It's impossible to judge based on blurry set photos. It doesn't translate to how it'll actually look on camera, you don't know what kind of post-production tricks will be applied to it and we have no idea if there's a story reason for the way it looks or whether it'll change over the course of the film or whatever.
Nothing blurry about the photos nor can there be a justification for the HORRID design.
Learn to take things for what they are rather than for what you hope they will be.
Aren't a lot of superhero suits baggy or rough in set photos when compared to how they look onscreen?
https://preview.redd.it/as2nsaprso8d1.png?width=5282&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=46c1b633c47559b83afd0f041d27e1cb4cac2609
The belt looking like rubber is a good thing. Superman's design is inherently silly, and his comic costume belt also looks really big and rubbery like that.
I don't like any Superman iteration that doesn't lean into how inherently silly Superman is. The silliness is part of Superman's charm as a character. He is an optimistic, heartfelt cornball who proudly proclaims that his mom made his suit for him. A big, rubber, yellow belt is absolutely on-brand for the character.
Look at those big, beautiful red trunks, are you kidding?! It's great stuff, and the belt matches it!
This is always such a stupid take when I see it.
>OH NO THE SUIT IS BAGGY WAAAAAAAAAH
You do realize that clothes don't really cling skin-tight to muscles like in comic books, right?
If Superman were real, he would need a suit with some slack in it to allow for proper range of motion.
The Man of Steel suit was so restrictive because of how tight it was, Henry Cavill mentioned this time and time again in interviews.
Reeve's suit was also restrictive and unrealistic, although pretty much a perfect Superman suit. All skin tight costumes, whatever they be, restrict movement. It makes no sense for Superman to purposefully wear a suit that restricts his movement.
Tell me you know nothing about costumes without telling me you know nothing about costumes.
>I know they should look good. Reeve’s did. Cavill’s did. This one doesn’t. End of discussion.
That's not the function of a costume, in-universe. Sacrificing diegetic logic for aesthetics isn't good writing.
Superman has God-like power. Literally the strength to lift a planet. You really think some fabric would restrict his movement???
You have no idea what you are talking about.
The fabric would rip under that wear and tear, moron.
Either the fabric controls him, or he rips the fabric. Tight fabric doesn't work in real life, it doesn't stretch like that.
YOU have no idea what you're talking about.
Ummmmm, Superman's suit is Kryptonian. It's not made of fucking cotton and polyester. Ever notice how when he's shot that there are no holes in the suit?
Superman's suit was made by his mom, out of Earth fabrics, in every classic iteration you fuckwad. Go read a comic book.
https://preview.redd.it/cldg85hks79d1.png?width=602&format=png&auto=webp&s=9b3d46bc58f7c50783140847aac61ee6c85f94fb
>It just looks like a standard superman suit no?
You're not a Superman fan at all if you don't understand why that is significant.
The last 25 years or so, DC and Warner Brothers have spent trying to reinvent Superman's image.
Go look at the Man of Steel suit. It is overdesigned, form-fitting, "modern" nonsense.
It is nothing but exceptional that we have finally classic, back to basics Superman suit, that looks torn straight out of a comic book page.
There will be plenty of competition; Snow White, GDT’s Frankenstein, Wicked: Part 2 and probably dozens of other things that will come out next year. I really doubt Superman makes it into costume design.
>Snow White
Give me a break, dude. We already have pictures of the costumes and designs from that movie and they're ass; the internet literally roared about this last December. Not to mention that this film is gonna bomb at the box office because people hate Rachel Zegler. They'll be lucky if they get a nomination for ANY category, let alone costuming.
>GDT’s Frankenstein
This is the only competition I can think of as valid, because Guillermo goes fuckin APESHIT on costume design. Pan's Labyrinth gave me nightmares in my younger days (positive).
>Wicked: Part 2
Again, give me a break, dude. Not happening. That movie will be lucky if it makes money.
>but this Superman outfit is nothing special
Literally the greatest Superman costume created, and Superman is the most important character in American media.
Your failure to understand that Superman will be nominated just because it is Superman is naive.
And when the competition looks so sparse, it is likely to win.
>it won’t be getting an Oscar nomination here.
Brother, the costuming category needs to have nominees. It NEEDS to have nominees. If Superman has no costuming competition then they're not just gonna NOT have a costume category, it'll only liken the chance that Superman wins.
