Is there an announcer outside that pod saying "LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, YOUR 2025 DAAAAAAAAILY PLAAAAAANET REPORTERS!!! "Steve Lombard:
Eve Teschmacher:
DC Cinematic Universe ( The James Gunn era)
- Thread starter Samurai8472
- Start date
A whole generation of fans turned pros (in all media) grew up with the characters from the first two Superman films. So it makes sense that those new characters and that version of old characters are the ones they insert when given the chance to do Superman. When was the last time Zod was a clean shaven bald guy in a military cap?
That's not what "sense" means in this context. The discernment involved is with regard to what an individual likes or does not like, not "good from bad."
Plus, it's not like we're drowning in Teschmacher appearances anyway. This will only be her second appearance in the last forty years. (Kitty and Tess don't count!)
Lots to catch up on
The Super suit looks a bit awkward and slightly ill fitting, and like a cosplay to me. But I'm sure it'll be shot at all the best angles and CGI'd over to eliminate all the creases and whatnot.
This is criticism I see pop up again and again, not just for this suit, but for a lot of new SF/F costumes in movies and TV. And I just can't take it seriously. Not as a criticism. Because cosplay has gotten to a point where it pretty much can't be topped. If costumes in movies look like cosplay, that's not saying the movie costumes look bad, it's pointing out that cosplay has caught up.
I just think it's a lazy swipe. (No offense to F. King Daniel intended -- though intended or not, I guess it is offensive. 
)
As for the "ill-fitting" part ... I feel like I've already said, somewhere in all this discussion, that I like the way it looks like clothing on an actual human body, instead of some vacuum-formed synthetic shell with fake abs glued on. I hope they don't smooth it out to the point of unreality in post; it looks great just the way it is to me.
)As for the "ill-fitting" part ... I feel like I've already said, somewhere in all this discussion, that I like the way it looks like clothing on an actual human body, instead of some vacuum-formed synthetic shell with fake abs glued on. I hope they don't smooth it out to the point of unreality in post; it looks great just the way it is to me.
They've spent the last decade trying to make superhero costumes as unnatural as possible, relying heavily on CG to make clothes do things that they do not do in real life. So it's understandable that people have had their expectations for these things warped a little.
And that's not to say it's wrong to prefer a certain approach. We all have our own preferences.
I'm certainly not against them using CG to alter the new suit in post in certain ways (and make no mistake, they will!) but I hope it retains the general look here.
And that's not to say it's wrong to prefer a certain approach. We all have our own preferences.
I'm certainly not against them using CG to alter the new suit in post in certain ways (and make no mistake, they will!) but I hope it retains the general look here.
Yeah, but again, why did it take more than 20 years before everyone suddenly wanted to revive these characters? It took less than a year for Jimmy Olsen to show up in the comics after he debuted on radio, and two years to get his own self-titled comic after he became a regular on the Superman TV show. It took 7 years after Harley Quinn's animation debut for her to show up in the comics, and 10 years for her to get her first live-action adaptation. It took 4 years for Phil Coulson to make the leap from the movies to comics and animation. And there were certainly plenty of other things about the Donner films that were emulated much sooner, like Jimmy Olsen being a photographer, Lois Lane being a bigger name in journalism than Clark Kent, the romance between them being played up much more, the Jor-El "ghost" idea, etc.
And come to think of it, while we're on the subject of why some adaptation characters make the leap to comics or other adaptations while some don't, why hasn't anyone ever done another version of Alexander Knox from Batman '89? A snarky, old-school reporter trying to find out who Batman is and butting heads with Bruce Wayne? That's a pretty cool idea for a character. Indeed, a case could be made that Knox was the protagonist of the first act of the movie, certainly its main viewpoint character while it was keeping Bruce a mystery. So it's a little surprising that nobody's adapted him, a major character from the first really big, influential Batman movie. The only time he's ever been seen since was in the Crisis on Infinite Earths teaser, and that wasn't an adaptation, it was a return appearance by the original version (although the DC Database counts them as separate incarnations for some reason).
