What's the problem with Red trunks ?

[Cmbmool]

Honestly, outside his proto moments in his early years. Superman has always been ID by his suit with his infamous RED TRUNKS.

His new 52 suit is just a bad joke and deserves to be destroyed soon.

As Superman fans I have to ask if anyone has a problem with the New 52 Suit and/or the Red Trunks ?

Because while I may not be a big fan of Superman, I can still ID him by his symbol, his cape and his Red Trunks.

This new 52 version looks more like a brute/bruiser than a icon/leader/inspiration to many heroes. Whether he's Young or not the new 52 Superman needs something to be the inspiration that he is to all.

[rightsuperhero]

I think Late Night Comedians started to make fun of them a decade or so ago and then it just started to catch on with the general public.

[MykeHavoc]

I prefer the trunks and don't give a damn how silly it looks. For me, its a color scheme thing to adequately break up the blue.

[DochaDocha]

Agreed with rightsuperhero. There's also some correlation between wanting to make superheroes more like Hollywood action heroes and ditching the trunks. In a 4-color comic panel, the trunks look okay, but they look stupid on an action star, so goes the argument.

I am 95% convinced that New 52 Superman has no trunks because Hollywood doesn't want Superman to "wear his underwear on the outside."

[daBronzeBomma]

Honestly, outside his proto moments in his early years. Superman has always been ID by his suit with his infamous RED TRUNKS.

His new 52 suit is just a bad joke and deserves to be destroyed soon.

As Superman fans I have to ask if anyone has a problem with the New 52 Suit and/or the Red Trunks ?

Because while I may not be a big fan of Superman, I can still ID him by his symbol, his cape and his Red Trunks.

This new 52 version looks more like a brute/bruiser than a icon/leader/inspiration to many heroes. Whether he's Young or not the new 52 Superman needs something to be the inspiration that he is to all.

The red trunks are far, far, FAR behind his symbol and cape in terms of recognition. I'd argue the red boots and blue shirt come way before the trunks as well.

Only diehard comic book fans of the character really get up in arms over the loss of the trunks (tho I'll agree the current New52 costumes have been disappointing so far, but I doubt they're going to go backwards).

Most casual fans (i.e. the ones that watch movies and other media ... and whom probably outnumber the diehards by 10 to 1 at least) just say "it's about time he figured out the underwear goes on the inside".

And seriously, if you're not a big fan of the character (as you state), then why do you even care?

Ex: I'm not a big fan of Booster Gold, thus I wouldn't care if that character loses his visor or flared collar or whatever. Not a fan (at all) of Deadpool, so they can do whatever to his looks and I wouldn't even notice.

Really, all they need to do is make Supes' pants less skin-tight and more like nigh-indestructible blue slacks that tuck into his boots and this "groin aesthetic" issue for Supes goes away for good.

[K. Jones]

I'm cool with the trunks, I'm cool without the trunks. It's a bit of an inefficient art dilemma, actually, for me. A point of contention, the new costume. Ostensibly there's nothing at all wrong with Superman's classic costume, so if you want to get rid of the trunks that's quite probably the only actual change you need to make.

I don't think they needed to look any further than Gardner Fox and Carmine Infantino's "space age" superhero costume designs for perfectly sophisticated style choice for super-suits with no strongman trunks. A "Silver Age/Space Age" Superman costume would be bloody fantastic.

[ekrolo2]

As long as its aesthetically pleasing to look at they can change it however they want. Hell if the story and/or characterization is good, I don't give a Kardashians ass what he's wearing as long as I can clearly identify him as Superman. Same goes for every other hero.

[The World]

Honestly, outside his proto moments in his early years. Superman has always been ID by his suit with his infamous RED TRUNKS.

His new 52 suit is just a bad joke and deserves to be destroyed soon.

As Superman fans I have to ask if anyone has a problem with the New 52 Suit and/or the Red Trunks ?

Because while I may not be a big fan of Superman, I can still ID him by his symbol, his cape and his Red Trunks.

