The 100 S3 |OT| Adventures In Character Assassination - Thursdays 9/8c

Never interacted with the 100 community and I finally caught up with this season.......what the fuck is going on in here?

Ricky? Jason? who? Boycotts? Trying to get the show cancelled? Lexa's death invoked some trope I never knew existed and pissed people off? I don't know what's going on, feels like a bomb went off
 
The Silver said:
Never interacted with the 100 community and I finally caught up with this season.......what the fuck is going on in here?

Ricky? Jason? who? Boycotts? Trying to get the show cancelled? Lexa's death invoked some trope I never knew existed and pissed people off? I don't know what's going on, feels like a bomb went off
Click to expand...

Rick Wittle aka Lincoln and Jason Rothenberg, the creator.
 
Valinor said:
wait . why is this a bad thing . its not like the arkadians had some society that was better than the grounders. they sent their kids to die. there was clear inequality between classes and people of privelege. whats wrong with integration with the grounders?
Click to expand...

I figured someone would say this.

The Arcadians carry with them the cultural, social and technological remnants of the culture that preceded them. I for one would not be interested in exchanging that for the superstition and arcane ways of the grounders.

And the previous system on the ark was established due to limited resources. People had to perform set duties because there was no room (literal or figuratively) to do as they pleased, but as Pike said we're not on the ark (and why did Kane state Pike was rigidly following the law when he had already spared one guy in a situation that would've resulted in his death on the ark - only upon being caught trying to drive an elected official out of the compound to be tortured to death was he sentenced to death himself).
 
Napoleonthechimp said:
The problem is that fans hold a show hostage. By that I mean try to boycott or be spiteful to the people involved in creating it until the point comes where the writing teams alter it for them.

I suspect they do it because they don't have a healthy detachment from the show and expect it to cater to them specifically (their desire for happy endings in a show that has no happy endings for anyone).

But I digress; the manipulation of a show has happened time and time again. The most recent example of this would be Arrow, which turned into a shit show from season 3 onwards because the writers tried to appease the shippers.

"LGBT is a trope and must be stopped!"

People would have a point about the trope if LGBT characters dying is the exception in this show. But it isn't. Perhaps there was a better way to kill her off which would seem more seamless with the development of the plot, but as it stands her death is par for the course in a show that has no happy endings.

I mean in season 1 they were willing to show a child kill herself for crying out loud. And in season 2 Clarke pulled the trigger and killed a whole bunch of innocent men, women, and children (who all died horrifically via radiation). That isn't even mentioning the many others who were mutilated by people (grounders cutting people up into pieces - in the latest episode no less) and animals (remember the gorilla tearing the woman's arm off?), nor the ones killed by acid fog or blown up by a great big missile.

So multiple characters have died horrifically but LGBT characters have to be immune because people want the writers to make a statement?
Click to expand...

You know what one of the main reasons for fans being upset about this is? They feel that they were queerbaited. The showrunner and others made a point to pander to these fans and fueled this reaction by hyping up this relationship/character to an impressionable young queer audience. Even responding to people on Twitter worried that Lexa would die telling them that she was fine even after they'd filmed her death scene. Why? Because he wanted it to be 'shocking'. He made his fucking bed.

You keep bringing it back up as if it is, but the death itself isn't strictly the problem, although it does further the trope. The similarity to Tara's death on Buffy is comical. But there's more to it than that. Lexa didn't die a horrific death, she died an incredibly poorly timed and senseless death. This whole movement isn't just because some gay fans can't tell the difference between fiction and reality. I already said before, but you seem to be ignoring it, the uproar goes beyond just Lexa and The 100. Lexa is merely a catalyst for this movement. And you trying to silence it because of 'artistic integrity' or whatever bullshit you want to pull out of your ass is just so incredibly tone deaf.
 
Saying she would die would indeed remove the shock, we would know it is coming and it would be boring. That is not queerbaiting, that is common sense for a showrunner to try and hide upcoming twists.
 
Joni said:
Saying she would die would indeed remove the shock, we would know it is coming and it would be boring. That is not queerbaiting, that is common sense for a showrunner to try and hide upcoming twists.
Click to expand...

He didn't have to say anything is my point. Obviously he's not gonna come out and say 'oh yeah, we're gonna kill her off'. That'd be absurd.
 
I'm not buying this face change from Bellamy.

Not at all. He chose to go down the path of antagonising the grounders and he knows that what's coming next because of Finn and yet continued to support Pike and stopped Kane from doing the one thing that would save them.

Doing the best thing for my people - my ass.
 
Miles Quaritch said:
I'm not buying this face change from Bellamy.

