|
TyrantWD posted:Octavia's "we're back bitches" set to Radioactive is probably what gets most people to drop the show after the pilot - but it's also probably what sold CW executives to pick up the show, as it was developed at a time when teen girls was still their biggest audience. Gotta introduce the conventions to subvert them. My "wait a sec, is this gonna be an interesting show" moment was when the little girl shanked Jaha Jr., who I assumed would be part of a three season love triangle with him, Finn and Clarke.
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2016 21:42
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 22:33 |
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:No it wasn't. The easy way out, and the standard CW network thing, would have been that Murphy is convinced to stand down and the girl goes on living. I mean, the entire episode was revolving around what way they would pull out of their rear end in order to save this dumb little girl. Turns out there was no way. Yeah killing a little girl is never the easy way out.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2016 02:52
|
|
|
Usually people wrongly apply the term "fridging" broadly to the death of any female character but that was pretty much the textbook definition of it. Of course, if you didn't know she was dead meat the second she appeared on screen you've never seen a CW show. Teen idol heartthrob male leads don't get into actual relationships off screen. At least she had kind of a badass death.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2016 06:09
|
|
|
Is that tower a recognizable building or is it just random? I did like the birds eye view they did of it where you could see that it actually lies within a ruined city. Also Polis is a specific place or are grounders bringing back Greek?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2016 18:02
|
|
|
The same linguist that invented Dothraki and whatever they speak on Defiance invented grounderese. It's intended to be an English Creole. It works well because they are still using American phonemes and such so all the grounder actors sound like native speakers.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
Everything at Polis rules. The Bellamy/Pike poo poo could work if it was at all earned. I'd have believed that heel turn if Octavia had died, or if they spread it out, had him struggle with it over a couple of episodes, maybe had a few more tense dealings between him and some Grounders. Hopefully this is some "realities of 16 episode seasons" or something that necessitates a bullet of a subplot to set up pieces for a much better plot and payoff in a couple of episodes.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2016 22:08
|
|
|
I think that might be an overreaction to a single lovely subplot.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2016 05:31
|
|
|
Pike is what happens if Trump wins.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2016 03:57
|
|
|
Shippers, man.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2016 08:13
|
|
|
So that's three out of four Clarke love interests dead. Watch yer back Bellamy.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2016 17:12
|
|
|
The Iron Rose posted:Bury your gays is a really lovely trope and I hoped that the 100 would have been above it. If we're gonna want more lgbt characters in fiction, and of course we do, you're gonna have more dead lgbt characters in fiction especially on a show like the 100. Fridging, "burying your gays" are all commonly used super reductively to barely meet thresholds for complaints rather than metaphors for cheap narrative tricks. Gina getting made up just to die was cheap, having a character developed over two seasons get written off due to both availability constraints as well as in a narratively game changing, secret revealing way that will have ramifications for all future plots is not some lazy ploy. If it's important to normalize lgbt characters, and I think the 100 is definitely on the forefront of that, then you can't give them special plot armor because some people used such characters poorly in the past. And I'm not accusing you specifically of this, or anyone here, but some of the tumblr/twitter reactions read to me more as people mad about their OTP not living happily ever after and they are just accusing the show of problematicity because it's a useful stick to enhance the wrongness of what is ultimately a narrative/necessary call.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2016 22:22
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:Everyone forgets the lesbian shop owner in the first episode. Yeah killing her would have been gay burying. Are there instances of lgbt character death that people could agree was not problematic? Because if Lexa's death ain't it, how else can you do it without saying, ok nothing bad can happen to gay characters?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2016 04:08
|
|
|
Again, must gay characters be immortal and exempt from having bad things happen to them?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2016 01:40
|
|
|
Troposphere posted:if there were more gay characters on tv it wouldn't really be an issue but the fact of the matter is that there isn't and they often end up dead, and that's a problem Ok so until there are enough gay characters then they must be exempt from the rules of storytelling. That'll make writers want to write gay characters. I'll admit that I didn't know much specifically about this trope but I assumed it was similar to "fridging", where poorly developed lgbt characters were grist for the narrative mill. I just googled it though, and it's not that, it's "gay characters aren't allowed to have happy endings" and it seems to be wholly constructed by the tvtropes community. What's the scholarship on it?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2016 01:51
|
|
|
Troposphere posted:get away with it as in not have any backlash or criticism Yeah next time they'll just make the character straight to begin with, much safer than taking any kind of a risk with a lgbt character.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2016 01:59
|
|
|
Monicro posted:This is a super bizarre post considering that equating bisexuality to being gay/lesbian (whichever is appropriate at the time) is like baby's first bi erasure So what's an example of a well done and nonproblematic lgbt character death?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2016 02:52
|
|
|
Monicro posted:I will answer this question as soon as you explain how that's an logical follow-up to that post I don't think you can.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2016 02:56
