Why can TPTB write Chloe/Lois likable but not Lana?

[Kreukie]

Do you think TPTB go out of their way to make Chloe/Lois likable, but really spend if any time worrying about what fans think about Lana?

I remember back in season three, after the whole Chloe joining Lionel.

TPTB said they were going to make Chloe bad, make her turn against Clark...but then they didn't because they couldn't do that to Chloe.

But time after time they have no problem having Lana turn against Clark or hate Clark.

Seems like TPTB have a bias with the female characters.

I also feel the same with Clark, I sometimes think they favor Lex over Clark.

And the only reason Tom and Kristin are made leads (beside the character title) is because Tom and Kristin hold the biggest fandom as compared to the other actors.

But deep down TPTB really could careless what fans think of how they write Lana, because deep down they don't care for the character or care to write her in a way that will make fans like her more than say Chloe/Lois.

Hmmm, maybe I'm just looking into this too much.

But what can I say when time after time I see people praising Chloe/Lois over Lana all the time.

[Timester]

Or that are going with the evil Lana plan all along?

[Kreukie]

Originally posted by Timester
Or that are going with the evil Lana plan all along?

They can't do it with a made-up character but they're going to for canon character who has always been on Superman's side since 1950? :confused:

Makes sense for Smallville. :lol:

[khufu]

Lois is likable? I must have missed that episode.

[muffinpeddler]

I don't know, but you have a point. I love Chloe, I like Lois, but I ever since Fanatic, I've just hated Lana. I hate what they're doing with her character. I must say though, i feel Allison Mack has a stronger fanbase than Kristin kreuk.

[Kreukie]

Originally posted by khufu
Lois is likable? I must have missed that episode.

:rotfl:

[Timester]

Originally posted by Kreukie
They can't do it with a made-up character but they're going to for canon character who has always been on Superman's side since 1950? :confused:

Makes sense for Smallville. :lol:

It does. They did said that they created Lana. And by the way, in the comics, Lana is the new LexCorp CEO. And her uncle Professor Lang is also back from the Silver Age. Guess that Lana doesn't have a stable background, so changing in Smallville doesn't change nothing at all.

[myankskent]

I think different people hate all three. It just depends on who you ask. On KSite, a lot of people do hate Lana.

[chlarkfan333]

It looks like they are making her into the character that everyone loves to hate, IMO. I'm not that surprised given they stated very early on that SV is a tragedy and the fact that they wanted to play Lexana for a long time.

[lilkoolmaria]

Well, that's kind of just your own opinion. Some people may think Lana is likeable, but not Lois or Chloe. Or any other combination. You can't speak for everyone.

[MBCorp]

Originally posted by khufu
Lois is likable? I must have missed that episode.

Some of us actually like Lois better than Chloe. :p


Anyway, what I can't understand about Lana is why they bothered making her so likable in Zod if they were only going to make her dislikable again in Sneeze. It's like, jeez, make up your mind Smallville.:p

[Kreukie]

Originally posted by muffinpeddler
I must say though, i feel Allison Mack has a stronger fanbase than Kristin kreuk.

Don't confuse Chloe fans vs. Lana fans with Allison fans vs. Kristin fans.

They're not the same in fandom.

[Extreme]

I think it was a mistake to acutally put Chloe into Smallville.

They've made her into a character that every guy would love to have, which I am guessing was Lana's role at one point.

Personally, I find Lana quite annoying, and Lois is just there. Chloe is my favourite Smallville Character.

[lilkoolmaria]

I find Lois much more likeable than Chloe.

[son2380]

I hate Chloe and I don't think Lois should be on the show.

The story should be about Clark and Lex

[RedKalEL]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MBCorp
[B]Some of us actually like Lois better than Chloe. :p


yeah really i love lois

[Kreukie]

Originally posted by Timester
It does. They did said that they created Lana. And by the way, in the comics, Lana is the new LexCorp CEO. And her uncle Professor Lang is also back from the Silver Age. Guess that Lana doesn't have a stable background, so changing in Smallville doesn't change nothing at all.

You missed my point, in the comics or any other TV series Lana is always on Clark's side.

Yeah she's the CEO of LexCorp, but that's because Lex was kicked out of power and Lana (with her good name) is trying to save the company so all those people who work for LexCorp don't lose their jobs.

Lana taking over LexCorp doesn't change her background, she just basically got a new job.

It happens.

So again, my question is. Why wasn't it okay to make Chloe turn against Clark, but okay for Lana to? :confused:

[chlarkfan333]

Originally posted by son2380
The story should be about Clark and Lex

The series is titled Smallville so it stands to reason that all characters in it are important to differing extents. Yes, Clark and Lex are the most important and that's what we've seen for the most part.

[Extreme]

Because they discovered a better story between Clark and Chloe than the ongoing relationship between Lana and Clark?

Seems logical.

[chlarkfan333]

Originally posted by Kreukie
So again, my question is. Why wasn't it okay to make Chloe turn against Clark, but okay for Lana to? :confused:

Lana was the love interest for Clark and not Chloe. So, from a drama/angst standpoint it works better.

[Kreukie]

Originally posted by Extreme
Because they discovered a better story between Clark and Chloe than the ongoing relationship between Lana and Clark?

Seems logical.

So TPTB saw this back in season three when they were still playing Clana and continue to do so for two more seasons? :p

[Extreme]

What's TPTB?

[Kreukie]

Originally posted by chlarkfan333
Lana was the love interest for Clark and not Chloe. So, from a drama/angst standpoint it works better.

But TPTB said they couldn't do that to "Chloe", not to the "storyline".

[chlarkfan333]

Originally posted by Extreme
What's TPTB?

The Powers That Be

Originally posted by Kreukie
But TPTB said they couldn't do that to "Chloe", not to the "storyline".

*Shrugs* Maybe they like her and thought she should stick around as Clark's friend since Pete left?

[Kreukie]

Originally posted by chlarkfan333
*Shrugs* Maybe they like her and thought she should stick around as Clark's friend since Pete left?

They said that before Pete left... :\

But yeah...I'm sticking to TPTB being bias because they created Chloe, they feel the need to protect her over everyone else.

[chlarkfan333]

Originally posted by Kreukie
I'm sticking to TPTB being bias because they created Chloe, they feel the need to protect her over everyone else.

I can understand that to a certain extent, although I will freely admit this particular sentiment is influenced by my bias in favour of Chloe's character.

[Dannyblue1]

I don't think the PTB didn't turn Chloe against Clark because they loved her character so much. I think the PTB changed their minds about making Chloe turn against Clark in season 3 because there was a huge backlash against that idea from a lot of fans. Maybe they just realized that many fans enjoy a likeable, supportive Chloe who was actually happy to, for example, the Chloe we were getting near the end of season 2.

