Impractical vs Practical Costumes in Comics

[dragonmp93]

Most of the 'practical' costumes I've seen though can not exactly be considered street clothes, though. Some may have real world elements, like Batgirl's Doc Martens, but that's hardly something new (see the assorted coats worn over costumes by a number of characters, like Gambit) but in general it's not exactly something you can buy off the rack, at the very least they are regular clothes that have been modified in some way, but often they are obviously custom made and usually still brightly colored and all that... so they are still costumes. They're just a different style.

*edit - to address the OP, I am fine with the new styles. Costume styles change over time, they always have, they always will, and characters will have their looks updated accordingly with a few rare exceptions. As long as the costumes still look nice, I just go along with it. I happen to like the current trend quite a bit.

Well, the only difference between my girlfriend's jacket and Spider-Woman's jacket is that the design is an eagle (a much cooler animal ) instead of an spider, and the glider in the armpits.

Or for instance, this recent designs of Wonder Woman:

Wonder Woman.



Normal Woman.



Because, to be sincere, the only thing you wont find in a store is the belt or the gloves.

The Spider-Woman costume was updated mostly as a panic reaction to the fan uproar over the Milo Manara cover. If the redesign had actually been planned out the logical thing would have been to debut it with the first issue, not the fifth one. The new costume isn't terrible but it certain looks out of place juxtaposed with the other Spider-Women that Marvel has been pushing lately. The designs for Silk and Spider-Gwen have been much better received than Jessica's new costume and they aren't really practical at all.

Well, i think that it's because Silk and Spider-Gwen look like superhéroines, instead Spider-Woman looks like Nancy Drew.

[dragonmp93]

That's more often true for recent changes.

Look at the changes in Wolverine's costumes throughout the years: http://geekologie.com/2013/07/the-co...erines-cos.php

Most costume changes are just pallet swaps, not modernized looks. And it's no coincidence that the looks which are modernized are more recent and look a lot less superhero-y and in my opinion less dynamic. Takes away a lot of the superhero aspects. Some are straight up boring and others are just movie adaptations. Where's the creativity in those? If Marvel as a whole is heading towards a more modernized creative direction, wouldn't more costumes start to have share similarities? More pouches, pockets, zippers etc. Is that necessarily creative? It became a notorious joke during the 90s.



As insincere as it might seem to you, there's some merit to it. Superheroes aren't real. Why should their costumes be grounded in realism? There's a standard in real society that doesn't apply to superheroes because they live in a fantasy world. I'm guessing police officers and fire fighters don't have the luxury of wearing superhero costumes because they don't have steel skin, healing factors, ultimate fighting ability, crazy reflexes, super strength etc.



More often than not, that issue is addressed within the book. He is constantly taking off his coat during fights and rolling up his sleeves. I feel like it's one of the most realistic portrayals of a modern costume in regards to practicality right now.



I'm trying to say modernized outfits, more often than not, look less superhero-y than their predecessors. Compare Bucky's facemask to his domino mask. One is practical. One isn't. One says superspy. The other says superhero. Arguably, he's both, but I feel like the looks should reflect superhero aspects more than their roles. Maybe that's just my preference. I find it more creative and dynamic than just going with what is expected. I do believe there's a balance, but it's my opinion that recent redesigns are having a hard time finding it.

In Hawkeye's case, he went from costumed vigilante to superspy. There used to be a time where he could stand with Cap, Thor and Iron Man and actually look like he fits in. Now, not so much. He looks like your standard SHIELD agent with a bow. It's boring as all hell. He doesn't look like a superhero at all anymore.

You know, now that i think about it, Spider-Woman's new costume wouldnt look so ugly if she wore a facemask like Bucky's.

[Of Atlantis]

You know, now that i think about it, Spider-Woman's new costume wouldnt look so ugly if she wore a facemask like Bucky's.

You mean the mouth cover, or the domino mask? I'd agree on the domino mask.

