This thread was proposed in the Mod thread as a place to pose the kinds of questions you hope PS3 (or anyone else affiliated with the show) will answer in any of their upcoming interviews. This is hypothetical--there's no specific interview in mind here. Just post the questions you hope they'll answer somewhere. You can also post follow-up questions to any of those asked by other posters, but take discussion to other threads to keep this one streamlined.

On the off chance that any of them read this thread themselves, keep it polite so that they'll want to keep reading. We don't need more than one Bitterness or Open Letter thread.

Which fan group do you consider more important? The Chloe/Chlarkers who have been with the show since Season 1 or The Lois/Cloisers who joined the show at Season 4?

You said in a previous interview that there will be an episode that would deal with the sexual undertones in regards to Clark, when will we see this, for it has yet to happen.

Do you feel College is Important?

Thank you for the thread. Here's the one thing I need to know.

1. (a) Was the use of SWFing a deliberate attempt to lessen Clois's importance this season? (b) If not, why can't Clois be written to stand on its own legs without the parrallels reminding me of Chloe?

What was the rationale behind the choice not to explain how Clark got his job at the Daily Planet?

Do you believe that Clark choosing not to fully restore Chloe's memories was a moral one?

I am still baffled by the choice to actually marry Chloe and Jimmy. Leaving the fact that Chloe is a non-mythos character, Jimmy Olsen is never married, divorced, or widowed in the mythos. If it's something that cannot last, why was it done at all? Particularly when many fans seemed vocal about how they just weren't feeling the chemistry between the characters. I'm not trying to bash, I just don't see that it was ever addressed -- whether you knew, on some level, that this isn't exactly a popular ship.

When will we see an episode, as promised, that deals with the underlying UST between Chlark? Abyss was about the overall friendship over the years. Nothing has properly addressed the underlying sexual nature between Clark and Chloe.

When will Chloe be going back to journalism? You've said before that fans of Chloe the reporter will have to wait and see how that plays out and they've waited for half the season. When and how will Chloe go back to the job she was unjustly fired from and back to her life's passion that you've built up her loving since she was 8 (per Progeny)?

Why did you devote half a season to a relationship that is not a ratings draw and is disliked by a large portion of the fanbase?

Do you consider Clark erasing Chloe's memories a violation of her free will?

Are Chimmy ever getting annulled? How can a marriage stand that was entered into when one party was infected by a space computer and mindwiped?

Was it deliberate to take Chlark scenes and reshoot them with Welling and Durance, such as the desk scene from Phantom becoming Lois and Clark's first day in Plastique? Or, how about putting Lois in a football Jersey in Committed to mimic the same set up from Devoted.

Why is Lois shown to have an alcohol addiction?

***FINALLY, can you clarify for me how the way the Fever Letter was handled was something Chlark fans would be happy with? It ended with Chloe shooting Clark down and then with what felt like, to many fans, Lois and Clark bonding over the letter CHLOE had written just for him. Do you realize that a large portion of the fanbase was wounded and very depressed by how it was handled?

What was the rational to reboot the series this season instead of continuing with the show that's been on the air for the past seven years?

How much of the Chloe that we've seen so far this season has been Brainiac influenced?

Can we have an episode (I'll take an AU) where Clark and Chloe do the wild thing?

Most importantly, why can't we have more shirtless Clark scenes? (Perhaps there could be one in the episode where Clark and Chloe do the wild thing.)

Thanks for this thread.

Is there going to be an episode where Chloe gets credit for all her hard work? So far she's:

-been fired from her dream job by the villain for helping the hero.
-been attacked and infected by Brainiac while helping the hero.
-been betrayed by the guy who claims to love her (Jimmy) to the villain.
-been captured and experimented on by the villain.
-been kidnapped by a monster on her wedding day.
-been mind-raped by her best friend (Clark) against her express wishes that she wouldn't trade her memories for anything.
-been kidnapped during her engagement party.
... and more that I am missing. Will Chloe ever get anything she's worked hard for, for the past seven seasons (being a top reporter at the DP; Being Clark's special partner and confidant)?

