I have a question regarding Superman and the red trunks...

[Jim Kelly]

It's just in comics, there are lots of super-heroes who have worn the blue long underwear, with red accents, so if you're going to do that design yet again--and for Superman--it has to have something distinctive to set it apart from all the others. That DC couldn't settle on one design, and you had mutliple versions, didn't help either.

Kind of funny, because all the other designs owed something to the original Superman look (even if Peter Parker won't admit it), but now you had Superman who looked like he was trying to rip off the designs of other super-heroes. The originality of Superman as the first comic book super-hero is the drum that DC likes to beat--and the costume was a way to show that.

No wonder Superman has fallen on hard times. People just think he's a cheap knock-off of better super-heroes.

[Vakanai]

The too much blue;
That's an argument that is base on an overall design look.

Unlike the anti-trunk fall back crutch - that they are "underwear" (which they aren't) and /or "outdated" (when the entire costume comes from the same time period) - in truth, "outdated" is just a replacement word - as it just high-lights the one section of the - body and costume - that some find offesnsive in some manner because it reminds them of the whole underwear misconception to begin with!

Just like land real estate it is - LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION - couch it, any way you like but the needle alway comes back to this and the location here is just a problem for some.

I'm sorry, I don't really know what you are trying to say here, could you clarify or simplify it a bit?

[jimmy]

I'm sorry, I don't really know what you are trying to say here, could you clarify or simplify it a bit?

Simply put - if the article of clothing which is the source of unwarranted ridicule -" the belted trunks"- weren't located in the region of the body governing the reproductive system, this entire controversy, most likely, would not be taken place at all.


Honestly - It really is JUST an article clothing which happens to be part of an ensemble of pieces or, at least gives the appearance of such since they are attached as one continuous pair of long pants.

[Jim Kelly]

You know you could take the Jim Lee Superman in black and white and fill in all those separate panels, outlined by seams, with random colours. I remember the colouring books when I was a kid (and I've seen this with most kids), I'd just use whatever colours I liked or had and didn't try to colour the pages in a way that made sense.

I wonder if Jim Lee was thinking that the suit would be coloured differently than how it ended up--

[Vakanai]

Simply put - if the article of clothing which is the source of unwarranted ridicule -" the belted trunks"- weren't located in the region of the body governing the reproductive system, this entire controversy, most likely, would not be taken place at all.


Honestly - It really is JUST an article clothing which happens to be part of an ensemble of pieces or, at least gives the appearance of such since they are attached as one continuous pair of long pants.

Well of course. But because they are there, they remind people of underwear. And thanks for explaining that.

[Last Son]

You know you could take the Jim Lee Superman in black and white and fill in all those separate panels, outlined by seams, with random colours. I remember the colouring books when I was a kid (and I've seen this with most kids), I'd just use whatever colours I liked or had and didn't try to colour the pages in a way that made sense.

I wonder if Jim Lee was thinking that the suit would be coloured differently than how it ended up--

I did something like that with one of the first images released, coloring different plates red to see how it looked.

I think they could have kept the red in the pelvic region but shaped the pattern in a way to disassociate it with trunks, like this:

batmanarkham.jpg

But I'm sure there would still be objectors shouting "NO RED CROTCH!" like Edna Mode.

[Jim Kelly]

There's almost like a Hal Jordan classic Green Lantern uniform inside the Lee design if you follow different lines. Or Ray Palmer's classic Atom suit when using other lines. A fun rainy day project, to try out different colour fills for the costume.

[Last Son]

There's almost like a Hal Jordan classic Green Lantern uniform inside the Lee design if you follow different lines. Or Ray Palmer's classic Atom suit when using other lines. A fun rainy day project, to try out different colour fills for the costume.

I always thought it was funny that they left the trunk lines on the suit since that could imply that there are still trunks on the suit, just colored blue.

[jimmy]

You know you could take the Jim Lee Superman in black and white and fill in all those separate panels, outlined by seams, with random colours. I remember the colouring books when I was a kid (and I've seen this with most kids), I'd just use whatever colours I liked or had and didn't try to colour the pages in a way that made sense.

I wonder if Jim Lee was thinking that the suit would be coloured differently than how it ended up--

like the old painit by numbers?

