My Mom Made It For Me: The Superman Suit Thread

[Lily Adler]

Would look better with trunks. *shrug*

I figured he has a trunks design too. Why else would he label this one No Trunks?

Also we should have @DorkyFresh and @ifriedrice battle each other.

 

[ArmsHeldOut]

Hairstyle should be reversed as well. At least that's the general consensus around here.

 

[7heBoss]

Agreed. I really wish all superhero costumes (esp. Superman) would do away with the trunks permanently.

why especially Superman? If anything, I feel like he should be the only one that keeps it because he is THE classic Superhero. While he didn't invent the look, I'm confident that Superman is the reason we associate that "underwear on the outside" imagery with Superheroes. It was a look that was made iconic by him.

 

[ArmsHeldOut]

I figured he has a trunks design too. Why else would he label this one No Trunks?

Also we should have @DorkyFresh and @ifriedrice battle each other.

 

[Lily Adler]

Hairstyle should be reversed as well. At least that's the general consensus around here.

Clark should style his hair to look professional at the Planet. Superman should let his hair fly free.

 

[Captain Tired]

I’m still all for the Reborn style suit. No trunks.
View attachment 88369

This would be perfect if it had trunks

 

[Wildcard]

why especially Superman? If anything, I feel like he should be the only one that keeps it because he is THE classic Superhero. While he didn't invent the look, I'm confident that Superman is the reason we associate that "underwear on the outside" imagery with Superheroes. It was a look that was made iconic by him.

Just not a big fan of the trunks on the outside of the attire. It serves no purpose whatsoever & imo looks incredibly weird and goofy.

I get it, it's been the standard look for Supes for decades. But (again, my opinion) I've always felt the majority of the costumes with no trunks are vastly superior.

Idk, I've felt this way since childhood, so pretty much the entirety of me being a comic book fan.

 

[Boom]

It's not a question of serving a purpose. If you're looking for a "purpose" behind a costume component that might be your first issue. It's strictly an aesthetic choice. The red waist breaks up the blue in a way that is uniform and visually pleasing. If the end result is something a bit weird and goofy looking, that's OK. It's a superhero costume, and for a character like Superman a little cheesiness isn't inherently a bad thing. You take the trunks away, and you're effectively left with a naked man painted blue - which I would argue is just as weird and distracting to look at (if not more so). The belt does little to offset that visual.

Snyder was able to get away with it somewhat because he chose a darker shade of blue and added a bunch of seams and ribbing to the midsection to keep the eyes engaged. If he opted for a lighter shade of blue and had a plain midsection like the manip posted, I wager it wouldn't have worked nearly as well. I don't think it's an accident that Snyder decided against a proper belt and instead went for a gold band with a separate "buckle." It gives the illusion of a belt, but it doesn't clean-break the blue. So you're not left with the "blue shirt + matching blue pants" look.

Just thought I'd share my perspective. You're of course entitled to your opinion. I hope if the suit does have trunks that you'll be able to enjoy it for what it's worth. For my part, Snyder is the closest I've ever been able to get to accepting a trunks-less suit. Every other design attempt I've ever seen (especially in the comics) simply do not beat the original aesthetic. I'd go one step further as to say the all blue suit with the red belt is one of the fugliest things I've ever seen. The blue and red clash in a way that just doesn't work. The blue suit + yellow belt + red trunks is a perfect balance of all three primary colors.

 

[SupermansPal]

My philosophy on the trunks is that if removing them makes enough of a difference that you just have to replace them with something else to make up for their absence, then it should be clear that they're there for a reason.

You can remove Batman's trunks without drastically altering his look, you can't for Superman.

 

[Lily Adler]

My philosophy on the trunks is that if removing them makes enough of a difference that you just have to replace them with something else to make up for their absence, then it should be clear that they're there for a reason.

You can remove Batman's trunks without drastically altering his look, you can't for Superman.

