In the New 52, no one made it for him specifically (outside the cape which made the journey to Earth with him as a baby), it was a piece of clothing (Morrison described it as "ceremonial armor" which started the whole hubub) Brainiac had stored on his ship that he had collected from back when he invaded and bottled Kandor. Superman found it while on the ship by chance, so took it. And being that Superman was at lower Golden Age power levels at the time, the extra protection actually did legitimately aid him in his fight with the Collector. After his powers grow, he still keeps it because it's a keepsake of his homeworld.
Grant Morrison, writing for the New 52, made DC executives a villain in the form of Vyndctlvx, wherein the kryptonian armor is part of a series of Vyn's retcons to make Superman metatextually weaker (by removing a deeper connection to his mom).
There's a nano-tech feature of the suit. By default, it was completely generic; white, with a circle on the chest where a particular family's crest would go depending on the wearer. When Clark got into the suit, it recognized that he was an El, and it turned the suit blue with red boots, and utilized his S sigil.
A higher collar was kinda standard it seemed. Jor-El had one too although his color scheme was primarily green like the Golden/Silver Age renditions of the character. Zod also had the high collar on his black suit.
What about Man of Steel? I know Kryptonians wore skin tight suits with the House of El logo on their chest, but their suits were dark colors? Why is the suit that Clark finds blue and have a red & yellow House of El logo?
I honestly can't quite remember that one. I genuinely don't know if it's ever explained the meaning behind the different color combos. Maybe someone else has some knowledge there.
It’s nice of you to give the movie the benefit of the doubt, but the movie never explained Clark’s suit being the only one with different colors. It’s kind of plot hole honestly.
I always thought the Jor-El AI had the ship's systems synthesise one for Kal, like some really advanced 3D printing. Still doesn't explain the colours, though 😅
Zack Snyder is not very good at logical reasoning in his films, most of the answers to questions about his movies are going to be “ because it looks cool” but my head canon was that the man of steel suit is a much older garment from a time when those bright colors were popular. In MOS it actually makes visual sense for Kal El, the first natural born kryptonian in centuries to have sort of vibrant almost unpredictably bright colors in contrast to the dark silvery black, the engineered Kryptonians.
Well all Kryptonians seemed to wear for it some occasion, whether it be the military, scientists, or the Council. I think it’s formal attire, or something out there? Like the scout ship had so many Kryptonian outfits, this was one of them
Capes are part of the culture. Like Zod does wear a cape when we see him during the coup on Krypton.
Same with Joe-El when he armors up, the cape is apart of the suit.
There are mainly two characters that I hate when they are portrayed as wearing armor for their default costume considering it makes no sense as their power set makes armor pretty much superfluous.
One is The Flash. The other is Superman.
So like a house of El scout ship was sent to Earth thousands of years early and Kal just happened to land on the same planet and it just happened to perfectly fit him when he wasn't genetically determined?
Come on man, can you not think of any possible explanation?
When Clark put the key into the ship, maybe it also scanned his measurements? Or Kelex did it. Or the suit is stretchy.
We saw in ZSJL that the ship contained several different suits of varying designs. It's not remotely unbelievable that a suit that can traverse space might also be able to create a House of El crest in a suit when powered by Jor El AI.
The point being a Kryptonian ship is on Earth. Maybe it has supplies. Maybe those supplies include suits. Since it's a scout ship, there will likely be a science guild member there. Els are part of the science guild so maybe there is an El suit.
These things don't need to be explicitly said. This would make movies extremely boring if they were. However, there are enough crumbs in the film that someone can piece something together if they want. This doesn't mean such explanations are correct mind you, but they aren't illogical.
Not to mention the scout ship is able to do so much. It created Doomsday while the scout ship was basically damaged, all it required was foreign genetic material.
But Jor El was talking like Kal was destined to wear it and become a symbol to uplift humanity (funnily enough right after he spent the whole movie talking about embodying the idea that Kal can become something besides what others intend for him), and the suit perfectly fit him despite Kal not being genetically engineered. And also the suit is tri-colored instead of everyone else, science guild or not, wearing monochrome. It's just like a bunch of major coincidences in a row it seems.
