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

[souperman]

Hey I'm all for keeping the trunks too, BUT the way you worded that is funny.

When someone says something "wasn't that bad", its almost an insult.

I'm going to say that about my girl's outfit tonight before we go out. Wish me luck.

duck and cover man...

 

[JBElliott]

While neither really makes sense, the trunks make more sense than the cape does. Capes don't really appear on "modern" superhero costumes these days. On the other hand, even Mr. Incredible's new costume had trunks.

 

[Kurosawa]

Souperman has really hit the nail on the head above.

The trunks derived from the original incarnation of Superman, drawn at a time when circus strongmen and musclemen wore trunks. Thus, that 'look' was seen as quite masculine, especially on a character who at the time was known primarily for his superstrength and stamina.

In modern culture though, it's come full circle. Trunks on top of leggings/trousers/etc look ridiculous and don't promote masculinity at all. If anything, they're the opposite ......... and imply a certain effeminacy and campness.

I get the argument that the trunks are part of Superman's traditional look, and some people are just totally opposed to changing that. But IMO, things like this - in films/comics/whatever - have to change, and have to move on. And they have to be relevant to modern culture and fashion. If they aren't, then they run the risk of alienating the audience and the item in question will either hold no interest for them, or become a running joke.

Superman as a character has been around for a long time now, and for all we know he could still be here in another 100 years. You can't honestly put your head in the sand and expect him to go forever with no costume updates or changes? We have to be open to change, provided that the change is a positive one and doesn't completely alter or ruin the fundamental aspects of the original concept.

If anything, we should be thankful that Snyder & co have managed to modernise Superman's look, add much more detail to the costume, and still have it looking instantly recognisable as Superman's outfit. They haven't bastardised it completely, unlike some of the concepts put forth whilst Warner were trying to knock together a Superman film over the 90s and early 00s.

So a belly ring and a tramp stamp is more masculine than a pair of trunks? In what world does that make sense?

It would make sense if his name was SuperSKANK, but not for SuperMAN.

 

[souperman]

So a belly ring and a tramp stamp is more masculine than a pair of trunks? In what world does that make sense?

It would make sense if his name was SuperSKANK, but not for SuperMAN.

I didn't see any belly ring or tramp stamp... but we still have 2 years to go!

Why don't we all just be happy that they kept the blue and red outfit and tried to make it look more serious by nixing the trunks. They COULD have gone the old standby for making a comic book character legit by putting him in black leather...again!

How lazy is that?

 

[souperman]

While neither really makes sense, the trunks make more sense than the cape does. Capes don't really appear on "modern" superhero costumes these days. On the other hand, even Mr. Incredible's new costume had trunks.

true... but that's a cartoon as well...

 

[Nevaratoiel]

On the other hand, even Mr. Incredible's new costume had trunks.

Now, that did look ridiculous! t:

 

[Kurosawa]

I didn't see any belly ring or tramp stamp... but we still have 2 years to go!

Why don't we all just be happy that they kept the blue and red outfit and tried to make it look more serious by nixing the trunks. They COULD have gone the old standby for making a comic book character legit by putting him in black leather...again!

How lazy is that?

If the movie is great I'll look past the crappy costume. It's what I've done with Nolan's terrible Batsuits.

 

[souperman]

that's the best we mortal men and women can do.

Maybe we should invent film goggles. Sort a like beer goggles, only you wear them for movies you may be disappointed with... or we can just drink the beer first and everything will be alright.

 

[moviedoors]

So a belly ring and a tramp stamp is more masculine than a pair of trunks? In what world does that make sense?

It would make sense if his name was SuperSKANK, but not for SuperMAN.

Ridiculous, hyperbolic response #723...

Haven't you been told to knock it off with the tramp stamp crap too? We don't get "panties," you don't get "tramp stamp."

 

[Vagosnati]

If the movie is great I'll look past the crappy costume. It's what I've done with Nolan's terrible Batsuits.

Mate,you have terrible taste on costumes.

 

[Kurosawa]

Mate,you have terrible taste on costumes.

Actually, I have excellent taste in costumes. Every single live action Batman costume has been ugly as hell for various reasons. A lot of Batman fans dislike the Nolan Batman costumes.

