Is Teen Jon the most divisive character in the Superman brand?

[Confuzzled]

I like Jon.

I like kid Jon from Super-Sons so I'm looking forward to the new CGI movie.

I like teen Jon, who I thought was a great anchor for the new LSH, even if I thought being a reboot kneecapped it before it even got started.

I like powerless teen Jon on TV's Superman & Lois, who has grown from being a bit of a dick in the pilot to now being one of the most endearing characters on the show.

I like bisexual SJW Jon trying to make a real difference in the world just like his dad tried to do back in the 30s. I think dramatizing that journey in the modern day was one of the smartest decisions Morrison made with the New 52 reboot, so I'm glad it's being carried on by Jon.

Jon Kent is a very different character than Conner Kent for one key reason. Lois Lane is 50% of Jon Kent, whereas Conner is 50% Lex Luthor (and even if you want to ignore that retcon, Conner's still lacking that key Lois element). Both of those characters are great, but Lois Lane being a fundamental part of who he is changes everything. It means that he's going to be on a similar journey as his father, but in a very different way because of who Lois Lane is.

That's the secret sauce of Jonathan Kent for me. Lois.

Now, were the editorial and creative decisions that DC made with Jon during his brief history always the greatest? Hell no. But I think those dumb stories will be papered over and generally ignored in the same way that both of his parents' less than stellar stories have been sidelined. It's always the core of the character that rises to the top. And the concept of Jonathan Kent is one of the strongest to come along in mainstream superhero comics for quite some time.

This is an excellent post. Of course Lois's boy would be an activist.

[Blue22]

I'm not a fan of Superman as a father in any facet, so I wasn't big on Chris at the time either (though I didn't hate him with the fervor I hate Jon and any of this current stuff). By comparison, that character, dynamic with Clark and Lois, the parallels, it was so wildly superior.

Honestly...after reading some old stuff with Chris Kent...you're actually kinda right. I still like the little Jon more but Chris was A LOT more interesting as both a child and especially as a young adult. That's who should have been brought in to pick up Clark's slack rather than bulldozing over Jon's growth to skip to him being damn near an adult.

Leave Jon as he was, bring Chris back, and make him the Superman of this rushed new 5G generation.

[Quinlan58]

The chance to bring back Chris Kent for anything pretty much died the second they brought him back as Lor-Zod in Rebirth and framed him as Jon's evil counterpart.

As for him as a character vs Jon as a character... admitedly I didn't read New Krypton so I'm missing that whole side of him, but while I did love his concept, how he played into the franchise's themes of adoption, and how Clark and Lois were depicted as parents far more than I did the same in Superman Rebirth... Chris himself was a pretty basic "cute kid", and Jon had more personality than him from the start.

[Iclifton]

Jon never had a chance with me. Ever since Superman Returns, the idea of an in-continuity child of Superman never sat well with me. You can give him kids in Elsewords like Secret Origins and explore whatever you want, but in the main continuity it's just a no-go. And on top of that, I feel like they didn't introduce him correctly, and aging him up like this feels lazy. So with all respect to fans who like Jon, I'd be happy if he were done away with.

But probably the biggest thing is that Jon is taking up aspects of Superman's space. Supporting characters don't take the spotlight away from Superman. If anything, they get their own books and their own space. Jon is a bit of a different story here. It sadly reminds me of those seasons of DBZ (here I go with the unnecessary DBZ references...) when Gohan became the main protagonist. But Jon is probably here to stay, especially with copyright looming in the horizon on the Superman franchise.

So yeah, I'd say he's the most controversial.

Not gonna lie, I always preferred Gohan to Goku. Was super bummed when he came back during the Buu saga.

[Blue22]

The chance to bring back Chris Kent for anything pretty much died the second they brought him back as Lor-Zod in Rebirth and framed him as Jon's evil counterpart.

And we see where that went [sigh] Did those two ever even meet?

Good God, I hope this doesn't mean they're gonna end up aging Lor up too -___-

As for him as a character vs Jon as a character... admitedly I didn't read New Krypton so I'm missing that whole side of him, but while I did love his concept, how he played into the franchise's themes of adoption, and how Clark and Lois were depicted as parents far more than I did the same in Superman Rebirth... Chris himself was a pretty basic "cute kid", and Jon had more personality than him from the start.

Personality wise, yeah. Real Jon was definitely a better character than Little Chris. But in terms of their stories and their relationships to Clark and Lois, I did find Chris to be the more interesting one. Just based on how unconventional it was and Lois' initial reluctance to even be his mother. Much like with Jon, there was a lot more that could have been done with him being raised by Clark and Lois but they dropped the ball and got him the **** out of there as fast as they could. The only differences are that I didn't hate his young adult self as much as I hate fake Jon, and he did end up getting de-aged the last time we see him (though I'm not entirely sure how). Even if he wasn't reunited with his parents...And probably never will be....

[Celgress]

Not gonna lie, I always preferred Gohan to Goku. Was super bummed when he came back during the Buu saga.

Same here, it is tragic what has happened to Gohan Post-Buu Saga (Dragon Ball Super onward), IMO. Gohan is now as irrelevant to the plot as are the other Z Fighters, (his mother) Chi Chi, Master Roshi, and Piccolo.

[exile001]

Same here, it is tragic what has happened to Gohan Post-Buu Saga (Dragon Ball Super onward), IMO. Gohan is now as irrelevant to the plot as are the other Z Fighters, (his mother) Chi Chi, Master Roshi, and Piccolo.

