Who is this Clark Kent?

[Watching Smallville]

I'm such a fan of this show, but I'm having so much trouble this season with Clark's priorities. First, he's moping around becuase he got his powers back just in time to save Smallville from nuclear attack. I mean -- even if he's pining over Lana, that blast would have killed her. And his parents. Now he's finally stepping up to the plate to tell Lana the truth -- not out of respect for their relationship, not because he owes Lana some truth and respect, but because he's selfishly worried about her relationship with Lex.

I'm not understanding the Smallville Clark Kent at all. And I'm thinking he has a long, long path to becoming the Superman we've come to admire.

[~*Lois & Clark Fan*~]

He'll never be the Superman we'd love and admire. Like someone said they've "Marvelized" him to much. :\

[flcn6]

Yeah, i think that (hope really) that Clark will turn around after the 100 eppy, seeing someone die. It looks like Clark needs to grow up, fast.

[PETER WEST]

This version Of Clark Kent WILL never become SUPERMAN.

The Real Clark Kent has yet to emager . hopfully 100th Episode "Reckoning" it will be the begining of his Transformation .

[BadToad]

I don't think he's motivated to tell Lana just because of her growing closeness to Lex. We've seen for seasons that he's troubled by not being able to tell Lana. We saw in Hidden that he didn't want to go back to the lies. Yes, he should've told her before this, No arguement with that. But I think his motivation for telling Lana is an overall feeling of her slipping away and him not wanting that to happen. Lex is a factor, but I don't believe its the primary motivation. Of course, I do wish things had been written a bit better in making Clark's mindset a bit clearer.

[photogirl]

we can hope.. he is selfish and pathetic...those are not superman traits!!!

[~*Lois & Clark Fan*~]

I truly hope he grows this season, cause right now he's backpeddled so much. Heck even Lana's grown more than him

[Watching Smallville]

And it's not just the Lana thing. It's the whole package the show has created this season. I'm seeing someone who has no perspective on his powers, on his frienship with Chloe (some of his conversations really take advantage of her), on the responsibilities of being in a relationship. I can't figure out why he's so off the mark. Almost every other character has shown more integrity than Clark this season. He's not even the same Clark from past seasons. How did he ever get from Season 1 Clark to this Clark?

[TML]

I'd say that anyone would have difficulty in setting their priorities right considering what Clark has to bear.

[Dannyblue1]

Originally posted by TML
I'd say that anyone would have difficulty in setting their priorities right considering what Clark has to bear.

I disagree. I person isn't measured by how they react when things are good and easy. They are measured by how they react to trials, tribulations, and troubles. And Clark just reacts badly way to much of the time. And, after five years of experience, he should be handling these situations (which are pretty much always the same, so nothing actually new for him) in a much better way.

No one is saying he should be perfect, or can't make mistakes. But he's been stuck at this level of development for way too long. No, actually, I think he's gotten worse over time. It's not that he isn't learning. He's unlearning all the stuff he already knew.

[Fish1941]

I can't believe this! For the first time we get to see the Clark Kent/Superman character as someone who is interesting, but flawed. And yet, all people can do is complain because he doesn't live up to the past portrayals of Clark as this NEAR PERFECT BEING?

Isn't there a Superman fan who is mature enough to appreciate SMALLVILLE'S portrayal of the show? Is it really necessary to portray Clark as someone who is near perfect . . . all the damn time?


Of course, I do wish things had been written a bit better in making Clark's mindset a bit clearer.

Clark is 18 or 19 years old by now. WHY do you expect him to be fully mature?


And Clark just reacts badly way to much of the time. And, after five years of experience, he should be handling these situations (which are pretty much always the same, so nothing actually new for him) in a much better way.


One, he's EIGHTEEN or NINETEEN YEARS OLD! Are you serious? Two, he is NOT ALWAYS going to handle matters perfectly. Even when he is a fully mature adult.

I really wonder about humans, sometimes. Each individual expect others to tolerate their own personal flaws, yet, nearly everyone expect others - ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY ARE FICTIONAL CHARACTERS to behave perfectly. I think that the majority of humans are very disturbed. And probably hypocritical.

[Watching Smallville]

It's not that he isn't perfect. I love the Clark Kent of this show -- except this season. His attitude this season just baffles me. He's supposed to be growing. This season is not even a step backward, it's a step off the rails. I think that's what people are seeing. I love that he wasn't perfect, that he had to learn his powers, that he was trying to balance his life. Now, he's just in denial all the time about everything. And he's not even logical. At least in the past he had logic.

[Fish1941]

Originally posted by Watching Smallville
It's not that he isn't perfect. I love the Clark Kent of this show -- except this season. His attitude this season just baffles me. He's supposed to be growing. This season is not even a step backward, it's a step off the rails. I think that's what people are seeing. I love that he wasn't perfect, that he had to learn his powers, that he was trying to balance his life. Now, he's just in denial all the time about everything. And he's not even logical. At least in the past he had logic.


SO WHAT?

What? Clark has to be right and behave perfectly in every damn situation? Then he would make for a BORING character. If that is how you believe a fictional character should act, do not become a writer.

[~*Lois & Clark Fan*~]

Originally posted by Fish1941
I can't believe this! For the first time we get to see the Clark Kent/Superman character as someone who is interesting, but flawed. And yet, all people can do is complain because he doesn't live up to the past portrayals of Clark as this NEAR PERFECT BEING?

Isn't there a Superman fan who is mature enough to appreciate SMALLVILLE'S portrayal of the show? Is it really necessary to portray Clark as someone who is near perfect . . . all the damn time?



Clark is 18 or 19 years old by now. WHY do you expect him to be fully mature?




One, he's EIGHTEEN or NINETEEN YEARS OLD! Are you serious? Two, he is NOT ALWAYS going to handle matters perfectly. Even when he is a fully mature adult.

I really wonder about humans, sometimes. Each individual expect others to tolerate their own personal flaws, yet, nearly everyone expect others - ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY ARE FICTIONAL CHARACTERS to behave perfectly. I think that the majority of humans are very disturbed. And probably hypocritical.


Being a teenager is NO excuse for how this Clark acts. That excuse gets used way too often for him.

Excuse me but I'm way mature enough to appreciate when a character I've loved my WHOLE LIFE is being written very poorly. This character isn't Clark Kent, he just shares the name with that character, the superpowers are just a bonus.

[Watching Smallville]

Originally posted by Fish1941
SO WHAT?

What? Clark has to be right and behave perfectly in every damn situation?

That's not what I'm saying. I'm not looking for perfect, which I posted before.

And "so what" is the whole point. Where is the Clark character who got me hooked on this show? I'm just hoping they get back to what they started with this character -- a caring individual struggling with an extraordinary issue. Let's bring the caring part back. There's clueless and there's dunderhead. I'm tired of the dunderhead.

[Daphne]

Being a teenager is an excuse for how Clark acts. Teenagers are outstanding individuals but it's a hard, hard time and especially in Clark's situation, (being an alien and all.) I am as confused at his selfishness lately as anyone, and it does bug me that it seems he's finally going to open up to Lana because Lana look's like she could be warming up to Lex..... but telling people his secret is SO foreign to him. He never told Chloe, she found out, he did tell Pete but pretty much because he had to. I think that admitting this is not easy and there are a lot of reasons to why he thinks that Lana will not accept him.
I also don't think he likes Lana as much as he thinks he does. Or he would have told her by now.
I am hoping that Clark does start acting a little more like Superman....

[Timester]

Originally posted by Fish1941
I can't believe this! For the first time we get to see the Clark Kent/Superman character as someone who is interesting, but flawed. And yet, all people can do is complain because he doesn't live up to the past portrayals of Clark as this NEAR PERFECT BEING?

Isn't there a Superman fan who is mature enough to appreciate SMALLVILLE'S portrayal of the show? Is it really necessary to portray Clark as someone who is near perfect . . . all the damn time?



Clark is 18 or 19 years old by now. WHY do you expect him to be fully mature?




One, he's EIGHTEEN or NINETEEN YEARS OLD! Are you serious? Two, he is NOT ALWAYS going to handle matters perfectly. Even when he is a fully mature adult.

I really wonder about humans, sometimes. Each individual expect others to tolerate their own personal flaws, yet, nearly everyone expect others - ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY ARE FICTIONAL CHARACTERS to behave perfectly. I think that the majority of humans are very disturbed. And probably hypocritical.

If you were talking about Peter Parker, I would agree 100%. The fact is this is supposed to be Clark Kent, not Peter Parker. The reason why I love Superman/Clark Kent is because he is a symbol, he give us hope, he does his job without asking for something or complaining about it. That's the complete opposite of this Non!Clark Kent. And older we get, more and more we prefer Clark Kents to Peter Parkers.

[HalJordan4184]

I totally agree with most of the people here. No one is looking for a perfect Clark. We're just looking for a plausible one.

Justice League Unlimited has done this character more justice in one season, last years, than this show has done in the last four. They had something everyone loved. A flawed, human Superman, who was still Superman.

I honestly don't know what to say to people out there, who insist this Clark is perfectly justified in being a hypocritical jerk. That doesn't work at any age. Being a teenager does not give you an excuse to treat others like dirt. Or to mope, and hate your life. There are perfectly well adjusted teens out there. There are also screwed up teens out there. And then there are those in the middle. Clark, was never in the middle, and never the screwed up one. That's a point, many people here miss. Especially non comics readers. They insist, with no real evidence or knowledge to back up the claim, that Superman's younger days, as simply famr Clark, have never been looked at. Rather the contrary, we saw exactly what made that young Clark into the man he is in the future. You know what it was, a boring life, on a boring farm, in a boring smalltown, in the middle of nowhere. That's ESSENTIAL to Clark growing into who he is. That's the difference between the DC origin of a hero, and the Marvel origin. In DC, characters aren't out fighting supervillains, as part of their JOURNEY to hero status. In Marvel, you just throw them in the thick of it, with no clue what's going on, or what to do, and watch as chaos erupts. And that's exactly what Al/Miles have done to this Clark. They've taken the essential parts of Clark's upbringing, mainly his isolation from the outside world, and thrown it to the wind, because that wouldn't make good teenybopper sci-fi drama, Dawson's Creekish crap. In other words, what sells on TV. This Clark is perfectly capable of growing up to be a good guy. He can be a decent man, and live a good life. However, this Clark is haunted by a past wrought with tragedy, pain and suffering. And that's not what Superman is. He can wear the costume, call himself Superman, all of that. But he won't be Superman, because is experiences, motivations, and trials, are so drastically different from waht actually made the character of Clark become Superman, that he just won't be the same. He might be a goodguy, and a superhero, but he'll be just another superhero, in a world too full of superheroes who are average. Who are just as selfish, and do their job because of selfish reasons, rather than hose who do what they do, because it is purely the right thing to do, and because they actually just want to help. No other motivation behind it.

[I_am_LEX]

i don't know if anyone remembers this or has said this but Clark has came close to telling Lana, twice i think. The episode where Emily comes back, remember he was going to but then all that stuff happened. Then in Covenant, he was gonna say it, but then Lana saw "Kara" in the the field. Then when Clark was supposed to be her "super shuttle" he wanted to talk but then Lex was there and it all changed. So he just needed an extra push, from Chloe... and now he's got mixed motives for telling her. He loves her and wants to be with her for the rest of his life which couldnt happen cause he's immortal but he doesnt know that yet for sure & he feels threatened by her going to Lex of all people and for the truth of all things! But, once u've lied about something, especially something like this, for so long... its a habit that's very hard to break... from personal experience, I know how hard it can be to tell the truth.

[Nerial]

Geez, if Clark is a selfish little brat...

...I'd hate to see what you guys would call me. :p

[Watching Smallville]

Originally posted by HalJordan4184
No one is looking for a perfect Clark. We're just looking for a plausible one.
That is what I was trying to say and couldn't find the words.

[ryb]

I'm really going to try to stay out of the argument in this thread because I have vehement disagreements with both sides on this one...but let me add a couple of observations.

I think there are two major themes going on this season that have been subtly hinted at and have not been attained by many of the people in this thread.

1) Lana is destined for human Clark Kent but is not at all destined for superhuman Clark Kent.
--Compare their relationship in Mortal (e.g.) to Fanatic/Lockdown -- heh, even Splinter for that matter. If Clark Kent could be human, Lana would be the perfect match for him. Many fans were annoyed at the "human" Clark, but I think the point of these episodes was to address the Clark that Lana is destined for versus the Clark that obviously can't work with Lana (post-Hidden). Interesting, then, how Clark's human compassion centers on Lana and how this seems to be a hindrance to his "superhuman" development. Which segues to theme 2...
2) Clark Kent's superhuman development cannot occur (at least completely) while in a relationship with Lana.
--Take, once again, Fanatic and Lockdown, two episodes where human emotion interferes with his "selfless-to-be" behavior later in life.

I think a lot of the negative response to Clark's behavior this season (and maybe even overall) is in actual agreement with the above two themes, of which I believe the writers have been developing for some time. In other words, if Clark's behavior seems regressive or "unlearning" of sorts, I don't think the writers would disagree with you. I think that's the point. So how does Clark Kent move past this? I'm guessing episodes post-100 will address this.

[Watching Smallville]

So you're saying his being in love with Lana is keeping him from being Superman. So it must be love for Lana in particular, and not love itself that hinders him -- because he is able to love Lois and be Superman at the same time.

Unless you mean he must become Superman first and then be able to love after that. Is that what you mean? I'm just trying to understand your post.

[superclarkville]

I think what people are forgetting is that no one is BORN a hero. They develop into one. No one is born with a sense of right and wrong, they're taught.

For Clark to become the symbol that everyone seems to love so much, he has to grow into that role. That means a few steps forward, a few steps back, until he learns to apply what he knows.