Will we ever see Lois working for anything? (She got hired at the DP because Lex's clone brother wanted to sleep with her, and she got a raise because Faora possessed her body).

How did Clark get a job at the DP without a college degree, experience, or even an interview? Why not have him using a police radio while doing freelance for the Smallville ledger and ease him into journalism?

Is Chloe still married to Jimmy despite not being under her right mind when she married Jimmy (with Brainiac's infection, most of her memories for the past four years erased/altered by Clark and Jor-El)?

Are we going to see a return of Real!Chloe, the spunky, smart, ambitious, career-minded, goal-oriented, loyal, brave, sexy Reporter Chloe who wouldn't take no for an answer and who wouldn't let anyone treat her like a door-mat the way she's let everyone stomp on her this season?

Were we suppossed to take the lie-detector scenes in "Committed" seriously because Lois had never cheated on Clark because as of that day they had never dated? Was this done on purpose to show the audience that the lie detector was not working properly?

What values do you think you are promoting in your representation of women in this program?

Will Tess continue to be undermined a character, or will she stand as her own as a strong villain? What other DC characters are going to be borrowed for the remainder of the season?

Do you consider Jimmy Olsen a good boyfriend, despite his wandering eye, neediness, and lack of respect for Chloe's choices? Is he supposed to be a good mate, or are you showing him to be the kind of man that women should not settle for? I think that being happiest when your fiancée has been lobotomized is essentially not a good thing, and women should not put up with men who demand all of their time without appreciating that they necessarily will have a life outside of their relationship.

Are we going to see a return to the Chloe Sullivan we saw developed over the course of the season as a strong, independent, career-focused woman capable of keeping up with the Justice League? Do you feel she is only "complete" once Chloe's character is paired with a male character?

Will the rest of the plots of the season focus on the telling of the story you have set up, or will it be the back and forth of who ends of with Clark Kent? Do you view heteronormativity as Clark's destiny, or is his destiny to become a hero who the world looks up to?

Will we ever get to see another glimpse of Lois' bisexuality (Combat)? Do you feel that the inclusion of Colin (Ring that Bell Guy) is a signal to a change in how Smallville treats its homosexual characters, as a joke (the jock in Truth) or as evil (Tina Greer, Emily, and Buffy)? Dead isn't a great status, but he was loved, despite his few appearances.

While villains such as Lionel Luthor, Zor-El, and Brainiac have denied Lex, Kara, and Chloe their memories with the connotation that this was evil, when Clark denies Chloe, it is portrayed as 'friendship' and 'heroism.' Do you feel that Clark's decision to override Chloe's desire to keep her memories is a moral one, one that Superman should make, and will Clark ever have to address his wrongs so that he can come out of the encounter as a better hero? I feel like continuously ignoring these issues makes a being with Clark's kind of power frightening.

On that note, is the Justice League ever going to take a stand against murder, or, since Oliver Queen is okay with murdering someone from behind, is the Justice League just not going to have a moral code different from the criminals they fight? If they don't, what makes them heroes?

What makes you believe that television is the best creative output for you, with regards to Smallville?

What in the world is behind your choice to keep resurrecting the Clana and letting it limp along without acknowledging it for the creepy, dysfunctional relationship it is? And while we're at it, what's with never calling Lana on her crap?

Going on from this question,

1) Why bring back Allison Mack if your intention was to destroy and humiliate the character in order to elevate the character played by Erica Durance? Would it not have been easier to let Allison go, and reboot the series by rewriting Erica's character so she can be more like Chloe, without having Allison as part of the show and Chloe a constant reminder that she's a better journalist and a better match for Clark romantically?

2) Allison, despite her character's deconstruction this season at your hands, is an actress that is in 22 episodes of the season - why have you never stepped up and promoted her the way you have Erica Durance? Or rather, why have you never stepped up and asked the network to promote her as a lead actress (and actress with the most seniority in the show)?

