Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

So, now Chloe's the self-proclaimed hero inspirer

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I can't remember even a single time when Clark's opinion mattered regarding Chloe in the last 5 years, or changed anything in her views.
    Because of Clark's speech and request, Chloe stayed at Watchtower rather than give it up (see Hostage).

    And in my Offscreenville, nothing happened to repair the friendship.
    I saw the friendship repaired and plenty of evidence on-screen. I don't know what happened in offscreenville -- my perspective is totally on what happened on the show.

    ETA: As an example, when she came back in Collateral he questioned the whole SS squad thing. She explained herself and he appeared to accept it. There was no scene later where he held back information from her or any hint of confrontation on world-view between them. In fact he made a statement of admiration regarding how far she had come. So... if the producers wanted us to think that he's not on-board with Chloe, why wouldn't they show SOME hint of an issue (like his introducing the SS squad) after they resolved that plot point?
    Last edited by SVFancross; 03-19-2011, 08:16 AM.

    Comment


    • As an example, when she came back in Collateral he questioned the whole SS squad thing. She explained herself and he appeared to accept it. There was no scene later where he held back information from her or any hint of confrontation on world-view between them. In fact he made a statement of admiration regarding how far she had come. So... if the producers wanted us to think that he's not on-board with Chloe, why wouldn't they show SOME hint of an issue (like his introducing the SS squad) after they resolved that plot point?
      You are right, thats the way the story went. Now, if that was enough for some viewers to think the matter was just fine and settled is another matter entirely. I think all of us, or most of us, realize the show tells us things that are a bit hard to believe or swallow.

      What I saw was Clark just cut off from having any real or rational objection to anything Chloe said or did. And to me, IMO, thats not resolution. Thats basically using Clark to service another character. Chloe's involvement with the SS was swept under the rug. And Clark very briefly explaining it was more or less her giving him "the hand" so he would shut up. Which, he did. Because thats how the show is written. Clark is not permitted to have valid issues with just about anyone, but especially Chloe upon her return.

      To have the friendship repaired, IMO, I would need to have seen several key issues addressed between Clark and Chloe on screen. I would need their relationship not to be retconneced and rewritten to service Chloe's character solely (as it was with this grand speech about her being the first to believe in him, and "inspire" him). This wasn't resolution. This was revisionist history.

      Over the years, this show has told us all a number of things. Whether the show actually showed us those things adequately, or made them believable, is purely a matter of perspective.

      So... if the producers wanted us to think that he's not on-board with Chloe
      Well, thats the thing, isn't it? Its clear that TPTB are all about making sure we buy that Clark is "on-board" with Chloe. Its amazing how little a priority it is for us to believe that Chloe is similarly "on-board" with Clark, because Clark's whole perspective in this supposed friendship has been rendered so moot. JMO

      Comment


      • Originally posted by BadToad
        You are right, thats the way the story went. Now, if that was enough for some viewers to think the matter was just fine and settled is another matter entirely. I think all of us, or most of us, realize the show tells us things that are a bit hard to believe or swallow.

        What I saw was Clark just cut off from having any real or rational objection to anything Chloe said or did. And to me, IMO, thats not resolution. Thats basically using Clark to service another character. Chloe's involvement with the SS was swept under the rug. And Clark very briefly explaining it was more or less her giving him "the hand" so he would shut up. Which, he did. Because thats how the show is written. Clark is not permitted to have valid issues with just about anyone, but especially Chloe upon her return.

        To have the friendship repaired, IMO, I would need to have seen several key issues addressed between Clark and Chloe on screen. I would need their relationship not to be retconneced and rewritten to service Chloe's character solely (as it was with this grand speech about her being the first to believe in him, and "inspire" him). This wasn't resolution. This was revisionist history.

        Over the years, this show has told us all a number of things. Whether the show actually showed us those things adequately, or made them believable, is purely a matter of perspective.



        Well, thats the thing, isn't it? Its clear that TPTB are all about making sure we buy that Clark is "on-board" with Chloe. Its amazing how little a priority it is for us to believe that Chloe is similarly "on-board" with Clark, because Clark's whole perspective in this supposed friendship has been rendered so moot. JMO
        If we are talking about Collateral, then that episode is something of a special case. The point about that story is that Clark realises that putting faith in himself and others may be more important on occasions than relying on the evidence of his senses (a faith that he will need to defeat Darkseid). Therefore, in that episode, it is appropriate that Clark accepts Chloe's word without further questioning. However, it would make sense that - as friends - he would want to ask her what she had been doing, just as she might want to to talk to him about Dr Fate's helmet had not shown her. Not an interrogation, not doubting her, just a normal conversation between friends who hadn't seen each other for a while.