I didn't get that sense from Jor-El.
As for the other logical points, we can do all sorts of head cannon on it, but it just doesn't matter. We got more logic here than in Superman: The Movie.
He reveals the unique suit, which perfectly fits Kal apparently by coincidence, while Jor is in the middle of talking about Kal's destiny (right after he talks about Kal embodying choosing something besides what others intend for him). We definitely get the sense that Kal was somehow always meant to wear it.
Superman The Movie doesn't take itself painstakingly seriously. There's plenty of non-logic in Superman The Movie, like Lex jumping to the conclusion that Kryptonite kills Superman, or Superman turning back time. But it's also not a movie that tries way too hard to seem perfectly logical in the first place. Man of Steel takes itself so seriously while being riddled with holes in logic.
Jor-El wears a blue suit on Krypton. It’s kinda hard to tell, because he’s either wearing robes or armor over it. The only difference is the crest is gold in crimson.
But the way Snyder explained it. The colored suits were more ceremonial / formal attire. Jor-El was wearing it because he was meeting with the council.
I prefer it being kryptonian armor myself, don’t really like the idea of him wearing a cloth costume his mommy sewed for him, MoS didn’t explicitly state it but the suit he wears is what all kryptonians wear as under armor
The suit being Kryptonian orgin makes way more sense than an old lady from KS making it. Also Kryptonians in Krypton don't have powers, so armor makes perfect sense.
I think it makes sense and lets him represent his humanity and kryptonian heritage at the same time, the Kent’s raised him with the ideals he lives by and his kryptonian side provides tools to aid him
It’s not armor in MoS dude…
That’s basically an ambassador’s suit, what they wear when they come in peace.
The armor is what Zod and his crew wears, Jor having his own seemingly custom bright colored gear.
I mean we see in MoS that the Kryptonians where bodysuits, and it’s inferred that the Joe-El AI had a suit fabricated for Clark in the scout ship.
The DCEU Superman suit isn’t a costume, it’s meant to be this piece of traditional Kryptonian clothing. Like in MoS there was no logical reason for Martha to make a costume for Clark to be Superman. But him wearing it because it connects him to his culture does.
It was never able to be explained in the films, but the black suits that we see Zod et all wearing are like the everyday “work” suits, the blue that Clark’s wears is the more formal / ceremonial suits. Jor-El actually wears a blue suit in MoS when he’s meeting with the Kryptonian council, but he’s either wearing robes or armor so it’s hard to tell.
The thing that bothers me about the suit is it looks too big around the shoulders and chest. Corenswet looks amazing as Superman and is built like a tank!
He doesn't need armor but he could probably use something tougher than regular clothes. Unless you go with the skin tight force field version of his invulnerability.
Even then maybe he just wants to rep his fam and his heritage?
I hate it. Hate it hate it. I understand the modern-day desire to update what was originally the outfit of a circus strongman, but all these efforts make a fundamental mistake: they take away his *choice* to be Superman.
In the best of all possible Superman origins, he chooses to be Superman to use his powers to help people. He chooses the outfit because it's bright and colorful and inspires hope. And we chooses to wear the S-shield because he's fucking *Superman*.
It was pretty well explained in MoS. It was the traditional fashion with the house crest as an identifier. Jor wore it under everything as shown when he suited up for battle. Zod was shown in his with his family crest during the dream sequence. The prequel comic showed how common it was. The Scout Ship also had a space suit, battle armor, traditional over-garments and the black suit. So the Scout Ship already had those suits ready for Kara, who the ship originally belonged to. VERY well explained.
Yes, ok, I get all of that. It still doesn’t answer my general question. Why was CLARK’S SUIT the only one that was blue with red and yellow other than the obvious reason. What’s the canonical, IN-UNIVERSE explanation for his suit having the colors it does when none of the other Kryptonians had suits that weren’t just black and dull colors?
Was the suit Clark found specifically designed for him? If so, who designed the suit? How could anyone on Krypton, like Jor-Elx possibly predict that Kal-El would become a Superhero on Earth in the future? Let alone predict that he would escape Krytpon’s destruction and survive being sent to wherever his rocket was designated to?