Well of course. But because they are there, they remind people of underwear. And thanks for

You are welcome....
One would think that the belt loops, with an actual belt runing through it would be enough of a distinqishing factor between the two, not to mentionion even when the top portion of long pair OF the PANTS happen to be shaded a differnt color, as it still reminds them of underwear, remarkable!

[JAK]

Well of course. But because they are there, they remind people of underwear. And thanks for explaining that.

And the main reason for that is that they made "Underoos" underwear in Superman and Batman colors in the 80's (maybe 90's, and a "throwback" version for adults today), so it stuck in our heads.

Honestly, Superman's sales weren't all that affected one way or the other. Me, personally, I've liked some of the trunksless costumes - just not as much as the classic. It just doesn't look as dynamic to me. It's not bad, just not (nearly) as good. If people are so hung up on something they see as "underwear" (not saying you) that they can't enjoy the character... there's no good way to say this so it doesn't come off much more aggressive than I mean it to, but that's kinda on them. I can enjoy the character without them, even though I strongly prefer them, so I think that's fair.

And I keep going back to this, but I don't remember people saying that Batman's "armor panties" in the first two Arkham games kept them from enjoying those games. They sold like hot cakes, they're phenomenal games, and that was that. So Superman having to put up with the jokes all the time (and worse yet, DC making them too) just seems like pure hypocrisy (I'm speaking mainly about the general public here, those who talk about them as a preference only is a different matter).

[JAK]

You know you could take the Jim Lee Superman in black and white and fill in all those separate panels, outlined by seams, with random colours. I remember the colouring books when I was a kid (and I've seen this with most kids), I'd just use whatever colours I liked or had and didn't try to colour the pages in a way that made sense.

I wonder if Jim Lee was thinking that the suit would be coloured differently than how it ended up--

Funny you say that, I always thought that, too.

Something like this, maybe? (only moreso, like red on the arms, too..):

testsupes.jpg

[Last Son]

And the main reason for that is that they made "Underoos" underwear in Superman and Batman colors in the 80's (maybe 90's, and a "throwback" version for adults today), so it stuck in our heads.

Honestly, Superman's sales weren't all that affected one way or the other. Me, personally, I've liked some of the trunksless costumes - just not as much as the classic. It just doesn't look as dynamic to me. It's not bad, just not (nearly) as good. If people are so hung up on something they see as "underwear" (not saying you) that they can't enjoy the character... there's no good way to say this so it doesn't come off much more aggressive than I mean it to, but that's kinda on them. I can enjoy the character without them, even though I strongly prefer them, so I think that's fair.

And I keep going back to this, but I don't remember people saying that Batman's "armor panties" in the first two Arkham games kept them from enjoying those games. They sold like hot cakes, they're phenomenal games, and that was that. So Superman having to put up with the jokes all the time (and worse yet, DC making them too) just seems like pure hypocrisy (I'm speaking mainly about the general public here, those who talk about them as a preference only is a different matter).

Yeah, that is strange isn't it? Nobody ever seemed to mind Arkham Batman's trunks, and those games were made just within the last ten years. But if you listened to the fanatics on Twitter, those games should have bombed because Batman supposedly looked like he was out of the 1940s and looked corny and ridiculous.

[Korath]

Not taking into account the fact that Batman's underwear are pretty easy to not notice in the games (and comics) compared to Superman's very bright red and "in your face" underwears is what is hypocritical. It took me hours to even notice the Batman's underwear in the games, because they aren't able to draw the player's attention. Neither their color nor their texture are comparable to Superman's really outdated and corny undies are. Their very texture is underwear-like, no matter how much defenders of the so-alled "iconic" Superman tries to spin it.

[rpmaluki]

It is iconic regardless of what people think.

[Last Son]

Not taking into account the fact that Batman's underwear are pretty easy to not notice in the games (and comics) compared to Superman's very bright red and "in your face" underwears is what is hypocritical. It took me hours to even notice the Batman's underwear in the games, because they aren't able to draw the player's attention. Neither their color nor their texture are comparable to Superman's really outdated and corny undies are. Their very texture is underwear-like, no matter how much defenders of the so-alled "iconic" Superman tries to spin it.

If you think the notion of Superman being iconic is "so-called", why the hell are you even on a Superman forum?