Tyler has been really unlucky with his suits. It's taken multiple appearances on Supergirl and the better part of three seasons of his own show to even get close to a suit that doesn't look weird in some way.
Last edited:
DC Cinematic Universe ( The James Gunn era)
- Thread starter Samurai8472
- Start date
Traditional comic book costumes look ridiculous to most adults.
That's the long and short of it.
It's not coincidental that the post-Reeve/Superman push to move film treatment of these characters away from camp and humor included the first substantial redesigns of their costumes, in Burton's Batman and the first X-Men movies.
Add to that the fact that even most fit young actors don't have the physiques to carry off yards of Spandex without muscle suits or design misdirection militates against the old unitary look.
The major reason for small patterns/ texture on costumes is similar to the real reason spaceships all became junk ships after 2001/Star Wars:* a lot of detail tricks the viewer's eye. There's nothing harder to make look real in CG than a large smooth surface.
The MCU has demonstrated time and again the best way to approach these designs, from Iron Man to Captain America and even Thor. And they do manage some variations on the unitard with characters who are less muscle bound and more acrobatic, like Spider-Man.
Superhero movies face the essential chalkenge of making entertainment for grown-ups out of visual material originally conceived to stimulate 5-12 year-old kids.
*Scale issues, too, which is just more visual misdirection.
That's the long and short of it.
It's not coincidental that the post-Reeve/Superman push to move film treatment of these characters away from camp and humor included the first substantial redesigns of their costumes, in Burton's Batman and the first X-Men movies.
Add to that the fact that even most fit young actors don't have the physiques to carry off yards of Spandex without muscle suits or design misdirection militates against the old unitary look.
The major reason for small patterns/ texture on costumes is similar to the real reason spaceships all became junk ships after 2001/Star Wars:* a lot of detail tricks the viewer's eye. There's nothing harder to make look real in CG than a large smooth surface.
The MCU has demonstrated time and again the best way to approach these designs, from Iron Man to Captain America and even Thor. And they do manage some variations on the unitard with characters who are less muscle bound and more acrobatic, like Spider-Man.
Superhero movies face the essential chalkenge of making entertainment for grown-ups out of visual material originally conceived to stimulate 5-12 year-old kids.
*Scale issues, too, which is just more visual misdirection.
Maybe most adults should choose a different genre, then.
Hmm, I prefer the S&L suit. It doesn't have the trunks and it's darker than I'd prefer, and it does have the excessive texturing, but it looks like actual fabric instead of rubber, it doesn't have the distracting, arbitrary ridges that this one has, and it fits better. The cape works well (much better than his Supergirl costume), and it has the authentic logo.
Well, to say it's all subjective is to state the obvious. For my personal taste, this suit avoids multiple sins of most recent Superman suits:
- It's not dark, dark, dark, based on some misguided belief that bright primary colors are the devil.
- It has the trunks. Superman should always have the trunks, not just because it's iconic/traditional, but because the suit looks better, more colorful and balanced, with them. Also, put simply, it makes him look like Superman, because that's what Superman wears.
- Though earlier official photos show this suit has some of the dreaded basketball texturing, it's not overdone or obtrusive in the set photos.
To the new suit's credit, I do like its color scheme better in the photo just above than in the earlier candid shots, where it seemed too pale; lighting makes a lot of difference. And it's okay in wider shots where the weird piping isn't as distracting. But the Kingdom Come-ish logo is still weird, especially juxtaposed against the super-authentic Mister Terrific costume.
Jimmy coming out of the same craft as Lois and Perry:
Also Ron Troupe:
Guess the whole Planet staff was aboard.
Also Ron Troupe:
Guess the whole Planet staff was aboard.
I think that's probably right. I saw an earlier photo when they were building and dressing the street sets that showed a largish construct with a distinctive "T" shape on its face. It may have been the door of this device before it was lowered, or a related piece of tech -- it did seem smaller than this thing IIRC. Not sure I could find it again to check; a lot of photos from the Cleveland location prep have passed in front of my eyes in the last week.
