The Problem

Intro

I watched this season out of order. Because of that, and the order of the reruns, my viewing of the arc was somewhat jumbled; however, that helped me to evaluate individual episodes, and I think ultimately the arc, better. Thus I created the "In Context of the Season" category, and will sometimes address the "arc vs. individual" angle .

Overall

Every show reaches the Fourth Season Crisis - a time when they feel the need to escape predictability and so "recreate" the show. Usually as a result, characters are destroyed, relationships are destroyed, a beloved atmosphere is destroyed, and ratings are destroyed. Smallville, conversely, fell into predictability, but in "Commencement" picked themselves up to recover the element of surprise, the atmosphere, the characters, and the relationships. (How it affects the ratings is yet to be seen.) Without "Commencement", which addressed many of the issues below, the season would have been painfully incomplete. And waiting until the finale to make sense of the season is not a practice I would advise. This is a page addressing the Problem. For a page addressing the solution, go to the "Commencement" page.

Theme

1. In the first season, there were two complementary themes: the Clark-Lex friendship, and the young teenage Clark who's discovering himself in both a touchingly human and a cool sci-fi kind of way. (At the time I assumed the latter was the theme of the whole show, but later episodes skewed that.) A double-theme like that naturally called in a lot of "destiny" episodes and endings, like the classic "Hug" ending, the "If you had the power to do whatever you wanted, what would you do..." question in the epic "Leech", and cute moments like Clark floating in "Metamorphosis".
2. In the second season, there was one strong theme: Clark's past intersecting with the present and affecting the future, as spaceships rise in the air, a voice from another planet speaks to him, he takes an impossible leap from building to building, and he finds himself...and along the way develops the courage to kiss the love of his life. The Superman-like episodes, intense, classic, and beautiful in writing, acting, special effects, music, you name it - nearly flawless. It was the epic season. A lot of "destiny" episodes.
3. The third season moved onto a "Superman and the crime world" level. It was perhaps too soon for this theme, which conflicted with their ages and lost the charming "Kent family" atmosphere of the earlier episodes in an unbelievably short span of time. Also, the writers, in their focus on the intense action, overlooked character development, and as a result the relationships and individuals suffered. All was not lost, but they did lose the classic Smallvillian "and how do you feel about that?" talks in the loft and the classic Smallvillian Clark-Lex relationship, both of which defined the first two seasons and were a large part of the reason people watched. They were what made the show different. Still, the season was like one big precursor - your first taste of Superman fighting the crime world day-to-day.
4. Season Four went all over the map. The writers attempted to repair the ratings that their "dark image" had injured, and unfortunately did so in the wrong way. Season Three gained much (Superman gets a higher-level playing field), but lost much (namely, the joy of the characters' interaction). Season Four gave up what they had gained without retrieving what they lost. They also overloaded themselves with a handful of extraneous characters and plots, half of which were never truly completed, and all of which took away from the characters you did care about. There was a feeling of aimlessness, not to the arc, but to the season as a whole...as if the writers were feeling their way, unsure where they were going to go with it. After "Crusade" and "Gone", Clark was neglected; even in the second-to-last episode, he was unaware of and not participating in the Battle for the Stones. Relationships weren't the only element the season overlooked...they also overlooked Clark.

Relationships

When I was dropped into the middle of the season, it was weeks before I could tell whether Lex and Clark were speaking to each other or not. I also didn't know what was going on between Clark and Lana. And it took a few episodes before either character met with Clark and spoke to him in a way that I knew they were on good footing with each other. Compare that with the first season or second season.

During that time, I wrote this: "Of course, I still don't know what relationships they have. Perhaps there is a frigidness between Lana and Clark. Perhaps Lex and Clark are still not speaking. But that takes away the whole joy of the show. So Lana and Clark aren't destined for romance...they still had a very sweet friendship that I would like to see. So Lex and Clark are destined to be enemies...but their friendship was better than Frodo and Sam, one of the best and most captivating relationships I have ever seen. Even when there was a strange dynamic introduced, some tension added...that was the drama. That was the attraction."

The fact that they were speaking doesn't change the fact that those elements mentioned above were still missing.

