I'm really off on recent continuity, but hadn't the New 52 Superman *just* done this, for real? If so, then how did they retcon that one, just in time to go through all this again?
I listen to Jim Cornette, who does a lot of comparison between comics and pro wrestling stories. The only way a move is genuine, is that you don't expose it and kick out of it repeatedly. Superman secret identity revelation...lazy booking.
Yea It kinda plays back into that Superman the animated series episode where he refuses to believe and fires the scientitst that had actual hard data to conclude Superman was Clark Kent, stating that a being with such godlike power would never pose as a human.
I regret to this day that the Powerless TV show (no one remembers it, but it was an Office-style sitcom set in the DCU) didn’t go with their original idea of having the cast work for Retcon Insurance Agency, protecting everyday citizens against superhero damage.
I loved that show, but it was just a *bit* ahead of its time, most of the public was still in the "dark and edgy" superhero stuff, before the more "silver age" style has now come back in fashion. Although I never saw the ep where Lois Lane is killed, so everyone (somehow) knows Supes will reverse time to save her, and so they have an entire free day to do whatever they want because it will all be retconned anyway!
I remember that show! I didn't know it was actually set in the DCU. I thought it was just set in a generic superhero world when I saw the promos for it. Now I want to watch it.
@@ExeErdna Where is he now? Kinda hard to believe he has much of a future in the industry after all this...kinda like the guys who ran Game of Thrones into the ground!
He was a big name that would have brought lots of new buyer. Too bad all his changes on the flagship character were terrible and killed tons of interesting storylines
Because Bendis was a failed experiment. DC expected him to be this big name that would lead to a huge growth in sales across the board, and instead all his stuff flopped because people had gotten tired of him and he'd become a subject of mockery like 8 years prior.
Maybe I am biased, but I actually prefer Superman as Clark Kent, it takes him out of the flying wonder and puts him in a place where he is not quite human but relatable, as he struggles to find balance in complex human interactions, despite his superhuman abilities. It is why Smallville worked so well also.
I definitely feel like a core element that this is good for is that Clark is who he is. Superman is an identity he assumes. It feels kinda wrong to strip him of his humanity.
@dueladent-5215 oh yeah, not saying it made CLARK not Clark. But it sort of deprived him of getting to just have a life. The idea that one day Clark is going to want to retire, to hang up the cape and just live peacefully, is special. Of course he'd never do it while he was needed, but once there's someone else to take care of it, him becoming JUST a family man is a great character trait. Melding his identities makes that more impossible. He'll always be Superman to the world.
@@hartthorn on top of that. Realistically there would be a mixture of people. Like Sasha said Superman is bigger than Clark. Can you imagine trying to do a interview for your day job with some run of the mill shmoe. And they are just excited about meeting Superman? Like Sasha said there would be at least a cut back of down time. On the flip side, people who start seeing Clark when he's Superman, would possibly take him less seriously. "You're a reporter. What makes you so qualified to tell me to surrender?" Or just personal jabs"Go back to Smallville you bumpkin." (Sarcasm) "Uh oh, he took of his glasses! He means buisness!"
It is crucial to Superman that he have a Clark Kent identity and that it be kept secret. IMHO, the retcon did not go far enough. The retcon has Superman regretting that his identity is a secret again. He should be happy it is back because he can finally have a life again. Bendis was never honest about the profound negative impact the reveal would have on Clark Kent's life. Indeed, Clark became irrelevant and suffered no ill-effects. It completely lacked verisimilitude.
Sounds like the reveal was more about making the character relatable to people coming out of the closet to reveal themselves as whatever. It sounds mostly political, in nature. Sometimes, writers, many people in general, really, are not honest with themselves, or others about the consequences of x action, or x person. Also, on a related note: The idea that Supes can't have a secret identity because he doesn't lie, is a really dumb idea, because it's essentially forcing the character away from the benefits of a secret identity, just to say that Superman literally never tells lies, or a lie. If Clark wants to have a somewhat normal life, he needs a secret identity. Over the decades, it's been a part of the Superman mythos that Clark is who he really is, and Superman is the superhero, which is a reverse of Batman, who makes Bruce the mask, and Batman the true identity, depending on continuity, of course.
Perfect sum up about the "Superman all the time" happened in the DCAU "The Late Mr Kent" Clark was believed murdered by the public and the option was brought to him by Ma and Pa Kent. He said he'd go crazy if was Superman all the time. Makes sense. That much pressure, and responsibility ALL the time? Clark is able to kick back watch a game with a beer, Superman doesn't have that luxury
I'm also reminded of the Mark Waid Justice League story in which the Leaguers get separated into their hero and civilian personas a'la Kirk getting separated into good and evil halves in Enemy Within. Without Clark's humanity Superman isn't the inspiring leader or pure noble hero, but a cold post-Crisis almost Vulcan-like Kryptonian. Also the Tom King story in Up Up and Away in which they again get separated and without Clark's humanity Superman doesn't have the will needed to triumph over seemingly impossible odds. Also Superman III in which we see Clark's humanity is what gives Superman the compassion to want to help people, preventing his great power from corrupting him. Also the issue of Man of Tomorrow in which Lois has Superman casually grab a coffee at a diner as Superman to show him why he needs a secret identity to connect with people because when he shows up as Superman people just stammer at him wide eyed or get worried he's there because there's some impending disaster or - as he himself puts it when he and his parents create his secret identity in Byrne's Man of Steel mini series - all just want a piece of him. It's almost like there were many many stories that could've shown Bendis that this wouldn't work...
Personally the one retcon I still want to happen is the return of my boy Jonathan Samuel Kent superboy back as his little 10 year old self and for him to go back to having his fun adventures and being great friends to Damian wayne robin again but that's just my opinion.
My theory is that young Jon is still out there, and the Jon we have now is actually *Ultraman's* son, who really wants to get away from the oppressive reality of Earth 3.
@@CrisisComics What a great idea. It would be a really interesting development for Jon as a character (and Clark, who would of course still treat Jon like a son because he's Clark) AND we could have our Super Sons back. Plus, there's SO MUCH dramatic storytelling potential there.
@@CrisisComics that theory actually does make tons of sense especially given this teenage Jon Kent's action's as of late and would explain why he's not the Jonathan Samuel Kent we all know and love from the super sons, also a bonus it would give superman to finally find his real son 10 year old Jonathan Samuel Kent superboy and save him from being lost and alone and reunite father and son finally and to let Jonathan Samuel Kent superboy experience his childhood the right way.
@@TevyaSmolka The only problem that now leaves 3 no 4 "Superboy's" in DC's "main" universe and it's getting messy now. Because you have a hack being hired to "fix" things only to only do everything to make readers mad.
@@ExeErdna not really because technically speaking there were only two Superboy's conner kent and Jon kent so with that logic this means we can fix everything by deaging Jonathan Samuel Kent superboy and letting conner kent become the new superman while Jon kent gets to experience his childhood and boom problem solved everybody wins.
Great video--I learned a lot from this. In my opinion, Superman _needs_ a secret identity since one of the main ways to threaten him is through his friends and family. If you take away his secret identity, you take away one of the main opportunities for dramatic tension. And Superman just is Clark to a certain extent. He's one of the best-adjusted DC heroes. He'd be perfectly happy just having a quiet life with his family, but he knows he has a higher calling as long as there are people who need his help. I agree that this retcon handles things pretty well (making it happen in a way that is more or less faithful to the universe's ground rules without breaking stuff).
@@prion42Yeah but that’s incidental, if he revealed you’d get a problem where they go specifically after every person close to Clark. Lois is in trouble partially because she’s a reporter who gets close to the story, and partially because people know that she has some kind of relationship with Supes.
*Superman: Warworld* was the best Superman comic I've read in years. Really showed why he's the super-man, other than the big muscles. Yet, even with the improvements made into Johnathan Kent's character I'm still haunted by Bendis' dark & strange shift in direction... Thanks Doctor Manhattan...
The idea of Clark throwing away his Clark identity immediately reminds me of when Clark did similarly in Smallville. Although rather than revealing his identity to everybody, he simply let Clark disappear and became "The Blur" full-time. However it didn't feel as cynical there. In fact, it more was used to show why Clark *needs to be Clark.* He can't keep going if he forsakes the person he grew up as. The *human* he grew up as. Superman is the uniform that Clark Kent puts on in order to go to work and help people in the best way he can, but it's not *WHO* he is. It seems clear to me though that Bendis here is very emblematic of what's happened to comics and related media more and more over years and years. A lot of writers treat the characters and comics they write more like vessels to shove their own thoughts into and lecture the reader or viewer. They distort the characters however they want in order to conform to *them,* even when it hurts the result. For one thing I think Bendis' monologue recounted here shows that he's thinking mostly of himself and being so grandiose with his philosophy and morals, and barely actually thinking of the result for Superman, or even making a good story. People used to try to make good stories that could be enjoyed by all. Now they use these beloved characters like skinsuits to yell at clouds about anything they don't like.
I've always been a huge fan of the drama that secret identites can have. So I'm actually kind of happy that Clark's reveal got retconned. Same with Jon. I feel like there's more interesting stories ( for me ) there.
I actually really wish Jay had forgotten and we could have gotten to see if he liked Jon or his cape, but the world refuses to give me an interesting Jay lol
It's interesting to me that superhero stories in other mediums seem to be getting rid of the concept...I think it's the notion that you're splitting the cast, between those who work with the hero in costume and their civilian friends and family, who have no reason to interact with the larger story now. That may work in comics, but not so well when you're dealing with actual *actors*, so we end up with things like "Team Flash", where literally EVERYone the hero knows is also his superhero support team! Also, MCU Spider-Man...How long before this trend makes it into the comics?
@@CasuallyComics Remember when we all thought Jay might be a secret villain using Jon? 😅 Showing if Jay actually likes Jon or just likes his powers would have been a good idea.
@@HandofOmega I think secret identities only really work for clark and batman, flash should defo not have it, its useless and basically everybody knows.
@@CasuallyComics I totally agree. This would have been a great test of the relationship. After all, with a healthy love, there has to be trust. Jay has been a bit shady about his past. Putting the shoe on the other foot, having Jay realize that he doesn't (and can't) know Young Superman's other life, something hidden from him out of necessity--would that be a strain? Would this cause them both to step back and reassess the relationship? Would this actually cause them to break up and seek new partners, or would they reconcile? Would a breakup be the catalyst for Jon to admit that, yes, he needs therapy for all he's gone through? Sadly, I don't think that they would ever go this route, as that would be stepping on Tom Taylor's toes. It'd be a nice challenge for the writers, though.
Superman and Lois has come right up to the edge of questioning the ethics of Superman's secret ID, but I would love to get into Lois' rationalization of the conflict between being a Reporter, whose calling is to reveal The Truth to the public, no matter what, and keeping one of the biggest secrets on the planet because she's personally invested in it. Either way, she's deciding for people what they should know...sounds like there's a story there! (and actually, I'd never heard the coffee table joke before!)
I feel like is an issue to easy to solve. Her job as a reporter is to investigate news and people who need to hide their identidies is really not news. "in other news, person who reported on the joker and placed into witness protection is currently living in ohio" -lois kent
@@edselcervantes6229 The real ethical problem is that reporters are supposed to reveal if they have a personal connection to the subject they're reporting on. Like, if someone writes an article on a new tech company that's sweeping the market, when they also own stock in that company, and so stand to profit by raising its profile in the press. In that scenario, the reporter either needs to include a disclaimer explaining their connection to the company (so readers can take this potential source of bias into account), or they need to just not report on it, and leave the story for someone else. In Lois & Clark's case, any time Lois wrote about Superman while being married to Superman, or Clark wrote about Superman while BEING Superman, they were presenting themselves as objective reporters, while concealing a relationship to their subject that made them FAR from objective. That's a big journalistic ethics no-no.
@@edselcervantes6229 Lois didn't PUT the guy in witness protection, tho, it was the authorities that did that, she's just reporting on it. The issue is Lois taking it upon herself to decide what the public should and shouldn't know, without any official authority to do so...She's far from impartial, she's involved in MAKING the news here, and refuses to disclose her investment in it. At the very least, it could be argued that she should simply refuse to cover Superman related stories, for this very reason...
@@ravenwilder4099 Most stories have it be known that Lois and the rest of the Daily Planet crew are friends with Superman that's not a secret or anything, Lois being married to him is and even there again Superman having a thing for her is usually shown to be common knowledge.
As someone who's read comics for as long as I have, there's always been this push and pull between advancing a character forward and returning/retconning back to status quo. For a character like Superman or Spider-Man, whose publishing history will likely go on forever, there will always be the tension between moving forward and retreating backward. Stan Lee always talked about creating the illusion of change; these days that means writers will try to make radical changes but put all the toys back in the box for the next writer. Sometimes changes stick, otherwise Peter Parker would still be dating Betty Brant. There's some enjoyment to be found in seeing how creative a retcon can be in resetting the status quo; as mindwipes go this is more aesthetically pleasing than "a wizard/the Devil did it", so yay for the current Superman team?