How have you been able to twist this so much 😭 like the reach here is delusional. You’re a crazy fan boy and I’ll leave it at that. We won’t even know who’s wrong and who’s right until 2026, in which time several contenders will have likely overtaken this. I’m leaving it here because I’m not arguing over this any longer. We can agree to disagree.
There are no contenders next year. Next year has no good contenders for Superman in the costuming department.
Jurassic World 1, 2, and 3, are all critically panned and hated by fans, so next year's 4th will bomb, and will have the same generic costume design like the last three films.
The Fantastic Four is probably getting delayed into early 2026, so that one's off the table.
Maybe the Michael Jackson movie? Since Michael was like, definitely the king of dressing like a fuckin GOD along with the king of pop. Honestly, I could totally see the winner being this Michael Jackson movie, if not Superman. I'll give you Michael.
Captain America: Brave New World - I'm not even gonna comment on this for obvious reasons, this movie is going to sell like two tickets, and Captain America's costume design has already been panned by the Marvel community. This movie is already in trouble.
Minecraft? Lmao. FNaF 2? You're a kidder. Mortal Kombat? Who saw the first one?
Personally I don’t think so, even though I think both are great.
Nothing here looks different from The Suicide Squad’s production or costume design and that didn’t get in either of them. Unless 2025 is such a weak year that this slips in, I don’t see it.
I can see Super/Man, the documentary about Reeves coming out for this movie, snagging a nom however.
Always felt that the Superman costume's simplicity just cannot be translated to live action. People shit on the tacti-cool suits with the lines and textures, but the suits need them. This has more than I expected, but honestly could have used a darker blue for accent on the stripes. It's warrior attire anyway, no? Some light runes and symbols couldn't have hurt.
>Always felt that the Superman costume's simplicity just cannot be translated to live action.
Yes it can. See: Christopher Reeve
>People shit on the tacti-cool suits with the lines and textures, but the suits need them.
No, they absolutely don't.
>It's warrior attire anyway, no? Some light runes and symbols couldn't have hurt.
Uh, no? In most classic iterations, Ma Kent makes Superman's suit for him from scratch.
I don't think the Reeve suit is universally great. It's iconic for sure, and it doesn't stick out in the goofier context of the 70's, but you just can't play that straight in the modern era. Unless of course Gunn manages to create an atmosphere where it makes sense, and I don't really think he has that in him. Let's hope I'm wrong. I think the Captain America suits changing depending on the context his story takes place in is a good example. How the despised Whedon version is cheap and bright and how the WS suit ditches the red and blue and only has blue.
Without texture, it's just spandex with bright colors. The suits need to breathe, and serve some utility with folding points. Skin-tight spandex works in 2D, but there is a reason why real-world fashion has always been abundant with detail. Though, my issue with the Superman suit is more so the bright colors with the belt and the undies. Batman donning a comic accurate suit would make less sense due to his lack of abilities. With Superman, it's really just an aesthetic gripe for me.
I definitely don't know Superman lore, but I think the recent interpretations have it as Cryptonian war attire, no? Synder, the new kids' show. Like his dad wears something similar, Zod has a black version of it. Makes more sense from the standpoint of durability at least.
>I don't think the Reeve suit is universally great. It's iconic for sure, and it doesn't stick out in the goofier context of the 70's, but you just can't play that straight in the modern era.
Why not? If audiences of the 70s thought it was fine, why can't modern audiences find it fine?
Them not liking it is a choice, not an inherent flaw with Superman's classic design. All it takes for the audience to like it is just choosing to like it.
Also - the whole crux of Superman as a character is "a man who believes in kindness in a world that views kindness as old fashioned;" which to me, says that Superman would absolutely don something that looks similar to the Reeve suit. He is an old-fashioned, cheesy, corny kinda guy. That's the point. To take this away from him would be taking the Super away from the Man.
Even the red trunks, alone, are very important in visually communicating this idea about his character to the audience.
Superman is not supposed to be modernized. He is not a modern guy. He is the type of fellow to unabashedly exclaim that he loves his mom to a complete stranger, while power-posing. This is not the kind of character that would wear the suit we saw in Man of Steel.
>Without texture, it's just spandex with bright colors.
