayer]

This.

'Lois, you'll notice that I'm currently sporting a pair of speedos over my outfit. Why? Well, I read a fashion blog that said I needed some red in there to break up all the blue and you know how seriously I take my appearance.....'

 

[Rorschach2012]

they start shooting next week right? maybe we'll get the suits monday! who am i kidding.

I think we should get more casting announcements before the suits.

 

[Travesty]

I'm still hoping they'll reveal it on July 23rd.

 

[MrsKent26]

By all means, give us a good reason why Supes would choose to ADD the trunks to his existing outfit (fyi, the 'it doesnt require an explanation doesnt work').

There is no reason.

While trunks and a cape are similarly useless in a practical sense, there's a key difference between them: Trunks look dorky and capes don't.

A cape enhances the whole image, while adding what some call "underwear over his pants" just ups the whole dork factor. It wasn't dorky back in the strongman era, but today is different. It's just outdated and in most cases negatively impacts the look of a suit (Superman's especially). Of course, not everyone thinks this, but it's certainly not an obscure opinion. I reckon it's why batman hasn't had trunks for years in live-action and why no one in the New 52 has them.

 

[regwec]

By all means, give us a good reason why Supes would choose to ADD the trunks to his existing outfit (fyi, the 'it doesnt require an explanation doesnt work').

Perhaps a superfart tears open the crotch of his under-suit, and he chooses to cover the damage with the bright red speedos beloved by generations.

 

[bluerayer]

By all means, give us a good reason why Supes would choose to ADD the trunks to his existing outfit (fyi, the 'it doesnt require an explanation doesnt work').

Three words. Super-Banana-Hammock.

 

[keith_v]

I never understood the demand for adding the trunks other than to cut the primary color of the outfit so said hero doesn't look like he's wearing a tight onesie. If a belt or stitching can do that job, then I think they should always go with that instead of the trunks. Trunks look fine on the page, but in live-action, they looks kinda weird and distracting.

 

[Wayne Bruce]

I'm curious as to how they'll explain changing it (if at all) when it's supposed to be his alien homemade wear. Hard to imagine him sitting down and sewing stuff together.... Little Kal-El homemaker over there.

 

[bluerayer]

I'm curious as to how they'll explain changing it (if at all) when it's supposed to be his alien homemade wear. Hard to imagine him sitting down and sewing stuff together.... Little Kal-El homemaker over there.

Hehehe.

 

[MrsKent26]

^ Sounds cute, actually.

 

[bluerayer]

Yeah, that's what made me giggle.

 

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

If they give Ben a great suit... he's already won half the battle against haters.

 

[ArmsHeldOut]

There is no reason.

While trunks and a cape are similarly useless in a practical sense, there's a key difference between them: Trunks look dorky and capes don't.

A cape enhances the whole image, while adding what some call "underwear over his pants" just ups the whole dork factor. It wasn't dorky back in the strongman era, but today is different. It's just outdated and in most cases negatively impacts the look of a suit (Superman's especially). Of course, not everyone thinks this, but it's certainly not an obscure opinion. I reckon it's why batman hasn't had trunks for years in live-action and why no one in the New 52 has them.

^ This.

 

[Man.of.Tomorrow]

Am I the only person who hates the 'S' on the cape? It's perfect how it was... an S would make it messy IMO...

 

[John-An]

Who can resist this beauty of cowl?

 

[Superherofan123]

Ben would look awesome in that!!

 

[BatScot]

Does anybody here truly believe that the Bat-suit will feature trunks?

Will feature... I have no idea. Could feature, and not look like underwear over tights, you betcha. It's been done... the latest Arkham suit, for example, solves the problem while maintaining the general effect. And this whole idea that 'because Superman not x then Batman not x' is nonsense... can Batman not have a utility belt because Superman only has a buckle? Of course not.

 

[John-An]

Will feature... I have no idea. Could feature, and not look like underwear over tights, you betcha. It's been done... the latest Arkham suit, for example, solves the problem while maintaining the general effect. And this whole idea that 'because Superman not x then Batman not x' is nonsense... can Batman not have a utility belt because Superman only has a buckle? Of course not.

I agree but with other reasons. Superman's outfit is alien and Batman's in from earth. They can sort of give him the vigilante crime fighter as the ancient warriors that weared underwear. And that will give Bat a badass effect if you ask me. And of course another thing that would differenciate Supes and Bats suits