If someone is good, then how do they know they're good? They know through growing, learning, applying. That's what Clark is doing now. He's a person growing into a symbol. That's not an esy thing to do.

my 2c

[ryb]

Originally posted by Watching Smallville
So you're saying his being in love with Lana is keeping him from being Superman. So it must be love for Lana in particular, and not love itself that hinders him -- because he is able to love Lois and be Superman at the same time.

Unless you mean he must become Superman first and then be able to love after that. Is that what you mean? I'm just trying to understand your post.

I'm not saying either of those interpretations is right or wrong. I'm not sure yet, actually. Either of those could be a believable transition. And I'm also not saying that Lana is the complete (read: whole) reason why Clark is not able to transition to Superman yet (There are certainly personality traits independent of his feelings for Lana that prevent him from transitioning completely). But his feelings for Lana and his relationship with Lana appear to be hindrances, at least in the themes presented by the writers of the show this season.

But it is certainly not love in general, no. It would be his love for Lana, yes. Anyway, just some food for thought.

[jag5311]

good say Superclarkville.

What bothers me by some of the comments is the assumption (whether it's 5 years of experience of 25 in terms of the Smallville show) is that Clark is dealing with some incredible emotions right now, from hating his biological father, to dying, coming back alive, saving lives, stopping nuclear warheads, losing his powers, getting his powers back, dying to tell Lana, not wanting to lose her, built a friend (Dr. Fine), got drugged paranoid, was lied to by Fine, almost lost Martha, etc...

There is a lot going on with the guy and everyone thinks after this season he should be primed for the Superman role.

Isn't superman when he comes to Metropolis like 26 or something? Clark is 18-19. He is not Superman and won't be for quite some time. Hell, he is probably still immature when he finally makes the decision to head to the FOS for his 7 year training, but after that, he is a man and ready for the world.

I think TPTB have done Clarks character purposely so that we can be prepared to slowly see a change post EP 100.

my 2 cents

[jwoodie]

Originally posted by ryb

1) Lana is destined for human Clark Kent but is not at all destined for superhuman Clark Kent.
2) Clark Kent's superhuman development cannot occur (at least completely) while in a relationship with Lana.


My take on it is this:

I think if you boil the show down to its two most fundamental story threads it would be these: 1) the future Superman learning to deal with his abilities, learning who he is and what his destiny holds for him and 2) young Clark Kent endlessly trying to fit in, to be normal, to find the love and friendships that all other normal young people enjoy and to do all of that while being forced to constantly lie about himself to those closest to him.

The two pillars of the show, then, are his relationship with his parents (related to #1 above) and his relationship with Lana, which is the key to #2 above. Sure he deals with all of those issues with Chloe and Pete and others but it is with Lana that the pain of the lies is the sharpest. I guess what I don't get about the Clark/Lana skeptics is that, for Smallville, #2 is just as much a key to the show as #1 and Lana is at the absolute heart of that. Sure, they tried to tie Lana in with the Superman mythology in season 4, with some success and some failed attempts, but Lana's role in the entire arc of Young Superman is, at the core, about Clark's trying to be human during the time in his life when he is just learning about not being human.

In the end, I don't understand how their relationship can be dismissed (as many people do) if you truly appreciate what the show is about. Without his parents and Lana (both contributing in different but critical ways to his humanity), Clark would just follow the path of so many other meteor freaks. We know that isn't going to happen and Lana is critical to Clark's humanity and compassion.

[~*Lois & Clark Fan*~]

Originally posted by HalJordan4184
I totally agree with most of the people here. No one is looking for a perfect Clark. We're just looking for a plausible one.

Justice League Unlimited has done this character more justice in one season, last years, than this show has done in the last four. They had something everyone loved. A flawed, human Superman, who was still Superman.

I honestly don't know what to say to people out there, who insist this Clark is perfectly justified in being a hypocritical jerk. That doesn't work at any age. Being a teenager does not give you an excuse to treat others like dirt. Or to mope, and hate your life. There are perfectly well adjusted teens out there. There are also screwed up teens out there. And then there are those in the middle. Clark, was never in the middle, and never the screwed up one. That's a point, many people here miss. Especially non comics readers. They insist, with no real evidence or knowledge to back up the claim, that Superman's younger days, as simply famr Clark, have never been looked at. Rather the contrary, we saw exactly what made that young Clark into the man he is in the future. You know what it was, a boring life, on a boring farm, in a boring smalltown, in the middle of nowhere. That's ESSENTIAL to Clark growing into who he is. That's the difference between the DC origin of a hero, and the Marvel origin. In DC, characters aren't out fighting supervillains, as part of their JOURNEY to hero status. In Marvel, you just throw them in the thick of it, with no clue what's going on, or what to do, and watch as chaos erupts. And that's exactly what Al/Miles have done to this Clark. They've taken the essential parts of Clark's upbringing, mainly his isolation from the outside world, and thrown it to the wind, because that wouldn't make good teenybopper sci-fi drama, Dawson's Creekish crap. In other words, what sells on TV. This Clark is perfectly capable of growing up to be a good guy. He can be a decent man, and live a good life. However, this Clark is haunted by a past wrought with tragedy, pain and suffering. And that's not what Superman is. He can wear the costume, call himself Superman, all of that. But he won't be Superman, because is experiences, motivations, and trials, are so drastically different from waht actually made the character of Clark become Superman, that he just won't be the same. He might be a goodguy, and a superhero, but he'll be just another superhero, in a world too full of superheroes who are average. Who are just as selfish, and do their job because of selfish reasons, rather than hose who do what they do, because it is purely the right thing to do, and because they actually just want to help. No other motivation behind it.


Very well said! I agree all the way ;)

[ryb]

Originally posted by jwoodie
My take on it is this:

I think if you boil the show down to its two most fundamental story threads it would be these: 1) the future Superman learning to deal with his abilities, learning who he is and what his destiny holds for him and 2) young Clark Kent endlessly trying to fit in, to be normal, to find the love and friendships that all other normal young people enjoy and to do all of that while being forced to constantly lie about himself to those closest to him.

The two pillars of the show, then, are his relationship with his parents (related to #1 above) and his relationship with Lana, which is the key to #2 above. Sure he deals with all of those issues with Chloe and Pete and others but it is with Lana that the pain of the lies is the sharpest. I guess what I don't get about the Clark/Lana skeptics is that, for Smallville, #2 is just as much a key to the show as #1 and Lana is at the absolute heart of that. Sure, they tried to tie Lana in with the Superman mythology in season 4, with some success and some failed attempts, but Lana's role in the entire arc of Young Superman is, at the core, about Clark's trying to be human during the time in his life when he is just learning about not being human.

In the end, I don't understand how their relationship can be dismissed (as many people do) if you truly appreciate what the show is about. Without his parents and Lana (both contributing in different but critical ways to his humanity), Clark would just follow the path of so many other meteor freaks. We know that isn't going to happen and Lana is critical to Clark's humanity and compassion.

I'm not sure whether you are agreeing or disagreeing with what I am saying (or maybe elements of both), but I have no problems with your arguments. In fact, in other posts, I've stated similar things to what you are saying here.

Just for clarification, the two themes I listed in my original post are by no means the total number of themes of the show (or even of the season). They were two themes specific to the Clark-Lana relationship that I have found to be subtle yet prevalent through the course of this season. And I think much of the negative response to Clark's "development" this season both regards and yet dismisses these themes in a single, simplistic, omniscient stroke without realizing the ramifications and the implications of the situations he is involved in. Having said that, I think the writers could have done a better job in expressing the themes listed above (much better, actually) -- this is why I have vehement arguments with both sides on this thread.

I'm not sure people realize how risky a show like Smallville is. It's using a story that is at least somewhat known to the general public and putting a modern interpretation (not regurgitation) on it. The result is always the same. Everyone has their issues with it, whether large or small, fundamental or infinitesimal. But people never, never, never look at the big picture hard enough. I always refer to this as "focusing on a few grains of sand while losing sight of the beach". I think the points you express above are a good look at the beach, something I rarely see in this forum (or any TV series forum, for that matter).

My last comment: To appreciate the show, I believe, you can do so in two ways. You can ignore most of the undercurrent and just watch the show for entertainment week by week (which is generally how I do so) or you can choose to muffle your own opinions on how things "should" transpire for an hour and see what the writers are trying to say. To do the latter, you have to look for some of the themes that are present from show to show. Having found the two that I listed above, I think the show's current position on character and current portrayal of character interactions is believable, reasonable, intriguing, and most importantly, understandable -- at least in the Clark-Lana-Chloe triangle right now.

[LexLuthorMetropolis]

Originally posted by ryb
I'm not sure whether you are agreeing or disagreeing with what I am saying (or maybe elements of both), but I have no problems with your arguments. In fact, in other posts, I've stated similar things to what you are saying here.

Just for clarification, the two themes I listed in my original post are by no means the total number of themes of the show (or even of the season). They were two themes specific to the Clark-Lana relationship that I have found to be subtle yet prevalent through the course of this season. And I think much of the negative response to Clark's "development" this season both regards and yet dismisses these themes in a single, simplistic, omniscient stroke without realizing the ramifications and the implications of the situations he is involved in. Having said that, I think the writers could have done a better job in expressing the themes listed above (much better, actually) -- this is why I have vehement arguments with both sides on this thread.

I'm not sure people realize how risky a show like Smallville is. It's using a story that is at least somewhat known to the general public and putting a modern interpretation (not regurgitation) on it. The result is always the same. Everyone has their issues with it, whether large or small, fundamental or infinitesimal. But people never, never, never look at the big picture hard enough. I always refer to this as "focusing on a few grains of sand while losing sight of the beach". I think the points you express above are a good look at the beach, something I rarely see in this forum (or any TV series forum, for that matter).

My last comment: To appreciate the show, I believe, you can do so in two ways. You can ignore most of the undercurrent and just watch the show for entertainment week by week (which is generally how I do so) or you can choose to muffle your own opinions on how things "should" transpire for an hour and see what the writers are trying to say. To do the latter, you have to look for some of the themes that are present from show to show. Having found the two that I listed above, I think the show's current position on character and current portrayal of character interactions is believable, reasonable, intriguing, and most importantly, understandable -- at least in the Clark-Lana-Chloe triangle right now.

Reasonable would be if Clark had matured beyond the attitude of a 14 year old, taken responsiblility at his age instead of just taking the usual excuse of "It's not my fault" or "I'm 18." He doesn't have the knowledge to move forward or the capability.

The problem with the argument you bring up is the fact that Superman is farily well known. You're ignoring the larger picture: Superman is well known world wide in every form.

As for respect and updating, there are countless properties that update the material but don't destroy what the characters are and become. SV isn't doing that. It's completely ignoring that and turning it into whatever they please. Not the other way around.

[jwoodie]

Originally posted by ryb
[B]I'm not sure whether you are agreeing or disagreeing with what I am saying ...

Oh, probably a little of both. But as I've watched Smallville, the thing that makes it work for me has always been the big themes, rather than the individual story arcs. The FotW stories don't usually do much for me (there are exceptions), but when they provide a backdrop for exploring the big themes of the show, that's when it works best for me. Take "Blank". The FotW "A" stories is forgettable, but it does provide a backdrop for exploring issues between the characters that makes for a good episode overall. Lots of episodes work in that way, even though the "A" story is not what draws me to the show. If Smallville spent 10 minutes per episode on character development/issues and 32 on FotW, I wouldn't watch. But it's usually a pretty even split, even in a standard FotW episode, which gives them a lot more time to explore what is driving the characters.
All that being said, I like the direction that all of the characters have taken this year as well. We're agreed on that point for sure. To be honest, even the "immature" Clark that people have been complaining about is just par for the course - he's ALWAYS been a little slow on the uptake when it comes to emotional issues. It's an explicit thing that can't be an accident - like when Pete tells him that he's not the most observant person in the world when he can't see that Chloe has feelings for him in season 1. There's a scene in season two, in "Duplicity" when Lana tells him it's "typical" when he talks about his problems with Pete, but can't tell her that it's because Pete has learned his secret. He can't understand at first what she means by "typical" and she has to spell it out for him.
Yeah, I'd say he's a little slow in that regard, but I think it's a deliberate thing. As I said before, he's learning from his friends and family what it is like to be human - in essence, practicing to "act" human and as such he's a little behind when he has to deal with new emotional issues. Can he be a little petulant at times? Geez, weren't we all, at one time or another?

[spideyfan]

IMO (big fan of comics):
CK shold have well and done embraced his destiny by now. I mean hes 18 / 19 but all he can do is fawn over this Lana chick who thinks she's something special. He doesnt realize the uber COOLNESS hes got w/ a friend like Chloe and doesnt use his powers for good as much as he can. I mean she does more than him if you think about it. I mean so he saves Lana, BUT in he end he complains more.

I CAN and WILL be hard on this guy. He is supposed to be a f'n GOD when he grows up (arguably) and he shouldnt be *****in like this. I want him to put on his serious face, do away with Lana, and takes his powers / responsibilities seriously for a change. This better change next week dammit!

[Coyote]

do away with Lana

Well, Spideyfan, I agree that Clark is a whining baby who needs a kick in the butt. But it seems a little harsh for him to kill poor Lana. :lol:

Anyway, I kind of like Clark this way. It makes him more human and unpredictable and entertaining to watch. The creators of Smallville don't really have a responsiblity to conform in detail to any previous version of Superman's personality. They want to make an entertaining TV show that will get them good ratings over a long period of time. They believe that the last generation's version of Superman is just too boring and cheesy to sustain the interest of a modern audience for years. They're probably right. Most (likely over 99%) Smallville audience members don't read comics, since comics have had an insignificant circulation in recent years. This audience doesn't have any preconceived concept of the character, other than maybe a few very basic facts. So they don't care if Smallville's Clark never develops into the Superman of the comics or the old movies or whatever. They want a more human scale character with more flaws and moral ambiguity, and would laugh the older, simpler version of Superman off the air. So far TPTB have had a successful five year run using this approach and are laughing all the way to the bank at critics who tell them they want the old Superman back. If their character appears "Marvel", or "teen soap", or whatever to hardcore comics fans, that's too bad, but it won't make any difference to them.

