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

[Ascended]

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.

I know, right?

I was worried because Clark's a very different kind of character than Bendis usually writes. He's got layers and layers and a lot of them are conflicting, and there's a duality to Superman that no one else in comics really shares; no one else divides who they are as deeply as Clark/Superman. And not many writers can get a proper hold on all of that and still make the guy interesting and fun and flawed, while still being......Superman. But Bendis......he totally pulls it off. He gets Clark's voice better than almost anyone not named Morrison, and it still blows my mind.

That fact alone makes me want to forgive how dreadful Zaar has been, and the other missteps in the run. We actually have someone who gets Clark's voice right, who gives a damn that one of the villains is boring as hell? Especially when the other villains (Red Cloud, invisible mafia) are solid?

[JasonTodd428]

That fact alone makes me want to forgive how dreadful Zaar has been, and the other missteps in the run. We actually have someone who gets Clark's voice right, who gives a damn that one of the villains is boring as hell? Especially when the other villains (Red Cloud, invisible mafia) are solid?

Having good, solid villains has keep me interested in Action but the fact that Zaar is boring as all get out is yet another reason I ended up dropping Superman. Personally I need a bit more than a writer getting a particular character's voice "right", even though that is a great thing, to keep me engaged in the story.

[Ascended]

Having good, solid villains has keep me interested in Action but the fact that Zaar is boring as all get out is yet another reason I ended up dropping Superman. Personally I need a bit more than a writer getting a particular character's voice "right", even though that is a great thing, to keep me engaged in the story.

Oh, under normal circumstances I'd totally be right there with you. I mean, usually its a given right?

But Im still just riding that high of "holy crap Bendis gets it!"

[JAK]

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.

The only problem with "Action" is that it could be seen as fairly generic, title-wise. While it might seem odd for "comics" to be in a movie title, I think the idea works with Superman because that is literally his origin. So it helps to drive home the "back to basics" idea. If it were me, I'd love to do a 40's piece. And since people are sick of origins, I'd make it plain that this will be different, starting with something like: "There have been many Supermen of many worlds over the years. This is the beginning of them all." (something like that, anyway).

But I could see the Morrison story being called "Superman: Action" or "Superman: in Action" with it being in the comics font. That could be cool!

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!)

Absolutely. For a character like Superman, I think stability is key. And they need to get off this "oh there's too much continuity" and just embrace the damn thing already, lol... if it's advertised as a feature and not a bug, maybe people will.... *gasp*.... buy some back-issues? I did that in the 90's and loved the heck out of it. But I stopped buying whole lots from after COIE because that's when the then-current history started.

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

Yeah - I go from "maybe one or two of them have it" to "pretty sure they're run by zombies and that's why none of them have brains," myself. lol

I know, right?

I was worried because Clark's a very different kind of character than Bendis usually writes. He's got layers and layers and a lot of them are conflicting, and there's a duality to Superman that no one else in comics really shares; no one else divides who they are as deeply as Clark/Superman. And not many writers can get a proper hold on all of that and still make the guy interesting and fun and flawed, while still being......Superman. But Bendis......he totally pulls it off. He gets Clark's voice better than almost anyone not named Morrison, and it still blows my mind.

That fact alone makes me want to forgive how dreadful Zaar has been, and the other missteps in the run. We actually have someone who gets Clark's voice right, who gives a damn that one of the villains is boring as hell? Especially when the other villains (Red Cloud, invisible mafia) are solid?

Oh, under normal circumstances I'd totally be right there with you. I mean, usually its a given right?

But Im still just riding that high of "holy crap Bendis gets it!"

It's pretty amazing how often Superman's voice is wrong in media of all kinds. But Bendis has actually nailed Clark's voice better than just about any other writer - even adding some things to the character that I've always had in my head-canon but never really saw anyone do. THAT impressed the hell outta me. In a comics ecosystem where Clark is generally only given so much attention (as a character, not an historical figure), here's a guy that dives deep into it. I know most people here don't care for Jurgens's Superman voice like I do, but Bendis easily nails Clark for me as well as Jurgens does, and that's no small credit in my book. As I'm reading and things happen, I think of what I'd be doing in Superman's place and *BOOM* there it is on the page. Over and over. As much as I don't like Jon's age-up and Zaar is kinda "meh", those (so far) are small potatoes compared to having a Superman I'm not second-guessing.

[JasonTodd428]

Oh, under normal circumstances I'd totally be right there with you. I mean, usually its a given right?

But Im still just riding that high of "holy crap Bendis gets it!"

I completely understand where you're coming from. Having a writer that just "gets it" is an amazing thing to experience especially when it happens to a character that is a favorite one. I'm still experiencing that high myself with regard to Action. I'm just disappointed that I wasn't able to continue to enjoy Superman itself. The fact that Bendis's voice for Superman is spot on just wasn't enough to balance out all the problems I had with the book. I did give it several issues to hooked me but it just didn't and the cost of comics being what they are I thought it best to just quit before I pulled another "I'm going to keep reading and hope it gets better" deal. I've done that to often in the past and in the end I was annoyed I'd wasted the time and money.

