Chad, are your comments about Grant Morrison's desires for the Superman and Wonder Woman characters facetious or based on actual comments he's made?

Fact. I'll look the quotes up later.

Chad, take the medication. It's for your own good. No more flights of fancy where a belt buckle symbolizes the collapse of everything you hold dear.

A smarmy comment from Robert Walsh? Color me shocked! See, this isn't about the collapse of all I hold dear. Not even remotely. It's about correcting people when they're off-base, crucially, about something fairly significant, which I've outlined.

Start with the small things, the changes to the costumes, the changes in their origins, and continue on from there until the characters, the icons of the superhero world, are unrecognizable. And then you'll have accomplished the feat of subjugating great ideas for limp, mediocre ones. Slippery slopes and all that.

...there were internal, story reasons given for the changes to Batman's emblem...

*********************

Really?  Never knew that.

Chad's point illustrates how I feel about comic book movies.  I just got tired of saying "...at least they didn't..." or "...at least they did..." and so I've enacted a sort of Minimal Threshold of expectations.  For example, Green Lantern isn't a character I'm particularly attached to, but there are certain things that, if changed, are going to be dealbreakers.  This is very subjective and I personally have no idea what they are going to be until I see them "broken", but once I do, I will not swallow my ideal and plunk down my $$.  For example, I expect their GL to wear a mask.  If he doesn't, include me out.

I'm not a huge Superman fan either.  I didn't "get" him until JB's version.  But his costume is just one of those perfect things (even though it went through a number of iterations before I was even born, yadda yadda).  Even if it's just a little S on a belt buckle, at some point you have to admit even a wafer-thin mint can be a "deal-breaker".

Really? That was one of the few things I didn't like about Frank's Batman in DKR. The notion that the bat emblem is bullet-proof and gives potential shooters a target assumes anyone shooting at Batman would be a crack marksman. And, frankly, if I was shooting at Batman, I'd aim that the one part of his body that was clearly not armored -- the lower half of his face!

...I'd aim that the one part of his body that was clearly not armored -- the lower half of his face!

********************

Double true.

Wasn't Singer's justification that the S was on the belt buckle because putting one on the cape would make it "too difficult" to do CGI animation?

--

I believe this to be the case.  Which is a bit of a worry as this didn't seem to be of any concern to Richard Donner.  On a side note, since when did Superman's cape go from being cloth to rubber?

++++

Waitaminute, waitaminute... are you telling me there's no S on Superman's cape?

1)  I need my eyes checked.

2)  I now dislike that movie even more.

---

In the post film discussion the first thing I said was that there wasn't an 'S' on the back, and no one else in the group noticed and didn't mind.  When I pointed out that it was an important part of the costume, they didn't get it.

Not only was the extra 'S' on the belt a bad move, it was the half dozen or so that were on the soles of his boots that were a real no-no.  Was the purpose of this a Zorro type brand as he stomped on the heads of bad guys?.