[LexLuthorMetropolis]

Originally posted by Coyote
Well, Spideyfan, I agree that Clark is a whining baby who needs a kick in the butt. But it seems a little harsh for him to kill poor Lana. :lol:

Anyway, I kind of like Clark this way. It makes him more human and unpredictable and entertaining to watch. The creators of Smallville don't really have a responsiblity to conform in detail to any previous version of Superman's personality. They want to make an entertaining TV show that will get them good ratings over a long period of time. They believe that the last generation's version of Superman is just too boring and cheesy to sustain the interest of a modern audience for years. They're probably right. Most (likely over 99%) Smallville audience members don't read comics, since comics have had an insignificant circulation in recent years. This audience doesn't have any preconceived concept of the character, other than maybe a few very basic facts. So they don't care if Smallville's Clark never develops into the Superman of the comics or the old movies or whatever. They want a more human scale character with more flaws and moral ambiguity, and would laugh the older, simpler version of Superman off the air. So far TPTB have had a successful five year run using this approach and are laughing all the way to the bank at critics who tell them they want the old Superman back. If their character appears "Marvel", or "teen soap", or whatever to hardcore comics fans, that's too bad, but it won't make any difference to them.

They've never said anything specifically about the old Superman being boring. Rather that's your intrepretation of the matters.

And for the thousandth time, Superman isn't a flawed 2D character. He's a boy scout, who has made countless mistakes. SV has moved him further from the true character he is and if that's for the matters of entertainment. All I can do is laugh.

As for making him Superman, they're a looooooooooooooong way from reaching that point. As a character, Clark has no rational thought, no moral center, etc. He's basically a hyprocrite that's determined to get laid and that's about it. Not the comics Superman or Superman in any form.

This is the Teenage Drama version of Clark Kent, that's partly on steriods of an ego trip looking to have Lana. He could careless about the people he saves and he doesn't he even think about anyone else but himself.

If you want this character to become Superman in the long run. They're going to have to do some serious development and Clark is going to grow up quick and attempt to redeem himself.

[spideyfan]

sorry for multiple posts

[LexLuthorMetropolis]

Originally posted by spideyfan
IMO (big fan of comics):
CK shold have well and done embraced his destiny by now. I mean hes 18 / 19 but all he can do is fawn over this Lana chick who thinks she's something special. He doesnt realize the uber COOLNESS hes got w/ a friend like Chloe and doesnt use his powers for good as much as he can. I mean she does more than him if you think about it. I mean so he saves Lana, BUT in he end he complains more.

I CAN and WILL be hard on this guy. He is supposed to be a f'n GOD when he grows up (arguably) and he shouldnt be *****in like this. I want him to put on his serious face, do away with Lana, and takes his powers / responsibilities seriously for a change. This better change next week dammit!

Dump her yes, not kill her, that would defintely go against the true meaning of the character but agree with you on all the other accounts.

Superman is suppose to be a person we wanna aspire to be and Clark Kent is nowhere near that idea. He's still back in S1 obessessing over Lana and not getting any. Nowhere near the legend he's suppose to be on any level.

And using the death as an excuse to do it is such a twinkie of a defense. Clark should chose to be a hero out of his own will, not by being forced by Jor-El or any other factors.

[Watching Smallville]

Originally posted by ryb
I think much of the negative response to Clark's "development" this season both regards and yet dismisses these themes in a single, simplistic, omniscient stroke without realizing the ramifications and the implications of the situations he is involved in.
I don't think you can make that assumption.

I have no problems w/ Clark's struggle with his humanity or with his relationship with Lana. I've just stopped liking the guy, and that signals a big problem to me. I've always liked Smallville's Clark until the fifth season. He is more self absorbed this year than ever, at a time when most people are reaching out to the world more. He has been sensitive to Chloe's feelings until this year, when he needs to be more understanding than ever. He is more suspicious of Lana than ever, at a time he needs to be building trust with her. Even his proposal is born out of suspicion.

And no one can explain his comment upon returning from the FOS in Hidden: "The real sacrifice would have been not to return at all." So that all of Smallville is destroyed? It's complete nonsense.

I'm not asking for this guy to be perfect. I just want him to continue his journey with some thread of personality intact. I'm seeing Clark used this season the way many people complain about Lana being used -- more as a plot device. I don't think I'm "missing the point." I think I'm missing Clark.

[God-Man]

I don't like the fact that Clark was so glad to be normal in the beginning of this season. At this point, he should accept his powers and put his responsibilities ahead of his personal life. We've had enough of Clark resenting his abilities and wishing to be normal. That's Spider-Man.

Superman is a hero because that is the responsible thing to do. He wants to be a hero and help people. Superman doesn't think for a second about leaving that behind just to have a "normal" life. He always puts his responsibilities ahead of everything else. In S

[spideyfan]

^^ i agree :)

[PETER WEST]

I'm sick and tried of "Moopy" Clark Kent(This season), Clark's 18 for goodness sake (by now he's suppose be all matured and grown up, not acting like a stupid Teenager, with no Bloody FUTURE.)

Clark is 18 , but act's like he still 15 years old (from Season 1)

GROW UP Clark,stop acting like a crybaby.

He acts like his powers are like a curse . He doesn't see that his powers are a blessing. This guy Clark Kent Will NEVER BECOME SUPERMAN .

I look forward to Mature Adult Clark Kent shows up. I'm sick & tried of Whiny Clark . (I feel like sometimes getting a 4x4 {tape some KRYTONITE to it} and beat the living crap out of This Clark Kent .

[ryb]

Originally posted by Watching Smallville
I don't think you can make that assumption.

I have no problems w/ Clark's struggle with his humanity or with his relationship with Lana. I've just stopped liking the guy, and that signals a big problem to me. I've always liked Smallville's Clark until the fifth season. He is more self absorbed this year than ever, at a time when most people are reaching out to the world more. He has been sensitive to Chloe's feelings until this year, when he needs to be more understanding than ever. He is more suspicious of Lana than ever, at a time he needs to be building trust with her. Even his proposal is born out of suspicion.

And no one can explain his comment upon returning from the FOS in Hidden: "The real sacrifice would have been not to return at all." So that all of Smallville is destroyed? It's complete nonsense.

I'm not asking for this guy to be perfect. I just want him to continue his journey with some thread of personality intact. I'm seeing Clark used this season the way many people complain about Lana being used -- more as a plot device. I don't think I'm "missing the point." I think I'm missing Clark.

I think I can make this assumption (Notice, btw, I said "much" and not "all" of the negative criticism -- just for the record), and I think your post is evidence of this.

My posts regarding Clark's behavior recognize some of the faults that you list in Season 5. And the point of my post was that his behavior is explained by the themes I listed (regarding Lana). I find it amusing, to say the least, that you believe that Clark has regarded Chloe's feelings until Season 5. This is true, of course, if we ignore the end of Season 2 and much of the first half of Season 3.

I'm not sure certain things you mentioned regarding Lana should be reiterated since they are still spoilers (somewhat), but I do agree that Clark's behavior is reactionary regarding Lana. But my theory is that this is exactly what the writers intend -- this is one of the themes of the season. His behavior is at times selfish and reckless because his feelings for Lana are substantial and blinding. So he cannot progress toward Superman if he continues his love with Lana.

So the thought I have here (although far from complete) is that Clark is going down a dangerous path unless things change between Clark and Lana. I think this is exactly what the writers are saying (i.e., Clark is not destined to be Superman if he continues with Lana).

This segues back to my original point. A lot of the negative reaction to Clark is regarding the theme while dismissing it at the same time -- when the actual intent of the theme is for you to recognize that this is exactly why Clark Kent will not become Superman if he continues with Lana.

Does this make sense (I know it's sort of confusingly written...)? I'm not saying you're missing the point -- you are, of course, free to interpret as you will. I'm just saying it's possible the writers intend for your reaction to be as it is but are also suggesting at the same time that Clark will not fall completely into the path. Something will happen to stop this (d)evolution.

[flcn6]

All i want to see (sometime in the near future hopefully), is Clark learning that he can be both Clark Kent and Superman. These abilities are inherent in him, and he should rejoice in that fact. He is different from everyone. Right now, he wants to be Human, rather than himself.



P.S. Sorry if I just reiterated what someone said. Its late and i have to get up early.

[Watching Smallville]

Originally posted by ryb
I do agree that Clark's behavior is reactionary regarding Lana. But my theory is that this is exactly what the writers intend -- this is one of the themes of the season. His behavior is at times selfish and reckless because his feelings for Lana are substantial and blinding. So he cannot progress toward Superman if he continues his love with Lana.
I believe that Clark can be conflicted (and written this way) about Lana and still retain a personality that is consistent with what we've seen in the past. If you're saying that Lana has a toxic effect on Clark, then okay, if that's what you're saying.

BTW, I don't mean that Clark is always considerate of Chloe, but that has been his development. And this is what I'm objecting to -- this odd turn in his development. You talk about themes, I'm talking about character. A character shouldn't just morph to accommodate a theme, which is what I meant by TPTB using Clark as a plot device. I think your post supports my criticism.

[LexLuthorMetropolis]

Either way it seems the majority of us are put out with the repeated "plot device" routine.

Overall, I'd say a small majority is enjoying it. (Just my take from the constant talk on the boards.)

I've stated my opinion countless times though. We can only hope for more character development in the season and further attempts to redeem the "well oiled machine" (Al Gough) and make things right by the audience and understanding of the characters. Only time will tell in the long run.

[CK&CK]

Originally posted by LexLuthorMetropolis
Either way it seems the majority of us are put out with the repeated "plot device" routine.

Overall, I'd say a small majority is enjoying it. (Just my take from the constant talk on the boards.)

I've stated my opinion countless times though. We can only hope for more character development in the season and further attempts to redeem the "well oiled machine" (Al Gough) and make things right by the audience and understanding of the characters. Only time will tell in the long run.

Al Gough is an id**t.......I'd be willing to bet that Miles is the far better half of this duo. As far as Clark this season.......Who is Clark Kent?.........for me it comes down to.....Moron or Idiot? And I find myself asking......can't he be both?...... especially after some of the episodes this season?.......I have no doubt that he can. Perhaps he should change his name from Clark Kent to Al Gough. I'd say that it really doesn't make a difference.......but if the shoe fits.......then the right person should wear it.

[ryb]

Originally posted by LexLuthorMetropolis
Either way it seems the majority of us are put out with the repeated "plot device" routine.

Overall, I'd say a small majority is enjoying it. (Just my take from the constant talk on the boards.)

I've stated my opinion countless times though. We can only hope for more character development in the season and further attempts to redeem the "well oiled machine" (Al Gough) and make things right by the audience and understanding of the characters. Only time will tell in the long run.

Yikes, proof of why the Founding Fathers predominantly believed in a two-party political system.

Anyway, my original post (I think...so long ago now) stated that I didn't want to get involved in the argument although it now appears I've taken a side. I just want to make clear that I have my own personal issues/criticisms with this aspect of the show although I'd say my criticisms are more on the clarity of the show's intentions versus the character viewpoints.

Whatever the case, character morphology/evolution is constantly driven or emphasized by themes in any form of literature/entertainment/art. From movie characters ranging from Michael Corleone to Anakin Skywalker to TV characters ranging from Andy Sipowicz to Gaius Baltar, a character's evolution is themed nearly always. It's ridiculous to argue otherwise because otherwise there is no development, positive or negative (i.e., a theme is an explanation for a particular character's actions/personalities or for a particular situation's evolution as much as it is a thesis).

My point: Both sides are talking about theme AND character. You can't have one without the other. The theme wouldn't exist without the characters and their actions.

I think the difference here is the fundamental look at either (and both). Perhaps one way to put it (There are others) is that one side looks at the character's change and asks why while the other asks what situations lead to particular changes in character? The first interpretation by nature is more restrictive since it constantly challenges change while the other side looks at several possibilities and determines different outcomes from those circumstances.

These are not plot devices. These are motifs. A plot device is a particular style or element that enables a story to be told (for example, foreshadowing is a plot device).

I conclude with this thought. I think we're all at a wide range of positions on the same scale. We're ready for change and the final giant leaps of character development toward the characters we know. And I think the show is finally ready to start treading this path. Here's hoping the show is successful in doing so.

[Watching Smallville]

Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I don't understand storytelling. But I've made my point. I won't repeat it.

[HalJordan4184]

ryb, I think you give the writers and producers of this show far too much credit. I mean, one half of the creative team behind the show, said all Clark wants is to get laid.

[ryb]

Originally posted by Watching Smallville
Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I don't understand storytelling. But I've made my point. I won't repeat it.

Oh, for crying out loud, I'm not saying you don't understand storytelling (although I think your use of literary terms could use a brush up). I'm saying there are multiple ways of interpreting the show and that some ways make the interpretation of Smallville (or any TV show) more reasonable (read: understandable) than others. No interpretation is better than another.

I also want to make clear before I may get hounded on it that a plot device may be a person or object, as well, but the device advances a plot and NOT a theme. For example, Milton Fine was a plot device used to drive a bigger wedge between Lex and Clark.


Originally posted by HalJordan4184
ryb, I think you give the writers and producers of this show far too much credit. I mean, one half of the creative team behind the show, said all Clark wants is to get laid.

