>>9162633>Just that they're both are a departure from the comic design.>taking all the queues from Jim Lee's Supermanok retard.
>You tried to claim the TV shows were somehow less of a departure brighter, with the more traditional colors. The belt is intact. There's a more traditional pattern of the "armor" for the costume.
Yes, that literally means it's closer to the jim lee design. Whereas the movie leaves various parts "open", as seen with the belt and chest/abdomen. Arms and legs have all that arm reinforcement type things tho.
... but this is ridiculous, because all these little elements are taken and done to remind us of the Superman 1979 design which was basially just the 1960s design which was taken from the 1940s designs.
Notice this pattern that it ALL COMES FROM THE COMICS? Again, go look at every little piece of media and merch and it will overwhelmingly not be based on the movies, because everything is literally based on the comics.
stop being a fucking retard who needs to ignore the vast majority of EVERYTHING, just because you like the awful DC movies.
>That's Jon Kent. Clark's son.same difference. You think this is the first time DC has changed the mantle role with another character? Anyway, it's based on Jim Lee's redesign and they'er calling him Superman.
>Ckark at the momet is wearing his classic costumei haven't kept track of that lawsuit, but did DC win it and why it's returning or is this just a temporary thing?
