|
Nerd Of Prey posted:I do think it's odd that they felt the need to mess with Superman's look yet again. His outfit has never really been "cool" or fashionable. It's timeless because it's always been bizarre. It doesn't even look like something a person would wear. Maybe less impressive now that it's been imitated thousands of times, but whenever somebody decides to "update" it, it suddenly ends up looking dated. Well Supermans modern costume isn't really iconic or original, its just based on what circus acrobats and weightlifters wore back in the 30's. Even back then it doesn't look like the modern costume that we've come to know:  His boots were originally kinda of odd and space-age looking, his logo was small and looked like a cops badge and he lacked the yellow belt. I'm always up for changing the status quo in costumes provided that we get an interesting look out of it. I admit that I don't really care for the modern "kryptonian battle armor" suit, its too busy but I'm a big fan of ditching the red undies and going for a sleeker and more simple look. I'd also be in favor of losing the symbol on the back of the cape, it looks out of place and asymmetrical.
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2011 05:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 09:44 |
|
|
McSpanky posted:Based on, not directly copied. Most of those guys were either wearing just the trunks or a single-piece unitard thing, and Superman's take on it is as original as it gets without literally inventing a new idea from scratch. It's iconic because it's the unique, immediately reconizable, archetypal look of the character that fathered the entire superhero genre. What do most people first think of when they think of superheroes? Dude in a skintight bodysuit, trunks on the outside and a cape, a.k.a. Superman. I didn't mean to imply that the character of Superman isn't iconic or that the basics of his costume aren't instantly recognizable, but rather that the details of his costume have changed over and over again through the decades and that the version we know today wasn't the original conception of the costume. I was mostly trying to make an argument in favor of allowing changes to take place -- who knows, maybe in a few decades people will look back on any version of Superman with the red shorts as an aberration and not the iconic model they grew up with, the same as we view his old chest symbol today.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2011 19:35
|
|
|
Shameless posted:It was far from pointless and stupid. It was making the point that the "more grown-up" DC heroes and comics we've got today are increasingly violent and have pretty much killed the kids comic market. It's feeding off the kid-friendly past to make yet more over-violent toss that bears no resemblance to the comics we (well, the older fans amongst us) grew up loving. Now that you mention it does DC have any kid friendly lines? I know that Marvel does have comics made specifically for younger readers, but I don't know as much about DC.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2012 01:16
|
|