As for them making Lana unlikeable, I don't think they're doing it on purpose. A lot of times, they'll have Lana do something I know many fans will criticize but, a majority of the time, I honestly don't think the PTB realize how viewers will react. For example, some of the writers have said themselves that they think Clark is mostly to blame for what happened between him and Lana, so they probably think Lana is completely justified in treating him the way she has been. It's just that a lot of viewer disagree.

[STFanatic]

It has taken me almost six years to get over Lana not being a redhead.

[xrayvision]

It's all because of the triangle they wanted to have since the start of the show. That's why Lana is written like this. The corruption of her character started all the way back in season 1. Lex has been training her all along. Autumn made a great thread about this (see Lexana not being a Lightswitch in the Speculation & Spoilers forum). It's full of examples and quotes. Some I don't think mean anything, but most of it make sense. The most telling is what he tells her in Legacy with that German poet. At that point he disapproves of Clark being with Lana and breaks them up for a while (until Arrival).

[Ares]

Lois is alright she has her bad acting moments but.. I'd take her over Lana

[D.M.A.]

Originally posted by MBCorp
Some of us actually like Lois better than Chloe. :p


Anyway, what I can't understand about Lana is why they bothered making her so likable in Zod if they were only going to make her dislikable again in Sneeze. It's like, jeez, make up your mind Smallville.:p
true but sum also like chloe better :p ,but naw I personally like both character(For diff reasons of course but likeable).And ur right I dont kno why they built lana up to be strong in Zod/likeable to only bring her back to late season 5 lana smh.

[ginnyfan]

Lana's just unhappy... and hurt that Clark doesn't trust her with his every thought. (sigh) Lana has been through a lot... By having Lana date Lex she's right in the middle of everything. Whereas if Lana were happily running the talon... She would be a little like Sheriff Nancy... Hopefully her character will gain more momentum when school reopens...

The writers just throw Lana in the middle of the action. Otherwise... she's kind of irrelevent... (ex. Witch Woman b/c main story arc centered on the Stones... boyfriend Adam Knight b/c main story arc dealt with the mysterious blood...etc...)

[djpnutz]

Originally posted by Kreukie
They can't do it with a made-up character but they're going to for canon character who has always been on Superman's side since 1950? :confused:

Makes sense for Smallville. :lol:

heh good one. I agree... but hey... they've ruined everything else CANON on this show... so why not.

Smallville is becoming more and more disliked by me every episode a "new" character appears.

[Farm_Girl]

Honestly, I like Lana now more than I ever did. Her presence on the show makes sense now. I think she'll get her own arc this season instead of playing the tiresome and mopey Lana.. I like the idea of a darker Lana..

And has anyone noticed KK's performance has improved so much this season?

[SteveS]

The only time that I found lois to being close to likeable was this week's episode, 'Sneeze', other than that, she has been a jerkette or worse in virtually every other episode.

[Damali]

Originally posted by Kreukie
Do you think TPTB go out of their way to make Chloe/Lois likable, but really spend if any time worrying about what fans think about Lana?

I don't have a problem with Lana. I think a lot of her reactions to things, especially to Clark comes from constantly being left out of the loop on certain matters. But as a character, I think she is written to be a little dark and gloomy and I don't have a problem with that, as for Chloe and Lois. I don't like Chloe at all, but Lois is starting to grow on me, now. So I think the unlikable label on Lana, is more about fan perference, then anything else. I don't think it's something the writers mean to do.

[Nospam]

I like all three, and Chloe is my favorite, but I also have reasons to dislike all three. Chloe when she is asked to perform those ridiculous technological miracles or acting jealous over Clark, Lana when she is pining about secrets and lies or the fact that she lost her parents thirteen fricken years ago, and Lois whenever she opens her mouth. Whenever Lois says almost anything it's like the verbal equivalent to the schtick of a pie to the face or slipping on a banana peel. Ugh.

Getting back to Lana, the fundamental mistake with Lana was inflating her importance in the show to the level of Clark and Lex. The main theme of Smallville and Superman, like so many others, is the battle of good and evil, and that ultimately manifests itself in the characters of Clark and Lex; thematically, there really isn't a "big three", just a "big two".

Along with Lana's inflated importance, they never really grounded her character enough to define who or what she represents. One second she is riding horses, the next she is a cheerleader, the next off to France to study art. A strong character wouldn't need these defining moments as we would already grasp what they were all about, but TPTB thought it would be enough to find a pretty face, make her the love interest for Clark and Whitney and all would fall into place. When fans seemed more interested in seeing Clark and Chloe together, they switched plans and started the Clark/Chloe/Lana triangle towards then end of season one. It's been that way all through the series and the result is a Lana who's motivations have been consistently inconsistent. Like them or not, at least with Chloe and Lois we know who they are what their passions are.

[Fly by guy]

I tend to think that Lana's "popularity" flows with whomever she happens to be dating. I think that stuffing Lexana down the throats of Clana fans after the first half of last seasons has left a foul cloud around Lana. She has become the burrito eating resident of a broken down elevator. Not too popular among close friends, uh.

[D.M.A.]

Originally posted by Nospam
I like all three, and Chloe is my favorite, but I also have reasons to dislike all three. Chloe when she is asked to perform those ridiculous technological miracles or acting jealous over Clark, Lana when she is pining about secrets and lies or the fact that she lost her parents thirteen fricken years ago, and Lois whenever she opens her mouth. Whenever Lois says almost anything it's like the verbal equivalent to the schtick of a pie to the face or slipping on a banana peel. Ugh.

Getting back to Lana, the fundamental mistake with Lana was inflating her importance in the show to the level of Clark and Lex. The main theme of Smallville and Superman, like so many others, is the battle of good and evil, and that ultimately manifests itself in the characters of Clark and Lex; thematically, there really isn't a "big three", just a "big two".

