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

[batman44]

Cavill kinda poked fun at his MOS costume.

As for Leno, well this isn't the first time he made laughs at Superheroes and he's a comedian, so it's his job to poke fun of stuff. Though, I admit I screamed at the screen saying it's not underpants Leno, they're trunks.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

The first of the many snarky interviews where the classic costume is riduculed. Not Cavill's fault-he has to play along-but seeing idiots like Leno make fun of the classic costume and in effect, Siegel and Shuster (not that an idiot like Leno even knows who they were) is typically disgusting.

I hate people.

Yeah I kind of hated that too... and TBH, i'm surprised he didn't defend it. He's usually so careful to make everything he says sound neutral, so I was expecting him to play along with the joke and then say 'No, but the old suit was classic, it's just this is just the new take' or something.

Feel bad for immortals for the complete lack of 'woo' at the picture, but I loved that clip.

The set for that battle had really interesting visual dynamics. I'm genuinely quite excited to see it.

 

[manofsteel4life]

I had feeling some people were gonna jump on Leno for saying that.....but then again , if he had the classic on I don't think he would have made that comment. I think he was simply tryna get people going with the new look, by using that joke ofcourse.

 

[epc11223]

The first of the many snarky interviews where the classic costume is riduculed. Not Cavill's fault-he has to play along-but seeing idiots like Leno make fun of the classic costume and in effect, Siegel and Shuster (not that an idiot like Leno even knows who they were) is typically disgusting.

I hate people.

as a superman fan, you should really let more things go. leno is entitled to his own opinions and he isn't the only one of the general audience who feels that it's silly to have the trunks on the outside of the costume. creators themselves are fine at poking fun of themselves. while you're entitled to get offended, but it's ok to poke fun at yourself on not take everything so seriously. to say "i hate people" while i'm sure you don't mean it literally, is a very un superman like thing to say lol. for all we know siegel and shuster could respond with "yea, it is a bit silly to have the trunks on the outside; but thats what was popular for the times!!" but say these things in a light hearted manner.

leno doesn't care who created superman as he's apart of the general audience who really doesn't care about superheroes. people who go see these movies want to be entertained and it is only the extreme fans who are picking apart the costume to every little detail. when leno displayed cavill as superman, there was a pretty good reception and that is what the creators of the movie are looking for. overall approval is something they are seeking and not just from the comic book fans. they are trying to respect the comic book fans while also creating a version of superman that will be overall accepted. the creators are meaning no disrespect to the fans. leno is a comedian and of course he's going to poke fun at something that most deem silly. thats why there was a reaction of laughter to the joke. that's the exact reason why they are trying to evolve superman and not keep him stagnant. they're not making superman an evil scientist/mad man like his original concept, they're just adapting his costume to modern times.

 

[epc11223]

I had feeling some people were gonna jump on Leno for saying that.....but then again , if he had the classic on I don't think he wouldn't have made that comment. I think he was simply tryna get people going with the new look, by using that joke ofcourse.

yea, i agree. some people take things way too seriously!

 

[Rev]

In reference to the bolded part of your message...

It's not always about the money a movie has made, its also about the money a sequel could make...

Superman is a much more iconic figure in the rest of the world than Batman is, and BB really took off with DVD sales



The argument is still about money. There was no sequel because the studio KNEW the next movie would be less profitable.
One of my pet peeves is so many movies are simply set-ups for sequels and trilogies, instead of stand-alone films. While SR was a bad movie, it was PAINFULLY obvious it was just being used to bridge the gap between the previous franchise and the next one.


Also, SR benefited from being released AFTER BB ushered in a new era of superhero movies. Also, according to thenumbers.com, BB still outperformed SR in domestic box office, DESPITE being released in approximately 10% fewer theaters...


http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/2006/SPRMN.php


http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/2005/BAT5.php

Also, SR returns was released domestically AND worldwide at the same time, BB was released worldwide 19 days AFTER it was released domestically.

I thought that Superman Returns was staggered in its release due to Pirates and also the World Cup?

 

[Kurosawa]

as a superman fan, you should really let more things go. leno is entitled to his own opinions and he isn't the only one of the general audience who feels that it's silly to have the trunks on the outside of the costume. creators themselves are fine at poking fun of themselves. while you're entitled to get offended, but it's ok to poke fun at yourself on not take everything so seriously. to say "i hate people" while i'm sure you don't mean it literally, is a very un superman like thing to say lol. for all we know siegel and shuster could respond with "yea, it is a bit silly to have the trunks on the outside; but thats what was popular for the times!!" but say these things in a light hearted manner.

leno doesn't care who created superman as he's apart of the general audience who really doesn't care about superheroes. people who go see these movies want to be entertained and it is only the extreme fans who are picking apart the costume to every little detail. when leno displayed cavill as superman, there was a pretty good reception and that is what the creators of the movie are looking for. overall approval is something they are seeking and not just from the comic book fans. they are trying to respect the comic book fans while also creating a version of superman that will be overall accepted. the creators are meaning no disrespect to the fans. leno is a comedian and of course he's going to poke fun at something that most deem silly. thats why there was a reaction of laughter to the joke. that's the exact reason why they are trying to evolve superman and not keep him stagnant. they're not making superman an evil scientist/mad man like his original concept, they're just adapting his costume to modern times.