I mean he looks good with a red belt and yellow buckle to me:

 

[DorkyFresh]

My philosophy on the trunks is that if removing them makes enough of a difference that you just have to replace them with something else to make up for their absence, then it should be clear that they're there for a reason.

This is pretty much how I feel too. By now I've learned to accept designs without trunks and even like some of them, but with these trunk-less design there has to be something to take it's place and break up the sea of blue and compensate for the lack of trunks. Instead of compensating, I say embrace what makes him special and just give him the trunks. Dude has a spit curl in the shape of an "S" and wears bright primary colors and a cape with a yellow "S" on his back, so to me trunks aren't even that much of a stretch.

It's not a question of serving a purpose. If you're looking for a "purpose" behind a costume component that might be your first issue. It's strictly an aesthetic choice. The red waist breaks up the blue in a way that is uniform and visually pleasing. If the end result is something a bit weird and goofy looking, that's OK. It's a superhero costume, and for a character like Superman a little cheesiness isn't inherently a bad thing. You take the trunks away, and you're effectively left with a naked man painted blue - which I would argue is just as weird and distracting to look at (if not more so). The belt does little to offset that visual.

Nailed it! While I understand, and can even relate to an extent, with the opinion that trunks are goofy and outdated, ultimately I find it to be a cynical outlook on Superman, which is the direct opposite of Superman's optimism and purity. So for me, his trunks aren't just an preference based solely on aesthetics but also one based on Supes's character. Clark is corny AF and that's what makes him endearing.

Also we should have @DorkyFresh and @ifriedrice battle each other.

If time allows I'd be down! It's like poetry, it rhymes!

 

[Alien Anal]

Also if anyone is goofy looking it's a dead serious guy out getting vengeance and working along side the police... Dressed as a bat. Batman's ears you would think people would point out as being the silliest part of anyone's costume...but it works regardless. Superman can get away with trunks if batman has pointy bat ears.

 

[GreenKToo]

We got the cool looking, trunkless, superman suit the last go around.
They even made the character pretty dark and brooding, and that went over like a lead Ballon.

It's time to bring back the trunks, and with them, superman needs the same attitude and personality he use to have.
Embrace the boyscout persona, don't run from it.

Superman is not batman lite, he's the goat. The first.

 

[Dr.]

The best argument for the trunks is tradition. This sartorial detail goes back to the 1938 origin; and it’s been part of Supes’ iconic look for 75+ years. Therefore, time to return to the classic iconography — especially if it’s in conjunction with a more classic characterization.

Less persuasive, in my view, is the notion that trunks are required based on some aesthetic or design theory criteria. Seems like there are too many counter-examples to make such a universal claim.

 

[Boy Scout]

The only strong arguments for the briefs are tradition and preference. I respect them both.

To me, though, the briefs just look goofy. Not to the point where they ruin the costume or the movie or the comic, but I've grown to vastly prefer costumes that do away with them. The only true purpose they serve (besides, again, tradition) is color balancing, and there are better ways to hit the mark.

No shade to anybody who likes them, I tried to type that as neutrally as possible

 

[Boom]

The only true purpose they serve (besides, again, tradition) is color balancing, and there are better ways to hit the mark.

Such as? This may be an entirely subjective matter, but the red belt w/ yellow buckle and yellow belt w/ red buckle aesthetics don't balance things out nearly as effectively.

 

[Boy Scout]

Such as? This may be an entirely subjective matter, but the red belt w/ yellow buckle and yellow belt w/ red buckle aesthetics don't balance things out nearly as effectively.

Yes, this is definitely going to be subjective.

Losing the briefs and keeping the belt is an imperfect solution. If my problem with the briefs is that they look goofy, I can't really justify a belt on a onesie.

You have a few options: waist detailing (MOS, Superman Reborn, though it was often drawn as a 3D belt); my preference, two vastly different shades of blue (SV Season 11, Superman and The Authority, S&L, terrible belts aside); or going a little radical with it, like below.

Spoiler

Pinterest tells me this is by ronsalas.