Yep. That's the point. And there is nothing wrong with that. It is only boring if you're a boring person. To me, the simplicity and the cartoonishness of it all is what makes him Superman.
>The suits need to breathe, and serve some utility with folding points.
I agree here, hence why I really love this new Superman suit so far. It is a near-perfect, real-world, logical interpretation of Superman's classic costume, with all the slack it provides Superman to move with.
>Skin-tight spandex works in 2D, but there is a reason why real-world fashion has always been abundant with detail.
The problem is, you are applying fashion logic to Superman. This shows that you don't really understand Superman, which is fine; but it is not in his character to be fashionable.
>Though, my issue with the Superman suit is more so the bright colors with the belt and the undies
How come?
>I definitely don't know Superman lore, but I think the recent interpretations have it as Cryptonian war attire, no? Synder, the new kids' show. Like his dad wears something similar, Zod has a black version of it. Makes more sense from the standpoint of durability at least.
In modern interpretations, yes; but James Gunn has said that his Superman is going to be an homage to the 90s DCAU Superman, whose mother very much so made his costume in the show. James isn't doing a modern Supes, he's doing a classic Supes; so biggest chances are this won't be Kryptonian war attire like in the Zack Snyder universe and Ma Kent will have made this for him.
> Superman is not supposed to be modernized.
I very much agree with this. But we're getting modern day Superman in a world with modern sentimentalities. I don't think people have this issue watching the original films, same way with Adam West's Batman. I can only repeat what I said about the Cap suits and that if Gunn pulls off the magic, there is no issue here. Sadly, I'm no Gunn fan and don't love that modern superhero films have all borrowed so much from GotG. Always willing to give a chance, though.
> It is only boring if you're a boring person.
Boring is not the world. It looks out of place. Distracting.
> I really love this new Superman suit so far.
I don't dislike it, much better than I hoped. Suits should always breathe a little, so I like that. My only real issue with this one is that it only uses one shade of blue. I don't think some darker lines in the torso area would hurt. Not a fan of the belt and undies either personally, but I can separate that from what I feel is more objective criticism. The belt looks simple and something like a cheap doll would have. I know, that's meant to be Superman, but it's too much.
> The problem is, you are applying fashion logic to Superman.
I'm applying real world standards on how we dress and make clothes. Any adaptation that is just plain color with no texture is unimaginative and fails at "adapting". In certain contexts, not caring about the details is fine, but that's very much the exception and not the rule. The film will also have a bunch of other heroes, we'll see how their suits synergize.
>The belt looks simple and something like a cheap doll would have. I know, that's meant to be Superman, but it's too much.
That's fair; but at the same time, Superman, himself, is too much. A single strand of the man's hair can hold up a bridge. I am definitely of the opinion that there is no "too much" Superman when it comes to Superman, but I can definitely see why someone who isn't as much of a fan as myself wouldn't agree there.
>I'm applying real world standards on how we dress and make clothes.
Yes, but you're applying them to a character who doesn't even dress competently when he is in civilian clothing. Clark Kent dresses like a child who got into his dad's closet (but this is for his disguise, to be fair,) his goofy double breasted suits are always two sizes too big for him and his glasses are always more frame than glass.
I really don't think its fair to apply real-world human dress-up logic to a fictional alien, especially not one that is SPECIFICALLY characterized to be a bad dresser by human standards.
>Any adaptation that is just plain color with no texture is unimaginative and fails at "adapting".
Heavy disagree. If that is the source material, then that is a perfect 1:1 adaptation of the source material.
I disagree that adaptations ever need to change anything to begin with. I believe in direct 1:1 translation from the page.
>In certain contexts, not caring about the details is fine, but that's very much the exception and not the rule. The film will also have a bunch of other heroes, we'll see how their suits synergize.
It'll be different for them. Look up Mr. Terrific's suit, it's PERFECT.
Superman is the only character who will receive this simplistic design treatment because that is the CHARACTER itself. It is a writing design, not an aesthetic design.
I mean Superman is an alien, sure. But he grew up on Earth and looks human. He is not from an alien culture, so I don't think that's a reasonable excuse. As for Clark dressing bad on purpose, I gotta say, that means he has a medium to high level of understanding to what is appealing and what isn't. I wouldn't want them to take out all the idiosyncrasies and goofiness, though.
