Holy skin-tight suit, Superman!

-
ComicBookMovie.com have posted some pictures of Henry Cavill dressed in full Superman costume, for the new, "darker" franchise reboot, Man of Steel (2013). Dark? Superman?! That just sounds wrong. But anyway. Here's what Clark Kent's superhero alias will look like:

Nice cape, Clark.

But what's more:

He's even allowed genitalia this time, unlike Brandon Routh.

Cute buns, Clark. Less keen on them ribs o' yours, though.

Err. Someone else get the feeling that this is just WRONG? I mean, sure, nice physique there, Cavill. Good for the eyecandy part and all, but where are the red undies? It looks too professional, somehow. Similar to the suit in Spider Man 3, and not a far cry from The Dark Knight either. Dunno. It just doesn't exactly scream "Superman" at me. And that's regardless of the big ol' S on the chest.

What do you think? Super hot or super not?

Comments

  1. Fabo/Musa4 September 2011 at 18:34

    I couldn't agree more with you! Not that I'm not admiring Henry Cavill's buns right now, but I miss the red shorts and I think it's OK to update, but tradition has its place as well. The hair and cape seem to be retro, but the rest! Plus, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the Superman franchise for kids, maybe older kids, but still?

    But I acknowledge that difficult to tell with just the few pics we've seen so far how it will actually look in the film.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous4 September 2011 at 18:43

    Good lord, you should not be able to tell whether or not a man is Jewish by looking AT HIS PANTS!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Traxy5 September 2011 at 10:32

    Musa: We had a discussion about Superman and the "let's reboot the franchise and make it DARKER!" thing that's sweeping the comic book movies. Do it again, only DARKER this time. It worked very well for Batman, but Batman lends itself very well to that style. The nature of Gotham City as such is quite dark, so it gels very well. Then they're doing the same to Spider Man, and that feels wrong simply because they had a successful reboot just a few years ago. The Superman universe in itself isn't dark. It's bright and colourful and cheerful. But now they're wanting to make dorky reporter Clark Kent into something that he has never been? And for what reason? "Darker is better!" I'm not sold on the idea, and neither were the comic book nerds with whom the discussion was held. :/

    ifbyyes: LOL!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Unknown7 September 2011 at 01:35

    I have mixed feelings about this flick. I like the idea of Cavill as Superman, but the costume just seems "off" to me, and the whole idea of "let's do it darker" -- not sure how this is gonna play out. Like you say, the Spider-Man "re-boot" -- seriously it hasn't even been ten years since Spidey 3 and we're already redoing it? Nuts. But what am I saying -- it's practically guaranteed that I'll see it. :)

    ReplyDelete
  5. Traxy9 September 2011 at 18:59

    Completely agree with you, Ruth. And yup, I'm fairly certain we'll be watching it at the cinema too when it comes out!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Thanks for stopping by! All comments are read (usually within 24 hours) and responded to whenever I can, but not necessarily straight away. Spam comments stop in the moderation queue. Be as snarky as you like, but I give as good as I get, and you probably need a hug. Cheerio! :)

Popular posts from this blog

You know you're a Richard Armitage fan when ...

-
I thought there should be a list like this. Maybe there already is, I've just not seen it yet. It's not a massive list by the time of posting this (25 points), but I'm hoping you'll help me come up with more so that one day it will be. :) Last updated: 14 June 2012, the list so far: You know you're a Richard Armitage fan when ...
READ MORE »

Richard Armitage will never be himself on TV

-
Image
One of the interesting comments Richard Armitage was when an interviewer asked him, because he's a great dancer, is if we'd ever see him on something like Strictly Come Dancing . His response was that we'd never get to see Richard Armitage as Richard Armitage on TV. Basically, he's not the kind of celebrity to show up as soon as someone waves an invite to a reality TV show. Richard Armitage as himself. On telly. But not in a reality show. Things that make me love and respect the man: +1! Before I read that interview, I was thinking about him on Strictly , and then started to think of a host of other reality TV shows and whether or not he would be a suitable candidate. This is what I came up with ... Top Gear What it is: This is a car show, or ... a comedy show with cars in, depending on how you look at it. Rupert Penry-Jones and Peter Firth came on it to promote series 7 (?) of Spooks , so why not Richard Armitage? He does drive a car, after all ... Why ...
READ MORE »

And you call yourself a Richard Armitage fan?

-
It's been just about a year since I wrote that post about IF Richard Armitage was gay, what's it got to do with us ? This has since become the most read and the most commented post on this blog, for better or for worse. Hotly debated issue, apparently. The thing that strikes me is how people look upon the subject. A lot of comments were very supportive, saying if he was gay, it might spoil the illusion somewhat, but all in all, if that's who he is, then that's who he is. Others claimed to have evidence of him being a homosexual, but from what I gather, it's really only based on hearsay, rumourmongering and/or "gut feelings". Personally, I'd be interested to hear a gay man's views on this. Why? Because everyone in the debate is female, and the vast majority, if not all, are straight. Ever heard the term "gaydar"? Whose gaydar is more likely to be accurate - a straight female's or a homosexual male's? I know who I'd vote for...
READ MORE »