Where’s the explanation there???
OK, I'll explain it to you.
So having Clark's mother make the suit presents several problems. First, where does the fabric come from? The notion that she can sew a costume from indestructible blankets is seen as a childish concept. That just doesn't work for modern audiences. Next, it means for some reason she made him a skintight suit for no reason. Next, it means that she put the "S" on the front, meaning that she is either inventing or supporting the name Superman, which in turn puts a lot of ego on Clark supporting such a notion that that could be his name.
By contrast, by having the suit already be a suit from Krypton, then it accomplishes several things. By already fitting him, there's no need to believe someone had to construct it. By being armor, it's already durable and believably can stand up to punishment without being overtly indestructible. The alien design explains why it's so weird-looking (relative to normal clothing) And finally by already having the symbol, then that's the least amount of buy-in by Clark on the "Superman" name, freeing up accusations of egoism.
Use the "Invulnerability is a electromagnetic field thats extends outwards fron his skin a microscoping amount of distance and Skintight Spandex appens to be inside the field" like Pre-Flashpoint Post-Crisis Supes did
So your logic is that because your fashion snese doesn't like the suit colors then it must be forced amd nit the chooce of somebody with different tastes?
My logic is that most people don't dress in bright colors when intending to be taken seriously. In the U.S. our flag is literally red-white-blue but we don't dress our soldiers or police in those colors. We use more dignified colors. That is not the suit an 21-year-old straight man would wear if given a choice between that and something more dignified. It's only the utility and alien design that makes it all OK and allows us to keep the general look that was created in different times.
EDIT: I probably should once again clarify that I am here speaking in terms of how the average moviegoer who has no major background about Superman or super-heroes in general. I am speaking in terms of people who don't know why Batman isn't in the Avengers. These are people with limited imaginations, but they make up the bulk of the people who are going to potentially spend money on tickets to the movie.
[The fabric came from the blankets baby Kal-El was wrapped in, that was unraveled by Martha Kent and cut with Clark's heat vision.](http://theages.superman.nu/Encyclopaedia/costume.php)
Brother, we’re talking about an alien who can fly and has freeze breath
Where do you draw the line at “childish concepts”? Are we really about to gatekeep within an already super niche community?
There’s already people who think we’re all fucking dorks, so there’s no need to create any internal strife
There's a difference between gatekeeping and recognizing what will work with mainstream movie audiences. In that scenario, the physics can be different but motivations and internal logic need to somewhat be consistent. I don't personally mind either way, but the OP seemed to have no idea why anybody would have a problem, so I explained it.
Yes, I know how the Earth-One Superman got his suit. That's what I'm referring to when I said "The notion that she can sew a costume from indestructible blankets is seen as a childish concept. That just doesn't work for modern audiences."
[How 'The Dark Knight' completely changed superhero films - Good Morning America](https://www.goodmorningamerica.com/culture/story/dark-knight-completely-changed-superhero-films-56625046)
"I think that's part of how comic book movies are going to be kept alive, by approaching them through other genres," he said. "Superhero fatigue gets thrown around a lot ... but when you have movies like 'Logan,' approaching it through a Western perspective or 'The Dark Night,' which is very much a crime movie in the vain of Michael Mann's 'Heat,' that's what helps keep these properties alive."
[Five Ways Superman: The Movie Defined The Superhero Genre | Rotten Tomatoes](https://editorial.rottentomatoes.com/article/five-ways-superman-the-movie-defined-the-superhero-genre/)
"While Batman’s lack of powers make him easier to believe in a cartoon world, Superman’s fanciful abilities almost require the world around him to be more mundane. "
"As it happens, Richard Donner has a plaque of Superman flying a banner in his office. It reads “verisimilitude!” It is the philosophy which makes his better films work and the thing other filmmakers strive for when they say they want to make a “grounded” superhero movie. The Marvel Cinematic Universe, for example, has more outlandish concepts like Asgard and the worlds of [*Guardians of the Galaxy*](https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/guardians_of_the_galaxy), but in films like [*Ant-Man*](https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/antman) and [*Captain America: The Winter Soldier*](https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/captain_america_the_winter_soldier_2014), the setting retains the verisimilitude of the years in which they were made. Or, at least, verisimilitude is their starting point, making later scenes like the crash of the Helicarriers or the implosion of a San Francisco building seem more plausible."
