 |
| Copyright DC COMICS |
Help me out with this one, Crivvies, just in case I'm missing something. Readers of Action Comics #407 don't know that Clark Kent has been kidnapped until the moment revealed in the above page, and it comes a s a bit of a surprise (as intended by the writer) due to the actual kidnap not being shown. However, that's not the problem. As Clark says in his speech balloon in panel 2, he's being used as a hostage against himself, so he clearly understands the reason for his abduction (and is doubtless aware of the inherent irony of the situation).
So why then, in panel 3, does he ask himself why he was snatched and what he has do to with things when he just said why in the previous panel? And he undoubtedly heard (super hearing remember) the baddie explain his motivations in the panel before that, so there's no reason for him to wonder. So what's going on? Careless dialoguing, or some hasty last minute revision in one panel without first comparing it to the preceding one (or vice-versa)?
I'd say it's just careless scripting by Cary Bates. If Clark's speech balloon in panel 3 read as follows, it would make more sense: "King Andrews! I was looking for him for days! He's obviously got some plan cooking involving me as Superman... but what is it?"
So he knows why Clark was snatched - to be a hostage to deter interference by Superman - but what he doesn't know is where Superman comes into the picture as far as what the baddies' plans for him are. That's not what comes across in the speech balloon in that third panel though. Or could there be another explanation for the seeming discrepancy that hasn't occurred to me?
Any ideas? Enlighten me and set my throbbing head at rest.
4 comments:
Isn't it the case that he knew the kid hit him to knock him out so he faked being uncoscience and that's all he thought would happen . But then they put him in the boot of a car to kidnap him which he didn't expect as all he thought was he was being knocked out. In panel 3 when he sees King Andrews he just wonders why he specifically kidnapped him as he didn't expect that . Also maybe as the kidnap wasn't shown before that it was simply to explain\ emphasis what happened ( seems a pretty big story plot not to show though).
I bet the guy in the disguise is Lex Luthor, it was always Luther in those days ( unless I'm wrong of course).
You're right about Luthor, McS, but I think you missed the point of what I was saying. Clark KNOWS he was kidnapped to thwart any intervention by Superman in the baddies' plot. Then he wonders why Clark Kent was kidnapped - though he's already aware why - as a hostage against Superman ('cos he's known to be a 'pal' of his). What the writer probably meant was that Clark didn't know what the baddies' plot was, but it doesn't really come across as that.
And the reason why Clark's kidnapping wasn't shown was so it would be a surprise/shock to the reader when he turned to page 6.
Ahh well at least I got Luthor right Kid.
Indeed you did, McS, so top marks for trying. Your blue Peter Badge is in the post.
Post a Comment