Can we just go back to the classic costumes with the underoos on the outside please? At least for fucking Superman.
Sure it looks kind of daft, but I've yet to see a redesigned "modern take" that looks better. Sure some look alright. I don't even hate the New 52 Superman one, but they don't look as good as the originals.
I get that they were trying to get away from the whole
>Hurr they wear their underpants on the outside thing
But firstly, there's a perfectly good explanation for it, even if it went out of date about 70 years ago in that it was based off of the look of the circus strongman. Secondly, and I think more importantly, the only people this would really appease en masse are normies, most of whom aren't even aware that its been half a decade since supes and bats put their underoos on outside on the reg.
I started reading comics in about 2002-3 and perhaps its just me, but I kind of stopped noticing how odd it was very soon after. Just like you stop questioning why everyone dresses up all together or gives themselves flamboyant code names.
Armour with all the lines on it will be looked back upon as being very much a product of its time, just like pouches, bandoleers and characters having guns completely fucking unnecessarily (Hulk I'm looking at you) were from the 90's. Maybe not as mocked, but they will.
>>82968451
I agree with all of this. All Star Superman even explains it as being kryptonian fashion and I'm sure other comics address it just as well.
>>82968646
It just seems odd to me to remove the underwear on the outside as though that's the weird part, not people dressing in flamboyant costumes to begin with.
>I wish to disguise myself so no-one will know who I am. To do so I will create a bright costume that draws the question of who is under the mask.
>>82968848
I think this is why a lot of live action versions of comic stuff leaves out the costume. People like to blame the underwear for making superheroes seem silly, but there is a reason Wolverine isn't wearing yellow spandex in his movies either.
>>82968451
Faggots like you who can it "le underwear le on le outside le epic le meme le XD" are why they stopped using it. They're TRUNKS, faggot. He was supposed to be dressed as a circus strongman. This shit ain't complicated.
It is an outdated explanation and I personally think that things should be allowed to evolve, even iconic characters. And many strongmen actually wore a solid coloured leotard with a huge belt instead of shorts that weren't the same colour as the rest of their clothes, or just shorts and no shirt.
Supes' costume need some kind of colour break in the middle so it doesn't look like a pyjamas, but you could do that without having him wear the rather outdated shorts. Something like a more pronounced belt could do the job but you could also go with a colour switch like the '90s Superboy costume did (yes, people hate it but it does colour blocking right).
The Rebirth suit is suffering from serious colour imbalance and lacks details but you could give him an appealing suit without going back to the shorts, as long as people can learn to accept change.
>>82968451
Did you forget to take your meds?
>>82969005
This was literally said in the OP you fucking idiot.
>>82969210
They've evolved far beyond the circus strongman get up though. Its a superhero outfit now to wear the trunks on the outside, so why should comic books, or more particularly DC pretend to be something they're not?
>>82969476
agreed
>>82969476
is lex luthor a buster?
>>82969663
Straight busta
All he had to do was follow the damn Kryptonian.
>>82969476
Do they have to stick to something forever because it's associated with them? It's not even /that/ common amongst comic book characters, it's just something some of the oldest characters wear because they were created like that.
I presume the underwear over the tights look is a relic of the early 20th century when the comic first started. Circus strongman had that look and I assume S&S took it from there.
>>82969698
wasn't there an episode where flash in luthors body had to chase down and rob a train
>>82968451
>waaaah
>>82969744
I'd agree, but when they've been that way for 70 years, perhaps its a thing that's here to stay? Or rather should be.
Because lets get real, at some point sooner or later they're going to revert.
>>82970055
>If you discuss a trend of the time, you're whining.
>>82970084
>at some point sooner or later they're going to revert
In a distant future, maybe, but from 5 years old to people on their early 30's, everyone thinks the underwear on the outside looks stupid, so they are not going to come back any time soon
>>82970084
Or maybe that just means it's time to change it. Problem is that you have to be careful when you redesign it but apparently DC's costume designers think it's better to boldly go or whatever. I'm not even sure if all of those guys have studied actual design theory...
But yeah, there's a pretty decent chance that they will just give the fuck up and go back to a more classic look.
Fuck trunks
>>82970553
But the only people who give a shit out of that are "normies" people who read comics never gave a fuck and people coming in aren't going to say "well I would read comics, but they wear their knickers on the outside so I won't" because that's how most people think they look anyway.
They aren't losing or gaining anyone by doing it, all we get are designs that while being perfectly fine, in the case of Superman at the very least just don't feel as good as before.
>>82970661
Oh I don't think change is a bad thing. I don't and did not mind the change when the new 52 came out, I was more thinking that with rebirth, why not go back to basics. Or just fucking incorporate the undies in the modern new take they want to do. "Normies" think they wear them anyway, a lot comic fans want them back (though most probably don't care) and quite frankly they break up the uniformity of colour.
>>82970942
>all we get are designs that while being perfectly fine, in the case of Superman at the very least just don't feel as good as before.
That's just your opinion
And it is up against professional artists, writers and executives who decided that Superman is better without the trunks.
Guess who is more likely to be wrong?
>>82971153
Well theirs is an opinion as well, so neither of us are wrong, if you want to be a cunt about it.
Trunks on the outside are the very epitome of a superhero outfit. If something is parodying superheroes or comic books in general they will more likely than not have underoos on the outside because its that ingrained in the public consciousness that thats what goes down.
It's THAT ingrained that even though I don't think there's a single well known Marvel hero outside of Wolverine that does it and it's still the staple.
If you're asked "how can you modernise a superheroes uniform?" of course one of the most oft parodied aspects will go.
This is the basis of the "NO CAPES!" bit from The Incredibles. It was mocking a well established, well parodied aspect of a superheroes costume under the guise that it would get you killed. How do you modernise it? Lose the cape.
>>82971153
>Are we out of touch? No. It's the consumers that are wrong.
100% agree with everything u say OP. I don't mind Batman or others ditching the underwear, but Supes just doesn't look right without it.
>>82971153
>professional artists, writers and executives
like the ones that gave us MoS and BvS? yes, pros are never wrong.
>>82971454
What's funny is that even Edna's Incredible suits still had the underoos.
Got nothing against underoos, or superheroes looking a bit silly, but it strikes me as a failure of the imagination to say that there's no way to make Superman's costume look good without trunks.
You may not agree with me on what that is, I'm just asking you to believe it's possible.
>>82969476
>overwatch.jpeg
>>82980245
I really think it just depends how he's drawn whether or not the trunks work.
>>82969210
>Supes' costume need some kind of colour break in the middle so it doesn't look like a pyjamas, but you could do that without having him wear the rather outdated shorts.
Can't the color break simply be the length of shorts?
>>82968451
It helps break the solid color of the rest of the costume, and makes the design more visually interesting.
>>82980680
That's one of the worse Ses I've seen
Why doesn't he just wear red pants down to his shoes?
>>82982322
>>82968451
>yfw you realize Dr.Manthattan stole Superman's shorts
>>82983233
Oh yeah, it looks like trash.
This would've been great, why is Jim Lee so shit at costumes?
>trunks are gone
>The boots are now blue
How long before they fuck with his cape?
