MAN OF STEEL (2018) Event mini-series Discussion thread (SPOILERS)

[RepHope]

I’ve had the exact same thoughts as you Superlad. Like you hit the nail on the head. Befriending formerly evil/antagonistic people? Kathy and Damian. Jon going off on high stakes adventures? Boyzarro Redeath has him and Kathy traveling the Multiverse together. Bendis could have done a better job with Jor’s Arguement for why Jon needs to go, but them actually going off on a trip? Nothing at odds with what Lois and Clark have let Jon do in Rebirth.

[The Dying Detective]

Everything in this is not at all out of character honestly which is saying something because it's Bendis. Lois is confident that she will get back her job which I don't doubt Perry will give it back. I'm just amazed that what Bendis set up will end pretty quickly when he said it would last a year I assumed Lois and Jon would be gone for much longer than that. I hope Jon is at a reasonable age and that Bendis remembers or at least knows that Damian is older than him.

[Miles To Go]

Everything in this is not at all out of character honestly which is saying something because it's Bendis. Lois is confident that she will get back her job which I don't doubt Perry will give it back. I'm just amazed that what Bendis set up will end pretty quickly when he said it would last a year

He never said Lois and Jon being gone would last a year, he said the story would last a year, and that the choices of the Super-Family would lead to new things in the DC universe. A story does'nt neccersarily mean a set status quo. He's building a mystery, with the questions being "what happens after Lois' journey?" and how she'll interact with Clark afterwards (that part worries me a little)

What Bendis did lie about was not using Lex Luthor, when he'll show up in September and involve himself with Lois.

The Superman title deals with the immediate fallout of Man of Steel, and Action Comics is the aftermath focusing on all the details Superman will miss while telling a much more cosmic story. Both are part of the same "United" saga, and the overall arc will last a year as intended.

[The Dying Detective]

He never said Lois and Jon being gone would last a year, he said the story would last a year, and that the choices of the Super-Family would lead to new things in the DC universe. A story does'nt neccersarily mean a set status quo. He's building a mystery, with the questions being "what happens after Lois' journey?" and how she'll interact with Clark afterwards (that part worries me a little)

What Bendis did lie about was not using Lex Luthor, when he'll show up in September and involve himself with Lois.

The Superman title deals with the immediate fallout of Man of Steel, and Action Comics is the aftermath focusing on all the details Superman will miss while telling a much more cosmic story. Both are part of the same "United" saga, and the overall arc will last a year as intended.

Okay my mistake. You're better of not worrying about tomorrow if you ask me because the worries of today are enough. Well at least that's not one thing that will deter a lot of people from reading his run.

[Superlad93]

What Bendis did lie about was not using Lex Luthor, when he'll show up in September and involve himself with Lois.

To my knowledge, he didn't actually lie about this. He just said that Lex wouldn't be his big bad, and that he'd shelve him in that regard, but he never said that Lex would have zero representation in his run. He even said that his new city big bad actually wants guys like Lex (Bendis cited Lex specifically, but he could've just been speaking in general) making a show of things.

On a personal note: I've always been of the opinion that Lex is both a supporting cast member and main antagonist in the Superman world, so I'd think it a bit strange if some form of his presence were absent from a run this long.

[manofsteel1979]

To my knowledge, he didn't actually lie about this. He just said that Lex wouldn't be his big bad, and that he'd shelve him in that regard, but he never said that Lex would have zero representation in his run. He even said that his new city big bad actually wants guys like Lex (Bendis cited Lex specifically, but he could've just been speaking in general) making a show of things.

On a personal note: I've always been of the opinion that Lex is both a supporting cast member and main antagonist in the Superman world, so I'd think it a bit strange if some form of his presence were absent from a run this long.

Yeah Bendis never said he's not going to use Lex at all. He's just going to not make him the focus of any " A" plots for the first year. Lex pulls double duty as occasional big bad and supporting cast member since the Byrne revamp so that's nothing new. Lex will definitely pop up from time to time.Probably all a part of eventually setting up when Bendis will use Lex as his main villain for a future story.

