Thread Manager
Moderator
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2011
- Messages
- 0
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 1
This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]357825[/split]
Don't hate on my terrible photoshop skills.I could nitpick that, but what the hell, it looks great. Let's go with something like that.
Maybe. Doesn't look purple on my laptop, but could be my laptop....That looks great...
maybe its my monitor but that blue looks a bit purple but still good
I could nitpick that, but what the hell, it looks great. Let's go with something like that.
Brighter blue, darker yellow, and tried to take some of the depth out of the shield.
It's a rich royal blue but not purple, at least not on my monitor.
The only argument for the traditional costume is the usual,
"Because that's the way it is, it's traditional, it's my cultural heritage, it's the way it is cuz it's the way it is. So there! Ha!"
:
Brighter blue, darker yellow, and tried to take some of the depth out of the shield.
Brighter blue, darker yellow, and tried to take some of the depth out of the shield.
- Zack Snyder's take on Watchmen and 300 made very little changes to their original depictions.
I don't see how you can say he was largely faithful to the character's looks in Watchmen. Just applying the standard that people have been doing in this thread, Nite Owl, Ozymandias, and Silk Specter are sacrilege. If a collar counts as a train wreck, then you can't say Synder was 100 percent faithful in Watchmen.
He's probably a troll and while I do agree with some of his preferences, I don't agree with most of his arguments. That said:Really? The only arguement?
Nothing in the way of:
Very very poor example, especially if you're arguing as to why superman won't be wearing armor. It worked for the film to an extent since they were clearly parodying modern superhero costumes....but it's not the best example. and on that note:- Zack Snyder's take on Watchmen and 300 made very little changes to their original depictions.
....soo basically he was true to the characters....except for the ones he wasn't true too. Gotcha.JAK®;20802847 said:Watchmen is a different thing because it's a standalone story and the characters are part of that story and nowhere else. They aren't brands like Superman, so their looks aren't iconic and are open to interpretation.
That said, he was true to the characters that did reach icon status; Rorschach, Dr. Manhattan and The Comedian.
Don't imagine then. There are plenty of examples that show it working just fine, including the latest Jim Lee JLA promo image. And don't give me crud about it not working in live action with the trunks either. Spider-man has been doing fine with nothing to cover his shame besides a skintight suit for years, and that will continue with the next movie.- It is incredibly difficult to imagine someone pulling off the crotch area with no trunks.
I have no idea if the people who want armor want it to somehow make Superman realistic...but for myself, I have no desire to make it so at all. Superman and his costume should be impractical and unrealistic....cause it's just who the character is.- The entire design is supposed to make Superman seem unbelievable. The more you make the costume 'realistic' the more people start to see him as just a man.
so u don't wear an underwear???He's probably a troll and while I do agree with some of his preferences, I don't agree with most of his arguments. That said:
Very very poor example, especially if you're arguing as to why superman won't be wearing armor. It worked for the film to an extent since they were clearly parodying modern superhero costumes....but it's not the best example. and on that note:
....soo basically he was true to the characters....except for the ones he wasn't true too. Gotcha.
Also, your argument about why they can be reinterpreted seems frankly reversed to me. Watchmen is a standalone story. Those characters are tied to that one story and so therefore their looks and characters are set in stone.
Superman is a character of serialized fiction. He's constantly growing and evolving as the lore is expanded and as such is dependent on his ability to remain relevant to continue. If anything, the Superman paradigm should be far FAR more open to reinterpretation than Watchmen ever should be.
Oh but what am I talking about.....there's only one true Superman and everything else should just be thrown out with the trash.
Don't imagine then. There are plenty of examples that show it working just fine, including the latest Jim Lee JLA promo image. And don't give me crud about it not working in live action with the trunks either. Spider-man has been doing fine with nothing to cover his shame besides a skintight suit for years, and that will continue with the next movie.
I have no idea if the people who want armor want it to somehow make Superman realistic...but for myself, I have no desire to make it so at all. Superman and his costume should be impractical and unrealistic....cause it's just who the character is.
I just want the silly outdated underwear gone.
so u don't wear an underwear???
i bet all the underwear companies gonna bankcrupt soon.
Personally I've never read the graphic novel, so I suppose I shouldn't be commenting until I have on it, but so many people have said that he translated the comics basically panel by panel, and was very visually faithful that I just assumed that was the case. Especially when there was a naked blue guy in the film, which I would have expected them to cover up if they weren't being faithul.
It's a rich royal blue but not purple, at least not on my monitor.
My understanding is that Moore intended Watchmen to be (among other themes) a critique and deconstruction of the superhero genre and mythos. In that respect, use of typically outré costumes was part of this critique and deconstruction. For his film version, Snyder basically followed this direction. It would have been counter productive (missing the point) to modernize the costumes so as to make them (in some sense) cooler or subtler.
But based on interviews hes given, Snyder seems to appreciate that MOS must be diametrically different. Instead of deconstructing it, Superman venerates the mythos. (No subtextual ridicule allowed.) But it remains an open (and controversial) question whether one venerates by adhering to the traditional costume (which some see as anachronistic, camp) or via judicious modernization (which some fans interpret as sacrilege of the highest order).