The Official Costume Thread - - - - - - - - - Part 18

[Tacit Ronin]

Yep. Once they start talking down to the audience, you can see how lazy TBTB are.

And based on what's been done with Star Wars, at least when Lucas is more involved, I'd say he thinks it's for kids too.

Actually it's the opposite. Didn't you see Plinkett photoshopping those kids watching those god awful senate scenes?

 

[Lencho01]

Actually it's the opposite. Didn't you see Plinkett photoshopping those kids watching those god awful senate scenes?

Yes, I did. I'm not saying he's a good writer. He still understands that he should cater to kids. They helped solidify Star Wars' place in pop culture and build his empire.

That's why you hear things of WB trying to sell GL as the Star Wars of the DCU and pushing the appeal of aliens. WB wanted kids to be interested.

So with these characters WB is going to make sure they can bring in kids who'll want to see the film, buy the merchandise, and grow up as fans or at least like enough to be interested if they make another film a few years from now or whatever reboot they do farther in the future.

 

[Krypto]

SUPERMAN : Man Of Steel

 

[ArmsHeldOut]

I totally agree. I love the classic Superman costume but I also believe it looks better on the comic book page than it does on the big screen. The same with Batman. Adapting a comic book superhero to film is not easy. The costumes became irrelevant in the great X-Men films. Christian Bale's Batman looks nothing like the Adam West version, whose costume is probably the most accurate of all the live-action Batman incarnations.
Adaptation usually means change. The classic Superman will always exist in the comics, in art, in merchandise, etc. At the same time there will always be new incarnations, such as the new DC version and the new film version. We are not losing the classic Superman but rather gaining additional versions.
I don't think the film's costume has anything to do with the ongoing lawsuit. I really can't believe that the Siegel family would put some kind of injunction on Supes' red briefs. I think it was just an aesthetic decision by the filmmakers in an effort to adapt a comic book to screen and offering something new and modern.

I think whether you're taking on a comics-to-film adaptation or reinventing a popular character in book format, the challenge is to draw inspiration from the original source material and make it even better. If I'm genuinely moved or impressed with updates/changes to a particular character or storyline, then I'm all for it. If I don't like a certain change or deem it necessary, I simply pass on the subject matter altogether. For example, X-Men: First Class, in my opinion, was brilliant on multiple levels regardless of the fact that it veered somewhat from the original comics it was based upon. I was thoroughly pleased w/ that film. In sharp contrast, the Brand New Day storyline in the Spider-Man books, to me, was like a dropkick to the face. My point is that if a new creative direction feels right to you deep down in your bones, then I see no reason not to go with that. It certainly doesn't make you less of a fan in any way. And if it's not for you, just skip it or pretend it never happened. Incidentally, I picked up the new X-men DVD earlier this month, and I haven't been reading Spider-Man for well over a year now since the BND fiasco. =)

As for the ongoing Siegel family lawsuit, I'm in agreement with you that it likely had little to do with Synder's decision to go without the trunks for his film. And again, although I'm a fan of the classic costume to some degree, I honestly never cared for the trunks -- even when I was a kid. I think you can appreciate the Superman character without liking every single aspect of his costume design.

 

[Kurosawa]

To me, the claim that the real costume doesn't work on screen is a complete lie. It worked before didn't it? Worked damn well too. No, the costume was changed to a dark dark dingy blue with no trunks as a tribal or whatever pattern because of shame, plain and simple. It's a damn miracle Superman: Returns got made with something resembling the real costume. Hell, it's fortunate that the MOS costume is as close as it is. Look at what Hollywood has tried to do to Superman over the years. No Krypton, no flying, Nic Cage, giant spider. It's why I feel they are worthless-they have hatred and scorn for comics and comics fans and only exploit them for money. But when I see the MOS costume-which isn't a half-bad costume as movie superhero suits go-I still see the shame of comics fans at their hobby, their embarrassment and a pointless attempt for acceptance. IT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN.

Selling Superman out to a group of people that will always think he is stupid is very lame.

 

[ArmsHeldOut]

No, the costume was changed to a dark dark dingy blue with no trunks as a tribal or whatever pattern because of shame, plain and simple.

If that was the case, wouldn't they have gotten rid of the bright red boots? Where's the shame in a lighter shade of blue? I don't get that mentality.

 

[Kurosawa]

The red isn't that bright, the blue is very dingy. If the movie was made by people who loved Superman and were proud of it, the colors would be Speed Racer bright.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

To me, the claim that the real costume doesn't work on screen is a complete lie. It worked before didn't it? Worked damn well too. No, the costume was changed to a dark dark dingy blue with no trunks as a tribal or whatever pattern because of shame, plain and simple. It's a damn miracle Superman: Returns got made with something resembling the real costume. Hell, it's fortunate that the MOS costume is as close as it is. Look at what Hollywood has tried to do to Superman over the years. No Krypton, no flying, Nic Cage, giant spider. It's why I feel they are worthless-they have hatred and scorn for comics and comics fans and only exploit them for money. But when I see the MOS costume-which isn't a half-bad costume as movie superhero suits go-I still see the shame of comics fans at their hobby, their embarrassment and a pointless attempt for acceptance. IT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN.