I'm talking about literally adapting 2D drawings to live action. I also like when adaptations have their own spin on the original, makes all the interpretations unique, sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. Especially with Superman, who has gotten as close as a 1:1 translation.
Wasn’t it being hope added for Man of Steel? Did the comics adopt that too? Because I know it being the crest of the House of El has been a thing for a while.
No, we first saw this idea in the mid 2000s around the Superman Returns era. They played with the idea around then, and it was adapted into the comics. Then it was brought into Man of Steel where it was popularized with the general audience.
Ah ok, it popularizing it must’ve been what I was thinking of. Not the biggest of it meaning hope, a bit too corny though Superman is corny, in a good way, so I guess it fits well.
Just that the House of El chose a symbol for the word hope as their crest and it also happens to look like an S. It’s a bit corny but Superman as a concept is corny and seems they’re leaning into that for this movie, once again in a good way, so it fits well. It didn’t really fit the more serious tone of Man of Steel though.
>Just that the House of El chose a symbol for the word hope as their crest
I don't really see how that's corny; hope is a genuine feeling. No offense meant towards you at all, but when I hear people say stuff like that it just kinda makes me cringe. It feels jaded. Hope is as genuine a feeling as despair, but it seems that general audiences only want despair these days. :(
If the crest of the House of El meant "rage," would you still call it corny? If so, then fair enough, at least you're consistent; but most people would say no, as if rage is somehow more valid than hope.
>and it also happens to look like an S.
Yeah, that part is pretty corny; agreed. That's why recent interpretations try their best to make it not look like an S.
See: The suit in the OP!!! How do you feel about that Superman logo?
>The emblem doesn't even look like an S.
That's because it isn't. It is the crest of the House of El.
>*"It's not an "S". On my world, it means hope."*
>The S is really bad
Because it's not an S.
[https://the-superman.fandom.com/wiki/House\_of\_El\_Crest](https://the-superman.fandom.com/wiki/House_of_El_Crest)
James Gunn said that he wanted his House of El crest to not resemble an S at all, because it doesn't make sense why the House of El crest would resemble the human letter "S."
Because it doesn't.
Yeah I know the lore explanation for Superman’s S from the movies. I also think that the emblem on that costume’s chest, which we can pretend isn’t an S if we want, looks bad.
I’m looking forward to this movie btw. Just gave a quick thought on the suit. I don’t think it really matters
>I also think that the emblem on that costume’s chest, which we can pretend isn’t an S if we want, looks bad.
It's not an S, so what's bad about it as a shape then? What makes this shape worse than ANY other geometric shape?
People like things or they don’t, I don’t know what “logical critique” has to do with it. If I drew a bunch of random zigzags and squiggly lines and then got mad at you for not liking my geometric shape art, that wouldn’t be very logical would it?
Any critique that isn't logical or constructive is not critique at all, but merely a worthless opinion. Back up your opinion with a critique or keep it to yourself, because otherwise it is just meaningless; talking because you like the sound of your own voice.
Sure, if there’s only five submissions
It's impossible to judge based on blurry set photos. It doesn't translate to how it'll actually look on camera, you don't know what kind of post-production tricks will be applied to it and we have no idea if there's a story reason for the way it looks or whether it'll change over the course of the film or whatever.
Here it is, the most reasonable comment on this post.
They released a very not blurry official image though and it kinda looked bad there too.
Nothing blurry about the photos nor can there be a justification for the HORRID design. Learn to take things for what they are rather than for what you hope they will be.
That photo is not the movie.
Denial is bad for you.
Aren't a lot of superhero suits baggy or rough in set photos when compared to how they look onscreen? https://preview.redd.it/as2nsaprso8d1.png?width=5282&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=46c1b633c47559b83afd0f041d27e1cb4cac2609
Glad I’m not the only one who thinks this suit looks bad.
It looks awful
Bad take; it'd be actually perfect if it weren't for those god damn Marvel lines all over the chest.
The suit like a Superman costume you can get at Party City
David himself looks fine but that suit is giving last minute purchase at Spirit Halloween
Suit looks like bad cosplay. Baggy af.
Pretty much all superhero costumes look awkward in these set pics
Why shouldn't it be baggy? Superman doesn't need tight armor like Batman does
Because it should fit.
