"Quest"
Review!
Written
by C.M.
Houghton ("Triplet")
Send
her feedback
WARNING:
If you never read spoilers, come back after
you've seen the episode. Otherwise, I will not
be held accountable for spoiling you rotten.
Just
so you know, here's the definition of Retcon:
A comic book term, it's short for retroactive-continuity.
It happens when a writer changes past established
continuity to make present events possible.
I've
used it before, so if you've read my previous
reviews you might have heard it, but I'm telling
you again because I'm going to use it again
here. A lot.
I
loved this episode, but it wasn't perfect.
I
guess my biggest problem with this was also
the same thing I loved about it: the continuity.
I loved how writer Holly Harold had worked in
references to previous mythos elements that
were on the show before and had been basically
been dropped. The Kawatche Numan/Sageeth legends,
the cave drawings foreshadowing Clark and Lex
becoming enemies, the real reason why Lionel
brought the castle over from Scotland, the communications
Jor-El had sent to Earth prior to Clark's arrival...
It's
wonderful that these things haven't been forgotten.
It proves that the show's The-Powers-That-Be
aren't completely clueless when it comes to
the series' past, significant recurring characters
getting killed off and never being mentioned
again (Alicia Baker, Grant Gabriel), notwithstanding.
However,
some of the explanations in "Quest"
simply don't make sense when you look at them
from the perspective of what had had happened
in the show before.
Yeah,
it's great that the real reason that Lionel
brought that castle to Smallville was that he
was looking for clues to find the way to control
the Traveler. It ties into the Veritas story
arc perfectly and makes sense given his character.
Only Lionel would buy an entire castle and pay
to have it moved to Smallville so he could explore
it at his leisure. He is that obsessive.
But
this is where all of that stops making sense.
If
Lionel was that obsessive, why would he pay
to move the castle from Scotland and then never
step through its doors?
If
you would recall, in the Pilot Lex had told
Clark that Lionel had "never even stepped
through the front door" of the mansion.
Yet in "Onyx," Lex had a long conversation
with himself in the basement of the building
describing how frightened the weaker half of
him had been as a child back when "they"
had gotten trapped in the wine cellar after
his father had had told him to never play "down
there." It was like he'd been in the house
when he'd said it, so I guess Holly was just
depending on the earlier "Onyx" retcon
to support this new plot point.
But
I'm fuzzy on the Veritas timeline and this episode
just further confused things. Just how long
ago did Jor-El plan to send Clark to Earth?
When had Jor-El started sending those communications?
Milash, that antiquities expert, had said that
the clock maker who had made the cryptograph,
Dietrich Brauer, did his work before the Second
World War.
Added
to that, in previous episodes they had established
that Jor-El had been a young man back in 1961
when Clark had learned his father had visited
Earth before in the third season episode "Relic."
And it was in an episode earlier this season
about Clark's birth mother, "Lara,"
where they'd established that Kara had visited
Earth in 1986. And it turned out that Lara had
been pregnant with Clark, or baby Kal-El, at
the time.
So,
how did Jor-El send information and stuff back
forty or more years? Maybe this all ties into
how Jor-El had managed to hide the stones back
to Earth's distant past which created the Fortress,
but they've never really explained how he did
that in the show.
With
all of this, however, keep in mind that Jor-El
was the same man that Raya had described in
the season 5 episodes "Zod" and "Fallout"
as good man; a man of science; a man of peace.
Clark's own birth-mother, or at least some sort
of weird alien clone of her, had said pretty
much the same thing just earlier this season
in the abomination that was "Blue."
In that same episode, Zor-El had called Jor-El
a "feeble minded pacifist."
So
why would Jor-El, a leader of his people, a
man of peace, a recognized pacifist, feel it
necessary to send weak-willed humanity a way
to completely control his son? Is this a retcon?
Is Jor-El no longer a peace-nick and is now
a manipulative bastard willing to believe his
son capable of atrocities and in need of someone
else having absolute power over him?
Okay,
the version of Jor-El that got turned into the
AI is already a manipulative bastard, dishing
up Kryptonian style tough-love to Clark nearly
every week, but is the real Jor-El like that
now too? Where's the hope Clark had voiced on
more than one occasion that his birth parents
aren't really monsters? In thinking about what
we've heard before about Jor-El, it just doesn't
make sense. Why would Jor-El trust humans enough
to send his son to them to raise even while
providing a way for them to completely control
him?