Selling Superman out to a group of people that will always think he is stupid is very lame.

I agree completely.

The thing is, I feel like i've invested a lot of hope in this film. Like this is the last time I am going to even remotely dream of the possibility of a Superman movie I love.

And I think that's why I, and a lot of other people who were heavily pro trunks, have been so accomodating about the changes.

Just trying desperately not to give up on our last hope for a good Superman film!

 

[CLARKY]

To me, the claim that the real costume doesn't work on screen is a complete lie. It worked before didn't it? Worked damn well too. No, the costume was changed to a dark dark dingy blue with no trunks as a tribal or whatever pattern because of shame, plain and simple. It's a damn miracle Superman: Returns got made with something resembling the real costume. Hell, it's fortunate that the MOS costume is as close as it is. Look at what Hollywood has tried to do to Superman over the years. No Krypton, no flying, Nic Cage, giant spider. It's why I feel they are worthless-they have hatred and scorn for comics and comics fans and only exploit them for money. But when I see the MOS costume-which isn't a half-bad costume as movie superhero suits go-I still see the shame of comics fans at their hobby, their embarrassment and a pointless attempt for acceptance. IT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN.

Selling Superman out to a group of people that will always think he is stupid is very lame.

I completely, completely, completely agree with you. The hate for SR is something that is beyond the reach of my comprehension, and the easy acceptance of the new suit too. Especially when people complain about the "red" of the SR suit but not about the dark grey blueish suit of the new film. I think Superman looks silly for a lot of people, that is what I hear all the time anyway, and a bright colorful skin-tightcharacter with "the undies over the pyjama" is clearlynot a way to show that comics are not for kids. It is easier to look "serious" when you like a realistic batman or wolverine or whoever.
Anyway, Kuro, I agree : Selling Superman out to this group of people is stupid, but it clearly sells more,and hollywood is not about art but money, did you forget? Right now the demystified-deconstructed superheroes are what is working and selling. It is not a shame anymore to be fan of a comicbook movie because "itis not for kids,it is real".

 

[Krumm]

I completely, completely, completely agree with you. The hate for SR is something that is beyond the reach of my comprehension, and the easy acceptance of the new suit too. Especially when people complain about the "red" of the SR suit but not about the dark grey blueish suit of the new film. I think Superman looks silly for a lot of people, that is what I hear all the time anyway, and a bright colorful skin-tightcharacter with "the undies over the pyjama" is clearlynot a way to show that comics are not for kids. It is easier to look "serious" when you like a realistic batman or wolverine or whoever.

I think it makes rather good sense. When SR came out, it had been nearly 20 years since the last Superman film. I was confused myself as to what I would've preferred that film to be: a film that is reminiscent of the Donner films (since that is the only reference most people have to the character on film) or something brand new. We got the former and it didn't work out all that great (I like the film but I don't love it like I would like). And considering that, people are now ready and open to something new.

Anyway, Kuro, I agree : Selling Superman out to this group of people is stupid, but it clearly sells more,and hollywood is not about art but money, did you forget?

I don't see how selling to the largest base possible is stupid. The point of selling is to make money and to sell to a small segment of the population is not a smart way to go about that -- that would be stupid. If you really want to see a Superman film for fans, it's not going to have the budget necessary because the return from that small segment would be dreadful.

There is a compromise that people are going to have to make when it comes to characters on film. 1) The fact that they NEED to sell to the larger audience. 2) That they need to alter elements in order to sell the story in a different and shorter format. You don't have 70 years or 10 seasons to get people invested. You have 2hrs (2.5hrs) to tell the story and you really only have the first 15 mins to get people to care.

Right now the demystified-deconstructed superheroes are what is working and selling. It is not a shame anymore to be fan of a comicbook movie because "itis not for kids,it is real".

I have been wondering lately if the US and the world is ready for a hopeful hero again. Maybe this can be Superman's time to reclaim the population from the gritty and dark heroes. One of SR's problems was that it came out at the wrong time. The world clearly wasn't ready for a hero like him (the story didn't help) and this is clear from the massive success from a film and story like TDK. Maybe it's different now.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

I completely, completely, completely agree with you. The hate for SR is something that is beyond the reach of my comprehension, and the easy acceptance of the new suit too. Especially when people complain about the "red" of the SR suit but not about the dark grey blueish suit of the new film. I think Superman looks silly for a lot of people, that is what I hear all the time anyway, and a bright colorful skin-tightcharacter with "the undies over the pyjama" is clearlynot a way to show that comics are not for kids. It is easier to look "serious" when you like a realistic batman or wolverine or whoever.
Anyway, Kuro, I agree : Selling Superman out to this group of people is stupid, but it clearly sells more,and hollywood is not about art but money, did you forget? Right now the demystified-deconstructed superheroes are what is working and selling. It is not a shame anymore to be fan of a comicbook movie because "itis not for kids,it is real".