3) Why do you persist in portraying Allison as the "ugly" actress on your cast? Why was she never worthy of a better love interest than Jimmy, who treats Chloe so badly?

4) Can you give me a reason without using the words: iconic, comics, mythos, destiny as to why Erica Durance's character is a character I should support and want to suceed when as far as I can tell she's in love with Clark, has Chloe's job at the DP and a raise, because: Hello, she's "Lois Lane", the General's Daughter and doesn't have to work for anything as hard as Chloe has over seven seasons.

5) Is a woman's self-respect ever something you consider when you write such a dysfunctional relationship like Chloe/Jimmy? Jimmy is close to verbally abusive and seems to have a desire to see Chloe beneath him (see Noir, his relationship with Kara and Maxima) in order to make himself feel better about himself - while Chloe seems to have lost the spine she'd been graced with earlier in the show's run in order to take Jimmy's awful behaviour.

6) Do you feel you have no need for Chloe/Chlark fans anymore since you rebooted the series?

7) Do you feel the show will be better off in season 9 without Chloe/Chlark fans?

8) Is Hex and Chloe turning into Erica's character a desire to finally be rid of Chlois fans like the treatment of the Fever Letter was your attempt to be rid of Chlark fans?

Going on from this, is EDLois really Clark's final love interest? If so, do you feel that you have adequately conveyed to the audience why she is a better choice for Clark than Chloe? Clark and Chloe have eight years of affection and sexual tension between them, and Chloe has saved Clark (and the world) multiple times. She's also protected his secret for years, even at the cost of her own career. Exactly what is it about EDLois' character that you feel makes her a better choice for Clark, and in what ways have you tried to show this to the audience?

Why did you choose to push Clark into the Daily Planet with so little qualifications, rather than spend half a season or so developing his writing (having him write a column for the Smallville Ledger or some such)? Was this intended to show us that the Daily Planet is no longer the great paper it once was, and that it's been corrupted? If so, will we see the Daily Planet redeemed?

Will Chloe get back into journalism, the career that was so much a part of her for the first seven seasons of the show?

Is it still your intention to present Ollie as a hero, despite the fact that he attempted to murder another man from behind, or is it your intention to depict him as a hero gone bad?

Do you believe the show can continue for another season without Tom Welling?

What authority, if any, does DC comics have over your story lines? This question/debate/argument gets bandied about quite frequently on the internet with theories ranging from DC having total control of your scripts to DC having no control. I think everyone understands the Warner Brothers feature department influence but the relationship with DC seems to be much murkier.

1. Will you please clarify how old Lois is?
2. Will you tell me what "Ring that Bell" guy's name is?
3. Do you ever visit/use the Smallville wiki?
4. Is Chloe still in college?
5. What relationship in pop culture would you say is similar to Clark and Chloe's?
6. Are you seriously considering trying to do the show without Tom Welling? Don't you think this is a huge disregard to all the hard work he's put into the show, and do you think anybody will be interested in a show about Clark's journey... with no Clark?
7. Do you realize that the Chloe/Jimmy relationship is killing me slowly? (I am pretty sure I'm not the only one who feels like this.) Why do Lana and Lois get billionaires that they decide to dump, but Chloe gets an insecure, asshole jerk who constantly questions her loyalty, cheats on her and dumps her over and over again?
8. On that note, do you realize that Chloe/Jimmy is so terrible, it's making me hate someone who is usually, traditionally a likeable, affable character? Is a "dramatic tension" really worth the character destruction that Jimmy has suffered due to this relationship?
9. Since it cannot be asked enough, will Chloe get back into journalism?
10. Don't get me wrong, Lex is no angel, but why does Ollie want to kill him for something Lionel did when Lex himself was nine? (This is the same man who very carefully evacuated buildings before he blew them up.)