During some of those middle episodes, we saw what happened when Lex became the guy in the semi-romantic triangle, the guy investigating some weird happenings. With his relationship with Lionel and his relationship with Clark gone, he became an everyday character. What was once the biggest attraction became a few lines of subplot.

Part of the problem was the Wall...

Plot and Subplot

This season there often seemed to be a wall between the plot and the subplot, between Set A of characters and Set B. Aside from being formulaic, this created a problem with the Relationships. Here's what would happen:

Lex, Lana, and Jason would have brief meetings with each other, in which the basics alone were conveyed; and then none of these characters would have any interaction whatsoever with the characters in the main plot. Take "Recruit". In the old days, Lana would have a reason for changing her mind and going to Lex, and that reason would come from a conversation she had with Clark, or at least with Chloe or someone in that circle. And the reason that would work so seamlessly is because there were skillfully-drawn parallels in the plot and the subplot, with both drawing from the same vein of truth. As they faced similar struggles, they would provide support for each other and work through it together. Now that's gone. And with that bond missing, I guess it's somewhat natural that the relationships would start to fall apart.

What Happens to a Character

Aside from the problems that the Wall posed, here are two examples of what happens to break down a character or relationship:

1. The Specific Example: There were two opportunities for Chloe to find out Clark's secret. One of them was an awesome cliffhanger ending after the two of them have vividly dreamed of their worst fears, and both of them feared a life of being alone. The other was a somewhat staged situation which allowe Chloe to know without Clark knowing that she knew. Really, they should have used the first instance for Clark to tell her. But in the comics there was a character who knew Clark's secret and didn't tell anyone, and perhaps they found the parallel too irresistible to give up. Whatever the reason, they chose the Clark-doesn't-know-she-knows scenario, leading to two sets of episodes for the rest of the season. And the first set involved some episodes where Chloe nearly crossed the line between "funny" and "pushy", with her neverending hints about "I don't know which is harder, being the one keeping the secret or the one who isn't told" or however she put it. Before her discovery, she knew her boundaries, no hints and no plaguing him. She respected whatever he wanted to do, whether that meant withholding information or sharing it. It was his decision. Now that she already knew, she became more aggressive, constantly throwing hints and reproaches in his face, which made him more wary. It pulled them apart, whether that was what the writers intended or not. Clark was not about to confide in her. So, during that first set, the Chloe-Clark relationship - really the only one that survived the season - was strained. Toward the end they recovered themselves, with a second set in which Chloe was more sympathetic and helpful; but that first set is a good example of what happens to a character or relationship...what should be a funny and interesting scenario, Chloe knowing and hinting and retracting, actually damages a relationship, sometimes temporarily and sometimes permanently.
2. The General Example: In the beginning, it's so important to get every nuance of every relationship right. Every encounter is measured, every line of dialogue constructed, to portray volumes in that short forty-three minute time span. It's important to make people see characters the way you see them. But during the second season, and most strongly the third and fourth seasons, that starts to fade away. The writers get a bit sloppy. They allow the main character to confront someone, in a way where you sympathize more with the someone than the main character. They put a line in that is more aggressive than funny, but are unwilling to part with the laugh. The characters that they have erected are slowly chipped away by little out-of-character moments, until the character you end up with is completely unlike the fundamental character they gave you in the beginning...and usually not in a good way. Yes, a show should re-invent itself, evolve some, but not by sacrificing the characters...and, unfortunately, the characters get sacrificed almost every time.

Lana

It's the question of the season. Why would they choose to turn Lana into a two-dimensional character? She was sweet, she was a little messed-up, she was wise in her innocence, she was sad, she was eloquent - she was the girl next door on a new level. There's only one explanation I can think of.

During the first and second episode in Season One, there was a slight feeling that she might "turn to the dark side", first when they played that "wicked" music during her bewitching slow-motion introduction, focusing on the kryptonite necklace; then as Clark's first words to her suggested that everyone has a dark side, to which she thoughtfully agreed; and then as she talked to Lex and you felt that the meeting was meaningful, and would lead to something more. Furthermore, there were Lex's hints about their partnership, the fact that in "Nicodemus" she first flirted with Clark and then with Lex, and some weird chemistry when Lex hugged her or wiped her tears, or when she found Lex on the ledge and pulled him back. Perhaps the writers' way of turning her to that side was sending her away to be transformed into this new, insecure, flippant chick with a valley-girl accent and a supposedly ominous tattoo that symbolizes "the element of transformation". They took the low-effort way out.

