The Official Costume Thread - - - - Part 13

[epc11223]

Not a chance.

just curious how you could say "not a chance"? i think it's going to look similar to the picture. it looks like an x and it doesn't look like there's going to be trunks to me. just wondering if you knew something that we all didn't.

 

[C. Lee]

I'll bet. Would that detail show up if you scanned it?

I'm not sure....I'll dig it out and see.

 

[Sabaoth]

and 100% of the people who voted will see the movie regardless, the question is what do all the nonfans out there think looks better. Those are the people that will decide whether we get a sequel or not. I doubt they care about tradition either.

Ain't that the truth?
If only everyone could understand that.

 

[Mad Love]

Hey... only 16% said that the trunks HAD TO GO... and 27% could careless either way.

So if you drop the 27% out of the picture... you have 57% wanting the trunks and a vocal 16% not wanting the trunks. I think that is accurate.

That's not the matter at hand.

If we're asking how many would accept a brief-less costume, then it's 50/50.

Therefore, those against a brief-less costume can't claim to be the majority as they have done.

PS. Apparently you can call people "dumbass" and accuse bad taste, but saying "panties" is too derogatory

 

[Kurosawa]

Accept, yes. But accepting second-rate interpretations of Superman is a lot of what has led to the characters decline. Will I see the movie even if the costume is not accurate? Yes. But is it a bad visual decision? Unless they have compensated for the losing the trunks in a smart manner, then yes, IMO, it is a bad design.

 

[Comics N' Toons]

Accept, yes. But accepting second-rate interpretations of Superman is a lot of what has led to the characters decline. Will I see the movie even if the costume is not accurate? Yes. But is it a bad visual decision? Unless they have compensated for the losing the trunks in a smart manner, then yes, IMO, it is a bad design.

You really get Superman... not many on these boards do. Too many people miss the point!

 

[Rage]

Where are these belt idea's comic from? I don't see anything in the original picture that would lead me to believe there is anything like that in the suit at all. If anything, if there are no trunks, it looks like there is a buckle, but nothing else. Could be like the Superman Flyby costume. But I don't see anything close to any of those images in the Cavill picture.

I just lightened up the shadows to reveal that there are some seams or tubing or belting and they definitely attach to the belt buckle at a 30-45 degree angle. You can also see more along the waist... but at a lesser angle perhaps (hard to see with his body all scrunched up.) AND... some sort of raised thigh piece on his right thigh

 

[Mad Love]

Accept, yes. But accepting second-rate interpretations of Superman is a lot of what has led to the characters decline. Will I see the movie even if the costume is not accurate? Yes. But is it a bad visual decision? Unless they have compensated for the losing the trunks in a smart manner, then yes, IMO, it is a bad design.

What indicates that it will be a second-rate interpretation? The costume doesn't make the man. Superman knows this.

 

[Rage]

What indicates that it will be a second-rate interpretation? The costume doesn't make the man. Superman knows this.

No trunks is a good indication

 

[Sabaoth]

True... but I think you undersell the nostalgic element to Superman. People love Superman like they love Mickey Mouse... They loved him as a kid and remember the old cartoons and toys and movies..and while they will probably not come out and say it... they might find radically changing the costume design might lessen thier nostalgic bond with the character.

I liken it to Mickey mouse having his red shorts taken away and replaced with a T-shirt or something. He is still Mickey Mouse... but he just doesn't look right...

You're assuming everyone else who looks at these images will feel the same way you do. I don't get a "Mickey don't look right without the red trunks" sensation at all. In fact, when I think of Mickey, I see him as he looked in Fantasia. The image with trunks reminds me of a phone I used to have and that is all.

If Superman had a huge nostalgic demand then SR would be filming its second sequel by now, and we probably would have gotten to see Mongul on screen by now...but no.

I understand what you are saying about a nostalgic bond (hey, I'm going to miss the crystal fortress and the John Williams themes), but I think the proof is in the pudding. Nostalgia doesn't rake in the big bucks.