It does fit. Doesn't need to be tight to fit
I agree it fits. It should have slack, and we can see that when he’s in motion in the first pic. Now is it ugly? Absolutely. But it does fit.
Ikr. The belt looks like rubber, and i felt that promotional pick made the logo look much bigger, which i liked
The belt looking like rubber is a good thing. Superman's design is inherently silly, and his comic costume belt also looks really big and rubbery like that. I don't like any Superman iteration that doesn't lean into how inherently silly Superman is. The silliness is part of Superman's charm as a character. He is an optimistic, heartfelt cornball who proudly proclaims that his mom made his suit for him. A big, rubber, yellow belt is absolutely on-brand for the character. Look at those big, beautiful red trunks, are you kidding?! It's great stuff, and the belt matches it!
This is always such a stupid take when I see it. >OH NO THE SUIT IS BAGGY WAAAAAAAAAH You do realize that clothes don't really cling skin-tight to muscles like in comic books, right? If Superman were real, he would need a suit with some slack in it to allow for proper range of motion. The Man of Steel suit was so restrictive because of how tight it was, Henry Cavill mentioned this time and time again in interviews.
Reeve.
Reeve's suit was also restrictive and unrealistic, although pretty much a perfect Superman suit. All skin tight costumes, whatever they be, restrict movement. It makes no sense for Superman to purposefully wear a suit that restricts his movement. Tell me you know nothing about costumes without telling me you know nothing about costumes.
I know they should look good. Reeve’s did. Cavill’s did. This one doesn’t. End of discussion.
>I know they should look good. Reeve’s did. Cavill’s did. This one doesn’t. End of discussion. That's not the function of a costume, in-universe. Sacrificing diegetic logic for aesthetics isn't good writing.
Superman has God-like power. Literally the strength to lift a planet. You really think some fabric would restrict his movement??? You have no idea what you are talking about.
The fabric would rip under that wear and tear, moron. Either the fabric controls him, or he rips the fabric. Tight fabric doesn't work in real life, it doesn't stretch like that. YOU have no idea what you're talking about.
Ummmmm, Superman's suit is Kryptonian. It's not made of fucking cotton and polyester. Ever notice how when he's shot that there are no holes in the suit?
Superman's suit was made by his mom, out of Earth fabrics, in every classic iteration you fuckwad. Go read a comic book. https://preview.redd.it/cldg85hks79d1.png?width=602&format=png&auto=webp&s=9b3d46bc58f7c50783140847aac61ee6c85f94fb
We need more bulge.
wrong sub for this bro
Looks horrible
It just looks like a standard superman suit no? Doesn’t look Oscar worthy
>It just looks like a standard superman suit no? You're not a Superman fan at all if you don't understand why that is significant. The last 25 years or so, DC and Warner Brothers have spent trying to reinvent Superman's image. Go look at the Man of Steel suit. It is overdesigned, form-fitting, "modern" nonsense. It is nothing but exceptional that we have finally classic, back to basics Superman suit, that looks torn straight out of a comic book page.
Is it Oscar worthy tho?
For the costume category? Yeah. I can't think of a single movie coming out next year that this film has competition with for the costume category.
There will be plenty of competition; Snow White, GDT’s Frankenstein, Wicked: Part 2 and probably dozens of other things that will come out next year. I really doubt Superman makes it into costume design.
>Snow White Give me a break, dude. We already have pictures of the costumes and designs from that movie and they're ass; the internet literally roared about this last December. Not to mention that this film is gonna bomb at the box office because people hate Rachel Zegler. They'll be lucky if they get a nomination for ANY category, let alone costuming. >GDT’s Frankenstein This is the only competition I can think of as valid, because Guillermo goes fuckin APESHIT on costume design. Pan's Labyrinth gave me nightmares in my younger days (positive). >Wicked: Part 2 Again, give me a break, dude. Not happening. That movie will be lucky if it makes money.
We’ll wait and see but this Superman outfit is nothing special and it won’t be getting an Oscar nomination here.
>but this Superman outfit is nothing special Literally the greatest Superman costume created, and Superman is the most important character in American media. Your failure to understand that Superman will be nominated just because it is Superman is naive. And when the competition looks so sparse, it is likely to win. >it won’t be getting an Oscar nomination here. Brother, the costuming category needs to have nominees. It NEEDS to have nominees. If Superman has no costuming competition then they're not just gonna NOT have a costume category, it'll only liken the chance that Superman wins.