        Which brings us to that final Clark/Chloe scene in Fortune. Now, to make things perfectly clear: as it was effectively her big "farewell" scene (even though her actual departure came later), so I can understand it being Chloe-centric to a degree. However, it was a chance to reflect on their friendship, to express how important a part they had played in each other's lives, not as merely hero and sidekick, but as friends - thus cementing Chloe as having an important role in the series whilst making it clear that their friendship, despite the ups-and-downs, was still strong. Instead we got another variation on "talk to the hand" - or rather, "be quiet, Clark, whilst I talk about my wonderful future." Already, we have to view what Chloe said about having spoken to the wedding chapel as a probable lie, because it does not fit with the discovery that Chloe married Ollie. Weirdly, the rest of Chloe's dialogue makes more sense if she is still telling lies.

        Look at things this way - Chloe has clearly decided to leave Smallvile/Metropolis for her own reaasons, but she know that Ollie will object and so, in all probability, will Clark. Therefore, she wants to present her departure as a fait accompli. Her way of dealing with Ollie is simple: say nothing and run away. Clark is a different matter, as their possible marriage is an unnecessary complication, so she lies about speaking to the chapel (buying time for her to resolve the issue by her own means). However, she knows that if she tells Clark that she needs to leave because she cannot cope with being Watchtower again, he will tell her how much she is needed and talk her into staying (much as he did in Sacrifice). If she says that she is simply leaving because she wants to "find herself" - going to go back to journalism and tuning her back on the "hero buisness" for a while - it sounds a lame excuse. Instead, tell Clark that she is going to help other superheroes develop their potential whilst following his example and creating a dual identity - making sure that he has little opportunity to get a word in edgeways - and how could he object?

        The above may not have been the intention of Anne Cofell Saunders and the producers, but, quite honestly, Clark and Chloe seemed to me to have a closer relationship back in at the beginning of season 9, despite the obvious bitterness. Paradoxically, Chloe was made to look shallow and selfish at the very point that we should have been reminded that - whatever her faults - she was an important and valued part of Clark's life, and thus, Smallville.

        Comment


        • To have the friendship repaired, IMO, I would need to have seen several key issues addressed between Clark and Chloe on screen.
          I would have loved that. And they had all of S9 to do it. Just wasn't a priority.

          We could have had a longer dialog at the end for them (versus jumping straight to the "wrap") but then we wouldn't have had Lois in a showgirl costume or Emil as Elvis. Really, they just don't feel the priority to hit the details and IMO it's worse under these producers than in the first 7 years.

          So... could it have better? Absolutely. Was it par for the course with the producer's intention clear? Yes, IMO.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Supsfan
            I still to this day never get what the point of Beast was. it just caused alot of unneeded drama for the sake of having it and makes somebody look bad depending on ones point of view(either Clark is a meany wanting to send Davis to the PZ or Chloe is wrong for stopping Clark).
            And this is exactly what was completely wrong with the writing in Season 8 in regards to Chloe and Clark. The writers went to create a scenario where fans of Chloe would get pissed at Clark and label him the inconsiderate bad guy, or something like that, and make some feel that they had to pick a side - and it worked!

            There are things littered all throughout that season that they used to manipulate some of the audience into thinking that Clark was questionable or to remind them of how inconsiderate that Clark has always been in regards to Chloe.

            The Fever letter was somehow brought in (Instinct), the Isis group situation (Prey), not restoring the memory of his secret (Abyss), and then what happened in Beast and Doomsday are some of the examples that I'm talking about. They even tried to turn Jimmy into the bad guy by writing him to leave her nasty text messages - something that is very OOC for him I think. In the end, she was made to look like the all-caring, self-sacrificing Saint and the sympathetic victim, while Clark was written to just stand there and question himself.

            I don't know WTH the writers were thinking by trying to create drama between Chloe and Clark in a way that goes to try to make Clark look bad. I just feel that that is completely wrong to do when you're telling a pre-Superman story so late in the series. It's just another example of the producers/writers having a bias towards her character and trying to make her more important than she ever should've been IMO.