The
retconning is running rampant on the show lately,
so maybe this episode is no different, but I
think some of this stuff is seriously straining
credulity even on a science-fiction/fantasy
drama....
|
Also,
I had problems with how Chloe reacted
to the whole situation. No way should
she ever suggest to Clark that killing
is the right thing to do. I would think
she would share his outlook on the matter,
even if she sees the need to kill someone
for the greater good. I can sort of see
why Holly had her do it. Chloe needed
to voice the opposing view, be the devil's
advocate, for Clark. It gives him a reason
to talk about how he feels about killing
Lex, maybe becoming more like him if he
kills just because he can, but couldn't
Chloe's dialogue be worded differently
so she doesn't openly endorse murder?
Yeah, Lex is a cold-hearted, evil man
and the world would be a better place
without him, but wouldn't Chloe know that
Clark would never take it upon himself
to execute him for his crimes despite
the potential threat he poses to Clark?
|
|
I
don't like how easily she bought into Edward
Teague's deification of Clark either. She's
his best friend, seeing Clark as God-like isn't
doing him any favors and she knows him personally
and should know that he isn't like that.
That,
on top of all the religious undertones, I think
was pouring it on too thick. Late film pioneer,
Samuel Goldwyn, I think had said it best: "If
you want to send a message, use Western Union."
I
agree with him. I don't like messages mixed
up with my entertainment anymore than he did
and this one laid it on way too thick. Clark
was sent to Earth to become the next Savior?
He'd prayed his whole life that he could serve
him? Teague was nuts, but come on... That is
just too much.
I
guess it was good that Edward Teague was nuts,
it helped to justify his need to kill Clark.
Lex Luthor controlling Superman is a frightening
enough prospect that it made some sense to kill
him to prevent it, but his torture of Clark
was brutal.
I
do like the Veritas Da Vinci Code-esque storyline
that had escalated in this episode. It was reminiscent
of the stones storyline in the 4th season, which
I know a lot of people hated, but I loved. I
like it when the season arc storylines give
the characters clear goals that directly conflict.
This was like that.
Lex
and Clark are both looking for the same thing,
but only one will get it. In the 4th season,
Clark won and found all the stones that formed
the Fortress of Solitude. This season, Lex has
already won the race to find the device that
will control the Traveler and Clark doesn't
realize it yet. I can't wait to see how the
events in the Veritas storyline will likely
all come to a head in the next episode, the
7th season finale, "Arctic."
I
also liked the way that Clark and Lex ended
up in the same place based on different clues.
I loved that Clark seemed to again be using
his brain. He figured out a lot of it based
on clues others found. Hopefully the dumbing
down of Clark just to give Chloe more things
to do is over. I like it when they work together
more like they did in this.
Despite
some of my problems with the story details,
the twists and turns in this episode kept me
on the edge of my seat, almost literally. Holly
Harold she penned an extremely suspenseful episode,
even if not all of the details made sense.
Tom
Welling again did an excellent job. He played
Clark as determined to get to the bottom of
what happened to Lex since the message seemed
to be designed for him. He was angry that Edward
Teague did what he did to Lex and then did to
him, but even that wouldn't make him just let
Lex kill him. He saved Edward's life, despite
his anger and confusion and lingering danger
the man might pose, and Tom played those mixed
emotions perfectly.
I
loved how resolved he played Clark in the scenes
with Edward Teague and with Chloe. He was very
Supermanly in this entire episode, even when
Teague got the drop on Clark and he was helpless.
Tom does pain so well. I think I've talked about
this before, but doing pain well must be bizarre
and surrealistic. I mean, it's just a green
light or some guy pretending to cut Clark's
chest up and Tom makes it look so agonizing.
I don't know how he does it and makes it look
so real, but he's just awesome at it.
I
loved Michael Rosenbaum in this episode. Probably
his best scene was with the old antiquities
expert on the plane. I loved all the warring
emotions that played across his face as he talked.
In pain from the injuries he'd received earlier,
Michael had Lex start on as completely over
the old guy blathering on about things he already
knew, like he didn't like being lectured to,
and then end on murderous resolve when he told
Milash that he was going to find out the answers
to all of his questions about why Lionel had
been so obsessed.
Allison
Mack was completely awesome in this episode.
Although I wasn't happy with some of the actions
that they had Chloe do, I thought she delivered
the sometimes out-of-character dialogue very
well. I liked the ending scene with Clark in
the barn a lot.
Aaron
Ashmore again was cute as Jimmy. I like how
clueless he can be even while thinking he knows
everything. It's funny how straight he plays
that and it's perfect for the part.
Rick
Ravanello played Edward Teague in "Veritas,"
and he was fine for that episode. However, I'm
glad the part was recast with the far more capable
Robert Picardo, best known for his portrayal
of the Doctor on "Star Trek: Voyager."
He gave the part of Edward Teague much needed
heft in the acting chops department that I'm
not sure Rick would have delivered. He was particularly
effective in the first scene with Clark in the
Cathedral. He turned Edward on a dime, motivation-wise,
and I completely bought the man turning from
blind adoration to disgust and contempt.
