Chloe Sullivan

[Dizagaox]

Given the immense popularity of the character, and DC's official stamp of approval (having bought the rights to the character, and through people like Geoff Johns), should Chloe be a part of the new movie-verse's canon?

This is not a "cast Allison Mack" thread, this is about the character, which would obviously be recast.

In terms of what the character brings to the canon, I think she's more important than Pete or Lana. Chloe is Clark's confidante, both when he is Clark Kent and when he is The Blur, and she recognises Clark's potential and assists where-ever possible. In the comics, Lois doesn't do this until after she learns of his secret identity, and so for many years Clark doesn't have a confidante, only Superman does.

And where-as Clark's parents help develop Clark's moral compass, Chloe goes one step further, and does the things she knows Clark shouldn't do. For example, killing Sebastian (Tess' noisy reporter) after he discovered Clark's secret, seducing Davis Bloom to prevent Doomsday, bringing Green Arrow back from the brink by hiring Roulette, or most recently, killing Tess in the alternative future.

Chloe is prepared to have blood on her hands, so that Superman doesn't. That undying devotion is why I think the character has a place in the canon - no other character can even compare in terms of usefulness, especially during Clark's Year One-era. Does anyone else agree?

[Cousin Itt]

No she's a pointless character.

[Dark_Lord]

No.

[Dizagaox]

Originally Posted by Cousin Itt

No she's a pointless character.

Originally Posted by Dark_Lord

No.

Why do you both think this?

I gave legitimate reasons why she is useful, the least you could do is give reasons why she isn't.

[Man of Tomorrow]

Chloe is absolute garbage on Smallville.

She singlehandedly dragged down "Absolute Justice" with all the focus she got.

She's a bad plot device used for exposition and crappy metaphors.


Immensely popular my ass. The Smallville fanbase should not be considered in regards to this project.


This is 100x times bigger than some low budget shipper drama on CW friday nights.


This thread deserves to be locked away in the Phantom Zone.

[Deaths Head II]

It felt to me like Chloe just took up time that could have been devoted to the other characters. Pete, for example, felt like he was supposed to be a confidant for both Clark and Super-Clark but they spent more time on Chloe on that show and eventually wrote Pete out.

[Man of Tomorrow]

Originally Posted by Dizagaox

In terms of what the character brings to the canon, I think she's more important than Pete or Lana. Chloe is Clark's confidante, both when he is Clark Kent and when he is The Blur, and she recognises Clark's potential and assists where-ever possible. In the comics, Lois doesn't do this until after she learns of his secret identity, and so for many years Clark doesn't have a confidante, only Superman does.

And where-as Clark's parents help develop Clark's moral compass, Chloe goes one step further, and does the things she knows Clark shouldn't do. For example, killing Sebastian (Tess' noisy reporter) after he discovered Clark's secret, seducing Davis Bloom to prevent Doomsday, bringing Green Arrow back from the brink by hiring Roulette, or most recently, killing Tess in the alternative future.

Chloe is prepared to have blood on her hands, so that Superman doesn't. That undying devotion is why I think the character has a place in the canon - no other character can even compare in terms of usefulness, especially during Clark's Year One-era. Does anyone else agree?

And clearly your knowledge is limited to Smallville's bastardization of the material..


Otherwise you'd know Lana is Clark's friend and confidant in the comics, TAS etc


There is no bloody "Blur" in the Superman mythos and never should be.


The Chloe character would drag down the films so badly, just as she's dead weight on CW's Smallville.


Chloe and SV in general brings nothing of constructive value to this project or to the Superman canon.

Rant over.

[Dark_Lord]

I hate what they've done with Chloe these last couple of seasons. All those reasons you mentioned above (the stuff she's done) is why I don't like her. Things like listening to Clark's phone calls with Lois or what she did with Doomsday. I also hate how they show that she can do anything.

I don't think she's important at all. Especially not more important than Lana (not talking about Smallville, but in general). There's no reason for her to be in the movie.

Originally Posted by Man of Tomorrow

She's a bad plot device used for exposition and crappy metaphors.

Oh, the metaphors. How I hate it when she speaks using metaphors. Which she does, all the time. It's really annoying.

[Cousin Itt]

Superman has gotten around fine for about 72 years without Chloe Sullivan. Just because she's on that tv show isn't a good enough reason to make her an official part of the story.

[Deaths Head II]

Looking back on it, they kind of made Chloe into what Lana should have been and then made Lana into an unlikable character.