Along with Lana's inflated importance, they never really grounded her character enough to define who or what she represents. One second she is riding horses, the next she is a cheerleader, the next off to France to study art. A strong character wouldn't need these defining moments as we would already grasp what they were all about, but TPTB thought it would be enough to find a pretty face, make her the love interest for Clark and Whitney and all would fall into place. When fans seemed more interested in seeing Clark and Chloe together, they switched plans and started the Clark/Chloe/Lana triangle towards then end of season one. It's been that way all through the series and the result is a Lana who's motivations have been consistently inconsistent. Like them or not, at least with Chloe and Lois we know who they are what their passions are.
agree,tptb have made her too important at times and really dont kno where to take her at this point.Atleast wit both chloe/lois they still have things to accomplish(Journalism).But I agree the story should have really been based on the big 2(Clark/Lex),and the ships should have been secondary,but tptb seem to luv KK so much that they r really startin to mess her character up.And ur right at first it was all about clana will they wont they,but once fans started leanin towards another couple thats when triangles came into play(Whether it was chloe/lex/Jason/Adam/Alicia etc).So I agree fully here

[InLove_with_Chloe]

Originally posted by Nospam
Getting back to Lana, the fundamental mistake with Lana was inflating her importance in the show to the level of Clark and Lex. The main theme of Smallville and Superman, like so many others, is the battle of good and evil, and that ultimately manifests itself in the characters of Clark and Lex; thematically, there really isn't a "big three", just a "big two".

Well said.
The 'big three' were a lie from the beginning.

About the 3 girls:
I actually liked the first few episodes of S1. Lana was the girl next door whith whom Clark had a lot in common, most importantly both being orphans. Since then they only grew apart, and nobody seems to really know why. At the same time Clark and Chloe got closer and closer, there seems to be nothing the writers can do to prevent that. Jealousy didn't help, neither did her notorious curiosity. Personally, despite being Chlarker, I think there was too much Chlark in 'sneeze'. How are they gonna bring back Jimmy now?!? I am worried. Finally, I am very happy that Lois got some development in the right direction, it was about time. So far, it always seemed like the writers really wanted her in SV, but couldn't come up with a real reason why...

[umm]

She is Lana, that's why! She is a classical 'damsell in distress, with no potential for growth' type of a girl! And frankly so far that has been proven time and time again!

[Liriel]

I think one of the things that makes Lana unlikeable is that she's (in the past) often been shoe-horned in where she wasn't needed. Unlike Chloe, at the beginning of the series, she had no real motivation (well, there was the finding herself thing, but that died quickly). Her purpose was to related to Clark and be the object of his affection. That's not enough of a purpose for a "big three" character. Then TPTB really messed up: they wanted people to like Lana more, so the white-washed everything she did. She was never held accountable for any of her mistakes and everyone viewd her as perfect, and that annoyed a large portion of the audience. And also, she got kind of repetitive, and although her frustration with Clark's lack of trust is understandable, it's annoying to watch over and over and over and over again.

But I have to say that it's the lack of purpose that gets to me. I don't hate Lana. For the first three seasons I found her incredibly dull, but had no like or dislike for her - she simply couldn't evoke emotions that strong in me. Fourth season, I didn't like her. I don't think it was as much because of the prominent (and IMO, not good) storyline, but because I found some actions of hers morally objectionable, but none of the other characters seemed to notice (and I'm not talking about Isobel's actions). The first half of the fifth season was great for Lana, to me. She was being shown to be equally as guilty as Clark in their slowly disentigrating relationship, and I thought that was wonderful, because she wasn't being put on a pedestal. But even better, she had her own goal, her own motivation, and was working towards something (instead of getting it in one episode). Best of all, she wasn't asking for help with the ship bit. She wasn't talking always about herself and what she was doing. She eschewed Lex's help. Oh, I liked her for the first time. Then she let Lex take over everything with the ship and even quit asking questions, went her old "backup boyfriend" route, and began nagging Clark about secrets and lies again. She was justified in being upset with him, but the audience got so tired of it in the past, that they just didn't care if it was justified and it still annoyed them.

So, I think the fundamental problem lay in giving her that much screentime and importance without giving her a purpose other than love-interest and freak-bait.

[umm]

Originally posted by Farm_Girl
Honestly, I like Lana now more than I ever did. Her presence on the show makes sense now. I think she'll get her own arc this season instead of playing the tiresome and mopey Lana.. I like the idea of a darker Lana..

And has anyone noticed KK's performance has improved so much this season?

It has, but that is due to the fact, that the actress probably feels that it's easier and perhaps more her thing to play the evil, or more moraly ambivalent Lana, than the pink princess Lana of the previous seasons! And it makes sense, I mean yes, there is a good part of the Smallville fanbase who hate the current Lana, but at least they have a good reason, or as good as they come anyway, I mean she is slowly turning evil, sho has moved in with lex, she is gloomy and quite dark! When you consider it like that, there is some logic, the only problem is, that that's how Lana should have been portrayed all along! I mean everyone can see, even those who hate the character, that she is far more belivable, when she is moraly ambivalent, dark and gloomy, than when she is god! The writers should have realised from the getgo that Smallvilles Lana wasn't meant for godness!

[InLove_with_Chloe]

Originally posted by umm
I mean she is slowly turning evil, sho has moved in with lex, she is gloomy and quite dark! When you consider it like that, there is some logic, the only problem is, that that's how Lana should have been portrayed all along! I mean everyone can see, even those who hate the character, that she is far more belivable, when she is moraly ambivalent, dark and gloomy, than when she is god! The writers should have realised from the getgo that Smallvilles Lana wasn't meant for godness!

One may say that the seed of her evil nature were planted long, long ago.
Remember how she used inside information to get rid of the 'beanery' as competition, I think it was in S1?
If I remember well, Lex played a role in that too. One might therefore come to the conclusion that Lana (under supervision of Lex) has gradually been turning evil right from the bginning, it was just masked for quite while, by her pink wardrobe and the princess attitude.

[Timester]

Originally posted by Kreukie
You missed my point, in the comics or any other TV series Lana is always on Clark's side.

Yeah she's the CEO of LexCorp, but that's because Lex was kicked out of power and Lana (with her good name) is trying to save the company so all those people who work for LexCorp don't lose their jobs.

Lana taking over LexCorp doesn't change her background, she just basically got a new job.

It happens.

Actually, we should except more changes in the background. Now, there was a "Super-boy" in Smallville, in the comics.

[umm]

Originally posted by InLove_with_Chloe
One may say that the seed of her evil nature were planted long, long ago.
Remember how she used inside information to get rid of the 'beanery' as competition, I think it was in S1?
If I remember well, Lex played a role in that too. One might therefore come to the conclusion that Lana (under supervision of Lex) has gradually been turning evil right from the bginning, it was just masked for quite while, by her pink wardrobe and the princess attitude.

One might, if one wants to take it ease on the writers, which I don't cos they haven't earned it! At least where the writing of lana's character is concerned!

[F-Stop Blues]

Originally posted by Timester
Actually, we should except more changes in the background. Now, there was a "Super-boy" in Smallville, in the comics.

Exactly. Plus I really got the vibe that Lana is going to try to get Clark back. She attempted to do it in Action #822 and I just got the vibe that now that she's running LexCorp she's going to be seeing Clark alot.