            ETA: To add to the above, it only makes it worse if someone adds to the fact that the show went out of its way in Seasons 5-7 to make Chloe look like the MVP that Clark would be lost without, while he came off looking badly in comparison IMO.

            Originally posted by luckycloisfan
            And all I can HOPE for now is that this does NOT happen AGAIN in the finale!! *fingers crossed* that Clark saves the day, without his little blonde friend
            I think that Clark will be given his time to shine in the series finale, but I also think that since Chloe's making an appearance as well, for the very last time, that the writers will make sure to give her a big moment too, somehow. Remember, this will be the very last time that the producers will be able to use their character in live-action capacity, which means that I'm sure that they'll make the most out of having her around - unless they can get AM to sign on for a Chloe Sullivan spinoff series.
            Last edited by HopeforTomorrow; 03-19-2011, 06:26 PM.

            Comment


            • I don't know WTH the writers were thinking by trying to create drama between Chloe and Clark in a way that goes to try to make Clark look bad.
              It has and ever shall be my belief that the writers had to "break up" Chlark to make Clois viable.

              If they chose to make Clark the ***hole, perhaps they did it as to minimize how crappy it was for Chloe fans. IDK.

              I do agree, the approach they took to distance Chlark was awful. BOTH S8 and S9. IMO Chlark was sacrificed at the altar of Clois mythos. If they needed to do that, I wish they would have found a better way than they did.

              I think the positive ending for Chloe was again (IMO!) more salve on the wound of destroying Chloe's character and Chlark.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by SVFancross
                It has and ever shall be my belief that the writers had to "break up" Chlark to make Clois viable.
                I think it is more of a case that the show loves it's "drama" and that was the drama quotient for S8. In all honesty the whole Davis storyline just felt like a bad Lana plotline, and with Chloe taking over the "leading lady" role for the second half of the season that plot got thrown on her.

                As for breaking up Chloe and Clark, I think the producers also realized that they can't move Clark forward while they dumb him down like they did in S5-7 in regards to Chloe's purpose in his life. I really don't see Chloe at any point on the show being in competition with Lois for what her purpose became in later seasons(I would consider Lana was more a crossover in that regard). If Lois' purpose was sitting behind a computer feeding Clark info I could see how one can say that Chloe was a threat to Lois

                While I agree with you there was better ways to split them apart(I don't think the Davis plotline did either characters favors, Clark looked stupid listening to Chloe while not going with his gut and Chloe just looked like a fool), I do think Clark needed to cut the umbilical cord with Chloe in regards to being more independent if they show wanted to show him moving forward.
                Last edited by Supsfan; 03-19-2011, 05:51 PM.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Supsfan
                  I do think Clark needed to cut the umbilical cord with Chloe in regards to being more independent if they show wanted to show him moving forward.
                  I agree in essence, but I would add that I think this was true for Chloe as well as Clark. Both needed to become more independent.

                  Rewatching seasons 1-3, it struck me how Clark and Chloe's relationship has always had a element of underlying conflict. There were parts of the first three seasons where Chloe and Clark struggled with much of the same issues they struggled with in this past season. What's great about their friendship is the fact that, more often than not, they are always able to deal with their issues and move past them to build a stronger and more enduring relationship.

                  For me, Season 9 was a season of growing pains. After being rather co-dependent on each other for three years, Clark and Chloe had the task of differentiating from the other and establishing more independent identities. Clark needed to do this to re-establish his sense of objectivity and Chloe needed to do this to realize that sometimes it is important to focus on herself, her own strength, and her own needs.

                  I think the cutting "the apron strings" approach (to use AM's words) was a good decision. It was to Chloe and Clark's benefit that their relationship be allowed to evolve away from this dynamic and into something where they were both stronger, more autonomous individuals. Such a process can be unpleasant at times, as independence movements usually are whether in the context of the family unit or on the larger stage of international politics (e.g. The American Revolution). However, the result is often worth the struggle.