Thinking about it this way makes me really sad.

I mean, I think it's great that comic book characters are being taken a bit more seriously as legitimate storytelling/film making opportunities... but I don't want their very nature stripped away in order to do that...

That's basically how I feel about some modern comic books stories. Mosty prominently X-Men. And it is a lot to do with the visuals. With the characters being stripped of what made them interesting and unique for the sake of 'realism'.

Hmmm, who knows. MOS could come out great. It could get the balance exactly right between the heart of Superman and the current style... or it could push Superman so far into 'realism' that they completely loose the point of the character

 

[moviedoors]

To me, the claim that the real costume doesn't work on screen is a complete lie. It worked before didn't it? Worked damn well too. No, the costume was changed to a dark dark dingy blue with no trunks as a tribal or whatever pattern because of shame, plain and simple. It's a damn miracle Superman: Returns got made with something resembling the real costume. Hell, it's fortunate that the MOS costume is as close as it is. Look at what Hollywood has tried to do to Superman over the years. No Krypton, no flying, Nic Cage, giant spider. It's why I feel they are worthless-they have hatred and scorn for comics and comics fans and only exploit them for money. But when I see the MOS costume-which isn't a half-bad costume as movie superhero suits go-I still see the shame of comics fans at their hobby, their embarrassment and a pointless attempt for acceptance. IT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN.

Selling Superman out to a group of people that will always think he is stupid is very lame.

My god you are unreasonable. I've liked the suit on screen in the past, sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't, but I totally open to a new interpretation. What the **** is wrong with that? Am I a liar. Good ****ing grief.

 

[Krumm]

My god you are unreasonable. I've liked the suit on screen in the past, sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't, but I totally open to a new interpretation. What the **** is wrong with that? I am liar. Good ****ing grief.

There are those of use who are open minded and those who are stuck in a single POV. It's unfortunate really because the bad word of mouth that will come from the strict purists - and it will - has real potential to hurt the film in the end.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

I don't think that the opinions of a few die hard fans are going to affect joe public.

But in Kuro's defense, when the first images of the suit came out, he was very open minded, and commented that he liked it. And i've seen recent posts where he says that the suit is much better than it could have been.

He's accepted that the suit looks okay, it's just the change itself which is insulting to a long time fan like him. Which I kind of get.

It's not as insulting to me, because i've grown up in a time of nothing being free from radical change.

I have been wondering lately if the US and the world is ready for a hopeful hero again. Maybe this can be Superman's time to reclaim the population from the gritty and dark heroes. One of SR's problems was that it came out at the wrong time. The world clearly wasn't ready for a hero like him (the story didn't help) and this is clear from the massive success from a film and story like TDK. Maybe it's different now.

Captain America worked, and there is nothing gritty about him IMO. That film absolutely understood that you make the WORLD gritty, and not the hero.

It's the perfect time for Superman.

 

[Krumm]

I don't think that the opinions of a few die hard fans are going to affect joe public.

I'm not saying it's going to cause the film to lose millions but the negative opinions of die-hards will keep their friends from going. To my friends I'm the Superman guy (as I'm sure is the case with a lot of people on here), and they are going to ask me what I think about the film when the time comes. My opinion will likely have an affect on them.

If I'm some die-hard who can't open my mind to interpretations (despite the fact that I'll accept it from artist to artist and writer to writer when it's on a page), then I'll tell my friend's not to waste their time.

Again, it's not going to hurt it greatly, but I know my aim is not to hurt my favorite character.

Captain America worked, and there is nothing gritty about him IMO. That film absolutely understood that you make the WORLD gritty, and not the hero.

It's the perfect time for Superman.

Keeping my fingers crossed!

 

[moviedoors]

I don't think that the opinions of a few die hard fans are going to affect joe public.

Remove the "think" part and your dead right. That's imply the way it is. There just aren't enough fanboys to make or break a potential billion + dollar gross.

 

[moviedoors]

There are those of use who are open minded and those who are stuck in a single POV. It's unfortunate really because the bad word of mouth that will come from the strict purists - and it will - has real potential to hurt the film in the end.

No it doesn't. The fringe geeks aren't going to matter a lick to the general public. Go look at all the Batman complaints here. Going by how nitpicky fanboys are, Nolan's Batman movies shouldn't have been the phenomenon's they are if fanboys actually mattered. The public doesn't care. And I'm not interested in anecdotal experiences with you're group of friends. Me telling my friends how much Transformers sucked didn't stop them from going and my praise didn't make my friends see Let Me In. My anecdotal evidence neutralizes your anecdotal evidence.

