The Official Costume Thread - - - - - - - - - - Part 19

[Mace Bloodstone]

is that... life size?

 

[TruerToTheCore]

I don't get the attitude some people have around here. It's like you either have to love everything about Superman or nothing at all. Why would it be impossible for me to dislike certain aspects of his look or character, but without hating it as a whole? It just reminds me of the whole "You're either with us, or you're against us" attitude and that's really silly. One doesn't have to love everything about Superman to love Superman.

And that doesn't mean I don't respect the creators or hate tradition or anything. It just means I have a different taste in some matters. But I guess that's just horrible.

Because one usually follows the other, from my experience. People who hate the trunks also want Superman to be a disguise, have him weak and dumb, want him to kill, whatever... There's a pattern here. And then they hate the Krypto, the Terra-Man and Vartox, the worst sins of them all

 

[hopefuldreamer]

Because one usually follows the other, from my experience. People who hate the trunks also want Superman to be a disguise, have him weak and dumb, want him to kill, whatever... There's a pattern here. And then they hate the Krypto, the Terra-Man and Vartox, the worst sins of them all

From my experience people who are adamant that no trunks doesn't work ASSUME there is a pattern between people who are fine with it and the rest of the opinions you described.

When in fact, there is no pattern.

Every single person on this thread who either has been pro trunks all along, or has accepted the new costume for what it is, is likely to have a different opinion on every aspect you mentioned.

For instance, I am okay with the new suit but was very much pro trunks. I don't want Superman to be of genius level intelligence, but I don't want him to be dumb and am fine with seeing some aspects of his minds capabilities shown (I.e. Being able to read super fast and take it all in, knowing a bunch of different languages etc). I don't want Superman to be weak, but I would like to see a villain like Zod capable of drawing blood for asthetic purposes. I don't have a take on the 'superman is the disguise' debate because I simply don't accept the black and white of that arguement. Glasses are a part of the disguise, the superman suit is another part of the disguise... The man in both those outfits is real. And I don't want Krypto, Terra-Man or Vortex in this movie.

So where do I fit in your pattern?

You can't just lump everybody into the same category because you assume one opinion means another and another is also there.

 

[El Payaso]

Yeah, I can live without the trunks - but have said many times that if anyone can get away with them perfectrly is Superman - but I don't want him to kill. No patterns there just a feeble attempt of reductionism.

 

[DKDetective]

Because one usually follows the other, from my experience. People who hate the trunks also want Superman to be a disguise, have him weak and dumb, want him to kill, whatever... There's a pattern here. And then they hate the Krypto, the Terra-Man and Vartox, the worst sins of them all

Lol I must be a real anomaly then! Since I'm pro-trunks (I'm just fine with their absence on the MOS because I'm so glad they got everything else so right IMO), I prefer a complex, modern take on the pre-Crisis characterization (although I'm not as opposed to the Byrne characterization as others), I want Superman to never kill, I prefer golden age/Man of Steel power levels, but still want him to be very intelligent (just not a super genius because that makes his natural gifts redundant) and I hate Krypto and Superboy.

I'm a mix of both camps and I think that's because I appreciate most the Golden and Bronze Age versions of the character, but grew up with the post-crisis interpretation.

 

[moviedoors]

That you take a disagreement and make it personal? Welcome to my ignore list.

No it's that you throw out comic book equivalents of patriotism tests. A real "with us or against us" vitriolic attitude. That's why you're the Bachman of the boards.

 

[camp Blood]

kind of like the the McCarthy trials of the 40s and 50s

 

[MydnightPhoenix]

Damn; by any chance, could you make it smaller?lol

My computer nearly had a stroke.

 

[Laufey]

Well, here's a smaller version of the picture that was posted on the last page.

 

[Dr.]

...But we know who wrote Superman-Jerry Siegel. And we know who drew Superman-Joe Shuster. And we know what they did. Superman grew and grew from 1938-1986 but the difference is he always kept true to his core concept. I don't know why characters being true to what they were intended to be would be a problem for anyone.

Imo, this is the nexus of contention.

I presume we all agree that S&S and the early writers intended Supes to be a serious and impressive figure – heroic, noble, dashing, brave, romantic, etc. These, I submit, are the “core concepts” of the character. And to reflect this, Supes was depicted as/doing (pardon the abstraction) x, y and z. So far, so good. But times change – including, perhaps, how x, y and z are interpreted by audiences. That’s to say, they may not be serving the “core concepts” as they once did. So then the question becomes: is our allegiance to x, y and z or to the “core concepts”? In a modern context, perhaps it would be more faithful to the original "core concepts" to substitute a, b and c. And someone who might make that suggestion is not necessarily trying to subvert anything. Indeed, they might have their focus firmly fixed on the real issue/challenge.

