LO and others,
It's interesting how much attention a potentially simple thing like a cockpit view can get. A couple of points, they may help.
The F-35 ruled out canopy jettison more or less straight from the start, mainly due to the need for rapid zero-zero ejection for the STOVL aircraft. The forward hinge design was chosen to help with signature, and also overall weight, as well as providing the best access. Many, many CAD studies and mock ups went into selecting that layout. The fan door aft of the cockpit also ruled out an aft hinge.
No breakers on the Martin Baker seat, as far as I remember. Just exit through the remains of the canopy once blown by the MDC.
As I said, the big difference between F-35 and most other US jets was the severity of the bird strike resistance requirement, which was stiffer than for any legacy US jets, and was pushed very hard by the UK in particular. That led to the need for a reinforced forward section, and the arch, to prevent deformation of the transparency under impact. I believe (can't be sure, but a decent guess) that a similar design process led to the Typhoon design.
Lockheed had all the info, intellectual rights and experience on the F-16 canopy design right there in Fort Worth. They'd have used it if it met the requirements of the F-35 programme. It didn't, so they couldn't.
Oh, and the first fighter jet with a reclined seat (as far as I am aware) was the Lightning.
Best Regards as ever to those making the calls
Engines