I'm assuming you're referring to this quote by Al Gough (regarding the Clark and Lana storyline this season):

I think so far, I think it's worked well. It's probably worked better than any other season, just 'cause you put 'em together, they have sex, he gets his powers back, so he clearly then hasn't been with her, which is what we're playing now, and then, guess what? It's going to go horribly awry, because he has honesty issues, and he wants to get laid. And then also, you've got Lex who's out there really, now that the gloves are kind of off with Clark, his feelings for Lana are an issue as well, so this relationship's got a lot to battle. Clark can either step up, or step aside.

It doesn't say "all Clark wants". It's not why he's struggling with everything. It's one of many issues he's having with Lana right now.

I may give the writers a bit too much credit (I tend to be optimistic about most TV programming), but I think a great number of you have little idea about how much these writers handle week by week. Could they handle it better? Definitely. But I've seen the view from their (read: TV writers) eyes, and sometimes chaos theory looks easier.

[Dannyblue1]

I guess I'm different in that I don't think Clark has to live up to "The Superman Ideal), necessarilly. I don't mind SV's Clark Kent being Marvelized. They're just not doing a good job of Marvelizing him, in my opinion. Giving a character lots of flaws, and making them whine and angst about their problems all the time, doesn't make them a good Marvel-type hero. A character flaw is supposed to serve a purpose. And Clark's flaws serve no purpose. They're just there. And, sometimes, I don't even think the flaws were intentional on the writers' part.

When I think of TV jerks, Angel comes to mind. Angel often acted like a jerk. The audience knew it. The other characters knew it (and often called him on it). Angel himself knew it. And the writers definately knew it, and they used it as part of the story. Angel's jerk-like behavior lead to some major plot developments, and there were always consequences. And, because of those consequences, Angel tried to be less of a jerk. He didn't always succeed, but he was aware of the problem, tried to change, and that lead to character growth.

Of all the times Clark has acted like a jerk on SV, there have been very few times when their have been consequences for his actions, or been called on it by another character. As far as I can tell, Clark isn't even aware of the fact that he was being a jerk on all of those occasions.

And, if he isn't even aware of this flaw in himself (after 4+ years) there's very little chance he will learn from those mistakes, or grow as a character.

I'm all for characters having flaws, but Clark's flaws serve no dramatic purpose.

[Coyote]

Of all the times Clark has acted like a jerk on SV, there have been very few times when their have been consequences for his actions, or been called on it by another character. As far as I can tell, Clark isn't even aware of the fact that he was being a jerk on all of those occasions.

Yes, that's the main problem with how they've handled this character. It isn't that Clark shouldn't have these flaws. He should. But when there's no cause and effect relationship between Clark's flaws and the events that happen in the story, there isn't any real point. Even though Clark often acts like a dumb jerk, everything still turns out OK, and almost everyone else on the show still worships him anyway. There's no need to make Clark into the "true DC Superman." They just need to follow through on the plotlines they create whenever they write a specific behavior for their character, and give this guy some hard consequences for the choices they have him make.

[superman79]

Why must people continue to condemn this show, you watch it you must enjoy it or you love to make yourself mad. For Example, I won't watch Fahrenheit 911 because I know that it will make me upset. I don't want to be upset. I want to be in a good mood so I surround myself with things I "Like". I'm not saying that the show is perfect or that it doesn't have it's flaws but it is what it is. Either you like or dislike it. How many times are we gonna have to hear about the writer's lack of skill? In the movie thread we are no longer allowed to say that we don't like BR or the new movie because the mod said it is the way it is so there is no point in debating it any more, my point is that why can we continue to bash Smallville when it is the way it is, we aren't going to change Miles or Al's minds by continuing to bash them. And my momma always said that if you can't say something nice perhaps we shouldn't say anything at all. This is something I too need to work on so I will start now. I appreciate that people take Superman seriously enough to care about how other creators handle him.

[Timester]

Originally posted by superman79
Why must people continue to condemn this show, you watch it you must enjoy it or you love to make yourself mad. For Example, I won't watch Fahrenheit 911 because I know that it will make me upset. I don't want to be upset. I want to be in a good mood so I surround myself with things I "Like". I'm not saying that the show is perfect or that it doesn't have it's flaws but it is what it is. Either you like or dislike it. How many times are we gonna have to hear about the writer's lack of skill? In the movie thread we are no longer allowed to say that we don't like BR or the new movie because the mod said it is the way it is so there is no point in debating it any more, my point is that why can we continue to bash Smallville when it is the way it is, we aren't going to change Miles or Al's minds by continuing to bash them. And my momma always said that if you can't say something nice perhaps we shouldn't say anything at all. This is something I too need to work on so I will start now. I appreciate that people take Superman seriously enough to care about how other creators handle him.

Uh...

"9) We cannot stress this enough: DISCUSSION ON THIS BOARD SHOULD AT ALL TIMES BE ABOUT THE SHOWS THEMSELVES, NOT OTHER POSTERS OR FANS. Threads about why people like Lana more than Chloe (or Logan more than Duncan or WHATEVER) or posting things like "People who think that are just stupid and prudeish" or attempting to psychoanalyze the reasons why another member of this board feels the way they do, or even couching it under "positive" terms such as "I'm glad people stopped talking about that really stupid and annoying subject!" are not allowed.

Even "I don't get the hate (or the love)" is frowned upon here - what it usually really means is "I don't get why YOU, THE OTHER FANS OF THE SHOW, feel this way, because that's a stupid way to feel." If you don't "get it," it's not really anyone's job here to justify their opinions ad infinitum to you. It's been our experience that those kinds of discussions descend into hair-splitting semantical bilefests, and nobody wants that, right?

Don't even try to be slick about this rule. We can still tell when you're trying to do this in an oblique way. We've been at this a while and we can tell."


Bottom line is people do care about the show, as much you think we don't. Also, we care about Clark Kent this much and to see this Non! Clark Kent hurts...

[Coyote]

Why must people continue to condemn this show, you watch it you must enjoy it or you love to make yourself mad. For Example, I won't watch Fahrenheit 911 because I know that it will make me upset. I don't want to be upset. I want to be in a good mood so I surround myself with things I "Like". I'm not saying that the show is perfect or that it doesn't have it's flaws but it is what it is. Either you like or dislike it. How many times are we gonna have to hear about the writer's lack of skill? In the movie thread we are no longer allowed to say that we don't like BR or the new movie because the mod said it is the way it is so there is no point in debating it any more, my point is that why can we continue to bash Smallville when it is the way it is, we aren't going to change Miles or Al's minds by continuing to bash them. And my momma always said that if you can't say something nice perhaps we shouldn't say anything at all. This is something I too need to work on so I will start now. I appreciate that people take Superman seriously enough to care about how other creators handle him.


Actually, I pretty much agree with you. I've said previously on this thread that I do like the general approach they're taking with Smallville, and since it's been successful that way, getting good ratings and making money, I agree that it's unlikely they're going to make any major changes. I just think there's room for some improvement that could make a better show that's more fun to watch.

But if other people don't care for the way a character is being treated, and think he should be more like the old traditional DC Superman or whatever, that's OK. They're entitled to have their own opinions and discussing their opinions with others is the point of having a discussion board.

I do agree that the personal bashing of Al Gough or other Smallville creators is wrong and pointless. If someone doesn't like the writing of the show, they should say that and say why, but saying something like "Al is an idiot" is meaningless.

[Timester]

Originally posted by Coyote
I do agree that the personal bashing of Al Gough or other Smallville creators is wrong and pointless. If someone doesn't like the writing of the show, they should say that and say why, but saying something like "Al is an idiot" is meaningless.

Actually, it's because the insults people call Al an idiot, but that's another story...

[Watching Smallville]

Originally posted by superman79
Why must people continue to condemn this show, you watch it you must enjoy it or you love to make yourself mad. For Example, I won't watch Fahrenheit 911 because I know that it will make me upset. I don't want to be upset. I want to be in a good mood so I surround myself with things I "Like". I'm not saying that the show is perfect or that it doesn't have it's flaws but it is what it is. Either you like or dislike it. How many times are we gonna have to hear about the writer's lack of skill? In the movie thread we are no longer allowed to say that we don't like BR or the new movie because the mod said it is the way it is so there is no point in debating it any more, my point is that why can we continue to bash Smallville when it is the way it is, we aren't going to change Miles or Al's minds by continuing to bash them. And my momma always said that if you can't say something nice perhaps we shouldn't say anything at all. This is something I too need to work on so I will start now. I appreciate that people take Superman seriously enough to care about how other creators handle him.
Personally, I'm not bashing the show. I'm not even bashing Clark. I'm asking a question about the way the writers have handled the character this year -- and I still have the same question.

This is the one show show I try not to miss every week. That doesn't mean I have to agree with everything about it, or that I suddenly don't like it because I take issue with one aspect of the writing. That's why I'm on the board -- to discuss my reactions to the show. I think that's why we're all here.

[Timester]

Originally posted by Watching Smallville
This is the one show show I try not to miss every week. That doesn't mean I have to agree with everything about it, or that I suddenly don't like it because I take issue with one aspect of the writing. That's why I'm on the board -- to discuss my reactions to the show. I think that's why we're all here.

Exactly.

[HalJordan4184]

Oh, and ryb, something i thought i'd throw in, since i missed it earlier, the foudnign fathers, were actually vehemantly opposed to a two party, or any party system. The parites in our current system, didn't actually come about until the 1800's.

[ma200]

I kinda get the feeling that the only way Clark would start getting proactive is if Lana is the one that dumps him and not the other way around.

[PETER WEST]

Originally posted by ryb

So the thought I have here (although far from complete) is that Clark is going down a dangerous path unless things change between Clark and Lana. I think this is exactly what the writers are saying (i.e., Clark is not destined to be Superman if he continues with Lana).

You make an intresting point rby, I remember reading a comic book issue one of the (post crisis ) SUPERMAN comic book Where The Spectre shows Clark Kent / SUPERMAN "A World without SUPERMAN" in which baby Kal-EL still came down to Earth , found & raised by The Kents, still had his Super powers. But never became SUPERMAN . Because Clark decided to stay in Smallville, Where he became a Farmer like Jonathan . And married Lana.

Spectre explains to Clark, that because He didn't leave The night on his 18 birthday, He never became SUPERMAN.

Lex Luthor (in that universe) Ruled Metropolis & The World, And Lois Lane (Died in the NASA space plane crash)- {Because Clark ( in that universe ) Was never their to save Lois. (Like In SUPERMAN's universe Clark
witnessed an experimental NASA space plane about to crash. He flew up into the sky in front of a huge Crowd. Saved the plane and there first met Daily Planet reporter Lois Lane. It was Lois idea to name the Flying man who just saved her life, SUPERMAN .)



The point is Clark needed to leave his past behind (his life in smallville, Lana & his Parents) inorder to move forward into The Future (His adult life as a Reporter in Metropolis,His life as SUPERMAN, His life with his wife : Lois Lane Kent.)

SV's Clark needs to grow up & start actsepting & Embrace his DESTINY . It's The only way he'll ever Become SUPERMAN.

[superman79]

Originally posted by Watching Smallville
Personally, I'm not bashing the show. I'm not even bashing Clark. I'm asking a question about the way the writers have handled the character this year -- and I still have the same question.

This is the one show show I try not to miss every week. That doesn't mean I have to agree with everything about it, or that I suddenly don't like it because I take issue with one aspect of the writing. That's why I'm on the board -- to discuss my reactions to the show. I think that's why we're all here.





I didn't mean to imply that anyone personally was bashing, it's just this show is this show. It's always the same damn complaints about how horrible this is or how wrong that is. I love a good debate, just not bashing to bash which happens very often here at ksite. I understand most complaints whether I agree or disagree and enjoy a good friendly discussion. But many times all we get are onesided arguments. I for one do not agree with every descision made on SV but I have to get over it or die under it.

[PETER WEST]

Season Five overview
This is the season that changes everything. Clark Kent (Tom Welling) finally begins to accept his destiny and takes giants leaps towards becoming the Man of Steel.

I have yet to see this happen . I hope this Change begins in "Reckoning".

The TIME Has Come for The Farmboy to Become A MAN !!!!

[puddinpiester]

He will become a man. He has to. The route he's taking is a bit tortuous, but if he progressed in a straight line, where would be the fun in that? SV might have to end too soon. I find SV entertaining in spite of all the flaws (which I'm not sure I agree with) and entertainment is what I'm after.

[CK&CK]

Originally posted by puddinpiester
He will become a man. He has to. The route he's taking is a bit tortuous, but if he progressed in a straight line, where would be the fun in that? SV might have to end too soon. I find SV entertaining in spite of all the flaws (which I'm not sure I agree with) and entertainment is what I'm after.


I don't think most of us are complaining about it not being a straight line......problem is that he's on the road that's heading in the opposite direction. If the writters are creative and talented enough.....he can have his pitfalls and still progress as an individual.....and in very entertaining fashion.

[LexLuthorMetropolis]

Originally posted by superman79
Why must people continue to condemn this show, you watch it you must enjoy it or you love to make yourself mad. For Example, I won't watch Fahrenheit 911 because I know that it will make me upset. I don't want to be upset. I want to be in a good mood so I surround myself with things I "Like". I'm not saying that the show is perfect or that it doesn't have it's flaws but it is what it is. Either you like or dislike it. How many times are we gonna have to hear about the writer's lack of skill? In the movie thread we are no longer allowed to say that we don't like BR or the new movie because the mod said it is the way it is so there is no point in debating it any more, my point is that why can we continue to bash Smallville when it is the way it is, we aren't going to change Miles or Al's minds by continuing to bash them. And my momma always said that if you can't say something nice perhaps we shouldn't say anything at all. This is something I too need to work on so I will start now. I appreciate that people take Superman seriously enough to care about how other creators handle him.

