Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Chloe's (Non)Accountabililty

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Why do I continue to have to fill in the blanks with characters like Clark and Chloe? Why can't they get some perspective?
    You wont get any argument from me on this. I've been asking for it for months. I personally blame the lack of insight on the forced Chlark rift - but YMMV.

    Moreover, I'm interested in the PTB delivering what they've assured the viewers of. Which, in my opinion, they haven't, with regard to Chloe's accountability.
    An interview comment is not the same as "delivering what they've assured the viewer of".

    I believe they THINK they delivered. It just didn't meet your expectation as far as I can tell. Seriously, Al Septien's tweets are evidence IMO that they think they are doing a good job writing a clear and compelling story and are proud of it. I don't think BP lied, or was evasive (which they DO alot of). I think he thinks they did a good job of showing accountability for Chloe and personal consequences for her actions.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by SVFancross
      I believe they THINK they delivered. It just didn't meet your expectation as far as I can tell. Seriously, Al Septien's tweets are evidence IMO that they think they are doing a good job writing a clear and compelling story and are proud of it. I don't think BP lied, or was evasive (which they DO alot of). I think he thinks they did a good job of showing accountability for Chloe and personal consequences for her actions.
      Compelling perhaps, but I'm not sure clear is their goal (at least in regards to Chloe).

      So much of what we've seen with Chloe lately has been vague and ambiguous (and open to interpretation). I have to believe it's intentional.

      The problem they have with Chloe, is there are fans that really love her, and fans that really hate her. So how do they please one group, without turning off the other?

      It seems to me they do it by muddying the waters. They present mixed messages on Chloe, in the hopes that each group of fans will see what they want to see (and ignore or minimize what they don't want to see). And really, who can blame them (TPTB)? With the Nielsen ratings hovering so perilously close to the two million mark, they can't really afford to alienate any more fans.

      It does seem to be working (at least with some fans, at least to some extent), at least for now.

      Just my opinion (and I would love to hear other's opinions on this), and of course YMMV.

      .
      Last edited by cma_454; 05-03-2010, 07:46 AM.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by cma_454
        Compelling perhaps, but I'm not sure clear is their goal (at least in regards to Chloe).

        So much of what we've seen with Chloe lately has been vague and ambiguous (and open to interpretation). I have to believe it's intentional.

        The problem they have with Chloe, is there are fans that really love her, and fans that really hate her. So how do they please one group, without turning off the other?

        It seems to me they do it by muddying the waters. They present mixed messages on Chloe, in the hopes that each group of fans will see what they want to see (and ignore or minimize what they don't want to see). And really, who can blame them (TPTB)? With the Nielsen ratings hovering so perilously close to the two million mark, they can't really afford to alienate any more fans.

        It does seem to be working (at least with some fans, at least to some extent), at least for now.

        Just my opinion (and I would love to hear other's opinions on this), and of course YMMV.

        .
        The same could be said about every char on the show, not just Chloe.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by cma_454
          It seems to me they do it by muddying the waters. They present mixed messages on Chloe, in the hopes that each group of fans will see what they want to see (and ignore or minimize what they don't want to see). And really, who can blame them (TPTB)? With the Nielsen ratings hovering so perilously close to the two million mark, they can't really afford to alienate any more fans.
          Thing is good story telling will solve the viewer problem. I am pretty sure they can write Chloe in a way that can please her fanbase and not annoy the people who don't care about her. Instead they go for the cheap conflict, making stuff ambigious as possible in reguards to there actions.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Supsfan
            Thing is good story telling will solve the viewer problem. I am pretty sure they can write Chloe in a way that can please her fanbase and not annoy the people who don't care about her. Instead they go for the cheap conflict, making stuff ambigious as possible in reguards to there actions.
            And that ambiguity, coupled with even more ambiguous "accountability" is what turns me off her character. If they wanted to write a compelling character, they could have had her go through her "dark period", as they did in the beginning, without her character constantly and seemingly going out of her way to berate and foil Clark. They then could have had her begin to come out of it and repair that relationship much, much sooner than 18 episodes into the season of 22. Clark recognizes what he did and even if it was over the top IMO, the way he apologized to her, at least he did so, and I would have liked to have seen her reach him halfway. Even if she didn't agree with him, to at least recognize how her actions had affected him, and account for that, even if she didn't believe she was at fault.

            ----- Added 8 Minutes later -----

            Originally posted by BadToad
            Then maybe thats how they should've answered the question when it was posed to them.
            That's half the problem though. BP did say that the characters were justified from their POV, which he then followed up with saying that there were consequences for all their actions.

            Maybe it's just me b/c I usually think of "consequences" as not purely "action--->reaction", but as serious "punishment fits the crime". I'm not trying to say Chloe=a Criminal, just that from where I sit, there are things that she should have serious consequences for, not just losing her megacomputer.
            Last edited by hellokitty; 05-03-2010, 09:47 AM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Britas15
              As I've been telling you for months now, I neither like nor dislike Chloe. I'm really only interested in her storyline making sense. Which, to me, this season, it does not. Moreover, I'm interested in the PTB delivering what they've assured the viewers of. Which, in my opinion, they haven't, with regard to Chloe's accountability.