That's exactly the problem for me. It doesn't look like normal loose-fitting clothing, it looks like a weirdly stiff rubbery material that bows out strangely in a bad-looking way. I'd almost say it's like a wetsuit, but a wetsuit would have a smooth surface.
I'm personally feeling so much excitement and positivity for this film after these past couple of days, and it's great. And, with the exception of a few inevitable doomcriers, the general reception online seems to be equally positive, which only reinforces my good feelings. 
Since the Clark Kent photo inexplicably excited no comment here, I went elsewhere to seek out reactions, and was delighted to see folks loving his look as well.
Since the Clark Kent photo inexplicably excited no comment here, I went elsewhere to seek out reactions, and was delighted to see folks loving his look as well.
Takes time to grow up and get in a position to do so.
It may well be my perceptions were set by Christopher Reeve in skintight spandex, so anything looser looks strange to me.I just think it's a lazy swipe. (No offense to F. King Daniel intended -- though intended or not, I guess it is offensive.
As for the "ill-fitting" part ... I feel like I've already said, somewhere in all this discussion, that I like the way it looks like clothing on an actual human body, instead of some vacuum-formed synthetic shell with fake abs glued on. I hope they don't smooth it out to the point of unreality in post; it looks great just the way it is to me.
I mean, have you seen the MCU? Gunn's own work in it in particular, or Taika Waititi's Thor movies? There's the entire characters of Tony Stark or Peter Parker, and Cap/Black Widow made a much more entertaining than expected duo in one of the most serious Marvel movies. Aquaman and Wonder Woman definitely had humor too.
It's just that as others have said, humor is subjective. People love comedy in superhero movies, Otis and Miss Tessmacher (and Hackman's Luthor) just... weren't.
Indeed.
Other than a small handful of the films? No. But I certainly have seen a freightload of online bitching that they're too comedic -- particularly from Z*ck Sn*d*r stans, who frown fiercely on such things.
But I mean, if you're not opposed to funny in superhero movies in general, and just didn't enjoy Superman '78's humor in specific -- that's a subjective perception to which you're completely entitled, inexplicable though my own tastes may find it.
You took part of my quote out of context. The question is, why did it take so long for these characters when it didn't take nearly as long for plenty of other characters? There were plenty of people making comics and TV shows in the '80s-'90s who loved the Donner movies, and who borrowed a number of elements from it as I already mentioned, but they apparently didn't see the need to include Otis or Eve among those elements.
Reeve's costume was nylon with a wool cape, not Spandex (aka Lycra). https://people.com/movies/superman-...e-original-film-sequels-nets-350k-at-auction/
I dunno... They weren't really bad for what they were. Within the movie, they did the job they were supposed to. I mean, "My mother lives in Hackensack" -- that's a very memorable moment. I just don't see the appeal of resurrecting them in other versions, or the point of reusing their names for completely different characters like Supergirl did.
Oh, you can't take that kind of thing seriously. There's a whole industry of people who profit from performative outrage to generate clicks on YouTube, and it's not even remotely representative of actual, honest fan opinions, it's just a bunch of sleazy opportunists pandering to the worst impulses of their audience.
That's exactly why. The people who like Eve and Otis weren't "in power" .
Indeed -- one of many such memorable and enjoyable moments for those characters.
Believe me, I don't take them even a little seriously. Besides, they take themselves seriously enough as to need no help on that front.
But it's not just revenue-driven YouTubers and the like, but plenty of unpaid fan commentators, including on this very message board.
It's a principle well-understood by statisticians that opinions on public forums tend to be weighted disproportionately toward the negative, because people who have something to complain about are more motivated to speak up than people who are satisfied. That's why pollsters seek out people at random instead of letting people come to them; no self-selected sample is ever going to be unbiased.
Exactly. You and The Realist are spot on.
Similar threads
