The Official Costume Thread - - - - - - - - - - - Part 20

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]368703[/split]

 

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]365421[/split]

 

[KyleDW2]

The trunks break up the blue, and just as importantly, serve the cause of modesty. Having a grown man's package on the big screen 10 feet tall is just ewwwwwwww.

Funny, I just asked two girls where their eyes went to with the Brandon Routh pic a few pages back. They immediately said his...guy stuff. They said the red drew their attention more to that area.

And for the record, I didn't lead them at all. I just asked, "Where does your eye go." That's all.

 

[camp Blood]

hundreds of pages about the same topic, I think by now we know where everybody stands in this issue and that's where thier opinion will stay

it's beyond beating s dead horse it's now beating the ground the dead horse rotted down into and the bat has worn to a stub

 

[craigdbfan]

That's a good way of putting it.

 

[herolee10]

I just want to see it in motion and professionally photographed for official release before I can say anything more about it.

I mean, when I first saw the new spiderman costume with the photos taken from fans that were on the exterior set locations, it didn't look that flattering at all, but when I saw those EW and officially released pictures, I was impressed with it.

 

[Krypto]

This is Why Zack doesn't want his superman wearing red underwear.....LOL

 

[Dr.]

The trunks break up the blue, and just as importantly, serve the cause of modesty. Having a grown man's package on the big screen 10 feet tall is just ewwwwwwww.

There are at least a few superheroes who opt for the “leotard sans trunks” look. Spider-Man, the Flash and Captain Marvel come to mind (and I assume there’s more). Presumably, you reserve your “ewwwwwwww” ridicule for them as well.

For live action translations, it seems common to “fit” these outfits (e.g. Spider-Man) slightly differently and add some extra thickness to the fabric. Thus, they end up looking more like form-fitting jumpsuits/wetsuits than the clingy “pantyhose” that you illustrated with your ballet dancer pic.

 

[Comics N' Toons]

Still think would have been better to incorporate a more efficient belt design that better breaks up all the blue. A redesigned yellow belt with some semblance of red trunks might have been better than this:

 

[hopefuldreamer]

The trunks break up the blue, and just as importantly, serve the cause of modesty. Having a grown man's package on the big screen 10 feet tall is just ewwwwwwww.

We're dealing with a director who's last comic book adaption featured a naked blue man with his package often fully visible... I really don't see what's so revealing about a tight suit of thick fabric with padding.

Snyder doesn't care about old fashioned shame in that sense - he's very open with bodies in general in his films.

And personally, I don't think there's anything 'ewwww' about it.

That's kind of your issue if the sight of a man's crotch area is disgusting to you.

 

[camp Blood]

I like that as well

 

[Crazymaverick]

My idea for the new suit. (I added red around the yellow belt)

(Original image created by fanboiii.)



Here's another stab at it:

(Original art by Brohawk posted at deviantart)



This one's by camp Blood:

 

[Superhero 101]

i like it.

 

[Crazymaverick]

tks bro!

 

[moviedoors]

We're dealing with a director who's last comic book adaption featured a naked blue man with his package often fully visible... I really don't see what's so revealing about a tight suit of thick fabric with padding.

Snyder doesn't care about old fashioned shame in that sense - he's very open with bodies in general in his films.

And personally, I don't think there's anything 'ewwww' about it.

That's kind of your issue if the sight of a man's crotch area is disgusting to you.

Truth. Trunks or not, there was always going to be immature viewers who focused on his crotch and went "eww!!!"

There will always be men terrified of even the idea of a penis that isn't their own.

 

[Nevaratoiel]

I still don't like the Man Of Steel suit, but I think if they want to change the suit, just change everything about it. Not just removing that piece of cloth around his crotch. I don't care anymore really. It's just an ugly suit, looks like it's been on the shelf for way too many years.

 

[Kurosawa]

There are at least a few superheroes who opt for the “leotard sans trunks” look. Spider-Man, the Flash and Captain Marvel come to mind (and I assume there’s more). Presumably, you reserve your “ewwwwwwww” ridicule for them as well.

For live action translations, it seems common to “fit” these outfits (e.g. Spider-Man) slightly differently and add some extra thickness to the fabric. Thus, they end up looking more like form-fitting jumpsuits/wetsuits than the clingy “pantyhose” that you illustrated with your ballet dancer pic.

Spider-Man's costume is designed in such a way that it doesn't draw the eye to there. Nor does Captain Marvel's, because the belt is more like a sash, the cape and boots are more ornate, and he has the gauntlets-which they tried to copy with the MOS costume to a degree. With Flash, the mask and the lightning bolt lines draw the eye. And even with the DCnU Superman costume, there is enough going on that he just looks like Superman without trunks. The DCnU costume, while lame, is actually better than the MOS costume because of the belt. But the MOS costume is the classic costume with the trunks gone and all that midriff silliness instead...it was a good try, but that's all it is.