At least Gohan (and several others) got a decent run i the final arc of the Super anime. Sure, they were still dwarfed by the big two in power but at least they were relevant again and got some solid fights. They were in danger of being Yamcha'd, though. Hopefully, if it returns, they'll get bigger parts.

I know, I know, I should be reading the Manga but I only have so much money to spend on comics. Lol.

[Blue22]

What Toriyama did to Gohan from the end of Z to the majority of Super was a straight up crime. Really, everyone who's not Goku or Vegeta got shafted hard as **** after the Cell saga, but it was especially painful seeing it happen to Gohan, Krillin, and Piccolo.

...But Gohan's wasted potential is nothing compared to Goten and Trunks. They're basically Jon in reverse. Jon was ruined because he grew up too fast, and those two were ruined because they refuse to do ANY growing. Both physically and as characters. In fact they've...kinda regressed.

[DragonKent17]

What Toriyama did to Gohan from the end of Z to the majority of Super was a straight up crime. Really, everyone who's not Goku or Vegeta got shafted hard as **** after the Cell saga, but it was especially painful seeing it happen to Gohan, Krillin, and Piccolo.

...But Gohan's wasted potential is nothing compared to Goten and Trunks. They're basically Jon in reverse. Jon was ruined because he grew up too fast, and those two were ruined because they refuse to do ANY growing. Both physically and as characters. In fact they've...kinda regressed.

From what I heard (correct me if i'm wrong) Gohan was meant to be protaganist with Goku passing the torch but Japanese fans who were not ready of that caused Toriyama rethink of his decision and look what we got here.

[the illustrious mr. kenway]

It's seems like Jon at any age is divisive in the fandom Lol.

[Blue22]

From what I heard (correct me if i'm wrong) Gohan was meant to be protaganist with Goku passing the torch but Japanese fans who were not ready of that caused Toriyama rethink of his decision and look what we got here.

Yeah from what I gather, that was what happened. But damn. That doesn't mean you have to almost completely bench him along with your supporting cast. I don't mind Goku staying the main character so long as he's not always the only character who matters. But thanks to the ever widening power gap, that's becoming more and more impossible.

It's seems like Jon at any age is divisive in the fandom Lol.

Yeeeeeeeeah that's what happens when you make such a mess of a character that they're basically split into two versions of themselves. You get a fandom that's just as split lol

It's why I can't really be mad at anyone enjoying the newer Jon even though I absolutely despise him. This is a character who clearly had more than one road ahead of him in terms of storytelling and everyone seems to have their own idea on which road was the right choice. Like the big debacle going on right now with Barbara Gordon and her identities as both Oracle and Batgirl. I don't particularly mind that she's still able to suit up as Batgirl but I definitely see why that pisses some people off.

[king81992]

Jon's "divisiveness" is primarily rooted in the very simple fact that Superman as a concept has become so stuck in its ways as far as the general public, fans, and suits go.

Jon is an idea that challenges the "perpetual now" of Superman by just existing. First it was "hey, what about the triangle for two?" Nope. In order for Jon to exist Lois obviously has to know who Clark is. And by proxy that means Superman must be married to Lois. Then it's "well, Superman can never have a kid." Nope. He's right there. But then came the interesting part because that's when the "perpetual now" tried to reassert itself. Jon could exist-- heck, even be Superboy...but he'd do it over there, and anything else would be in service of Clark as a dad.

Now with him as the new Superman, bi, and more proactive than his father we start to realize what the point was: to move the Superman brand forward past what was "allowed" or expected. People say you could do all of this with Conner but you really couldn't. You can ignore Conner or flat out erase him. Conner is no different than Kenan Kong in that regard. But Jon isn't a character the Superman franchise can ignore, and now it'll be a **** storm if he's ever not Superman again especially after the headlines and even PKJ himself going on an interview and proudly stating "this isn't freakin Geo Force coming out as bi-- this is SUPERMAN".

The divisiveness comes from how far past the comforts of the "perpetual now" (be it the easily ignored cute kid era or the classic era) being challenged with something new. No matter how it's spun I think it all comes from that.

What a random character for PKJ to bring up, though I'd like to see more of Geo Force and his sister.

[Blue22]

Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure the Young Justice cartoon is the most attention Geo-Force will be getting anytime soon. Dude's just not nearly as popular as his sister. And even in her case, her popularity stems from a story from the 80s that she just can't seem to ever escape lol

[Quinlan58]

Re:Gohan and Goku, from what I've read Toriyama said he pulled back on Gohan as the main character because he wasn't as fitting a protagonist as Goku for his story. On the one hand, that makes perfect sense, because Goku is the one that proactively wants to get stronger, the one that is always on the lookout for new enemies to challenge and new techniques to learn, the one for whom it's in-character to let the enemy get strong to have a better fight. Gohan isn't any of that. Toriyama's attempt at making him more proactive in a way that made sense for the character (Great Saiyaman) wans't very well-received, from what I've seen, and Toriyama himself might not have found that route very interesting (he did get rid of it pretty fast).

On the other hand, Toriyama is the one that wrote Gohan like that, and of course he may very well be lying... but why would we assume that?

[manwhohaseverything]

That's not the reason..Dragon ball and z was structured around a flat arc character and goku is that.Gohan has ups and downs.He is has arcs.Him letting go had a build and conclusion(pay off).Goku requires none of that.Goku doesn't change.He changes people.