DC Cinematic Universe ( The James Gunn era)
- Thread starter Samurai8472
- Start date
Er...that's one way...of describing that family.
This would not be a decades-long issue if National (aka DC) did not completely mistreat and rip off the creators of Superman. About the Schusters "ruining" Superman, it is doubtful they would cause the same kind of endless damage to the character seen at various points in his published history. Nothing could be that bad.
I agree. The Schuster's are just trying to get back what they are owed.
What are they owed beyond the $100,000 they get paid every year as part of the agreement made in 1992?
Okay, i'm not following the recent legal battle too closely, but just to make sure, it is the Shusters, not the Siegels? Because I know it was the heirs of Jerry Siegel who did most legal battles in since the turn of the century, and it was because of their most recent settlement with DC that the credit "By Special Arrangement with the Jerry Siegel Family" is listed in every comic book with Superman or other characters of the Superman family in it.
I'm pretty sympathetic to comic book creators, and their estate, who want their share of the pie. I can't remember if it was Brubaker or Miller who called out Marvel for using their stories in massive movies without compensating them monetarily, for example. I don't know the details of this particular case, but they probably wanted their share of the movie's profit.
Yeah. The issue isn't about any one creator's or family's personal profit, but about reforming the system so that all creators are fairly compensated for the value of their creations. If someone co-created a character that makes a corporation billions, they should get more than a token sum or a "Special Thanks" nod racing by at the end of the credits.
Yeah, it's pretty sad when you hear about people who created characters who probably brought these companies at least millions of dollars, and they're so broke they need to do GoFundMes to get medical treatments.
That's a good opening to promote these folks: https://www.heroinitiative.org
Still don't understand the decision to keep the red underwear. They modernized the suit in general by adding all this texture and shapes but keep the completely un-modern and quite frankly in this day and age goofy looking original design for the costume?
Honestly if this remains my only criticism for the movie we're on a very good track, so far all the trailers and teasers have me gaining a real positive vibe, even love Guy Gardner's supergoofy haircut ( i hope they make fun of it in the movie).
It's not underwear.
I assume Gunn kept the trunks because that's what Superman wears.
95% of Superman suits that get rid of them look slightly off, and they always seem to struggle to find some way to balance the look of the suit without them.
Blue onesie with big red boots and a red cape: Fine.
Red trunks: Stupid!!
And I still don’t understand why it’s an issue for anybody.
Appreciate the positive tone of the rest of your comments, though.
Same. And I should have said so.
For me personally it just looks silly, like he actually wears tighty whities ( only in red) on the outside. Back in the 1930s when he was invented the design was ok and it became a staple but societies and fashion senses change and what worked nearly a hundred years ago might not work today for some.
It's a personal thing for me and i have no fashion sense at all i might add
It just seems odd to me to give the rest of the suit a modern look but keep the general old style. I know why Gunn decided for it, i just don't like it.It's a minor thing in the grand scheme of things though.
TBH I don’t much care for the more “modern” aspects to the suit. The pointless piping and the excessively stylized “S” are its worst elements.
They’ve been overthinking the suit for decades, when they already designed a definitive live-action Superman costume in 1978 that never needed changing. Certainly they’ve never improved upon it.
But agreed that both our carps are unimportant in the grand scheme. The overall effect of the suit is just great.
And anyway, Lois is the most important thing in that picture.
They’ve been overthinking the suit for decades, when they already designed a definitive live-action Superman costume in 1978 that never needed changing. Certainly they’ve never improved upon it.
But agreed that both our carps are unimportant in the grand scheme. The overall effect of the suit is just great.
And anyway, Lois is the most important thing in that picture.
Similar threads