And, perhaps in an effort to replace what was missing, they introduced Lois Lane...

Lois Lane

Part of the reason it's hard for me to be interested in Lois Lane is because she has so far to go. Drop the current character into the movies, and you would hate her. She has no interest in writing (no goal in life whatsoever), bickers with Clark, and does nothing worth mentioning but serve coffee, make saucy comments, and trail after Clark and get in the way. Plots that actually involve her participation involve either her needing rescuing, or Clark needing rescuing from her. The first two episodes, "Crusade" and "Gone", had the right idea. But once those two were over, the best episodes (Transference, Jinx, Sacred, etc.) were the ones where she was conveniently absent. She weighed down the plots too much.

When I saw Lois Lane in the middle of the season, I thought she was a two-dimensional stick figure. Later I saw "Crusade" and Gone", their original vision for her, and discovered that initially she was witty. warm, and intelligent. She had her overly-familiar, very modern quirks, but she really wasn't bad. But because my introduction to her was mid-season, I was able to separate What They Had from What They Have Now. And What They Have Now needs a lot of work.

What They Had: In "Crusade", they introduced a character with the potential to be complex, have struggles, have victories, and be enigmatic and charming. She was warm, savvy, humorous, and even compassionate, although sometimes she didn't know quite what to do with her emotions or how to treat people so they felt comfortable. Her cool, dangerous talk with Lionel achieved that quiet level of mystery that surrounds many Smallville characters. And in forty-three minutes, she and Clark had developed a strangely comfortable, secretive relationship with the potential to be complex, multi-faceted, and satisfying.

What They Have: Lois is anything but complex. Her character is extraordinarily simple. Right now, her struggles are finding tart comebacks, acting as the pebble in the cog of the plot's machinery, and in one isolated episode looking after her little sister. Even the conflict with her father is gone: even her struggle with smoking is gone. Her only victories are in meaningless verbal battles. There can be nothing enigmatic when a character doesn't have substance to back it up (that was the problem with the flat Genevieve Teague, despite the mysterious mood music), and the sort of modern quirky charm she had soon turned into mere hardness. They turned her savviness into flippancy. They turned her humor into comedy routine (think tray-dropping in "Lucy", pun-making in "Recruit"). Her actions and her dialogue have no substance. Her current relationship with Clark consists of immature banter. Right now, it's not promising.

What I Wish: Chloe Sullivan, the precursor, was a quick-witted, eloquent, intelligent and witty figure, who had the makings of a classic Superman romance with Clark as he saves her life numerous times but has eyes only for Lana. You watched her journalistic instinct battle it out with her sensitivity and her lifelong crush on Clark. She had the attitude, the charm, the fun, and that dangerous side, with the "what if she finds out?" angle. In the commentary in the first season, she is described as "the precursor to Lois Lane". She leaves Lois Lane in the dust.

I really wish Chloe could have been Lois Lane.

Overall: Based on her introduction, Lois has some potential. But they've got a lot of ground to regain, and they need to give her a relevant role so she doesn't weigh the plots down. Then again, any episode with characters that are like bodies, meant to say the lines and act out the plots without getting you emotionally involved, is going to move sluggishly. You can't pin it all on one character.

Lex

Nobody wants a character to remain stationary. But nobody wants to watch a character take a step backward, either.

The whole point of having a character is watching it shape, evolve, and I think that was what the writers tried to do to Lex...to change him...this season. But I think they went about it the wrong way.

The whole theme of Smallville is taking two friends - Lex and Clark - who both have the makings of a hero in them, and watching as the trials they undergo shape who they are destined to become. Think about it. Clark has a biological father who wants him to take over the world, and he fears sometimes that he is destined to be a force for evil. He sometimes feels desperately that he is a danger to everyone around him, that he will hurt the people closest to him. Sometimes the fear is so strong that he rejects the people around him. Meanwhile Lex is (was) trying to break out of his father's path, in any way possible, and ultimately the way he will do so is to figuratively create the headline "Son Outshines Father". He tries to do the right thing, but the burden of who he came from weighs heavily on him, and eventually he begins to fight fire with fire...and become adept at it. He begins to live two separate lives, one in which he is the person he wants to be, one in which he doesn't let consideration for anyone else to stop him.

