|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Jun 14, 2005 3:58 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 18, 2005 11:51 am
Yeah, but maybe after a while of tring to kill him and not seceeding she would understand and would accept him for who he is. Though I do agree that it would ruin their relationship for a while.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 4:02 am
Yeah and they know that so that is why they don't try to get together.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2005 6:32 am
Just to add more to the list. I felt like bringing back some old topics. Oh, and the last one is a joke. xp
-Helicopter crash
-Being turing into a "vampire"
-getting cut from too many episodes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2005 8:07 am
cut from too many episodes? what like 2? Oh no not two episodes! chloe has not been in more then that
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 04, 2007 2:56 pm
I don't know; I'm not all that fond of Lana. She strikes me as very self-absorbed. Yes, she's had a great many things happen in her life that were, admittedly, tragic -- but she can't see past her own pain. She's not the only one who lost people she loved the day of the meteor shower. She's not the only one who has had to face off against a mutant. And she's definitely not the only character on the show.
I suppose part of my problem is how much the writers of the show seem to idolize her; which is why she gets so much screen time. And, really, besides all of her supposed tragedy, she's not a very interesting character. I mean, she could be, but she's not. And part of that is the writers' fault.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 04, 2007 3:02 pm
She is more eye candy for the guys then a real complex person, but either way, she gets the job done. I mean a lot of viewers watch because of her for well her looks or because they want her to hook up with someone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 04, 2007 3:44 pm
Yes, but that's exactly my point -- she serves no real point. Her character is almost completely useless, unless you take into account that her existence gives Clark something to angst about and eye-candy for everybody else.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:45 am
just remember the only reason why shes's in the show is cuz she was clarks high school love in the movies but then of course we know it becomes Lois later on and whatever did happen to the hole in Lanas hand when Zod shoved the pole in it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 11:56 am
I wouldn't say she serves no point....About half of the episodes this season the show was based upon her.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 1:03 pm
The hole mysteriously disapeared or maybe hanging out with Lex has given her some of his super-immunity. Don't know, lot of plot holes in the show. rolleyes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 11:29 pm
zach61092 I wouldn't say she serves no point....About half of the episodes this season the show was based upon her. That doesn't mean she's worthwhile. It just means the creators of the show are unjustly in love with her. And, besides -- we're watching the show to see Superman, not his squirrel-like, would-be-girlfriend.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 2:44 pm
SaberFireTiger She is more eye candy for the guys then a real complex person, but either way, she gets the job done. I mean a lot of viewers watch because of her for well her looks or because they want her to hook up with someone. urgh... I was watching Smallville with my sisters boyfriend (<-- earned him major props in my book) and he was like "Whose that girl?" and I go "Thats Lana, I basically hate her character when she's not with Lex" and He's like "Oh...Well She isn't that bad to look at" my response: rolleyes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 3:37 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 3:43 pm
rolleyes Typical.
I guess I can add falling through windows and down stairs to the list.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