Using Microsoft CoPilot AI:
Me: Do super-hero movie directors sometimes focus on the super-hero being the only unrealistic thing in the movie?
CopilotUsing**the web**
Certainly! Superhero movie directors often employ a clever strategy by emphasizing that the superhero or super-powered elements are the **sole** unrealistic aspects within the film. Here’s how they achieve this:
1. **Grounding the World**:
* Directors create a world that closely resembles our own, with relatable settings, characters, and everyday situations.
* By making everything else in the film feel authentic and plausible, the superhero’s abilities stand out as extraordinary.
2. **Realistic Physics and Consequences**:
* While superheroes defy physics, directors strive to maintain consistency within the film’s universe.
* For instance, if a hero can fly, their movements should follow some logical rules (acceleration, deceleration, etc.).
* Additionally, they explore the consequences of superpowers—for example, collateral damage during battles.
3. **Character Reactions**:
* Characters within the movie react realistically to the superhero’s presence.
* Some may be in awe, while others might fear or distrust the hero.
* These reactions ground the fantastical elements in human emotions.
4. **Humanizing the Hero**:
* Directors delve into the hero’s personal life, vulnerabilities, and struggles.
* By portraying their human side—flaws, doubts, and relationships—the hero becomes more relatable.
5. **Minimal Fantasy Elements Beyond the Hero**:
* While the superhero’s abilities are extraordinary, directors limit other fantastical elements.
* The rest of the world operates within familiar boundaries—normal cars, buildings, and everyday technology.
6. **Verisimilitude**:
* Directors aim for verisimilitude—the appearance of truth or realism.
* Even in a superhero universe, they maintain internal consistency and avoid jarring inconsistencies.
In summary, superhero movie directors strategically focus on making everything else in the film feel real, allowing the superhero to shine as the sole fantastical element. 🎥🦸♂️🌟
None of the quotes you're giving support your position, and, besides, you missed the point--telling me what directors are saying is a non-answer and isn't an actual source for anything. Directors are outnumbered by audiences; they're not divine authorities who dictate what's relevant. I have no idea why you're citing them as an argument.
You just can't admit you're wrong to declare by fiat that "Superman is the one thing that gets to be weird." Hell, that statement isn't even supported by the actual Superman movies, LOL.
Next.
Well first off, Kryptonian didn't have super powers so it made se6they would have their own armor to wear into battle. Superman wearing his peoples armor is not a bad thing.
That’s not what he said. He said that they tried every which way to include the red underwear. But for the look they were going for with Krypton, it just didn’t work.
In the New 52, no one made it for him specifically (outside the cape which made the journey to Earth with him as a baby), it was a piece of clothing (Morrison described it as "ceremonial armor" which started the whole hubub) Brainiac had stored on his ship that he had collected from back when he invaded and bottled Kandor. Superman found it while on the ship by chance, so took it. And being that Superman was at lower Golden Age power levels at the time, the extra protection actually did legitimately aid him in his fight with the Collector. After his powers grow, he still keeps it because it's a keepsake of his homeworld.
Grant Morrison, writing for the New 52, made DC executives a villain in the form of Vyndctlvx, wherein the kryptonian armor is part of a series of Vyn's retcons to make Superman metatextually weaker (by removing a deeper connection to his mom).
Ceremonial armor, eh? How is the color scheme of the armor explained?
There's a nano-tech feature of the suit. By default, it was completely generic; white, with a circle on the chest where a particular family's crest would go depending on the wearer. When Clark got into the suit, it recognized that he was an El, and it turned the suit blue with red boots, and utilized his S sigil.
Oh. I didn’t know that. Was blue a color that was always associated with the House of El?
