Looks like Jon is going forward to the future.

[jason white reborn]

I agree fanboys that can’t accept a job story unless he is a kid probably won’t be happy, for people with a open mind, I do think there is a lot of potential

deflect much, ther objectively is nothing interesting about adult jon. and when this comic has **** sales I will be the first on the thread to tell you so

[Rakzo]

Aaaaand ruined. Thanks Bendis!

And to think that people insulted others because they were against this direction.

[Superlad93]

Been reading some old Superboy issues from back when they also stared the Legion, and it dawned on me that Superboy would never actually use the time bubble to travel back and forth between the present and future, but instead he'd simply break the time barrier under his own will.

Given the fact that Jon now has a suit that can teleport him back and forth across space, I wouldn't at all be surprised if Bendis is intending to homage Clark's silver age ability to time travel under his own will with this suit? It can also be argued that it's also a homage to Kon-El's hyper-time jacket (that was in itself a homage to Clark's time travel power) given that it's an article of clothing that (potentially) has this power.

What I think I may like most about this idea (beyond just the fun and freedom of a character with this ability. It's almost like the Super equivalent of getting your driver's licence haha) is the implied reasoning behind it: Jor-El never what's something like that black hole incident to happen to Jon again. So, he makes the kid a suit that allows him to return home from anywhere in the galaxy (and potentially time and space, and maybe other dimensions given how he found Jon in the first place).

I hope this'll be the case because, for one, I really dig the homage. It's rare that a modern creator would allow a character this much freedom and power. It's refreshing. And two, I like that it plays into the whole larger-than-life air the Superman family is working with.

[Ascended]

Been reading some old Superboy issues from back when they also stared the Legion, and it dawned on me that Superboy would never actually use the time bubble to travel back and forth between the present and future, but instead he'd simply break the time barrier under his own will.

Given the fact that Jon now has a suit that can teleport him back and forth across space, I wouldn't at all be surprised if Bendis is intending to homage Clark's silver age ability to time travel under his own will with this suit? It can also be argued that it's also a homage to Kon-El's hyper-time jacket (that was in itself a homage to Clark's time travel power) given that it's an article of clothing that (potentially) has this power.

What I think I may like most about this idea (beyond just the fun and freedom of a character with this ability. It's almost like the Super equivalent of getting your driver's licence haha) is the implied reasoning behind it: Jor-El never what's something like that black hole incident to happen to Jon again. So, he makes the kid a suit that allows him to return home from anywhere in the galaxy (and potentially time and space, and maybe other dimensions given how he found Jon in the first place).

I hope this'll be the case because, for one, I really dig the homage. It's rare that a modern creator would allow a character this much freedom and power. It's refreshing. And two, I like that it plays into the whole larger-than-life air the Superman family is working with.

I wouldn't be surprised if this is how it played out. Bendis is a big Silver Age fan, if his social media feed is any indication (or is the Bronze Age he's always posting? I dont follow him) so I could see it.

I'd be down. I walk a weird line between wanting to see Clark (and by extension his family) be "hands on" and not rely on gadgets and tools, but I also want to see them use some of that fantastic technology they have access to. So Jon's suit being able to travel through time as well as space? Sure, bring it on! Let Jon be the resurgence of Silver Age craziness I've been wanting to see!

[Superlad93]

I wouldn't be surprised if this is how it played out. Bendis is a big Silver Age fan, if his social media feed is any indication (or is the Bronze Age he's always posting? I dont follow him) so I could see it.

I'd be down. I walk a weird line between wanting to see Clark (and by extension his family) be "hands on" and not rely on gadgets and tools, but I also want to see them use some of that fantastic technology they have access to. So Jon's suit being able to travel through time as well as space? Sure, bring it on! Let Jon be the resurgence of Silver Age craziness I've been wanting to see!

Incorporating tech into Superman characters with powers is almost always a bit of a high-wire act, but this suit doing things Jon (or Superman, frankly) couldn't do on his own is smart.

I really think the sort of unfettered--almost sprite-like nature the ability denotes fits Jon so well, and works as a super scaled up analogy for getting your driver's licence at 16. Very silver/bronze age.

On a related note: I'd say Damian is very likely to be on Legion reservist status. Back in the day Pete was an honorary member, and Lana was granted reserve membership. Seems possible Damian may get a similar honorary or reserve membership as Jon's best friend.

[Cmbmool]

Until Damian none of those "sons" were biological, and giving him a blood son in Damian caused a lot of controversy at the time and there's still plenty of us not happy with it.

It’s one of the reasons why I’m not a big fan of Batman anymore. Somethings are just viewed with alternative world on the Multiverse.

[Cmbmool]

Oh, the state of the medium and how things were approached back in the day are totally why this is the thing it is. But that can be applied to every aspect of comics too. The medium has been influenced and controlled by corporate interests since very early on, and the creative and business sides often butt heads, with results no one intended. Wherever you put the blame though, the end result is that Clark's been characterized in a certain way over the years.

And no, I wouldn't say Clark having a family is "impossible" and he's had Kara for decades and decades, Conner for what, twenty-something years, and now Jon for a couple. To say nothing of all the imaginary tales where he has kids. I just think it goes against the basic themes the brand plays around. The concept is elastic by nature; you can define "family" in many ways, after all. And if Clark and Lois are going to be married (which I support) then having a kid is the logical next step and not such a big jump. But still, it's not something I think makes the most sense for the character. Makes a lot of sense for the brand and the marketing, but for the character I just think family is one of those things Clark can't have. >shrug<

He's the Last Son of Krypton. Except he's not. Kara technically avoids breaking that title by being older than Clark (and a girl) and Jon technically doesn't break it by being born on earth and only being half Kryptonian.....but having kids, knowing the family line will continue, renders the premise of "Last Son" moot.