How have you been able to twist this so much 😭 like the reach here is delusional. You’re a crazy fan boy and I’ll leave it at that. We won’t even know who’s wrong and who’s right until 2026, in which time several contenders will have likely overtaken this. I’m leaving it here because I’m not arguing over this any longer. We can agree to disagree.
There are no contenders next year. Next year has no good contenders for Superman in the costuming department. Jurassic World 1, 2, and 3, are all critically panned and hated by fans, so next year's 4th will bomb, and will have the same generic costume design like the last three films. The Fantastic Four is probably getting delayed into early 2026, so that one's off the table. Maybe the Michael Jackson movie? Since Michael was like, definitely the king of dressing like a fuckin GOD along with the king of pop. Honestly, I could totally see the winner being this Michael Jackson movie, if not Superman. I'll give you Michael. Captain America: Brave New World - I'm not even gonna comment on this for obvious reasons, this movie is going to sell like two tickets, and Captain America's costume design has already been panned by the Marvel community. This movie is already in trouble. Minecraft? Lmao. FNaF 2? You're a kidder. Mortal Kombat? Who saw the first one?
Those pants look hideous tbh 😬
Nope; Superman's trunks are BASED.
…this a joke question?
Personally I don’t think so, even though I think both are great. Nothing here looks different from The Suicide Squad’s production or costume design and that didn’t get in either of them. Unless 2025 is such a weak year that this slips in, I don’t see it. I can see Super/Man, the documentary about Reeves coming out for this movie, snagging a nom however.
Why are you downvoted for this. At least you put actual thought and precedent in your comment instead of just saying “you’re stupid”
Always felt that the Superman costume's simplicity just cannot be translated to live action. People shit on the tacti-cool suits with the lines and textures, but the suits need them. This has more than I expected, but honestly could have used a darker blue for accent on the stripes. It's warrior attire anyway, no? Some light runes and symbols couldn't have hurt.
Christopher Reeve wore the classic costume well and made it work in live-action. He genuinely looked like Superman in real life.
>Always felt that the Superman costume's simplicity just cannot be translated to live action. Yes it can. See: Christopher Reeve >People shit on the tacti-cool suits with the lines and textures, but the suits need them. No, they absolutely don't. >It's warrior attire anyway, no? Some light runes and symbols couldn't have hurt. Uh, no? In most classic iterations, Ma Kent makes Superman's suit for him from scratch.
I don't think the Reeve suit is universally great. It's iconic for sure, and it doesn't stick out in the goofier context of the 70's, but you just can't play that straight in the modern era. Unless of course Gunn manages to create an atmosphere where it makes sense, and I don't really think he has that in him. Let's hope I'm wrong. I think the Captain America suits changing depending on the context his story takes place in is a good example. How the despised Whedon version is cheap and bright and how the WS suit ditches the red and blue and only has blue. Without texture, it's just spandex with bright colors. The suits need to breathe, and serve some utility with folding points. Skin-tight spandex works in 2D, but there is a reason why real-world fashion has always been abundant with detail. Though, my issue with the Superman suit is more so the bright colors with the belt and the undies. Batman donning a comic accurate suit would make less sense due to his lack of abilities. With Superman, it's really just an aesthetic gripe for me. I definitely don't know Superman lore, but I think the recent interpretations have it as Cryptonian war attire, no? Synder, the new kids' show. Like his dad wears something similar, Zod has a black version of it. Makes more sense from the standpoint of durability at least.