[dragonmp93]

You mean the mouth cover, or the domino mask?

Given that she already has those glasses, i would prefer the mouth cover.

[Of Atlantis]

Given that she already has those glasses, i would prefer the mouth cover.

Attached to the glasses would make it look like more like a mask. I wouldn't hate it, though I'd still change some things.

[HaveAtThee]

I personally don't like how they've shown Thor without a costume or without his helmet. It's obvious they're pushing for synergy with the MCU, but one of the coolest aspects of all the Norse Gods was their funky helmets with horns and feathers. The Ribic redesign a couple years ago was cool enough, where Thor's helmet was totally metallic instead of having feathers, but I feel Thor lost his regal look. Now he just looks like Chris Hemsworth who hasn't showered in a year, but whatever.

[gwangung]

Hm. Must be weird. I think the new Spider Woman outfit is sexy as all hell. It allows for more facial expression and more subtle body language, and a bit more mystery---the think about traditional superhero costumes is that they're obvious and unsubtle. That's fine for straight up heroics, but for moodier and more mysterious stories, you might want something different.

[Zero Hunter]

It is not about being practical or impractical. It is about what will transfer over to live action the best. That is what it is all about theses days no matter what they say.

[Arfguy]

It is not about being practical or impractical. It is about what will transfer over to live action the best. That is what it is all about theses days no matter what they say.

I guess. I could respect that, as well if it was sometimes the case. Other than Superman 1 - 4 and Superman Returns, Wonder Woman TV show and the Spider-Man 1, 2, 3 and ASM2, there aren't a whole lot of comic book costumes translated pretty much directly from comic book pages to live action.

There's always going to be changes made. Minor and major ones. Trying to create this synergy between live-action and comic book art seems kind of counter productive, seeing as how superhero comics should embrace a lot of the out-there elements. I don't mind comics trying to be realistic, but seriously? Embrace that costumes are not practical, at all and in most cases, will need drastic modifications to work in live-action.

[thecrimson]

It is not about being practical or impractical. It is about what will transfer over to live action the best. That is what it is all about theses days no matter what they say.

What's the point in doing that when the movies were always going to change the costumes to fit live-action? Why do the work for them?

[PiercedMonk]

Speaking of [im]practical costumes, I absolutely love Matt's new look in DAREDEVIL 14. He looks like a complete douchebag, and it's awesome.

[jphamlore]

I personally don't like how they've shown Thor without a costume or without his helmet. It's obvious they're pushing for synergy with the MCU, but one of the coolest aspects of all the Norse Gods was their funky helmets with horns and feathers. The Ribic redesign a couple years ago was cool enough, where Thor's helmet was totally metallic instead of having feathers, but I feel Thor lost his regal look. Now he just looks like Chris Hemsworth who hasn't showered in a year, but whatever.

Wasn't the artist who pushed the boundaries of Thor art and beyond Mike Deodato, Jr., with so much golden hair, no helmet, and often the bare-chested look?

[Zero Hunter]

What's the point in doing that when the movies were always going to change the costumes to fit live-action? Why do the work for them?

Because all comics are now (at least from Marvel and DC) is just testing ground for new movie properties. They see if they can find something that will work and build up a little buzz and then figure out how to best translate it the big screen.

[Marvel_Is]

I personally don't like how they've shown Thor without a costume or without his helmet. It's obvious they're pushing for synergy with the MCU, but one of the coolest aspects of all the Norse Gods was their funky helmets with horns and feathers. The Ribic redesign a couple years ago was cool enough, where Thor's helmet was totally metallic instead of having feathers, but I feel Thor lost his regal look. Now he just looks like Chris Hemsworth who hasn't showered in a year, but whatever.

I absolutely agree with everything you've said here.

[Thirteen]

Given that she already has those glasses, i would prefer the mouth cover.

Like SILK? The other other Spider-Woman....
Silk_Vol_1_1_Lee_Textless.jpg