Article Erik Larsen posted on Facebook concerning the "trunks"

[stk]

And outside of Batman getting them back for a brief period after they were first taken off him,

??

He got them back for years and years. Like a decade or so. Brief in terms of the history of the universe, but kind of a while from our perspective.

[Sacred Knight]

Was it that long? I could of swore it was maybe 5 or so years. I am mistaken then there.

This is not a challenge or anything to back up my personal beliefs here, I'm genuinely curious after mentioning it last night, is there any superheroes left outside of Magneto that has trunks?

[nightrider]

I would like those who are complaining about the loss of trunks to say out whatever they have written over here. Tell it to someone who doesn't read read comics on a monthly basis. You'll realise when you're saying it out loud about how tragic it is to lose the trunks, you'll sound completely and utterly ridiculous.

[An Ear In The Fireplace]

Actually, I think to anyone who doesn't read super-hero comics, it sounds ridiculous either way. It's one of those stupid things that us comc geeks argue about--the kind of thing that audiences laugh at on THE BIG BANG THEORY--but nobody outside super-hero fandom would give it any consideration.

[iRacingRyan]

Sometimes things go out of date and out of style and are replaced by crap.

Shibe Park, Philadelphia:



Veteran's Stadium, Philadelphia:

Stopping halfway to make a point isn't really a good way to make a point. Veterans Stadium has been replaced with Citizens Bank Park, which is one of the most beautiful ballparks in the country. So I guess that gives you a few decades of hope that it'll turn around. ;)



And one that I snapped last season,

[stk]

I would like those who are complaining about the loss of trunks to say out whatever they have written over here. Tell it to someone who doesn't read read comics on a monthly basis. You'll realise when you're saying it out loud about how tragic it is to lose the trunks, you'll sound completely and utterly ridiculous.

You seem to be another person under the impression the character was created for adult tastes. You know who else dresses ridiculously? Donald Duck. You could have a discussion with your grown up friends who don't read monthly Disney comics about Donald's refusal to wear pants. But that, like this, would be missing the point.

[Fate's Faith]

What do kids have to do with anything concerning Superman's costume? Are you saying the trunks are more kid friendly in some fashion? Are all new kid characters created with trunks today? If that's the concern, then the costume how a long way to go being updated to kid's tastes today. A very long way.

[stk]

What do kids have to do with anything concerning Superman's costume? Are you saying the trunks are more kid friendly in some fashion? Are all new kid characters created with trunks today? If that's the concern, then the costume how a long way to go being updated to kid's tastes today. A very long way.

I'm saying little kids like things that are bright and colorful and don't get embarrassed at weirdness the way self-conscious adults trying to co-opt the characters for themselves do.

[Kurosawa]

Stopping halfway to make a point isn't really a good way to make a point. Veterans Stadium has been replaced with Citizens Bank Park, which is one of the most beautiful ballparks in the country. So I guess that gives you a few decades of hope that it'll turn around. ;)



And one that I snapped last season,

That is my hope and I did consider adding some pics of Citizens Bank Park to complete the analogy. I hope once the legal issues are settled that DC celebrates by bringing back Superman's proper visual.

[nightrider]

Actually, I think to anyone who doesn't read super-hero comics, it sounds ridiculous either way. It's one of those stupid things that us comc geeks argue about--the kind of thing that audiences laugh at on THE BIG BANG THEORY--but nobody outside super-hero fandom would give it any consideration.

You seem to be another person under the impression the character was created for adult tastes. You know who else dresses ridiculously? Donald Duck. You could have a discussion with your grown up friends who don't read monthly Disney comics about Donald's refusal to wear pants. But that, like this, would be missing the point.

The simple fact is I don't care either ways. I have a preference of one over the other, but it is not important enough for me to be overly vocal about it. Its not the costume that makes the man. So it seems ridiculous for me to see someone arguing so much over what is just a fashion choice.

[stk]

So it seems ridiculous for me to see someone arguing so much over what is just a fashion choice.

It's not a fashion choice, because Superman is not a person. He's a drawing. There are no actual clothes involved. It's not about wearing anything. It's visual branding.

[SediarSago]

It's not a fashion choice, because Superman is not a person. He's a drawing. There are no actual clothes involved. It's not about wearing anything. It's visual branding.

It's the character's fashion choice. In Superman in the New 52, Superman doesn't like trunks. I see why the trunks are liked, but I have grown into the no trunks. I have never really looked down at his crotch region while reading comics, so I never thought about it till this thread. HOWEVER, it's different of they change his top or his cape or his hair. THOSE are iconic. TRUNKS are not. If someone were to change Luke Skywalker's pants color from the one in ROTJ to the new movie, I'm sure their would not be as much complaining as when the outer underwear is changed to blue.

[stk]

It's the character's fashion choice. In Superman in the New 52, Superman doesn't like trunks. I see why the trunks are liked, but I have grown into the no trunks. I have never really looked down at his crotch region while reading comics, so I never thought about it till this thread. HOWEVER, it's different of they change his top or his cape or his hair. THOSE are iconic. TRUNKS are not. If someone were to change Luke Skywalker's pants color from the one in ROTJ to the new movie, I'm sure their would not be as much complaining as when the outer underwear is changed to blue.

That is such a bizarre analogy, I almost don't know where to begin. Luke wears clothes, not a costume.

The hair is iconic? Well, they changed it for the movie, so maybe it isn't more or less iconic than the trunks. Superman as a whole was iconic. I love how DC can change things and people can say, "Well, that wasn't the iconic part." lol

Iconic isn't something that you or I can decide. It's how the character is perceived in the group unconscious. Not even the current comics have anything to do with it. We'll see how the character is continued to be portrayed in advertising and merchandising over a long period. That will tell us, "iconic".

[Kurosawa]

It's the character's fashion choice. In Superman in the New 52, Superman doesn't like trunks. I see why the trunks are liked, but I have grown into the no trunks. I have never really looked down at his crotch region while reading comics, so I never thought about it till this thread. HOWEVER, it's different of they change his top or his cape or his hair. THOSE are iconic. TRUNKS are not. If someone were to change Luke Skywalker's pants color from the one in ROTJ to the new movie, I'm sure their would not be as much complaining as when the outer underwear is changed to blue.

They've changed his hair lots of times and his hair is different now-no spitcurl. It's just mussy. It actually looks kinda cool but it's not what it usually is.

I don't like the nu52 costume or the MOS costume and I like the classic best, but I think it is possible to redesign it without the trunks and make it work, but I don't think either of those two get the job done. And I really don't see the need. There are many pressing issues with Superman, or at least there were before Morrison's Action Comics, but the costume was not a problem.

[Fate's Faith]

I would say his iconic look is the red and blue coloring, the shield and the cape. How you put those elements together has changed over the years but that's where the imagery comes from. I'm fairly certain that the new 52 Superman is recognizable as Superman. No one's going to get him confused with any other character. Of course I come at this as someone who had wished the trunks had been a casualty of CoIE.