An examination of super-hero depiction meeting the film industry

advertise on the 'Nest
ADVERTISER LOGIN

	EUROPE'S MOST VISITED SF/F WEB SITE

HOT PANTS AND ZOOT SUITS
an examination of super-hero depiction meeting the film industry.

by GF WILLMETTS

What do you prefer? Yellow spandex?
Cyclops to Wolverine: X-Men The Movie (2000) .

There is a great deal of difference between the four-colour world of comicbooks and our reality. For instance, we don’t have super-heroes flying to rescue us from the schemes of megalomaniacs or nefarious super-villains in equally gaudy-clad costumes.

A sure hit for any journalist and likely to keep the less interesting stuff out of the newspapers and television. Then again, we don’t have any megalomaniacs or nefarious super-villains either...well, not anyone who doesn’t own a country and its army that is.

If we had, this would seem quite normal rather than out of place in our reality. Costumed super-heroes would be seen as a fashion statement with many people dressing in variations of said costumes.

What captures the imagination on the comicbook page doesn’t always translate so well when translated into ‘real life’ let alone as portrayed in the cinema or television. It just goes to show how good comicbook artists and writers are in convincing us otherwise.

We’re also less prone to condemn super-hero action as being other than questionable vigilante deeds or bully tactics.

With the early Superman films, it was a problem of not being able to create workable special-effects or people to match the image. Little wonder that when George Reeves flew everyone could spot the strings holding him up.

With the early Batman films, it was more to do with less-than-athlete actors trying to fill out costumes made of material that wouldn’t hold together in a simple shower. Then again, latex hadn’t been invented at the time.

Producers recognised that super-heroes sold but couldn’t figure out what held the attraction to make it work on the screen and gave them ‘B’ serial status as only suitable for kids.

This is despite the statistics showing comicbooks were read by a wide age range. For the actors who portrayed super-heroes, it was quickly seen as the death of their career for any other part. The aforementioned poor George Reeves took it one step further and actually committed suicide while depressed as his acting career dived.

A matter of a couple decades later and he would have at least got by on the convention circuit. As I understand if, Burt Ward - the 60s Robin actor - is still making a passable living from personal appearances in America.

In the mid-60s, the Batman TV series succeeded for a couple years by being fashionably camp with neither the actors or public taking it for anything more than it was.

A chance for grown-ups to go around in fancy dress putting stop to criminal schemes of other fancy dressed grown-ups. It was carried off by the skills of the villainous cast who lined up to star where they could play larger-than-life parts.

Batman and Robin stars, Adam West and Burt Ward, practically played straight men to the villains. Neither side played to the camera audience adding to the credibility of the reality and carried the viewers along with the action.

The series worked because some of the essence of the comicbooks, like the noise-effected fight scenes, wasn’t forgotten nor making excuses for what it was doing. It also helped that everything was larger than life in Gotham City and everybody took it for granted when the Batmobile rolled to a halt outside police headquarters that they were there to sort out some trouble.

In many respects, the TV Batman killed off TV super-heroics for a decade when it went into syndication. Also, no other producer wanted to take the more campier route because it would point back to this source.

If anything, the two Bionic TV series probably filled the gap for super-heroics without having to resort to wearing costumes. The Spider-Man TV series out around the same time was let down by not having given enough thought given to providing adequate villains to make it work.

The costume looked like the comicbook version but let down by the consequences of what to do about his web-zingers and web-cartridge belt which was left out for all to see. Had Spidey’s villains also been equally flamboyant, he wouldn’t have seemed too unusual.

The Incredible Hulk TV series took some aspects of the comicbook source but just saw it as a vehicle for a modified Fugitive series. Even better, the Hulk didn’t wear a super-hero costume! Kids and adults alike took to it for different reasons and heralded a success of sorts but it wasn’t really as it was in the comicbooks and only had one serious green adversary.

Wonder Woman had the right personification of the character in the shape of actress Lynda Carter but made too many concessions to explain her presence and neglected her own villain’s gallery. Her costume was essentially a wired swimming costume and everyone took it for granted that was what Amazons wore that year.

Both the Wonder Woman and Batman TV series left the quick-change into costumes as something unexplainable than demonstrable. It’s only when you think about it that shedding civvies for super-hero garb in a few seconds to be totally implausible...unless your name was...er..Superman and had his kind of speed. Speaking of which...