 

[StarvingArtist]

Well, here's a smaller version of the picture that was posted on the last page.

That's some nice art

 

[TheDragonator]

What some people, like Kurosawa, need to understand, is that having a different opinion does not them more or less of a fan of the character. They assume not minding or wanting a change to being, and, as I've read in these threads:

*Being Unpatriotic
*Hating Superman
*Hating the creators of Superman
*Hating Superheroes
*Not being smart
*Not being a real fan

For simply being okay with removing, or not liking, the trunks.

Now, tell me that isn't unreasonable for simply having a different opinion.

 

[StarvingArtist]

What some people, like Kurosawa, need to understand, is that having a different opinion does not them more or less of a fan of the character. They assume not minding or wanting a change to being, and, as I've read in these threads:

*Being Unpatriotic
*Hating Superman
*Hating the creators of Superman
*Hating Superheroes
*Not being smart
*Not being a real fan

For simply being okay with removing, or not liking, the trunks.

Now, tell me that isn't unreasonable for simply having a different opinion.

I'd say that's reasonable. But it begs the question of where the line should be drawn before Superman changes so much as to become unrecognizable. And I'm not saying the loss of the trunks goes beyond that line.

 

[DKDetective]

Imo, this is the nexus of contention.

I presume we all agree that S&S and the early writers intended Supes to be a serious and impressive figure – heroic, noble, dashing, brave, romantic, etc. These, I submit, are the “core concepts” of the character. And to reflect this, Supes was depicted as/doing (pardon the abstraction) x, y and z. So far, so good. But times change – including, perhaps, how x, y and z are interpreted by audiences. That’s to say, they may not be serving the “core concepts” as they once did. So then the question becomes: is our allegiance to x, y and z or to the “core concepts”? In a modern context, perhaps it would be more faithful to the original "core concepts" to substitute a, b and c. And someone who might make that suggestion is not necessarily trying to subvert anything. Indeed, they might have their focus firmly fixed on the real issue/challenge.

Excellent post! I attempted bringing the same issue to light a few times in this thread and was ignored. Specifically, I tried addressing how athletic fashions and scifi imagery have changed and that it might better serve Siegel and Shuster's intention to modify the suit in accordance with those changes. Its relevant because the appearance of the suit conveys certain messages about Superman.

 

[moviedoors]

Imo, this is the nexus of contention.

I presume we all agree that S&S and the early writers intended Supes to be a serious and impressive figure – heroic, noble, dashing, brave, romantic, etc. These, I submit, are the “core concepts” of the character. And to reflect this, Supes was depicted as/doing (pardon the abstraction) x, y and z. So far, so good. But times change – including, perhaps, how x, y and z are interpreted by audiences. That’s to say, they may not be serving the “core concepts” as they once did. So then the question becomes: is our allegiance to x, y and z or to the “core concepts”? In a modern context, perhaps it would be more faithful to the original "core concepts" to substitute a, b and c. And someone who might make that suggestion is not necessarily trying to subvert anything. Indeed, they might have their focus firmly fixed on the real issue/challenge.

To paraphrase David Cronenberg: "sometimes to stay to true to a story you have to betray it."

 

[sf2]

That Hot Toys Superman goes for about $200, and just released. You think that's too much, wait until about a year from now, it'll probably be $500 or more.

are u sure!!!??? then i gotta save and buy it now.

 

[sf2]

If they had just kept the trunks the suit would be completely perfect. Forgetting all that loyalty to the creators minefield, the trunks are aesthetically essential in my view because they break up the big blob of blue and create a costume that is easier on the eye. And I don't know about you guys but blue makes the er... bulge all the more noticeable. Forget history, the costume just LOOKS better with trunks. The MOS costume is good but not as good as it could have been, which is a shame.

exactly!!!
n i believe a lot will think the same.

Kind of beating a dead horse here, but what the hell...

[URL="http://www.tencentticker.com/projectrooftop/2011/10/26/pr-approved-karl-heitmeullers-superman-comic-strip-for-back-issue-magazine/"]http://www.tencentticker.com/projectrooftop/2011/10/26/pr-approved-karl-heitmeullers-superman-comic-strip-for-back-issue-magazine/[/URL]

i see the fire is coming!

 

[Kurosawa]

that's the reason i love this suit its the perfect combination of all the best incarnations of batman this is and forever shall be "my" batman

i would have said "i like it" just like i did with cavills as soon as i saw the flat shield i was on board

That is awesome, way better than any of the hideous movie costumes.

Because one usually follows the other, from my experience. People who hate the trunks also want Superman to be a disguise, have him weak and dumb, want him to kill, whatever... There's a pattern here. And then they hate the Krypto, the Terra-Man and Vartox, the worst sins of them all

Hating the trunks is a symptom of a sickness, the sickness of having no respect for classic Superman. Other symptoms are the ones you've mentioned, along with a few others.