Comics usually follow a "use it or lose it" approach to changes sticking. If it doesn't interest following writers, it's gone sooner or later. The uninteresting ones that stick around are often editorial pet projects. I have a love-hate relationship with this system. On the one hand, it fixed this wasted potential, giving us lost story types and leaving room for a more inspired writer to try it again some day. On the other, it creates a push-and-pull between different generations of writers trying to bring things back to their favorite era and no one is trained to build off of bad ideas when they can ignore them, wasting potential in its own right.
@@BrandonVout The lure of fannish nostalgia is always risky. Retreading past stories more often than not leads to the same-old same-old. I kind of prefer someone taking a bold swing at something new, even if it doesn't work, but on the other hand there are very few modern stories that give me the same thrill I got when I first started reading comics, so maybe I'm too old and jaded, lol.
I like a lot of what Bendis has written (even some of the things that many people loathe), but he is definitely more author-oriented than character/world-oriented, and he seems to have a nasty habit of dropping bombshells and then leaving it to other people to explore the repercussions...That is a very dangerous position to put yourself in, because it makes the evaluation of YOUR work almost entirely dependent upon the subsequent work of other people. It also kind-of baffles me, personally, because writing about the *consequences* of something seems much more interesting to me than just writing the set-up.
That's why if I came after anything he did I would retcon it. He doesn't give enough meat to a character before moving on and expecting people to deal with it is very toxic. Like he's not even doing whole arcs for something he claims to put "a lot of pride into"
This gets into an issue I had with his dc work espwcially. The stories were sometimes all introduction of a new concept or character but little to no meat to make them satisfying stories on their own. Heck sometimes it was so just build up I didnt feel there was a story. Examples would be event leviathan, a shitty badly designed mystry that ends on the reveal with no other sastifying elemwnt added. Tk see the actual story you had to reaf a new title. Theres also a lot of his first arcs with villians, even the ones I liked like the invisible mafia and its red cloud enforcer.
From what I saw, he's got concepts, not stories. BMB: " Hey, what if we turned Superman into a Giant Robot?". DC: "OK, go ahead. You're our guy". BMB does. DC: "Okay, Brian, we've turned him into a Giant Robot. What now?". BMB: " IDK, bye".
@@ExeErdna Yeah...And it's really unfortunate that he does this so often, too, because he had several long runs on series at Marvel where he DID bother to dig in and explore beyond the initial reveals, but he's built up a reputation to just set-up thin concepts and move on. Plus, doing the set-up and then expecting other people to flesh it out is really obnoxious, like you said.
@@gregcourtney751 I tend to agree. It feels like his stint at DC amounted to, "I'm gonna make sure I've touched every major character I possibly can, so that I can say on my résumé that I've written them." The end of his time at Marvel kind-of turned into that as well...As if it was more about saying he'd written for every character and getting his name in the "Special Thanks" section of the movie credits than it was about writing a compelling story about characters he clicked with.
After all that Bendis did to the status quo of Superman when he joined DC, most of it is gone... except for the changes to Jon, he made sure they couldn't just "kintsugi" him back together.
A character I’ve noticed that is surprisingly difficult to write is Punisher. The character is supposed to be a broken man who is well aware he’s a bad guy, and openly hates doing what he does. Whenever you get writers who have hard opinions about antiheroes (O’Niel / Bendis) he’s often portrayed as a monosyllabic psychopath with no personality outside of loving to kill people
This is something I've noticed with a lot of Marvel. They take a "human" aspect of them like a tragic point in their life and make that the character. That's why Punisher became so bad and even Spider-Man has been in some awful arcs. I can admit Superior Spider-Man was legit good progression after the shit show which was "One More Day". Punisher being a villain shooting psycho isn't Castle. Spider-Man being broke and lonely forever isn't good for Peter.
Very good point. Personally, I always find Frank Castle's humanity and best-written runs in this weird tension that exists between bone-deep weariness and an irresistible drive toward revenge. The Punisher is a man who gets up and kills rooms full of criminals every day because he feels that's all he is and all he has to offer the world anymore, and he's damned good at it, but he'd give up the rest of his life living like that in an instant if he could just enjoy just 5 more seconds with his family. He wants to quit, but can't, and that makes him both tragic and fearsome.
Marvel is basically apologizing for the Punisher's existence for some years now. They reduced him from a very complex, interesting character to a one note psychopath. They would get rid of him If they could.
I believe Bendis style of writing could work well if there were more an overview of it, pulling things out that doesn't work and put things that does work in his own terms. Like the whole problem of Iron heart and Spider Morales that they started of what they are with no set plan for character development until future writers make it. Or not thinking ahead of what the audience of super Jon kent would react of Jon being older, technically not being friends with Damien anymore, and the whole dynamic of the duo. Just to give him a love Intrest out of no where, and attempting to be friends with Tim Drake and Dick Grayson. It just feels like there isn't much of a road map for these characters, just ideas being put in too early
I think there's a trend somewhat broadly in comics of the past few years of ideas being put in too early, and I think it's a symptom of another issue. It seems to me that a lot of comics are just going from one big story to the next from arc to arc, and that sort of thing pushes out time for gradual development. It's harder to find time in a story for gradual development when it constantly has to be the biggest story in recent memory. With that lack of time, writes have to introduce any ideas they have in a big way, which isn't always what an idea needs to thrive.
And now we're in a place where if you're still complaining about it you need to move on and like, ... no!!! you ruined our favorite character and then now forced him into a new direction in, gave him a role that was completely unearned, ignored the rest if the Superman family, and robbed us of countless stories in moments. Dc been constantly from Son of Kal-el and Dark Crisis trying to make Jon more mature and give him Superman moments with Clark it doesn't feel real because of how artificial his age up was and that This is the same person who Basically gave Jon away 2 times because Bendis just didn't want to write about him Although this being comics all it'll take it the wace of a hand, to get the Jon we actually like back as a 14 🏳️🌈 superboy.
Since its clear that Bendis just does better on "street level" characters and teams, and should never have been given something like Superman (as anyone who read his Avengers already knew)...What DC book WOULD have been a genuinely good fit for him?
@@HandofOmega signal maybe or the outsiders he does like his diversity which isn't a knock at him but when it's originals character well we have many examples already.
@@velemamba260 Yeah, I still miss the earlier triangle era: just weekly story progression, fleshed out supporting characters, Metropolis feeling like a real setting...
Superman is a celebrity in the DC universe. Does that mean that he forfeits his right to a private life? I ask this because I think the idea that Superman was not being truthful because he had a secret identity ignores the fact that everyone has a secret identity. We all have boundaries, things that we keep from others. He's Superman. He's the world's most famous superhero. Does that fame mean that he should be treated differently in that aspect? If this wasn't a Superman story, if this was a C level Superhero or an every-man character, I'm not sure people would be equating him keeping a secret identity to him lying to the world.
One of the things missing from a lot of modern Superman stories that was more highlighted in the silver and bronze ages was the idea of a god trying to live as a man. That as much as clark wanted to be a part of humanity he could never fully be one of them. I mean think of stories like for the man who has everything where he has to give up the life he always wanted, with a family and a place he belongs, because his sense of duty to humanity is that strong. Makes him seem a lot more heroic right? Nowadays he pretty much has everything he ever wanted with no cost. Worse even, in stories like injustice he comes across like someone whose only a hero because his life is good, which stops the second thats taken away from him. It strips the character of a lot of depth in my opinion.
@@mr.goblin6039 Lex: "I want your marriage!" Clark: "Will you take Brian Michael Bendis instead?" Lex: "I am pretty sure I'm getting ripped off.....but all right."
The moment they announced Superman would reveal his identity, the question was not IF they would retcon it back, but how long till they did. Just like pretty much every shake up in the status quo in comics.
Personally i am glad they restored superman secret identity because lets be real here the whole superman revealing his identity to the world was just a horrible idea from day one especially from bendis who clearly had no idea what the hell he was doing and just didn't care at least in my opinion.
My favorite Clark/Lois secret identity joke: Lois: Man, Batman sure has gained a lot of weight? Clark: Looks like we should call him *takes off glasses* Fatma- Lois: OH MY GOD ITS SUPERMAN
If that's what they were going for then they flopped hard, IMO. Also I think that's a connection stretch a bit too far even by comic fan standards, which is saying something.
I quite like secret identities. Especially in the modern age, with how parasocial relationships are such a big thing and how easy it would be for common folk and villains to know where a hero is All the Time. And like Sasha says being a hero all the time would suck for that person. I think it could be used well with certain stories and characters, but I'm just not all that interested in those characters myself haha
It's a good move. I still mourn Tomasi's run on Superman. It was such a nice balance between man, family, and Superhero. RIP Tomasi's Supersons (yeah, I'm still doing it).
To me, the question of whether any hero has and keeps a secret identity ought to rest on two things: their personality and their circumstances. Tony Stark is super-rich and essentially lives in a techno-fortress (and is therefore super-protected), is already famous as Tony Stark, and has an ego bigger than a Hulkbuster armor. It makes perfect sense that he'd get tired of fibbing about something that he'd rather take honest credit for. Batman could be similarly protected in terms of his circumstances, but his personality is all wrong for a reveal -- he's an introvert who would likely loathe the celebrity that would come from being publicly outed, not because of what it'd do to Bruce Wayne, but because of how it would de-mythologize Batman and rob him of his intimidation factor. I think Superman and Spider-Man are alike in that although they personally might find it almost a relief for the world to know their identity -- it would simplify certain aspects of their complicated "civilian" lives tremendously -- but both of these heroes very conscientiously wanted to keep their identity secret out of respect for their loved ones. Not only as a matter of safety, but of wanting to have a happy shelter of family to return to that's separate and protected from the bruises and scrapes (reputational and literal) that they take every day as superheroes. I can't imagine Supes would have revealed he was Clark to the world without agonizing over what it might mean for Lois and Jon, to the point he never would have voiced the idea out loud, much less acted on it. I personally suspect you hit the nail on the head that Bendis's reasoning was actually pretty simple but also very personal for him: he doesn't like or appreciate the idea of people keeping secrets (of any sort) and he wanted to shake things up. That worked for him, but I'm not sure it worked for Superman, and I'm personally glad for the retcon. In a weird way, the hypnotic suggestion actually opens the door to a best-ever explanation for how Clark's "glasses disguise" could actually work. Moving forward, a vague hypnotic suggestion that "No, Clark Kent is definitely NOT Superman" in the minds of all humanity makes the otherwise-thin disguise seem much more plausible.
You touched on something that has bothered me a lot for a while now, which is writers being put on books or given projects who don't really care about the character who is supposedly the focus of the book. It's like, a writer has a story they want to tell, and they figure that if they can make it about [Character X] they can get it published, so they shoehorn that character into it. One would hope that editors would be able to clamp down on stuff like that, but they don't seem to. It's particularly suspicious when a new writer comes in and changes major things that have been part of the story forever---the Superman reveal is a big recent one, but it seems like almost every character death for a long time is also falling into that category. The core characters of the DCU are important in that milieu and should not be lightly played with that way. I am a big fan of Bendis' writing generally but I was disappointed with his tenure at DC because instead of taking over Superman and telling Superman stories for a few years he started almost immediately shaking up fundamental parts of the universe. On the other hand, that is the DC model anymore.
My experience with Bendis has seemingly always been akin to going to the toilet and seeing crap in the urinal. It's like, "why did you think this was ok?"
I have to agree that's the best way to say it. It's like a massive turd in the small urinal so everybody can see it. Bendis is PROUD about his bad choices that people have to retcon because it makes their job harder.
I present to you all an example of Bendis' dialog: Teen #1: "Bendis is a hack!" Teen #2: "Bendis?" Teen #1: "Yeah, Bendis." Teen #2: "A hack?" Teen #1: "Yeah, a hack." Teen #2: "Really? A hack? Bendis?" Teen #1: "Yeah, really. Bendis. A hack."
I was going into Bendis Era @ announcement cautiously optimistic. Was was willing to overlook the Krypton retcon in Man of Steel after ending it with the tease of no more Secret ID and the possibilities. Then Superman and AC issues started coming out, all issues before the big reveal feeling like Leviathan set up. GA was cancelled to be used in his Leviathan story. Then Jon got aged up. Then Legion was not what I hoped for. Then the reveal at #18. No real follow up aside from Bendis making other series and corners of the DCU. It was my first DC rough patch since starting to collect in 2016...