 

[Rage]

Accept, yes. But accepting second-rate interpretations of Superman is a lot of what has led to the characters decline. Will I see the movie even if the costume is not accurate? Yes. But is it a bad visual decision? Unless they have compensated for the losing the trunks in a smart manner, then yes, IMO, it is a bad design.

I agree. Good post Kurosawa.

 

[Mad Love]

No trunks is a good indication

That's the problem I have with the pro-brief fans.

 

[C. Lee]

I'll bet. Would that detail show up if you scanned it?

Here it is -

 

[tomk]

You really get Superman... not many on these boards do. Too many people miss the point!

I think plenty of us get Superman but for some reason most are too polite to stand up and say what they think. I hate the idea that the "this year's model" crowd, people who know little about the character of Superman, are being allowed to dictate the way things are going. I don't understand why they claim to be fans but want to change him into something that will eventually be unrecognisable. This movie it's the trunks. Next time perhaps the cape? That serves no useful purpose either does it?
Go and find some other character and allow us real fans to enjoy the character we've all loved for decades.

 

[Sabaoth]

What indicates that it will be a second-rate interpretation? The costume doesn't make the man. Superman knows this.

Nothing does.
The overwhelming majority of fans love the new Cavill Superman.
A tiny few will hold out for a while but I'm sure they'll come around as we get closer to release.

 

[X Knight]

when do you think we will see another pic or shot of Henry in the suit??

 

[Rage]

That's the problem I have with the pro-brief fans.

I was making a joke.

I've stated a few times now that, other than the fact that he has ALWAYS had that element in his costume design... The trunks help break up the mass of blue (dark thinning colour) and help to create BLOCKS of colour that help to make the wearer (Routh, Cavill, Reeve, Reeves...) look chunkier and thicker instead of slim like say Andrew Garfield in Spiderman. People want a built Superman... and HC has worked really hard to put on mass, but then they go and optically cut their own legs out from under themselves by putting him in a onesie... THAT IS MY MAIN REASON FOR WANTING THE SHORTS.

 

[Nathman]

For what, the 50th time? It is NOT an 'X' shaped belt, it is a normal, straight belt strap with an oval buckle. The lower 'line' visible in the picture is the belt strap which is partially covered by the angle Cavill is standing at and the fact that his stomach is hanging over slightly because of his stance, and the upper line is simply a seam, it really is VERY obvious if use your brain and consider the angles.

Honestly, how anyone can still think the upper line is part of an 'X' shaped belt astounds me. If you can't work it out from the obviousness of picture then at least realise they would NEVER use a design like the belt posted by Rage because, if nothing else, it looks absolutely, unbelievably, indefensibly awful.

 

[Sabaoth]

I think plenty of us get Superman but for some reason most are too polite to stand up and say what they think. I hate the idea that the "this year's model" crowd, people who know little about the character of Superman, are being allowed to dictate the way things are going. I don't understand why they claim to be fans but want to change him into something that will eventually be unrecognisable. This movie it's the trunks. Next time perhaps the cape? That serves no useful purpose either does it?
Go and find some other character and allow us real fans to enjoy the character we've all loved for decades.

What gives you the authority to decide who the "people who know little about the character of Superman" are?
What gives you the right to define who the ""real fans" are, and what they would like to "enjoy"?
You seem to fall in the "if they don't think like me then they are wrong" type of thinking category.

 

[Rage]

Nothing does.
The overwhelming majority of fans love the new Cavill Superman.
A tiny few will hold out for a while but I'm sure they'll come around as we get closer to release.

Hey.. I'm pleased as frickin' punch that Cavill is playing Superman. I am also happy at s**t that they got the giant S and the neckline exposing his neck down to the clavical.... I FRICKIN LOVE THE CAPE!! I just don't like that it APPEARS that they have eliminated the red break in the costume (aka trunks)

I gave the photo an 8 out of 10 on the homepage poll... the detractions being the OVERWELMING pattern and the apparent lack of trunks.