                  It was natural that Clark's growing closeness to Lois in S8 onwards, and his doing more in his professional (reporter) and hero (RBB/Blur) roles, would cause conflict with Chloe who had previously garnered more of his attention, played the go-between in his relationship with Lana, and partnered with him in his heroic endeavors as a trusty sidekick. Lois became for Clark what Al Gough and Miles Millar had always intended, which was a combination of Lana and Chloe--the object of lust and romantic affection as well as a partner and friend. Indeed, Lois becoming more important to Clark is no different than Jimmy becoming a more important part of Chloe's life in S8, in my opinion.
                  Chloe: When Jimmy and I get married, things will probably change -- between us, I mean. And I don't know if I'm ready for that just yet. Are you? (Plastique)
                  Platonic and romantic relationships can co-exist, but the closeness that Chloe and Clark had was not only counterproductive to Clark's emerging autonomy as a superhero, it was also damaging to Chloe's own development. As Oliver said to Clark in Bloodline, "It's not [Chloe's] life anymore, Clark. She's living yours." I think natural psychological development which was mutually beneficial to all resulted from adjusting the relationship dynamics on the show. It wasn't always done with the best balance and finesse, and it wasn't always pleasant to watch, but I do think change was needed for Chloe and Clark to be a more functional as individuals and as a pair.

                  I discussed this matter further here in a post from months ago.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by SVFancross
                    It has and ever shall be my belief that the writers had to "break up" Chlark to make Clois viable.
                    I'm not saying this just because I'm not a big Chloe fan, but I think that it has more to do with the producers having Chloe far overstaying her intended usefulness than making way for progressing Clark and "Clois". Many feel that Lana overstayed her intended usefulness as well, and look at the way that her and Clark were split apart. That's because those characters had been unfortunate enough to still be around while the producers were having to make way for "Clois" and "align with the mythos". So, while many may direct hatred and blame at Lana for getting in the way of "Clois", like you, I could look at it another way and not be completely wrong to say that Lana got shafted because of "Clois" too. It still comes down to Lois being introduced as a regular too early while Chloe and Lana both stuck around a bit too long and the writers just being incompetent IMO.

                    I do agree, the approach they took to distance Chlark was awful. BOTH S8 and S9. IMO Chlark was sacrificed at the altar of Clois mythos. If they needed to do that, I wish they would have found a better way than they did.
                    I too would have rather been spared the writing that went into distancing Chloe and Clark in Seasons 8 and 9.

                    She lost her identity in Seasons 5-7 because they were forcing her into the story at that point IMO. I think that it came down to the producers wanting her on the show at ANY cost. By having AM sign back up for Season 8 for 22 episodes, and having to deal with the issue of putting Clark in a different place AND getting the "Clois" ball rolling, it was a collision waiting to happen.

                    So, I don't put "Clois' at fault for that, but rather the producers for continuing to force Chloe into the story. She could have left the show after Season 7 with her and Clark on good terms, and I would've been spared feeling disgusted with the way that her character is written in on this show. This coming from someone who liked Chloe in the first 4 or 5 seasons, but by Seasons 6-7, I just got tired of it and felt indifferent to her, probably because I didn't think that Clark and the others were being written well at all in comparison to her.

                    The mythos dictates this stuff, and it would've been best if Chloe got her sendoff back in Season 7 at the latest IMO, with maybe a few return appearances if the producers decided to continue the show without her - which I'm not sure they would've done based on how much they love their character.

                    I think the positive ending for Chloe was again (IMO!) more salve on the wound of destroying Chloe's character and Chlark.
                    Well, at least she got a positive ending. She's all on her own in the shows happy ending department. It's too bad that the other characters didn't get nearly the same treatment.
                    Last edited by HopeforTomorrow; 03-20-2011, 07:43 AM.

                    Comment


                    • Personally I loved the scene, Chloe was there most of Clarks life, always there for him, his sidekick to a certain extent. I loved it and don't think that Chloe took to much of the credit.

                      Comment


                      • I think people are reading a lot between the lines, probably the only thing that the writers meant to say is that Chloe was the only regular character to be there for Clark from the beginning to the end, or that she has been loyal to him or simply to make her goodbye more emotional. I didn’t even realized that sound arrogant until now and I guess that what she meant to say is that she was the first to believe in him outside of his family because Pete just ran away to hide his secret. Besides in sort of way all what she said was actually kind of true. I mean where were Lois, Lana or his parents each time that Clark wanted to solve a mystery during the firsts seasons, or where were them the time that Clark lost his memory, or when he was shoot, it was always Chloe the one that was there for him and this is what makes their relationship so special. Maybe Lois and Oliver are the love of their lives but they don’t share with them the bond that Clark and Chloe have.