I have the entire Bendis run of Superman bagged and boarded in long boxes. I read them all, and after it, I can say honestly that your take on this plot line is correct. Telling the world "I am Superman," needed to be the start of a ten to twenty book arc. Who dies? Who hates him now? Who suddenly loves him for it? If Bendis had taken the time, he could have played with the idea of Clark coming out like a members of the LGBQ+ community have to. Finding out that Superman felt like a liar when he was playing Clark Kent could have be powerful, but instead, we got nothing. That is the legacy of Bendis at DC. A few great ideas, some okay ones, some really bad ones, one unforgivable one. SUPER SONS FOREVER!!!! But none of them every mattering. He never did anything with his twists, with his stories. All of Bendis work is just sound and fury, signifying nothing. The only good that came from Superman #18 is Action Comics 1050. The best thing about the Bendis run, is someone else fixing it. Thanks for the great video.
A superhero hides his identity for very different reasons than an LGBT person does. A hero hides his identity to protect those around him not to protect himself from being stigmatized.
@@indyatmn420 this sentence is genius. it would be very interesting to see a story of a hero who is lgbt for example jon himself jon is lgbt and his identity is still secret but while he was superboy he kisses his boyfriend and a reporter saw it and reported it. now everyone knows that superboy is lgbt and this becomes big news, causing reactions of support and prejudice. Jon doesn't know how to deal with this, not just because he's getting a lot of attention and harassment, but because it's Superboy who came out of the closet, not Jon Kent, and he feels he's starting to see the effects being Superboy is having on his life.
I think it could work, but the problem is that Clark Kent isn’t the disguise, Superman is. It would be interesting if they temporarily renamed the series “Clark” instead of Superman, and it wouldn’t be uncommon for him to do super heroics in a baggy suit instead of always changing. Personally though, I think that it’s a good idea, but it wouldn’t work as well as with other heroes. I could see it working pretty well for Green Arrow, especially since he has a history of left leaning story telling.
The mild-mannered secret identity is as vital to Superman's legend as his Kryptonian origins. In many ways, Clark is the better man, who knows the truth, but sometimes must keep it quiet to protect others. He understands that self-aggrandizement would be easy. And disastrous.
Superman reveals his identity to the world and it leads to new and exciting stories dealing with this change and one of the most direct repercussions is Joker War, a Batman story. I'm not sure that's how that's supposed to work.
The idea that wanting to have a secret identity is unrealistic is honestly baffling to me. I would think doxxing would be more well-known at this point.
Wasn't there a story where an old woman saw Superman as her guardian angel, who would always save her so she would do things like deliberately provoke gangsters into attacking her, so that they would get stopped by Supes (who kinda got used to "listening out" for her)? And one day he was in outer space and she got hurt, and I think it got into the issues of "can he be Superman and doing good ALL the time, or does everyone, even Superman, deserve some private time to himself?" After all, if he really doesn't NEED to eat and sleep, then is it inherently irresponsible of him to NOT be Superman most of the time? Is he responsible for all the things that he COULD have stopped, if he weren't hanging out with Lois or Jimmy?
I loathe Bendis so much ... not just for this, but largely, yes -- for this. Anyone who jokes or ridicules, "Can't they just look at Clark and see that he's Superman?!" simply does not understand the character, and should not be writing him. In fact, they don't understand superheroes in general, but especially this -- the original, prototypical superhero. Because that is the WHOLE POINT -- THEY DON'T LOOK AT CLARK! If they did, yes -- they would see that he's Superman. His disguise is not the glasses, and it's not predicated on any actual dishonesty on his part. His disguise is other people's confirmation bias. It's a statement about the human condition, about human nature -- how we tend to only see what we expect to see. There are some deep psychological, philosophical and theological truths in this paradigm. It works best with the Clark-Lois-Superman love triangle: His primary motivation as a character is to be accepted as a human, by humans, on human terms, most acutely in the person of Lois who -- as the star reporter for the Daily *Planet*, is representative of the world itself. He desperately loves her and wants to be accepted by her, but as Superman, she worships him, and he can only reciprocate if she loves him as an equal, not as a god. So, he divests himself of everything 'super' and comes to her on her terms, as an equal, but in so doing ... he is beneath her notice. She's too distracted by her infatuation with Superman to even notice Clark Kent. There is an allegory here for God's love of humanity and humanity's rejection of Him in the person of Christ, but it also resonates with every nerdy teenaged boy who can't get the attention of the girl he loves who is too smitten by the football captain to notice him. For Bendis to wave that aside and to turn it into an enactment of a gay person "coming out" betrays his fundamental misapprehension of this character and what he means ... In fact, DC Comics as a company appears not to understand anymore what these characters are about.
My favorite ever retcon: Isaiah Bradley super soldier serum testing. Honorable mentions: the millions of times Polaris was and then wasnt magnetos daughter. Pietro and Wanda being siblings and Magneto's children. Magnetos full name. Namors oxygen in the blood related insanity. Earth X before they ruined it. Reverse retcons. The powers the removed from Magneto and Professor Xavier like Magentos ability to astral project and Xaviers helicopter than ran on the power of his mind ( or was it a car?).
On the subject of wasted potential, if we're insisting on this coming out metaphor, why not use it? Commit, my biggest problem with this era is that it committed to none of the ramifications of this decision Was Jon, a bisexual, not upset about being outed? He definitely didn't want this, everything he says in his own book makes it seem like he should be upset with his dad about it, but we never get him saying that to his father. Superman also met apollo during this era, and Apollo had a whole speech about how Clark inspired him, we could have put a line about it somewhere in that. They touched upon this once in an anthology book then never again. Gay metaphors are so varied and versatile yet so personal, there's really so much you can do. Buffy alome got away with doing several episodes that were obvious gay metaphors. It really felt like they didn't want to approach this from any angle other than "it happened, let's move on"
Thank you!!!! I DESPISED Bendis´s change! For the most part, DC´s characters have secret indetities...as silly as they may seem (Superman/Wonder Woman/Black Canary...) but they do. So, keeep them! ...more so since it was done in New 52!
I can see valid points on both ends of the scale, but I personally prefer Superman having a secret identity. Simply put it means that anyone who knows Clark Kent and superman are one in the same is either intelligent enough to connect the dots no one can or is willing to see, or alternatively Superman trusted that individual enough to share his biggest secret. If everyone knows Clark Kent is Superman, then there’s no impact when someone refers to him as Clark. Also on a logical level Superman revealing his secret identity puts everyone he knows and loves in harms way. Whether it’s super villains or Amanda Waller, what stopping powerful individuals from holding Superman‘s family hostage unless the man of steel does what they want? Also if superman is a character wants to have a little bit of privacy, why can’t he? If the world knows he’s super man no one will ever let him have a moment to himself in public. Clark Kent wouldn’t be able to go to a restaurant without dozens of people wanting an autograph from Superman. (I understand the argument that a character who stands for truth should be honest, but I feel people are entitled to some privacy.) Edit: I will admit this, the superhero revealing their identity publicly can work in certain context. For example I think the idea of Tony Stark having a public identity as Iron Man works for him because realistically Tony can afford the greatest security and private buildings money can buy for anyone he cares about and since he’s no stranger to being the center of attention, it makes sense with his story that he without himself as Iron Man and then later see the repercussions of making such a decision (just look at any time stark tower has been attacked because of his identity as Iron Man.) but again I feel this works better for Tony because it matches his character to casually reveal such life-changing information. He’s a lot more reckless than someone like Superman.
A really interesting concept to me: who knows him as A) Kal-el B) Clark C) Superman. Each is a different person yet the same person. It would be based on relationships.
That's a angle that would be interesting. I tend to assume the "true" Persona is the one he has when talking to those who knows the full story, Like Lois. He doesn't have to act "as Clark" or "as Superman" he is just himself. I like scene where Superman and Batman have a conversation where they call each other "Clark" and "Bruce".
comparing supermans secret identity reveal to essentially coming out the closet and not having him really tackel any issues around doing that is a really weird thing, people lose friends, family disown them, they make new friends or stronger friendships, peoples opinions shift on topics, "oh i dont really like them superheros but that clark kent is such a sweet guy he helped me carry my groceries up the stairs maybe they aint so bad" and to basically do none of that is really fucking boring, like until seeing this video i didnt even know he went public thats how little impact it must have had
I felt this didn't work simply, as opposed to Batman, Clark was the being and Superman was the "Suit". They killed the person and only the projection remained. Clark was our narrator, our window of insight into the demigod. Ultimately this came down to forcing the story line on a character it was unsuited for.
I love the adult Jon Kent Superman stories. It's some of the best writing in contemporary comics. I loved young Jon too, but the transition was a great idea. Super kid was always a short-run concept.
First time commenting on your channel. Just wanted to say that I enjoy your take on the sometimes absurd world of comics. You take a fairly even-keeled approach, contrary to some of the other commentators in this area. Around the end of the New 52, with Lois Lane revealing Clark's identity, I believe that sales tanked. Nobody liked the direction it was taking, the subsequent power-down and the increase in edginess for Clark. Superman comics were like a house that had been victim of one too many frat parties. For Rebirth, they brought back some of the old guard and got things back to code, so to speak. There was room to expand, but everything was on a solid foundation. Bendis...certainly shook things up. He also did not address certain plot threads that he raised, leaving it to the next person to figure out. Am I glad that the secret identity is back? Yes. Did I wish that an OMD-like plot device didn't have to be used? Yes. Anyway, love the channel and how you're not going down the rabbit hole of constantly griping.
Something I'm interested in, though I can see them just not dealing with it at all, is that while Jon Kent's identity is back under wraps, Jay Nakamura is still very publicly dating Superman the Younger. Could cause some interesting bumps in their relationship, though like I said, I'm actually doubtful they'll address it at all.
So, the reset causes anyone encountering historical information about Clark being Superman to mentally reject the information. What about the unborn when the reset was implemented? Having escaped the reset, will they be able to correctly interpret the information when they are born and have attained an age where they can, say, read?
It makes no sense. I'm just going to say that after lex did his thing, superman said "screw it" and let oracle wipe the internet about everything relating to him being superman.
Just one of those comics things they expect you to roll with. Kinda like on TITANS, Dick Grayson attacks a bunch of cops and goes to prison, where he attacks more cops. Then, one day, he's out of prison. No explanation. Not even a throw away line about Bruce Wayne pulling some strings with Amanda Waller. You can fret about it. Or, you can just enjoy the ride.
I would love if they brought these up years from now when those infants would be old enough to find out that there was a global conspiracy to mindwipe the planet to cover up superman's secret identity. Imagine the fallout that writers would never realistically explore.
From me this was covered in Batman TAS "Over The Edge". All villians did lawsuits, law enforcement raided the hero's home, the hero's close ones were targeted for arrest/death & the hero had nowhere to hide.
X-Men TAS and Spider-Man TAS so satisfyingly did retcons to the Dark Phoenix and Black Cat. It made both characters make more sense. Making BC a super soldier recipient and making TDP destroy an uninhabited planet did wonders in giving Felicia's powers and why sh has them make sense and Jean still redeemable.
@dupersuper1938 I think it is because they had the opportunity to look at both situations in hindsight. That is what good retcons typically do. I think that's what a good adapted character does. It omits things that don't work in the source material and focus and expand on the things that do and have hindsight to understand what makes sense (that's technically a retcon). That was why the MCU were so successful when they began.
@@jaymesEo6 Except it's not technically a retcon. The term retcon is a shortening of retroactive continuity. No past continuity is change in the reinterpretation of a new iteration with it's own bran new continuity.
@dupersuper1938 That's not actually true. This is the modern way Google describes retcons and is more accurate to modern understanding of the term: (in a film, television series, or other fictional work) a piece of new information that imposes a different interpretation on previously described events, typically used to facilitate a dramatic plot shift or account for an inconsistency. Though my way of viewing it isn't exactly. This, more often than not, retcons just change information previously given with hindsight being 20/20.
@@jaymesEo6 Yes, and some current dictionaries accept the opposite of literally as a definition for literally. I'm just going to stick with the actual word. Though even by that google definition it's not a retcon as there were no previously described events in the universe of those cartoons to shed new light on. The only way your definition works is if you consider any change in a completely new interpretation a retcon, in which case the BBC Sherlock series retconned the original Conan Doyle stories and retcon now means the exact same thing as reboot.
While I dislike the return to status quo, it's not like they did anything interesting with the outing of Superman's identity, and I find the storyline itself pretty well-done; I'd rather it be another grand-level Lex scheme than another universal reset. My only real problem with it is Lex begging for his life at the end after Superman reveals his power upgrade. Lex has faced down Darkseid, come on.
"Use it or lose it" is the law of the land in comics. If it doesn't interest subsequent writers, it's either gone sooner or later, or it's an editorial pet project that sticks around for years.
Really says something that I knew a bunch of the other dramatic twists since 2018 in the Superman books, but did not really know that he’d revealed his identity until literally this vid.
