Why isn't Bendis' run doing better, both critically and commercially?

[manwhohaseverything]

To you b/c you don't like it.

Statements like this is a good example of the difference between actual criticism of a story vs personal dislike b/c it doesn't do what you want.

Admittedly I don't care for Rogol Zarr either but that's for another post.

Obviously, i am talking about myself. Aged up jon is boring because he is unenergetic, stiff and has so far shown only be able to have one emotion most of the time happy-go- lucky.so,much so that whenever he shows other emotions like wonder and pride for his father it comes of diluted and doesn't have the impact.
Jon kent is the opposite of unenergetic or stiff. He has always been very emotive. His moods always changed fast and he always got over things or pushed things to the back of his head fast. Bendis's jon in man of steel was more inline to that characterisation.Aged up jon doesn't have screen presence like the kid. Like this:



What i wanted from aged up jon was for him to be a badass. that is it.instead Aged up jon is only been allowed to see his dad do awesome things in wonder like a kid without doing much himself like an superpowered adult would.
Oh yeah! I hate how jon's missing years were speed through like it didn't matter. From what i gather, you like aged up jon.so,don't you want some meat to the aging up itself.
They could have elaborated Jon's relationship with Ultraman, his adventures in parallel earth... Etc. But, no all i got was caricature of happy-go-lucky jon.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

Bendis's biggest defenders come from new 52 fans who want Jon put in limbo...keep that in mind.

Bendis is the worst superman writer in recent years and his sales and reviews reflect that

Not sure where you are getting this from. I liked the Morrison stuff (Pak was decent, too), but I also liked the whole family man set-up (Tomasi & Gleason were great until double-shipping burnt them out, Jurgens was kinda dull though), and I have been enjoying almost everything Bendis has been doing (even though Rogal Zarr is a dud so far).

Making sweeping generalizations about what fans like is usually a fool's errand.

[rpmaluki]

Bendis's biggest defenders come from new 52 fans who want Jon put in limbo...keep that in mind.

Bendis is the worst superman writer in recent years and his sales and reviews reflect that

I 'm not so sure they actually exist. I do however, see some people giving Bendis a fair shot and some even liking what he does with some expectant issues, I, being one of those individuals who loved Rebirth and adored baby Jon. We've gone over his sales plenty and so far, he's stable and I won't say he's worse than previous creative teams. I do find it ironic that the book that features the one thing most complained about sells better than the one that is his street-level wheel house. It may not be much but I wouldn't use sweeping statements when making a point, the Superman fandom isn't a one size fits all domain as we all like to claim sometimes.

[JAK]

But, the problem Bendis's run isn't Action Comics, it is superman series. Rogol zarr and aged up jon are boring beyond belief

I've enjoyed both, overall - even though I'm not at all a fan of aging Jon up. But I'm a huge fan of Bendis's voice for Clark/Superman - which has been so good that I've been able to give some of the other stuff a pass for now, more-or-less.. in the hopes that those things improve with time.

[rpmaluki]

I've enjoyed both, overall - even though I'm not at all a fan of aging Jon up. But I'm a huge fan of Bendis's voice for Clark/Superman - which has been so good that I've been able to give some of the other stuff a pass for now, more-or-less.. in the hopes that those things improve with time.

This is how I feel about Bendis so far, not just with Jon but Lois as well. It's not perfect but there's room for improvement.

[Yoda]

This is how I feel about Bendis so far, not just with Jon but Lois as well. It's not perfect but there's room for improvement.

I've found his voice for Lois has greatly improved over the last 5 issues of Action and the Leviathan Rising Special. I've come to actually like it quite a bit. It's not quite at the level I was expecting of Bendis from his past work with Jessica Jones or Deana Pilgrim, but it's getting there. Rucka's Lois is already my Platonic ideal for Lois Lane. Whiskey day drinking and hiding butts in the freezer from her husband with x-ray vision included.

[rpmaluki]

I like that she "hides" her ciggies from her x-ray visioned husband. I don't think she smokes regularly, more like a "break in case of emergencies" which would explain them remaining in the freezer and Clark hasn't done anything about them.