Whereas TV couldn’t prove an outlet on a small budget, the cinema came to the rescue with a Superman film and an athletic Christopher Reeve filling the correct trademarked costume adequately enough without looking uncomfortable.

Even still, there was enough awareness of how tight the costume was that Reeve insisted on wearing a box inside the red pants so he didn’t show which way the wind was blowing when he walked. Even so, in all three films his was the only costume of significance. Lex Luthor never really wore one in the comicbooks for long either.

With special effects now getting up to the tasks it had to solve, everyone was following the action than be worried about the man or alien’s sanity who wore his pants outside his trousers. No one questioned why Superman wore a costume and probably just assumed that was the way it was to identify him from out of the crowd.

An interesting comparison comes from Superman II film, where in the bar fight no one wonders when they see the spectacle-less Clark Kent being like Superman without the costume effortlessly beat up a couple thugs. Must happen all the time. It’s interesting to note that in the first film, Clark Kent acknowledges and then disregards the latest US phone booth as a place to change into costume.

Even when it was shaped like an enclosed box, I defy anyone to take their clothes off quickly in one. Superman might be fast but I wouldn’t’ expect any set of civvies not to be left in shreds at the speed he is supposed to move at. Over the films, such changes ultimately were seen as mystical metamorphosis than reality.

Seeing how it was done, TV quickly latched on with a Superboy TV series knowing the costume could be made to work if it was taken for granted as that was the way things were. Essentially, this was the working clothes of the super-hero.

A decade later came Tim Burton’s Batman film where the caped vigilante had a serious make-over in the costume department switching from grey and blue to black and shiny black. In the comicbooks, Batman was supposed to be extremely athletic.

Michael Keaton is a competent actor but could hardly support such a costume, so the costume was seen more as a protective armoured disguise - hints given when the two reporters looked around Wayne’s private museum. Not once but for each of the three films, eventually changing to silver and shiny black. There was no compromises made over costume changes. It was fumigated for each nightly outing with no quick change.

It was also remembered that effective villains can also make things work together to some extent, providing the director and script was up to task. Like all such situations, the films ended up parodying itself than something people could watch as escapist fantasy build in a world that lived like in the comicbooks.

An odd contraction since in the comicbooks the plot and script are seen as being important as the pictures.

Other super-heroes have fared better in the costume stakes from this period. TV’s The Flash had a more muscular costume but it was still the familiar red with yellow trimmings. Although not seen on TV in the UK, it at least had super-villains who dressed the part.

Both film and TV interpretations of Captain America’s costume have been better than the 50s serial representation but generally let down by a story that felt obliged to have an origin. ‘The Adventures Of Superman’ carried on from what was established in the films but was more soapish when it dealt with the Kryptonian’s relationship with Lois Lane and ultimately proved its undoing.

The Punisher film completely forgot the costume and other than the background history could really have been anyone killing mob members. The Phantom film also had the familiar purple costume sans the striped trunks. This was probably changed because he would have stood out more whether he was in the jungle or city. Didn’t stop the Phantom following the Batman’s lead in using black make-up than a tight mask around the eyes.

The Justice League Of America film had a most remarkable Martian Manhunter resembling the comicbook version even if he was only seen briefly. It was a shame that this wasn’t held out for a better budget and more work on the other characters who were turned mostly into inadequates than people who could be looked up to. Shame really, cos the costumes were reasonably accurate when they got around to wearing them.

Where super-heroics are concerned, higher budgets get better returns. The Blade film isn’t forgotten but then with his leather gear even in the comicbooks it was never considered to be a real costume anyway. An important ingredient commonly neglected, probably because of budget restrictions, is if the lead character is larger-than-life, then so should the rest of the reality. In that respect, the 60s TV Batman series got it totally right.

The latest in super-hero films brings us the X-Men Movie. Not wearing any of the various costumes they have worn throughout their comicbook history have been landed with black leather costumes because its director thinks the mutants should not be conspicuous.

Something a bit hard to imagine avoiding when they let rip with their powers and become easy to spot. In a recent interview, director Bryan Singer says the leather isn’t unprecedented because it was worn in the comicbook. The only time that I can remember that was when Storm went through her punk phase. It was hardly something that caught on with the rest of the team.