 

[Compi716]

Mate,you have terrible taste on costumes.

Actually, I have excellent taste in costumes. Every single live action Batman costume has been ugly as hell for various reasons. A lot of Batman fans dislike the Nolan Batman costumes.

Now this is what the Internet is all about. Two polar opposites coming banging against each other. When an unstoppable force meets an immovable object.

 

[Dr.]

For the most part, capes are quite impractical. But many seem to agree that they often look “cool.” I’m not sure you could say the same (“impractical – but very cool!”) about trunks.

 

[souperman]

What he said ^^^

Actually, I have excellent taste in costumes. Every single live action Batman costume has been ugly as hell for various reasons. A lot of Batman fans dislike the Nolan Batman costumes.

All had their "issues" for sure, but at least Nolans makes sense from a plausibility stand point.

Not sure how much protection (body armor as is was referred to in the film) that cowl was for Keaton being easily ripped for a tender reveal for CatWoman. , not to mention Keaton's plausibility who doesn't exactly spark fear in the hearts of men... but...it worked for the times

 

[Superwoman Prime]

Actually, I have excellent taste in costumes. Every single live action Batman costume has been ugly as hell for various reasons. A lot of Batman fans dislike the Nolan Batman costumes.

You don't even like the '89 Keaton costume?

 

[hopefuldreamer]

So a belly ring and a tramp stamp is more masculine than a pair of trunks? In what world does that make sense?

It would make sense if his name was SuperSKANK, but not for SuperMAN.

Ridiculous, hyperbolic response #723...

Haven't you been told to knock it off with the tramp stamp crap too? We don't get "panties," you don't get "tramp stamp."

Exactly, thank you!

I'm really tired of Kuro being as offensive as he likes about the new suit, but expecting some kind of special treatment in regards to the vocabulary his opposition is allowed.


Neither Tramp, nor Skank are particularly nice words, and are both much more offensive than anything I have ever seen an anti trunks crusader say.


Besides, I feel I sufficiently proved that it is illogical to refer to piping designs running down the back AND side of his suit as a 'tramp stamp', when that terms specifically describes a lower back tattoo most commonly seen on women, of ANY design. And it's even a derogatory term for THAT! Let alone for a costume worn by Superman.

 

[Superwoman Prime]

What he said ^^^




All had their "issues" for sure, but at least Nolans makes sense from a plausibility stand point.

Not sure how much protection (body armor as is was referred to in the film) that cowl was for Keaton being easily ripped for a tender reveal for CatWoman. , not to mention Keaton's plausibility who doesn't exactly spark fear in the hearts of men... but...it worked for the times

If I saw Keaton's Batman at the end of a dark alley coming toward me, I'd be more frightened than if I saw Bale's Batman crouching like Gollum on some rooftop.

Keaton's costume set his body into a very confident posture and movement.

 

[souperman]

edit

 

[souperman]

If I saw Keaton's Batman at the end of a dark alley coming toward me, I'd be more frightened than if I saw Bale's Batman crouching like Gollum on some rooftop.

Keaton's costume set his body into a very confident posture and movement.

That's just because Keaton is CRAZY...

I personally wouldn't be as fraidy scared of a 5 foot 9 inch bat as a 6 foot 1 inch bat... but then again, anyone wearing a bat suit in an alley at midnight deserves a wide birth, unless you've got your big spoon.


But Keaton's costume did not allow ANY neck movement and his eyes did not always end up in the middle of the mask. That costume sparked the "Batman" neck description for people with ruptured disks!

But I loved it at the time...

Beatlejuice,Beatlejuice,Beatlejuice

 

[souperman]

Exactly, thank you!

I'm really tired of Kuro being as offensive as he likes about the new suit, but expecting some kind of special treatment in regards to the vocabulary his opposition is allowed.


Neither Tramp, nor Skank are particularly nice words, and are both much more offensive than anything I have ever seen an anti trunks crusader say.


Besides, I feel I sufficiently proved that it is illogical to refer to piping designs running down the back AND side of his suit as a 'tramp stamp', when that terms specifically describes a lower back tattoo most commonly seen on women, of ANY design. And it's even a derogatory term for THAT! Let alone for a costume worn by Superman.