[Yoda]

I like that she "hides" her ciggies from her x-ray visioned husband. I don't think she smokes regularly, more like a "break in case of emergencies" which would explain them remaining in the freezer and Clark hasn't done anything about them.

Yeah. That is what that scene was. It was the complete "break glass" package with the cigs in the peas and the emergency signal in the ice cream box. It was a great bit of characterization on pages with little dialogue. I admit I wasn't that into the art when it was initially announced, but this preview sold me mainly on that sequence.

[manwhohaseverything]

All i was saying is that the current arc as whole is sub par and boring in superman series. The important parts are skipped and glossed over like jon space adventures and non important parts are stretched to oblivion like this space battle. We still haven't gotten rogol zarr's motivation or background. And i wish this united planets thing will get over with so that Clark, jon.. Etc can move on.

[Truman Burbank]

What I saw initially - and what everything I've seen discussed after I dropped the books reinforces - is that Bendis is not telling Superman stories, but Bendis stories using Superman characters. And nothing indicates that that is going to change anytime soon.

As long as he's twisting the characters to fit his writing rather than adapting his writing to the characters, it's not going to be successful.

There's also the possibility that the simplest answer is the correct one: because the books just aren't very good.

[phonogram12]

As has already mentioned, "because it's Superman." Unless Jim Lee's drawing it or Clark's dying, he always sells at a certain price point. It's always been reliable, but hardly ever phenomenal.

I for one, am a fan, personally. I'm not sure why I'm so surprised by the fact that he gets Clark's voice since characterization has always been one of Bendis' biggest strengths, but he really does get Clark's voice. It's not snarky or sarcastic or even overly clever. It's just Clark - a humble and genuine good man who will do anything he can to protect people. I can't remember the writer who said this, but some writer once said that just so long as you get the voice and characterization right, you should be able to drop a character in any situation and tell an enjoyable story, which is why (again) I'm surprised that Superman working in a spy story works so well.

[The World]

What I saw initially - and what everything I've seen discussed after I dropped the books reinforces - is that Bendis is not telling Superman stories, but Bendis stories using Superman characters. And nothing indicates that that is going to change anytime soon.

As long as he's twisting the characters to fit his writing rather than adapting his writing to the characters, it's not going to be successful.

There's also the possibility that the simplest answer is the correct one: because the books just aren't very good.

Don't you think there's just a touch cognitive dissonance going on here?

Now back when I was first starting to look into Superman it was the Post-Crisis readers who wanted to let the past go and "move on". They didn't want there to be a standard about what Superman was suppose to be and what Superman stories were because they didn't want to have defer to their Golden/Silver age predecessors. You guys were pretty up front about this too and all through out my time watching the fanbase in the aughts leading up to the N52 I saw endless gnashing of teeth about the Silver Age elements that were tossed in even though Post-Crisis Superman himself was basically the same character from the Byrne days. You guys are usually the first people to proclaim how the character has "moved beyond" his past yet also believe that there's some mysterious proper formula that should dictate what a well written Superman actually is which as far as I can see is that Superman's character needs to be grounded in a way the puts tertiary elements in front of the bigger core ideas of the character.

I think there's some truth to what you're saying, for whatever reason Superman does attract writers who have massive ego's and believe they're the smartest person to ever touch the character and yeah Bendis is one of them he just has some of those qualities that seem to particularly everything to do with Jor-El and Rogal Zar. But that mentality began with the post-crisis writers and still is chiefly a post crisis mentality.

[Kuwagaton]

Well, you are talking about an era defined as the opposite of the creator dominant. It was in complete contrast to the developments that led to Image, and even if Jurgens became a very popular creator from some of it (as opposed to being a popular creator to come to it), it was never about being a bigger draw than the other three books. Byrne, who was a big figure at the time, was dominant as both a writer and artist, and a guy who could do both across three books in a month to boot. And his run required plenty of concessions on his own ideas anyway.

I don't really agree at all that the success of these books enters a discussion on the ego of Bendis. I don't get that from him. But clearly, he does use existing characters to prop up his own.