[Superlad93]

You know, I looked back at the fact that Bandis acknowledges paying homage to the famous Alan Moore Superman story, Whatever Happened to The Man of Tomorrow, and it got me thinking: maybe there's more we haven't stumbled on?

So I looked back and thought about Moore's For The Man Who Has Everything. Some of that stuff seems to fit. For one it features a Jor-El disappointed in his son's life choices. A Jor-El who sort of had the luster of his memory tainted by his continued existence. One of Jor-El's actual lines in Moore's comic is "I had great hopes for you Kal." The comic also features Kal losing his family.

Just something I noticed.

[Ascended]

I don't mean no harm, but can we talk about something? Can we talk about the prevalent complaint that Lois and Clark are written out of character because they decide to go along with what Jon wanted in MOS?

Apologies for the length. Thoughts?

You're completely right.

Bendis has a strong grip on each of the Kents; he gets their voices better than most writers and I've seen nothing here I would consider out of character. Not even a little bit.

Now, if Jor-El was a straight up villain that might be a different matter. But as I understand it, in Jurgens' Action he was being manipulated or controlled in some way, and his actions weren't entirely his own.

So yeah, I see nothing wrong with the writing of the Kents so far. In fact, I'd say Bendis gets them better than most (words I never thought I'd say). A lot of the complaints Ive seen feel an awful lot like they're coming from people who had made up their mind about how terrible this run would be before the first issue ever hit the stands and they're just trying to justify their opinion.

Now, I'm not really thrilled with Jon and Lois being taken off world, and I'm not sold on the story direction at all. But no one is acting out of character here.

[Superlad93]

Now, I'm not really thrilled with Jon and Lois being taken off world

Not to spoil anything for you since it seems like you're staying away from interviews, but you won't have to worry about this for very long at all. Some twists that basically none of us really saw coming.

[rosawater]

I think we all assumed this would be the reasoning early on, and I remember myself and Sacred Knight having a conversation on how feasible it would be to keep that going even after Zaar's apparent downfall, temporary or not. It becomes harder to justify Lois and Jon being gone if the danger is no longer present, imo. You'd have to keep adding on stuff to their end. Or Zaar sticks around as the main threat for a year keeping them away, and we end up resenting Zaar waiting for the story to be over. I remember telling SK that what I wanted above all was Lois having a personal reason to stay, and a thing to do that we know her for.

For me at least, this really hits the sweet spot of that, AND it gives us a relatively lengthy time period to think about, summer vacation. Obviously things likely won't go as planed, but at least the timeline was set before hand.

I guess that's my round about way of saying.....you really don't wanna see Lois do her best Star Trek/Doctor Who impersonation with her son and jerky father-in-law....

Honestly, I would be super interested in reading that. I'm on record in saying that I wish Lois and Jon had Mother/Son time and I personally think that this concept could be extremely interesting one. It just the reasoning behind getting to this point just didn't work for me.

I don't mean no harm, but can we talk about something? Can we talk about the prevalent complaint that Lois and Clark are written out of character because they decide to go along with what Jon wanted in MOS?

So, like, the issues a lot of people seem to have are as follows: 1) Lois and Clark are cool with having their son interact with someone who used to basically be an enemy 2) Lois and Clark are nuts for even entertaining the idea of their son going across the galaxy of all places with said used-to-be-evil dude. And 3) Jon's 10 he doesn't make the rules.

And I'd honestly be with everyone who cites these complaints if this wasn't the super heightened reality of the Superman world. Some may disagree, and still say it's even too extreme for that kind of world, and maybe that'd be true.......if I hadn't just spent two years reading Tomasi, Gleason, and Jurgens write this family. That may ring super false for some--and may in fact be the reason why they think it's mischaracterization, but I wanna just bring up a few things.