Read the movie section rules. Seriously. Everyone's opinions are allowed but there are limits. Read and know the rules. Each section has had serious upgrades.

As for SV, everyone is allowed to their opinion. If we dislike the show, we dislike. No bashing intented here. Just perspective.

Personally, I'll come right out and say it. The show needs work but it's entertaining but beyond that I haven't much else to say.

And that's my last remark on this matter.

[Daphne]

I think people just love it so much they want it as good as it can be and of course, everyone has their own opinion as to what could make it better.

[vikingjedi]

IMO Clark isn't close to being Superman yet because he doesn't want to be Superman.

Clark wants to be a normal human living a normal life with the woman he loves - Lana. He wants to tell her the truth but he's afraid she will blame him for her parents deaths and reject him. As they've shown in "Scare" thats his worst fear.

By hiding his secret all of this time he has turned into a liar and a hypocrite. Those lies have consequences. We'll soon see those consequences when Lana and Lex finally find out the truth. He's going to find out that what he wants is impossible because its not who he really is. Then and only then will Clark embrace his true destiny.

[PETER WEST]

Originally posted by vikingjedi
IMO Clark isn't close to being Superman yet because he doesn't want to be Superman.

Clark wants to be a normal human living a normal life with the woman he loves - Lana. He wants to tell her the truth but he's afraid she will blame him for her parents deaths and reject him. As they've shown in "Scare" thats his worst fear.

By hiding his secret all of this time he has turned into a liar and a hypocrite. Those lies have consequences. We'll soon see those consequences when Lana and Lex finally find out the truth. He's going to find out that what he wants is impossible because its not who he really is. Then and only then will Clark embrace his true destiny.

Well said Young Jedi . :D ;)

[EmtWarrior]

I agree he has to want to be the world's greatest hero before he can become it. And I believe that it will happen. In this season or the next. But before it can, this next episode will have to have a "Crisis on Infinite Earths" size change as far as how he sees himself, his destiny, Jor-El and Lex. He has got to somehow get over this "I'm depressed, Oh I'm depressed, whatever am I going to do cause I'm depressed." crap.

[Old Juan]

There's a difference between wanting a perfect Clark and wanting a Clark who is closer to the ideal of Superman than he currently is.

Smallville's Clark Kent should be much further along in this regard than he currently is. I don't hold to the excuse of the "he's a teenager, blah blah, blah" The idea that all teenagers are somehow imature whiners who don't know whats right and wrong or don't have a understanding of what healthy mature love is, is fallous generalization of people in that age group. I've known plently of teenagers younger than Clark Kent on the show is who are more mature than he is. So this notion that Clark is acting like any other teenager would is nonsense. After five years and Clark still being as far away from becomming Superman as he is, is just bad storytelling plain and simple.

[MBCorp]

I don't like the "Clark's just a teenager" argument, because he's not a teenager! He's what, 18? 19? He's officially an adult now. And let's not forget that Lex was only 21 in Season 1, only about two or three years older than Clark is right now, and yet nobody uses Lex's youth to excuse any of his shady behavoir in S1.

[HalJordan4184]

I thinkt he idea Clark want's to be a hero is a fallacy in and of itself. Being a hero is something Superman never set out to be. He's just trying to do what's right. Even he refuses to acknowledge his status as world's greatest hero. He refuses to acknowledge his status as hero even. He thinks he's doing what everyone in his position would do. That, to me, is one of the shows biggest misses. People are constantly telling Clark he's meant for huge, tremendous, legendary things. And that's completely anticlimactic as far as the character is concerned. A big part o who SUperman is, is he has no idea just how monumental his presence is. And on Smallville, that's just about all everyone talks about. It just makes Clark come across as stupid, rather than idealistic, and caring.

To me, the show can't start backtracking now, and forcing Clark into a Superman mold. It won't work. The biggest difference I think they will have, is how he's motivated now. This Clark will always be linked to pain and tragedy. He's linked to everything negative that's happened in Smallville, and it keeps bringing him down. That in and of itself has led to a lot of the problems I've had with the show. They've dealt with this in the comics, in Day of Doom. A reporter there actually blames Superman for bringing about the age of supervillains. The world went from bank robbers and kidnappers, to aliens with genocidal tendencies. And it blames the whole thing on Superman. And the key thing here, is he acknowledges the role he could potentially play in that. He admits, there may be some truth there. But then, he reminds the people, these things, probably would have happened anyway without him. And the best quote he has on this, is the last line he says to this guy. He looks at him, and he says, you have to ask yourself the question I ask everyday. Without me, would there be less Doomsday's, or more Coast City's.

Now for a little background, Coast City was destroyed during Superman's death. An alien war lord, Mongul, blew it up to create an engine so he could make Earth his new war world. Doomsday of course, is the monster Superman died fighting. Doomsday and SUperman's fight caused a tremendous amount of destruction, and SUperman knows this. He knows people died, and he feels for them and their families. But he also knows, without him, no one would have been able to defeat Doomsday. And Coast City, if he had been there, had a chance to be saved. Basically, he's saying, without me, would there be less supervillains, or more earth shattering catastrophes that could have been prevented.

With Smallville's Clark, i can easily see him thinking he's responsible for every bad thing, and leaving, like he did two seasons in a row, to make everyone else's life easier.

[SmallvilleMan]

I'm such a fan of this show, but I'm having so much trouble this season with Clark's priorities. First, he's moping around becuase he got his powers back just in time to save Smallville from nuclear attack. I mean -- even if he's pining over Lana, that blast would have killed her. And his parents. Now he's finally stepping up to the plate to tell Lana the truth -- not out of respect for their relationship, not because he owes Lana some truth and respect, but because he's selfishly worried about her relationship with Lex.

He's not telling her, because of lana's relationship with Lex. He's telling her, because he loves her. Clark doesn't want to lie her, it tears him up inside. He deeply loves Lana and wants to marry her, that has zero to do with her relationship with Lex.

[Small2]

"He's not telling her, because of lana's relationship with Lex. He's telling her, because he loves her. Clark doesn't want to lie her, it tears him up inside. He deeply loves Lana and wants to marry her, that has zero to do with her relationship with Lex."

I don't know if I agree with this statement. The most daming evidence is he has loved her since he was young, his best friend has told him for months he has to tell her, Lana basically shows that with or without him she is going to find out the truth, and he still won't tell her. It is only when it is very obvious that his relationship with Lana is going to end as shown in Lockdown, that he finally relents and decides to tell her.

As is common for Chlark, his telling Lana is not proactive but reactive. Not a positive basis for telling her.

As my wife says, "Oh he loves her, he's just too immature to know what to do."

[SmallvilleMan]

I don't know if I agree with this statement. The most daming evidence is he has loved her since he was young, his best friend has told him for months he has to tell her, Lana basically shows that with or without him she is going to find out the truth, and he still won't tell her. It is only when it is very obvious that his relationship with Lana is going to end as shown in Lockdown, that he finally relents and decides to tell her.

Lana wasn't going to find out the truth. How could she have found out the truth, when lex has been searching for 5 years and hasn't it? And yes, he does tell her when their relationship does seem to be ending. Why? Because he loves her and doesn't want to lose her. If he didn't love her, he'd let her walk out the door. Plus, you don't know that he hasn't been planning on telling her. He has a ring, which leads me to believe that he's been thinking about marriage and telling her.

[CK&CK]

Originally posted by Old Juan
There's a difference between wanting a perfect Clark and wanting a Clark who is closer to the ideal of Superman than he currently is.

Smallville's Clark Kent should be much further along in this regard than he currently is. I don't hold to the excuse of the "he's a teenager, blah blah, blah" The idea that all teenagers are somehow imature whiners who don't know whats right and wrong or don't have a understanding of what healthy mature love is, is fallous generalization of people in that age group. I've known plently of teenagers younger than Clark Kent on the show is who are more mature than he is. So this notion that Clark is acting like any other teenager would is nonsense. After five years and Clark still being as far away from becomming Superman as he is, is just bad storytelling plain and simple.

Great post Old Juan....and that is why......"You're the Man!"

[~*Lois & Clark Fan*~]

I don't believe he's telling her because he loves her, he's doing it because he's afraid he's going to lose her. Which is what Chloe's been reiterating to him for months. It's only when he's gonna lose her that he's going to tell her. :\

[PETER WEST]

The excuse of the "he's a teenager, Is Bull. {Sv version Of Clark Kent spent most 5 years (Whiny) & (Complaining). For goodnesake Bruce Wayne parents Were killed before his eyes at The Age of 8. Bruce Wayne swore an oath to rid the city of the evil that had taken his parents' lives that night. At The age of 14 (in the BATMAN MYTHOLOGY)Bruce Wayne left Gotham City and began his 12 year around The World Journey training himself intellectual and physical perfection and learning a variety of crime-fighting skills, including "detective skills","Chemistry","Criminology","Forensics",(over 120 different) Fighting & "Martial art" skills , "Gymnastics" as well as theatrical skills like "Disguise" ,"Escapology", " Ventriloquism"

I don't buy The excuse he a teenager, If anyone has the right to that excuse is Bruce Wayne . He didn't have the The kind of childhood like Clark did . Bruce's chlidhood was taking from him {the night his parents were murder before his very eyes.}

[jaime,oburg]

Originally posted by PETER WEST
This version Of Clark Kent WILL never become SUPERMAN.

The Real Clark Kent has yet to emager . hopfully 100th Episode "Reckoning" it will be the begining of his Transformation .

Yes! This is what I look forward to most about episode 100. Not who dies (not Chloe, not Chloe, please don't let it be Chloe;) ) but that Clark finally steps up and starts to become the hero he is meant to be.

[Coyote]

I thinkt he idea Clark want's to be a hero is a fallacy in and of itself. Being a hero is something Superman never set out to be. He's just trying to do what's right. Even he refuses to acknowledge his status as world's greatest hero. He refuses to acknowledge his status as hero even. He thinks he's doing what everyone in his position would do. That, to me, is one of the shows biggest misses. People are constantly telling Clark he's meant for huge, tremendous, legendary things. And that's completely anticlimactic as far as the character is concerned. A big part o who SUperman is, is he has no idea just how monumental his presence is. And on Smallville, that's just about all everyone talks about. It just makes Clark come across as stupid, rather than idealistic, and caring.

You've pretty much hit the nail on the head, HalJordan. The key to the traditional Superman character is his amazing modesty. And I don't think that modesty is a front that he puts up just to be polite to the puny humans. He really doesn't look on himself as exceptionally heroic. I think he does understand how powerful he is and what that power could do, but his attitude is maybe comparable to an Air Force pilot flying a bomber full of nuclear weapons. There is incredible power at his command, but he doesn't think of himself as some great hero because of that. He's just a guy doing a job that must be handled with great restraint and responsibility. Obviously this attitude comes from the way Superman was raised, and I also agree with you that the way the other people on the show are constantly telling Clark he's a hero and meant for a great destiny (I think Chloe even called him a superhero) won't create the traditional Superman. It will create a whiner who pouts because he isn't getting enough credit for how wonderful he thinks he is. When Chloe tells Clark that Lex took a bullet for Lana, his response was to whine "but I saved her from a bomb." The old Superman never bragged about his feats like that. He understood that he was invulnerable and had superspeed, so the bomb couldn't hurt him, saving people from bombs was the right thing for someone with his gifts to do, and that was that.


To me, the show can't start backtracking now, and forcing Clark into a Superman mold. It won't work. The biggest difference I think they will have, is how he's motivated now.

I also agree with this. It's too late to realistically make this character into the traditional Superman. I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing, since it makes the show less predictable, and potentially more interesting and fun to watch. But he won't be "the true Superman."

Certainly the motivation of this character is going to be a lot darker than previous versions. Not only might this character think he's responsible for every bad thing, he might be right. The Kryptonite causes the plague of mutations in the Smallville area, and possibly even shifts reality so that super beings are popping up in other areas of the world as well. Gough once stated that their assumption was that the kryptonite drew power from Clark. Without Clark's presence it could revert to harmless rock, just as lana's necklace is now harmless. Certainly if Clark hadn't been sent here in the first place, the meteors wouldn't have come either. And of course Jor-El's motivation for sending him here was apparently also darker than previous versions. Clark's presence on Earth may have caused a huge mess for the world. In his mind he may decide that the right thing to do is try his best to clean the mess up. This is not the traditional Superman motivation, but it makes sense for the Smallville world, and could be an interesting story in and of itself.

[SmallvilleMan]

I don't believe he's telling her because he loves her, he's doing it because he's afraid he's going to lose her. Which is what Chloe's been reiterating to him for months. It's only when he's gonna lose her that he's going to tell her.

If he didn't love her, he would let her walk out that door. Why would you be afraid of losing someone you don't love? You can tell he loves you a lot, you can see it in his emtions and his eyes when he talks about her. He's telling her, because he loves her and wants her to be his wife. Geez, he's alreayd made his mind he won't ever love anyone else.

[~*Lois & Clark Fan*~]

He is? I've seen no evidence of that. In "Lockdown" he had no intention of telling her, he basically said it was because she wouldn't accept him. So something has to happen to change that.

I don't want to get spoilerish but I thought I remember something about Clark being afraid of losing her, so that leads me to believe he's going to tell her out of fear of losing her. Nothing else.

