Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Apocalypse - A Horrible Episode

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Apocalypse - A Horrible Episode

    I hated this episode.
    The whole premise behind Clark/Superman is that he is a good person who is good to others and he saves peoples lives. Fans of Superman like that about him. That is what makes him an appealing character and a hero.
    The writers made it out as if every cast members life would be better without Clark. Why would that be appealing to fans knowing that the people he is closest to would be better off without him? This bothered me alot and is a major disappointment in the series. I know they tried to redeem themselves by showing that the world would end without Superman, but I think fans of this show and of Clark/Superman would have appreciated if this episode was done differently.

    Also with as many times as Clark had saved the characters of the show over & over again during the course of the series I can't imagine any of them still surviving without him.
    Lex would have been dead in the 1st episode without Clark for sure. How many times did Clark save Lex after that. It was crazy how many times Clark saved Lana. How could she still be alive without him. Having the other characters being alive made no sense either.

    This episode was poorly written and had major mistakes. It was among the worst episodes of the entire series!!!!!

  • #2
    screw that it was one of the best of the season.

    Comment


    • #3
      Everybody is entitled to their own opinion, and I for one loved this episode.

      Comment


      • #4
        I loved it...although, HeroAtLarge, I think you're missing the point of the episode. It showed that, despite the fact that the world may have seemed superifically better, it still needs Clark in the grand scheme of things.

        Comment


        • #5
          Um WTF?

          This was one of the best episodes of the season, if not of the entire series.

          I don't see your logic whatsoever. Sorry.

          The episode got 10/10 from me.

          Comment


          • #6
            This was the turning point in clark's life.

            How can it possibly be a bad episode? it pushed him in the right direction, to love himself, to be superman..indicating his attachment to Lois.

            It also didnt indicate that everyone would be better off without him

            the two characters who dont belong in his future had happy lives without him but Lois needed him, Kara needed him, Lex needed to be controlled.
            Last edited by DontCha; 11-02-2008, 11:33 AM.

            Comment


            • #7
              I agree with the first poster. It bothered me too. I did not like the episode either & how it was done.

              They should have done it more like "It's A Wonderful Life" then came up with a way Clark could save the entire planet

              Comment


              • #8
                One of the better episodes of this terrible season.
                Last edited by Simba_Muffy; 03-22-2011, 12:11 AM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  One of the best episode's of the series but also a reminder that the writers can't tell a good story in Smallville continuety without resolving some alteration's to time and space (think of "Homecoming").

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Maybe that's what Jor-El tried to teach him. Jor-El created this little fantasy. It wasn't an AU or a real alternate timeline. It was a fiction created by Jor-El. That's why Kara attacked Kal-El when she learned who he was. Because that's how Jor-El (AI Jor-El) sees Kara.

                    And Jor-El tends to think in the big picture. Even if all his friends were OK on a personal level, they would suffer without him in the grand scheme of things.

                    Technically, if it weren't for Clark, Lex would have died in the car crash (I hereby ignore the Traveler plot and just go by the events of the Pilot). And depending on who would attend without Clark binding the group together at least Lana and Whitney, but also possibly Pete and Chloe would have died at the Homecoming dance through electrocution.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      One of the top episodes of the whole series. Clark, Lois, Lex, Jimmy, Kara, Brainiac. No Lana and very little Chloe. Could it be better?

                      TW did very good job directing this.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Cetainly one of the best of S7.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by skully
                          Cetainly one of the best of S7.
                          Yes!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Apocalypse was the saving grace of Season 7.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I disagree that this was a poorly written episode. This is a universe where Kal-El never landed. Meaning that an X amount of history, following 1989, would be different. You can't fit the history of a world with Kal-El/Clark Kent, into a universe where he never landed. To look at the pilot. Jeremy Creek decided to kill everyone at that dance, because Whitney and the others made Clark the scarecrow. Only, this is a universe without Clark (not counting that teenager. He wouldn't have been at Smallville High in 2001). So, the treatment of Clark wouldn't have motivated Jeremy to kill the teens. Maybe someone else would've ended up being the scarecrow, but we don't know if someone else was intended (and it was changed to Clark last minute)... or if they would've even managed to get their hands on said person. Lex crashed through a guardrail and ended up under water. However, between his car and the guardrail was an invulnerable kid, with super strength. Oh, wait, not in this universe. The question is... would Lex always have ended up in the water... or did Clark's strength affect the strength of the guardrail? If it did, then Lex's car wouldn't have made it through the guardrail, without Clark there.