So in the interest of fairness, lets put the last two years of Lois and Clark bringing up Jon under the same microscope as MOS. So, for one, Lois and Clark are cool with Jon being best friends with and going on adventures with a 13 year old born killer. Yes, Damian is reformed, but even after that reformation he still killed Nobody's dad (doesn't help that he just killed Black Mask apparently). But more relevant to Jon, he goes by the motto of "better to ask forgiveness than permission." This mainly being in relation to sneaking out, and probably the most famous instance of Damian sneaking out was, well, when he got himself implied with a sword and died. But again, in relation to Jon, the first time Jon and Damian went on a solo adventure, Damian sneaks Jon out, and.....the promptly see a bunch of dead bodies and fight a murderer. Jon's 10, and when Lois found out that he did sneak out, he wasn't forbidden from ever putting on a cape again or seeing Damian. I think he was just grounded for a bit, if that. And to make matter worse, Damian had Jon actively hide the facts of their adventures from his parents. That means he's not talking about seeing a dead family with anyone but the person who is quite used to it.

Then there's the whole fact that Clark straight up took his kid into space to save a planet full of people, but ended up having to let him watch a whole race of people basically commit mass suicide. He's 10, and so far he's seen a dead family, and a whole dead race front row.

And what about Kathy and all the aliens of Hamilton that used to work for and believe in Manchester Black of their own free will? Like, no one remembers how Kathy made a child (Damian) internally bleed, and now she's allowed to be alone with Jon? What about how she and the others of Hamilton were party to the actual drugging, brain washing, and mental torture of Jon? Clark has a speech about earning back trust and all with the Hamilton squad, but he still lets his kid go back there mostly unsupervised shortly after. The only bit of supervision is Lois having Nobody keep tabs on him and text her. But that's all dependent on if Lois' phone is on, Nobody has the time, and Jon and Kathy aren't off in another universe. That's also a thing Jon does super regularly: goes to other universes for missions or just for fun, and the last time he went he literally made it so something dangerous followed him back, Boyzarro. And one time when Jon was mad at his parents for moving he literally jumped to another city (Gotham). He's not even old enough to drive anywhere in America, why is this cool?

For that matter, why would any set of responsible parents let their 10 year old son continue to be an underage superhero after all the logical psychological damage and very, very real risk of death associated with it (remember how his best friend already died at his age)? To make matters worse, Superman in this continuity is so acutely aware of these the psychological effects that he saw fit to co found Sanctuary, and he's very well aware of the risk of death and how indiscriminate it is even to someone like him. Letting Jon continue to be a superhero is inherently irresponsible of both Lois and Clark as parents. They're flat out irresponsible.

.......but, they're actually not, are they? The world is heightened, and the rules for the family and the world don't mirror our own 1 to 1. That's why it's not a big deal that Jon's best friend is a reformed once-dead killer, and his possible crush is a young lady that helped facilitate his capture, torture, drugging, and brain washing. That's why it's not that big of a deal that Jon passes the time by going to other dimensions or casually going to other states or cities to blow off steam.

So framed in that context, Lois saying that Jon's not going to space with his once-evil grandpa without parental guidance is down right sensible. There's also the fact that Clark would've had a way of staying in contact with them all the time, and likely using the Fortress tech with the communicator could've gotten their signal whenever and wherever. Lois even says "you can come pick us up." And keeping the communicator in the Fortress was just about the safest place on Earth. That place has proven it can keep Superman himself out. He had no way of knowing that something that much stronger than him would come down and wreck everything.

A lot of the safety net associated with Lois and Clark being cool with Jon being a hero and going to other Earths is the idea that Clark can get to his location with his considerable power, connections, and tech. And Lois flat out banks on that same sort of safety net in MOS too, right? She verbalizes it even. It just so happens that life, even Superman's, can be a bit of a b!tch, right?

Apologies for the length. Thoughts?

For me, my issue is that Lois’ characterization seemed off.
In this particular situation, It just doesn’t feel right to have Lois say: “ Well I can’t stop you and your dad can’t stop you, So I might as well drop everything and go“ and “ This has been decided for us. “

It would’ve made much more sense if Lois explained why she thought that this would be a good move for Jon. Basically rolling over and letting Jon and Jor-El call the shots just doesn’t seem very Lois-like. If she gave an actual reason why Jon should go her characterization would have been seen as much more accurate.
Jon’s characterization doesn’t feel off. It certainly did in the last issue when he straight out said he wasn’t going instead of arguing or reasoning with parents. However, that was remedied when he gave his ( extremely flimsy and nonsensical ) reason in the final issue. He at least gave a reason for wanting to go instead of saying it like it was final and he was the sole decision maker.