                        The truth is that the main problem that some fans have with this character is that she doesn’t belong to the comic books until only a few months ago, but people need to remember that this is a tv show not the comic books so people need to get over it. And is not like she is cared by the writers because she is their own creation, Lionel, Tess (at the beginning) …. Are from their own property as well… besides if you can tell during the first seasons Lana was their “important” girl, she was the one that was in the big story lines, the boyfriends were for her. while Allison was actually the last person to appeared in the opening credits, even Withney appeared first. I guess that she was originally meant to leave the show along with Withney or Pete or maybe when her house exploded, but since she became so popular the producers didn’t let her go. And when Kristin left the show they needed someone to replace Lana´s role (just like Tess did with Lex) and sadly they choose Chloe because the Davis storyline is something typical of Lana and the jealous guy role would probably have gone for Clark instead of Jimmy but well…

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by HopeforTomorrow
                          And this is exactly what was completely wrong with the writing in Season 8 in regards to Chloe and Clark. The writers went to create a scenario where fans of Chloe would get pissed at Clark and label him the inconsiderate bad guy, or something like that, and make some feel that they had to pick a side - and it worked!

                          There are things littered all throughout that season that they used to manipulate some of the audience into thinking that Clark was questionable or to remind them of how inconsiderate that Clark has always been in regards to Chloe.

                          The Fever letter was somehow brought in (Instinct), the Isis group situation (Prey), not restoring the memory of his secret (Abyss), and then what happened in Beast and Doomsday are some of the examples that I'm talking about. They even tried to turn Jimmy into the bad guy by writing him to leave her nasty text messages - something that is very OOC for him I think. In the end, she was made to look like the all-caring, self-sacrificing Saint and the sympathetic victim, while Clark was written to just stand there and question himself.

                          I don't know WTH the writers were thinking by trying to create drama between Chloe and Clark in a way that goes to try to make Clark look bad. I just feel that that is completely wrong to do when you're telling a pre-Superman story so late in the series. It's just another example of the producers/writers having a bias towards her character and trying to make her more important than she ever should've been IMO.

                          ETA: To add to the above, it only makes it worse if someone adds to the fact that the show went out of its way in Seasons 5-7 to make Chloe look like the MVP that Clark would be lost without, while he came off looking badly in comparison IMO.



                          I think that Clark will be given his time to shine in the series finale, but I also think that since Chloe's making an appearance as well, for the very last time, that the writers will make sure to give her a big moment too, somehow. Remember, this will be the very last time that the producers will be able to use their character in live-action capacity, which means that I'm sure that they'll make the most out of having her around - unless they can get AM to sign on for a Chloe Sullivan spinoff series.
                          I think is actually the opposite, it from there (season 8 finally) when some fans started to dislike Chloe´s character, so she was the one that looked bad in that scene not Clark, because thanks to her wrong choice Jimmy died, specially in that moment when there was no Lana to blame.

                          And actually the characters that these new writers were trying to protect are Clark and mostly Lois, is not a coincidence than when Kristin left smallville the producers gave the Lana story line to Chloe (because the whole Davis storyline is something typical from Lana) I could bet anything that if Kristin hadn’t left the show, Davis would have felt for Lana instead of Chloe and Clark would have been the jealous guy not Jimmy, the same was with the isis foundation and watchtower that is typical from Lana and then when Allison left smallville all of sudden Tess becomes in a good person and fills Chloes hole.

                          With Lois on the other hand felt the opposite, she became all of sudden in the new Chloe –the calm supportive, journalist who was there for Clark solving the mysteries- instead of the –funny, “crazy” girl that was always trying to upset Clark from season 4 to 7-. So no seems like these new writers don’t like Chloe´s character because if you can remember Chloe was created from the original creators of smallville not them. And that is a shame for Allison because for me she is the most talented actress on that show.

                          Comment


                          • Well, Chloe is a narcissist. They even pointed it out in the episode before this:

                            Other Chloe: "It feels good, doesn't it? To be better than all those, who fell before him?"

                            Chloe: "Pride."

                            Other Chloe: "That's our hubris, our fatal flaw. Our control issues. Our grossly disproportionate sense of independence."

                            So, her standing around and insisting that she was the first who believed in him and helped him to realize his true potential, is pretty consistent with what they established in "Masquerade". It doesn't magically make what she's saying true. Clark is just too humble to correct her. Because Clark is a nice guy. He'd never point out the obvious flaws with her statement.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X
                            😀
                            🥰
                            🤢
                            😎
                            😡
                            👍
                            👎