[Man of Tomorrow]

Originally Posted by Dark_Lord

Oh, the metaphors. How I hate it when she's speaks using metaphors. Which she does, all the time. It's really annoying.

She's from a point where ALL the teen drama shows on "The WB" scripted their dialogue like that


It all started with "Dawson's Creek".... remember how they talked

Epic fail.

Originally Posted by Deaths Head II

Looking back on it, they kind of made Chloe into what Lana should have been and then made Lana into an unlikable character.

Yeah, and in the process ruined them both.

[B]

No, the character doesn't really have any substantial part in Smallville's version of Superman's origin. Shes only really a friend..

Fair enough if they want to mention her in capacity I'd have no problem with that, but as for the character appearing.. no not feeling it.
Besides, people like Pete Ross, Lana Lang etc should all be in this movie before mildly successful characters that have only been developed by Smallville, SR, STM, L&C, TNAS etc.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

This isn't a Harley Quinn situation Chloe is not a good or memorable character.

[NewYorkSpider]

Chloe would just be a waste in the new movie. They need to spend time developing the characters that are actually relevant.

[Showtime]

I kind of like Chloe but she wont end up in a movie.

[Mindreaper21]

Well I feel Chloe deserves a spot in the Superman origin. Since her future is unknown, there's alot that can be done with her character. Once upon a time people said Lois Lane was pointless as well, until her and Clark fell in love and got married. Chloe isn't pointless to me, she's been a big help to Clark on his journey. If she were in the movie she could be anything from Superman's oracle to a super villainess given she still has her powers. I'm all for a new direction, unlike most diehard Superman fans. It's people who bash things too quikly that kills the Superman franchise.

[Sam Fisher]

Originally Posted by Man of Tomorrow

Chloe is absolute garbage on Smallville.

She singlehandedly dragged down "Absolute Justice" with all the focus she got.

She's a bad plot device used for exposition and crappy metaphors.


Immensely popular my ass. The Smallville fanbase should not be considered in regards to this project.


This is 100x times bigger than some low budget shipper drama on CW friday nights.


This thread deserves to be locked away in the Phantom Zone.

[NewYorkSpider]

Originally Posted by Mindreaper21

Well I feel Chloe deserves a spot in the Superman origin. Since her future is unknown, there's alot that can be done with her character. Once upon a time people said Lois Lane was pointless as well, until her and Clark fell in love and got married. Chloe isn't pointless to me, she's been a big help to Clark on his journey. If she were in the movie she could be anything from Superman's oracle to a super villainess given she still has her powers. I'm all for a new direction, unlike most diehard Superman fans. It's people who bash things too quikly that kills the Superman franchise.

So you think that Chloe should become a villainess in a future movie?

We still haven't seen Mettalo, Darkseid, Braniac, Bizzaro and Doomsday in a movie.

[solidsnake86]

I thought they decided against using her in the comics. I would say no just for the simple fact that they don't really need her character or have time for her in a movie. If they do show smallville, its going to be quick and the most important character is lana coupled with showing how he got his powers. I really dislike her character on smallville just for the fact that she almost gets more screen time then clark.

[NewYorkSpider]

DC tried to squeeze her into the comics, but they just didn't see where the stars aligned. If they're not certain about her being in the comics, I doubt they're gonna waste any time bringing her into a movie.

I love the character of Chloe on Smallville, but I just don't think that bringing her into a movie is the right choice at the moment.

[Doc Ock]

I love Chloe and Smallville so I may be a bit biased, I would love to see her in the comics but definitely not a film, at least not so soon. Maybe long after Smallville is over.

[Mindreaper21]

Originally Posted by NewYorkSpider

So you think that Chloe should become a villainess in a future movie?

We still haven't seen Mettalo, Darkseid, Braniac, Bizzaro and Doomsday in a movie.

No I'm just pointing out that her character is very flexable since her future is uncertain.

[Webhead2006]

i have been a big fan of the character on the smallville show. sure the character has had many ups and down through the show's current 9 yr run. I wouldnt be against the character being used in some way in a new film series. Heck could be just another random friend from his highschool days like if they do include pete ross and lana lang into new film series.

[FVD]

I like Chloe and everything but in a movie environment no!!

[Lone]

Originally Posted by Man of Tomorrow

The Smallville fanbase should not be considered in regards to this project.

Let's keep Smallville and anything related to it, where it belongs.