And yes, I know Snyder's last movie featured a huge blue dong as well. That's why people were laughing every time Dr. Manhattan appeared on screen when I went to see it, and another poster who attended a viewing in NYC, of all places, actually saw people get up and leave the theater. Which I didn't care about it in Watchmen, as it is not for children and any adult that would take their kid to see it is a poor parent anyway, IMO, but Superman is different. you should be able to take your kids to see a Superman movie.

 

[moviedoors]

And yes, I know Snyder's last movie featured a huge blue dong as well. That's why people were laughing every time Dr. Manhattan appeared on screen when I went to see it, and another poster who attended a viewing in NYC, of all places, actually saw people get up and leave the theater. Which I didn't care about it in Watchmen, as it is not for children and any adult that would take their kid to see it is a poor parent anyway, IMO, but Superman is different. you should be able to take your kids to see a Superman movie.

You seriously think this costume makes Superman inappropriate for children? Really?

 

[Ryudoz]

You seriously think this costume makes Superman inappropriate for children? Really?

No, he's merely saying that the costume is a good try at replacing the trunks with something else but ultimately fails to accomplish it's goal. He was merely using Dr. Manhattan's example in the larger scope of Watchmen as being faithful to the translation with the content on the whole not being very family/kid friendly. Whereas he feels a Superman movie should be for everyone, not just adults.

Personally I think the costume is okay. Nothing mind blowing, but nothing sacrilegious. There are elements that I like (the texture, the cape attachment, as well as the shield) and elements I don't (the midriff detailing, non-existent belt). While I've never particularly cared for the trunks, I think this design is definitely lacking an element of color around his midsection. If the detailing were another color, it'd be more pleasing to the eye, but as it stands I'd call this along a similar vein: a nice try, but it falls a little short.

Either way I think this will work fine within the context of this film. It's not a deal breaker for me, but I think the suit could be better.

 

[moviedoors]

No, he's merely saying that the costume is a good try at replacing the trunks with something else but ultimately fails to accomplish it's goal. He was merely using Dr. Manhattan's example in the larger scope of Watchmen as being faithful to the translation with the content on the whole not being very family/kid friendly. Whereas he feels a Superman movie should be for everyone, not just adults.

Personally I think the costume is okay. Nothing mind blowing, but nothing sacrilegious. There are elements that I like (the texture, the cape attachment, as well as the shield) and elements I don't (the midriff detailing, non-existent belt). While I've never particularly cared for the trunks, I think this design is definitely lacking an element of color around his midsection. If the detailing were another color, it'd be more pleasing to the eye, but as it stands I'd call this along a similar vein: a nice try, but it falls a little short.

Either way I think this will work fine within the context of this film. It's not a deal breaker for me, but I think the suit could be better.

Well, those are more reasonable critiques than "Crotch! EWWW!!!"

 

[souperman]

I think the superhero outfits were developed and depicted as they were for several reasons.

In order to depict a muscular strong body the artists needed to show the anatomy of the body and muscles and often drew nude figures and simply "colored on" clothing of some interesting design.

Burn Hogarth (Tarzan) comes to mind. It is an efficient way to show strength and physical power in a graphic way. If they were say clothed in loose outfits, they would still be a Superman of course, but we would have to remember that rather than viserly sense it by seeing the powerful form.

It would be very difficult to achieve this practically and UN-laughibly in a realistic film without "painting" on the suit. With some characters this works, Mystique comes to mind. Also very tight fitting spandex or rubber works for certain applications but have their own issues.

I guess it depends on the level of realism the filmmakers are trying for.

 

[KRIM]

You seriously think this costume makes Superman inappropriate for children? Really?

I can't wait until 2013 rolls around as the film releases. People are coming back from the theaters raving about the awesome visuals; the flying, the super strength, the destruction, etc.

And then a select few pop into the discussion: "Yeah that's cool and all but did you guys see Supes' blue crotch?! "

 

[moviedoors]

I can't wait until 2013 rolls around as the film releases. People are coming back from the theaters raving about the awesome visuals; the flying, the super strength, the destruction, etc.

And then a select few pop into the discussion: "Yeah that's cool and all but did you guys see Supes' blue crotch?! "

Ain't the truth. They'll always be there!

 

[TruerToTheCore]

The difference between Spider-Man and Superman is also that both move totally differently. And they pose differently. Superman is the guy who's classic image is to stand strong and straight, imposing. This naturally exposes THAT area more to the viewer than crouching Spidey.

 

[KRIM]

In any case, I'm confident persons of lingering eyes are in the very small minority of those that will likely forget about the costume altogether while watching the film.