                              Linda Danvers is indicated to have been free from her ship for years (rather than a few months, like Kara). We don't know how long, or how many situations was resolved by her. We know that Lionel was in Smallville, to attempt to intercept Kal-El's ship (see "Eternal" for further details) in 1989. Only, no ship would've landed. No Kal-El/Clark Kent. No Davis Bloome. So, Lionel would've kept searching until he found a Kryptonian ship (Linda's). In the main universe, no such search was needed (keeping Kara under water for almost 20 years).

                              Lex is said to have rounded up the meteor freaks, possibly preventing a lot of events (including Gabriel Duncan's need to nuke the town, to wipe out the meteor infected population).

                              Any incidents, relating to Kal-El/Clark Kent, in the lives of Lana Lang and Chloe Sullivan would never have happened. AU Chloe admits that she and Lana never hanged in the same groups, at school, because Clark wasn't there to bring them together. Ian Randall attempted to kill Chloe and Lana, because of Clark's attempt to reveal that he was two-timing them. No Clark = no one to expose Ian to Chloe and Lana = no attempt on the lives of Chloe and Lana by Ian Randall. Lex's first interaction (and much early involvement) with Lana (not counting a past encounter, when she was ten, that Lana mentions) was Clark-motivated. So, Lex might never have become part of Lana's life (or Chloe's). Lana left Smallville for Paris in 2004 (looks like her AU counterpart did the same), only returning because of her back tattoo. That she only got because Jason Teague arranged (in retrospect, it seems a bit suspect) for her to touch the tomb of Isobel Thoreaux. We don't know the story of the stones in this universe (other than that they were eventually (no date given) combined to create Linda's fortress). Meaning that we don't know if Lana and Jason met. Judging by the evidence, I'd guess that AU Lana never returned to Smallville (no Clark to constantly pull her back). Thus, any life threatening situation for Lana in S4-7 wouldn't have happened to the AU Lana (as she was in Paris, and not Smallville, at the time). In my eyes, the town of Smallville was a place that brought Lana little more than pain. So, her leaving that place forever would likely bring Lana happiness (in the form of a fresh start).

                              A large part of the lives of the mainstream Lana and Chloe revolved around Kal-El/Clark. A boy that they both had feelings for. And certains actions motivated by (would they have been at certain locations without Clark? Would they have done certain actions, without attempting to get back at Clark (ex. Chloe's early S3 involvement with Lionel)?). You remove the boy, the remove the influence (both good and bad), that said boy had on their lives. Chloe spent years crushing on Clark. After learning his secret, she set herself up as his sidekick. A role that clearly affected her relationship with Jimmy (as she constantly ran off to help Clark). By season 9, Chloe basically seems to have lacked much of a life outside of Clark. How many dates, how many new friendships did Chloe turn down... because she thought "Clark might need me at any moment"? Lana got to know Lex through the mutual friendships/relationships with Clark. Lana got involved with Lex (resulting in an abusive and manipulate relationship), following a break-up with Clark.

                              So, Chloe and Lana seemingly being happier, in this Clark-less universe, is not an example of poor writing. It's the writers looking at the history of the characters on the show, and examining what their lives would've been without Clark. That their conclusion is that Chloe and Lana would've been happier without him is not bad writing, it's following a line of thought to it's conclusion. The important point of the episode isn't that Chloe and Lana would've been happier without him... it's that the world would be doomed without him. One must look at the bigger picture. One can't judge a world, based on the lives of two people. Can't just look at them and say: "this world is better/perfect". The President of the United States nuking the world would suggest that this world is worse, when you get past the lives of two people... two people who would be killed in said nuclear apocalypse anyway. While the mainstream Lana and Chloe might've suffered a bit, at least they aren't killed by nuclear war. A nuclear war brought on by Clark not being there.

                              Comment

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