[Truman Burbank]

Don't you think there's just a touch cognitive dissonance going on here?

Now back when I was first starting to look into Superman it was the Post-Crisis readers who wanted to let the past go and "move on". They didn't want there to be a standard about what Superman was suppose to be and what Superman stories were because they didn't want to have defer to their Golden/Silver age predecessors. You guys were pretty up front about this too and all through out my time watching the fanbase in the aughts leading up to the N52 I saw endless gnashing of teeth about the Silver Age elements that were tossed in even though Post-Crisis Superman himself was basically the same character from the Byrne days. You guys are usually the first people to proclaim how the character has "moved beyond" his past yet also believe that there's some mysterious proper formula that should dictate what a well written Superman actually is which as far as I can see is that Superman's character needs to be grounded in a way the puts tertiary elements in front of the bigger core ideas of the character.

I think there's some truth to what you're saying, for whatever reason Superman does attract writers who have massive ego's and believe they're the smartest person to ever touch the character and yeah Bendis is one of them he just has some of those qualities that seem to particularly everything to do with Jor-El and Rogal Zar. But that mentality began with the post-crisis writers and still is chiefly a post crisis mentality.

How is any of that related to forcing characters into a story? From what I've seen, other than some minor details, Bendis could be writing the exact same story with the extended Flash family that he's writing for Superman. Then there are characters (namely Lois) doing things that their established histories suggest they wouldn't do, but are necessary for Bendis's plot.

That's what I mean. His stories, from what I can gather, aren't based on using the characters as they've developed, regardless of supporting detail. They are based in making certain things happen. Now, whether that's on Bendis or editorial is another discussion, but those are signs that the characters are being forced to fit the story, rather than the story fitting the characters.

As for Post-Crisis, the core writers for that period - the Triangle Era crew - are on record more than a few times about how hard they worked to make their stories feel as if they'd fit in any era of Superman. It wasn't until post-1999 that all the side details became the focus of the books.

[Ascended]

Yes to all of this - I'd even call the movie "Action Comics" - shame we missed the 80th, that would have been perfect.

Hmm....not bad, but maybe just "Action"?

I was thinking something like "Man of Tomorrow" or something, myself. But I do like using "Action" in the title.

If you did an animated film like that Spider-Verse movie, with the crazy and comic-esque animation style, then "Action Comics" all the way, but for live action? I'd have to hear a convincing argument. But your ideas are usually spot on so if I were a WB exec and you were pitching this, I'd be very tempted to defer to your creative choices.

I think consistency is important, too. Say, if Jurgens/Tomasi or some group (maybe with a stronger vision) would be there for a good chunk of time and advertise them consistently, that'd be good. Doing the hard work of slow growth won't be as flashy as cheap sales with fresh #1s, but it'll be better in the long run, imo.

Oh absolutely. I should've been more clear in my post but when I said "quality creative teams over the course of years" or whatever it is I wrote, I meant "consistent quality."

The Super books go through a rotation; a couple years of great stuff followed by twice as many years of utter crap. And it's been this way since the end of the triangle era, or there about. After all that time, I think a lot of fans have decided that Superman's not worth the effort. You get really into a run and get invested in it, and then see it all torn apart, ignored, abandoned, etc. How many times does a fan have to get burned like that before they wise up and leave for good? (obviously I'm dumb as bricks because Im still here ).

DC has to convince fans that not only is Superman still relevant and important and fun and interesting, but that DC itself wont self-sabotage everything again and that the books are "safe" to get into. And it'll take time and consistency to do that. You're gonna have to be able to say "Look, for the last ten years Superman has been consistently good. And it's going to remain that way. It's okay to come back now, we won't hurt you anymore!" (okay, maybe not ten years, but it's gonna take a lot more than six damn months!)

Yeah - it's crazy how much of the same stuff has come full-circle, front-and-center again. There's a real opportunity, if they can have the courage to seize it.

Courage, brains, talent, willingness.......all things that DC and WB make me question they possess far too often for my tastes.