First I have to admit that I am one who was not aware of what Bendis did…also I’m firmly in the belief that unlike Bruce , Clark is who He is , Superman is what He can/ does do…I like that it is being retconned, but IMO it could have been done so much less convoluted by say having Mr.Mxyzptlk say He is not as fun to mess with, without the secret Identity & make everyone forget 🤷🏾♂️…Keep Up The Outstanding Work Sasha 🖖🏾
All we need now is to de age Jon back to a reasonable age, 14, or whatever Damian is to get the Supersons back in some form. Because anything else is just unsatisfying and frankly doesn't really work. Fun adventures of The supersons is better than Son of Kal-el "My father is Superman and now ... so am I" (cue slow music) RANT INCOMING DC forced him into Superman and then essentially rewrote reality and ignored most of the other members of Superfam (kara and Connor) to try (and fail) to make him Clark's version of Nightwing Considering Jon's place amongst the rest of the Superman Family (who Should be both older and more experience than he is) this is like if Damien Wayne was suddenly put ahead of Dick Jason Barbara and Timothy. Plus, now that Clark's back, what can they even do with Jon? He's turning him into electric blue Superman and having him fight Ultraman (because We're keeping that stupid Earth 3 nonsense Bendis made but then ignored the tramua for) OK, now what, He still has no childhood, no teen titans, nothing left to learn, Jon's been through 2 crisis and fought doomsday and darksied (at least Batman’s plot armor is earned) What else is there now? Kara, Connor, Steel, and Kenan all have unquie roles to play. Jon has no actual life or direction outside of "being Superman too," but there were endless storylines for him as a kid. Heck, even Superboy-Prime has more stories you can tell with him than adult Jonathan. Also, the Bendis stuff just made Clark and Lois terrible parents.
I'm currently reading Bendis' run on Superman for the first time but I had to watch this considering all the controversy I've read about it. I am reminded of the 1991 Action Comics annual that was part of the Armageddon 2001 event - we see a potential future where not only is Superman's identity revealed but he also winds up getting elected President. Although that was just a what-if type story that wound up not happening, it was well-written and positive - it played out changes in Clark and Lois' lives, some in great detail and others in quickie broad strokes, and it worked because the annual-length story and imaginary what-if nature allowed the writer to really explore just how far an "out" Superman could be taken (and still keep things upbeat instead of going grimdark). I still will finish Bendis' run, but this video does make me wonder if yeah, despite his skills as a storyteller, if maybe Bendis was putting a little too much of himself first instead of it being a more honest exploration of "ok let's really do this and see what happens", especially if he wasn't willing to explore consequences. It doesn't make the idea inherently bad, and it sounds like it was well done up until the actual reveal was committed... it just feels like he didn't have a fully-thought out plan for after. And that's being generous given his years of good work, because if he's really equating Superman's secret identity to, say, homosexual and transgender people keeping their true selves secret, that smacks of privilege. Now, by that same token, the current writers doing the retcon, THEY could have been bolder in KEEPING the identity reveal and exploring consequences more in-depth.
Superman losing his secret identity had potential, sadly it was handled by Bendis who was waaaaay out of his element (street leve heroes is where he's decent and even there he can screw it up: See RiRi Williams) he handled both Superman and Legion of Heroes titles, set up a lot of ideas that never came to fruition or had disappointing payoffs (that red cloud fire Villán and secret organisation come to mind) hell he even did his own D.C. Riri Williams in the shape of Naomi (who was handled well until her powers became the Uno reverse card for almost anything on her book or any others where she was a main part) had it been handled by someone else it might have been gotten a better reaction
Just no, the Super needs the man, Clark needs time to be the human who grew up on a farm with a heart of gold and the attitude of a boy scout. And being the icon, the symbol of Superman's actions, Clark needs to rest, eat beef bourguignon with ketchup, spend time with his parents and his wife and son.
The problem with people like Bendis is that the comic and characters become more about him then just telling a good story. He didi it because of him. Not that he thought out a cool story line thread to follow through on with pros and cons to create a larger narrative that something like this would create.
I'm not a frequent Superman reader. I think the first Superman book I actually read was Superman and the Authority from a couple years back, which I liked. I picked up this issue because I'd read the solicitations for action comics going forward and I liked the sound of it. I actually had no idea that Superman's identity was publically known until I read that book. But I really liked the issue because it felt like peak Lex. Grandiose, yet so small and petty at the same time.
Friend: Can you believe their making Superman hide his identity again?! Me: Oh... Oh noooooo. Friend: You didn't know everyone knew Clark was Superman in the comic did you? Me: Absolutely no idea.
The fans protested when they gave him a suit without the red underpants, why would Bendis think this would work? (I avoided the whole Bendis wave, so thank you for the updates. This was all new to me.)
Oo! Oo! Sasha I have a video idea!!! How bout an episode on Calendar girl from Batman the animated series!!? I know it’s probably a difficult video to make with that probably being her only appearance ever but still! I loved what she represented and the whole episode in general! Including that scene with Calendar girl’s old agent talking with this young girl implying for her to give him “something” in return for getting her part in a show or movie!!! The whole episode felt real…?😭🤩🤩🤩🙏
I really love your videos. I'm a comic book fan but have distance myself from the medium a bit over the last 10 or so years. I was knee-deep in it for the majority of my life but unfortunately the publishing cycles of marvel and DC kind of pushed me out of it. That's why I love these videos because it gives me a bird's-eye view of what's been going on. I do still care about these characters so it is nice to know what's going on to a degree.
I think the writing was on the wall once the rogol zaar retcon happened early in Bendis's superman run. Just the idea that Krypton is no longer a tale of hubris, but of some random man-made super-solder made by Jor-El both takes the great nuance out of the planet's demise, but also drags Jor through the mud in the process. I know there's a lot of origin redo's where the superhero's parents aren't as good as they originally imagined, like maybe the Waynes were corrupt, or Jor-El had his own issues, but I think the goodness of these people as parents is important to the tragedy of their loss, since alot of the hero's their sons/daughters become are *based* on continuing their altruistic memory. Hypoleta herself has gone through her own 'evil' sorts of arcs, like Amazons Attack, but they ended up being retconned as some sort of mind control, or something. I think a lot of the changes ended up feeling like things Bendis was surprised he could change...before asking himself if he should. That, or themes took precedent over character. As for the retcon itself, I hope it sticks, but also changes. I like the chance of Superman telling people the truth, the drama of him contemplating that reveal is always great, even in the original Superman movie, it just plays into how alone he usually feels, having to keep the secret from those he loves or cares about. So, to an extent, I understand where Bendis was originally coming from, since he is about truth, and this is the one lie he has to live with. But now that it's undone as well, with the consequence of heart attacks and such..it just feels like it's still not entirely the same. I guess they'll just not address it for long enough for everyone to forget the looming heart-attack threat is the case, until someone points out 'hey, when Supes told [rando citizen] his secret during that sweet moment, shouldn't they have had a heart attack?'.... But still, it feels like one step forward, while the other foot still hasn't budged...
Secret IDs need to be looked at on a case by case basis. If Superman it works because it allows him to live among the people he loves and represents, removing it others him more when people only ever see him as a symbol. This view of his secret identity also assumes that Clark is the mask and Superman is the guy, which hasn't been the case for decades at this point, like you brought up Clark created Superman to be a public figure who can help people so that Clark didn't have to. They're still more or less the same guy at the end of the day, but the context matters. On the flip side, going the public route with Iron Man makes sense. Dude's already a self-destructive disaster who finds some way to push away the people he care for, so what's knowing he's Iron Man gonna hurt? Plus most of his villains hate Tony Stark, not Iron Man specifically since he's already a controversial public figure. Iron Man was his "bodyguard" to protect himself from all the people who at least believed he wronged them. May as well go "don't mess with me, I'm covered in weapons."
I needed no crystal ball for this. I knew they'd hit the 'factory reset' on the reveal eventually. It's like Mall Brat Diana that JMS came up with or when Bruce gave up being Batman and everyone thought he was dead and The Joker was just a guy. Or Lex as Superman in Rebirth. We alweays return to point of origin. I do still miss 10 year old Jon. The stories told about him and the Kents as a complete family were very good
I think "Bendis is Coming" is an homage to the "Kirby is Coming" ads that ran in DC comics before the return of Jack Kirby in the 1970s, beginning the run that would start Fourth World, the Demon, Kamandi etc.
I almost didnt watch the vid cuz I got such a kick out of the thumbnail each time it popped up in my feed. That screaming Supes is the stuff legendary memes are made from!
@@Pensive_Scarlet We don't know yet, we just get a panel of them standing outside his hospital room while he lies there. He could be in a coma, in critical condition, asleep or just resting his eyes.
This is why I've given up on mainstream comics. Just endless reboots and reset buttons, circling a status quo again and again. There's no real forward movement, just the illusion of excitement and change. That's why I prefer movie adaptations nowadays. At least in the MCU actors have to get old and move on sooner or later!
IMO ever needed hypnosis glasses because humans are a bunch of unobservant idiots and Clark does more than wear glasses, he changes his body language, speech patterns and such. All I ever needed to buy it as plausible was seeing Christopher reeves performance in "superman: the movie." It's an illusion. A magic trick. The only reason it appears dumb is because once you know it's a trick and how the trick works it appears obvious.
I guess if they weren't actually going to take advantage of the opportunities in having Clark be Superman openly, it makes sense to go back, and all things considered, this was a better way of doing that than, say, One More Day.
As hands off as Superman and the JL try to be while setting up protection for the Kents, Daily Planet staff, et all: their privacy was destroyed. Them not being almost immediately attacked by several villains is ludicrous. It also completely ignores how psychologically beneficial it is for Clark to have a way to interact with people in a normal way (that issue of Man of Tomorrow comes to mind...).
Bendis taking away Superman’s secret identity was like the decision to bring Jason Todd back to life. A seismic change in the status quo that DC ultimately ended up doing nothing worthwhile with to justify the decision
Something I like about the identity reveal is that it was Superman's choice. Certainly a nice change of pace from the previous time this had happened (the Truth saga from The New 52).
Lol now I just kind of want to go through all the silver age stories where Clark "revealed" his identity.
I'm really off on recent continuity, but hadn't the New 52 Superman *just* done this, for real? If so, then how did they retcon that one, just in time to go through all this again?
“Everything is canon”
new playlist time. you could even delve into other heroes lol.
@@HandofOmega New 52 was replaced in 2016
I listen to Jim Cornette, who does a lot of comparison between comics and pro wrestling stories. The only way a move is genuine, is that you don't expose it and kick out of it repeatedly. Superman secret identity revelation...lazy booking.
Really, the idea that Luthor did all this because he can't stand the world seeing Superman as anything close to human is so petty that it's brilliant.
Well it tracks cause like his whole argument was that “he’s not human and he makes me inferior because he doesn’t have to try”
Yeah, if this had to happen I’d prefer it actually be treated like this and explicitly shown as the villain’s doing rather than Superman doing it.
Wasn't Lex all about Humans being emancipated from these Godly Beings so He (Lex) can bring them towards an Utopia?
Yea It kinda plays back into that Superman the animated series episode where he refuses to believe and fires the scientitst that had actual hard data to conclude Superman was Clark Kent, stating that a being with such godlike power would never pose as a human.
I agree very in character for Lex.
I always liked the quote: "Clark is who I *am* , but Superman is what I can *do* ."
I regret to this day that the Powerless TV show (no one remembers it, but it was an Office-style sitcom set in the DCU) didn’t go with their original idea of having the cast work for Retcon Insurance Agency, protecting everyday citizens against superhero damage.
I remember it, I loved the original premise when I heard about it, changing it to Wayne Industries just killed my interest.
I loved that show, but it was just a *bit* ahead of its time, most of the public was still in the "dark and edgy" superhero stuff, before the more "silver age" style has now come back in fashion. Although I never saw the ep where Lois Lane is killed, so everyone (somehow) knows Supes will reverse time to save her, and so they have an entire free day to do whatever they want because it will all be retconned anyway!
Fun fact, the original pilot was recently found and uploaded online.
I still watch this show it was great
I remember that show! I didn't know it was actually set in the DCU. I thought it was just set in a generic superhero world when I saw the promos for it. Now I want to watch it.
It's honestly kind of hilarious that DC has essentially scrubbed Bendis' biggest shake-ups after making such a big deal about his ship jump...
Now if only they'd get rid of the trunks again...
Because they realized Bendis basically scammed them. Not a single thing he did was good. Look at how hard they tried to push Naomi
@@ExeErdna Where is he now? Kinda hard to believe he has much of a future in the industry after all this...kinda like the guys who ran Game of Thrones into the ground!
He was a big name that would have brought lots of new buyer. Too bad all his changes on the flagship character were terrible and killed tons of interesting storylines
Because Bendis was a failed experiment. DC expected him to be this big name that would lead to a huge growth in sales across the board, and instead all his stuff flopped because people had gotten tired of him and he'd become a subject of mockery like 8 years prior.