1) Lois is super awesome. Is it possible for her to be any more super awesome?
2) Lois petting Clark's blazer was the most romantic thing this show has ever done. I squeed out loud. Will there be more stuff like that?
3) It was such a nice thing when Clark eliminated Chloe's memories of his secret to protect her. It shows he truly cares about her and her needs. When did he get to be so generous?
4) It's so great that Clark decided to become The Red Blue Blur. The build up to this was expertly done. Will the people of Metropolis begin admiring him the way he should be admired?
5) Chloe moving out of the DP was a well thought out and well done idea. Clearly the paper had nothing left for her. And her helping meteor freaks makes sense for her next career path knowing about her character. It's nice she's helping other people for a change. What's next for Chloe?
6) Whose brilliant idea was it to have Lex's body double substituting for Lex this season? It adds a lot to the show.

Like I said in the first post, we don't need another Bitterness or Open Letter thread. If the posts continue to be similar in tone to the posts in those threads, there's no point in keeping this thread open, too.

Tennison, I hope it doesn't approach your concern, but there is a question that was raised in the run-up to Omar's recent interview that I don't think was addressed.

The question is to what extent is the discrepancy between "Show" and "Tell" on Smallville intended? We see Lionel abusing Lex for (basically) his whole life, including after Lionel's "conversion", but the script had Lionel claiming that he did everything he could for Lex and Lex was beyond redemption. We see Lois repeatedly missing the point of key clues and repeatedly getting caught in her sneaking, but then we have Lex saying she is the only reporter he fears and Gabriel saying she can dive for penny and find the Holy Grail. We see Clark doing some truly terrible things (the mindwipe being the most recent) that may indicate his moral compass is out of whack, but he is the Hero, and the one who will bring Hope to the people of Metropolis. We see Lana...well, being Lana, and yet everybody, Good and Bad alike, agrees that she is a perfect flower of perfection.

Are we seeing things that (in the writers' mind) aren't there, or is all this a subtle deconstruction of the mythos, or what?

Or option 3: Are the writers using this method of persuading us of elements that are supposed to be "facts," rather than taking the trouble to show us or possessing the craft to present them in a way that will truly convince us? Is there a point when they think: hey, the audience doesn't seem to be buying, for example, that Lex is the Bad Guy. Maybe if we have everyone from the metermaid to the "Good Guys" talk smack about him, they will!?

At the risk of being repetitive:

The only possible rationale for Clark being hired at the DP is that Tess wanted to keep an eye on him, for he was completely unqualified for the position. Is this going to be revealed to be the case?

On the one hand we have a young woman who is smart, hardworking, and loyal, who would sacrifice her life for the hero, who has been unjustly fired, kidnapped and tortured, inhabited by an alien AI, and mentally violated by said hero. On the other hand, we have a somewhat dim woman with morally casual attitude who gets hired because she is hot, gets raises and story leads dropped on her from the ether, and who is destined to be with the hero, while the first lady winds up with a dweeb. Is this situation going to continue or will we see Chloe work her way back? Is the final message going to be that hard work and dedication wins out, or all that you need to succeed is a smart mouth and big plastic boobs?

What were you thinking when Ollie was going to kill Lex with very minimal cause? This one really pisses me off. Chloe can get her job back, and I’ll be satisfied on that issue, but how do you undo attempted murder?

Lana has abused her friendship with Chloe in the wine cellar incident, cruelly tortured Lionel, and tried to kill Lex, to list just her major transgressions. We saw her darker progression, then this interesting aspect of her character appears to have been dropped. Will she ever be called to account?

Will Clark be held accountable for what he did to Chloe?

My problem with this show is that too often characters have no consequences for their poor moral choices. Issues that should be confronted and examined are just dropped. There is no punishment, no redemption, nor often an acknowlegment that something is wrong. It makes me wonder about the writers’ attitudes, and it worries me.

Yes, I would very much like this question addressed.


And do they ever mean to make the subtext text.

I would also love to see this addressed. Somewhere. Anywhere. The distinctions between "show" and "tell" are so pointed that I can't believe it's not intentional. What is the point of this discrepancy, and will it ever be acknowledged onscreen? If not, what is the statement you're trying to make?