[Absolute Kingdom]

Originally posted by Timester
Actually, we should except more changes in the background. Now, there was a "Super-boy" in Smallville, in the comics.

I wonder if they're going to mention something about Lois chasing the Super-boy. That would parallell Birthright to some extent. Perhaps that's where Smallville is headed?

[F-Stop Blues]

Anyway, I feel that tptb are trying to make Lana edgy and dark so thats why she's being mean to Clark and has all but stopped hanging out with Chloe. Plus to make Lana relevant tptb have to make her do dramatic things, like becoming a witch or getting with Lex. If she didnt do things like that then her character would just fade away like Pete.

[Timester]

Originally posted by Absolute Kingdom
I wonder if they're going to mention something about Lois chasing the Super-boy. That would parallell Birthright to some extent. Perhaps that's where Smallville is headed?

Chasing the myth, perhaps. Clark on the same issue, tries to deny that there ever was a "Super-boy". Basically, he was saving people Smallville-style, trying to hide himself.

But, anyway, it is very possible that Lana isn't that sweet on the comics anymore.

[umm]

Originally posted by Timester
Chasing the myth, perhaps. Clark on the same issue, tries to deny that there ever was a "Super-boy". Basically, he was saving people Smallville-style, trying to hide himself.

And that makes sense, I mean until he moves to Metropilis, and becomes a journalist at the Daily Planet, he will always be Clark Kent from Smallville/hero in hidding, not Superman and therefore I don't think they should couple him with Lois just yet, let her have other boyfriends, him other girlfriends, other than Lana! I don't care in which Superman universe she tried to win him back, as far as Smallville goes, that door should stay closed!

[F-Stop Blues]

Originally posted by Timester
Chasing the myth, perhaps. Clark on the same issue, tries to deny that there ever was a "Super-boy". Basically, he was saving people Smallville-style, trying to hide himself.

But, anyway, it is very possible that Lana isn't that sweet on the comics anymore.

Word.

[Absolute Kingdom]

Originally posted by Timester
Chasing the myth, perhaps. Clark on the same issue, tries to deny that there ever was a "Super-boy". Basically, he was saving people Smallville-style, trying to hide himself.

Yeah but what if she sees something or hears some rumors about the Super-boy? Since she's going to be close with GA I can see this happening. That would be an interesting storytelling IMO, writing about Clark without knowing. Its ironic but the writers seem to enjoy that a lot :D

[Nospam]

I like dark Lana this season, although she really hasn't been all that evil. She was a bit harsh with Clark, but Lana was right in questioning Clark's motives in finding Lex.

On a side note, It's interesting that she comes down on Clark for keeping secrets and how he knew that Lex would return with powers, but Lana hasn't raised the same questions with Chloe, whom she knows has to know something as she saw Clark and Chloe discussing Lex before Zod was released. Surely Lana is going to put it all together that Chloe knows something and confront her looking for the truth, but then again it may never come up.

[Absolute Kingdom]

Very interesting point about Chloe and Clark and Lana making the connection. Never thought about that. But then again, Lex knows about how close Chloe and Clark are and he hasnt made a move, so I highly doubt that Lana will.

[Nospam]

Originally posted by Absolute Kingdom
But then again, Lex knows about how close Chloe and Clark are and he hasnt made a move, so I highly doubt that Lana will.

I know. At the start of last season it certainly looked like Lex was going to lean on Chloe for information on Clark. Not that I want to see Chloe hurt, but realistically Lex would have gone after Chloe long ago looking for the truth.

[F-Stop Blues]

Originally posted by Absolute Kingdom
Very interesting point about Chloe and Clark and Lana making the connection. Never thought about that. But then again, Lex knows about how close Chloe and Clark are and he hasnt made a move, so I highly doubt that Lana will.

I think at some point Lex will come after Chloe.

[avidreader]

Originally posted by Nospam
[B]I like dark Lana this season, although she really hasn't been all that evil. She was a bit harsh with Clark, but Lana was right in questioning Clark's motives in finding Lex.

But if someone wants to help, why would you question their motives. Clark wants to help, Lana knows he has always come through in the past. She wants Lex saved, so why does she need to show the door to the only one who has offered, regardless of his reasons?

It comes across like she wants to control everything when she really should have put her feelings aside to help Lex.

[supes0]

Originally posted by F-Stop Blues
Exactly. Plus I really got the vibe that Lana is going to try to get Clark back. She attempted to do it in Action #822 and I just got the vibe that now that she's running LexCorp she's going to be seeing Clark alot.

Idelson said she is going to lose the homewrecking status of the Austen Era. From the supermanhomepage "Ask Matt" section:

Hi, Matt! I was reading the July solicitation for SUPERMAN #654, and it said "[Superman] also faces trouble with Lois, [and] looming problems involving Lana Lang". Please tell me this is not the return of "homewrecker Lana". I don't think I'd be able to handle it again.

Matt: Well I hate to tell you this, Emy, but Lana will most certainly be returning, though I think it's safe to say she'll be losing that "homewrecker" status. All of us working on the books take Clark and Lois' marriage seriously, and wouldn't want to ruin it. Also, and forgive me if I've said this before, but everyone knows we're not going to break up the marriage, so pretending to by bringing in Lana or anyone else would just be a waste of your time.



And in the recent Busiek interview with Newsarama he's said he isn't going to write strife in to the marriage (Johns and Donner don't seem to be inclined to go down that path either judging by Johns' interviews and Idelson comments above):


NRAMA: Lois & Clark’s relationship – how important is it to the larger picture of Superman? Obviously, it wasn’t something that was there for the first…what…60 years, but now, it’s an unshakable part of the mythos. For you, how did you tackle the idea of a married Superman? It seems like something where cliché is always knocking at the door…

KDB: Does it? I don't really see how it's cliché in a way that, say, the old romantic triangle isn't. I think there's a lot to be had from both setups – and lots and lots of people in the world are married without it being clichés.

I simply assume that Clark and Lois have a strong relationship, and roll from there. I can't see doing stories where Lois *****es about him being Superman – aside from the fact that she knew that when she married him, she approves of it. And I can't see doing jealousy stories – how dumb do you have to be to think Superman – Superman, of all people – could be untrustworthy?

So they love each other and they play off each other nicely – he's all heart, masking a keen brain, she's all brain, masking a warm heart. She's sarcastic, he's earnest. They both don't quit 'til the job's done. They're fun to write.



http://www.newsarama.com/dcnew/Superman/busiek.html

He also made an interesting comment about upcoming stories, "Insect Queen". He's said it's a new character, but I wonder how Lana plays in to this, considering she was the original Insect Queen back in the silver age. I'm really intrigued.

[D.M.A.]