Nobody knows or cares who Siegel and Shuster were...and that's just the way WB/DC wants it.

 

[Lencho01]

Conan would've probably busted out a new The Flaming C clip.

 

[moviedoors]

The first of the many snarky interviews where the classic costume is riduculed. Not Cavill's fault-he has to play along-but seeing idiots like Leno make fun of the classic costume and in effect, Siegel and Shuster (not that an idiot like Leno even knows who they were) is typically disgusting.

I hate people.

That's why you hate people? Not bigotry or genocide, but because a comedian poked fun at Superman's trunks?

 

[afan]

No problem with Leno's remarks, he's a comedian, it's his job to try and be funny.
I had a problem with Cavill's remark tho.

 

[Kurosawa]

One thing is for certain: this is a decent example of initial reaction-not "Oh wow, Superman is a great icon of American pop culture", but "hey, let's laugh at the stupid comic book characters". And all the crap they've done in comics and they are doing in movies to try to stop this attitude is not working one bit-and never will.

That's why they shouldn't run from Superman being what he is, but instead they should embrace it and tell people to ****ing deal with it.

 

[moviedoors]

embrace it and tell people to ****ing deal with it.

The irony.

 

[Superman_200]

I don't think anyone except comic book fans would care about something like what Jay Leno said. Superman fans (from movies, or the internet or people who have heard of the character and seen some of Smallville, or the Reeves movies, etc) wouldn't care either. I don't think they'd care at least. Only the Superman and comic book fans who truly like the character more than the average "Superman fan" would be offended or even catch that he said underpants. I didn't catch or care now that I realized it.

 

[Vagosnati]

Nobody knows or cares who Siegel and Shuster were...and that's just the way WB/DC wants it.

In EVERY project SUPERMAN evolved,has allways the : superman created by jerry Siegel and joe Shuster.Everybody knows who they was.Even the little kids.

 

[epc11223]

Nobody knows or cares who Siegel and Shuster were...and that's just the way WB/DC wants it.

well one, wb/dc are in a legal battle with siegel and shuster so of course they don't want people to know them. from the little that i know, seems like the heirs are just being greedy; but that's a separate issue. two, i'm curious what you're favorite show is? do you really analyze and obsess over who created the show? is it really that important who creates something as long as you enjoy the product? if you don't like the current product, then find something else to enjoy, or re read/watch the movies/television that you do enjoy. but the current creators are doing nothing wrong by trying to update/cater to new fans and try to reinvigorate the product.

 

[Kurosawa]

well one, wb/dc are in a legal battle with siegel and shuster so of course they don't want people to know them. from the little that i know, seems like the heirs are just being greedy; but that's a separate issue. two, i'm curious what you're favorite show is? do you really analyze and obsess over who created the show? is it really that important who creates something as long as you enjoy the product? if you don't like the current product, then find something else to enjoy, or re read/watch the movies/television that you do enjoy. but the current creators are doing nothing wrong by trying to update/cater to new fans and try to reinvigorate the product.

Show? As in TV show? Currently, or of all time?

I always keep track of the creative staff in anything that I have an interest in. My current favorite shows are the Clone Wars animated series and The Walking Dead on AMC. My favorite show of all time is M*A*S*H.

 

[camp Blood]

mine is the venture bros

spartacus blood and sand is a very close second

 

[KyleDW2]

Show? As in TV show? Currently, or of all time?

I always keep track of the creative staff in anything that I have an interest in. My current favorite shows are the Clone Wars animated series and The Walking Dead on AMC. My favorite show of all time is M*A*S*H.

Wait. Wait wait wait wait wait. Wait.

Your favorite show is MASH? The same MASH that starred Alan Alda as Hawkeye Pierce? That MASH, right? Because if so, then you might just be the biggest hypocrite on the Internet. You constantly talk about how the original creator's intent should be followed to the letter, and yet you cite MASH as your favorite show of all time. Okay, let's look at that.

Richard Hornberger, writer of the book which MASH is based on, who himself was the inspiration for the character of Hawkeye Pierce, is a staunchly conservative Republican. That's how he was written in the book. Yet in the show he was...well, Alan Alda. The producers of the MASH TV series basically changed everything that Hornberger wrote of Hawkeye in order to create the show. Doesn't that bother you? No? Well, let's go further.