              In my opinion, regardless of what Chloe's issues are, the show has failed to clearly establish where they're coming from. The show doesn't really mention Jimmy, her mother, or Davis. The show doesn't really mention what Chloe went through after the JLA took off after the Doomsday debacle. It's been -- what? -- eighteen episodes since Jimmy's name was mentioned. That's too long. If Chloe's still damaged because of what happened at the end of last season, if she still hasn't moved on, if she's still reeling, if she still can't pull it together, if she still can't quite manage to do things differently, then the show needs to say so.

              I really don't think I'm asking for much at all. It's just not that hard to provide a line or two of introspective dialogue here or there to make it clear where she's coming from. Hell, I'd even take some actions that made it clear where she was coming from. Like, after she had to hightail it out of Watchtower, why not have her run back in to grab that picture of Jimmy that was on her desk for a while? And then have her look down at it, and then at Watchtower itself, and then at the place where Jimmy died, and then show her running out? Because all I got from that scene is that Chloe didn't want to lose all of her information and her hard work. It was the job that she was afraid of losing. The significance of the place in which she lost Jimmy getting suddenly ripped from her didn't even come up.

              Why do I continue to have to fill in the blanks with characters like Clark and Chloe? Why can't they get some perspective? Where's the neglect coming from? It's like the show just says, "She's in a bad way. Take our word for it. Don't bother with why. Just trust us." Sorry, but I'm not that gracious and forgiving when it comes to things that, in my opinion, need to be spelled out, if they're gonna matter so damn much, and "Chlollie" does matter so damn much.

              If Chloe's mom, who hasn't been brought up in I-don't-even-know-how-long is the root of her issues with Oliver, then I need to hear that. If Chloe's still not past the Doomsday thing twenty episodes later, and that's why she's keeping Oliver at a distance, then I need to hear that. Hell, if Chloe thinks that Oliver's gonna lose interest in her and run off with an underwear model someday, then I need to hear that. Because some vague line about having lost trust in people and knowing that Oliver would eventually leave just don't cut the mustard for me. Your mileage may vary.
              You shouldn't have to continue filling in the blanks. That's why showing and not telling is vitally important to storytelling. Which, is where SV fails big time over and over and over.

              Aside from that, I can and do get where Chloe is coming from. Heck, as AM said in one of her interviews, "Chloe's been emotionally damaged by every relationship she's ever cared about." The things she's been through, the things she's seen, and the things she's lost are plenty enough to see and understand this (maybe I do because I've been a Chloe fan since day one).

              Last season she didn't just lose Jimmy, she lost Davis and Clark as well. That's enough for most anyone to have these issues. Doesn't really matter what part she may or may not have had in it. The fact is she went though some very damaging experiences, period.

              Too bad all the wonderfully insightful things that take place offscreen isn't available on DVD!

              About Jimmy, I don't think TPTB are ever going to own up to that one. Therefore, he'll continue to be ignored as much as possible (which is fine by me). As far as Ollie is concerned and what Chloe thinks he'll do, he's a known womanizer who's notorious for the underwear model type women he's dated/associated with. When Chloe got into this relationship, she knew that upfront (Escape: reminding Lois of his track record) so, IMO, she has every reason to believe this. Plus, every male she has been romantically linked with has left to a certain degree, including Jimmy.

              Anyway . . .

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Tatiana
                ya I really hated how she talked to Clark in the hospital, what was that all about? I hope she is not blaming Clark now for what happened to Oliver

                You know she was. And probley for not saving her too. Again the lack of responability for Chloe should not be a surprise now. It has been going on for the past couple season especially since season 6 and has gotten worse.

                BUT REMEMBER CLARK HAS TO SEE IT FROM HER SIDE!

                Comment


                • Not sure what prompted me to delurk into this thread, but here goes and of course YMMV and this is all just my opinion:

                  Originally posted by Bizarrolover
                  The entire dialogue was so contrived and it came out of the blue. I mean, Tess telling Chloe that Oliver loves her just because the way she looks at her? Did Tess, Oliver and Chloe ever shared one scene in Smallville?
                  As someone who loves Chloe and Oliver, I have to say that ITA with all of that Bizarro. I believe in Chlollie, but didn’t buy what Tess was selling.

                  Originally posted by borednow
                  I actually like Good guy/Bad guy dynamics... don't assume just because I hate Chlavis that I don't. However I am not assuming they didn't have feelings for each other, I am basing my opinion that they did not have real feelings on what actually happened in the show without calling anything a retcon.
                  borednow Chloe spent as much time being afraid of Davis as "attracted" IMO. I see the facts pretty much as you presented them, but of course mileage will certainly vary.