Originally posted by F-Stop Blues
I think at some point Lex will come after Chloe.
o he will but at that point he'll be completely evil and ready to kill cause I think a reason he didn't pursue her is cause he knew he'd have kill her.I can actually see lana approachin her before lex cause the only thing to lose is a friendship which they never really had.But I agree wit the posts earlier,u would think she'd be mad wit chloe too not jus clark,yet chloe was the one she called when she appeared at the warehouse smh.I like the dark side of lana startin to show,as long as she isn't as bitter towards clark.Atleast not about the secret,she can hate him but hopefully for other reasons,if everytime they see each other she ask about his secrets then she'll be hated.Otherwise I think its cool her character gets alil darker,but I would like to see her approach chloe tho.If she stays wit lex long in the season,and clark does catch sum feeling for chloe(Even if he doesn't speakup about em)I can see her and chloe havin a fallout this season.Cause the only thing that connects them is clark and now he's out of the pic so this yr will really test their so called friendship imo

[InLove_with_Chloe]

Originally posted by F-Stop Blues
I think at some point Lex will come after Chloe.

I think the actual reason why Chloe has not yet been in trouble for knowing Clark's secret (although, logically she should have by now, as pointed out by Nospam) is because TPTB want to keep the possibility of a Chlark relationship alive right now. I don't say that because for me, everything is about Clark, but because if Chlark was to happen, they would have to stage it as a short-lived, but angst-free romance, which will have to end in a tragedy (Lex killing Chloe, and Clark moving on...). They are obviously playing with us, Chlark-wise, these days...

[coco#1]

what does tptb mean?

[Farm_Girl]

I don't think Lana would have to do anything with Chloe. She is figuring out her own life yet..

Lex coming after Chloe might be a possiblity, if the producers want to set up Chloe's death, but that won't happen until S7 I guess, Chloe is such a likeable character, no one would want her written off, not until the series finale atleast..

As far as Lana is concerned, I think in future episodes, I am looking forward to seeing her.. for the first time, she might stop and think about the choices she made and might realize she made mistake in giving up on Clark.. it will lead to the comics Clark/Lana arc.. though Clark might not have the same feelings to return now..

[Liriel]

Originally posted by coco#1
what does tptb mean? The Powers that Be. The people who make the decisions about the show.

[sstray72]

I am praying that TPTB go back to Lex pushing up on Chloe for knowledge of Clark. It was too good a plotline only to be dropped for Lexana and more secrets and lies.

Originally posted by Liriel
I think one of the things that makes Lana unlikeable is that she's (in the past) often been shoe-horned in where she wasn't needed. Unlike Chloe, at the beginning of the series, she had no real motivation (well, there was the finding herself thing, but that died quickly). Her purpose was to related to Clark and be the object of his affection. That's not enough of a purpose for a "big three" character. Then TPTB really messed up: they wanted people to like Lana more, so the white-washed everything she did. She was never held accountable for any of her mistakes and everyone viewd her as perfect, and that annoyed a large portion of the audience. And also, she got kind of repetitive, and although her frustration with Clark's lack of trust is understandable, it's annoying to watch over and over and over and over again.


This is my exact opinion regarding Lana. Her character was never fully developed and combined with her over-inflated "importance" to the show, she has been made unlikable for many.

[F-Stop Blues]

Originally posted by supes0
Idelson said she is going to lose the homewrecking status of the Austen Era. From the supermanhomepage "Ask Matt" section:




And in the recent Busiek interview with Newsarama he's said he isn't going to write strife in to the marriage (Johns and Donner don't seem to be inclined to go down that path either judging by Johns' interviews and Idelson comments above):




http://www.newsarama.com/dcnew/Superman/busiek.html

He also made an interesting comment about upcoming stories, "Insect Queen". He's said it's a new character, but I wonder how Lana plays in to this, considering she was the original Insect Queen back in the silver age. I'm really intrigued.

thanks for the info. I'm glad that my vibe was wrong.

Originally posted by InLove_with_Chloe
I think the actual reason why Chloe has not yet been in trouble for knowing Clark's secret (although, logically she should have by now, as pointed out by Nospam) is because TPTB want to keep the possibility of a Chlark relationship alive right now. I don't say that because for me, everything is about Clark, but because if Chlark was to happen, they would have to stage it as a short-lived, but angst-free romance, which will have to end in a tragedy (Lex killing Chloe, and Clark moving on...). They are obviously playing with us, Chlark-wise, these days...


I think thats part of it but I think the main reason they are keeping Lex off of Chloe is because they are saving that for the end of the show. They way I see it Lex HAS to kill Chloe. Thats the only way for him to be truly evil in the minds of everyone on Smallville and the fans.

[supes0]

Originally posted by F-Stop Blues
thanks for the info. I'm glad that my vibe was wrong.

You're very welcome. I was worried about that too. I didn't want to see a repeat of that Austen debacle.

Even then, I wish Lana would move on with her life and get over Clark. I hope now she is divorced from Pete and she's seen how this unrequited love is destroying her life, she'll find a way to move forward.

[F-Stop Blues]

Originally posted by supes0
You're very welcome. I was worried about that too. I didn't want to see a repeat of that Austen debacle.

Even then, I wish Lana would move on with her life and get over Clark. I hope now she is divorced from Pete and she's seen how this unrequited love is destroying her life, she'll find a way to move forward.

Yeah exactly. She does need to move on and you're right the Austen run was a deboacle. But anyway we should stop talking about the comics.

[Liriel]

Originally posted by F-Stop Blues
They way I see it Lex HAS to kill Chloe. Thats the only way for him to be truly evil in the minds of everyone on Smallville and the fans. Well, he's already evil to me. Torturing people and doing experiments on unwilling people pretty much solidified it for me. I know I'm in the minority, though.

I still say Chloe dying would be bad if they're using it to propel Lois or especially Clark. Superman should not need death to motivate him. I love Spiderman, and many folks love Batman, but Superman isn't supposed to be like that.

[supes0]

Originally posted by F-Stop Blues
But anyway we should stop talking about the comics.
Agreed.

I think thats part of it but I think the main reason they are keeping Lex off of Chloe is because they are saving that for the end of the show. They way I see it Lex HAS to kill Chloe. Thats the only way for him to be truly evil in the minds of everyone on Smallville and the fans.

I disagree, I don't think Lex is going to kill Chloe, I think he'll kill Lionel.

I don't see Chloe dying, she is Smallville's contribution to the Superman mythos. She is a popular character, I could see them trying to spin her off in to her own show.

[Liriel]

I disagree, I don't think Lex is going to kill Chloe, I think he'll kill Lionel. I think, regardless of who else he kills, Lex will kill Lionel. That one is all but written in stone to me.