Maybe I am biased, but I actually prefer Superman as Clark Kent, it takes him out of the flying wonder and puts him in a place where he is not quite human but relatable, as he struggles to find balance in complex human interactions, despite his superhuman abilities. It is why Smallville worked so well also.
Agree
I love Smallville. When are we ever gonna get a movie Luthor the same caliber as Rosie's Luthor? Best Luthor ever is Michael Rosenbaum
I definitely feel like a core element that this is good for is that Clark is who he is. Superman is an identity he assumes. It feels kinda wrong to strip him of his humanity.
Exactly, for some reason that thought just kept escaping me while I was watching the video
But he was still Clark Kent post-reveal. Lex points that out, that people started to see him as a person like them and that insulted his ego.
@dueladent-5215 oh yeah, not saying it made CLARK not Clark. But it sort of deprived him of getting to just have a life.
The idea that one day Clark is going to want to retire, to hang up the cape and just live peacefully, is special.
Of course he'd never do it while he was needed, but once there's someone else to take care of it, him becoming JUST a family man is a great character trait.
Melding his identities makes that more impossible. He'll always be Superman to the world.
@@hartthorn on top of that. Realistically there would be a mixture of people. Like Sasha said Superman is bigger than Clark. Can you imagine trying to do a interview for your day job with some run of the mill shmoe. And they are just excited about meeting Superman? Like Sasha said there would be at least a cut back of down time.
On the flip side, people who start seeing Clark when he's Superman, would possibly take him less seriously. "You're a reporter. What makes you so qualified to tell me to surrender?" Or just personal jabs"Go back to Smallville you bumpkin." (Sarcasm) "Uh oh, he took of his glasses! He means buisness!"
It is crucial to Superman that he have a Clark Kent identity and that it be kept secret. IMHO, the retcon did not go far enough. The retcon has Superman regretting that his identity is a secret again. He should be happy it is back because he can finally have a life again. Bendis was never honest about the profound negative impact the reveal would have on Clark Kent's life. Indeed, Clark became irrelevant and suffered no ill-effects. It completely lacked verisimilitude.
Exactly, but members of his family should have actually been killed as a result of his identity being revealed.
Sounds like the reveal was more about making the character relatable to people coming out of the closet to reveal themselves as whatever. It sounds mostly political, in nature. Sometimes, writers, many people in general, really, are not honest with themselves, or others about the consequences of x action, or x person.
Also, on a related note: The idea that Supes can't have a secret identity because he doesn't lie, is a really dumb idea, because it's essentially forcing the character away from the benefits of a secret identity, just to say that Superman literally never tells lies, or a lie. If Clark wants to have a somewhat normal life, he needs a secret identity. Over the decades, it's been a part of the Superman mythos that Clark is who he really is, and Superman is the superhero, which is a reverse of Batman, who makes Bruce the mask, and Batman the true identity, depending on continuity, of course.
Perfect sum up about the "Superman all the time" happened in the DCAU "The Late Mr Kent" Clark was believed murdered by the public and the option was brought to him by Ma and Pa Kent. He said he'd go crazy if was Superman all the time. Makes sense. That much pressure, and responsibility ALL the time? Clark is able to kick back watch a game with a beer, Superman doesn't have that luxury
It's the Hannah Montana reason. Being famous while having the privacy of a normal civilian life.
@@hope-cat4894 great analogy
I'm also reminded of the Mark Waid Justice League story in which the Leaguers get separated into their hero and civilian personas a'la Kirk getting separated into good and evil halves in Enemy Within. Without Clark's humanity Superman isn't the inspiring leader or pure noble hero, but a cold post-Crisis almost Vulcan-like Kryptonian. Also the Tom King story in Up Up and Away in which they again get separated and without Clark's humanity Superman doesn't have the will needed to triumph over seemingly impossible odds. Also Superman III in which we see Clark's humanity is what gives Superman the compassion to want to help people, preventing his great power from corrupting him. Also the issue of Man of Tomorrow in which Lois has Superman casually grab a coffee at a diner as Superman to show him why he needs a secret identity to connect with people because when he shows up as Superman people just stammer at him wide eyed or get worried he's there because there's some impending disaster or - as he himself puts it when he and his parents create his secret identity in Byrne's Man of Steel mini series - all just want a piece of him. It's almost like there were many many stories that could've shown Bendis that this wouldn't work...
I think Flash at least would hang out with him
Personally the one retcon I still want to happen is the return of my boy Jonathan Samuel Kent superboy back as his little 10 year old self and for him to go back to having his fun adventures and being great friends to Damian wayne robin again but that's just my opinion.
My theory is that young Jon is still out there, and the Jon we have now is actually *Ultraman's* son, who really wants to get away from the oppressive reality of Earth 3.
@@CrisisComics What a great idea. It would be a really interesting development for Jon as a character (and Clark, who would of course still treat Jon like a son because he's Clark) AND we could have our Super Sons back. Plus, there's SO MUCH dramatic storytelling potential there.
@@CrisisComics that theory actually does make tons of sense especially given this teenage Jon Kent's action's as of late and would explain why he's not the Jonathan Samuel Kent we all know and love from the super sons, also a bonus it would give superman to finally find his real son 10 year old Jonathan Samuel Kent superboy and save him from being lost and alone and reunite father and son finally and to let Jonathan Samuel Kent superboy experience his childhood the right way.
@@TevyaSmolka The only problem that now leaves 3 no 4 "Superboy's" in DC's "main" universe and it's getting messy now. Because you have a hack being hired to "fix" things only to only do everything to make readers mad.
@@ExeErdna not really because technically speaking there were only two Superboy's conner kent and Jon kent so with that logic this means we can fix everything by deaging Jonathan Samuel Kent superboy and letting conner kent become the new superman while Jon kent gets to experience his childhood and boom problem solved everybody wins.
Great video--I learned a lot from this. In my opinion, Superman _needs_ a secret identity since one of the main ways to threaten him is through his friends and family. If you take away his secret identity, you take away one of the main opportunities for dramatic tension. And Superman just is Clark to a certain extent. He's one of the best-adjusted DC heroes. He'd be perfectly happy just having a quiet life with his family, but he knows he has a higher calling as long as there are people who need his help. I agree that this retcon handles things pretty well (making it happen in a way that is more or less faithful to the universe's ground rules without breaking stuff).
Yeah but isn't Lois constantly in danger anyway?
@@prion42Yeah but that’s incidental, if he revealed you’d get a problem where they go specifically after every person close to Clark. Lois is in trouble partially because she’s a reporter who gets close to the story, and partially because people know that she has some kind of relationship with Supes.
*Superman: Warworld* was the best Superman comic I've read in years. Really showed why he's the super-man, other than the big muscles.
Yet, even with the improvements made into Johnathan Kent's character I'm still haunted by Bendis' dark & strange shift in direction...
Thanks Doctor Manhattan...
Honest to God, I first thought that the ‘Bendis Is Coming’ advertisements were fanart made by people as a warning for other fans to jump ship.
The idea of Clark throwing away his Clark identity immediately reminds me of when Clark did similarly in Smallville. Although rather than revealing his identity to everybody, he simply let Clark disappear and became "The Blur" full-time. However it didn't feel as cynical there. In fact, it more was used to show why Clark *needs to be Clark.* He can't keep going if he forsakes the person he grew up as. The *human* he grew up as. Superman is the uniform that Clark Kent puts on in order to go to work and help people in the best way he can, but it's not *WHO* he is.
It seems clear to me though that Bendis here is very emblematic of what's happened to comics and related media more and more over years and years. A lot of writers treat the characters and comics they write more like vessels to shove their own thoughts into and lecture the reader or viewer. They distort the characters however they want in order to conform to *them,* even when it hurts the result. For one thing I think Bendis' monologue recounted here shows that he's thinking mostly of himself and being so grandiose with his philosophy and morals, and barely actually thinking of the result for Superman, or even making a good story.
People used to try to make good stories that could be enjoyed by all. Now they use these beloved characters like skinsuits to yell at clouds about anything they don't like.
4:44 Don't mind me. I'm just leaving this timestamp here to see cute, smiling Clark showing off his logo design skills. 😍
And this wasn’t a retcon - which is retroactive continuity - but a return to the status quo
I've always been a huge fan of the drama that secret identites can have. So I'm actually kind of happy that Clark's reveal got retconned. Same with Jon. I feel like there's more interesting stories ( for me ) there.
I actually really wish Jay had forgotten and we could have gotten to see if he liked Jon or his cape, but the world refuses to give me an interesting Jay lol
It's interesting to me that superhero stories in other mediums seem to be getting rid of the concept...I think it's the notion that you're splitting the cast, between those who work with the hero in costume and their civilian friends and family, who have no reason to interact with the larger story now. That may work in comics, but not so well when you're dealing with actual *actors*, so we end up with things like "Team Flash", where literally EVERYone the hero knows is also his superhero support team! Also, MCU Spider-Man...How long before this trend makes it into the comics?
@@CasuallyComics Remember when we all thought Jay might be a secret villain using Jon? 😅 Showing if Jay actually likes Jon or just likes his powers would have been a good idea.
@@HandofOmega I think secret identities only really work for clark and batman, flash should defo not have it, its useless and basically everybody knows.
@@CasuallyComics I totally agree. This would have been a great test of the relationship. After all, with a healthy love, there has to be trust. Jay has been a bit shady about his past. Putting the shoe on the other foot, having Jay realize that he doesn't (and can't) know Young Superman's other life, something hidden from him out of necessity--would that be a strain? Would this cause them both to step back and reassess the relationship? Would this actually cause them to break up and seek new partners, or would they reconcile? Would a breakup be the catalyst for Jon to admit that, yes, he needs therapy for all he's gone through? Sadly, I don't think that they would ever go this route, as that would be stepping on Tom Taylor's toes. It'd be a nice challenge for the writers, though.
Superman and Lois has come right up to the edge of questioning the ethics of Superman's secret ID, but I would love to get into Lois' rationalization of the conflict between being a Reporter, whose calling is to reveal The Truth to the public, no matter what, and keeping one of the biggest secrets on the planet because she's personally invested in it. Either way, she's deciding for people what they should know...sounds like there's a story there! (and actually, I'd never heard the coffee table joke before!)
I feel like is an issue to easy to solve. Her job as a reporter is to investigate news and people who need to hide their identidies is really not news.
"in other news, person who reported on the joker and placed into witness protection is currently living in ohio"
-lois kent
@@edselcervantes6229 The real ethical problem is that reporters are supposed to reveal if they have a personal connection to the subject they're reporting on. Like, if someone writes an article on a new tech company that's sweeping the market, when they also own stock in that company, and so stand to profit by raising its profile in the press. In that scenario, the reporter either needs to include a disclaimer explaining their connection to the company (so readers can take this potential source of bias into account), or they need to just not report on it, and leave the story for someone else.
In Lois & Clark's case, any time Lois wrote about Superman while being married to Superman, or Clark wrote about Superman while BEING Superman, they were presenting themselves as objective reporters, while concealing a relationship to their subject that made them FAR from objective. That's a big journalistic ethics no-no.
@@edselcervantes6229 Lois didn't PUT the guy in witness protection, tho, it was the authorities that did that, she's just reporting on it. The issue is Lois taking it upon herself to decide what the public should and shouldn't know, without any official authority to do so...She's far from impartial, she's involved in MAKING the news here, and refuses to disclose her investment in it. At the very least, it could be argued that she should simply refuse to cover Superman related stories, for this very reason...
@@ravenwilder4099
Most stories have it be known that Lois and the rest of the Daily Planet crew are friends with Superman that's not a secret or anything, Lois being married to him is and even there again Superman having a thing for her is usually shown to be common knowledge.
I don't get it. Why can't Superman have his privacy? Are people not entitled to that anymore?
As someone who's read comics for as long as I have, there's always been this push and pull between advancing a character forward and returning/retconning back to status quo. For a character like Superman or Spider-Man, whose publishing history will likely go on forever, there will always be the tension between moving forward and retreating backward. Stan Lee always talked about creating the illusion of change; these days that means writers will try to make radical changes but put all the toys back in the box for the next writer. Sometimes changes stick, otherwise Peter Parker would still be dating Betty Brant. There's some enjoyment to be found in seeing how creative a retcon can be in resetting the status quo; as mindwipes go this is more aesthetically pleasing than "a wizard/the Devil did it", so yay for the current Superman team?
Comics usually follow a "use it or lose it" approach to changes sticking. If it doesn't interest following writers, it's gone sooner or later. The uninteresting ones that stick around are often editorial pet projects.
I have a love-hate relationship with this system. On the one hand, it fixed this wasted potential, giving us lost story types and leaving room for a more inspired writer to try it again some day. On the other, it creates a push-and-pull between different generations of writers trying to bring things back to their favorite era and no one is trained to build off of bad ideas when they can ignore them, wasting potential in its own right.
