[trebleshot]

I agree with Snow, there needs to be a balance when adapting a comic to movie. That's why we all use words/phrases like "adapting" "turn into" or "version of". It's never a direct port from one format to another. Some things work really well in one format and suck in another.

For example, in novels and comics you have a narrator and inner monologues to help move the plot. In movies, you can't always do that. There are exceptions, but it's mostly because the story's structure calls for it - sometimes for comedic effect like Stranger Than Fiction.

On the flipside, movies can give you more visual details (in 3D, no less) in 5 seconds than one could gather from in a couple pages of a book or comic. But the trick is the visual has to be believeable in order to work.

It's the suspension of disbelief, really. It's much easier for us to ignore things while reading than it is when watching a movie and seeing the visual representation. The former allows your imagination to control the mental images, while the latter gives you no choice and therefore must make enough sense for you to go along for the ride.

Purple pants may look silly, but it can easily be explained since Bruce tends to go through clothes a lot. Superman's outfit could be a nod to his Kryptonian heritage (in fact, I think I read one story where it was made from the blankets/sheets his mother wrapped him in as a baby). In fact, a lot of Supes can be explained by him being an alien. Unfortunately, him being able to have a kid with Lois is not one of them, even if he was depowered during conception. But I digress.

As for the X-Men costumes, I think Scott summed it up pretty well in the first movie.

Oh, and I agree with everything Snow said about Deadpool. I want my merc-with-a-mouth breaking the fourth wall in full outfit. He's already insane, why worry about explaining his costume?