[jimmyolsenblues]

lana is a plot device to show the divide between lex and clark but sadly has been given way too much screen time TPTB thinking she will bring viewers.
Ratings are down, people do not like lex and lana together, show is about superman. get rid of this lana please.

[umm]

Originally posted by F-Stop Blues
thanks for the info. I'm glad that my vibe was wrong.




I think thats part of it but I think the main reason they are keeping Lex off of Chloe is because they are saving that for the end of the show. They way I see it Lex HAS to kill Chloe. Thats the only way for him to be truly evil in the minds of everyone on Smallville and the fans.

Not really! He is already now considered truly evil by the inhabitants of Smallville and the fans, so killing Chloe will neither add or take away anything from that fact!
And one can't really use the argument: 'Chloe has to die for Lois to come into her own' either, cos if written properly, there is room for both of them in the Superman Universe! And there is really no point introducing a character into already preexisting universe and developing the said character to such extent where it becomes one of the more important parts of show, just to kill them in the end! Why do the work, then if you intend to ruin it?
So no, I don't think they'll kill Chloe at all, let alone use Lex to accomplish that!

[Deana]

As of last season, I like Lana more so than Chloe.

Not saying that I still hate Chloe but the fact that Clark can't make any of his own decisions without her makes me sick.

It least the Witch arc only lasted on horrible season. This is two seasons of nosense...

I'm with the crew that thinks because they created Chloe they are making her larger than life. Who cares how dumb it makes Clark look.

It's the same situation with Lex and Lionel. Lionel is a better character than Lex.

[F-Stop Blues]

Originally posted by umm
Not really! He is already now considered truly evil by the inhabitants of Smallville and the fans, so killing Chloe will neither add or take away anything from that fact!
And one can't really use the argument: 'Chloe has to die for Lois to come into her own' either, cos if written properly, there is room for both of them in the Superman Universe! And there is really no point introducing a character into already preexisting universe and developing the said character to such extent where it becomes one of the more important parts of show, just to kill them in the end! Why do the work, then if you intend to ruin it?
So no, I don't think they'll kill Chloe at all, let alone use Lex to accomplish that!


I disagree. Lex still isnt considered evil imo. He risks his life to save Lana and he risked his life to save his employees in Scare. He may not like Clark, Chloe, or Lois but the "real" Lex Luthor would want all three of them dead and Smallville Lex doesnt want that. For him to be truly evil he has to do something so shocking and evil and thats killing Chloe.

[BadToad]

Not saying that I still hate Chloe but the fact that Clark can't make any of his own decisions without her makes me sick.

Funny, it looked to me like he made all his decision in "Zod" without Chloe. And it looked to me that he was going out and trying to help the city every night without Chloe. And it looked like he was the one that got the PI's name, without Chloe (then they worked together from there). And it looked to me like he left her at the PI's office, and went and saved Lex and Lana without Chloe.

IMO, yes, sometimes they go overboard with Chloe and her abilities, and her role as wise sage. But also IMO, people really gloss over all the things Clark does without Chloe.

But as for the topic question, I think the problem is that TPTB consider Lana this object of beauty and worship, and they don't write her as a 3-D chararacter. Whereas they don't have these same blindspots when it comes to Chloe and Lois, and so their characters come across as more dimensional and real. They are earthier, more relateable. IMO

[Liriel]

Lex is evil to me. He tortured someone. He has participated in illegal and unethical experiments on a human being against that person's will.

Just because someone is willing to risk his/her life for another, does not make that person not evil.

[D.M.A.]

Originally posted by F-Stop Blues
I disagree. Lex still isnt considered evil imo. He risks his life to save Lana and he risked his life to save his employees in Scare. He may not like Clark, Chloe, or Lois but the "real" Lex Luthor would want all three of them dead and Smallville Lex doesnt want that. For him to be truly evil he has to do something so shocking and evil and thats killing Chloe.
or his father,him killin his father will show ppl how far he's willingin to go for power.Cause as long as lionel is around lex will always be 2nd best.So I do agree him killin chloe would show that he's completely evil,but won't have as big of an impact unless he kills lionel first.If he kills lionel then chloe that could really push him and clark to become enemies.Ah how one can only hope tho smh

[Liriel]

Cause as long as lionel is around lex will always be 2nd best.I agree with this part - no matter who else Lex does or does not kill, he has to kill Lionel.

[F-Stop Blues]

Originally posted by Liriel
Lex is evil to me. He tortured someone. He has participated in illegal and unethical experiments on a human being against that person's will.

Just because someone is willing to risk his/her life for another, does not make that person not evil.


If you think Lex is evil then fine but Clark doesnt. He stood up for him in Aqua when Fine compared him to Hitler and Stalin. That should be a fair comparison when this show is over.

Originally posted by D.M.A.
or his father,him killin his father will show ppl how far he's willingin to go for power.Cause as long as lionel is around lex will always be 2nd best.So I do agree him killin chloe would show that he's completely evil,but won't have as big of an impact unless he kills lionel first.If he kills lionel then chloe that could really push him and clark to become enemies.Ah how one can only hope tho smh


I think he'll kill Lionel also but I dont think that will be as dramatic as him killing Chloe.

[MBCorp]

Originally posted by Liriel
Lex is evil to me. He tortured someone. He has participated in illegal and unethical experiments on a human being against that person's will.

Just because someone is willing to risk his/her life for another, does not make that person not evil.

Lex is evil in a wishy washy weak way that causes people not to take him seriously as a villain. Because nobody really seems to be taking Lex seriously...neither the fans nor the characters in the show. It's just, "Oh, there's dumb old inept Lex again doing something shady and getting kidnapped/tortured/shot as a result" They need to have Lex do a big grand gesture of evil that will cause people to actually take him seriously and view him as a threatening, badass villain, and not the inept emo wimp he sometimes comes across as being.

Saying that, I don't think Lex killing Chloe is really the answer to the solution. I'm not a fan of Chloe but I just don't see why they should kill her off when there's so many other grand evil gestures they could have Lex make. Like killing his father, which is what I've been looking forward to the most.

[F-Stop Blues]

Originally posted by MBCorp

Saying that, I don't think Lex killing Chloe is really the answer to the solution. I'm not a fan of Chloe but I just don't see why they should kill her off when there's so many other grand evil gestures they could have Lex make. Like killing his father, which is what I've been looking forward to the most.

I dont think that will be his grand gesture but I think that him killing Chloe is vital for this story to be taken seriously. That should be his final act as we head towards the future in Metropolis and all that stuff.