Not at all. He chose to go down the path of antagonising the grounders and he knows that what's coming next because of Finn and yet continued to support Pike and stopped Kane from doing the one thing that would save them.

Doing the best thing for my people - my ass.
Click to expand...

It really annoys me that after all the shit he's pulled this season, he's gonna get a redemption arc while Pike gets off'd and everyone will just forget that he helped murder 300 people in their sleep (oh but he saved Indra, he's not all bad!). I can't stand the way his character has been written lately.
 
figadapaura said:
It really annoys me that after all the shit he's pulled this season, he's gonna get a redemption arc while Pike gets off'd and everyone will just forget that he helped murder 300 people in their sleep (oh but he saved Indra, he's not all bad!). I can't stand the way his character has been written lately.
Click to expand...

Yup. Also killed two messengers in cold blood. No reason at all.

He should die right alongside Pike to be redeemed. Any other redemption arc will make zero sense.
 
WhereAreMahDragonz said:
But don't fucking do it after a passionate and beautiful sex scene with the woman she loves. Don't fucking allow her as a character and the fans watching to be happy only to have her dead on a pile of furs not five minutes later. That's just fucking shitty.
Click to expand...

Why not? It made a sad scene even more sad which is great, TV shows should make you emotional and they nailed it.
 
St3v3 said:
Why not? It made a sad scene even more sad which is great, TV shows should make you emotional and they nailed it.
Click to expand...

Yeah...I mean this is The 100. They did it with Finn with "we're gonna save him" twice, they did it with the whole section of the arc in season 1 with the whole signal thing, and the whole season 2 revolves them went back and forth with Grounders alliance which end up with them being betrayed.
 
Napoleonthechimp said:
I figured someone would say this.

The Arcadians carry with them the cultural, social and technological remnants of the culture that preceded them. I for one would not be interested in exchanging that for the superstition and arcane ways of the grounders.

And the previous system on the ark was established due to limited resources. People had to perform set duties because there was no room (literal or figuratively) to do as they pleased, but as Pike said we're not on the ark (and why did Kane state Pike was rigidly following the law when he had already spared one guy in a situation that would've resulted in his death on the ark - only upon being caught trying to drive an elected official out of the compound to be tortured to death was he sentenced to death himself).
Click to expand...

agreed that maybe certain aspects of arkadia's culture being strict is due to limited resources.

but to carry on the cultural , social and technological remnants of culture that potentially overpopulated the planet. had fragile political affiliations that set up the scenarios for a cascading nuclear obliteration out of one nuke launch (by ai ) is not something that should be seen as a positive. if the preceding culture is what led to this situation , is that something that arkadians should seek to emulate or even practise. them stealing lands from grounders for massive agricultural practise are all aspects of that culture you speak of. the grounders albiet living in barbarity of blood must have blood seem to be relatively less destructive to the environment around them.

in many ways the rogue ai has saved the earth from overpopulation and pollutions of that previous human culture. there seems to be a plethora of growth both in terms of fauna and flora.
 
It is also not like they are really advancing on that technological and social advances. One person has been seen reading a book, there are no schools, they hardly have any technology to farm, ... Mount Weather was advanced in those areas, Arkadia should be but isn't.
 
I've never liked Bellamy, fuck that guy. It's felt like, at least to me that Lincoln has just been "there" since season two with very little to do and probably should've died last year from the silly drug thing.



Lexa's death was very poorly executed, there shouldn't be much argument there.
 
St3v3 said:
Why not? It made a sad scene even more sad which is great, TV shows should make you emotional and they nailed it.
Click to expand...

Because it's in poor taste? You give fans a beautiful scene that means something only to have it destroyed five minutes later. I'd feel the same if it was a m/f pairing.

But I mean...in the context of the LGBTQ movement, if you REALLY wanna go there, it demonizes their love by having them get together and killing off Lexa immediately after at the hands of the father figure who does not approve of her relationship. It's saying "same sex couples are doomed to be tragic and sad, they're not allowed to be happy."

If she had died...like...a few episodes AFTER the sex scene, in battle or something, I wouldn't even have a problem with it. But the fact that it's literally the next scene after they bang is the most fucking distasteful thing I've seen in a while.
 
WhereAreMahDragonz said:
Because it's in poor taste? You give fans a beautiful scene that means something only to have it destroyed five minutes later. I'd feel the same if it was a m/f pairing.

But I mean...in the context of the LGBTQ movement, if you REALLY wanna go there, it demonizes their love by having them get together and killing off Lexa immediately after at the hands of the father figure who does not approve of her relationship. It's saying "same sex couples are doomed to be tragic and sad, they're not allowed to be happy."