Imo, this is the nexus of contention.

I presume we all agree that S&S and the early writers intended Supes to be a serious and impressive figure – heroic, noble, dashing, brave, romantic, etc. These, I submit, are the “core concepts” of the character. And to reflect this, Supes was depicted as/doing (pardon the abstraction) x, y and z. So far, so good. But times change – including, perhaps, how x, y and z are interpreted by audiences. That’s to say, they may not be serving the “core concepts” as they once did. So then the question becomes: is our allegiance to x, y and z or to the “core concepts”? In a modern context, perhaps it would be more faithful to the original "core concepts" to substitute a, b and c. And someone who might make that suggestion is not necessarily trying to subvert anything. Indeed, they might have their focus firmly fixed on the real issue/challenge.

True allegiance to Superman is marked by favoring the core concepts that were consistent from 1938-1986, along with the few concepts that were kept post-1986. IMO.

I'd say that's reasonable. But it begs the question of where the line should be drawn before Superman changes so much as to become unrecognizable. And I'm not saying the loss of the trunks goes beyond that line.

Usually it starts somewhere-no trunks, Clark as the real identity, etc, then snowballs until what you have is support for versions of Superman that just have never worked.

 

[DoomsdayApex]

I honestly wonder on how people would have responded if the costume had ended up looking something more like this?

I wouldn't mind Superman wearing something similar to this, however, my only gripe is it appears that Kal-El is wearing a miniskirt from afar.

 

[DoomsdayApex]

That is awesome, way better than any of the hideous movie costumes.

Severely disagree. Nolan's Batsuits have been stellar and impressive.

Hating the trunks is a symptom of a sickness, the sickness of having no respect for classic Superman. Other symptoms are the ones you've mentioned, along with a few others.

Hating the trunks is a sickness? That's enormously hyperbolic.

Exactly, this isn't YOUR classic Superman/Kal-El. This is Snyder's & Nolan's Superman. And I, for one, commend their hard work. They're actually giving Superman testicles in this film -- something that Kal has lacked for years.

 

[camp Blood]

Well, here's a smaller version of the picture that was posted on the last page.

did quick manip with stronger colors

 

[Laufey]

Hating the trunks is a symptom of a sickness, the sickness of having no respect for classic Superman. Other symptoms are the ones you've mentioned, along with a few others.

You may be too far up their ass to get this, but I think both Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster would find you laughable, had they ever read that comment. There's no "sickness" here man and even using a word like that makes it clear that you have absolutely no respect or understanding of anyone here that doesn't share your ridiculous opinion. To be perfectly honest, someone like you shouldn't be allowed to be a member here. I really wish a moderator would put your membership here to an end so that you can go back to whatever life you have outside of this and clear us from any more hateful and idiotic comments like that.

Seriously, grow the **** up.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Shuster

 

[Kurosawa]

Severely disagree. Nolan's Batsuits have been stellar and impressive.

I personally think every single live action Batman costume has been horrible.

Hating the trunks is a sickness? That's enormously hyperbolic.

Not a sickness, a symptom. The sickness is having no respect for classic Superman.

Exactly, this isn't YOUR classic Superman/Kal-El. This is Snyder's & Nolan's Superman. And I, for one, commend their hard work. They're actually giving Superman testicles in this film -- something that Kal has lacked for years.

Not MY classic Superman. Siegel and Shuster's classic Superman. And I'd rather see Superman based in their vision than in Snyder and/or Nolan. If they want to give the real Superman respect and show his creators respect, their first priority will be keeping it as true to their vision as possible.

 

[DoomsdayApex]

I personally think every single live action Batman costume has been horrible.

Not a sickness, a symptom. The sickness is having no respect for classic Superman.

Not MY classic Superman. Siegel and Shuster's classic Superman. And I'd rather see Superman based in their vision than in Snyder and/or Nolan. If they want to give the real Superman respect and show his creators respect, their first priority will be keeping it as true to their vision as possible.

It appears to me that you're suffering symptoms relating to an obsessive purist ideology.

The trunks are a meaningless piece of cloth. They are not symbolic, in any form.

As it's been uttered, grow up the **** up.

 

[I Am The Knight]

You may be too far up their ass to get this, but I think both Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster would find you laughable, had they ever read that comment. There's no "sickness" here man and even using a word like that makes it clear that you have absolutely no respect or understanding of anyone here that doesn't share your ridiculous opinion. To be perfectly honest, someone like you shouldn't be allowed to be a member here. I really wish a moderator would put your membership here to an end so that you can go back to whatever life you have outside of this and clear us from any more hateful and idiotic comments like that.

Seriously, grow the **** up.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Shuster

Agreed. This crazyness...It's too much.