Originally posted by MBCorp
Lex is evil in a wishy washy weak way that causes people not to take him seriously as a villain. Because nobody really seems to be taking Lex seriously...neither the fans nor the characters in the show. It's just, "Oh, there's dumb old inept Lex again doing something shady and getting kidnapped/tortured/shot as a result" They need to have Lex do a big grand gesture of evil that will cause people to actually take him seriously and view him as a threatening, badass villain, and not the inept emo wimp he sometimes comes across as being.


Exactly, He's Lex FREAKIN Luthor and he gets the snot kicked out of him on a weekly basis, I mean Lex Luthor. Come on. I dont need to see him get kindnapped by some whacko ex commando, Lex is a billion times smarter than that guy from Sneeze but he never outsmarts anyone...he just gets outsmarted. It bothers me. The only badass out smart type thing he did was when he screwed his dad with the Apex take over and that was not that big of a plot point. He needs to do more things like that. He needs to start up LexCorp and start kicking ass. PLEASE!!!!!!

[MBCorp]

Originally posted by F-Stop Blues
I dont think that will be his grand gesture but I think that him killing Chloe is vital for this story to be taken seriously. That should be his final act as we head towards the future in Metropolis and all that stuff.

I really don't want to see the show end on such a dark note, Clark losing one of his best friends like that. I know Al&Miles have said that SV will end as a tragedy, but that would be a bit much, especially after having him lose his father, girlfriend, and having his former best friend (Lex) turn evil. And it kind of strikes me as a cliche melodramatic plot device, killing Chloe off like that. Of course, I wouldn't be surprised if the show actually went in that direction, but I just don't think it absolutely *has* to. There's other ways to show that Lex is evil besides killing off Chloe.

[F-Stop Blues]

Originally posted by MBCorp
I really don't want to see the show end on such a dark note, Clark losing one of his best friends like that. I know Al&Miles have said that SV will end as a tragedy, but that would be a bit much, especially after having him lose his father, girlfriend, and having his former best friend (Lex) turn evil. And it kind of strikes me as a cliche melodramatic plot device, killing Chloe off like that. Of course, I wouldn't be surprised if the show actually went in that direction, but I just don't think it absolutely *has* to. There's other ways to show that Lex is evil besides killing off Chloe.

I understand what you're saying and that would be alot for Clark to handle, but I just think that it needs to happen. I've had the feeling all along that he will kill her and I think that its something his character wants to do he just cant except that yet. I dont want her to die and I dont view it as a plot device for Lois or anything I just think that its a neccessary thing for Lex Luthor to do. I mean think about it, why wouldnt he kill her? If by this time he and Clark are clearly enemies this would be the perfect way to harm the invulnerable Clark Kent. I just think its happening but who knows.

[MBCorp]

Originally posted by F-Stop Blues
I understand what you're saying and that would be alot for Clark to handle, but I just think that it needs to happen. I've had the feeling all along that he will kill her and I think that its something his character wants to do he just cant except that yet. I dont want her to die and I dont view it as a plot device for Lois or anything I just think that its a neccessary thing for Lex Luthor to do. I mean think about it, why wouldnt he kill her? If by this time he and Clark are clearly enemies this would be the perfect way to harm the invulnerable Clark Kent. I just think its happening but who knows.

Oh yeah, I can definitely see it happening and they have set it up as a possibility (what with those Chloe/Lex scenes in S5 and the antagonism between the two. They really do hate one another) It's just something that I really wouldn't want to see. And I disagree about it being a necessity, I really don't think that storywise Lex has to kill her. There's other routes they could go. But I definitely agree that it's a possibility.

[Liriel]

Yes, but then why wouldn't Lex kill Martha? That would certainly harm the invulnerable Clark Kent.

I think it's likely to happen, but I'm 100% against it because I don't want death to be any sort of motivator for Clark or for Lex to be his enemy out of Clark wanting vindication or personal justice.

Lex needs to be his enemy because Lex is a morally reprehensible person that kills, and endangers and tortures and does any number of horrible things. It needs to simply be about Clark and Lex being against each other because their differing goals and moral codes demand it.

I don't think it would hurt Lex's characterization to kill Chloe like that, but I do think it would hurt Superman's to have that personal bit as any sort of basis to Lex being his enemy. It needs to be about right and wrong for Superman, and not about his personal loss.

[F-Stop Blues]

Originally posted by MBCorp
Oh yeah, I can definitely see it happening and they have set it up as a possibility (what with those Chloe/Lex scenes in S5 and the antagonism between the two. They really do hate one another) It's just something that I really wouldn't want to see. And I disagree about it being a necessity, I really don't think that storywise Lex has to kill her. There's other routes they could go. But I definitely agree that it's a possibility.

Yeah but thats why I think he has to kill her because you hate it so much. Everyone would hate it so thats why I think its going to happen.

Originally posted by Liriel
Yes, but then why wouldn't Lex kill Martha? That would certainly harm the invulnerable Clark Kent.


Yes but the show does play with certain ground rules and Martha Kent is one of the untouchables.

Originally posted by Liriel

I think it's likely to happen, but I'm 100% against it because I don't want death to be any sort of motivator for Clark or for Lex to be his enemy out of Clark wanting vindication or personal justice.

Lex needs to be his enemy because Lex is a morally reprehensible person that kills, and endangers and tortures and does any number of horrible things. It needs to simply be about Clark and Lex being against each other because their differing goals and moral codes demand it.

I don't think it would hurt Lex's characterization to kill Chloe like that, but I do think it would hurt Superman's to have that personal bit as any sort of basis to Lex being his enemy. It needs to be about right and wrong for Superman, and not about his personal loss.

I agree and I dont think that if Lex did kill her then Clark would proclaim that they are mortal enemies. I think they already will be by the time that happens. All I'm saying is that Chloe is such a beloved character on this show and so intuned with whats going on with all the characters that Lex would want to use her for info and since she has said that she would die for Clark I see her making the ultimate sacrifice. Also I dont think that Clark would know that Lex did it, I think only the audience would know that.

[Liriel]

See, the thing is for me that Clark has to be against Lex because Lex is a person that deserves to have heroes against him, not because of something personal.

And Superman can't be motivated by death.

Superman is the one hero, above all others to me, that must be the hero simply because he has the ability to help. No personal motivation, no loss, no unavenged murders, no none of that. Just because he can.

Chloe's death would take away from that, would diminish his heroism in a way. Because then he would be this only because of something that personally affected him.

[F-Stop Blues]

Originally posted by Liriel
See, the thing is for me that Clark has to be against Lex because Lex is a person that deserves to have heroes against him, not because of something personal.

And Superman can't be motivated by death.