That said, I don’t think Lois and Clark’s situation with Jor-El is comparable to Kathy or Damian . Both Kathy and Damian are children, are on the path to redemption, and are not as big as a threat as Jor-El is. Remember that Jor-El has Kryptonite vision and has been controlled and tortured by what Jor-El described as an unbeatable and unstoppable force. Also, unlike Kathy and Damian, Jor-El hasn’t really done anything to earn back their trust. The last time they saw Jor-El, his staff was broken, which was something he claimed to haven’t been able to live without, and was teleported away. Before even considering leaving with him or in the care of Lois and Jon, they should have asked him how did he survived the destruction of his staff, what happened to the unbeatable force, and what happened to him when he was teleported away.
Don’t get me wrong, I think Jon trusting Jor-El is completely within character. I just don’t think that Lois and Clark trusting him without asking questions makes much sense.

[Superlad93]

Honestly, I would be super interested in reading that. I'm on record in saying that I wish Lois and Jon had Mother/Son time and I personally think that this concept could be extremely interesting one. It just the reasoning behind getting to this point just didn't work for me.

Gotcha! No worries, I wasn't actually judging lol

In this particular situation, It just doesn’t feel right to have Lois say: “ Well I can’t stop you and your dad can’t stop you, So I might as well drop everything and go“ and “ This has been decided for us. “
It would’ve made much more sense if Lois explained why she thought that this would be a good move for Jon. Basically rolling over and letting Jon and Jor-El call the shots just doesn’t seem very Lois-like. If she gave an actual reason why Jon should go her characterization would have been seen as much more accurate.

I feel like this is partly the idea that Lois doesn't want her son to resent her and his father, and go off alone and unsupervised to find the answers he feels he needs. Jon has a streak of sneaking out and running away in him. When he was mad about the move to the city he ran off and literally jumped to another city. His main peer influence and big brother figure has him learning to "ask for forgiveness rather than permission." And Jon obviously looks up enough to Damian that he quotes him to his father and actually goes along with his plans more often than not.

And I'm sure the last thing Lois would want to do is put him under a mini police state in their house to keep him from going (that would do wonders who his psychology). Her and Clark's disciplinary actions have never even come close to that anyway. When Jon goes off with Damian the first time without permission late at night he's not punished to the level you'd assume for something like that.

I think because Lois sees her kid literally crying she takes this as a real thing, and she wants him to be safe, so she goes along with him and has one of the most powerful being in the galaxy on standby to come pick them up with his considerable power, connections, and means. That's my read on it.

However, that was remedied when he gave his ( extremely flimsy and nonsensical ) reason in the final issue.

I don't think his reasoning was flimsy to him, and since the root of the issue is a psychological and developmental issue that could possibly be linked to a biological one, I don't think it makes sense to label his feeling nonsensical, ya know? He's wrong for not coming to his parents sooner, but Clark's main solution seemed to be boiled down to "try not to think about it too much." But here comes Jor-El who was the smartest person from the plant of the smartest people, and without Jon even verbalizing what he's been holding in, Jor-El acknowledges his struggles. I think that was huge for Jon--like a life raft in a ocean no one knew he was in.

Both Kathy and Damian are children, are on the path to redemption, and are not as big as a threat as Jor-El is.

I'm not really seeing how Kathy and Damian being kids makes them any less willingly compliant with drugging, kidnapping, psychological torture, and brain washing (the kid was left an emotional wreck during Black Dawn), and having a body count before they were old enough to grow armpit hair (respectively). I'm not really seeing how a telepath approaching Manchester's level and a direct link to Jon mind isn't at least as bad as kryptonite vision. Same goes for the child trained by the house of The Demon, Batman, and Nightwing, and well aware of the weaknesses of major superheroes.

At worst I think he allowed them off too quickly without doing a more extensive check. But really, check what and check how? I think he's going off the last state he saw Jor-El in, and that was remorseful and full of love for his family. That doesn't mean Clark actually fully trusts him. You can see that with basically everything he does and says. But that's why he had the ability to talk to Lois and Jon (Clark himself confirming the device is what it is with a look/scan), and pick them up before everything went to hell.