[jwoodie]

Whatever you think of his motivations for wanting to be human (versus traditional Superman canon), the whole point for him was to be with her, unencumbered by the lying he is constantly forced to do. Now does turning his back on his abilities and responsibilites just to be with her reflect badly on him as a person, much less a future superhero? Yeah, can't really get around that, and I agree with much that has been said here.
But to the one specific point of why he is telling her now - he's given up trying to escape who he is, but cannot bring himself to turn his back on their relationship. In fact, that's the last thing he wants. I for one believe that he does love her, and the way he sees it, the only thing that has prevented them from really being together in a healthy relationship was her not knowing his secret and his lying to her about it. Removing that from the equation is a big step, and obviously something he's thought about since the pilot, but this isn't because of Lex or anything else. It's because if he isn't honest with her, it's over, period.
It's been strung out for too many episodes this season anyway. I liked seeing them together when he was human - there are too few happy relationships in this show, and I even liked seeing Lana and Jason for about the first six episodes last season, until that all went to hell - but since he was resurrected, that issue and the ship have, realistically, not been a big enough issue between them. I mean, with the death and the space ship between them they should have lasted about 10 minutes together. But on Smallville, you get the feeling that absolutely no conversations take place that aren't on film. But instead, they've gone on for several months of show time just avoiding the issue, when we all know that Lana is far more curious about it to just let it go. So, once we started to see that come out (in the last two weeks) it all came to a head, and Clark's revelations became a now-or-never thing. The thing with Lex makes it seem like a main motivation for Clark, but that's peripheral - it's always been about the lying and even removing Lex from the picture, he will lose her no matter what if he doesn't tell her.

[SmallvilleMan]

He is? I've seen no evidence of that. In "Lockdown" he had no intention of telling her, he basically said it was because she wouldn't accept him. So something has to happen to change that.

Basically saying it, is not saying it and liitle bit of an assumption to say he doesn't intend on telling her. Obviously Clark thinks about it every day, he says that himself. He also has a ring, which leads me to believe he's been waiting to tell her, because he wants to get married.


I don't want to get spoilerish but I thought I remember something about Clark being afraid of losing her, so that leads me to believe he's going to tell her out of fear of losing her. Nothing else.

Why would he be afraid of losing someone he doesn't love?

[HalJordan4184]

He's afraid she's gonna go, and that's why he's telling her. He's admitted he doesn't want to, and is afraid of rejection. When you truley love someone, you take that risk anyway, you don't wait until your only options are take taht risk, or lose them forever, which is where clark is at now.

[Watching Smallville]

And not to mention what you owe to the person who loves you, what he owes to Lana. That's what gets me. Now it's too late for him to act out of integrity. I'd been sympathetic with Clark -- and the writing -- until that moment. There's no turning back from that.

[smallville_fetish]

To reply to the first post, I use to think we're seeing Clark making mistakes, being human, and slowly improving, learning, etc. and becoming the ideal Superman we know. But after rewatching season 1-3, I've noticed, as someone mentioned before, Clark was much better in season 1 and you could see the little glimse of the moral and goodwilled future Superman. Now, it's like he's sort of, dare I say it, going backwards? I think the real problem here, is whatever TPTB, and that they're focusing too much on the woman of Smallville. (Like making Clark dumber for more Chloe scenes, as someone mentioned) Seeing more Lois skin, giving Lana an attitude make-over, etc. and they've forgotten, that this show is about Clark. The second TPTB lost interest in him, suddenly I have too and that dissappoints me. I've missed the old Clark Kent or the one I thought was Clark Kent.

[Watching Smallville]

Exactly how I feel, Smallville_Fetish.

[SVFan7337]

I definitely don't like this current Clark either, and I agree with all that has been said about him being closer to the traditional Superman in earlier SV seasons, but the thought has occurred to me that perhaps TPTB are trying to establish that ALL Clark has been taught and ALL the bad AND good decisions he's made are what eventually turns him into that Superman we are all waiting to see him become.

Perhaps he ends up having such a strong moral compass because he's seen the results of his bad decisions in the area of morality. Perhaps he ends up advocating NO LYING EVER because of all the lies he has had to tell in Smallville and their consequences. Maybe his great upbringing by his parents eventually plays into his becoming a boyscout, as do all these other things because he concludes that being a boyscout is the only way to live after all these events. Perhaps what occurs in the 100th episode, or even episodes beyond, will snap him out of the whiny, angst-filled, self-focused Clark and accelerate his maturing process.

Someone mentioned that Bruce Wayne proves age does not necessarily define maturity level, but we must realize that seeing one's parents gunned down in front of one's own eyes has a tendency to mature one far beyond that tender age. Perhaps Clark's maturity will come when he loses someone closer to him than a girlfriend of a few days or weeks (Alicia).

All this is where I hope Smallville is headed, so I am withholding judgment until I see the Clark they leave us with when the series ends. I am hoping he develops the boyscout image of the man who fights for TRUTH, JUSTICE, and the AMERICAN WAY because he's seen all the crap that happens when those ideals are thrown out the window, even (and especially) by himself.

[HalJordan4184]

The point is though, you can't just end the series with that at this point. It changes Superman to do so. ANd it's unbelievable.

Superman is not a character motivated by loss, or guilt. And that is EXACTLY what will motivate Clark after the death in 100. He's not going to be motivated by his morals. He'll be motivated to follow other people's ideas of what is right and wrong, because his didn't hold up.

Clark Kent didn't suddenly become a modest, mild mannered, good guy one day. That's who he is. Not what he grew into after screwing up royally, and seeing people killed because he can't get his priorities straight. That's Peter Parker. Not Superman.

[SmallvilleMan]

He's afraid she's gonna go, and that's why he's telling her. He's admitted he doesn't want to, and is afraid of rejection. When you truley love someone, you take that risk anyway, you don't wait until your only options are take taht risk, or lose them forever, which is where clark is at now.

What? I disagree completely. Clark NEVER, EVER said he didn't want to tell her. Clark is telling her, because he loves her and doesn't want to lose her. If he didn't love her, he would let her go and not think twice about it. She's the only girl he ever loved and can't imagine himself loving anyone else.

[HalJordan4184]

You're right, he did want to tell her, and put it off, and put it off, and put it off, and there was the episode where she said she'd be freaked out meeting an alien, so he continued to put it off, all the while telling Lana, no more secrets, no more lies, so he continues lying, continues with the secrets, and keeps putting it off. Now that Lana is at the point of being ready to end things, and is getting uber frustrated at him, he's decided, gee, maybe i should tell her. THough he is afraid she won't like him, and BE MAD HE KEPT NOT TELLING HER. They aren't in love. That's the central theme of their relationship. If they were in love they could accept each other for who they really were, and even Al/Miles have said that isn't the case, and exactly why Clana is doomed to fail. Because when you strip the physical away, there is nothing to keep these two together. They don't have a deep serious emotional relationship, cause neither person really knows the other one.

[warriorrenegade]

Heres my take on this version of Clark. This Clark will never be Superman not saying he can't be I don't know we won't see that part of the story. This story being told is that of the boy who grows into the man who later goes on to be Superman. This is the story of Clark Kent. Do you really want Clark to done the cape and save the world tommorow? I sure don't. Hes still has a lot of growing to do. From what I've read Clark doesn't become Superman for another what? 10 years? I guess what Im trying to say is .. relax give him time hes a youngman wanting and trying to find his way in the world. It'll happen ... besides if we( I ) had our (my) way the show would've be completed already. We'd have him flying wearing the cape and saving the world.;) :lol:

[Lois Sullivan]

Originally posted by Watching Smallville
I'm such a fan of this show, but I'm having so much trouble this season with Clark's priorities. First, he's moping around becuase he got his powers back just in time to save Smallville from nuclear attack. I mean -- even if he's pining over Lana, that blast would have killed her. And his parents. Now he's finally stepping up to the plate to tell Lana the truth -- not out of respect for their relationship, not because he owes Lana some truth and respect, but because he's selfishly worried about her relationship with Lex.

I'm not understanding the Smallville Clark Kent at all. And I'm thinking he has a long, long path to becoming the Superman we've come to admire.

I don't think so much it was that he was moping around because he got his powers back in time to save Smallville. He was moping around because he screwed up, and preferred to stay with Lana. When he could have just checked her pulse, made sure she was okay, than ran back to the FOS. Hopefully with enough time to get there before sundown. By choosing to stay with her, and not fulfill his promise to Jor-El, he died, and his death came with a price that someone he loved has to pay. That's why he wsa moping. Which is why he told Chloe "Chloe, I think I made a terrible mistake."

The rest, yeah I can agree on. He's selfish and self-centered when it comes to not telling Lana the truth. But we don't know if he's about to tell her because of Lex. He's scared of losing her, and has been pushing her away so much because of the secret. That's why he's stepping up.

[sirconical]

Originally posted by Fish1941
I can't believe this! For the first time we get to see the Clark Kent/Superman character as someone who is interesting, but flawed. And yet, all people can do is complain because he doesn't live up to the past portrayals of Clark as this NEAR PERFECT BEING?

Isn't there a Superman fan who is mature enough to appreciate SMALLVILLE'S portrayal of the show? Is it really necessary to portray Clark as someone who is near perfect . . . all the damn time?



Clark is 18 or 19 years old by now. WHY do you expect him to be fully mature?




One, he's EIGHTEEN or NINETEEN YEARS OLD! Are you serious? Two, he is NOT ALWAYS going to handle matters perfectly. Even when he is a fully mature adult.

I really wonder about humans, sometimes. Each individual expect others to tolerate their own personal flaws, yet, nearly everyone expect others - ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY ARE FICTIONAL CHARACTERS to behave perfectly. I think that the majority of humans are very disturbed. And probably hypocritical. Here, here!
I am one of the people who prefers this Clark. He does seem more human and more flawed, like most of us growing up.

And that was a great observation about people and their flaws. :)


Originally posted by ~*Lois & Clark Fan*~
Being a teenager is NO excuse for how this Clark acts. That excuse gets used way too often for him.

Excuse me but I'm way mature enough to appreciate when a character I've loved my WHOLE LIFE is being written very poorly. This character isn't Clark Kent, he just shares the name with that character, the superpowers are just a bonus. You're right, it's not an excuse. It's a reason.

I'm sure you are mature enough to recognise when a character you've loved your whole life has been written poorly, but this isn't really the same character. Same person, yes, but they've intentionally changed the character. Otherwise it would just be a re-write of what everybody has seen already. It's supposed to be different.


Originally posted by HalJordan4184
Being a teenager does not give you an excuse to treat others like dirt. Or to mope, and hate your life. There are perfectly well adjusted teens out there. There are also screwed up teens out there. And then there are those in the middle. Clark, was never in the middle, and never the screwed up one. That's a point, many people here miss. Especially non comics readers. They insist, with no real evidence or knowledge to back up the claim, that Superman's younger days, as simply famr Clark, have never been looked at. There's that word again, excuse. I don't remember seeing anyone try to EXCUSE his behaviour. They just said that's the REASON for his behaviour, not that it is correct. And as for producing evidence that his youth was never examined, well I'm not one of the ones that said that, but It's a re-write. The point of it all is that they are remapping how Clark got from 'A to B', and it is really up to them in the end.

[zanos]

Why is everyone talking about Clark's behavior? Isn't the point of the show to see him show off his powers?

[Coyote]

Correct. That's always been the point of Superman. That and making money for Warner Brothers.

[No-El]

This is Al Gough's interpretation, however a struggled and confusing it is, of Clark Kent!!:( :confused:

[jwoodie]

This entire discussion is interesting, but I think one thing is missing. Everybody has their opinions as to how Clark should be acting with regard to his destiny, but the thing many don't seem to remember is that ever since the second season, destiny has truly been a four-letter word to Clark.
If you recall, the first substantive talk of his destiny came in Rosetta when it was revealed to him in the ship that he should rule the earth, and he took that to mean that he was sent to earth to conquer. That, my friends, is not a good way to start off your relationship with your future destiny. Everything that followed after that in the second season was related to this "clark the conquerer" idea, up to the point where Clark took the proactive step of, well, blowing up his farm. Nice work.
But even after that, can anyone point to anything (in Smallville, not the external Superman universe) that *should* have led Clark to believe that his initial assessment of the "conquerer" destiny was wrong?
Every encounter he's had with Jor-El has led to tragedy. You can definitely make the case that it has been Clark's resistance to all of Jor-El's "fulfill your destiny" talk that has led to that tragedy, essentially making all of it Clark's fault, directly or indirectly. I can buy that, but again - can you blame him? His initial thought is that he's supposed to rule the planet with an iron fist, then his father burns a killer tattoo into his chest to force compliance, and every other time his destiny comes up, it means a fresh round of pain and suffering. So my question, again, is there anything specific in any of the episodes that should have led Clark to believe that his original understanding of his "conquerer" destiny is wrong? If so, I'd like to hear it. If not, then isn't all of the discussion about Clark not doing enough to strive towards his ultimate destiny kinda irrelevant?
Just looking at the Jor-El character in Smallville versus the movies (the only Superman mythos I'm at all familiar with), Clark's first meeting with Jor-El in the movies is a positive one. He knows he's different, obviously, and he's curious about his origins. And basically, his first introduction comes hand in hand with meeting Jor-El in the FOS and getting the whole story. All very positive.
In Smallville, it has been the opposite - he gets only part of the story second-hand, then when he does meet Jor-El, he turns out to be a domineering, tyrannical bastard, at least as far as Clark can see. It's not too much of a stretch to imagine that Clark truly believes that Jor-El wants to turn him into that conquerering ruler, is it? And with Clark's upbringing by the Kents, its also not a stretch to imagine him doing everything in his power to resist such a destiny. How many conversations have they had about Clark making his own destiny, how the conquerer may be what Jor-El wants (again, that's all they and we have seen coming from Jor-El) but that doesn't mean Clark has to follow that path, etc.
So, where we stand now, Clark has NO IDEA what his destiny is. And when he even considers the prospect, it is in the context of all of the horrible encounters he's had with Jor-El.
It didn't have to be this way, and if you want to blame poor writting or the way the show has been run over the past few years, fine. But it is what it is, and the way they have portrayed Jor-El has almost forced Clark to run away from his destiny, not embrace it.

