PKJ Action Comics Discussion and Spoilers

[Prime]

Which one lol. Tanya is in Future State so they haven’t forgotten about her completely. If Johns is taking on JSA again, maybe he’ll put Tanya and Karen on the team together, that would fit the legacy vibe of JSA pretty well.

My ideal Superfamily is:
Clark
Jon
Kara
Kenan
Kon
John Henry Irons
Natasha Irons
Tanya Spears
Sideways (I like him)
Miguel (Dial H was great and I really wish he wasn’t forgotten, he’s Latino & LGBT)
Karen I don’t see as part of the immediate Superfamily, more like the second cousin who still shows up now and again.

Karen is part of the Superman family. She is literally Superman's cousin :P

[Sacred Knight]

In a way yes, in a way no. She's a Superman's cousin, but not the main verse one.

[Vordan]

Hence the “second cousin” joke because she comes from Earth 2

[manwhohaseverything]

Hate to break it to you guys.These guys barely interact in a meaningful way.None of their lives affect each other.How is that even a family dynamic?It might make business sense.But,story sense?i don't think so.Regarding Clois and jon,They atleast feel like family.Hence,The age-up made absolutely no sense.I find that pretty interesting.Superman doesn't absolutely care if kon is taken by suicide squad or supergirl by bwl.I mean,i didn't see lois or jon being affected at all.In his book there is no reprecussion.They are able to do that,unlike jon situation.Which some might find detrimental.I find it to be building a interconnectedness.Throwing a bunch of characters together that only need each other for some event is not building a family dynamic.Clark is portrayed as guy who doesn't even care about bizarro.That guy was clark's first relative,as far as i have read.Batman atleast is constant presense in every characters books and vice versa reprecussions are felt as well.The batfamily is a family dynamic.I find build the superman family thing to be absurd.A family needs to feel like one.Not a bunch of guys getting together soliving an issue.That's why justice leagues,sucks compared to the titan when written well.Heck!damian and jon feel like a family.Titans had jon when damian was missing.Vice versa,when jon got agedup damian was there.There is such a thing as emotional bonds being built.
Edit-bizzaro is the most interesting superfamily character,including superman and jon combined.Period.Espiecally,since rebirth.Yet,superman has nothing to show for it.

[Myskin]

Interesting thoughts. I guess there is somewhat similar issue with the marriage itself and thats why some fans (ignoring those who simply want him with WW or Lana or someone else) would prefer if he wasn't married to Lois.

Now, I know that Morrison initially wanted to kill off Damian for good, but I wonder if what you describe wasn't in Morrison's head at the time. So you know, DC might decide to keep him so I better create a set up that doesn't fundamentally change Batman.

Morrison was too clever a writer to ignore that DC might resurrect Damian after his run. But here's the thing: Batman is one of the very few characters who could go through the death of a relative - in this case, a son - and remain Batman. This type of tragedy is basically part of his character. I am not saying that Batman surviving the death of his son without a subsequent resurrection would be an easy thing to tell. But it would be a completely different and IMHO easier thing from Superman and Lois Lane living the same experience.

However, Damian is in a completely different place from Jon. He has been created in such a specific and clever way that Batman stayed Batman even after the introduction of Damian. He appeared all of a sudden in Batman's life, but his being an outsider - with a very specific, separate upbringing - is exactly what makes him interesting. There are moments when he is so "sympathetically unsympathetic" that you can really see that he perfectly works as an addition to the Batman family. Plus, he is his own character. If Damian decided to go to Nanda Parbat for one year and live his own adventures there, Batman probably wouldn't even have to mention it in his comic book and the readers would accept it. If - instead of Damian - Batman's son was more similar to Bruce Wayne Junior, that is Silver Age Batman and Batwoman's child in a series of imaginary stories, Batman now would have the exact same problems Superman and Lois are having, because Batman would have a relatively "normal" family (instead of a dysfunctional, bizarre one), and that's what happens every single time when a cast of characters is changed into a family. In addition, Jon's addition to the main cast was not told in an organic way as Damian's was. He appeared all of a sudden, already a 11 (or 12?)-year-old-one, we didn't know anything about him but he already had a very close (and IMHO stereotypical) relationship with his parents. Batman DIDN'T have a pre-existing relationship with Damian when he first met him. So both the readers and Batman had to gradually become acquainted with Damian and start to accept his eccentric characterization in-story. That's way more organic. I am not saying that we should have necessarily seen Jon's upbringing from the moment he was born to his 12th age. But they should have introduced him in a more organic way anyway. Maybe - just maybe - if we had had a series of stories from Lois discovering she was pregnant up to the moment Jon was born and then a series of well-done time skips I would have found Jon's inclusion more acceptable. But probably an even better choice would have been if they had gone the Chris Kent route in a more organic, well-done way. That is, if Superman and Lois had adopted a son - maybe the son of an older enemy of theirs, with a very specific upbringing and no blood ties with Clark and Lois - and they had learned how to love him in-story, together with the readers. Chris Kent's characterization in Last Son was all over the place and mostly stereotypical. But think what would have happened if - for example - they had characterized him as a kid seriously traumatized by his own childhood within the Phantom Zone and they had taken their time - 2, 3 years - to really work on it. They could have made Superman's life similar to real-life situations with parents adopting and creating a family with children from war zones, suffering from PTSD. It would have been something new and an interesting moral challenge for Superman and Lois. Instead they went with a biological son (again!) and a Norman Rockwell family dynamics.

