Superman is a typical superhero. He wears a colorful suit and a cape. This clothing is a special recognition feature and helps that superheroes can be distinguished from each other. The colors of their clothing can also have a specific meaning. The colors red and blue are two of the three colors of the U.S. National Flag. So it is no wonder that Captain America, Spiderman and Superman wear these colors. If Captain America, for example, wouldn´t have been a propaganda figure, then today his suit would probably look different. Nevertheless, their suits went through many changes over the decades. However, only the designs have been changed, but not the colors.
Today, times have changed. Superheroes with colored suits with a letter on the chest and a cape look for the modern man corny and clichéd. Now some questions: Wouldn´t it be time for a rethink? Are colorful suits and capes still up-to-date? Please do not misunderstand: I have nothing against suits or colors. But when I look at Superman, I see a man in a blue "pajamas" with a red "underpants" (he wears outside), red boots and a red cape. What bothers me about it?
1. It looks childish. I mean, who among us would wear such a thing? He looks like a walking U.S. flag. (Transferred patriotism.)
2. Why does Superman need a cape? The cape has no function.
In addition, there are some logic errors:
a) Is it realistic that Superman wears the letter (S) on his chest? Initially, the S-shield had one meaning: S for Superman. Why would an alien wearing the first letter of the name, the people have given him? And if this letter is from his home planet, where would his father have known that people will call him Superman? I know, this is not the case (I wanted to mention it yet). According to the original story from the Golden Age comics, Superman's suit was made from the cloths and blanket he had when his capsule crashed into Earth. But who made the suit? If his mother made the suit, how could she sew the fabric? The fabric is indestructible yet. If I have understood something wrong, please correct me. Back to the (S): Over time, the meaning of the letter changed. Wiki:
One of the first alternative meanings was presented in Superman: The Movie, in which it was not an S, but rather the S-shaped Coat of arms of the House of El. After the Superman reboot story The Man of Steel, the symbol's story was that it was designed by Jonathan Kent and was derived from an ancient Native American symbol. The symbol was featured on a medicine blanket given to an ancestor of the Kent family by a Native American tribe after he helped to cure them of a plague and was supposed to represent a snake, an animal held to possess healing powers by the tribe (implying that, by wearing this symbol, Superman was a metaphorical healer). In 2004, Mark Waid's Superman: Birthright series says the S-Shield is the Kryptonian symbol for "hope" and Superman believes it may have begun as a coat of arms for the House of El. Later, writer Geoff Johns confirmed it was indeed a coat of arms, as well as a symbol for hope.
No matter which origin was ever invented: it looks cheesy and out of date, in any case.
b) A pair of glasses as a perfect disguise? Isn´t it strange that when Superman wears normal clothes and has a pair of glasses on his nose no one recognizes him? Well, his hair is a little different, but does it matter so much? What about his face, his voice and his body size?
c) How does his hero gap fits under his regular clothes? Can you pull socks and shoes over long boots? And where's the cape?
d) Clark Kent rips the clothes off and flies away. The following things are left:
Nobody finds these things? And when they are found, everyone knows who they belong to. This means you know who Superman is. In addition, Clark Kent would have a ton of the same garments. And almost every day he would apply for a new ID card. (Or does he flies back quickly after ending rescue operations and collect all his things?)
As a solution to this problem one came up with the following:
His Kryptonian bio-tech armored suit allows him to change his clothes without having to find a phone booth or having to wear the same blue suit, white shirt and red tie, that he did for decades before the Pre-Crisis reboot. The specially treated suit that could be compressed into his super cape without wrinkling. http://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/21910/what-is-the-secret-of-supermans-suit
In the movies, the clothes problem was still there - why?
For these reasons, I ask: Is it time to reinvent Superman? I am only referring to Superman himself, especially with focusing to the cinema. Here my amendments:
There are two possibilities:
No.1: Superman looks different than Clark Kent. If he want to have contact with humans, he takes the form of Clark Kent. If it is needed, he turns into Superman. Superman's real skin color is bluish. So that people are not afraid of him, he uses the human skin color for his face, his neck and his hands. The rest of his body remains bluish. His private parts and buttocks are covered by extra skin. His bluish skin is his suit (no cape). He is barefoot. Why does an alien who can move planets need shoes?
No.2: If Superman turns into Clark Kent, he needs a belt (a high-tech device from his father, which he has put into the space capsule). Before Superman was born, his father had been visiting Earth to explore. This explains the existence of the fortress of solitude. The belt is very flat and maybe very flexible, it can also become invisible. Inside the belt many clothing options are saved. If Superman activates one of these options, he is fully clothed. If Clark Kent turns into Superman, he deactivated his belt. Then he has his bluish skin color again. Or he activates the bluish suit, which is programmed in the belt. Sounds like the Kryptonian bio-tech armored suit, but at least the belt is a larger gadget.
In the comics and in the movies Superman stands for good virtues. However, I get the impression that he has no edges. He is more of the soft type, someone who never loses his attitude. This is of course nothing bad. But I still feel that Superman should be rough (a little batman-like). In short: he should be a badass. Even as Clark Kent, I think it would be better if he would be a normal guy; even as Clark Kent. If he's angry, he smashes a rock or he rushes at full speed into space - maybe he sits down on the moon and pouts :-). Man, I want to see how Superman grabs a bank robber by the throat, lift him up and says in a hoarse deep voice: “The money stays here.” And if the bank robber is cheeky, he flings him into his getaway car. Bam! "Is this your getaway car?" Second BAM! "That was your getaway car." :-)
The story begins the same: The home planet is about to fall. His father is building a space capsule and sends his son to Earth. I imagine, like the weird thing strikes perpendicular to the ground. A childless couple found the baby. His childhood and youth is similar to the movie "Chronicle". First he must get to know his super powers and learn where he came from. All the information he needs, he takes out of a book that his father has placed in the space capsule (a metal object). Thus, Superman would be a mixture of Chronicle and Hancock.
(Sorry, if my english is faulty. I´m german.)