 

[Boom]

Spoiler

Ditch the collar on the last one and it's interesting.

 

[GreenKToo]

The only strong arguments for the briefs are tradition and preference. I respect them both.

To me, though, the briefs just look goofy. Not to the point where they ruin the costume or the movie or the comic, but I've grown to vastly prefer costumes that do away with them. The only true purpose they serve (besides, again, tradition) is color balancing, and there are better ways to hit the mark.

No shade to anybody who likes them, I tried to type that as neutrally as possible

For Me, the only way to make a trunkless suit look right, is too either have a belt that's red and yellow, or have the suit look more like a two piece outfit, with two different shades of blue.

A solid one tone blue suit without trunks, hurts my eyes.

 

[Wildcard]

It's not a question of serving a purpose. If you're looking for a "purpose" behind a costume component that might be your first issue. It's strictly an aesthetic choice. The red waist breaks up the blue in a way that is uniform and visually pleasing. If the end result is something a bit weird and goofy looking, that's OK. It's a superhero costume, and for a character like Superman a little cheesiness isn't inherently a bad thing. You take the trunks away, and you're effectively left with a naked man painted blue - which I would argue is just as weird and distracting to look at (if not more so). The belt does little to offset that visual.

Snyder was able to get away with it somewhat because he chose a darker shade of blue and added a bunch of seams and ribbing to the midsection to keep the eyes engaged. If he opted for a lighter shade of blue and had a plain midsection like the manip posted, I wager it wouldn't have worked nearly as well. I don't think it's an accident that Snyder decided against a proper belt and instead went for a gold band with a separate "buckle." It gives the illusion of a belt, but it doesn't clean-break the blue. So you're not left with the "blue shirt + matching blue pants" look.

Just thought I'd share my perspective. You're of course entitled to your opinion. I hope if the suit does have trunks that you'll be able to enjoy it for what it's worth. For my part, Snyder is the closest I've ever been able to get to accepting a trunks-less suit. Every other design attempt I've ever seen (especially in the comics) simply do not beat the original aesthetic. I'd go one step further as to say the all blue suit with the red belt is one of the fugliest things I've ever seen. The blue and red clash in a way that just doesn't work. The blue suit + yellow belt + red trunks is a perfect balance of all three primary colors.

You bring up a fair amount of good points, but I do feel the cape being the flowing red that it is gives us enough to break up the blue as it is. I do agree that Snyder found a perfect way to handle it because the chainmail version Cavill had is certainly among my favorites. It's actually what I had always envisioned and wanted for a trunks-less Superman suit.

By all accounts, I'm not someone who's going to rage or be angry if Superman has the trunks. And I don't think anyone's wrong for liking or preferring it. As iterated before, it's an iconic look. And I've definitely learned to appreciate the designs that include them, I just prefer for them not to be there.

 

[SupermansPal]

Not huge on the trunks, not a fan of when they look like briefs instead of well, trunks.

 

[routhman]

I agree with others that the trunks are goofy, but I think that is part of what can be so endearing about Superman.

Here’s this guy who dresses so ostentatiously and so flamboyantly, is so mild-mannered and polite around normal people, and yet he’s the most powerful being on earth.

I think that contrast is part of what makes Chris Reeves’ portrayal so memorable, and the trunks contribute to that.

 

[ifriedrice]

David isn't this massive but to me this suit is just about perfect. Really clean and sleak!

View attachment 88474

I love datrini’s style… however, I hate that it’s already being shared. He respectfully asked people not to share it on socials until he did, and it’s not on his instagram as of noon April 24th yet. Oh well.

 

[DorkyFresh]

Doooh!!! My bad, I didn't know. Just deleted it. That suuucks. How did it get online if he didn't want it shared??

 

[Lily Adler]

Doooh!!! My bad, I didn't know. Just deleted it. That suuucks. How did it get online if he didn't want it shared??

Just post all that weird AI generated **** like everyone else.