HERE, HERE! ...

Where, where?

 

[SuperMike335!!]

If I saw Keaton's Batman at the end of a dark alley coming toward me, I'd be more frightened than if I saw Bale's Batman crouching like Gollum on some rooftop.

Keaton's costume set his body into a very confident posture and movement.

That whole crouching thing killed me, it looks like a dog squatting to take a dumb, and it is indicative of everything wrong with the Nolan Batman films. There is no real visual art in his films the way Burton’s style really made great a Batman visual. BTAS had better Batman visuals than Nolan’s style.

The crouching Gargoyle look seems silly next to the Vampire like Gowned black Silhouette of what Batman ought to look like if you should cross him. I don’t see how that squating dog gargoyle helped the Nolan religion of realism. That and the Batman's voice sounds like he is having trouble taking a dump to.

I don’t care how popular Nolan’s movies were. Argumentum ad Populum is all that boils down to.

His obsession with realism completely throwing out all of the Sci-Fi elements of the Batman mythos, and the stunning visuals it should have to. Why the obsession with realism? Because Batman does not have any powers? That means everything has to be realistic? Does realistic mean visually lame? I’d take the 1989 Batmobile in a heartbeat over that eyesore in the Nolan movies. Stealthy creature of the night, rolling around in a fugly tank.

Nolan is a great story teller, I’ll give him that. The story in his movies does pull me in, but the obsession with realism killed it for me. He might think its his "realistic" approach that made his movies do well, but not as I see it. It’s the story telling ability. Now that he is wrapping up his series with an "ending" maybe we can get a Batman movie that looks right.

At least Snyder’s Superman makes me think "Superman"

Unlike Nolan’s catwoman. I hope that is not the final outfit.

It's realistic because of the glowing LED on the glasses. Everything "hi-tech" in the real world has glowing LED. Nolan you break from realism for THAT?! No we can't have Killer Croc or Clayface. Too unrealistic, but lets cram LED onto her night vision, or whatever that junk on her face is in broad daylight.

 

[Kurosawa]

You don't even like the '89 Keaton costume?

No, nor do I like the Adam West TV show costume.

Exactly, thank you!

I'm really tired of Kuro being as offensive as he likes about the new suit, but expecting some kind of special treatment in regards to the vocabulary his opposition is allowed.


Neither Tramp, nor Skank are particularly nice words, and are both much more offensive than anything I have ever seen an anti trunks crusader say.


Besides, I feel I sufficiently proved that it is illogical to refer to piping designs running down the back AND side of his suit as a 'tramp stamp', when that terms specifically describes a lower back tattoo most commonly seen on women, of ANY design. And it's even a derogatory term for THAT! Let alone for a costume worn by Superman.

1. I have him on my ignore list and didn't see his post, nor will I answer it
2. Offending a nobody movie costume designer is nothing compared to insulting Joe Shuster, Superman's co-creator without whom we wouldn't have the character in the first place.
3. Fans do not matter to me, not if they are for or against the trunks, and they shouldn't matter to anyone else either. All that should matter is the integrity of Superman as a character and for proper respect to be paid to his creators. In my mind, the MOS costume fails to pay the proper respect to Joe Shuster, as it changes the design that he created and he approved as changes were made in it until 1945, by which time the final design was settled. That and the designs on the sides and back are too elaborate for a costume that is very basic in every other aspect. Changing Superman's costume says to me that Shuster's costume is not good enough, and to me that assertion is unacceptable.

 

[I Am The Knight]

The Batman Returns batsuit is a thing of beauty, and Keaton looked killer in it.

 

[Kurosawa]

I'll dislike every live action Batman costume until they do one that isn't all black and has a cowl that looks good. If the Keaton costumes were dark gray or the Nolan Batsuits were dark gray, I'd like them fine.

I liked all the costumes on the TV show except Batman's, although it wasn't a serious show of course.

 

[Nevaratoiel]

All the Batman costumes I've seen (live action, that is) seem like he can't move around in it. They're highly impractical. He could learn a thing or two from Superman.

Black is good, but it seems more like a harness, like a knight in the middle ages...