| Author |
|
Jim Muir
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 26 June 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1374
|
| Posted: 15 July 2009 at 2:19am | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
I don't dislike the movie for the darkened suit, the absent cape 'S' or the surplus belt 'S'.
No, the crime it commits is the greatest crime any film can commit...
Its just such a boring film.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Knut Robert Knutsen
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 22 September 2006
Posts: 7374
|
| Posted: 15 July 2009 at 2:43am | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
"Its just such a boring film."
Yeah. You'd think that with the budget, the set pieces and the talent involved, it would come across as more exciting than a very special episode of Lois and Clark. I loved that series and was willing to forgive some of its faults, but even some of the lamest episodes were more exciting than that movie.
A superhero movie lives and dies on the casting of the hero and villain. Routh was too "weak" to compete with Spacey and Spacey was hamming it up. I swear, if you put Tim Daly and Clancy Brown (the cartoon voice actors) in that movie you'd have more chemistry and a better movie. Even if Tim Daly is a bit too old to play a 30 year old Superman.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Robert Walsh
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 24 July 2008
Posts: 456
|
| Posted: 15 July 2009 at 3:23am | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
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 can see where he was going with that. Chest shot is the easiest shot for a non-marksman. Center-mass will usually result in a hit. Even if he moves, your miss will still hit something.
Head shots are a lot harder, especially on a moving target.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Robert Walsh
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 24 July 2008
Posts: 456
|
| Posted: 15 July 2009 at 3:39am | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
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.
* * * * * * *
And every couple of weeks, you've got another example of the comic industry going too far, which probably stretches back to 1748. All of which phrased as semi-hysterical ravings, often involving the sexual context of the characters that seems to be a sick fascination of yours.
There comes a point in which a sane man stops reading comics and finds a hobby that doesn't cause him endless aggravation. I can understand a professional complaining about the state of his industry, because it's his livelihood that is being destroyed; but a fan who doesn't enjoy what he's reading/watching is just a masochist.
I didn't read a lot of comics as a kid and even I was aware that characters and costumes changed quite a bit between generations. Superman's costume has evolved over the years and there have been numerous minor tweaks to it stretching back as long as I can see. Changing a belt buckle is, despite your hysterical ravings, is a minor change (I didn't even realize it was a change until you guys pointed it out). Maybe you don't like it, but it's not as though changing a belt buckle makes the character less suitable for children.
I know the industry has a lot of problems and the rather shocking state of affairs that a bunch of children's characters are being read almost exclusively by anal-retentive adults truly boggles the mind.
But a belt buckle. That's the slippery slope. Not heroes killing. Not popular characters getting killed for shock value. Not using graphic violence as cover images. The least objectionable bit on that cover is the belt buckle, seeing as it has a picture of a guy with a giant hole in his head and dangling eyeball. And you think the belt buckle is what's wrong with comics?
Your posts pretty much demonstrate that you lack anything resembling perspective.
Edited by Robert Walsh on 15 July 2009 at 3:41am
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Tom French
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 07 January 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 4154
|
| Posted: 15 July 2009 at 5:52am | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
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.
I was going to point this out, but you beat me to it. The belt buckle didn't bother me anywhere NEAR as much as the S on the boots -- worse, the SOLES of the boots.
One of my students gave me a three foot tall action-figure of the "new" Superman -- I'd post an image, but it's at work and I'm on vacation -- and I spent one day ranting to the kids about how different the uniform was. For comparison, I had a "classic" Superman action figure. The first thing the kids noticed were how dark the colors were on the new -- the cape is blood-red. And then someone noticed the boots...
I can't see anything else now when I look at the movie...
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Joe Hollon
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 08 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 13705
|
| Posted: 15 July 2009 at 6:07am | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
Robert wrote: "Superman's costume has evolved over the years and there have been
numerous minor tweaks to it stretching back as long as I can see."
*********
I'm really sick of hearing that argument for a defense of the SUPERMAN RETURNS creators putting Superman in a purple and maroon suit with a 3D emblem, no "S" on the cape, "S"-boots, short boots, bikini style underwear and casting an actor that weighs 160 pounds, has no chin and giving him the wrong hairstyle. There were no significant changes in Superman's appearance in the comics, TV series, cartoons or live action movies from about 1941 until SUPERMAN: RETURNS. Superman's costume goes through tweaking for his first year or so of existence and then there's a pretty specific model that was settled on.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
e-mail
|
| |
David Ferguson
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 March 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 6782
|
| Posted: 15 July 2009 at 6:13am | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
I noticed the cape "S" was missing but I thought I was being obsessive
complaining about that to civilians. I couldn't remember if artists always
included it. It's there though. I think it's just that you don't see his back that
often in comics.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Joe Hollon
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 08 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 13705
|
| Posted: 15 July 2009 at 6:20am | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
Analogy time:
The change to Superman's costume would be like a Hollywood sports movie depicting modern NBA players playing basketball using peach baskets and defending it by saying, "Well, the game has been going through numerous minor tweaks stretching back as long as we can remember...."
That's just not how it is, and not how it's been settled on and recognized for generations.
*I just realized the Superman change is even worse than my basketball analogy. Basketball players really did use peach baskets at one time. Superman never looked like that.
Edited by Joe Hollon on 15 July 2009 at 6:23am
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
e-mail
|
| |
Paulo Pereira
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 24 April 2006
Posts: 15539
|
| Posted: 15 July 2009 at 6:56am | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
JB wrote:
| 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? |
|
|
According to this site, yes. The site also claims that Superman did have the S on his buckle at one point; doesn't say at which point, though.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 133580
|
| Posted: 15 July 2009 at 7:15am | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
…Superman did have the S on his buckle at one point…•• Yes, on the costume designer's sketches for the first movie. And Christopher Reeve had them remove it.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 133580
|
| Posted: 15 July 2009 at 7:18am | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
Chest shot is the easiest shot for a non-marksman. Center-mass will usually result in a hit. Even if he moves, your miss will still hit something. •• Like the emblem in the center of his chest? Lucky shot! (For Batman!) Thing is, if you look at the character Frank was working with in DKR, you'll see he has much more in common with the Adam West version than any comicbook iteration seen before DKR. Only in the TV show was the chest emblem ever shown to be a separate, hard attachment, rather than being stitched or silkscreened on. And only the TV show gave us the pouches on the utility belt. (It is significant, too, than in the show Alfred was clearly the old family retainer, and Catwoman had no origin -- two of the other points Frank got wrong in DKR.)
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Robert Young
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 26 June 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 100
|
| Posted: 15 July 2009 at 7:26am | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
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?
---------------
And everyone knows that CGI belt buckle animation is what makes a movie 'special'.
I don't get the justification. It's like saying, I'm going to wear a hat because my shoes are too tight.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Topic Closed)