ETA: Actually, I remembered where I saw it and was able to locate it. Clearly not the same thing at all, but whatever it is, it does look like it's probably Terrific-related.
ETA: Actually, I remembered where I saw it and was able to locate it. Clearly not the same thing at all, but whatever it is, it does look like it's probably Terrific-related.
Last edited:
So they've got a guy with an S symbol and a guy with a T symbol. They just need 24 other heroes and they can go on Sesame Street! Or maybe 22, since Elongated Man and Geo-Force have two letters each in their logos.
That's suggesting there's a single standard for superhero costumes which takes an influence from one visual source and/or approach. Even within the comic pages that's never been the case, as the comic book versions of Superman, Batman, Thor, Robin, Captain America, the X-Men, Scarlet Witch, the Doom Patrol, Wonder Woman, Black Lightning, Giant Man/Goliath, Luke Cage, Black Widow, most of the Legion of Super-Heroes, Green Arrow, Wolverine, Namor and another 100 or so characters have not maintained one, strict appearance since their debut appearance. Usually, costumes were changed to not only spice things up for readers, but to evolve with the times / expectations of readers no longer buying what had its inspiration in the glorified circus strongman and acrobat costumes from the 1920s/30s.
Moviegoers--dealing with films populated by living people set (in some cases) in a world mirroring real life in appearance--have certain expectations based on what is considered believable, even when that world is mixed with with fantastic situations. For that reason, both filmmakers and comic book talents have updated costumes to appear to be more durable than spandex or a "onesie", in consideration of the relentlessly violent nature of the heroes' work. That does not mean the costume needs to appear to be SWAT or fire department protective gear, or obvious foam padding (and muscles), but there is an expectation that the costume is as ready for the job as the person wearing it. Spandex and circus acrobat costumes do not sell durability.
Steve Lombard:
Eve Teschmacher:
Eve Teschmacher:
Steve Lombard looks very Steve Lombardish.
I still find it weird that Superman productions in this century keep bringing back Eve Teschmacher in some form, when before 2000 she'd never made any appearances outside the first two Reeve movies. It's not like the original Eve was all that great a character. Why did she suddenly start being seen as indispensable? I mean, I haven't seen Batman projects rushing to resurrect Alexander Knox or Bob the Goon.
I still find it weird that Superman productions in this century keep bringing back Eve Teschmacher in some form, when before 2000 she'd never made any appearances outside the first two Reeve movies. It's not like the original Eve was all that great a character. Why did she suddenly start being seen as indispensable? I mean, I haven't seen Batman projects rushing to resurrect Alexander Knox or Bob the Goon.
Teschmacher is a memorable character from what remains the most beloved and influential Superman anything ever. I don't find it surprising at all she would get revisited. Hell, some version of Otis has also turned up in several productions at this point, including Gunn's.
And if any Superman fan didn't get a huge kick and a big laugh out of Cat Grant bellowing, "MISS TESSMACHER!!!" on Supergirl -- well, I'm not sure that's a fan I want to know.
And if any Superman fan didn't get a huge kick and a big laugh out of Cat Grant bellowing, "MISS TESSMACHER!!!" on Supergirl -- well, I'm not sure that's a fan I want to know.
The average Superman fan--especially any familiar with the comics' history--does not care a whit about Teschmacher. That character was already antiquated (like more than a few things) in the '78 movie.
Polled 'em all, have you?
I assure you, not all Superman fans share your disdain for Donner's film. Indeed -- admittedly without polling them either -- I doubt very many of them do.
But that's just what's so strange -- for roughly a quarter-century after the Donner movies, nobody at all revisited either Otis or Eve. They made exactly zero appearances outside the movies in the 20th century. Clearly, nobody back then considered them indispensable. Yet somehow, once we hit the 2000s, they suddenly came into vogue. It's that change that I find so puzzling.
Similar threads