This rundown isn’t supposed to be a history of comicbooks in the film and TV world but to bring everyone up to speed regarding the various costume incarnations over the years and trying not to let anyone off the hook. Looking over my own notes here, there are many factors involved in making sure a live-action version of a super-hero comicbook work. It isn’t always big budget.

A lot depends on the actor or stuntmen/women filling the costume adequately without looking embarrassed and our own expectations. In that respect, the costume almost seem like secondary importance except as a character identifying trademark that is now being seriously compromised.

Are we going to see super-heroes running around in dark leathers simply because gaudy costumes aren’t seen to be effective in the super-hero business? How far do these changes have to go before they forget their comicbook roots?

Now before I go on, this is not an attack on the X-Men Movie but at a recurring problem that is likely to escalate based on its success. The discussion point is a look at what the super-hero costume actually represents and why do directors go shy from keeping to the source.

At its most basic, the costume is a disguise in case you’re recognised and your loved ones are threatened or possibly killed. This works in much the same way as people only remember they spoke to a policeman and not the man wearing the uniform.

It gives an element of authority in pointing out to any self-respecting villain that you are the threat and not some innocent bystander. In some unspoken code, the super-villain plays the same game back, wearing a costume to ensure everyone gives him or her plenty of room going about their business, usually robbing the bank or some research laboratory. The costume is seen as effective working clothes far more than the traditional crook in a stripped sweat-shirt and cap carrying a swag bag.

When both sides switch into civvies, they disappear into a crowd. Although the super-hero is there to effectively out a stop to the super-villain, they are basically gladiators or warriors and their battlefield is the city streets. Outside of Halloween, no civilian would want to dress so outlandishly.

A costume offers fewer restriction to the super-hero. If made from the right kind of latex or spandex, provides the freedom for athletic prowlness that a standard lounge suit is clearly inadequate to support.

Many Marvel characters have their uniforms made of Reed Richards/Mr. Fantastic’s patented ‘unstable molecules’ formula that is more pliable and indestructible to the individual’s super-powers. Considering that so many of the costumes are sewn together by the heroes themselves, it’s surprising none of them ply their trades as tailors.

It’s surprising that so few choose to wear any armour protection depending more on their speed to avoid bullets. In the comics, only DC’s Batman and Marvel’s Punisher’s chest logos are made to stand out as targets for guns and each conceals bullet-proof kevlar to avoid being shot in the head.

Given the choice, kevlar threaded spandex would be the better option for any costume as it makes for longer wearing and is prized by motorcyclists for the same reason. Considering so many super-heroes are also super-human in both strength and speed, it is probably understandable that natural advantages are better than any conventional armour. Of course, if the costume is more than a few millimetres thick it would be a lot harder to hide it under civvies. Kevlar isn’t exactly very flexible, holds in sweat and can be a tad heavy.

If you’re not going to present yourself as a target, then adequate thought has to be given to concealment when not super-heroing. It’s very easy to spot a super-hero in civvies. In the summertime, they’re the people who always keeps their shirt’s buttoned to the neck and never roll up their sleeves.

Wearing a double set of clothing pads them out and would probably sweat a lot and look rather red in the face no matter how thin the costume underneath is. It must surely be a relief to shed their civvies and smash some super-villain up. Is it any wonder that many super-heroes see wearing costumes as part of their job and don’t disguise the fact, especially when they work in groups like Marvel’s Avengers or Fantastic Four and don’t even consider wearing civvies or have secret identities.

If the Avengers stroll out for a pizza, chances are they drop their cowls and wear a raincoat than waste time changing. That way, they are always on call than play around with any disguise charade.

Probably the most oddest arrangement I ever saw was on the cover of a 60s DC World’s Finest cover where Batman and Superman are being attacked by a medieval Crusader knight’s sword with their costumes torn open revealing civvies beneath. It caused a lot of question marks from fans that had to be addressed.

I mean, if they wear their super-hero togs beneath their civvies then they have to do a double strip, put back on the civvies and then the costume. Poor Batman would never catch up with the bad guys at that rate. The cover was put down to artistic licence but DC did go out of their way to show Superman compressing his civvies after that and tucking them away in a pocket in his cape.

Quite why no one spotted the bulge there is still a mystery, let alone how his civvies survived undamaged. For a time, Batman always left the Bat Cave suitably dressed and didn’t take his civvies on patrol.

With so many DC characters wearing capes, it at least stopped silly questions like ‘You turning into a hunchback, Mr. Wayne?’ as his cloak rides up under his suit.

