Not one of the better episodes, IMHO. Certainly a let down after last week's spectacular "Red."

I did like the interplay between Lex and Clark in the one scene, where Clark says that his family never flies much, to which Lex replies "trust me, that's gonna change." Nice foreshadowing there.

BTW. The reason why the scenes for next week didn't show us much is because the episode, "Redux," is actually a holdover from the first season that was never aired. I believe Whitney will even be in it.

I like how they didn't just drop Lana's resentment over Clark's actions in Red. Nice nod to continuity there. More and more shows are doing this I've noticed, and I think it's a good thing.

I sorta cringed at the "man of steel" line...

Also why didn't they shoot Byron with a few of those tranqs that his dad shot him with in the beginning of the episode?

Brian: I did like the interplay between Lex and Clark in the one scene, where Clark says that his family never flies much, to which Lex replies "trust me, that's gonna change." Nice foreshadowing there.

Actually, my friends who watch this and I look for a line like this every week. I can't remember an episode that hasn't had a superman reference. I wish I could give some examples but I use the same tape to record episodes so I only have one week of material to refer to.

I know, I usually catch those too. Some fly, some don't (pardon the pun).

Lana visits her mother's grave twice in this episode, both times at night. The second time, she even falls asleep on the tombstone. This is creepy enough as it is, but there's someone leaving her love letters on the grave. Didn't that obsessed bug freak from Metamorphosis attack her here? I find it strange that she isn't terrified of this place, or at least, wouldn't visit in the middle of the night.
---
I love the hypocritical statement Clark makes about the author of the letter being a stalker, when later he shows up in the graveyard to "save" Lana from Byron. Even if he was only following her because of the letter, it's still ironic. I'm disappointed Lana didn't ask for an explanation.
---
Pete's lucky he came out of that with only a broken arm. If Byron could knock Clark clear across the yard, Pete should have been roadkill as soon as he was hit.
---
Byron didn't resist Clark very much about going into the sunlight. Why did he wait to say something until he was already outside? Sure, from Byron's point of view, Clark might not believe a story about a failed medical treatment giving him superpowers in the daylight, but if he knew he'd lose control and hurt people, why not at least say he has a condition and can't go into the sunlight?
---
I liked Lex teasing Clark about Lana. "Kinda raises the bar for any other potential suitors, eh Clark?"

Irony isn't the same thing as hypocrasy, and in this case, it's neither. If indeed Clark's following her because he's concerned about the letter's author, that's not hypocrasy at all. It would only be hypocrasy if Clark was in the habit of following Lana to her grave the way Byron did.

Well, first of all, we don't know Byron had a habit of following her to the graveyard. He could have first noticed her there one night and started dropping letters, knowing she'd show up. But that's besides the point. I'm saying it's hypocrasy because Clark calls Byron a stalker when all he's done is drop an anonymous love letter for Lana, while Clark himself is guilty of stalker activity against the same person in both the past and future, for the same motivation (he's watched her several times through his telescope, and he stalks her to catch Byron). Clark's current motivation (protecting her against a percieved threat) is irrelevent. He utilizes the very method he's critiquing. I'm not saying that Clark's character is now in question (I mean come on, it's superman), but I do think he was hypocritical in suggesting Byron is a stalker.

On further consideration, I wish to retract the following sentence: "Clark's current motivation (protecting her against a percieved threat) is irrelevent. He utilizes the very method he's critiquing."

I realize that this doesn't support my arguement. The act of following someone because you are obsessed with them is different than following them to protect them. However, like I stated earlier, Clark has done things in the past, such as watch her through his telescope, where his motivation is his infatuation. Thus, I still believe calling Byron a stalker is hypocritical.

Point taken.

How was Byron able to hold down a helicopter?

Did his sunlight superpowers not only include Clark rivalling strength, but the ability to weigh more than a helicopter's strength? Is he gravity sucking and amplifying or something?

One might argue that if it were Superman, he'd be flying through the ground to the core, but Byron?

And what, precisely, knocked the pilot out? He might have hit his head on that corner frame there, but his movements were not consistent with that. It's like he jerked his head forward and that was it.

Pete must have a very hard head. He went flying through the air, flying through a windshield, presumably banging his head on the frame as he crashed through, and he was awake, conscious, and not looking dazed when Byron ran off.

Well, being a close friend of Clark's, Pete probably gets exposed to kryptonite a lot... maybe he's starting to experience side-effects (of course, I still can't get over the fact that out of all the people who just happen to be near a big kryptonite deposit or the impact site of one of the meteors, the only thing that happened to Lex was a loss of hair).

I'm reminded of a series of novels (Callahan's Crosstime Saloon) that featured an alien with super strength, invulnerability, etc. But a side-effect of his presence was that anyone who spent any huge amount of time around him developed invulnerability to impacts as well. In the books, I don't think it was intentional that this character imparted the power on his friends-- it was just a natural side effect of spending a couple of years in his presence.

Okay, to get back to my point-- maybe spending all of this consistent time with Clark is starting to rub off on people.

Didn't the meteor impact also cure Lex's asthma or someother childhood disease he had. I could be mistaken.

>>I'm reminded of a series of novels (Callahan's Crosstime Saloon) that featured an alien with super strength, invulnerability, etc. But a side-effect of his presence was that anyone who spent any huge amount of time around him developed invulnerability to impacts as well. In the books, I don't think it was intentional that this character imparted the power on his friends-- it was just a natural side effect of spending a couple of years in his presence. <<

The character was Mickey Finn. I want to say he was a cyborg, not just an alien, but I'm not positive. The gifts of invulnerabilty were intentional in the first book to help protect against a nuclear attack, I believe.

Marc

The character was Mickey Finn. I want to say he was a cyborg, not just an alien, but I'm not positive. The gifts of invulnerabilty were intentional in the first book to help protect against a nuclear attack, I believe.

I knew the name, I just didn't want to overgeek the rest of the folks here... and actually, he was an alien cyborg, yes. But I think they mention in one of the stories before the nuclear explosion that perhaps it was partially intentional on Mickey Finn's part (he might have just wanted to protect his friends) rather than just a side-effect, but anyone who spent a great deal of time with him just developed the invulnerability over time (of course, it should be noted that the invulnerability was only effective any sort of damage that was impact-based-- it couldn't save you from being burned, for example). It could also repel falling rain, but the start of the effects of Mickey's presence was brought up in the story where he first met Mary... but they didn't reveal the full protection granted until later.

And now we return you to other geek discussions, already in progress. ;)