Logic would also dictate that Zod being the CEO of a company in the headlines currently as RAO is, particularly after the fall of the towers, would need to be addressed onscreen during the course of this "is he an agent or isn't he" discussion. Any failure to do so is a detriment to the narrative and to the character of Lois Lane, because it implies a lack of fundamental knowledge on her part to everyone who isn't willing to write half the story themselves (and I am not). If I have to guess and rationalize about what characters think or know about important issues (and Zod's dual role as CEO and purported FBI agent is a big issue) then the writers have failed at their job. For Lois not to mention it, when it's such a big part of Zod's public persona that you yourself say she must have knowledge of, is a big gaffe on their part.
A simple line during her exchange with Clark where she could have acknowledged how weird it is that a CEO of a major company would also be an undercover FBI agent would have been sufficient. These are the kinds of sins of omission they've been making all season (see Jimmy death talk happening offscreen for a lesser example). It's lazy and there's no excuse for it when, as I've said, it would have taken a handful of words to solve the problem. It would've taken nothing away from the scene as they had written it, only added the continuity fix.
On a final note, ambiguity served no purpose here. There was no justifiable reason for them NOT to explain that Lois knows of his CEO role, but plenty of reasons for them to do the opposite. I contend they have serious editorial issues on the show. The Alia story proved this already but things like this reinforce it. The viewers should not be expected to write parts of the story for them, it's as simple as that in my view.
A simple line during her exchange with Clark where she could have acknowledged how weird it is that a CEO of a major company would also be an undercover FBI agent would have been sufficient. These are the kinds of sins of omission they've been making all season (see Jimmy death talk happening offscreen for a lesser example). It's lazy and there's no excuse for it when, as I've said, it would have taken a handful of words to solve the problem. It would've taken nothing away from the scene as they had written it, only added the continuity fix.
On a final note, ambiguity served no purpose here. There was no justifiable reason for them NOT to explain that Lois knows of his CEO role, but plenty of reasons for them to do the opposite. I contend they have serious editorial issues on the show. The Alia story proved this already but things like this reinforce it. The viewers should not be expected to write parts of the story for them, it's as simple as that in my view.
Comment