The treatment this show gives some serious issues often leaves much to be desired. This ranges from things like education to the very serious issue of child abuse. Are there moments you think the writers went too far, or perhaps dropped an issue that should have been resolved?

What are your views on the responsibility you take on by writing a television show about one of the world's most beloved heroes? Or, indeed, just a show about heroes? As Artie M said above, the lack of moral reflection is very troubling, whether it's a character getting away with a professional ethics violation or attempted murder or mind rape.

How was the idea of Doomsday as Zod's son formulated? (I kind of think it's brilliant)

Parallelism is such a strong part of this show- Davis and Clark have clearly been set up as mirrors of each other; Chloe and Lex have been paralleled over and over again over the past seven seasons. To what extent are things like that planned, and to what extent are they serendipitous (such as the accident of Chloe and Lex both declaring their love for Clark at the FoS, since only the former was scripted)?

(Tennison, I don't mean to ask this question to be bitter, I genuinely would like an answer because I feel like Hex is them laying their cards on the table with respect to their fan groups and characters)

I've been mulling over how to ask this question, and I've tried to come up with a way that doesn't make me sound like a petulant 12-year old stomping their feet because they didn't get what they want - because I do understand, you have an overall direction for the show and that not every fan group will like the way you go with it ie Chloe's storyline since season 6.

After the spoilers for Hex, and the episodes leading up to Hex, I have to ask: why should Chloe/Chlois fans come back to the show in January?

(I think it’s fairly obvious that Allison, hired for 22 episodes, will survive whatever happens in Legion, but as of right now, whether it’s with her memories or not is of no consequence to me. The spoilers for Hex and the episodes after Legion show that nothing about her status in the show has changed ie there’s a reason we call this show “The Kick-Chloe show”. I just would really like to know why you think Chloe fans should return for more of that. My problem is I wanted to enjoy being a Chloe fan again, but I’ve finally realized that is something that is not your problem or on your agenda – I’d still really just like to know why all this time is spent on deconstructing her character when killing her off would have been easier and serve the other characters on the show better.)


I've put both Chloe and Chlois there, because more than anything to me, Chlois means the Chloe of the earlier seasons, the strong, vibrant, determined woman who wanted to succeed at her career at the DP. Her relationship with Clark was always a bonus, but it was the character I admired more than anything. She didn't need to be the prettiest girl on the show, but she was the one that I identified with the most - she was strong, even when Clark and the stories you wrote for her would have destroyed her - she overcame, and she persisted. I would have preferred Chloe die with those characteristics intact, rather than see her embroiled in everything that's happened to her since season 6, and I honestly think you would be surprised how many fans would choose that for her over seeing her carry on like this.

I know every show's writers and showrunners have their favorite group of fans, I think it's only human that you do, and it's not something I can change, that is something I do understand - I just don't understand the rationale behind bringing Allison and Chloe back when there were storylines that would have been better served with Erica Durance in them, with the overall direction of this season.

Why wasn't Erica Durance signed for a full season and Allison let go? Especially, when the episodes in the latter half of the season are directed at taking her further away from the character that we fell in love with up to season 5? Shouldn't the time spent on taking Chloe out of EDLois' path to her iconic ending be better spent on developing ED's character with Doomsday and Brainiac instead and pushing the Clark + EDLois relationship forward rather than using mind-whammies, and lie detectors to do it? Especially, when in the end, your aim was to end the Chlark/Chlois friendship/relationship anyway?

Also, please pass on an adieu to Ms Mack. She's been awesome, but I'm not going to be able to watch the second half of the season at all. The boards and livejournal will be around, so that's easier to keep up with spoilers that way.

So did Lois screw, make love, do the horizontal tango with Grant?

How old was Lois when she got kicked out of College for drinking? If she was 21 then did you bother thinking that it was a bit odd to have her in high school just months before trying to get her diploma?

Lois isn't a nice person as you've written her, why should I be happy that Superman ends up with her?