[DCStu]

Maybe I'm easily pleased... but I've got three of the Bendis Superman trades... and I must say I've had a pretty great time with them! I like what he's doing with Supes. Feels traditional and at the same time new. Last time I was this content with a Superman title was "Secret Origin" which I adore...

[Ascended]

But I could see the Morrison story being called "Superman: Action" or "Superman: in Action" with it being in the comics font. That could be cool!

I do like "Superman: In Action!"

Gotta add the exclamation point though. If you're gonna go retro, go all in.

Absolutely. For a character like Superman, I think stability is key. And they need to get off this "oh there's too much continuity" and just embrace the damn thing already, lol... if it's advertised as a feature and not a bug, maybe people will.... *gasp*.... buy some back-issues? I did that in the 90's and loved the heck out of it. But I stopped buying whole lots from after COIE because that's when the then-current history started.

DC needs to stop being ashamed of Clark and his history. I dont get why they always hang their heads in shame because of some silly Silver Age stories that happened to Clark fifty years ago, but Batman in a zebra suit? They just smile fondly, like they're looking at photos of their kid as a toddler, saying "Boy, wasn't he cute when he was so young?"

Yeah - I go from "maybe one or two of them have it" to "pretty sure they're run by zombies and that's why none of them have brains," myself. lol

Zombies can at least stick with their direction. They want to eat brains. They're actually really stable, as far as motivation goes. WB's treatment of Clark would be improved if they had that kind of focus.

It's pretty amazing how often Superman's voice is wrong in media of all kinds.

Right? Oh it pisses me off so gods damn much! How friggin hard is it to understand that he's not some idiot farmboy, an angry and disconnected god, or a boy scout who doesn't have a mean bone in his body?

I completely understand where you're coming from. Having a writer that just "gets it" is an amazing thing to experience especially when it happens to a character that is a favorite one. I'm still experiencing that high myself with regard to Action. I'm just disappointed that I wasn't able to continue to enjoy Superman itself. The fact that Bendis's voice for Superman is spot on just wasn't enough to balance out all the problems I had with the book. I did give it several issues to hooked me but it just didn't and the cost of comics being what they are I thought it best to just quit before I pulled another "I'm going to keep reading and hope it gets better" deal. I've done that to often in the past and in the end I was annoyed I'd wasted the time and money.

Oh, I get it. Im starting to reach that point with Superman myself. I dont have....much....of a problem with aged-up Jon and I think what Bendis has done with the character might even make up for that loss when the dust has settled, but the last issue or two just felt rough; like I'm still not sure what that whole space battle was actually about. And I do not buy books I dont enjoy. I drop titles like bad jokes. Action is really impressing me still, and the Leviathan one-shot, which I just read an hour ago, was excellent. So I still got no real complaints. But give it time, I'm sure I'll find some eventually.

[JAK]

I do like "Superman: In Action!"

Gotta add the exclamation point though. If you're gonna go retro, go all in.

Love it!

DC needs to stop being ashamed of Clark and his history. I dont get why they always hang their heads in shame because of some silly Silver Age stories that happened to Clark fifty years ago, but Batman in a zebra suit? They just smile fondly, like they're looking at photos of their kid as a toddler, saying "Boy, wasn't he cute when he was so young?"

Exactly. This double-bat-standard pisses me off.

Zombies can at least stick with their direction. They want to eat brains. They're actually really stable, as far as motivation goes. WB's treatment of Clark would be improved if they had that kind of focus.

Eh....kinda. But loud noises can distract them and lead them to what they think is brains but gets them (re)killed.. so the "brains" in this scenario are sales, and DC keeps getting distracted by different tropey-traps waving their arms to get their attention. lol

Right? Oh it pisses me off so gods damn much! How friggin hard is it to understand that he's not some idiot farmboy, an angry and disconnected god, or a boy scout who doesn't have a mean bone in his body?

Yep. And I love that, in Bendis's run so far, criminals are afraid of him enough to have a list of words they don't say so they don't get his attention. That's just beyond fantastic, and it's exactly the way they should be in Metropolis.

Oh, I get it. Im starting to reach that point with Superman myself. I dont have....much....of a problem with aged-up Jon and I think what Bendis has done with the character might even make up for that loss when the dust has settled, but the last issue or two just felt rough; like I'm still not sure what that whole space battle was actually about. And I do not buy books I dont enjoy. I drop titles like bad jokes. Action is really impressing me still, and the Leviathan one-shot, which I just read an hour ago, was excellent. So I still got no real complaints. But give it time, I'm sure I'll find some eventually.

Definitely. I'm hoping we "get to the point" on Zaar soon so they can play with other stuff like they are on Action. Action reminds me of a modern version of what I loved about the early 90's stories - and I kinda wish they'd "triangle-up" the two titles with the story that Action is doing. Won't happen, but I'd like to see it.