The choices that they make are what causes their paths to divide. Smallville is supposed to trace the "Y" shaped path (no pun intended) as the two friends who start out together slowly turn aside. This season, both Clark's path and Lex's path weren't slowly branching outward...they were zig-zagging, and sometimes crossing to opposite sides.

I loved "Scare" in that both Clark and Lex were heroes. They both were willing to sacrifice themselves to save the town, although Lex was the only one who actually made the sacrifice, with Clark's help. In their hallucinations, Clark feared being alone, and Lex feared his future, the person he was destined to become. Somehow the experience seemed to unite them, to bring them together in that intriguing Jean Valjean-Javert way. But that was one episode in a season of inconsistencies. Lex is sometimes willing to sacrifice, sometimes not. He is sometimes honorable, sometimes not. Sometimes he is base. He and Clark barely speak, much less connect (their connections in "Transference" and "Scare" were, for me, highlights of the season), and when they do, sometimes he is "betting on Clark Kent" and sometimes he is stealing maps from his barn.

We saw about five different Lexes this season. There is a way to show his journey to the dark side mingled with the good in him, without revolutionizing his character every five episodes. And there is a way to show that journey without having him personally take advantage of Clark. I can see him be merciless toward underlings, toward his father, toward rival companies; but his relationship with Clark is what makes this villain different. Once he tries using Clark as a pawn, the whole thing falls apart. And this season used that angle more than any season before it.

Weekly Updates with Lex

Aside from the characters themselves, there was a problem with the plot formula that I mentioned before - the Wall. A different kind of action was happening on each side of the Wall, and the action on Lex's side (the arc) was having some problems.

In a commentary on an earlier Smallville season, one of the creators commented, "The interesting thing isn't the information, it's 'What's he going to do with the information?'" That was an excellent comment, and they would have done well to stick to it. But in this season, the interesting thing was the information. They relied on what I call "Weekly Updates with Lex". The arc's development was really just a new piece of information every week..."Jason grew up surrounded by relics of the Countess Thoreau", etc. Some of it wasn't even all that interesting or ominous. In the old days, they always left the question of, "What will he/she do, now that _______?" This season, that question wasn't brought up; the main characters were almost passive, as the updates were hand-delivered to them. Some episodes, like "Sacred", were exceptions. But they were exceptions, not rules.

In Context of the Season

Some episodes this season were good individually, but destroyed the season when strung together. The biggest problem was the unparalleled number of out-of-character episodes.

There was Kal-El in "Crusade", body-switching in "Transference", witch-possessing in "Spell", visions of people acting freaky in "Scare", Clark on red k in "Unsafe", Isobel again in "Sacred", Alexander in "Onyx", teenage girl-possessing in "Spirit", Clark with a blank memory in "Blank", Lionel getting converted and converted back, Jason being the "Adam" of this season, Lana's new persona, and a lot of uncharacteristic behavior from Lex.

While the season couldn't have gone without the first two, the characters gradually became detached over the season. "Blank" and "Onyx" had a lot of potential, but they were lost in a season of uncharacteristic behavior; it became almost ho-hum, the same old thing. If the writers really wanted to use all these episodes, they shouldn't have packed them all into one season. Less is more.

The Changes We Liked

1. Although Lex was inconsistent throughout the season, his journey toward the dark side was directly hinged to his relationship and "chess game" with his father. This season was not about Clark pushing him there, and that's a good thing. With Lex's ongoing saga with his father, Clark didn't have to do the villainous-rejecting-thing, and got to be a full-time - well, part-time - hero.
2. I half-appreciated the fact that Chloe's character didn't take a step backward like the others did, but the drawback was that instead of keeping her unique personality, she tended to go with the flow of predictable emotions. She, in many ways, became Lana. However, this was better than the regression that the others went through, and it was good to have a character to whom the viewers could be sympathetic.

© Voice of Reason, 2007