[Watching Smallville]

For my part, my problem is not with Clark ignoring his destiny. It's with his integrity. Even when I look at Exile, Clark made a bad decision, but there was still a strange kind of integrity behind it, removing himself from his family because of what had happened to Martha's baby, removing himself from the people he loved so he wouldn't do them any more harm, punishing himself, in a sense. Running away from Jor-El, for me, is an issue apart from this season's sudden lack of kindness, sensitivity, logic, humility -- all the things I had grown to appreciate about the Smallville Clark Kent, whether or not he's embracing his destiny (although the more I read posts from people who really know the canon, the more I can appreciate their impatience with that aspect of the show).

The journey to Superman has always the central storyline for me. I'm not impatient for him to arrive at his destiny. I'm not impatient for flights or tights. But, unfortunately, I don't believe this character at this point. This season, the writing has removed too many elements that I consider central to the Smallville Clark Kent. I don't know who this guy is.

It's as if the writers have decided to turn him into someone else in Season 5 because this year's story arc requires a different kind of character. Another poster put it well -- we seem to be watching Red K Clark without the ring. I begin to wonder whether a little sliver of that silver splinter wasn't left behind.

[jwoodie]

Originally posted by Watching Smallville
It's as if the writers have decided to turn him into someone else because they have a story arc in mind that requires a different kind of character.

This is definitely true, and the point I was trying to make was that the character we see now is consistent (even if he's becoming slightly more emotionally unstable) with the story arc we've seen since season 2.
What the show really needs, to bring it in line with all of the other Superman mythos, is some kind of jolt to the Kal-El/Jor-El relationship that doesn't involve death, destruction and mayhem. I mean, eventually Clark has to embrace Jor-El's vision of Clark's destiny and NOTHING we've seen to this point would lead to that conclusion. Not once have we had an encounter between them that would lead Clark to believe that Jor-El has his best interests at heart, that Jor-El forsees a future destiny where Clark is the force for good that Clark truly wants to be. That, I think, is the big piece that is missing. If Clark had any clue as to what Jor-El forsees as his destiny, then Clark would not have to be dragged kicking and screaming towards his destiny. Clark, his parents and Jor-El want the same basic thing - for Clark to be a force for good in the world. The problem is that, so far in the show, Clark has no idea that Jor-El wants that for him. Talk about a misunderstanding.
Your point about the writers is definitely true - they have created a new version of this character, at least at this stage of his life. The decision to pit Jor-El against Clark has definitely the show into a different direction - almost every mythology story line since season 2 has pushed Clark farther and farther from his destiny, which is a strange choice. But I'm not ready to condemn them for what the show is today - it's just different from other versions of the story.

[SmallvilleMan]

You're right, he did want to tell her, and put it off, and put it off, and put it off, and there was the episode where she said she'd be freaked out meeting an alien, so he continued to put it off, all the while telling Lana, no more secrets, no more lies, so he continues lying, continues with the secrets, and keeps putting it off. Now that Lana is at the point of being ready to end things, and is getting uber frustrated at him, he's decided, gee, maybe i should tell her. THough he is afraid she won't like him, and BE MAD HE KEPT NOT TELLING HER. They aren't in love. That's the central theme of their relationship. If they were in love they could accept each other for who they really were, and even Al/Miles have said that isn't the case, and exactly why Clana is doomed to fail. Because when you strip the physical away, there is nothing to keep these two together. They don't have a deep serious emotional relationship, cause neither person really knows the other one.

I really don't understand this? How many times it need to be said that Lana said she would be a LITTLE freaked out. A LITTLE! They are in love, i don't how many times that needs to be proven. When Lana's life was on the line, who did she need to see? CLARK! The same thing for Clark, he sacrificed so much to be with her. If they weren't in love, then they wouldn't be together. I mean geez, everyone else on the show can see their in love. And how is Lana suppose to accept Clark, when she doesn't know anything? No, them not being in love isn't the central theme of their relationship. Because they in love, you can't go through all they went through and come back together, if they weren't in love. Clark didn't tell her his secret, because he didn't want to take a chance at ruining their relationship, but now he reconizes that he has to. He doesn't want to lose the only girl he's ever loved, the only girl he imagine loving.

[Kryptonian Snake]

I don't mind that Clark distrusts Jor-El and is wary of his intentions. Honestly, none of us completely know what Jor-El's intentions are at this point. What we do know is that the premise of this show is to tell the story of Clark Kent's journey to becoming a superhero. What I want to see at this point is a Clark Kent who understands that he simply cannot be normal. I want to see Clark come to accept his powers as a fundamental part of who he is. He doesn't need to wake up one morning and decide to become the protector of mankind, but he does need to start thinking about the amount of good he can do to protect people with his powers. Right now he has the mentality of a good Samaritan -- he helps out when he happens to come across those in need. He has yet to start thinking outside of Smallville and his loved ones.

We've seen some of these issues touched on in past seasons. In "Leech", Clark still feels responsible for his powers even though he doesn't have them. In "Run" he tries to convince his father that he should investigate the document with the map hidden within it because his quest in "Crusade" was probably important. That mentality is absent each time Clark complains about his powers being a burden that hinders him from being truly happy with his life. Remember when he told Lex in "Whisper" that he would need to adjust to blindness rather than overcome it? That's the kind of attitude we need to see Clark develop regarding his powers and heritage.

As for Jor-El, even though Clark has good reasons to be wary of him, there plenty of times in which he could bluntly ask Jor-El what he wants. In the beginning of "Arrival" we see Clark willingly learning from Jor-El. We haven't seen that since kind of proactiveness from Clark since then. If someone brought me back from the dead and vaguely told me my destiny was too important to be sacrificed, I'd immediately be asking for some direct answers. Clark and Jor-El are horrible at communicating with each other -- Clark doesn't press for answers and Jor-El gives vague warnings. My guess is that it's much easier for the writers to handle their relationship this way rather than having it gradually improve over time.

[Watching Smallville]

Great post.

[Kryptonian Snake]

Originally posted by jwoodie
But even after that, can anyone point to anything (in Smallville, not the external Superman universe) that *should* have led Clark to believe that his initial assessment of the "conquerer" destiny was wrong?
I can't say Jor-El has done or said anything to absolutely contradict the message in the ship. However, there are things that don't quite add up. For instance, if Jor-El wanted Clark to conquer the world, why didn't he tell his son to join forces with the Disciples of Zod to achieve this goal? In Commencement, Jor-El warns Clark about a "dark force from Krypton" that was awakened when blood stained the last stone and states that Clark is the only one who can save humanity. In "Solitude" Clark finds out that Braniac's description of Jor-El as a ruthless dictator (which supports Clark's negative opinion of Jor-El) actually referred to Zod. Seems to me that this revelation would be another great opportunity for Clark to start asking questions about Krypton, its destruction, Zod, and Jor-El's plans for him. Clark also has yet to hear Jor-El actually repeat the message from the ship in some form. I don't think any of Jor-El's messages after "Rosetta" can clearly be taken as encouragement for Clark to conquer the world.

Thanks, Watching Smallville!

[jwoodie]

Originally posted by Kryptonian Snake
My guess is that it's much easier for the writers to handle their relationship this way rather than having it gradually improve over time.

This is dead on, and I guess you could say that it's a shame they've taken this long circuitous route, but the closer Clark gets to Jor-El, the closer the gets to being "Metropolis" instead of "Smallville" and I just don't think they wanted to rush towards the end of the series.
I mean, what if episode #100 was all about Clark talking to Jor-El in the FOS instead of Lana? Suppose they sat down and had that heart to heart? Where would that leave the show? Actually, that's not a rhetorical question, I'm curious as to the mythology that surrounds this time in his life, because, like I said before, I'm only familiar with the movie. And in the movie, that scene ended with a cut to 12 years later or something like that. Clark took that time, so it seemed, to learn to embrace his destiny and was transformed from the farmboy with powers to the superhero.
So, what does everyone expect to happen if Clark and Jor-El were to get on the same page? Or, if you don't think that is appropriate for this time in the Smallville version of Clark's story, then how would you like to see this handled differently than it has been?
Seems like all that vague destiny talk has just been a plot device used by the writers to keep that part of the story on a VERY slow boil for as long as possible.

[jaime,oburg]

Originally posted by Watching Smallville
For my part, my problem is not with Clark ignoring his destiny. It's with his integrity. Even when I look at Exile, Clark made a bad decision, but there was still a strange kind of integrity behind it, removing himself from his family because of what had happened to Martha's baby, removing himself from the people he loved so he wouldn't do them any more harm, punishing himself, in a sense. Running away from Jor-El, for me, is an issue apart from this season's sudden lack of kindness, sensitivity, logic, humility -- all the things I had grown to appreciate about the Smallville Clark Kent, whether or not he's embracing his destiny (although the more I read posts from people who really know the canon, the more I can appreciate their impatience with that aspect of the show).

The journey to Superman has always the central storyline for me. I'm not impatient for him to arrive at his destiny. I'm not impatient for flights or tights. But, unfortunately, I don't believe this character at this point. This season, the writing has removed too many elements that I consider central to the Smallville Clark Kent. I don't know who this guy is.

It's as if the writers have decided to turn him into someone else in Season 5 because this year's story arc requires a different kind of character. Another poster put it well -- we seem to be watching Red K Clark without the ring. I begin to wonder whether a little sliver of that silver splinter wasn't left behind.



I couldn't have posted better. I understand that this is the journey of young Clark to Superman and that there is going to be pitfalls along the way. I look forward to watching Clark work them out or else the TV show would be over.
It seems that Clark has regressed in that journey and that all the hard lessons he has learned over highschool (usually the most confusing time in one's life), he has forgotten. Fans start using words like selfish. Who is this Clark Kent?
I want to see Clark's journey to Supes move forward, not back to the CK of freshman year. In a lot of ways, Clark was much more mature and focused then.
My take on all of this... drama. All of the regression is to make episode 100 the point where Clark finally gets his $hit together and starts acting like the man we all know he is to become.

[Dannyblue1]

Originally posted by jaime,oburg
I want to see Clark's journey to Supes move forward, not back to the CK of freshman year. In a lot of ways, Clark was much more mature and focused then.
My take on all of this... drama. All of the regression is to make episode 100 the point where Clark finally gets his $hit together and starts acting like the man we all know he is to become.

I agree. I think they had Clark forget all the lessons he was supposed to have learned just so they can show him learning the same lessons over again. And not only is that repetative, it's lazy writing.

Instead of making a character forget old lessons so they can relearn them all over again, a writer should give a character new mistakes to make, and new lessons to learn from them. A writer should take the character to a new place, not make them slog through the same old territory.

But, apparantly, the writers of SV have decided there are only a few lessons for Clark Kent to learn. So we get him learning, forgetting, and relearning the same old lessons again and again.

[Kryptonian Snake]

Originally posted by jwoodie
So, what does everyone expect to happen if Clark and Jor-El were to get on the same page? Or, if you don't think that is appropriate for this time in the Smallville version of Clark's story, then how would you like to see this handled differently than it has been?
I think it might have been best to simply hold off on the introduction of Jor-El until last season. Seasons 2 and 3 could still have explored the mythology surrounding the caves and we could have seen Clark learning things from Dr. Swann. When Dr. Swann died In "Sacred", Clark mentioned that he had so much to learn, but other than two episodes or so, we never really saw their conversations. Season 4 could have shown Clark being called by Jor-El through the ship, being skeptical of his intentions, and then being more open to Jor-El's influence after talking things over with Dr. Swann and the Kents. From there, Jor-El could have guided Clark on his quest to find the stones while providing more information about the history surrounding them and their significance.

Where can the writers go with the story they've already presented to us? They could have Clark asking some questions about Krypton, its history, and Zod. Maybe we could see some flashbacks to life on Krypton. There's a lot for Clark to learn and think about regarding his heritage (not to mention it gives him something to talk about with Chloe besides his relationship problems). I know this is pretty vague, but that's why writers get paid to flesh out these themes and make them interesting.

I guess we should also keep in mind that there are restrictions placed on creative team by DC. In commentaries from season 3, it was mentioned that Jor-El, Lara, and Krypton couldn't actually be shown because of Superman Returns (which I don't think was even in production at that point). In "Memoria", Al Gough mentioned that they had to fight to even show the flashback to baby Kal-El being placed in the spaceship.

[Watching Smallville]

Originally posted by jwoodie
So, what does everyone expect to happen if Clark and Jor-El were to get on the same page? Or, if you don't think that is appropriate for this time in the Smallville version of Clark's story, then how would you like to see this handled differently than it has been?
Great questions.

I would have liked to see Clark continue to grow, too. I think personal setbacks are so much more powerful when the character believes he has conquered a problem, only to learn that he (or she) has so much more to learn. He doesn't need to become less of a person in order to grow. In fact, the better he is, the more dramatic the lessons, the greater he becomes afterward. Kryptonian Snake makes a good point that perhaps the development has been rushed. There's so much potential good stuff in the caves, the stones, Dr. Swann and his group after he's gone. Even Bridgette Crosby could have been used more. But we're already in the FOS, which I would have envisioned as a Series Finale kind of thing.

I would also like to see Clark out in the world more. I thought TPTB made a good start in Aqua and Exposed by showing the very human side of darkness and evil in contrast with the FOW problems in Smallville. I'd like to see a gradual and well-written awakening of Clark's wanting to help people beyond his own circle of friends and family -- as someone wisely said above, moving from the Good Semaritan to actively wanting to do something about wrongdoing. To me, that's Clark's real growth path -- more than Jor-El or Lana or Kent family drama.

