HOME | DD
Bunk2 — Superman Reboot Concepts
Published: 2008-10-05 03:42:30 +0000 UTC; Views: 12491; Favourites: 141; Downloads: 1016
Redirect to original
Description
The reboot suit from earlier only with the back of the cape and a couple of variations for fun. The Jim Lee style symbol and a Fleischer look for fun. I don't expect to do any more variations, I'm pretty much spent with this thing.Illustrator for the line work, colored in Photoshop
Related content
Comments: 17
I like how many different versions of Superman are represented here.
Personally, I always kinda liked the long (almost-shorts-like) briefs, as well as removing them altogether. The top right design is actually a really interesting one (reminds of "The New Frontier"), and I actually like the blank-suit very well (the one without briefs or an \S/). Strangely, I think all it would require would be an S and a cape and it would be good to go. Maybe neither.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
This is great! If I was making a superman movie, this is how the suit would look!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I gotta tell ya, the first reboot you did looked very professional and movie worthy. Much better than what they did with Superman Returns. His "s" was too small.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No, it wasn't. The size was consistent with the Golden Age/Fleischer/Alyn/Reeves versions. It wasn't until the Donner movie that the emblem became permanently enlarged.
Of all the problems with SUPERMAN RETURNS, the costume wasn't one of them. It was actualy VERY faithful to Superman's entire design history.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I wasn't saying it wasn't historically accurate. Just prefer the larger "S". And believe me, I know that wasn't even close to a major issue compared to some of the film's problems
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
For me, the film's real problems had everything to do with acting and scripting. Every plot point and design element in came from if not the comics (SON OF SUPERMAN immediately comes to mind), the previous TV shows, movies, and cartoons. Where it went wrong was not gelling those elements into a cohesive plot. Luthor says he can use Kryptonian crystals to create vehicles and weapons of mass destruction, and just makes a kryptonite-laced island. Superman's five-year absence and return has no real impact on the world at all. The Lois/Superman situation is left completely unresolved, and Lois is so self-absorbed and unlikeable that she doesn't really deserve either him or her fiance. Superman's son has no real bearing on the story at all; he's just a prop. The trip to Krypton's ruins could have been shown in brief flashbacks (it was filmed), but it's only mentioned in dialogue. The movie races along at a fast clip, but nothing actually happens in it. It's just empty air. Which is surprising, given how meaty its plot elements were.
As far as the acting goes...Kate Bosworth and Kevin Spacey ruined the movie for me. She embodied everything I've ever disliked about Lois Lane and nothing of what what the Noel Neill/Phyllis Coates versions likeable. Spacey acted like a homicidal Daffy Duck rather than a career criminal bent on revenge and power lust. As for everyone else, they all seemed like they'd rather be anywhere else but in that movie. And Brandon Routh got screwed. After all the fanboy hate he took simply for not being Tom Welling, he wasn't given a chance to prove them wrong. Superman was such a nonentity in the script that nobody could have carried it off. Truthfully, I never want him to wear the suit again, simply because it was more trouble than it was worth. Fanboys made up their minds to hate him sight unseen and still hate him, the movie didn't give him anything to do, and it did his career more harm than good. He's better off leaving Superman behind and finding something else to do.
I will give SUPERMAN RETURNS this: it wasn't anywhere near as offensive and infuriating as the Nolan Batman movies. At worst, it was just a disappointment. But I will say that in the wake of these movies, I don't ever intend to watch another comic book movie again.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I pretty much agree with you. Not, of course, about the Nolan Batman movies (I actually love those a lot, even if they are drastically different from any other version of Batman), but about why Returns failed. We will never know, truthfully, whether Routh would have been a good Superman. He never really got the chance to prove us otherwise. It's not simply that he didn't have many lines (though for the record he did NOT have enough lines in that movie), but rather that the film simply didn't seem to focus on Superman. It also didn't seem to focus on anyone else for any great length of time either, which was a severe problem. Luthor alternated between campy/silly and strangely menacing, neither of which were done at appropriate times. His plan had far too much build-up to and was presented as being far too intense (with the storm effects and the dark lighting at odd times) to simply be a complex re-hash of his plan from Superman: The Movie (which it quite frankly was).
Kate Bosworth brought NOTHING compelling to Lois Lane. She was simply uninteresting and wasn't given any interesting focal points. The character of Richard White was incredibly likable with no real character flaws. This wouldn't have been as much of a problem if he hadn't been set up as perhaps being an antagonist to Superman. But then again maybe he's an ally. Or just a curiously ignored non-entity who's too nice a guy to deserve being completely ignored by his semi-fiance and the superpowered alien who left poor Richard with an asthmatic kid with intermittent super-strength. The whole time Superman alternates between flying brick who doesn't say anything to posing creeper (who watches his ex-girlfriend at random times) who doesn't say anything.