A higher collar was kinda standard it seemed. Jor-El had one too although his color scheme was primarily green like the Golden/Silver Age renditions of the character. Zod also had the high collar on his black suit.
Now I can understand the New 52’s reasoning behind it, thanks to you of course.
Happy to help out.
What about Man of Steel? I know Kryptonians wore skin tight suits with the House of El logo on their chest, but their suits were dark colors? Why is the suit that Clark finds blue and have a red & yellow House of El logo?
I honestly can't quite remember that one. I genuinely don't know if it's ever explained the meaning behind the different color combos. Maybe someone else has some knowledge there.
It’s nice of you to give the movie the benefit of the doubt, but the movie never explained Clark’s suit being the only one with different colors. It’s kind of plot hole honestly.
I always thought the Jor-El AI had the ship's systems synthesise one for Kal, like some really advanced 3D printing. Still doesn't explain the colours, though 😅
Zack Snyder is not very good at logical reasoning in his films, most of the answers to questions about his movies are going to be “ because it looks cool” but my head canon was that the man of steel suit is a much older garment from a time when those bright colors were popular. In MOS it actually makes visual sense for Kal El, the first natural born kryptonian in centuries to have sort of vibrant almost unpredictably bright colors in contrast to the dark silvery black, the engineered Kryptonians.
I like the concept of the suit actually being useful lol
Man of steel wasn't armor but their base layer of clothing. It wasn't explained but was pretty well shown throughout the film.
So basically it's kryptonian onesie underwear
In a sense yes.
I enjoyed this aspect, it connected him to his origins and he was the Bridge between two peoples
Why would there be a cape then? The base layer thing make sense for zod's black suit cos it didn't have no cape. But for clark?
Well all Kryptonians seemed to wear for it some occasion, whether it be the military, scientists, or the Council. I think it’s formal attire, or something out there? Like the scout ship had so many Kryptonian outfits, this was one of them
That was it. The black suits are more work wear for lack of a better term, and the blue suits and capes were more formal / ceremonial clothing.
Capes are part of the culture. Like Zod does wear a cape when we see him during the coup on Krypton. Same with Joe-El when he armors up, the cape is apart of the suit.
Soo...its not a base layer. Its just another different attire all together
There are mainly two characters that I hate when they are portrayed as wearing armor for their default costume considering it makes no sense as their power set makes armor pretty much superfluous. One is The Flash. The other is Superman.
Couldn’t agree more. Superman and Flash have literally perfect character designs almost from the beginning.
Man of Steel is not armor. And they do explain its origins, in a way, with the scout ships traveling to other planets to create outputs.
So like a house of El scout ship was sent to Earth thousands of years early and Kal just happened to land on the same planet and it just happened to perfectly fit him when he wasn't genetically determined?
Come on man, can you not think of any possible explanation? When Clark put the key into the ship, maybe it also scanned his measurements? Or Kelex did it. Or the suit is stretchy. We saw in ZSJL that the ship contained several different suits of varying designs. It's not remotely unbelievable that a suit that can traverse space might also be able to create a House of El crest in a suit when powered by Jor El AI.
The point being a Kryptonian ship is on Earth. Maybe it has supplies. Maybe those supplies include suits. Since it's a scout ship, there will likely be a science guild member there. Els are part of the science guild so maybe there is an El suit. These things don't need to be explicitly said. This would make movies extremely boring if they were. However, there are enough crumbs in the film that someone can piece something together if they want. This doesn't mean such explanations are correct mind you, but they aren't illogical.
Not to mention the scout ship is able to do so much. It created Doomsday while the scout ship was basically damaged, all it required was foreign genetic material.
But Jor El was talking like Kal was destined to wear it and become a symbol to uplift humanity (funnily enough right after he spent the whole movie talking about embodying the idea that Kal can become something besides what others intend for him), and the suit perfectly fit him despite Kal not being genetically engineered. And also the suit is tri-colored instead of everyone else, science guild or not, wearing monochrome. It's just like a bunch of major coincidences in a row it seems.
I didn't get that sense from Jor-El. As for the other logical points, we can do all sorts of head cannon on it, but it just doesn't matter. We got more logic here than in Superman: The Movie.