If you ever get to Metropolis, you'll have to join in on our all-night-long Superman character convos/"debates" - we deep dive into this stuff like crazy, and doing it in person is just a ton of fun. I'm getting packed for Metropolis now, which is what made me think of it.

[Ascended]

Definitely. I'm hoping we "get to the point" on Zaar soon so they can play with other stuff like they are on Action. Action reminds me of a modern version of what I loved about the early 90's stories - and I kinda wish they'd "triangle-up" the two titles with the story that Action is doing. Won't happen, but I'd like to see it.

You know, Im actually kinda glad that Bendis is doing it the way he is. This way, you know you're getting the "side" of Superman that you prefer depending on which book you read. If you're into the crazy Morrison style cosmic stuff, you've got Superman. If you're into the Metropolis-focused triangle era style stuff, you've got Action. If, like me, you enjoy both, you've got twice as much Superman to read about each month. And I feel that between the two books we've got a really solid representation of the character.

I can definitely see the appeal behind triangle era 2.0 though. I had only just started reading back then and man, I did not know how good I had it! Even if a lot of the post-Crisis trappings aren't my cup of tea that era was one of the highlights of Super-history.

If you ever get to Metropolis, you'll have to join in on our all-night-long Superman character convos/"debates" - we deep dive into this stuff like crazy, and doing it in person is just a ton of fun. I'm getting packed for Metropolis now, which is what made me think of it.

Someday, I'll make it there. But debates in person? Oh gods, no! I get way too animated when I'm talking about something Im passionate about; people think I'm angry or upset and I'm just really into the conversation. No, I wouldn't put you through that!

[Talon1load]

I’m not so sure Bendis gets Clark all that well but even if he does, he doesn’t seem to get any of the supporting characters. His Lois is terrible. I’ve just finished the first trade but holy crap, why did she say Baby so much? When has she ever talked like that? Actually, right now she’s the main problem. I’m not as enamored with his Clark as many of you seem to be but I hate his Lois so far. Hope it gets better.

[Ascended]

It does. Bendis still doesn't write anything close to my favorite Lois or anything, but hes getting better. I'm hoping that Event Leviathan really helps him hone her voice. But if not, Rucka's Lois solo will make it a little easier to suffer Bendis being off.

I think he's done fine with Jimmy. It's a little too retro for my tastes but it certainly seems a viable take on him. Almost too classic, actually (though Fraction knocked his side story in the Leviathan one-shot outta the park). Perry seems.....fine? He doesn't have the pizzazz of triangle era Perry, but that's been the case since the triangle era ended. Bendis isn't making me care about Perry White again but it doesn't seem any different than how most writers have handled him since the 90's.

Bendis definitely doesnt have as firm a grasp on the supporting cast as he does Clark, but with his Lois making improvements I think he's doing well enough with them.

[Yoda]

Lois in Action Comics Leviathan Rising arc has a real Erica Durrance vibe to her. She’s still a little off in the first part, but greatly improves in the later chapters in my opinion. I’m growing to like Bendis’ take on her, and Rucka writes the best Lois for my money, so I’m hoping things continue on this trajectory through Event Leviathan, her series, and whatever they are doing with her in Year of the Villain.

[Talon1load]

Oh, so now I’m almost done with the first Superman trade, what’s with the Phantom Zone? This is a much different take on that than I’ve read before. He also writes Barry like Wally. I think he’d probably write a pretty good Wally book actually. Anyway, still going. It’s enjoyable enough right now but there’s stuff going on that makes me wonder what kind of research he actually did because some of this is just off.

[Ascended]

I.....think.....I read something about Bendis saying that the Phantom Zone has never really had a singular version, even within continuities. The closest you probably come is the writers who rip off Donner. Anyway, I **think** I read that Bendis figured since there wasn't a solidified version of the Zone he felt he had the freedom to put his own spin on it.

But take this with a giant grain of salt. I could be thinking of something else or imagining the whole thing.

And you know.....he *does* write Barry a bit like Wally, doesn't he? Gods I hate it when people do that. Barry is a very different person than Wally was, DC! What's the point of bringing Barry back if you're just going to give him all of Wally's best personality traits?

[Talon1load]

From everything I’ve read over the last few decades, the Phantom Zone has been pretty consistently portrayed as a place where the prisoners are “phantoms” and there’s no being poisoned because of whatever reasons Bendis came up with. Also, people couldn’t harm each other, that’s why Mon El wasn’t destroyed while stuck in there with Zod and the other prisoners. So, if Bendis did say that, it doesn’t make any sense. If he didn’t , then it still doesn’t make any sense. I’m all for writers trying new things but I’m also a fan of them respecting what came before. Sorry, not trying to argue just trying to make sense of things in my head and typing it out in here.
As for the Barry thing, I don’t know why they do that but many writers do. I think it’s that Wally is the one most are familiar with due to his comic and media presence over the last 20 years or so. He’s kind of their go to Flash. To me, he’s also the more interesting Flash so that, in my mind, plays into it as well.
Anyway, does Bendis do a better job of explaining Rogol Zar’s motivation eventually?