Basically, the writers were crap and so was much of the supporting cast. Oddly enough, the actor for Richard White was fine but the character is just as much of a nonentity as Superman. Mind you, EVERYONE was kinda a non-entity in that film, which is actually an amazing feat of bad script-writing.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I actually had zero problem with Superman watching Lois at random times. Compared to the ridiculous, obsessive-infantile way he behaved vis-a-vis Lois pre-DCNu, that was mild. I could buy that after a failed mission to search Krypton's ruins for survivors that cost him years of his life, Superman would be struggling with the knowledge that the woman he loved had moved on. I cannot and will not accept comic book Superman, after being repeatedly emotionally abused by Lois (and at one point, cheated on with a scummy ex-boyfriend named Jeb Friedman*) for the mere fact that he's Superman, would take said abuse like a whipped puppy, constantly blubber and whine whenever Lois isn't around or gets captured (he wasted half of a four-part Marv Wolfman story in 2001, sobbing and punching asteroids because "I LOST LOIS!"), and show no backbone or initiative of his own. That's behavior I find completely out of character for him, and far creepier than the understandable human flaws Routh's Superman showed.
In fact, I think that's another reason the movie faltered. I've said it before and I'll say it again: it spent far too much time cherry-picking story and design elements from all over the mythos and not nearly enough stopping to think how it would all fit together as a narrative. One of the things the movie ran with was the 1995-2011 recurring motif of Lois Lane and everything connected to her hurting Superman and/or the people around her. Lois, in that era of the comics, was depicted as selfish, arrogant, self-righteous, disloyal, uncaring, and ready to knife you in the back if she got into a snit. Bosworth's Lois was this version to a T. Unspeakably rude to the poor flight attendant when we first meet her. Copping an attitude with everybody at the Planet. Treating her fiance like a plank of wood. Stupidly taking her son into a dangerous situation where she knows there's a good chance they'll both get killed. Even her anger at Superman leaving can't be justified because in a cut scene used for the screen tests, Clark indirectly states that the reason Superman didn't tell her he was going to the ruins of Krypton was because he knew she'd try to stop him, and he'd give in. If Superman's that afraid that Lois wouldn't accept him acting on information of possible Kryptonian survivors, that doesn't speak very well of Lois, does it? I think Kate Bosworth was simply performing the character she was given. She was playing the vindictive, selfish Lois of the then-recent comics, and she delivered. She was every bit as unlikeable as her comics counterpart. Even if Lois hadn't been the real star of SUPERMAN RETURNS (the entire movie revolves around her), I still would have been put out because this was the version of Lois I hated in the comics. And it's the biggest flaw with SUPERMAN RETURNS; they chose to be faithful to the worst aspect of the comics of the time and made it the core of the movie. Even if Luthor had been better cast and his plan properly played out, even if Superman's exile hadn't been so glossed over, even if Superman Jr. had been a more active character, building the movie around what people had come to call "Lois Lane, Superbitch" would still have been a derailment.
*Lois' fling with Jeb was never explicitly shown in the comics, but was implied with the subtlety of a sledgehammer. I had the opportunity to ask Ron Frenz, one of the artists on that particular era, about it, and he confirmed that Lois was "emotionally cheating at least" with Jeb. He also said he'd tried and failed to talk the writers out of it, which explains so much about how Lois morphed into such a rotten character.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Also, just thought I should mention that the film really should have tried to stay in-universe (the Donnerverse, specifically, which we all know is pretty distant from the comics). Instead, all the main characters were drastically changed. Superman was always a bit quiet but here he barely got any lines at all. Lois Lane of the Donnerverse was usually outspoken, and a tad clumsy, but Kate Bosworth just COMPLETELY ignored that. Luthor of the Donnerverse was quite, quite campy, and very over-the-top, which Spacey used in exactly ONE scene. The rest of the time he spent glowering in a manner that didn't quite make sense.
The only characters that felt consistent were Perry White and Jimmy Olsen, and they were minor characters. Again, this wouldn't have been a problem if the movie wasn't so obviously trying to keep itself in the same universe as the earlier Superman movies, but it was.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Strangely I did NOT get her being a bitch at all. She was just too much of a nonentity in that film, like every other main character save perhaps Luthor.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Now that's what Superman's suit should look like for the reboot 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Much appreciated. I just hope they stick with the traditional elements and don't go too crazy with it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1