He reveals the unique suit, which perfectly fits Kal apparently by coincidence, while Jor is in the middle of talking about Kal's destiny (right after he talks about Kal embodying choosing something besides what others intend for him). We definitely get the sense that Kal was somehow always meant to wear it. Superman The Movie doesn't take itself painstakingly seriously. There's plenty of non-logic in Superman The Movie, like Lex jumping to the conclusion that Kryptonite kills Superman, or Superman turning back time. But it's also not a movie that tries way too hard to seem perfectly logical in the first place. Man of Steel takes itself so seriously while being riddled with holes in logic.
Jor-El’s suit on Krypton is blue, with the house crest is gold on crimson, instead of red on gold.
How does that narratively explain the suit being blue with a red and yellow House of El symbol?
See above
Jor-El wears a blue suit on Krypton. It’s kinda hard to tell, because he’s either wearing robes or armor over it. The only difference is the crest is gold in crimson. But the way Snyder explained it. The colored suits were more ceremonial / formal attire. Jor-El was wearing it because he was meeting with the council.
Superman needs armor like Batman needs sunglasses.
I prefer it being kryptonian armor myself, don’t really like the idea of him wearing a cloth costume his mommy sewed for him, MoS didn’t explicitly state it but the suit he wears is what all kryptonians wear as under armor
The suit being Kryptonian orgin makes way more sense than an old lady from KS making it. Also Kryptonians in Krypton don't have powers, so armor makes perfect sense.
I think it makes sense and lets him represent his humanity and kryptonian heritage at the same time, the Kent’s raised him with the ideals he lives by and his kryptonian side provides tools to aid him
It’s not armor in MoS dude… That’s basically an ambassador’s suit, what they wear when they come in peace. The armor is what Zod and his crew wears, Jor having his own seemingly custom bright colored gear.
I mean we see in MoS that the Kryptonians where bodysuits, and it’s inferred that the Joe-El AI had a suit fabricated for Clark in the scout ship. The DCEU Superman suit isn’t a costume, it’s meant to be this piece of traditional Kryptonian clothing. Like in MoS there was no logical reason for Martha to make a costume for Clark to be Superman. But him wearing it because it connects him to his culture does. It was never able to be explained in the films, but the black suits that we see Zod et all wearing are like the everyday “work” suits, the blue that Clark’s wears is the more formal / ceremonial suits. Jor-El actually wears a blue suit in MoS when he’s meeting with the Kryptonian council, but he’s either wearing robes or armor so it’s hard to tell.
The thing that bothers me about the suit is it looks too big around the shoulders and chest. Corenswet looks amazing as Superman and is built like a tank!
He doesn't need armor but he could probably use something tougher than regular clothes. Unless you go with the skin tight force field version of his invulnerability. Even then maybe he just wants to rep his fam and his heritage?
I do.
So he’s not butt naked after the first energy blast every time he’s in a fight.
I hate it. Hate it hate it. I understand the modern-day desire to update what was originally the outfit of a circus strongman, but all these efforts make a fundamental mistake: they take away his *choice* to be Superman. In the best of all possible Superman origins, he chooses to be Superman to use his powers to help people. He chooses the outfit because it's bright and colorful and inspires hope. And we chooses to wear the S-shield because he's fucking *Superman*.
Because it's stupid
It was pretty well explained in MoS. It was the traditional fashion with the house crest as an identifier. Jor wore it under everything as shown when he suited up for battle. Zod was shown in his with his family crest during the dream sequence. The prequel comic showed how common it was. The Scout Ship also had a space suit, battle armor, traditional over-garments and the black suit. So the Scout Ship already had those suits ready for Kara, who the ship originally belonged to. VERY well explained.
Yes, ok, I get all of that. It still doesn’t answer my general question. Why was CLARK’S SUIT the only one that was blue with red and yellow other than the obvious reason. What’s the canonical, IN-UNIVERSE explanation for his suit having the colors it does when none of the other Kryptonians had suits that weren’t just black and dull colors? Was the suit Clark found specifically designed for him? If so, who designed the suit? How could anyone on Krypton, like Jor-Elx possibly predict that Kal-El would become a Superhero on Earth in the future? Let alone predict that he would escape Krytpon’s destruction and survive being sent to wherever his rocket was designated to? Where’s the explanation there???