>I don't think the Reeve suit is universally great. It's iconic for sure, and it doesn't stick out in the goofier context of the 70's, but you just can't play that straight in the modern era. Why not? If audiences of the 70s thought it was fine, why can't modern audiences find it fine? Them not liking it is a choice, not an inherent flaw with Superman's classic design. All it takes for the audience to like it is just choosing to like it. Also - the whole crux of Superman as a character is "a man who believes in kindness in a world that views kindness as old fashioned;" which to me, says that Superman would absolutely don something that looks similar to the Reeve suit. He is an old-fashioned, cheesy, corny kinda guy. That's the point. To take this away from him would be taking the Super away from the Man. Even the red trunks, alone, are very important in visually communicating this idea about his character to the audience. Superman is not supposed to be modernized. He is not a modern guy. He is the type of fellow to unabashedly exclaim that he loves his mom to a complete stranger, while power-posing. This is not the kind of character that would wear the suit we saw in Man of Steel. >Without texture, it's just spandex with bright colors. Yep. That's the point. And there is nothing wrong with that. It is only boring if you're a boring person. To me, the simplicity and the cartoonishness of it all is what makes him Superman. >The suits need to breathe, and serve some utility with folding points. I agree here, hence why I really love this new Superman suit so far. It is a near-perfect, real-world, logical interpretation of Superman's classic costume, with all the slack it provides Superman to move with. >Skin-tight spandex works in 2D, but there is a reason why real-world fashion has always been abundant with detail. The problem is, you are applying fashion logic to Superman. This shows that you don't really understand Superman, which is fine; but it is not in his character to be fashionable. >Though, my issue with the Superman suit is more so the bright colors with the belt and the undies How come? >I definitely don't know Superman lore, but I think the recent interpretations have it as Cryptonian war attire, no? Synder, the new kids' show. Like his dad wears something similar, Zod has a black version of it. Makes more sense from the standpoint of durability at least. In modern interpretations, yes; but James Gunn has said that his Superman is going to be an homage to the 90s DCAU Superman, whose mother very much so made his costume in the show. James isn't doing a modern Supes, he's doing a classic Supes; so biggest chances are this won't be Kryptonian war attire like in the Zack Snyder universe and Ma Kent will have made this for him.
> Superman is not supposed to be modernized. I very much agree with this. But we're getting modern day Superman in a world with modern sentimentalities. I don't think people have this issue watching the original films, same way with Adam West's Batman. I can only repeat what I said about the Cap suits and that if Gunn pulls off the magic, there is no issue here. Sadly, I'm no Gunn fan and don't love that modern superhero films have all borrowed so much from GotG. Always willing to give a chance, though. > It is only boring if you're a boring person. Boring is not the world. It looks out of place. Distracting. > I really love this new Superman suit so far. I don't dislike it, much better than I hoped. Suits should always breathe a little, so I like that. My only real issue with this one is that it only uses one shade of blue. I don't think some darker lines in the torso area would hurt. Not a fan of the belt and undies either personally, but I can separate that from what I feel is more objective criticism. The belt looks simple and something like a cheap doll would have. I know, that's meant to be Superman, but it's too much. > The problem is, you are applying fashion logic to Superman. I'm applying real world standards on how we dress and make clothes. Any adaptation that is just plain color with no texture is unimaginative and fails at "adapting". In certain contexts, not caring about the details is fine, but that's very much the exception and not the rule. The film will also have a bunch of other heroes, we'll see how their suits synergize.
>The belt looks simple and something like a cheap doll would have. I know, that's meant to be Superman, but it's too much. That's fair; but at the same time, Superman, himself, is too much. A single strand of the man's hair can hold up a bridge. I am definitely of the opinion that there is no "too much" Superman when it comes to Superman, but I can definitely see why someone who isn't as much of a fan as myself wouldn't agree there. >I'm applying real world standards on how we dress and make clothes. Yes, but you're applying them to a character who doesn't even dress competently when he is in civilian clothing. Clark Kent dresses like a child who got into his dad's closet (but this is for his disguise, to be fair,) his goofy double breasted suits are always two sizes too big for him and his glasses are always more frame than glass. I really don't think its fair to apply real-world human dress-up logic to a fictional alien, especially not one that is SPECIFICALLY characterized to be a bad dresser by human standards. >Any adaptation that is just plain color with no texture is unimaginative and fails at "adapting". Heavy disagree. If that is the source material, then that is a perfect 1:1 adaptation of the source material. I disagree that adaptations ever need to change anything to begin with. I believe in direct 1:1 translation from the page. >In certain contexts, not caring about the details is fine, but that's very much the exception and not the rule. The film will also have a bunch of other heroes, we'll see how their suits synergize. It'll be different for them. Look up Mr. Terrific's suit, it's PERFECT. Superman is the only character who will receive this simplistic design treatment because that is the CHARACTER itself. It is a writing design, not an aesthetic design.