Capes are hardly the best super-hero accessory although it was part of the standard DC wardrobe. They slow you down running and as writer Alan Moore noted in his series, The Watchmen, have a nasty habit of getting stuck in doors giving the villain a chance to shoot you dead as was discussed regarding the death of Dollar Bill.

One of the best arrangements of costume under civvies has to be Spider-Man’s, who’s headpiece and gloves are sufficiently long that once pulled off means he can walk around with his top two buttons undone and sleeves rolled up.

People might think he’s always wearing the same red undershirt and naff red socks but it's a lot better than most. When he changed into costume, his civvies were always webbed into a pack left secured on a skyscraper wall. In the early days, when Daredevil wore his first yellow and black costume, he actually carried a tight knapsack high on his back containing his civvies.

Fortunately, he dropped the idea when he changed to his all red costume as it got in the way of his gymnastics. The roofs and air ducts of New York must be littered with forgotten civvies over the years. One also has to wonder what the super-heroes do with their wallets...excuse me if you’re American, billfolds as well as anything that would identify them.

It’s also another give-away that you’ve a super-hero identity by the number of identical suits that have to be bought monthly. No wonder so many DC heroes come from the millionaire class.

The worse problem of roaming the streets in civvies is if you see a crime is what to do about changing. American cities have more dark side alleys than they know what to do with and probably a lot easier to change than finding a phone booth. It’s a good thing the super-hero costume is worn as an under garment or they could face arrest for flashing.

Mind you, if everyone else is watching the crime taking place who’s to see you slip away? Well, outside of the girl-friend you’re out with on a date who doesn’t think much of your cowardly lack of interest in what’s going on or running off in the opposite direction on the pretext of finding a policeman. How is she to know that you’re more than a little interested in the action because you’re actually part of it? Dilemmas of a double identity can probably be explored in a separate article.

I’ve stayed pretty much with the more well-known super-heroes than drag out too many characters that you wouldn’t know without a serious history of reading comics. Still, let’s indicate a few other interesting examples. Probably the most under-dressed hero has to belong to DC’s ‘The Watchmen’ where Dr. Manhattan didn’t see the necessity of wearing anything at all.

Then again, being tall and blue-skinned he would always stand out in a crowd. Having a body make-over like the Hulk had is probably the easiest solution except for finding a change of clothes when reverting to normal.

His alter-ego, Bruce Banner, stitched money into his trousers for when he reverted to normal as with that exception, everything else got shredded in the transformation. Technically, the Silver Surfer was naked except for his silver coating although there was a suggestion of pants in the early comicstrips.

A couple of the X-Men, Beast and Nightcrawler, by their physical nature always stood out anyway. The Beast resorted to rubber masks for a time as disguise but gave them up when he took on super-hero celebrity status full-time with the Avengers and never went back. It did produce an undiscussed problem for any of his colleagues when they went out together and they wore civvies.

Nightcrawler used an image inducer device to look human but dispensed with it rather than deny his demonic appearance resorting to a hat to cover his features when he had to. Anthony Stark carried components of his standard Iron Man costume compacted in his attaché case. Considering, until he had his heart operation, it must still have rather heavy to carry.

Speaking of which, as Stark is a renowned womaniser, I wonder why none of his dates felt they’re jewellery clank against his metal chestplate when they kissed? Maybe we’re not supposed to think of things like that?! If there has been a change in super-hero comicbooks over the decades, then it is with the writers addressing such problems than simply ignoring them.

Outside of the aforementioned Dr. Manhattan, on a body covering basis, super-heroines wear the least clothing covering their assets. Wonder Woman would make a small fortune with the secret to how her frontispiece stays in place when she runs. One can only surmise the extra showing of bare flesh gives super-villains pause for lusty thoughts allowing the heroine to get in a few punches first.

Then again, considering the original target audience of comicbooks was the adolescent male, super-heroines with plenty of flesh showing was hardly given any practical considerations.

The traditional super-hero costume followed the lines of a cowl or mask secured to a body spandex stocking, gloves and boots. The exterior pants should be thought of as more in line with a disguised codpiece to protect the genitalia. Only at DC was it thought important that a cape was mandatory accessory from the 1950s period. With the characters revamped in the early 60s, there were fewer cloaked super-heroes at long last amongst the DC comicbooks.