Spearchucker was cut from the show. Henry Blake gets killed. Hot Lips becomes much more mellow. And the tone of the show becomes much more melancholy and serious, focusing on anti-war themes. Again, the book's writer was not anti-war. Exactly the opposite, in fact. That should bother you, shouldn't it? I mean, the creator of the book's wishes weren't followed!

And you complain about removing some underpants. Your favorite show of all time completely changed everything its original writer wanted from it. And yet, for all that, the show still became one of the greatest, most beloved shows of all time. So we can learn two lessons from it. One: change is not bad. Change should be tried. Change can turn out great. Two: sometimes the orignal creator can be wrong. Or, if not wrong, can have a great idea that can be improved upon by others. Improvements like, say, changing the character of Hawkeye to make him more compelling, or removing parts of a modern costume that have become anachronistic over time.

 

[TheDragonator]

. Wait wait wait wait wait. Wait.

Your favorite show is MASH? The same MASH that starred as Hawkeye Pierce? That MASH, right? Because if so, then you might just be the biggest hypocrite on the Internet. You constantly talk about how the original creator's intent should be followed to the letter, and yet you cite MASH as your favorite show of all time. Okay, let's look at that.

Richard Hornberger, writer of the which MASH is based on, who himself was the inspiration for the character of Hawkeye Pierce, is a staunchly conservative Republican. That's how he was written in the . Yet in the show he was...well, Alan Alda. The producers of the MASH TV series basically changed everything that Hornberger wrote of Hawkeye in order to create the show. Doesn't that bother you? No? Well, let's go further.

Spearchucker was cut from the show. Henry Blake gets killed. Hot Lips becomes much more mellow. And the of the show becomes much more melancholy and serious, focusing on anti-war themes. Again, the book's writer was not anti-war. Exactly the opposite, in fact. That should bother you, shouldn't it? I mean, the creator of the book's wishes weren't followed!

And you complain about removing some underpants. Your favorite show of all time completely changed everything its original writer wanted from it. And yet, for all that, the show still became one of the greatest, most beloved shows of all time. So we can learn two lessons from it. One: change is not bad. Change should be tried. Change can turn out great. Two: sometimes the orignal creator can be wrong. Or, if not wrong, can have a great idea that can be improved upon by others. Improvements like, say, changing the character of Hawkeye to make him more compelling, or removing parts of a modern costume that have become anachronistic over time.

 

[TheDragonator]

He's probably just going to say something like 'But MASH isn't Superman' or some bullcrap as an excuse, though.

 

[El Payaso]

The faces I'll give you, and there is plenty I find annoying about Maguire's portrayal.

But it's hardly his fault that you don't like a line or idea in the script.

Point for you, h.s.

The first of the many snarky interviews where the classic costume is riduculed. Not Cavill's fault-he has to play along-but seeing idiots like Leno make fun of the classic costume and in effect, Siegel and Shuster (not that an idiot like Leno even knows who they were) is typically disgusting.

I hate people.

But... but... you had predicted that people around the world were going to rididule the NEW suit because it had no trunks...

what went wrong?

 

[hopefuldreamer]

Point for you, h.s.

Yay! Do points make prizes.

 

[Scuba]

Longtime lurker, haven't posted before.


The new costume rocks. The trunks debate was going on for so long that it would have been like they weren't moving forward without abandoning them. Now it looks modern, stream-lined, and badass. Bravo.


Regarding Superman Returns, I loved the film initially but, as most here have noted, it suffers upon repeated viewings. The movie is sloooowww. However, I do think it was the right movie for that period in Superman's history. The character (on many levels, apparently) wasn't ready to move on yet, so we got the next-best thing: an homage. But I'm glad they're ditching its costume and going for the complete reverse (especially the more natural hair -- it looks way better).


By the way, this thread is endlessly entertaining thanks to Kurosawa's fundamentalistic take on the mythos. And I mean that in the best possible way. Love the passion.

 

[nikdavies15]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurosawa

"embrace it and tell people to ****ing deal with it.

Reply:
Orginally Posted by Moviedoors

"The irony."

______________________


Love it...!!

 

[Krumm]

Longtime lurker, haven't posted before.


The new costume rocks. The trunks debate was going on for so long that it would have been like they weren't moving forward without abandoning them. Now it looks modern, stream-lined, and badass. Bravo.


Regarding Superman Returns, I loved the film initially but, as most here have noted, it suffers upon repeated viewings. The movie is sloooowww. However, I do think it was the right movie for that period in Superman's history. The character (on many levels, apparently) wasn't ready to move on yet, so we got the next-best thing: an homage. But I'm glad they're ditching its costume and going for the complete reverse (especially the more natural hair -- it looks way better).


By the way, this thread is endlessly entertaining thanks to Kurosawa's fundamentalistic take on the mythos. And I mean that in the best possible way. Love the passion.

Welcome!