In addition: besides introducing him at a relatively late point in his life, DC also shoved Jon down the throat of the readers by making his parents "THE" official and in-continuity Superman and Lois, all of a sudden and with no real acceptable explanation. As I have explained in my earlier post, I can vaguely understand some people's frustration at Jon's aging. But Jon becoming an adult overnight, or Jon taking his father's place, is not inherently unfairer than Jon appearing all of a sudden at the age of 12 with a well-established relationship with his parents, or making his father and mother THE Superman and Lois of the DCU. The character has been a long series of narrative stretches from his very inception.

[manwhohaseverything]

Aye!Aye!aye!Except,age-up isn't the problem I or many people like me had.It's the way it was done.There is difference in quality between lois and clark series by jurgens and bendis's action comics.I am sure someone can fix it down the line.But anyway,I was pissed that super-sons was relegated to and isolated from dcu as a series.The series was a boys meet world kinda deal.Even dad's weren't in the aoss book.Which is unacceptable.I have been reading Jon from birth now with time skips.So,i don't get this suddenness argument .There was convergance as a baby,lois and clark as toddler from 5-7 year old,tomasi's run had him at 10 to 11 so on and so forth.what people really are asking for is couple of years of jon being not character but a thing.So,the parents can be seen as parent and get used to that as an idea.(I don't understand that.lois is basically female clark and clark is basically metropolis's dad.They just get a kid now).I am not attached to the parents at all.So ,I don't care if their evolution into being parents isn't organic.Jon has a mom and a dad,like many protagonists have.His dad is superman.they raised him.Their relationship is a standarad parent child relationship with an extra of clark being superman.That's it.That's their role from that point of view.You may point to changes in continuity and retcons.That happens all the time. superman has the same problems since 2000's.They literally changed the origin from byrne to waid's to john's.It's comics.There is more than enough material to understand what jon is,what he ain't.As if,new52 superman was universally embraced.The guy was seen as abomination by the hope and optimism classic superman crowd.He was replaced cause he wasn't dating lois or wearing underpants on the outside or having fluff moments with parents where they tell him to be good.So,superdad is shoved down reader's throats,if at all.Not the superson.If it wasn't,the sale that were more or less stabilised during jurgens and tomasi's run wouldn't have started to plummet in bendis's run(yes!the guy had enough of a drop.No use hiding from it),were the kid went away and superdad became the sole focus.Heck!teen jon isn't liked because he acts like his superdad than superson in bendis's run .As for the character being independent.We just had dceased where clark is dead.legion didn't have superman either.jon did show up in titans as well,as kid.The character was more or less independent.The problem is ,the superoffice doesn't build tightly nit narrative with superfamily members or his other cast from the get go.So people aren't accustomed to another character going through an event having an impact on main characters.Superman is used to shoving his cousins in orphanages or neglecting his clone's existence or whatever.so that if something happened to them it wouldn't have had any impact on clark.cause,we are used to seeing clark have no bonds with them.So,people never asked questions "where is kara or kon or bizarro " .They just didn't do that in rebirth with jon involved as characterisation for his parents.So,it was jarring to see that old charactersation being given to this superdad who was portayed as extra posessive of the kid just prior .Anyways,There would be minimal to no reprecussion on the main line if conner,kara where to die or anything really,Let alone someone like steel or bizzarro.As said,If superman isn't written to handle bizarro in a good manner.Then i am gonna have to assume writers don't want to tackle subjects like that.Then why i should i or anyone expect the guy to be written to take care of an adopted child.And Norman rockwell family is exactly what superman fans in general want.Otherwise,the kents would be dead.Clark has always been norman rockwellian since donner espiecally.Jon being in or out has no impact on that(unless he is superman).Moreover,people who complain about that with jon never say anything about the wierd adventures of the kid,the alien refugees of hamilton and the horror aspect..etc in tomasi's run.They just made up their mind that jon is rockwellian creation.But,infact that rockwellian farmlife was just cover of mundainity for the reality that was much more surreal.

[Journey]

The age up also butchered Clark & Lois as characters the way it happened makes them look awful to the point in the future everytime Clark dishes some heroic monologue, you can be like, "ain't this the same man who sent his underage son and human wife with a known psychopath, only for that same wife to be like yo son I got a dip missing ya daddy have fun in space with someone I think is bat shit, gotta get back to super bae!" They look like shit parents & frankly shit people.