@@BrandonVout The lure of fannish nostalgia is always risky. Retreading past stories more often than not leads to the same-old same-old. I kind of prefer someone taking a bold swing at something new, even if it doesn't work, but on the other hand there are very few modern stories that give me the same thrill I got when I first started reading comics, so maybe I'm too old and jaded, lol.
I like a lot of what Bendis has written (even some of the things that many people loathe), but he is definitely more author-oriented than character/world-oriented, and he seems to have a nasty habit of dropping bombshells and then leaving it to other people to explore the repercussions...That is a very dangerous position to put yourself in, because it makes the evaluation of YOUR work almost entirely dependent upon the subsequent work of other people. It also kind-of baffles me, personally, because writing about the *consequences* of something seems much more interesting to me than just writing the set-up.
That's why if I came after anything he did I would retcon it. He doesn't give enough meat to a character before moving on and expecting people to deal with it is very toxic. Like he's not even doing whole arcs for something he claims to put "a lot of pride into"
This gets into an issue I had with his dc work espwcially. The stories were sometimes all introduction of a new concept or character but little to no meat to make them satisfying stories on their own. Heck sometimes it was so just build up I didnt feel there was a story.
Examples would be event leviathan, a shitty badly designed mystry that ends on the reveal with no other sastifying elemwnt added. Tk see the actual story you had to reaf a new title. Theres also a lot of his first arcs with villians, even the ones I liked like the invisible mafia and its red cloud enforcer.
From what I saw, he's got concepts, not stories.
BMB: " Hey, what if we turned Superman into a Giant Robot?".
DC: "OK, go ahead. You're our guy".
BMB does.
DC: "Okay, Brian, we've turned him into a Giant Robot. What now?".
BMB: " IDK, bye".
@@ExeErdna Yeah...And it's really unfortunate that he does this so often, too, because he had several long runs on series at Marvel where he DID bother to dig in and explore beyond the initial reveals, but he's built up a reputation to just set-up thin concepts and move on. Plus, doing the set-up and then expecting other people to flesh it out is really obnoxious, like you said.
@@gregcourtney751 I tend to agree. It feels like his stint at DC amounted to, "I'm gonna make sure I've touched every major character I possibly can, so that I can say on my résumé that I've written them." The end of his time at Marvel kind-of turned into that as well...As if it was more about saying he'd written for every character and getting his name in the "Special Thanks" section of the movie credits than it was about writing a compelling story about characters he clicked with.
After all that Bendis did to the status quo of Superman when he joined DC, most of it is gone... except for the changes to Jon, he made sure they couldn't just "kintsugi" him back together.
A character I’ve noticed that is surprisingly difficult to write is Punisher. The character is supposed to be a broken man who is well aware he’s a bad guy, and openly hates doing what he does. Whenever you get writers who have hard opinions about antiheroes (O’Niel / Bendis) he’s often portrayed as a monosyllabic psychopath with no personality outside of loving to kill people
This is something I've noticed with a lot of Marvel. They take a "human" aspect of them like a tragic point in their life and make that the character. That's why Punisher became so bad and even Spider-Man has been in some awful arcs. I can admit Superior Spider-Man was legit good progression after the shit show which was "One More Day".
Punisher being a villain shooting psycho isn't Castle. Spider-Man being broke and lonely forever isn't good for Peter.
Hey Nick do you watch ComicPop as well?
Very good point. Personally, I always find Frank Castle's humanity and best-written runs in this weird tension that exists between bone-deep weariness and an irresistible drive toward revenge. The Punisher is a man who gets up and kills rooms full of criminals every day because he feels that's all he is and all he has to offer the world anymore, and he's damned good at it, but he'd give up the rest of his life living like that in an instant if he could just enjoy just 5 more seconds with his family. He wants to quit, but can't, and that makes him both tragic and fearsome.
Marvel is basically apologizing for the Punisher's existence for some years now. They reduced him from a very complex, interesting character to a one note psychopath. They would get rid of him If they could.
@@ExeErdna I hated Superior at the time, and now i'm willing to admit that It was a solid comic, specially compared with shit like one more day.
I believe Bendis style of writing could work well if there were more an overview of it, pulling things out that doesn't work and put things that does work in his own terms. Like the whole problem of Iron heart and Spider Morales that they started of what they are with no set plan for character development until future writers make it. Or not thinking ahead of what the audience of super Jon kent would react of Jon being older, technically not being friends with Damien anymore, and the whole dynamic of the duo. Just to give him a love Intrest out of no where, and attempting to be friends with Tim Drake and Dick Grayson.
It just feels like there isn't much of a road map for these characters, just ideas being put in too early
I think there's a trend somewhat broadly in comics of the past few years of ideas being put in too early, and I think it's a symptom of another issue. It seems to me that a lot of comics are just going from one big story to the next from arc to arc, and that sort of thing pushes out time for gradual development. It's harder to find time in a story for gradual development when it constantly has to be the biggest story in recent memory. With that lack of time, writes have to introduce any ideas they have in a big way, which isn't always what an idea needs to thrive.
And now we're in a place where if you're still complaining about it you need to move on and like, ... no!!! you ruined our favorite character and then now forced him into a new direction in, gave him a role that was completely unearned, ignored the rest if the Superman family, and robbed us of countless stories in moments.
Dc been constantly from Son of Kal-el and Dark Crisis trying to make Jon more mature and give him Superman moments with Clark it doesn't feel real because of how artificial his age up was and that This is the same person who Basically gave Jon away 2 times because Bendis just didn't want to write about him
Although this being comics all it'll take it the wace of a hand, to get the Jon we actually like back as a 14 🏳️🌈 superboy.
Since its clear that Bendis just does better on "street level" characters and teams, and should never have been given something like Superman (as anyone who read his Avengers already knew)...What DC book WOULD have been a genuinely good fit for him?
@@HandofOmega signal maybe or the outsiders he does like his diversity which isn't a knock at him but when it's originals character well we have many examples already.
@@velemamba260 Yeah, I still miss the earlier triangle era: just weekly story progression, fleshed out supporting characters, Metropolis feeling like a real setting...
Superman is a celebrity in the DC universe. Does that mean that he forfeits his right to a private life? I ask this because I think the idea that Superman was not being truthful because he had a secret identity ignores the fact that everyone has a secret identity. We all have boundaries, things that we keep from others. He's Superman. He's the world's most famous superhero. Does that fame mean that he should be treated differently in that aspect? If this wasn't a Superman story, if this was a C level Superhero or an every-man character, I'm not sure people would be equating him keeping a secret identity to him lying to the world.
Sums up part of why the reveal fell off to me as she was explaining it having never heard it
One of the things missing from a lot of modern Superman stories that was more highlighted in the silver and bronze ages was the idea of a god trying to live as a man. That as much as clark wanted to be a part of humanity he could never fully be one of them.
I mean think of stories like for the man who has everything where he has to give up the life he always wanted, with a family and a place he belongs, because his sense of duty to humanity is that strong. Makes him seem a lot more heroic right?
Nowadays he pretty much has everything he ever wanted with no cost. Worse even, in stories like injustice he comes across like someone whose only a hero because his life is good, which stops the second thats taken away from him. It strips the character of a lot of depth in my opinion.
So Superman finally has his own"One More Day"?
Yeah, but they didn’t have to sell his marriage for this, so it’s better.
@@mr.goblin6039
Lex: "I want your marriage!"
Clark: "Will you take Brian Michael Bendis instead?"
Lex: "I am pretty sure I'm getting ripped off.....but all right."
The moment they announced Superman would reveal his identity, the question was not IF they would retcon it back, but how long till they did.
Just like pretty much every shake up in the status quo in comics.
Personally i am glad they restored superman secret identity because lets be real here the whole superman revealing his identity to the world was just a horrible idea from day one especially from bendis who clearly had no idea what the hell he was doing and just didn't care at least in my opinion.
My favorite Clark/Lois secret identity joke:
Lois: Man, Batman sure has gained a lot of weight?
Clark: Looks like we should call him *takes off glasses* Fatma-
Lois: OH MY GOD ITS SUPERMAN
Pretty good
Wasn't the "Bendis is coming" a shout out to "Kirby is HERE!"? Maybe I'm just reading into things...
If that's what they were going for then they flopped hard, IMO. Also I think that's a connection stretch a bit too far even by comic fan standards, which is saying something.
@@bobdude7111 Yeah, it was a pretty audacious comparison to make, since Bendis is no Kirby. But hype is hype.
I took it as a warning but that probably wasnt the intent.
I quite like secret identities. Especially in the modern age, with how parasocial relationships are such a big thing and how easy it would be for common folk and villains to know where a hero is All the Time. And like Sasha says being a hero all the time would suck for that person. I think it could be used well with certain stories and characters, but I'm just not all that interested in those characters myself haha
It's a good move. I still mourn Tomasi's run on Superman. It was such a nice balance between man, family, and Superhero.
RIP Tomasi's Supersons (yeah, I'm still doing it).
To me, the question of whether any hero has and keeps a secret identity ought to rest on two things: their personality and their circumstances. Tony Stark is super-rich and essentially lives in a techno-fortress (and is therefore super-protected), is already famous as Tony Stark, and has an ego bigger than a Hulkbuster armor. It makes perfect sense that he'd get tired of fibbing about something that he'd rather take honest credit for. Batman could be similarly protected in terms of his circumstances, but his personality is all wrong for a reveal -- he's an introvert who would likely loathe the celebrity that would come from being publicly outed, not because of what it'd do to Bruce Wayne, but because of how it would de-mythologize Batman and rob him of his intimidation factor.
I think Superman and Spider-Man are alike in that although they personally might find it almost a relief for the world to know their identity -- it would simplify certain aspects of their complicated "civilian" lives tremendously -- but both of these heroes very conscientiously wanted to keep their identity secret out of respect for their loved ones. Not only as a matter of safety, but of wanting to have a happy shelter of family to return to that's separate and protected from the bruises and scrapes (reputational and literal) that they take every day as superheroes. I can't imagine Supes would have revealed he was Clark to the world without agonizing over what it might mean for Lois and Jon, to the point he never would have voiced the idea out loud, much less acted on it. I personally suspect you hit the nail on the head that Bendis's reasoning was actually pretty simple but also very personal for him: he doesn't like or appreciate the idea of people keeping secrets (of any sort) and he wanted to shake things up. That worked for him, but I'm not sure it worked for Superman, and I'm personally glad for the retcon. In a weird way, the hypnotic suggestion actually opens the door to a best-ever explanation for how Clark's "glasses disguise" could actually work. Moving forward, a vague hypnotic suggestion that "No, Clark Kent is definitely NOT Superman" in the minds of all humanity makes the otherwise-thin disguise seem much more plausible.
You touched on something that has bothered me a lot for a while now, which is writers being put on books or given projects who don't really care about the character who is supposedly the focus of the book. It's like, a writer has a story they want to tell, and they figure that if they can make it about [Character X] they can get it published, so they shoehorn that character into it. One would hope that editors would be able to clamp down on stuff like that, but they don't seem to. It's particularly suspicious when a new writer comes in and changes major things that have been part of the story forever---the Superman reveal is a big recent one, but it seems like almost every character death for a long time is also falling into that category. The core characters of the DCU are important in that milieu and should not be lightly played with that way. I am a big fan of Bendis' writing generally but I was disappointed with his tenure at DC because instead of taking over Superman and telling Superman stories for a few years he started almost immediately shaking up fundamental parts of the universe. On the other hand, that is the DC model anymore.
My experience with Bendis has seemingly always been akin to going to the toilet and seeing crap in the urinal. It's like, "why did you think this was ok?"
Been feeling that recently
I have to agree that's the best way to say it. It's like a massive turd in the small urinal so everybody can see it. Bendis is PROUD about his bad choices that people have to retcon because it makes their job harder.
Same
I present to you all an example of Bendis' dialog:
Teen #1: "Bendis is a hack!"
Teen #2: "Bendis?"
Teen #1: "Yeah, Bendis."
Teen #2: "A hack?"
Teen #1: "Yeah, a hack."
Teen #2: "Really? A hack? Bendis?"
Teen #1: "Yeah, really. Bendis. A hack."
I was going into Bendis Era @ announcement cautiously optimistic. Was was willing to overlook the Krypton retcon in Man of Steel after ending it with the tease of no more Secret ID and the possibilities. Then Superman and AC issues started coming out, all issues before the big reveal feeling like Leviathan set up. GA was cancelled to be used in his Leviathan story. Then Jon got aged up. Then Legion was not what I hoped for. Then the reveal at #18. No real follow up aside from Bendis making other series and corners of the DCU. It was my first DC rough patch since starting to collect in 2016...