Marvel characters, even when they were under the Timely trademark, tended to be costumed more practically. It also helped differentiate them from their DC rivals originally but made a lot of practical sense although the general public thought they belonged under a single banner. It wasn’t until the early 70s that National Periodicals officially changed their name to DC Comics as all the comic fans called them anyway.

There have been some open comparisons to costumes worn by circus performers. Robin’s original costume was supposed to have been based on his family’s ‘Flying Graysons’ although quite how no one made the connection is hard to say. The number of rich playboys with teen-age wards running around would have aroused the suspicions of any intelligent villain spotting a connection let alone child welfare.

Certainly, the more ghostly Deadman was an ex-trapeze artist and still wore his costume and mask. Only Marvel’s martial artists, among the more prominent ones Shang-Chi and Iron Fist, wore anything resembling traditional dojo gear. Normally, the traditional zootsuit with prominent colouring and recognisable symbol was sufficient to show a super-hero or heroine was on the nightly prowl looking for trouble.

Let’s face it. The super-hero would look really out of place in a reality closely resembling our own. We don’t have the crime output anything like that of DC’s Gotham City and Metropolis let alone Marvel’s version of New York. If we did, then it’s unlikely any special section of the police force could keep it in check. Considering how fast so many of the captured super-villains escape jail, it doesn’t speak much for their judicial system either.

If you want to get a light sentence in Gotham City, plead an insanity plea as it’s rather easy to break out of the Arkham Asylum than the state prison. The DC Universe’s Earth always did have more super-villains criminally insane than just purely evil anyway. The super-hero vigilante would be considered a necessity to cover for an inadequate police force or imprisonment plan.

Comicbook reality is full of super-characters running around in costume. As such, it doesn’t look too extra-ordinary. When a film studio buy rights to a comicbook character or team that’s usually all they can afford. To put cameo appearances or even mention other characters would cost big bucks.

They daren’t refer to or show other characters because other studios have more than likely optioned them. Consequently, the costumed super-hero is seen in isolation and out of context to keep budgets more centred. Although this has never really affected DC character based film or TV series, it tends to be a bigger blow to Marvel characters who populate a single area.

It’s a lot easier to use a conventional reality for a backdrop that the director figures regular film-goers will recognise. As much as I can sympathise with producers and directors who balance their budgets this way, one really has to query if they really want to create a story actually based on super-heroes or just the aspects that appeal to them.

What we really should be asking is whether we want to see an interpretation or a real super-hero movie or TV series where the full implication of super-humans running around in colourful costumes is exploited in the reality rather than being an extension of our world. If so, what would it look like?

As I commented at the beginning, to the fashion conscious, it would be a means to imitate. One only has to look at how the spread of body piercing to tattoos have spread across the world to see how such things would be latched on to. The interest in the rather flamboyant but totally garish costumes would have half the population wearing variations indicating whom they support. A minor step like that would make for a colourful backdrop although make it difficult for the super-hero to stand out.

Of course, one could always go the way of the Dick Tracy film and have the sets and costumes based on a simple four colour choice. Unfortunately, because it was done there first, it can’t be imitated elsewhere without comparisons being made.

The recent depictions of super-hero worlds have been to show a dirty world. As most super-hero action is done late at night rather than in full daylight, it’s understandable why the costumes are perceived as being dark as well. Unfortunately, it doesn’t answer the question of why change a winning formula when converting to films.

With recent talk that a new Superman film is likely to have the Kryptonian alien in a new costume also indicates little regard to the character’s history. Is it so uncool to have a traditional super-hero costume?

The main reason why director Tim Burton got away with this in the Batman film was because he kept the basic arrangement of cowl, cape, utility belt and symbol but added the armour on the basis that any man dressed in a costume is going to need any edge they can have. This doesn’t really apply to super-human physiology.

They have the edge and want the colourful costume to warn any super-villain who is coming after them. To do otherwise is doing a disservice to a genre that has survived for seventy years.

Comicbooks might have lost some readers to other interests like computer games but to say they’re out of touch with outlandish costumes doesn’t relate to the reality they are depicted in.

‘Sides, would you go up to a super-human who wears his pants over his trousers and tell him he looks silly?

Browse for the latest books and videos for The X-Men

FREE SF MAGAZINE
Sign up for the Crowsnest SF e-magazine - full of funny reports and gossip. Be the first to find out about hot sci-fi opportunities & news!