(Tennison, if this doesn’t sound right for this thread, can I please edit before you delete? Thanx)

So, I just wanted to say something up front before I ask a question about Hex – I am not beautiful. My nose is too big for one, and I have a lazy left eye. My skin isn’t Neutrogena perfect, I simply can’t afford to buy Neutrogena every month. I am intelligent, worked my butt off to get where I am, to the point that I saved enough so I can chuck it all for the next year to go traveling in Europe. I don’t particularly think that makes me a loser or desperate though I imagine there are those that will think so.

I just wanted to establish up front, that this isn’t a question from someone who is jealous of ED or KK’s physical beauty. I’m not exactly sure where the quote about anyone who didn’t like Lana being jealous of KK’s beauty came from, but it’s a hell of an insult to the show’s fans that aren’t fans of KK. There’s forum here filled with people who think ED and KK are beautiful as is Allison.

The things I lack physically, are not the reason I identify with Chloe either – there was far too much else that previous writers and Allison gave the character that I identified with eg her determination to succeed, her drive, her curiosity, her strength to name a few.

I do understand that as a TV show, you need to establish the parameters for what you consider the physical beauty ideal for your cast – KK at first, and now ED have been solidified as those ideals time and time again through dialogue, lighting and the wealth of male characters that have pursued them romantically – Chloe has Jimmy, who has degraded her, cheated on her because he was insecure, escapes from paying for his deal with Lex, and blames her for everything that went wrong in their relationship - that last difference, in the suitors attached to the female charcters, is the most striking as to what you think your female physical ideals deserve.

Which leads me to wonder about the rationale in pointing out that Chloe and AM will not, and for Clark, cannot compare to the physical types that EDLois and Lana represent in his storyline ie his physical ideals of beauty despite the time, effort and episodes you’ve put into showing that he loves her for her heart, for her bravery and has been with him every step of the way on his journey?

You’ve established that he will only think of Lana and EDLois as his physical ideals of beauty, is there really a need to show that he can’t think of Chloe that way, unless she’s in ED’s body? (please highlight blackened part to read) in Hex?

There is a cruelty implied in an episode like Hex, that makes me desperate for an explanation because I don’t want to believe that this Clark is so shallow. His mind-rape as a “gift”, his cold behaviour on the dance floor with EDLois at the moment he’s seemingly washed his hands of Chloe and now this have made me dislike him immensely and see him not as a hero, but as a caricature of one.

All I get from this episode is to show what Chloe can never have because, never mind that she doesn’t have the right name, physically, she’s not ‘right’ either – is that your attempt to lay Chlois to rest once and for all? At her most fundamental & basic level, physically she cannot be ILL? I’m not trying to be sarcastic, I’m just looking for reasons behind choosing to portray Chloe & Clark like this. Why are you addressing Chlois in such a way when you’ve maintained that it will never happen? I suppose that so many Chloe/Chlois fans dislike the concept behind the episode and what it puts Chloe is answer enough though.

Do you consider the sort of messages this sends your female viewers, especially the younger part of your audience? What about the comics fans, who have seen Clark fall for ILL in the comics, not because she’s the most beautiful woman in the room, but because when she walks out after she’s had her say, everyone will know her name (I forget the exact quote)? That’s always been the most attractive thing about Clark in the other incarnations of this story – he fell in love with ILL’s heart because she was as compassionate as he was. Yet, I see nothing of that compassion in Clark or EDLois to make me support either character when everything about them ie their success at their jobs (Clark taking Chloe’s even though he knew better last season; EDLois SWF-ing Chloe and Chlark moments all season) affects Chloe so badly.

In the end I’m left wondering if Clark and EDLois are your versions of “heroes”, why you need villains. I'm sorry this is so long-winded, I'm really just trying to find a way to like the story you're telling again.

I'm closing this thread while I decide whether or not it's different enough from other threads to stay open. So far, it's not. Long, one-sided conversations with a few questions are not the same as interview questions. We already have the Open Letter thread for that.