I have the entire Bendis run of Superman bagged and boarded in long boxes. I read them all, and after it, I can say honestly that your take on this plot line is correct. Telling the world "I am Superman," needed to be the start of a ten to twenty book arc. Who dies? Who hates him now? Who suddenly loves him for it? If Bendis had taken the time, he could have played with the idea of Clark coming out like a members of the LGBQ+ community have to. Finding out that Superman felt like a liar when he was playing Clark Kent could have be powerful, but instead, we got nothing. That is the legacy of Bendis at DC. A few great ideas, some okay ones, some really bad ones, one unforgivable one. SUPER SONS FOREVER!!!! But none of them every mattering. He never did anything with his twists, with his stories. All of Bendis work is just sound and fury, signifying nothing. The only good that came from Superman #18 is Action Comics 1050. The best thing about the Bendis run, is someone else fixing it. Thanks for the great video.
A superhero hides his identity for very different reasons than an LGBT person does. A hero hides his identity to protect those around him not to protect himself from being stigmatized.
@@indyatmn420 this sentence is genius. it would be very interesting to see a story of a hero who is lgbt
for example jon himself jon is lgbt and his identity is still secret but while he was superboy he kisses his boyfriend and a reporter saw it and reported it.
now everyone knows that superboy is lgbt and this becomes big news, causing reactions of support and prejudice.
Jon doesn't know how to deal with this, not just because he's getting a lot of attention and harassment, but because it's Superboy who came out of the closet, not Jon Kent,
and he feels he's starting to see the effects being Superboy is having on his life.
I think it could work, but the problem is that Clark Kent isn’t the disguise, Superman is. It would be interesting if they temporarily renamed the series “Clark” instead of Superman, and it wouldn’t be uncommon for him to do super heroics in a baggy suit instead of always changing.
Personally though, I think that it’s a good idea, but it wouldn’t work as well as with other heroes. I could see it working pretty well for Green Arrow, especially since he has a history of left leaning story telling.
The mild-mannered secret identity is as vital to Superman's legend as his Kryptonian origins. In many ways, Clark is the better man, who knows the truth, but sometimes must keep it quiet to protect others. He understands that self-aggrandizement would be easy. And disastrous.
Superman reveals his identity to the world and it leads to new and exciting stories dealing with this change and one of the most direct repercussions is Joker War, a Batman story.
I'm not sure that's how that's supposed to work.
The idea that wanting to have a secret identity is unrealistic is honestly baffling to me. I would think doxxing would be more well-known at this point.
Wasn't there a story where an old woman saw Superman as her guardian angel, who would always save her so she would do things like deliberately provoke gangsters into attacking her, so that they would get stopped by Supes (who kinda got used to "listening out" for her)? And one day he was in outer space and she got hurt, and I think it got into the issues of "can he be Superman and doing good ALL the time, or does everyone, even Superman, deserve some private time to himself?" After all, if he really doesn't NEED to eat and sleep, then is it inherently irresponsible of him to NOT be Superman most of the time? Is he responsible for all the things that he COULD have stopped, if he weren't hanging out with Lois or Jimmy?
Now that has always been an interesting question I would love to read more of that if you know where I can find it
I want to read it
There are tonnes of stories about people putting themselves in danger to get Superman's attention, often due to a cult worshipping him.
He is there to catch us, not to carry us
Astro City digs pretty deep into those kind of questions with their Superman expy, the Samaritan.
I loathe Bendis so much ... not just for this, but largely, yes -- for this. Anyone who jokes or ridicules, "Can't they just look at Clark and see that he's Superman?!" simply does not understand the character, and should not be writing him. In fact, they don't understand superheroes in general, but especially this -- the original, prototypical superhero.
Because that is the WHOLE POINT -- THEY DON'T LOOK AT CLARK! If they did, yes -- they would see that he's Superman. His disguise is not the glasses, and it's not predicated on any actual dishonesty on his part. His disguise is other people's confirmation bias.
It's a statement about the human condition, about human nature -- how we tend to only see what we expect to see. There are some deep psychological, philosophical and theological truths in this paradigm.
It works best with the Clark-Lois-Superman love triangle: His primary motivation as a character is to be accepted as a human, by humans, on human terms, most acutely in the person of Lois who -- as the star reporter for the Daily *Planet*, is representative of the world itself. He desperately loves her and wants to be accepted by her, but as Superman, she worships him, and he can only reciprocate if she loves him as an equal, not as a god. So, he divests himself of everything 'super' and comes to her on her terms, as an equal, but in so doing ... he is beneath her notice. She's too distracted by her infatuation with Superman to even notice Clark Kent. There is an allegory here for God's love of humanity and humanity's rejection of Him in the person of Christ, but it also resonates with every nerdy teenaged boy who can't get the attention of the girl he loves who is too smitten by the football captain to notice him.
For Bendis to wave that aside and to turn it into an enactment of a gay person "coming out" betrays his fundamental misapprehension of this character and what he means ... In fact, DC Comics as a company appears not to understand anymore what these characters are about.
I also like the vibe that Superman is there to protect Clark and not his loved ones. To allow him to be human and do his life away from the limelight
I love this channel so much. As a lifelong fan of comics, I really appreciate how much thinking you put into your video essays!
My favorite ever retcon: Isaiah Bradley super soldier serum testing. Honorable mentions: the millions of times Polaris was and then wasnt magnetos daughter. Pietro and Wanda being siblings and Magneto's children. Magnetos full name. Namors oxygen in the blood related insanity. Earth X before they ruined it.
Reverse retcons. The powers the removed from Magneto and Professor Xavier like Magentos ability to astral project and Xaviers helicopter than ran on the power of his mind ( or was it a car?).
On the subject of wasted potential, if we're insisting on this coming out metaphor, why not use it? Commit, my biggest problem with this era is that it committed to none of the ramifications of this decision
Was Jon, a bisexual, not upset about being outed? He definitely didn't want this, everything he says in his own book makes it seem like he should be upset with his dad about it, but we never get him saying that to his father. Superman also met apollo during this era, and Apollo had a whole speech about how Clark inspired him, we could have put a line about it somewhere in that. They touched upon this once in an anthology book then never again.
Gay metaphors are so varied and versatile yet so personal, there's really so much you can do. Buffy alome got away with doing several episodes that were obvious gay metaphors. It really felt like they didn't want to approach this from any angle other than "it happened, let's move on"
Thank you!!!!
I DESPISED Bendis´s change!
For the most part, DC´s characters have secret indetities...as silly as they may seem (Superman/Wonder Woman/Black Canary...) but they do. So, keeep them!
...more so since it was done in New 52!
Does Wonder Woman currently have a secret identity? She mostly hasn't since 1987...
@dupersuper1938 Right now she doesn't have a secret identity. It can't work for Wonder Woman because she's a ambassador to the world.
I can see valid points on both ends of the scale, but I personally prefer Superman having a secret identity. Simply put it means that anyone who knows Clark Kent and superman are one in the same is either intelligent enough to connect the dots no one can or is willing to see, or alternatively Superman trusted that individual enough to share his biggest secret. If everyone knows Clark Kent is Superman, then there’s no impact when someone refers to him as Clark.
Also on a logical level Superman revealing his secret identity puts everyone he knows and loves in harms way. Whether it’s super villains or Amanda Waller, what stopping powerful individuals from holding Superman‘s family hostage unless the man of steel does what they want?
Also if superman is a character wants to have a little bit of privacy, why can’t he? If the world knows he’s super man no one will ever let him have a moment to himself in public. Clark Kent wouldn’t be able to go to a restaurant without dozens of people wanting an autograph from Superman. (I understand the argument that a character who stands for truth should be honest, but I feel people are entitled to some privacy.)
Edit: I will admit this, the superhero revealing their identity publicly can work in certain context. For example I think the idea of Tony Stark having a public identity as Iron Man works for him because realistically Tony can afford the greatest security and private buildings money can buy for anyone he cares about and since he’s no stranger to being the center of attention, it makes sense with his story that he without himself as Iron Man and then later see the repercussions of making such a decision (just look at any time stark tower has been attacked because of his identity as Iron Man.) but again I feel this works better for Tony because it matches his character to casually reveal such life-changing information. He’s a lot more reckless than someone like Superman.
How about the good old: "Bobby, I had a terrible Dream" Retcon method :D
Oh all I heard was bendis and said oh god not him
A really interesting concept to me: who knows him as A) Kal-el B) Clark C) Superman. Each is a different person yet the same person. It would be based on relationships.
That's a angle that would be interesting.
I tend to assume the "true" Persona is the one he has when talking to those who knows the full story, Like Lois. He doesn't have to act "as Clark" or "as Superman" he is just himself.
I like scene where Superman and Batman have a conversation where they call each other "Clark" and "Bruce".
At least when Supermans identity was put back in the bottle, Neither of the Supermen forgot (Glares at Flash Ignition)
comparing supermans secret identity reveal to essentially coming out the closet and not having him really tackel any issues around doing that is a really weird thing, people lose friends, family disown them, they make new friends or stronger friendships, peoples opinions shift on topics, "oh i dont really like them superheros but that clark kent is such a sweet guy he helped me carry my groceries up the stairs maybe they aint so bad" and to basically do none of that is really fucking boring, like until seeing this video i didnt even know he went public thats how little impact it must have had
I felt this didn't work simply, as opposed to Batman, Clark was the being and Superman was the "Suit". They killed the person and only the projection remained. Clark was our narrator, our window of insight into the demigod. Ultimately this came down to forcing the story line on a character it was unsuited for.
I'm so happy about this
I love the adult Jon Kent Superman stories. It's some of the best writing in contemporary comics. I loved young Jon too, but the transition was a great idea. Super kid was always a short-run concept.
First time commenting on your channel. Just wanted to say that I enjoy your take on the sometimes absurd world of comics. You take a fairly even-keeled approach, contrary to some of the other commentators in this area.
Around the end of the New 52, with Lois Lane revealing Clark's identity, I believe that sales tanked. Nobody liked the direction it was taking, the subsequent power-down and the increase in edginess for Clark. Superman comics were like a house that had been victim of one too many frat parties.
For Rebirth, they brought back some of the old guard and got things back to code, so to speak. There was room to expand, but everything was on a solid foundation.
Bendis...certainly shook things up. He also did not address certain plot threads that he raised, leaving it to the next person to figure out.
Am I glad that the secret identity is back? Yes. Did I wish that an OMD-like plot device didn't have to be used? Yes.
Anyway, love the channel and how you're not going down the rabbit hole of constantly griping.
Something I'm interested in, though I can see them just not dealing with it at all, is that while Jon Kent's identity is back under wraps, Jay Nakamura is still very publicly dating Superman the Younger. Could cause some interesting bumps in their relationship, though like I said, I'm actually doubtful they'll address it at all.
@@Superlad94 I was thinking more that if Jay suddenly starts going around with Jon Kent, people are going to assume he's cheating on Superman.
So, the reset causes anyone encountering historical information about Clark being Superman to mentally reject the information. What about the unborn when the reset was implemented? Having escaped the reset, will they be able to correctly interpret the information when they are born and have attained an age where they can, say, read?
It makes no sense. I'm just going to say that after lex did his thing, superman said "screw it" and let oracle wipe the internet about everything relating to him being superman.
Just one of those comics things they expect you to roll with.
Kinda like on TITANS, Dick Grayson attacks a bunch of cops and goes to prison, where he attacks more cops. Then, one day, he's out of prison. No explanation. Not even a throw away line about Bruce Wayne pulling some strings with Amanda Waller.
You can fret about it. Or, you can just enjoy the ride.
I would love if they brought these up years from now when those infants would be old enough to find out that there was a global conspiracy to mindwipe the planet to cover up superman's secret identity. Imagine the fallout that writers would never realistically explore.
From me this was covered in Batman TAS "Over The Edge". All villians did lawsuits, law enforcement raided the hero's home, the hero's close ones were targeted for arrest/death & the hero had nowhere to hide.
X-Men TAS and Spider-Man TAS so satisfyingly did retcons to the Dark Phoenix and Black Cat. It made both characters make more sense. Making BC a super soldier recipient and making TDP destroy an uninhabited planet did wonders in giving Felicia's powers and why sh has them make sense and Jean still redeemable.
I'm not sure retcon is the right term for different takes in completely separate adaptations in other media...
@dupersuper1938 I think it is because they had the opportunity to look at both situations in hindsight. That is what good retcons typically do. I think that's what a good adapted character does. It omits things that don't work in the source material and focus and expand on the things that do and have hindsight to understand what makes sense (that's technically a retcon). That was why the MCU were so successful when they began.
@@jaymesEo6 Except it's not technically a retcon. The term retcon is a shortening of retroactive continuity. No past continuity is change in the reinterpretation of a new iteration with it's own bran new continuity.
@dupersuper1938 That's not actually true. This is the modern way Google describes retcons and is more accurate to modern understanding of the term:
(in a film, television series, or other fictional work) a piece of new information that imposes a different interpretation on previously described events, typically used to facilitate a dramatic plot shift or account for an inconsistency.