[Sacred Knight]

In the interest of adding something positive to the conversation: Bendis and Fabok just confirmed that this image was a homage

Funny thing is, I didn't think twice about this when I read the actual book. But as soon as you said it was a homage, it clicked and I knew what it would be before scrolling.

[rosawater]

I feel like this is partly the idea that Lois doesn't want her son to resent her and his father, and go off alone and unsupervised to find the answers he feels he needs. Jon has a streak of sneaking out and running away in him. When he was mad about the move to the city he ran off and literally jumped to another city. His main peer influence and big brother figure has him learning to "ask for forgiveness rather than permission." And Jon obviously looks up enough to Damian that he quotes him to his father and actually goes along with his plans more often than not.

And I'm sure the last thing Lois would want to do is put him under a mini police state in their house to keep him from going (that would do wonders who his psychology). Her and Clark's disciplinary actions have never even come close to that anyway. When Jon goes off with Damian the first time without permission late at night he's not punished to the level you'd assume for something like that.

I think because Lois sees her kid literally crying she takes this as a real thing, and she wants him to be safe, so she goes along with him and has one of the most powerful being in the galaxy on standby to come pick them up with his considerable power, connections, and means. That's my read on it.

I don’t think your reading on the situation is incorrect. I just think that if Lois actually made some of these points instead of saying “ I and your father can’t stop you. “ her characterization wouldn’t feel so off. I can totally see her being moved by her baby’s tears. I can see her feel like he might do something drastic because he has this low opinion of himself. I just wish she was written as saying such things.

I don't think his reasoning was flimsy to him, and since the root of the issue is a psychological and developmental issue that could possibly be linked to a biological one, I don't think it makes sense to label his feeling nonsensical, ya know? He's wrong for not coming to his parents sooner, but Clark's main solution seemed to be boiled down to "try not to think about it too much." But here comes Jor-El who was the smartest person from the plant of the smartest people, and without Jon even verbalizing what he's been holding in, Jor-El acknowledges his struggles. I think that was huge for Jon--like a life raft in a ocean no one knew he was in.

I don’t think his feelings are nonsensical, I think using this as a reason to travel with Jor-El is nonsensical. I completely understand a child , and even an adult for that matter, feeling rejected after that ordeal. Even when the Titans claimed that it was them and not him, I could understand Jon not believing them. I can also 100% believe that Jon would be scared that he could possibly unintentionally hurt so many people. What I feel is nonsensical if that traveling with Jor-El is presented as a solution to this problem. I can believe that Jon would wholeheartedly would think that this would help. It just doesn’t make much sense that a trip with Jor-El would solve his problem. Additionally, there wasn’t a reason presented as to why travelling Jor-El could help. This is the reason why I call his reasoning flimsy and nonsensical.

I'm not really seeing how Kathy and Damian being kids makes them any less willingly compliant with drugging, kidnapping, psychological torture, and brain washing (the kid was left an emotional wreck during Black Dawn), and having a body count before they were old enough to grow armpit hair (respectively). I'm not really seeing how a telepath approaching Manchester's level and a direct link to Jon mind isn't at least as bad as kryptonite vision. Same goes for the child trained by the house of The Demon, Batman, and Nightwing, and well aware of the weaknesses of major superheroes.

At worst I think he allowed them off too quickly without doing a more extensive check. But really, check what and check how? I think he's going off the last state he saw Jor-El in, and that was remorseful and full of love for his family. That doesn't mean Clark actually fully trusts him. You can see that with basically everything he does and says. But that's why he had the ability to talk to Lois and Jon (Clark himself confirming the device is what it is with a look/scan), and pick them up before everything went to hell.

As for Kathy and Jon, I think their age is important because in both of their cases they were under the influence of adults. Additionally people in this age range are seen as stronger cases for redemption because they have their whole lives ahead of them and ( I’m speaking very broadly here ) are generally seen as being pushed toward crimes rather than the perpetrators. This doesn’t make their crimes any less horrible, but I could see Superman being more forgiving towards a child who was raised by assassins, or another child who thought she was protecting her town and their livelihood, than a man he wasn’t even sure was his father and went against everything he knew. I can totally see Superman eventually forgiving Jor-El, but it’s somewhat hard to accept if he isn’t even questioning the man. Like I said earlier, Kathy and Jon both have made steps, including putting their lives on the line, to gain back trust. However up to this point Superman’s mistrust for Jor-El ran so deep that he tried to go back in time to prove him a liar.