Superman is the one hero, above all others to me, that must be the hero simply because he has the ability to help. No personal motivation, no loss, no unavenged murders, no none of that. Just because he can.

Chloe's death would take away from that, would diminish his heroism in a way. Because then he would be this only because of something that personally affected him.

I dont think he would know Lex did it and I think they will already be enemies by that point, thats why I dont think it goes against the "mission statement" for Superman. You're right he's not a vengeful person, he's very much like a jedi (sorry my geek slipped out).

[All about Clark]

Originally posted by avidreader
But if someone wants to help, why would you question their motives. Clark wants to help, Lana knows he has always come through in the past. She wants Lex saved, so why does she need to show the door to the only one who has offered, regardless of his reasons?

It comes across like she wants to control everything when she really should have put her feelings aside to help Lex.

This is true. Why would she withhold information from the one person who would save Lex. This just proves to me that Clark's secret is more important to Lana than Lex's life.

Lex and Lana are so beside themselves with the fact that Clark won't share it with them. It eats at both of them, and sooner or later, it will turn dangerous.

Originally posted by F-Stop Blues
If you think Lex is evil then fine but Clark doesnt. He stood up for him in Aqua when Fine compared him to Hitler and Stalin. That should be a fair comparison when this show is over.

Clark's maybe didn't see Lex as evil in Aqua, but alot has changed, and I think he does see him as evil with the happenings in Vessel.


I think he'll kill Lionel also but I dont think that will be as dramatic as him killing Chloe. [/QUOTE]

Yes, I agree.

Originally posted by Liriel
Yes, but then why wouldn't Lex kill Martha? That would certainly harm the invulnerable Clark Kent.

No, killing Martha would be different than killing Chloe. Chloe helps Clark to investigate, that makes her just as dangerous as Clark. Killing Chloe would take away Clark's aid and hurt Clark at the same time. In essense, Chloe is a threat to Lex and Martha is not.

[ShelbyKent]

I personally like Lois and Chloe. But I must admit Lana has her well-written moments as well.

It also depends on which Lana you like: the sweet, slightly naive Lana of the earlier Seasons, or the slightly rebellious and darker Lana of the recent seasons.

Not that being slightly rebellious or darker makes her necessarily a "bad" or "unlikeable" character. Smallville is a "coming of age" story, and I think this applies to all the young characters, not just Clark.

Everybody is figuring out who they are and what's their place in the world; and that involves making not-so-bright decisions. Thus we had the Chloe teaming up with Lionel scenario, Lois' spotty educational record, Clark releasing Zod, and now Lana's current team-up with Lex.

Lana's current portrayal makes her character more textured. It's not pure black or white, good girl or bad girl. She's more complicated now which is more realistic, and probably offers KK a greater challenge as an actress.

p.s. this is my 1st post on K-site, so please go easy on the newbie ;)

[InLove_with_Chloe]

Originally posted by ShelbyKent
p.s. this is my 1st post on K-site, so please go easy on the newbie ;)

Well, then let me be the first one to welcome you here, Shelbykent (great name, btw)!!!

What bothered me for a while is that everything Lana did or went through was somehow connected to a no-good boyfriend, now they seem to go the same route with Lexana. That's annoying as it makes her look very weak, like she can't act on her own.

[ShelbyKent]

Originally posted by InLove_with_Chloe

What bothered me for a while is that everything Lana did or went through was somehow connected to a no-good boyfriend, now they seem to go the same route with Lexana. That's annoying as it makes her look very weak, like she can't act on her own.

Yeah, that seems to be a running theme in Lana's character. Definitely something she needs to grow out of.

But you know Smallville - they need conflict and angst. By the time Lana has worked things out for herself, it's probably nearing the end of the series lol!

But no matter what happens, I think TPTB would not turn her into an irredeemable character.

p.s And Thanks for the warm welcome :)

[Gaussian]

What I keep wondering is "How stupid is Lana?"???? She has all the puzzle pieces and can't seem to put it together.

She knows Clark has a secret....she knows about the twister.....she knows something came down with the first meteor shower....she knows Clark knew about Lex....she knows Clark came back from the dead.....come on....can't she figure it out???

Or something close ????

[F-Stop Blues]

Originally posted by Gaussian
What I keep wondering is "How stupid is Lana?"???? She has all the puzzle pieces and can't seem to put it together.

She knows Clark has a secret....she knows about the twister.....she knows something came down with the first meteor shower....she knows Clark knew about Lex....she knows Clark came back from the dead.....come on....can't she figure it out???

Or something close ????

Word. I think at some point this season she will find out the truth about Clark. How could she not? Her character would be a complete fool if she didnt. She already knows the name Kal-El from Arrival and know she knows of Krypton.

[InLove_with_Chloe]

Originally posted by Gaussian
What I keep wondering is "How stupid is Lana?"???? She has all the puzzle pieces and can't seem to put it together.

I bet she was one of those kids who tried to hammer the little round pieces of wood into the square openings...
:lol:

[Gaussian]

Originally posted by F-Stop Blues

[QUOTE She already knows the name Kal-El from Arrival and know she knows of Krypton.

Exactly....my point. Hmm.....who does she know that might fit the description of Kal-el??

Unless....maybe she thinks he's just some meteor freak. But, I really don't think she does.

He knows too much about Lex going Zod. Surely....she'll put two and two together.

But, then she seems totally clueless about Lex. She can't figure out that he's evil. Even when Clark....who at the time she was in love with.....hated him.

I think that's why I can't stand her this season.....she has no discernment when it comes to the people around her. She only seems to go on face value.

[clana20]

This post is right on. I love Lana, and I HATE watching the producers destroy her character ever since the middle of last season. Bring back the likable Lana and make things between her and clark at least bearable and people wont hate her.

[cotton candy girl]

Originally posted by Gaussian
What I keep wondering is "How stupid is Lana?"???? She has all the puzzle pieces and can't seem to put it together.


If Lana's stupid then so is Lex. Lex knows so much about Clark and still doesn't know he's an alien. And to be honest, the only reason Chloe knows is because someone showed her, so let's be fair.

[Liriel]

Truly - I can't hold it against anyone for not realizing Clark has superpowers. It's just the nature of the genre.

[F-Stop Blues]

Originally posted by Liriel
Truly - I can't hold it against anyone for not realizing Clark has superpowers. It's just the nature of the genre.

As stupid as it is I would have to agree. It took Lois like 60 years to learn the truth and she didn't even figure it out. Clark told her. But to be fair in the comics it was easier for Clark to fool people because he had Superman robots and Jonn could shapeshift into Superman so Clark could be around them as Clark. But lets be honest Lana should figure it or Clark should atleast tell her by the series end which I think he will.