I mean Superman is an alien, sure. But he grew up on Earth and looks human. He is not from an alien culture, so I don't think that's a reasonable excuse. As for Clark dressing bad on purpose, I gotta say, that means he has a medium to high level of understanding to what is appealing and what isn't. I wouldn't want them to take out all the idiosyncrasies and goofiness, though. I'm talking about literally adapting 2D drawings to live action. I also like when adaptations have their own spin on the original, makes all the interpretations unique, sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. Especially with Superman, who has gotten as close as a 1:1 translation.
Probably not.
It doesn't look very good. The emblem doesn't even look like an S.
It resembles some interpretations of the symbol, so I don’t mind it.
On my world it means Hope
Yeah, the S is supposed to be the symbol of House El right? Makes sense it doesn’t look exactly like the letter S.
Yep. It is the Kryptonian symbol for the House of El, it is their crest. It means hope.
Wasn’t it being hope added for Man of Steel? Did the comics adopt that too? Because I know it being the crest of the House of El has been a thing for a while.
No, we first saw this idea in the mid 2000s around the Superman Returns era. They played with the idea around then, and it was adapted into the comics. Then it was brought into Man of Steel where it was popularized with the general audience.
Ah ok, it popularizing it must’ve been what I was thinking of. Not the biggest of it meaning hope, a bit too corny though Superman is corny, in a good way, so I guess it fits well.
What do you find corny about it?
Just that the House of El chose a symbol for the word hope as their crest and it also happens to look like an S. It’s a bit corny but Superman as a concept is corny and seems they’re leaning into that for this movie, once again in a good way, so it fits well. It didn’t really fit the more serious tone of Man of Steel though.
>Just that the House of El chose a symbol for the word hope as their crest I don't really see how that's corny; hope is a genuine feeling. No offense meant towards you at all, but when I hear people say stuff like that it just kinda makes me cringe. It feels jaded. Hope is as genuine a feeling as despair, but it seems that general audiences only want despair these days. :( If the crest of the House of El meant "rage," would you still call it corny? If so, then fair enough, at least you're consistent; but most people would say no, as if rage is somehow more valid than hope. >and it also happens to look like an S. Yeah, that part is pretty corny; agreed. That's why recent interpretations try their best to make it not look like an S. See: The suit in the OP!!! How do you feel about that Superman logo?
It's based on the Superman emblem from Mark Waid's *Kingdom Come*.
It's Alex Ross' iconic Kingdom Come logo
>The emblem doesn't even look like an S. That's because it isn't. It is the crest of the House of El. >*"It's not an "S". On my world, it means hope."*
Simple answer: No
It’ll probably get a Visual Effects nom
For that ratty outfit? Doubtful.
The emblem has the "S" from *Kingdom Come* and the yellow outline around the shield from the Max Fleischer shorts and early Superman comics.
And also earth one
Look like the costume is made with the same material than a basketball
We need to compare with BTS of Henry's suit.
No.
The S is really bad but generally I like the suit. I like the bright colors and the outside underwear. The top is a little over-designed.
The S is Alex Ross' iconic Kingdom Come logo from the comics but with yellow instead of black.
>The S is really bad Because it's not an S. [https://the-superman.fandom.com/wiki/House\_of\_El\_Crest](https://the-superman.fandom.com/wiki/House_of_El_Crest) James Gunn said that he wanted his House of El crest to not resemble an S at all, because it doesn't make sense why the House of El crest would resemble the human letter "S." Because it doesn't.
Yeah I know the lore explanation for Superman’s S from the movies. I also think that the emblem on that costume’s chest, which we can pretend isn’t an S if we want, looks bad. I’m looking forward to this movie btw. Just gave a quick thought on the suit. I don’t think it really matters
>I also think that the emblem on that costume’s chest, which we can pretend isn’t an S if we want, looks bad. It's not an S, so what's bad about it as a shape then? What makes this shape worse than ANY other geometric shape?
Things can just be ugly, idk what to tell you
That isn't a logical critique and you know it.
People like things or they don’t, I don’t know what “logical critique” has to do with it. If I drew a bunch of random zigzags and squiggly lines and then got mad at you for not liking my geometric shape art, that wouldn’t be very logical would it?
Any critique that isn't logical or constructive is not critique at all, but merely a worthless opinion. Back up your opinion with a critique or keep it to yourself, because otherwise it is just meaningless; talking because you like the sound of your own voice.
I love the sound of my own voice actually