At worst I think he allowed them off too quickly without doing a more extensive check. But really, check what and check how? I think he's going off the last state he saw Jor-El in, and that was remorseful and full of love for his family. That doesn't mean Clark actually fully trusts him. You can see that with basically everything he does and says. But that's why he had the ability to talk to Lois and Jon (Clark himself confirming the device is what it is with a look/scan), and pick them up before everything went to hell.

Yes, this is exactly my thought.

I think at the very least they should have questioned Jor-El a little more about his suspicious reappearance. They could have at least asked him how he was surviving without the staff or what happened to him after he teleported. That would have made things easier to swallow.

[Ascended]

Not to spoil anything for you since it seems like you're staying away from interviews, but you won't have to worry about this for very long at all. Some twists that basically none of us really saw coming.

Well, I'm not "avoiding" interviews, but I'm definitely not hunting them down, either. Thanks for the heads up! But these last six issues have proven that Bendis is capable of writing the kind of Superman I want to read about (even if Rogal is a pretty weak villain thus far). In fact, Bendis has done a better job than most of the writers Clark's had in recent years. Whatever he's got planned, he's bought some goodwill and I'm willing to see where he goes.

[Superlad93]

Funny thing is, I didn't think twice about this when I read the actual book. But as soon as you said it was a homage, it clicked and I knew what it would be before scrolling.

Did you listen to Bendis Word Balloon interview? He's looking at al lot of the emotional truths behind the Imaginary Stories of the past (Whatever Happened being one of the most famous ever). I feel like people forget that Superman and Lois are currently living their Imaginary Story lives with the marriage and child, so Bendis adding to that from that stand point is very fascinating.

I don’t think your reading on the situation is incorrect. I just think that if Lois actually made some of these points instead of saying “ I and your father can’t stop you. “ her characterization wouldn’t feel so off. I can totally see her being moved by her baby’s tears. I can see her feel like he might do something drastic because he has this low opinion of himself. I just wish she was written as saying such things.

Well, since that's the reading I got from it without any outside input, I felt like she communicated that to me well, but I can understand someone else needing more from it.

I can believe that Jon would wholeheartedly would think that this would help. It just doesn’t make much sense that a trip with Jor-El would solve his problem.

Ah, in that case I agree. A character doesn't have to be in the right or objectively right about a choice to be in character or a good character. I think this is an example of that. Like, personally, I don't at all agree with Jon's choice, but I very much see his internal logic, and that's all I need to recognize him as a character.

I think their age is important because in both of their cases they were under the influence of adults.

Sure, but my point is that if we put this under any form of scrutiny, there's no way any self respecting parent in the real world is letting their kid interact alone with either of them, children or not. It's just not gonna happen. But the world in question isn't the real world, and the heightened logic allows for Superman to say it's cool for Jon to hang out with the little girl that facilitated his gross mistreatment, and the young boy who has kill since he could walk (this same kid got himself killed with his "better to ask for forgiveness rather than permission" motto that Jon is actively adopting). I'd say the same would apply to your estranged not-dead and once mind controlled grandfather. Perceptions are taken and parental guidance is provided. He's not allowed the same freedom with Jor-El that he is with the boy-killer and kidnapping facilitator little girl. I think that's fine in this world.

Yes, this is exactly my thought.

I think at the very least they should have questioned Jor-El a little more about his suspicious reappearance. They could have at least asked him how he was surviving without the staff or what happened to him after he teleported. That would have made things easier to swallow.

Yeah that would be my only issue, but even that is mostly alleviated by the communicator and Clark's enormous power, tech, and connections, and Lois going along to be the judge of things. Their plan, in the context of Superman's world, is pretty strong given all he can do if he puts his mind, body, and connections to it.

But I don't judge you for coming at it differently