I'm not crazy about the new Superman outfit, but I wasn't crazy about the Superman Returns one at first, either. After seeing it in motion in the trailer, though, I didn't mind it as much. Same as Thor, funny enough. We haven't seen a lot of Spidey in action, so it might look better in motion.
Bootlegged Amazing Spider-Man Trailer
- Thread starter ThatNickGuy
- Start date
- Status
I'm still not sold on this Spider-Man, like everyone said it looks too dark, and the first time I saw the trailer I was confused because I could almost swear it was just a trailer for the Sam Raimi one with one or two new shots added.
But I will probably still see it, assuming any of my friends are interested.
But I will probably still see it, assuming any of my friends are interested.
Yeah, why do they keep removing the belt... it just doesn't look good...
Hell, i dislike the belt design the comic version uses atm, but i'm glad it's there...
I think they have to go with the rubberized suits because we would all make fun of men running around in tights. Rubberized suit can be written off as a Kevlar-type protective thing. Tights aren't acceptable unless they intend to break out in song and dance at some point, and I think we all remember how well that worked in Spiderman 3.
Right, but times have changed. I think that a modern day hero would take a cue from the military or police and wear protective gear, or at least not spandex.
Also, I don't like the idea of Spidey following the strong man path, as he would then be reduced to a bodybuilder outfit, and who wants to see him swinging through Manhattan in a spider-themed banana hammock?
Also, I don't like the idea of Spidey following the strong man path, as he would then be reduced to a bodybuilder outfit, and who wants to see him swinging through Manhattan in a spider-themed banana hammock?
Why would Supes need to wear protective gear?
I'm not saying he needs it. I'm saying that, in today's society, one who is theoretically acting on the side of law enforcement might want to look they are with someone.
A better question is why Supes would need to wear a cape? Or a costume in the first place? Why not fight crime in his overalls or cargo pants, where he could still reach his phone? I mean, you clearly have no place for pockets in that thing.
Well, okay...one place, assuming your not using the space that has been so generously allotted for it.
Spidey's costume is supposed to be a pro wrestler's outfit that he just modifies after he leaves the wrestling behind, or atleast thats how they explain how he gets the tights in the Ultimate Universe. Not sure how they explained it in the 616 continuity.
The better question is why is a lame superhero like Superman still around?
He's still a potential money-making property for WB. I imagine if this new movie doesn't do well, we won't be seeing another for quite some time.
But on a non-financial level, you have something of a point. I like Superman, but as a character, not as a superhero. The best parts of Superman: The Movie show him where he's vulnerable. The people he cares about are his biggest crutch and pretty much his only real weakness as a person with powers far surpassing anyone else's, so his dramatic moments are all I care about. In the super moments, I couldn't give a damn. Unless there's kryptonite involved, he's going to win. And even in cases like Doomsday or if he's fighting Captain Marvel, the city-wide destruction is the interesting part, not the fight itself. I like how in a Spider-man fight, he has certain skills, his opponent has certain skills--interesting things are going to happen. Superman fights tend to be about slugging it out. Even the animated series had to make Superman solving mysteries a la Batman half the time to keep things suspenseful.
Dude, Superman is the lamest of all the comic book heroes. Total Mary Sue character. If it wasn't for the qualities that Quotemander mentioned, he'd be a total one dimensional character.
Take Batman for instance. He's at least interesting. He's a fucked in the head vigilantly with serious coping issues. That's why there have been tons more Batman movies that were good over Superman ones. It's easy to come up with a good story for Batman. I like it when the protagonist can actually grow as the story progresses - lose things and in the process become the better person for it. Superman has the power to save everything he loves. He's invulnerable.
I'd go so far as to say that the entire Superman franchise is no better than Twilight. It's built around the same premise. Any obstacle the hero faces is easily subdued and there's no real growth or loss. It's not genuine. Superman for the most part is a totally lame 1950s golden age ideal caricature.
http://www.bamkapow.com/bk-feature-why-superman-will-always-suck-1189-p.html
I like how five of the six comments for that article were from the same Superman fan.