If she had died...like...a few episodes AFTER the sex scene, in battle or something, I wouldn't even have a problem with it. But the fact that it's literally the next scene after they bang is the most fucking distasteful thing I've seen in a while.
Click to expand...
This is done all the time with straight pairings though. Moment of happiness (aka sex) and then things go bad immediately. 24 Season 7 comes to mind.

There's nothing "wrong" with it, but it is a really cheap/hacky way of writing to provoke a reaction.

I don't think there's anything intrinsically "wrong" with the choices they made- but I think there was a much better story to tell here that would still rip people's hearts out without being so banal.

edit: The other issue that's really here- shows having only one LBGT character full-time, which means the SOs are always guest stars, not full timers, and often not available long-term.
 
kirblar said:
This is done all the time with straight pairings though. Moment of happiness (aka sex) and then things go bad immediately. 24 Season 7 comes to mind.

There's nothing "wrong" with it, but it is a really cheap/hacky way of writing to provoke a reaction.

I don't think there's anything intrinsically "wrong" with the choices they made- but I think there was a much better story to tell here that would still rip people's hearts out without being so banal.

edit: The other issue that's really here- shows having only one LBGT character full-time, which means the SOs are always guest stars, not full timers, and often not available long-term.
Click to expand...

There difference here is, I can name the amount of gay couples on my hand who ended up with a good ending.

You are right it's not just done to LGBTQ characters, but it tends to ALWAYS happen to them and there is a pattern to it.
 
kirblar said:
This is done all the time with straight pairings though. Moment of happiness (aka sex) and then things go bad immediately. 24 Season 7 comes to mind.

There's nothing "wrong" with it, but it is a really cheap/hacky way of writing to provoke a reaction.

I don't think there's anything intrinsically "wrong" with the choices they made- but I think there was a much better story to tell here that would still rip people's hearts out without being so banal.

edit: The other issue that's really here- shows having only one LBGT character full-time, which means the SOs are always guest stars, not full timers, and often not available long-term.
Click to expand...


I specifically said I'd have a problem with it if it was a straight pairing. I've never seen 24 so I can't speak for that show, but I know it happens all the time and I fucking hate it.

There is a lot wrong with it. There is a lot going on with this whole controversy, ranging from Jason being a dick to the issues that have come to the forefront of media culture in recent weeks regarding the treatment of LGBTQ characters and their fans. But I mean, I've discussed it at length in this thread, and people still choose to ignore it and instead come in here with some ignorant knee-jerk reaction just to rile people under the pretense of "protecting creative freedom" so whatever. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 
WhereAreMahDragonz said:
I specifically said I'd have a problem with it if it was a straight pairing. I've never seen 24 so I can't speak for that show, but I know it happens all the time and I fucking hate it.

There is a lot wrong with it. There is a lot wrong with this whole controversy, ranging from Jason being a dick to the issues that have come to the forefront of media culture in recent weeks regarding the treatment of LGBTQ characters and their fans. But I mean, I've discussed it at length in this thread, and people still choose to ignore it and instead come in here with some ignorant knee-jerk reaction just to rile people under the pretense of "protecting creative freedom" so whatever. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Click to expand...
It's a discussion board where people aren't going to agree? People are obviously engaging with it- but they're going to have differing opinions, and it's going to lead more towards discussion/conflict- it's not that your point of view is invalid or that people are ignoring it, but it's also one where people can reasonably agree to disagree. You stated earlier that you're looking for "support" - but the nature of this type of forum setup leans away from that and towards conflict. (see: Console War, Console War never changes)
 
kirblar said:
It's a discussion board where people aren't going to agree? People are obviously engaging with it- but they're going to have differing opinions, and it's going to lead more towards discussion/conflict- it's not that your point of view is invalid or that people are ignoring it, but it's also one where people can reasonably agree to disagree. You stated earlier that you're looking for "support" - but the nature of this type of forum setup leans away from that and towards conflict. (see: Console War, Console War never changes)
Click to expand...

Just because it's the internet and a message board doesn't stop you from being a decent human being.
 
Valinor said:
agreed that maybe certain aspects of arkadia's culture being strict is due to limited resources.

but to carry on the cultural , social and technological remnants of culture that potentially overpopulated the planet. had fragile political affiliations that set up the scenarios for a cascading nuclear obliteration out of one nuke launch (by ai ) is not something that should be seen as a positive. if the preceding culture is what led to this situation , is that something that arkadians should seek to emulate or even practise. them stealing lands from grounders for massive agricultural practise are all aspects of that culture you speak of. the grounders albiet living in barbarity of blood must have blood seem to be relatively less destructive to the environment around them.

in many ways the rogue ai has saved the earth from overpopulation and pollutions of that previous human culture. there seems to be a plethora of growth both in terms of fauna and flora.
Click to expand...