Though my way of viewing it isn't exactly. This, more often than not, retcons just change information previously given with hindsight being 20/20.
@@jaymesEo6 Yes, and some current dictionaries accept the opposite of literally as a definition for literally. I'm just going to stick with the actual word. Though even by that google definition it's not a retcon as there were no previously described events in the universe of those cartoons to shed new light on. The only way your definition works is if you consider any change in a completely new interpretation a retcon, in which case the BBC Sherlock series retconned the original Conan Doyle stories and retcon now means the exact same thing as reboot.
While I dislike the return to status quo, it's not like they did anything interesting with the outing of Superman's identity, and I find the storyline itself pretty well-done; I'd rather it be another grand-level Lex scheme than another universal reset. My only real problem with it is Lex begging for his life at the end after Superman reveals his power upgrade. Lex has faced down Darkseid, come on.
"Use it or lose it" is the law of the land in comics. If it doesn't interest subsequent writers, it's either gone sooner or later, or it's an editorial pet project that sticks around for years.
Really says something that I knew a bunch of the other dramatic twists since 2018 in the Superman books, but did not really know that he’d revealed his identity until literally this vid.
First I have to admit that I am one who was not aware of what Bendis did…also I’m firmly in the belief that unlike Bruce , Clark is who He is , Superman is what He can/ does do…I like that it is being retconned, but IMO it could have been done so much less convoluted by say having Mr.Mxyzptlk say He is not as fun to mess with, without the secret Identity & make everyone forget 🤷🏾♂️…Keep Up The Outstanding Work Sasha 🖖🏾
All we need now is to de age Jon back to a reasonable age, 14, or whatever Damian is to get the Supersons back in some form.
Because anything else is just unsatisfying and frankly doesn't really work.
Fun adventures of The supersons is better than
Son of Kal-el "My father is Superman and now ... so am I" (cue slow music)
RANT INCOMING
DC forced him into Superman and then essentially rewrote reality and ignored most of the other members of Superfam (kara and Connor) to try (and fail) to make him Clark's version of Nightwing
Considering Jon's place amongst the rest of the Superman Family (who Should be both older and more experience than he is) this is like if Damien Wayne was suddenly put ahead of Dick Jason Barbara and Timothy. Plus, now that Clark's back, what can they even do with Jon?
He's turning him into electric blue Superman and having him fight Ultraman (because We're keeping that stupid Earth 3 nonsense Bendis made but then ignored the tramua for)
OK, now what, He still has no childhood, no teen titans, nothing left to learn, Jon's been through 2 crisis and fought doomsday and darksied (at least Batman’s plot armor is earned) What else is there now?
Kara, Connor, Steel, and Kenan all have unquie roles to play. Jon has no actual life or direction outside of "being Superman too," but there were endless storylines for him as a kid.
Heck, even Superboy-Prime has more stories you can tell with him than adult Jonathan.
Also, the Bendis stuff just made Clark and Lois terrible parents.
I'm currently reading Bendis' run on Superman for the first time but I had to watch this considering all the controversy I've read about it. I am reminded of the 1991 Action Comics annual that was part of the Armageddon 2001 event - we see a potential future where not only is Superman's identity revealed but he also winds up getting elected President. Although that was just a what-if type story that wound up not happening, it was well-written and positive - it played out changes in Clark and Lois' lives, some in great detail and others in quickie broad strokes, and it worked because the annual-length story and imaginary what-if nature allowed the writer to really explore just how far an "out" Superman could be taken (and still keep things upbeat instead of going grimdark). I still will finish Bendis' run, but this video does make me wonder if yeah, despite his skills as a storyteller, if maybe Bendis was putting a little too much of himself first instead of it being a more honest exploration of "ok let's really do this and see what happens", especially if he wasn't willing to explore consequences. It doesn't make the idea inherently bad, and it sounds like it was well done up until the actual reveal was committed... it just feels like he didn't have a fully-thought out plan for after. And that's being generous given his years of good work, because if he's really equating Superman's secret identity to, say, homosexual and transgender people keeping their true selves secret, that smacks of privilege. Now, by that same token, the current writers doing the retcon, THEY could have been bolder in KEEPING the identity reveal and exploring consequences more in-depth.
Superman losing his secret identity had potential, sadly it was handled by Bendis who was waaaaay out of his element (street leve heroes is where he's decent and even there he can screw it up: See RiRi Williams) he handled both Superman and Legion of Heroes titles, set up a lot of ideas that never came to fruition or had disappointing payoffs (that red cloud fire Villán and secret organisation come to mind) hell he even did his own D.C. Riri Williams in the shape of Naomi (who was handled well until her powers became the Uno reverse card for almost anything on her book or any others where she was a main part) had it been handled by someone else it might have been gotten a better reaction
Just no, the Super needs the man, Clark needs time to be the human who grew up on a farm with a heart of gold and the attitude of a boy scout.
And being the icon, the symbol of Superman's actions, Clark needs to rest, eat beef bourguignon with ketchup, spend time with his parents and his wife and son.
I’m so glad I’m not the only one that remembers the punching of reality resurrected Jason Todd. 😊
The problem with people like Bendis is that the comic and characters become more about him then just telling a good story. He didi it because of him. Not that he thought out a cool story line thread to follow through on with pros and cons to create a larger narrative that something like this would create.
Wait….that wallflower Kent IS Superman!?! This changes everything!!! Next, you’ll be telling me Lois Lane is Wonder Woman! (would explain a lot)
I'm not a frequent Superman reader. I think the first Superman book I actually read was Superman and the Authority from a couple years back, which I liked. I picked up this issue because I'd read the solicitations for action comics going forward and I liked the sound of it. I actually had no idea that Superman's identity was publically known until I read that book. But I really liked the issue because it felt like peak Lex. Grandiose, yet so small and petty at the same time.
Bendis did terrible damage, ageing up Jon was the worst.
I have no idea how I’ve been watching this channel for years and haven’t been subscribed!! I fixed that today!
Friend: Can you believe their making Superman hide his identity again?!
Me: Oh... Oh noooooo.
Friend: You didn't know everyone knew Clark was Superman in the comic did you?
Me: Absolutely no idea.
The fans protested when they gave him a suit without the red underpants, why would Bendis think this would work? (I avoided the whole Bendis wave, so thank you for the updates. This was all new to me.)
Oo! Oo! Sasha I have a video idea!!! How bout an episode on Calendar girl from Batman the animated series!!? I know it’s probably a difficult video to make with that probably being her only appearance ever but still! I loved what she represented and the whole episode in general! Including that scene with Calendar girl’s old agent talking with this young girl implying for her to give him “something” in return for getting her part in a show or movie!!! The whole episode felt real…?😭🤩🤩🤩🙏
I really love your videos. I'm a comic book fan but have distance myself from the medium a bit over the last 10 or so years. I was knee-deep in it for the majority of my life but unfortunately the publishing cycles of marvel and DC kind of pushed me out of it. That's why I love these videos because it gives me a bird's-eye view of what's been going on. I do still care about these characters so it is nice to know what's going on to a degree.
I think the writing was on the wall once the rogol zaar retcon happened early in Bendis's superman run. Just the idea that Krypton is no longer a tale of hubris, but of some random man-made super-solder made by Jor-El both takes the great nuance out of the planet's demise, but also drags Jor through the mud in the process.
I know there's a lot of origin redo's where the superhero's parents aren't as good as they originally imagined, like maybe the Waynes were corrupt, or Jor-El had his own issues,
but I think the goodness of these people as parents is important to the tragedy of their loss,
since alot of the hero's their sons/daughters become are *based* on continuing their altruistic memory.
Hypoleta herself has gone through her own 'evil' sorts of arcs, like Amazons Attack, but they ended up being retconned as some sort of mind control, or something.
I think a lot of the changes ended up feeling like things Bendis was surprised he could change...before asking himself if he should. That, or themes took precedent over character.
As for the retcon itself, I hope it sticks, but also changes. I like the chance of Superman telling people the truth, the drama of him contemplating that reveal is always great, even in the original Superman movie, it just plays into how alone he usually feels, having to keep the secret from those he loves or cares about. So, to an extent, I understand where Bendis was originally coming from, since he is about truth, and this is the one lie he has to live with. But now that it's undone as well, with the consequence of heart attacks and such..it just feels like it's still not entirely the same. I guess they'll just not address it for long enough for everyone to forget the looming heart-attack threat is the case, until someone points out 'hey, when Supes told [rando citizen] his secret during that sweet moment, shouldn't they have had a heart attack?'.... But still, it feels like one step forward, while the other foot still hasn't budged...
Secret IDs need to be looked at on a case by case basis. If Superman it works because it allows him to live among the people he loves and represents, removing it others him more when people only ever see him as a symbol. This view of his secret identity also assumes that Clark is the mask and Superman is the guy, which hasn't been the case for decades at this point, like you brought up Clark created Superman to be a public figure who can help people so that Clark didn't have to. They're still more or less the same guy at the end of the day, but the context matters.
On the flip side, going the public route with Iron Man makes sense. Dude's already a self-destructive disaster who finds some way to push away the people he care for, so what's knowing he's Iron Man gonna hurt? Plus most of his villains hate Tony Stark, not Iron Man specifically since he's already a controversial public figure. Iron Man was his "bodyguard" to protect himself from all the people who at least believed he wronged them. May as well go "don't mess with me, I'm covered in weapons."
I needed no crystal ball for this. I knew they'd hit the 'factory reset' on the reveal eventually. It's like Mall Brat Diana that JMS came up with or when Bruce gave up being Batman and everyone thought he was dead and The Joker was just a guy. Or Lex as Superman in Rebirth. We alweays return to point of origin. I do still miss 10 year old Jon. The stories told about him and the Kents as a complete family were very good
I think "Bendis is Coming" is an homage to the "Kirby is Coming" ads that ran in DC comics before the return of Jack Kirby in the 1970s, beginning the run that would start Fourth World, the Demon, Kamandi etc.
I almost didnt watch the vid cuz I got such a kick out of the thumbnail each time it popped up in my feed. That screaming Supes is the stuff legendary memes are made from!
The Superman Rebirth books were so great before Bendis came along. I really wish they would have run longer.
Thanks for reminding me about that "Bendis is Coming" threat 😂
"Let's not get dark, now!" - dudes who decided to have Superman accidentally kill Perry
I mean, wow.
Perry's not dead.
@@dupersuper1938 So, what's the damage?
@@Pensive_Scarlet We don't know yet, we just get a panel of them standing outside his hospital room while he lies there. He could be in a coma, in critical condition, asleep or just resting his eyes.
Fuckin’ Xorn being Magneto being Zorn
It was Xorn all along except for when it wasn't lol
And they're back in the krakoa era, both of them.
@@CasuallyComics I know you think that original Morrison New X-Men run was overrated, but I love it. Made me fall in love with Quietly’s art.
Now I kinda wanna what these hot button topics were about surrounding secret identities.
LOL fallout from the Phoenix Jones saga?
This is why I've given up on mainstream comics. Just endless reboots and reset buttons, circling a status quo again and again. There's no real forward movement, just the illusion of excitement and change. That's why I prefer movie adaptations nowadays. At least in the MCU actors have to get old and move on sooner or later!
The more quote you read about the guy and secrets I was ţhinking "JJ is that you"
Idk if this is a hot take or not, but the hypno glasses were my favorite explanation for why his secret identity worked.
IMO ever needed hypnosis glasses because humans are a bunch of unobservant idiots and Clark does more than wear glasses, he changes his body language, speech patterns and such. All I ever needed to buy it as plausible was seeing Christopher reeves performance in "superman: the movie." It's an illusion. A magic trick. The only reason it appears dumb is because once you know it's a trick and how the trick works it appears obvious.
I guess if they weren't actually going to take advantage of the opportunities in having Clark be Superman openly, it makes sense to go back, and all things considered, this was a better way of doing that than, say, One More Day.
As hands off as Superman and the JL try to be while setting up protection for the Kents, Daily Planet staff, et all: their privacy was destroyed. Them not being almost immediately attacked by several villains is ludicrous.
It also completely ignores how psychologically beneficial it is for Clark to have a way to interact with people in a normal way (that issue of Man of Tomorrow comes to mind...).
Man I was getting some serious Kill Bill flashbacks with Lex rambling on about his motives XDXDXDXDXD
Bendis taking away Superman’s secret identity was like the decision to bring Jason Todd back to life. A seismic change in the status quo that DC ultimately ended up doing nothing worthwhile with to justify the decision
🤔
If you got the Donna Noble reference, you are my people. Lol
Something I like about the identity reveal is that it was Superman's choice. Certainly a nice change of pace from the previous time this had happened (the Truth saga from The New 52).
2:06 "For Thy Sins, Supreme Bendis Shall Be Wrought Upon Thy Head."
I’m just waiting on them to bring back Clark’s Legion. Geoff Johns was gonna do it till Bendis showed up.