 

[El Payaso]

There are those of use who are open minded and those who are stuck in a single POV. It's unfortunate really because the bad word of mouth that will come from the strict purists - and it will - has real potential to hurt the film in the end.

Nah. Die-hard fans are in love with the idea that their opinion will affect things, but they don't. I don't remember Batman 89 having problems because die-hard fans didn't like Joker being the Waynes' killers. That just doesn't happen. Same with trunks. If the movie's good, trunks won't matter.

And I've been told many times not to go to see this or that movie by my friends. And believe me, impossible as it sounds, people tend to make their own decisions.

 

[Krumm]

No it doesn't. The fringe geeks aren't going to matter a lick to the general public. Go look at all the Batman complaints here. Going by how nitpicky fanboys are, Nolan's Batman movies shouldn't have been the phenomenon's they are if fanboys actually mattered. The public doesn't care. And I'm not interested in anecdotal experiences with you're group of friends. Me telling my friends how much Transformers sucked didn't stop them from going and my praise didn't make my friends see Let Me In. My anecdotal evidence neutralizes your anecdotal evidence.

I was actually supporting your point to a certain extent. I never said it will hurt the movie.

There are those of use who are open minded and those who are stuck in a single POV. It's unfortunate really because the bad word of mouth that will come from the strict purists - and it will - has real potential to hurt the film in the end.

And I never said it was going to keep it from being a hit.

I'm not saying it's going to cause the film to lose millions but the negative opinions of die-hards will keep their friends from going. To my friends I'm the Superman guy (as I'm sure is the case with a lot of people on here), and they are going to ask me what I think about the film when the time comes. My opinion will likely have an affect on them.

If I'm some die-hard who can't open my mind to interpretations (despite the fact that I'll accept it from artist to artist and writer to writer when it's on a page), then I'll tell my friend's not to waste their time.

Again, it's not going to hurt it greatly, but I know my aim is not to hurt my favorite character.

If someone is able to keep one person out of a seat because of their antiquated views of a character, that's hurting the film.

Use your looking balls and take a deep breath. Sheesh.

 

[Kurosawa]

Basically the whole idea of accepting alterations to the costume because it will reach a wider audience is an admission that this movie is product, not art. Superman fans accepting a sellout of this level would be like Metallica fans accepting a collaboration with Justin Beiber.

 

[Zorex]

Basically the whole idea of accepting alterations to the costume because it will reach a wider audience is an admission that this movie is product, not art. Superman fans accepting a sellout of this level would be like Metallica fans accepting a collaboration with Justin Beiber.

What about accepting alterations or differences because that's the nature of adaptation? At least, that's the nature of adaptation in my opinion... things changing between mediums. I don't think any property or character or story is completely above and beyond interpretation and variation. Your opinion is your own and I respect that, but I also think your condemnation of changes to the costume and anyone who accepts them is a tad excessive.

 

[camp Blood]

SUPERMAN : Man Of Steel

really good but make one for ZOD: Man of Kneel


maybe you can base it off the symbol i came up with

Spoiler

 

[Krumm]

What about accepting alterations or differences because that's the nature of adaptation? At least, that's the nature of adaptation in my opinion... things changing between mediums. I don't think any property or character or story is completely above and beyond interpretation and variation. Your opinion is your own and I respect that, but I also think your condemnation of changes to the costume and anyone who accepts them is a tad excessive.

Exactly, films have a different structure and aesthetic. Things that work over the course of thousands of issues and brightly colored panels don't necessarily work in 2hrs and in a "real" (i.e. recognizable) world.

Now, I understand not being pleased with changes that affect the essence of a character but his costume is hardly his character. Yes, his costume is a big part of how we recognize him and there are limits to the change I'll accept, but the a change in costume is not going to change his decisions and actions as a character and that's the most important thing.

 

[Kurosawa]

What about accepting alterations or differences because that's the nature of adaptation? At least, that's the nature of adaptation in my opinion... things changing between mediums. I don't think any property or character or story is completely above and beyond interpretation and variation. Your opinion is your own and I respect that, but I also think your condemnation of changes to the costume and anyone who accepts them is a tad excessive.

I feel people use the "nature of adaption" as an excuse to sell out and to accept sellouts. The goal should be to as faithful to the source material as possible. Only technical and financial restraints are acceptable in compromising the integrity of the character is acceptable to me.

 

[camp Blood]

i agree with you some of the times but i feel that's being a little stubborn

saying i am not a real fan because i can accept superman for what he is in this adaption is a kind of mean. wouldn't that mean i love him more because i embrace him and this change for what it is

i will always want classic but cant i be happy just because where getting a half-way decent adaption