Superman sucks, Spider-Man owns
Fuck, looking stuff up, I had forgotten how many shitty Spider-Man stories there are. Like the one where Norman Osborne was actually having a relationship with Gwen Stacy behind Peter's back, knocked her up, she gave birth to twins and he killed her on the bridge (in the second biggest moment in the history of Spider-Man) so she wouldn't tell him the truth.
Fuck Marvel, Spider-Man stories aren't hard.
I think the point I'm trying to get at is 99% of comics are garbage.
Fuck Marvel, Spider-Man stories aren't hard.
I think the point I'm trying to get at is 99% of comics are garbage.
Spider-man Clone Saga is what made me stop buying the magazine comics. Probably did me a favor, really.
A character is only as good as the writer. There have been just as many bad or lame Batman stories as there have been Superman or Spider-Man stories. Need I remind people of Azreal-Batman, Ace the Wonder Dog, or the entire homosexual undertone controversy between him and Robin (a theory I don't buy, but it's there). Also, Batman's no more trapped in his own mythology than the other characters. He's not going to develop anymore than the other iconic characters. He's always going to mourn his parents, he'll always outsmart the bad guys, he'll never kill the Joker (and God knows how many times I've heard the "I can't kill them because I'd be one of them..." or "I should have killed the Joker a long time ago.")
My point is, he's just as cliche and stuck in his mythology than Superman.
Superman can be an interesting character, but I'll admit that (like Batman), there's been a lot of people that have written bad stories about him. Of course you're going to think that he's a boyscout and outdated, but that's assuming that a moral character can't exist in this world. I would say Superman should exist moreso in this world because he's such a moral character. He has all this power and yet hasn't been corrupted. He's a country bumpkin just trying to live up to his own reputation. It kills him that he can't save everyone, even though he knows he can't be everywhere all the time.
Also keep in mind that, in my opinion, he's a character loved primarily by people who are a big kid at heart. He's an optimist or an imaginative person's best friend. The kind of person who dreams of flying or maybe playing catch with their super-powered dog in space.
Anyway, I could rant on and on to the point that this becomes ridiculously tl;dr. I'm not going to convince you, just like you won't convince me that Batman isn't just a scarred little boy lashing out a the world with his toys. Yeah, Superman's a boyscout and I love him for it. I could recommend all sorts of things that might, just might, convince you otherwise (All Star Superman, Superman: Secret Identity), but it won't change how you think, so I don't see why you need to bring it up in the first place other than to troll Superman fans like me.
My point is, he's just as cliche and stuck in his mythology than Superman.
Superman can be an interesting character, but I'll admit that (like Batman), there's been a lot of people that have written bad stories about him. Of course you're going to think that he's a boyscout and outdated, but that's assuming that a moral character can't exist in this world. I would say Superman should exist moreso in this world because he's such a moral character. He has all this power and yet hasn't been corrupted. He's a country bumpkin just trying to live up to his own reputation. It kills him that he can't save everyone, even though he knows he can't be everywhere all the time.
Also keep in mind that, in my opinion, he's a character loved primarily by people who are a big kid at heart. He's an optimist or an imaginative person's best friend. The kind of person who dreams of flying or maybe playing catch with their super-powered dog in space.
Anyway, I could rant on and on to the point that this becomes ridiculously tl;dr. I'm not going to convince you, just like you won't convince me that Batman isn't just a scarred little boy lashing out a the world with his toys. Yeah, Superman's a boyscout and I love him for it. I could recommend all sorts of things that might, just might, convince you otherwise (All Star Superman, Superman: Secret Identity), but it won't change how you think, so I don't see why you need to bring it up in the first place other than to troll Superman fans like me.
I know Superman can be interesting, but it was REALLY hard when they had him at smash-an-entire-planet-with-one-punch power levels. When a character is that invincible they can get boring really quickly.
As for the Spider-man movie, I'll wait to hear what the reviews say because I'm just not feeling it from what's been released so far.
As for the Spider-man movie, I'll wait to hear what the reviews say because I'm just not feeling it from what's been released so far.
I wish they'd make The Incredibles 2.
The only way the new Superman movie can make Superman interesting is it essentially replaces Superman with:
Yes, Nick, really.
Mr. Incredible has been in ONE movie. ONE appearance. And he's 100x more interesting and three dimensional than Superman.
- Status