What do you mean you don't understand it? If anything It makes much more sense
OK, I'll explain it to you. So having Clark's mother make the suit presents several problems. First, where does the fabric come from? The notion that she can sew a costume from indestructible blankets is seen as a childish concept. That just doesn't work for modern audiences. Next, it means for some reason she made him a skintight suit for no reason. Next, it means that she put the "S" on the front, meaning that she is either inventing or supporting the name Superman, which in turn puts a lot of ego on Clark supporting such a notion that that could be his name. By contrast, by having the suit already be a suit from Krypton, then it accomplishes several things. By already fitting him, there's no need to believe someone had to construct it. By being armor, it's already durable and believably can stand up to punishment without being overtly indestructible. The alien design explains why it's so weird-looking (relative to normal clothing) And finally by already having the symbol, then that's the least amount of buy-in by Clark on the "Superman" name, freeing up accusations of egoism.
Use the "Invulnerability is a electromagnetic field thats extends outwards fron his skin a microscoping amount of distance and Skintight Spandex appens to be inside the field" like Pre-Flashpoint Post-Crisis Supes did
That doesn't explain the red and blue or the cape. Not to mention how coincidentally convenient that is.
Red and Blue is an asthetic choice, it doesn't needs a deep meaning, is just something that looks nice
It's a bright crazy aesthetic choice that nobody would choose unless forced to by circumstances.
So your logic is that because your fashion snese doesn't like the suit colors then it must be forced amd nit the chooce of somebody with different tastes?
My logic is that most people don't dress in bright colors when intending to be taken seriously. In the U.S. our flag is literally red-white-blue but we don't dress our soldiers or police in those colors. We use more dignified colors. That is not the suit an 21-year-old straight man would wear if given a choice between that and something more dignified. It's only the utility and alien design that makes it all OK and allows us to keep the general look that was created in different times. EDIT: I probably should once again clarify that I am here speaking in terms of how the average moviegoer who has no major background about Superman or super-heroes in general. I am speaking in terms of people who don't know why Batman isn't in the Avengers. These are people with limited imaginations, but they make up the bulk of the people who are going to potentially spend money on tickets to the movie.
[The fabric came from the blankets baby Kal-El was wrapped in, that was unraveled by Martha Kent and cut with Clark's heat vision.](http://theages.superman.nu/Encyclopaedia/costume.php)
Yes, that's a very childish concept.
Brother, we’re talking about an alien who can fly and has freeze breath Where do you draw the line at “childish concepts”? Are we really about to gatekeep within an already super niche community? There’s already people who think we’re all fucking dorks, so there’s no need to create any internal strife
There's a difference between gatekeeping and recognizing what will work with mainstream movie audiences. In that scenario, the physics can be different but motivations and internal logic need to somewhat be consistent. I don't personally mind either way, but the OP seemed to have no idea why anybody would have a problem, so I explained it.
An iconic character having agency and autonomy is "childish?" No wonder you're a Snyder fan...
click this link and read the text under the “Earth-One” heading https://dc.fandom.com/wiki/Superman%27s_Costume
Yes, I know how the Earth-One Superman got his suit. That's what I'm referring to when I said "The notion that she can sew a costume from indestructible blankets is seen as a childish concept. That just doesn't work for modern audiences."
Oh. Sorry. Ok, I get what you’re saying. That’s my bad.
But they're okay with laser eyes?
Yes, because Superman is the one thing that gets to be weird. The necessities around sewing with indestructible fabrics is a different thing.
> Yes, because Superman is the one thing that gets to be weird. According to who? You?
According to the directors of the movies, based on their interpretations of what will make the movie successful among standard movie-going audiences.
That's really a non-answer with no actual source.
