Superman's Red Trunks Return in Action #1000

[titansupes]

It's always going to the THE superhero look. There's no changing that. DC were just pissing against the wind with those revisions. I'm thrilled the real suit's back.

[jimmy]

It was the archetype...in the 1940s and 1950s. Now, just over 75 years later, it is the archetype of how to NOT dress your super-hero...unless it's a parody.

Kal might as well wear red trunks on his head too.



Well, I don't want to look at any artwork with the red trunks.

Unless it's a poster with "DC: your grandfather's Superman!" or "DC: we backpedaled faster than Flash could ever dream!

So what, if it is 75 years later, especially in a world where you can wear anything you want (with virtually, No Limits) hmm?. Besides, I wasn't aware that there is some type of "Rule of Law" (standards) of what constitutes -"Super-hero"- attire or, is it just an "opinion"?

My grandfather's Superman, ha if you only knew...

[Kuwagaton]

I love the fun DC is having with rustling people about it. Like giving out the promotional pieces yesterday and directly calling them underwear. I don't have one feeling or another about Superman returning to his classic look, but it's strange that so many find it unacceptable. This is more or less how he looked for over 70 years. If you didn't enjoy anything from those years Superman may not be for you, or if you want more of the same of what we got after, I'm sure it has to do with plenty of other things before the trunks.

If only Marvel would follow this one time and give Logan his brown and tan costume, haha.

[scary harpy]

I love the fun DC is having with rustling people about it. Like giving out the promotional pieces yesterday and directly calling them underwear. I don't have one feeling or another about Superman returning to his classic look, but it's strange that so many find it unacceptable. This is more or less how he looked for over 70 years. If you didn't enjoy anything from those years Superman may not be for you, or if you want more of the same of what we got after, I'm sure it has to do with plenty of other things before the trunks.

Where did you get this idea?

When I was a child, I watched The New Adventures of Superman Filmation Late 1960s and loved it.

That was then and this is now.

[Kuwagaton]

I said "if you didn't enjoy anything." If you did and you still are not happy about the trunks returning, it sounds like you may not like the concept of a retread. But that visual in and of itself can't really be a problem then, can it?

[Korath]

You'd be surprised, however, wow...dude... they are just"two toned belted pant-trunks" all "one piece" with top brief area in red and the legs are blue that's all - to each their own!



Yikes...
"One of the worst out there" Really? It was the Arch-type blue-print for many a costume!
"Cheap texture" the Original was made from his blankets, which are indestructible.
"Underwear" They aren't underwear - they are "one piece two-toned belted pant-trunks"
As far as where you are looking at, well...now... that's a problem you might want to work on.

I'll refer you to "Granny's peach tree" on the Internet about the bolded part. If it looks like an underwear and smell like an underwear, then it's an underwear, no matter how creators, authors and fans try to spin it.

And, yes, they are utterly ugly and ridiculous. And the perfect example of what is wrong with comics (and especially D.C.'s right now). Nostalgia and the retreading of all stories matters more than anything, especially for the older characters like Superman.

[Miles To Go]

And, yes, they are utterly ugly and ridiculous.

I'm in hysterics over how serious you're taking this.

Nostalgia and the retreading of all stories matters more than anything, especially for the older characters like Superman.

If it ain't broke

[Korath]

I'm in hysterics over how serious you're taking this.



If it ain't broke

Well, that's too bad it is then. Because the "iconic" Superman is as unappealing to new readers as you can. Hence why Jon was created, but even him as become less than interesting in Superson, where Damian is constantly belittled to help a member of the Superman family outshine a Batfamily's, since it apparently can't do it without it (which is a shame, but hardly surprising seeing what the Superman line has been for most of the last four decades, with the thankful exception of New 52).

[Lvenger]

I still don't get why there's such opposition to Superman getting the trunks back. I'm certainly not a massive trunks advocate who demanded them back (though the New 52 armour was garish and ugly) and the Rebirth and Reborn costumes were good alternatives. But it was inevitable that DC would realise that Superman's classic uniform with trunks can't be replaced or revamped in terms of design and its iconic cultural recognition. Such fuss over a small part of Superman's aesthetic is quite ridiculous.

[Soubhagya]

I don't get agree with this notion of 'grandfather's Superman'. I am 26. Started reading Superman comics with Rebirth and loved it anyway. And i prefer 'trunks' over the 'trunk less' look. Somehow it seems right and correct to me. Its not a big deal. I was fine with the Rebirth/Reborn costume. But the costume looks more beautiful and colorful to me now.

I don't know about the general opinion. But i think its dividing fans. Some for and others against. I am for it. But i agree with the view that it is not a very big thing. I am more concerned about the quality of books.

[Myskin]

I still don't get why there's such opposition to Superman getting the trunks back.

I really don't think there is. There may be someone here on CBR who is very vocal against the trunks on even against the New52 version, but I don't think that the CBR forums are representative of anything. The public at large doesn't care about the trunks IMHO. Well, the public at large probably doesn't read Superman, either.

[Korath]

The public at large, at least here in France, find Superman utterly ridiculous. He is known for being the big boring dummy who wears his underwears on the outside for the general public. It's probably different in America, but as for myself, I would have died of shame as a five years old if someone had offered me a Superman costume for a birthday party or something. It's worn mostly to lampshade it, and when it appears in non-comics fiction. It's mostly "Don't you look ridiculous like that? Yeah, but it got me to talk to you" kin of vibe, if you know what I mean.

[SiegePerilous02]

The public at large, at least here in France, find Superman utterly ridiculous. He is known for being the big boring dummy who wears his underwears on the outside for the general public. It's probably different in America, but as for myself, I would have died of shame as a five years old if someone had offered me a Superman costume for a birthday party or something. It's worn mostly to lampshade it, and when it appears in non-comics fiction. It's mostly "Don't you look ridiculous like that? Yeah, but it got me to talk to you" kin of vibe, if you know what I mean.

Would not having the trunks change France's opinion on him a great deal? I'm doubtful. What is the perception of superheroes in general over there?

[GreatKungLao]

I still don't get why there's such opposition to Superman getting the trunks back. I'm certainly not a massive trunks advocate who demanded them back (though the New 52 armour was garish and ugly) and the Rebirth and Reborn costumes were good alternatives. But it was inevitable that DC would realise that Superman's classic uniform with trunks can't be replaced or revamped in terms of design and its iconic cultural recognition. Such fuss over a small part of Superman's aesthetic is quite ridiculous.

I wouldn't call my stand an opposition. I just think that this return is completely unnecessary. They tried Superman without red trunks and it worked. His Rebirth/Reborn/Man of Steel designs are awesome and I just can't understand why reversing something that already looked great. To me it's just going backwards, I prefer moving forward.

[Sacred Knight]

I'm not a massive trunks advocate or detractor either (well outside of live action, then I'm a detractor). But there's no truth to the idea that the suit "can't be replaced or revamped". I mean, that's going to be the narrative from here on out, but its specious reasoning at best. Point of fact, the past 6 years have proven they very much can be. He hasn't fallen completely off the map in that time period because he was wearing an updated costume. So the costume can very much be revamped. They're not bringing them back out of any factual, tangible data suggesting it just can't be changed. They're bringing them back to sync with a huge anniversary and, as silly as it might seem to the layman, use it as an extra piece of hype.

But Lee is still talking completely out of his ass when he says it was the plan all along. I guaran-damn-tee that if either the New 52 or Rebirth saw gains on an exponential level, they wouldn't have changed anything. They would have ridden with the hot hand (as even if the look would have little to do with any success or failure, it would be visually associated with said success).