| Posted: 23 April 2018 at 3:38pm | IP Logged | 7
|
post reply
|
|
When I was a kid creating my first few dozen super-heroes---and knew nothing of circus strongmen of the 30's--I often gave them trunks...simply because it was a chance to add another color to the design and break things up a little. (The unwritten rule was that the arms should match the legs, the gloves should match the boots, etc.) And I'm sure this was the thinking of many adults in the business as well.
Marvel avoided different-colored trunks for the most part in their major heroes, but plenty of second and third-string characters got them. Even DC skipped them for their cool Silver Age redesigns of the Flash, Green Lantern, and others. But Batman and Superman had them since the 30's, so it became an "old DC" thing.
But, again, even as a kid, I understood that--far from being "underwear on the outside"--the usually loose-fitting trunks (even on Captain America and Thor where they were the same color as the legs or shirt) were there for modesty's sake. That extra layer of clothing protected the wearer (and the viewer) from "unsightly bulges."
And the proof is in the pudding! After a few years of Henry Cavill wearing tights that were uncomfortably tight in a certain area--and the accompanying cosplayers at cons who wear even thinner material--you can't help but feel embarrassed for anyone wearing a super-suit without some loose, thick, or armored material "down there."
People asked for it for years--remove Superman's trunks (which sounds weird)--and DC (and the movies) finally gave it to them. And it looked bad. The design needs that extra red down there and even the yellow belt. He looked unfinished (or not completely dressed) without it.
I guess that's what experiments are for--and when something DOESN'T work, you get rid of it! Like DC just did for Superman. Good riddance to the mandarin collar too!
Edited by Eric Jansen on 23 April 2018 at 3:50pm
|