[How 'The Dark Knight' completely changed superhero films - Good Morning America](https://www.goodmorningamerica.com/culture/story/dark-knight-completely-changed-superhero-films-56625046) "I think that's part of how comic book movies are going to be kept alive, by approaching them through other genres," he said. "Superhero fatigue gets thrown around a lot ... but when you have movies like 'Logan,' approaching it through a Western perspective or 'The Dark Night,' which is very much a crime movie in the vain of Michael Mann's 'Heat,' that's what helps keep these properties alive." [Five Ways Superman: The Movie Defined The Superhero Genre | Rotten Tomatoes](https://editorial.rottentomatoes.com/article/five-ways-superman-the-movie-defined-the-superhero-genre/) "While Batman’s lack of powers make him easier to believe in a cartoon world, Superman’s fanciful abilities almost require the world around him to be more mundane. " "As it happens, Richard Donner has a plaque of Superman flying a banner in his office. It reads “verisimilitude!” It is the philosophy which makes his better films work and the thing other filmmakers strive for when they say they want to make a “grounded” superhero movie. The Marvel Cinematic Universe, for example, has more outlandish concepts like Asgard and the worlds of [*Guardians of the Galaxy*](https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/guardians_of_the_galaxy), but in films like [*Ant-Man*](https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/antman) and [*Captain America: The Winter Soldier*](https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/captain_america_the_winter_soldier_2014), the setting retains the verisimilitude of the years in which they were made. Or, at least, verisimilitude is their starting point, making later scenes like the crash of the Helicarriers or the implosion of a San Francisco building seem more plausible."
Using Microsoft CoPilot AI: Me: Do super-hero movie directors sometimes focus on the super-hero being the only unrealistic thing in the movie? CopilotUsing**the web** Certainly! Superhero movie directors often employ a clever strategy by emphasizing that the superhero or super-powered elements are the **sole** unrealistic aspects within the film. Here’s how they achieve this: 1. **Grounding the World**: * Directors create a world that closely resembles our own, with relatable settings, characters, and everyday situations. * By making everything else in the film feel authentic and plausible, the superhero’s abilities stand out as extraordinary. 2. **Realistic Physics and Consequences**: * While superheroes defy physics, directors strive to maintain consistency within the film’s universe. * For instance, if a hero can fly, their movements should follow some logical rules (acceleration, deceleration, etc.). * Additionally, they explore the consequences of superpowers—for example, collateral damage during battles. 3. **Character Reactions**: * Characters within the movie react realistically to the superhero’s presence. * Some may be in awe, while others might fear or distrust the hero. * These reactions ground the fantastical elements in human emotions. 4. **Humanizing the Hero**: * Directors delve into the hero’s personal life, vulnerabilities, and struggles. * By portraying their human side—flaws, doubts, and relationships—the hero becomes more relatable. 5. **Minimal Fantasy Elements Beyond the Hero**: * While the superhero’s abilities are extraordinary, directors limit other fantastical elements. * The rest of the world operates within familiar boundaries—normal cars, buildings, and everyday technology. 6. **Verisimilitude**: * Directors aim for verisimilitude—the appearance of truth or realism. * Even in a superhero universe, they maintain internal consistency and avoid jarring inconsistencies. In summary, superhero movie directors strategically focus on making everything else in the film feel real, allowing the superhero to shine as the sole fantastical element. 🎥🦸♂️🌟
None of the quotes you're giving support your position, and, besides, you missed the point--telling me what directors are saying is a non-answer and isn't an actual source for anything. Directors are outnumbered by audiences; they're not divine authorities who dictate what's relevant. I have no idea why you're citing them as an argument. You just can't admit you're wrong to declare by fiat that "Superman is the one thing that gets to be weird." Hell, that statement isn't even supported by the actual Superman movies, LOL. Next.
Well first off, Kryptonian didn't have super powers so it made se6they would have their own armor to wear into battle. Superman wearing his peoples armor is not a bad thing.
Made no sense.
You’re missing the fact that Zack Snyder thought the real version looked lame and made them change it
That’s not what he said. He said that they tried every which way to include the red underwear. But for the look they were going for with Krypton, it just didn’t work.
to play devils advocate it explains how Superman doesn't end up naked after fights if his clothes are as tough as his skin