Incredible. You're actually justifying the grounder's way of life.

They are the ones with the blood must have blood mantra, but yet they are the ones who began systematically hunting down The 100 back in season 1. An event which began this entire chain of events.

Incidentally I find the "good guys" suggesting that maybe they should live like that to be extremely alarming. By that I mean it is alarming that they seriously think abducting democratically elected leaders, carting them off and letting others torture them to death is a reasonable approach (killing leaders who you disagree with is a very grounder thing to do btw).

Their willingness to resort to that kind of behaviour honestly makes me dislike them. If we followed their line of thinking then eventually all law would break down and anarchy would reign.

A better approach would be to reinstate the ruling council so decisions to engage in war could be made fairly by elected officials. That way you could avoid dictatorial behaviour by individuals like Pike or Kane (yes, Kane).

WhereAreMahDragonz said:
Just because it's the internet and a message board doesn't stop you from being a decent human being.
Click to expand...

The assumption that disagreeing with you is the same as not being a decent human being is something I completely reject. I may not agree with the reaction toward this show from the LGBT fans but I support LGBT communities as much as a straight white male introvert can.

And by the way people are vastly more complicated than a simple label so don't bash people over the head with it and claim privilege (which others have already done in here). You don't know where people come from, nor what they've had to endure.
 
Michael Beach (actor who plays pike) going all in on twitter.

Michael Beach Retweeted shar. | #freekane
U owe him nothing but he owesu what? 2do everything uwant him 2do exactly as uwant it done? Haveu ever run a TV show
Click to expand...

In reply to:

shar. | #freekane
‏@bellamysalways
@MikeABeach lots knew them b4 but what does that have to do with anything? we don't owe jason shit for bullying cast members & queerbaiting
Click to expand...

I assume the spelling is to keep it under the character limit.
 
Napoleonthechimp said:
The assumption that disagreeing with you is the same as not being a decent human being is something I completely reject. I may not agree with the reaction toward this show from the LGBT fans but I support LGBT communities as much as a straight white male introvert can.

And by the way people are vastly more complicated than a simple label so don't bash people over the head with it and claim privilege (which others have already done in here). You don't know where people come from, nor what they've had to endure.
Click to expand...

Interesting. I remember saying something pretty similar a few pages ago.


And in regards to being a decent human being, I was more referring to the you coming in here with a blatantly offensive post like a bull in a china shop just to make people mad. I don't really give a fuck if you have a different opinion. Where I have a problem, however, is how you present it.
 
WhereAreMahDragonz said:
Interesting. I remember saying something pretty similar a few pages ago.


And in regards to being a decent human being, I was more referring to the you coming in here with a blatantly offensive post like a bull in a china shop just to make people mad. I don't really give a fuck if you have a different opinion. Where I have a problem, however, is how you present it.
Click to expand...

Your experiences may lead you to the false assumption that my bluntness is some personal attack on you or what you believe but truthfully I don’t know enough about you to want to make it my mission to intentionally offend you.

I’ve had enough experiences in life to know sugar coating things in an attempt to appease as many people as possible is a pointless endeavour as it only leads to indifference to the people within earshot.

So I could either honestly say what I think or tell you what you want to hear. In some circumstances those things could very well be the same, but in this case they aren’t.
 
Napoleonthechimp said:
Your experiences may lead you to the false assumption that my bluntness is some personal attack on you or what you believe but truthfully I don’t know enough about you to want to make it my mission to intentionally offend you.

I’ve had enough experiences in life to know sugar coating things in an attempt to appease as many people as possible is a pointless endeavour as it only leads to indifference to the people within earshot.

So I could either honestly say what I think or tell you what you want to hear. In some circumstances those things could very well be the same, but in this case they aren’t.
Click to expand...

The whole point of a debate and discussion is to say what you want to say. All I'm asking is just to be tactful about it. I don't think you're attacking me personally. There's a difference between "sugar coating" and just straight up not being rude.
 
Napoleonthechimp said:
Incredible. You're actually justifying the grounder's way of life.

They are the ones with the blood must have blood mantra, but yet they are the ones who began systematically hunting down The 100 back in season 1. An event which began this entire chain of events.