                  Originally posted by Bizarrolover
                  BTW, I think the dream had another significance. It was some kind of premonition that told her that her siding/protecting Davis would lead to Clark's death. Davis words 'how did you think this was going to end'? was her own subconscious telling that she was doing the wrong thing.
                  Same mileage again, Bizarro, SnowBird. Chloe's dream IMO was a nightmare. Davis imprisoned her with threats against Clark, and dreams are subconscious desires and fears. So while maybe some part of her wanted Davis, the bigger part knew not only that it was wrong, but was terrified of it and Davis. It’s the part of the brain warning her (and the viewing audience) about what's to come. That was also anviled by Clark early in the season Prey, Chloe trusting the wrong person. JMHO.

                  Originally posted by Britas15
                  As I've been telling you for months now, I neither like nor dislike Chloe. I'm really only interested in her storyline making sense. Which, to me, this season, it does not. ... Why do I continue to have to fill in the blanks with characters like Clark and Chloe? Why can't they get some perspective? Where's the neglect coming from? It's like the show just says, "She's in a bad way. Take our word for it. Don't bother with why. Just trust us." Your mileage may vary.
                  I cannot give enough WORD to this Britas. I had the same feeling about S8 Chloe. Her actions and motivations were all over the place, so OOC IMO.. but then character assassinations are one of SV’s favorite games. It's the OOC parts of S8 Chloe that bugged me as much as anything with Chlavis, not any chemistry or lack thereof. (I didn’t see it but of course I realize everyone's ‘ships will vary.) And IMO it’s also not about whether you liked or didn't like Chimmy, or Chloe.

                  How Chloe behaved towards Davis, while in a professed committed (uh, not wild about that episode) relationship with fiancé/wounded husband Jimmy, reflected on her character. Sure Chloe would lie to Jimmy about Clark, but she wouldn't "cheat" on him, just pick up with someone else. I found S8 Chloe to be, like I said, character assassination. TPTB suggesting that even though she loved and married Jimmy (while mind-wiped I feel compelled to note) she'd “want” Davis. She'd trust "darkness inside me" Davis over her drugged, crazy acting but in-the-end right husband. A few off camera, profanity laced emails, and it's over, 3 years just like that? Didn't buy any of it 'cause TPTB did a bad job showing it. YMMV.

                  Yes I blame Jimmy as well as Chloe (it takes 2), but the real FAIL lies with TPTB. Plenty of plausible, credible ways to end Chimmy but what they did destroyed the characters in horrible, unrealistic OOC ways. Jimmy as foul-mouthed, drugged out douche? Chloe as light switch, move onto the next available guy? Davis as victim/killer with a heart, -er not.. whatevs. FAIL!

                  Originally posted by DA_Champion
                  She did save Davis' life at the risk of everybody else's .. and she did trust Davis over Jimmy.
                  DA Champion and ginevrakent, I think I agree with you a little here and I’ll probably get into some trouble with my take on things.

                  IMO the problem here is not Chloe or Davis, the problem was the show. Chloe didn’t learn that “Saving Davis” and “Protecting Clark” were mutually exclusive b/c the show told us, not her. In the audience and spoiler free, I saw it coming miles away, always saw Davis (not just DD) as a serial killer. But the way TPTB wrote it, how the characters saw each other... if I try really hard, I can sort of see how Chloe could rationalize that she could do both: Save Davis AND Protect Clark at the same time.

                  But that comes to a head at the end of the season. Davis by his own admission told Jimmy and Oliver that HE had to kill one of them so he could control the Beast from killing both (which sounded like his choice to me but .. I’ll stop there.) Instead of having Oliver (whom Chloe trusted) better explain in clear detail what happened in that basement, TPTB have him act like a judgmental jerk with the "bad guys" crack, her plan being seriously flawed and be all glib about Clark ending things (which I also found a little OOC for Oliver). Plus another "how'd you think this would end?" anvil.

                  If that convo had been better, if he had spelled it out for her clearer, would she still have thought to "save" Davis from the PZ? I ask the rhetorical question, not really wanting an answer b/c there's no point and obviously nothing will change what happened. Bottom line: BoredNow DA Champion, Bizarro and almost everyone, I think you're ALL a little right and that's because of the terrible, terrible writing. YMMV.

                  Originally posted by AChloeChick
                  About Jimmy, I don't think TPTB are ever going to own up to that one. Therefore, he'll continue to be ignored as much as possible.
                  As to the OT and accountability, everyone’s mileage will vary as to what that will really mean or look like. Ultimately I don’t think any character on this show (save maybe villains) really gets held responsible and it’s frankly all on TPTB. Like ACC said, they totally failed with Davis and Jimmy (and IMO Lex, Chloe, Clark, Super Lana), and they KNOW it, so the last thing they want to do is bring that up again.

                  As to Clark and Chloe, it’s been years. Forget accountability. Time to live, learn and move on already IMO. There’s no going back, no rewriting the past. They’re friends with complex histories which should add to their relationship, but for some reason it’s not being written that way. YMMV.

                  Whew, no idea where all that came from. Hope it made some sorta crazy sense.

                  Comment

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