 

[Superman_200]

I just lightened up the shadows to reveal that there are some seams or tubing or belting and they definitely attach to the belt buckle at a 30-45 degree angle. You can also see more along the waist... but at a lesser angle perhaps (hard to see with his body all scrunched up.) AND... some sort of raised thigh piece on his right thigh

I think that is either a seam or part of a belt that has some overlapping on it from the costume and his stomach since he hunched over like that. I don't think its actually a belt in itself. I think what we see there is a seam sort of like the seams in the Earth One suit. I can't tell in the original picture. In the brightened one there is something but it looks like what he has on the wrists. It could be part of the belt true, but what I see is a seam or a wrinkle in the costume or fold, probably because of the position he is standing in.

 

[Rage]

For what, the 50th time? It is NOT an 'X' shaped belt, it is a normal, straight belt strap with an oval buckle. The lower 'line' visible in the picture is the belt strap which is partially covered by the angle Cavill is standing at and the fact that his stomach is hanging over slightly because of his stance, and the upper line is simply a seam, it really is VERY obvious if use your brain and consider the angles.

Honestly, how anyone can still think the upper line is part of an 'X' shaped belt astounds me. If you can't work it out from the obviousness of picture then at least realise they would NEVER use a design like the belt posted by Rage because, if nothing else, it looks absolutely, unbelievably, indefensibly awful.

Has that EVER stopped comicbook movies from making a bad design choice before?

While my first impression of looking at that angular shape was that it was a seam... we don't have enough information to conclude that it might not be part of a belt like design. Until we have an actual photo with nice lighting and a perfectly straight cavill... we will be guessing at what is in that shadow.

 

[tomk]

What gives you the authority to decide who the "people who know little about the character of Superman" are?
What gives you the right to define who the ""real fans" are, and what they would like to "enjoy"?
You seem to fall in the "if they don't think like me then they are wrong" type of thinking category.

I definitely fall into the category "If you really think any of the trunkless suits portrayed here are better than the original then you have very different tastes and aesthetic values from me". There's not a single valid argument been proposed here for removing the trunks.

 

[Rage]

I think that is either a seam or part of a belt that has some overlapping on it from the costume and his stomach since he hunched over like that. I don't think its actually a belt in itself. I think what we see there is a seam sort of like the seams in the Earth One suit. I can't tell in the original picture. In the brightened one there is something but it looks like what he has on the wrists. It could be part of the belt true, but what I see is a seam or a wrinkle in the costume or fold, probably because of the position he is standing in.

It is really hard to see what is happening in there. It also looks like the "seam" could be grey/silver (much like the thing on his thigh) We are assuming that it is gold/yellow because that is the colour he originally had... but the only gold could be in his crest.

This is a great action shot of Superman... and a great topic of conversation... but they could have gone with a more all-out look and less moody picture to keep the peace around here... GAAWWWD!

 

[Kurosawa]

I think plenty of us get Superman but for some reason most are too polite to stand up and say what they think. I hate the idea that the "this year's model" crowd, people who know little about the character of Superman, are being allowed to dictate the way things are going. I don't understand why they claim to be fans but want to change him into something that will eventually be unrecognisable. This movie it's the trunks. Next time perhaps the cape? That serves no useful purpose either does it?
Go and find some other character and allow us real fans to enjoy the character we've all loved for decades.

That's the goal of deconstructionists-to take things apart, bit by bit. First the trunks are silly, then the cape, then the costume itself, next him flying is too silly-"Today's audiences cannot believe in a flying alien!", then you have Jon Peters giant spider in the third act. The anti-trunks, anti-tradition crowd are his little brothers and sisters.

What indicates that it will be a second-rate interpretation? The costume doesn't make the man. Superman knows this.

Apparently he would disagree, as he wears a costume so that his mission to help people and to fight evil is known.