Incidentally I find the "good guys" suggesting that maybe they should live like that to be extremely alarming. By that I mean it is alarming that they seriously think abducting democratically elected leaders, carting them off and letting others torture them to death is a reasonable approach (killing leaders who you disagree with is a very grounder thing to do btw).

Their willingness to resort to that kind of behaviour honestly makes me dislike them. If we followed their line of thinking then eventually all law would break down and anarchy would reign.

A better approach would be to reinstate the ruling council so decisions to engage in war could be made fairly by elected officials. That way you could avoid dictatorial behaviour by individuals like Pike or Kane (yes, Kane).
Click to expand...

k what are you talking about? the whole idea of elections/democracy not leading to dicatorial behaviour [i think this is the wrong word , but crazy society selfish behaviour] like pike or kane is moot because pike was elected. by the people of arkadia. hence that point actually kind of supports that elections and demoncracy can lead to dictatorial behaviour.

with regards to their early history . i see it more in the lines of native behaviour vs anglo saxon colonial behaviour. the natives in this case grounders trikru defending their territory from invaders [the 100]. i see it as an inevitable conflict brought about by the sudden arrival of a new variable in an environment

ultimately thought the reason i pick grounders over arkadians is because i want to look at the bigger picture. i see the arkadian culture as selfish, representetive and similar to the culture that lead the world to destruction while the grounder culture although barbaric in nature , seems to seek a balance between their people and the environment around them.

i think as humans no matter how hard you try to control that barbarism , the outlet for it is inevitable. like water in a bottle. the arkadians actively try to control that water leaving the bottle, they dont see it as a part of them (ignorantly) hence when it comes out, it cause larger bouts of change in the environment . the loss of the mountain men. etc

while the grounders see the barbaric nature as part of them. its just a part of their existence. the need to kill invaders for the sake of peace. they don't need to believe that human society or community needs to establish priority or superiority over other things like nature etc. maybe embrace is the word.

i am not quite sure i communicated the last point correctly.
 
Couple photos from 3.09, nothing really too spoilery, but I'll tag em to play it safe.

5NuSxzZ.png

qXPEdfq.png
 
So with Ricky Whittle joining American Gods and supposedly (?) shitting on the showrunner of The 100 on Twitter and elsewhere, I take it that means Lincoln is going to be killed off this season?
 
RatskyWatsky said:
So with Ricky Whittle joining American Gods and supposedly (?) shitting on the showrunner of The 100 on Twitter and elsewhere, I take it that means Lincoln is going to be killed off this season?
Click to expand...

I think we've all come to the conclusion that he will be dieing this season, ya.
 
I had to force myself to sit through this episode. I find the whole Pike/Bellamy/Arkadia storyline really annoying and boring. Only parts I enjoyed were the Raven/Jasper interactions.
 
figadapaura said:
I had to force myself to sit through this episode. I find the whole Pike/Bellamy/Arkadia storyline really annoying and boring. Only parts I enjoyed were the Raven/Jasper interactions.
Click to expand...

I didn't like them till this episode, it didn't feel as rushed this time around. I liked the back and forth games with each other.

The Raven/Jasper sections though are worth watching... at least watch for that Dragonz :)
 
Somnia said:
I didn't like them till this episode, it didn't feel as rushed this time around. I liked the back and forth games with each other.

The Raven/Jasper sections though are worth watching... at least watch for that Dragonz :)
Click to expand...

I just can't stand most of those characters right now. I also missed Abby. Wonder what she was doing this whole episode.
 
figadapaura said:
I just can't stand most of those characters right now. I also missed Abby. Wonder what she was doing this whole episode.
Click to expand...

I like Abby, Kane, Harper, Miller and Lincoln who are there as of right now.

I just don't see myself ever really liking Bellamy again no matter how they try to redeem him. I hope they understand this, they can have him redeem himself, but still not be trusted again. Because he clearly wants to get redeemed to save the people as he feels Pike is wrong, but he clearly still dislikes/hates the Grounders.
 
Honestly I got five minutes in when Pike was at the watchtower and he said something like "Something has changed..." and I thought about last episode and I was like oh no don't talk about Lexa
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Sports betting |OT|
7
10K
Hideous Snake replied
Arrow S6 |OT| You know Diggle, I'm all out of island stories - Thursdays 9/8c
9 10 11 12 13
641
80K
Grizzlyjin replied
ItalianGAF |OT| - Italia
3
947
Azzurri replied
The 100 S4 |OT| Meltdowns of Epic Proportions - Wednesdays at 9/8C
17 18 19 20 21
1K
105K
Funky Papa replied
Food |OT| GAFeteria
2
77
17K
SLoWMoTIoN replied
Top Bottom