[DragonPiece]

The age up also butchered Clark & Lois as characters the way it happened makes them look awful to the point in the future everytime Clark dishes some heroic monologue, you can be like, "ain't this the same man who sent his underage son and human wife with a known psychopath, only for that same wife to be like yo son I got a dip missing ya daddy have fun in space with someone I think is bat shit, gotta get back to super bae!" They look like shit parents & frankly shit people.

Or look at it from this perspective, Clark and Lois raised a kid with the powers of a god so well that even though he was tortured for years, that never broke his soul. He remained pure hearted and good natured.

[manwhohaseverything]

Or look at it from this perspective, Clark and Lois raised a kid with the powers of a god so well that even though he was tortured for years, that never broke his soul. He remained pure hearted and good natured.

This accomplishment would have been worth something had clois adopted bizzaro clone child or lor zod or a damian or a jason todd?A child with issues from the get go and raised him to be good.Jon was already a good kid,albeit a bit mischevious.Jon didn't need clois's "raising" to be good.Whatever jon went through was his problem,Not their problem.Superman didn't save him.He was too busy with lois.Jon saved himself, on his own.Clark can't even say he trained jon.He only taught him how to use laser vision.Everything else,he learned on his own on his adventures.

[Sam]

Or look at it from this perspective, Clark and Lois raised a kid with the powers of a god so well that even though he was tortured for years, that never broke his soul. He remained pure hearted and good natured.

That actually makes it worse. No one can endure years of torture and come out the other side saying, "Yeah, it was fine." It's not a matter of weakness or strength or whether you remain a good person either. It's just a matter of basic psychology. Not reacting to a traumatic experience isn't a sign of good parental-rearing. It's a reaction completely outside the realm of any kind of reality.

In other words, for Bendis to achieve the age up, he had to not only have Clark and Lois act supremely out-of-character and stupid, but he needed Jon to act the same way. There is no way to look at it that can escape that.

[Hcmarvel]

The age up also butchered Clark & Lois as characters the way it happened makes them look awful to the point in the future everytime Clark dishes some heroic monologue, you can be like, "ain't this the same man who sent his underage son and human wife with a known psychopath, only for that same wife to be like yo son I got a dip missing ya daddy have fun in space with someone I think is bat shit, gotta get back to super bae!" They look like shit parents & frankly shit people.

I just read the first three Superman by Bendis trades and it is legit a bad look on Lois and Clark's part. They try to alleviate the guilt by having Jon want to go but he's a child and it's their job to keep him from doing that. Then Lois just leaving him halfway through is nonsense. And then Clark not finding a way to go to Earth-3 to punish Ultraman is extra extra nonsense. I don't have any connection to Jon whatsoever, didn't care for Tomasi and Jurgen's run either, but this story was a BAD look for Lois and Clark

[HsssH]

Or look at it from this perspective, Clark and Lois raised a kid with the powers of a god so well that even though he was tortured for years, that never broke his soul. He remained pure hearted and good natured.

Would be cool if we actually saw that.

[Journey]

Or look at it from this perspective, Clark and Lois raised a kid with the powers of a god so well that even though he was tortured for years, that never broke his soul. He remained pure hearted and good natured.

They didn't raise him that's the point and for all intents and purposes Lois flat out abandoned him in space he was a child him wanting to be there matters in no way his parents should know what's best for him and they didn't. It flat out makes them look bad there is no spin on it.

[SuperX]

I don't blame the characters, I blame the shitty writing.

I see Jon now as Invincible,thsts the only way I can be OK with the greatest hero of all time getting replaced by a big wet mess of a character (if we actually look at how he got here thst is).

The more they try to take away from superman by using Jon, the more I'm happy I'm a kon fan.

[OpaqueGiraffe17]

That actually makes it worse. No one can endure years of torture and come out the other side saying, "Yeah, it was fine." It's not a matter of weakness or strength or whether you remain a good person either. It's just a matter of basic psychology. Not reacting to a traumatic experience isn't a sign of good parental-rearing. It's a reaction completely outside the realm of any kind of reality.

In other words, for Bendis to achieve the age up, he had to not only have Clark and Lois act supremely out-of-character and stupid, but he needed Jon to act the same way. There is no way to look at it that can escape that.

They didn't raise him that's the point and for all intents and purposes Lois flat out abandoned him in space he was a child him wanting to be there matters in no way his parents should know what's best for him and they didn't. It flat out makes them look bad there is no spin on it.

I just read the first three Superman by Bendis trades and it is legit a bad look on Lois and Clark's part. They try to alleviate the guilt by having Jon want to go but he's a child and it's their job to keep him from doing that. Then Lois just leaving him halfway through is nonsense. And then Clark not finding a way to go to Earth-3 to punish Ultraman is extra extra nonsense. I don't have any connection to Jon whatsoever, didn't care for Tomasi and Jurgen's run either, but this story was a BAD look for Lois and Clark

exactly, that garbage fire of a story legitimately hurts my ability to enjoy all 3 characters in the main universe. Its a stain on all of them.