And Bendis is doing it right, as far as Im concerned. If Clark is going to have a family, I'd prefer it to be a weird, non-traditional, extranormal dynamic rather than something mundane and ordinary. Tomasi wrote the Kents a lot like my own family, actually (we're very close to the nuclear standard, oddly). And it was fun, dont get me wrong, but not really what Superman is about, in my eyes. And as Ive said, I enjoyed Tomasi and I like Jon (a lot more than I should, given my opinion here). But Clark actually getting the family and kids he so desperately wants? Just rings false to me.



Yeah I'd say the lack of marketing was a much bigger issue than fans feeling injured because Bendis took Jon in a new direction.

And I dont buy the idea that the maxi was an "apology." Has anyone here ever known DC to be overly apologetic to fans? Who the hell in their right mind would say "Man, some people on the internet are sad because they don't like a direction that hasn't even solidified yet. Let's spend thousands of dollars on a book no one will buy so we can tell them we're sorry they disagree with our creative choice!" That doesn't sound like DC to me.



Simple answer is that Clark isnt Bruce. Bruce is all about family and has been since very, very, very early on in his inception. A whole lot of his development has revolved around the idea of him trying to build a new family within the framework of his crusade and he's recruited and adopted a lot of people (especially kids) into it. Clark, since the early days of his publication history, has been much more of a "friendly loner" who didn't know what to do with blood relations (or clones, Daxamites, etc) and struggled to connect with them. Just look at that comic from a few pages back where Kara, Conner, Cir-El and Chris Kent accuse Clark of letting them die to protect his legacy. That's the history of the character. Almost eighty years of history have told me that Clark having kids isn't something natural or correct for him, and as much as I love Jon that opinion isn't going to be changed because DC management, who dont understand Superman in the first place, have told me it's suddenly different now.

I am however, intrigued by the idea of Clark learning how to be good with family. As Superlad says, it's not "impossible" for Clark to have a positive family dynamic, it's just not his natural setting. But people can change. Watching him overcome that and learn to be a good and involved dad who didnt push his kid away would've been fascinating. But we didn't get that, we got Jon fully formed at ten years old. Had we gotten to see Clark's learning curve I likely would be calling this a natural progression for Clark instead of saying it doesn't fit his character. Im not a *total* slave to the pre-Crisis mindset, after all.

I rather have Superman be a family man than Batman because Batman’s treats his family a bit terrible and his more manipulative than Superman a bit.

Besides I can see Superman trying to bond with those around him better than Batman and that should include family members, right ?

Also why is it that Superman is often seen as the trustworthy hero while Batman is not ?

[Digifiend]

Superman doesn't wear a mask (Clark Kent's glasses are the disguise instead). People know who Superman is (they don't know he's Clark, but his alien heritage is public knowledge). Batman, on the other hand, is a mysterious vigilante who hides his identity.

[Ascended]

I rather have Superman be a family man than Batman because Batman’s treats his family a bit terrible and his more manipulative than Superman a bit.

It would definitely seem to make sense, right? But that's not how the history has played out.....for reasons I don't really understand. Bruce got a Robin very, very early on and just kept gaining new sidekicks and legacies, while Clark.....for the longest time he just had Kara, who he foisted off on other people. And that's sorta defined how they deal with family; Bruce is an ******* but he actually keeps his family pretty close, while Clark struggles to connect. I don't get why DC didn't capitalize on the sidekick thing with Clark the way they did Batman, but they didn't, and certain traits and themes kept popping up whenever Clark would discover a new "relative" (like Mon-El or Conner).

Besides I can see Superman trying to bond with those around him better than Batman and that should include family members, right ?

Again, it feels like that's how it *should* go but the history went a totally different way until Jon. I dont think its anything like Clark not *wanting* to bond with family, I just think the guy was/is so accustomed to being the only one of his kind he's not sure how to handle not being "alone" like that anymore.

Clark does make more of an effort to be friendly, while Batman purposefully makes an effort to be stand-off-ish, but oddly, both of these traits seem like they've ended up being disguises for their "real" traits; Batman the guy who needs to surround himself with family, and Clark the guy who doesnt know what to do with himself if he is.

Also why is it that Superman is often seen as the trustworthy hero while Batman is not ?

Probably because, of the two of them, Clark *is* the more trustworthy one. Bruce has kill-plans for all his friends and peers, keeps terrible secrets from everyone, and uses those around him if he has to. Clark's just a nicer, better person. Of course, Clark has his share of secrets and emergency plans he's never told anyone else about.....and those tend to be way, way more dangerous than what Bruce does.....but for Clark, most of his secrets (that aren't about his identity) tend to be either about protecting people close to him (not telling Lois about his powers acting oddly, for example) or plans for extinction-level events (like the Phantom Zone projector he built to pull the whole human race into an artificial world inside the Zone). Clark's failings and flaws tend to be more easily forgivable, I think, because they're usually not aimed directly at his friends the way Batman's often are, and Clark's flaws are also harder to see past the Shield and what that's come to represent.

[Jackalope89]

Yeah, screw this direction. I wasn't originally against bringing the LOSH back, but with this and everything else Bendis has done to Jon...