This new 52 version looks more like a brute/bruiser than a icon/leader/inspiration to many heroes. Whether he's Young or not the new 52 Superman needs something to be the inspiration that he is to all. :(

The trunks were suppose to be a call back to early strong man uniforms so the trunks being on the outside doesn't mean whatever you think it means. Or at least that's what my Superman Archive collection is telling me in the foreword of the book. Besides every leader I've seen during my lifetime is either in religious robes or in a business suit.

I'll ask the OP this, do you also wonder why Thor or Iron Man don't have their trunks anymore?

[Superguy]

The answer is that it's simply outdated.

[Tony]

Honestly they should just go back to the classic. The artists of today don't have the talent to do a redesign that doesn't look like crap. Same with most comic book heroes and villains. it seems most comic artists today are just fans who learned to draw from comics. They don't have the skill for design.

[Cmbmool]

The trunks were suppose to be a call back to early strong man uniforms so the trunks being on the outside doesn't mean whatever you think it means. Or at least that's what my Superman Archive collection is telling me in the foreword of the book. Besides every leader I've seen during my lifetime is either in religious robes or in a business suit.

I'll ask the OP this, do you also wonder why Thor or Iron Man don't have their trunks anymore?

Iron Man changes his suits a lot and Thor....well he is a "god" so he sort of gets a pass of having armor on him.

[The World]

Iron Man changes his suits a lot and Thor....well he is a "god" so he sort of gets a pass of having armor on him.

I'm talking specifically about the trunks. Both characters use to wear trunks but Marvel dropped them over time. Do you also have a problem with that?

They could easily just have them in trunks with their respective armors but don't because they want the characters to have larger appeal to the GA and probably saw the way Superman had been flayed over their years vs Spider-man and chose to abandon them.

[Dispenser Of Truth]

The problem is that occasionally a TV show or comedian will make a remark about it, and that convinced fans that the baseline superhero costume doesn't work anymore and has been rejected by culture as a whole, even though Batman rocked a pair of trunks for the vast bulk of his own career without hearing a word about it. Same as Green Lantern never gets any crap for supposedly being "overpowered"--Superman's the cultural reference for the idea of 'superhero', so he gets the short shift when people have issues with that idea, or just a joke in general. My advice? Get over it, and at least be happy at the degree of cultural cache this indicates Superman still having.

Any arguments against this premise would best be framed as a two-pronged essay on why if Superman's costume is so goddamned silly and that's actually a serious reason why the world theoretically no longer respects him
A. Why a flick about a man cosplaying as the American flag was last year's biggest superhero movie (unless you count Guardians of the Galaxy, in which case you must make the same argument about a foul-mouthed raccoon).
B. Why Batman still looked totally awesome and badass while rocking the underwear in Dark Knight Returns, including during the beginning of the book when it's bright blue.

[Vanguard-01]

I prefer the trunks and don't give a damn how silly it looks. For me, its a color scheme thing to adequately break up the blue.

This.

I used to be onboard with getting rid of the trunks. But lately? After three years of seeing Superman without them, I'm actually beginning to think to myself "You know? Something just seems to be missing, here."

I think you're right: without the trunks, there's just too much blue. Now, could this problem be solved by something other than bringing back the trunks? Sure, I suppose. I'm not a fashion designer, so I'm not so sure what could be used in place. But it's taken me three years before it started to dawn on me that Superman without the trunks just doesn't look as much like Superman, anymore.

[ekrolo2]

This.

I used to be onboard with getting rid of the trunks. But lately? After three years of seeing Superman without them, I'm actually beginning to think to myself "You know? Something just seems to be missing, here."

I think you're right: without the trunks, there's just too much blue. Now, could this problem be solved by something other than bringing back the trunks? Sure, I suppose. I'm not a fashion designer, so I'm not so sure what could be used in place. But it's taken me three years before it started to dawn on me that Superman without the trunks just doesn't look as much like Superman, anymore.

Give him some red on the arms, worked for E-2 Superman. That'll make the blue less pronounced. Or instead of that maybe do what Futures End did and add an extra color to it, maybe a different shade of blue like the Smallville comic did. Any and all of these can easily rectify the "too much blue" complaint.