But not to diminish Brainiac -- who's a great character -- and the more flashy villains on the show. That's all good. I just expected a different, let's say, interior path for Clark. But, okay. I'll see what TPTB do with the rest of the season. Maybe ep 100 will set things right for me.

[jwoodie]

But we're already in the FOS, which I would have envisioned as a Series Finale kind of thing.

I definitely agree here, that you would think that the FOS would not come into play until Clark is truly ready to make that final leap. That, to me, would effectively be the end of the series. But I think we will see the FOS used in this way towards the end of the season. I think when Brainiac comes back and we have Zod looming, the Clark/Jor-El relationship will expand a lot. And the death in Reckoning, whether it's Jonathan or Lana, will have a lot to do with that as well. Clark moving on should equate to Clark moving towards Jor-El.

[warriorrenegade]

Originally posted by Watching Smallville
Great questions.

I would have liked to see Clark continue to grow, too. I think personal setbacks are so much more powerful when the character believes he has conquered a problem, only to learn that he (or she) has so much more to learn. He doesn't need to become less of a person in order to grow. In fact, the better he is, the more dramatic the lessons, the greater he becomes afterward. Kryptonian Snake makes a good point that perhaps the development has been rushed. There's so much potential good stuff in the caves, the stones, Dr. Swann and his group after he's gone. Even Bridgette Crosby could have been used more. But we're already in the FOS, which I would have envisioned as a Series Finale kind of thing.

I would also like to see Clark out in the world more. I thought TPTB made a good start in Aqua and Exposed by showing the very human side of darkness and evil in contrast with the FOW problems in Smallville. I'd like to see a gradual and well-written awakening of Clark's wanting to help people beyond his own circle of friends and family -- as someone wisely said above, moving from the Good Semaritan to actively wanting to do something about wrongdoing. To me, that's Clark's real growth path -- more than Jor-El or Lana or Kent family drama.

But not to diminish Brainiac -- who's a great character -- and the more flashy villains on the show. That's all good. I just expected a different, let's say, interior path for Clark. But, okay. I'll see what TPTB do with the rest of the season. Maybe ep 100 will set things right for me.


I think you've touched on something here. Having Brainiac on the show is their " TPTB"s attempt at having Clark look beyond his inner circle. Brainiac of course is bent on releasing Zod and is wanting to make earth the kryton 2. If done right this could be the awakening this character could use to propel it further into the uber being we'd all like him to be.

[Eh,Man?You-El?]

Lest we forget, Clark is supposed to be 18 years old (yeah, played by a 26 year old) - even by Earth standards, most teen agers make some pretty poor decisions.

And who knows what Kryptonian hormones are like? There have been some Comics stories where Kryptonians lived VERY long lives (not immortal but in the hundreds of years). By Kryptonian standards, Clark might still be an infant.

That said, I have gotten SO, SO, SO, very bored with Clark's lack of initiative. If Clark doesn't SERIOUSLY mature in the next few episodes I will simply wait for the Season 5 DVD (and later the Season 6 DVD) set to be available to watch the show.
Or maybe skip it entirely.

[sirconical]

Originally posted by Kryptonian Snake
I can't say Jor-El has done or said anything to absolutely contradict the message in the ship. However, there are things that don't quite add up. For instance, if Jor-El wanted Clark to conquer the world, why didn't he tell his son to join forces with the Disciples of Zod to achieve this goal? In Commencement, Jor-El warns Clark about a "dark force from Krypton" that was awakened when blood stained the last stone and states that Clark is the only one who can save humanity. In "Solitude" Clark finds out that Braniac's description of Jor-El as a ruthless dictator (which supports Clark's negative opinion of Jor-El) actually referred to Zod. Seems to me that this revelation would be another great opportunity for Clark to start asking questions about Krypton, its destruction, Zod, and Jor-El's plans for him. Clark also has yet to hear Jor-El actually repeat the message from the ship in some form. I don't think any of Jor-El's messages after "Rosetta" can clearly be taken as encouragement for Clark to conquer the world.

Thanks, Watching Smallville! Damn, just realised I posted a spoiler. Consider it removed.

PS: I fully agree with your post there. He has had plenty of clues that Jor-El isn't the evil genius he's protrayed as.

[mosespeach]

Originally posted by photogirl
we can hope.. he is selfish and pathetic...those are not superman traits!!!

He's acting like a human being, not a 2-D "god" character. The show wouldn't be even a fraction as good as it is right now, if Clark were perfect.

[All about Clark]

Yes he is only 18 and only has the influence of humans at this point, I give TPTB the chance to get where it should go.

You have to admit that stuff needed to move rather slowly until he became 18. There is just so much time for improvement in Clark. And sometimes you do take a step backward before taking the step forward.

[sirconical]

Originally posted by mosespeach
He's acting like a human being, not a 2-D "god" character. The show wouldn't be even a fraction as good as it is right now, if Clark were perfect. Also, people can be different characters from one moment in their life to the next, just like they have portrayed Clark this season compared to the previous four. I agree with what you're saying. I do think, however, that Clark is ignoring some glaringly obvious inconsistencies in the way Jor-El has been protrayed in earlier episodes as a tyrant, against recent events unfolding which suggest Jor-El was a man of peace and justice, who just happens to not disclose much information when he's lecturing Clark.

[jwoodie]

Originally posted by sirconical
I do think, however, that Clark is ignoring some glaringly obvious inconsistencies in the way Jor-El has been protrayed in earlier episodes as a tyrant, against recent events unfolding which suggest Jor-El was a man of peace and justice, who just happens to not disclose much information when he's lecturing Clark.

Ok, gotta part company with you here. "A man of peace and justice"? Where do you get that exactly? And just looking at it from Clark's perspective, the "reckoning" seems like a punishment for his supposed misdeeds - not returning to the FOS. Just given that little bit of information, it doesn't seem unreasonable that Clark would view Jor-El as a tyrannical bastard indeed, and this seems pretty much in line with what he's seen from him in the past. So the glaringly obvious inconsistencies with the past portrayal of Jor-El? I'm not seeing that.
Now, I will concede there is some progress there, so at least the pendulum is swinging away from all-out-tyrannical-bastard back towards your more typical domineering father figure, and I could see that moving into something like a meaningful relationship in the forseeable future. But they're just nowhere near that now.
Things may change significantly in the next episode, though.

[Timester]

Originally posted by mosespeach
He's acting like a human being, not a 2-D "god" character. The show wouldn't be even a fraction as good as it is right now, if Clark were perfect.

Again, Superman is not a "2-D god character". That's knowing absolutely about Clark Kent and even humankind. You guys make to look like that every people on Earth is like Smallville's Clark, when it's the exact opposite. :\

And again with the age... In many countries in the world, people are adults by 16-years old. Clark acts like a 13-14 years old girl.


Originally posted by Eh,Man?You-El?
And who knows what Kryptonian hormones are like? There have been some Comics stories where Kryptonians lived VERY long lives (not immortal but in the hundreds of years). By Kryptonian standards, Clark might still be an infant.

Yes, I'm starting to think that. 18-years male Kryptonians have the same hormones of 14-years female Terran. :lol: :\

[ma200]

Clark is either Superman or he's not. if some of you guys are saying that SVClark has to grow into Superman, then I guess it's possible for anyone to be a Superman.

Heck, I'd make a better Superman.

[Timester]

Originally posted by ma200
Clark is either Superman or he's not. if some of you guys are saying that SVClark has to grow into Superman, then I guess it's possible for anyone to be a Superman.

Heck, I'd make a better Superman.

The problem is people tend to think that Superman is all about the powers, when it's not. Even Superboy and Supergirl say that is a great responsability of carrying the \S/ because of what it represents (even Steel stopped to use it). And that says a lot of what Superman means.

[jwoodie]

Originally posted by ma200
Clark is either Superman or he's not. if some of you guys are saying that SVClark has to grow into Superman, then I guess it's possible for anyone to be a Superman.

Heck, I'd make a better Superman.

I'm sure this is tongue-in-cheek, but of course he has to grow in Superman. Smallville is all about Clark navigating the very trying teenage years, having these crazy powers, knowing nothing about his origins (at first) and trying to keep it all a secret, while trying to live as "normal" a life as he can. That's a tough thing, and the show has the made the point time and time again - if it weren't for Clark's parents and their guidance, Clark could easily end up like so many of the meteor freaks that exploit their powers for selfish purposes. That kind of temptation, while you may not think it is worthy of the mythical figure of Clark/Superman, is a centerpiece of the show. Getting through these years of his life, while developing the kind of moral compass that will inform his life as a superhero later, is also central to the show. Both of those themes revolve around Clark's "growth" into the kind of person that could don the cape later - but he's NOT superman in high school. He's just Clark Kent.

[Timester]

Originally posted by jwoodie
I'm sure this is tongue-in-cheek, but of course he has to grow in Superman. Smallville is all about Clark navigating the very trying teenage years, having these crazy powers, knowing nothing about his origins (at first) and trying to keep it all a secret, while trying to live as "normal" a life as he can. That's a tough thing, and the show has the made the point time and time again - if it weren't for Clark's parents and their guidance, Clark could easily end up like so many of the meteor freaks that exploit their powers for selfish purposes. That kind of temptation, while you may not think it is worthy of the mythical figure of Clark/Superman, is a centerpiece of the show. Getting through these years of his life, while developing the kind of moral compass that will inform his life as a superhero later, is also central to the show. Both of those themes revolve around Clark's "growth" into the kind of person that could don the cape later - but he's NOT superman in high school. He's just Clark Kent.

No, he's just Peter Parker. Clark didn't "grew" to Superman. Superman was always there. Superman is Clark's ethics, honesty, morals and impulse to help without thinking anything else than doing the job. That's Superman. Bruce Wayne did grew into Batman. Peter Parker did grew into Spider-Man. Clark Kent was always Superman.

[ma200]

Originally posted by jwoodie
I'm sure this is tongue-in-cheek, but of course he has to grow in Superman. Smallville is all about Clark navigating the very trying teenage years, having these crazy powers, knowing nothing about his origins (at first) and trying to keep it all a secret, while trying to live as "normal" a life as he can. That's a tough thing, and the show has the made the point time and time again - if it weren't for Clark's parents and their guidance, Clark could easily end up like so many of the meteor freaks that exploit their powers for selfish purposes. That kind of temptation, while you may not think it is worthy of the mythical figure of Clark/Superman, is a centerpiece of the show. Getting through these years of his life, while developing the kind of moral compass that will inform his life as a superhero later, is also central to the show. Both of those themes revolve around Clark's "growth" into the kind of person that could don the cape later - but he's NOT superman in high school. He's just Clark Kent.

There are actually more ppl in real life that focused more on their ideals and cared a greal deal about the value of human life than this CK.

There are actually superheroes in fiction, even before they became superheroes, that dealt with their powers a lot better than this CK did, who actually cared a great deal about the value of human life.

CK doesn't.

[jwoodie]

Originally posted by Timester
Clark didn't "grew" to Superman. Superman was always there.


Originally posted by ma200
There are actually more ppl in real life that focused more on their ideals and cared a greal deal about the value of human life than this CK.

There are actually superheroes in fiction, even before they became superheroes, that dealt with their powers a lot better than this CK did, who actually cared a great deal about the value of human life.

CK doesn't.

Again, my point is about Smallville's Clark Kent. Who is this Clark Kent? Apparently quite different from other incarnations of Clark Kent, but the "growth" of a superhero is definitely the track that this show has taken, regardless of other versions of the Superman mythology. Love it or hate it, it just is what it is.

Where he's at right now, I think we can all agree he's got a long way to go before he can fulfill those ideals and don the cape. But that implies character growth, regardless.

[Timester]

Originally posted by jwoodie
Again, my point is about Smallville's Clark Kent. Who is this Clark Kent? Apparently quite different from other incarnations of Clark Kent, but the "growth" of a superhero is definitely the track that this show has taken, regardless of other versions of the Superman mythology. Love it or hate it, it just is what it is.

Where he's at right now, I think we can all agree he's got a long way to go before he can fulfill those ideals and don the cape. But that implies character growth, regardless.

And like I said, this Clark is like Peter Parker (actually, worst, because Peter did assumed his problems). But telling me that this Clark will be Superman is just laughable... :\

[jwoodie]

Originally posted by Timester
But telling me that this Clark will be Superman is just laughable... :\

You won't get an argument from me on this point. He's not in a good place this season, emotionally. And just the fact that he is SO lead by his emotions is silly - he's NOT HUMAN! I like how they played it in the earlier seasons how he had a tough time relating to his friends because of his emotional immaturity. They played up the fact that he was a little naive and ignorant of simple human emotions - emphasizing the fact that he did not share those emotions himself, exactly. That was more believable than the Clark Kent of this season, who is completely lead by his emotions. He is getting a little ridiculous, but I think he's in for a big awakening that could definitely change things.

[PETER WEST]

Originally posted by Timester
And like I said, this Clark is like Peter Parker (actually, worst, because Peter did assumed his problems). But telling me that this Clark will be Superman is just laughable... :\

I agree.

SV's Clark Kent , the way he's heading he will NEVER Become SUPERMAN .


Now it's possible that in " Reckoning" The Death Of Clark's love one . Will be The wake up call, For Clark to start moving forward in his DESTINY .

[Daphne]

Originally posted by HalJordan4184
ryb, I think you give the writers and producers of this show far too much credit. I mean, one half of the creative team behind the show, said all Clark wants is to get laid.

Nice. They definitely are getting too much credit if that is their thought.

There is so much more that could be going on.