|
|
|
Monicro posted:No, the problem is my post said "y'all are missing the forest for the trees" and you followed it up with "POINT AT A BIRCH TREE" C'mon this should be easy, name just one.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2016 03:02
|
|
|
Monicro posted:I'm not very inclined to considering how blatantly you're arguing in bad faith so I'll just quote this post again and then take hollylolly's advice and bow out of this Nah I think you would if you could, because that would straight up win you the argument. What it shows instead is that lgbt characters must in fact be immortal and above the rules of storytelling in order to satisfy you, and in my opinion that's an unreasonable standard, and actually counterproductive to the goal of increasing lgbt representation on TV. Because if you have to treat gay characters with kid gloves then it's not worth it to make a character gay in the first place, since it ties your hands against all behinds the scenes realites, audience demands, new narrative ideas or changes.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2016 03:21
|
|
|
Luvcow posted:i like identifying with characters that feel things like emotions and love no matter who their particular interest is but seriously i don't get why some people itt are having a hard time respectfully listening to the opinions of other people. If someone says they see something one way then maybe just nod your head and try to understand there are different perspectives in life. I'm pretending it takes place 200 years after the attack instead on 100 years and please no one tell me different.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
Is there a new episode this week?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2016 19:44
|
|
|
Yeah the reason I even asked is because all the other CW shows I watch are on break.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2016 15:07
|
|
|
hope and vaseline posted:Do CW shows benefit from delaying important episodes into the sweeps period? Or are they so niche that this doesn't really matter I have no idea. The DC comics shows just had a big winter break, come back for a couple of episodes, and break for another month? Also apparently there is some downvote campaign brigade on imdb, The 100 usually scores high eights, low nines but the latest episode has a 4.8. That's not even the episode they're mad about it was the previous one, and that has an 8.7!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2016 17:01
|
|
|
Aphrodite posted:Oh no everyone who cherry picks episodes of a TV season based on IMDB ratings is going to skip it. Hell hath no fury like a shipper scorned. I only found out because some guy on r/tv was asking if the 100 was worth it because he noticed that the latest episode had half the rating of the previous one and was wondering if the show had jumped the shark or something.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2016 17:05
|
|
|
Spergatory posted:Lexa fans legitimately want to see the show cancelled now. This whole campaign has officially moved from the realm of "unhappy fans voicing their opinions" to "shrieking children smashing their own toys in a temper tantrum." They won't succeed. The ratings for last week were actually up a tenth over the week before. It's an extremely small but extremely vocal minority.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2016 18:30
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:But last week was when she died. So we haven't seen the response to it yet. I could've sworn it was two weeks ago...but nope it was Thursday. This has been a longer week than I thought 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
Azhais posted:If ratings are dropping its probably because someone decided this season needed to be "WOPR vs Skynet: Does anyone have a working tic-tac-toe program?" They aren't.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2016 18:49
|
|
|
Aphrodite posted:Apparently the showrunner lost 15000 followers or something as part of their campaign. And that's only if they actually quit watching.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2016 18:55
|
|
|
Troposphere posted:I think a lot of you are failing to grasp the point that there are not many lesbian characters on television and certainly not many that are important to the plot and who have relationships with the main character No we get that but since the alternative is to never ever kill off an lgbt character even if the actor leaves the show or we riot, it's absurd. Johnny Truant posted:I think I have to accept that I'll ever be able to wrap my head around people like this, or the people who stop watching a show if their favourite character dies, or people on tumblr or twitter. Oh well, to each their own I guess. This happens all the time though. AV Club even had a Q&A about it the other day.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2016 19:31
|
|
|
Johnny Truant posted:You've made that abundantly clear. I guess I don't understand why people need to relate to the entertainment they watch. Like, gently caress, I relate to none of the characters on House of Cards but I eat that poo poo up. http://www.avclub.com/article/what-show-did-you-quit-watching-after-character-yo-232572 Also I did a bit of research into "Bury Your Gays" after last week. Common dramatic devices like the Bechdel test, fridging, black guys die first and so on usually have some quantified scholarship so we're not just relying on viewers' anecdotal data. Everything recent I can find on BYG is from tvtropes or tumblr, but I did find this blog entry that tries to integrate BYG into existing Queer Theory and here's how they define it: " The T.V. trope ‘Bury your gays’ follows the format of painting a tragic tale of an individual struggling against an oppressive society which either directly kills the individual or pushes them to murder. Mulholland Dr., Cruising, Cloud Atlas, Brideshead Revisited, and shockingly Nine Dead Gay Guys (to name a few) all follow this rough format." Does that sound like what happened on The 100? I don't have an issue with talking about lack of representation on TV or the ways in which characters representing irl marginalized populations are poorly served by straight white dominated media companies, but I can't stand it when people try to take a subjective narrative decision and try to make it objective by labeling it problematic. It's harmful to the cause of equality and acceptance, because the next time The 100 writers have an opportunity to make a character gay, I bet they think twice.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2016 19:48
|
|
|
Troposphere posted:I'd say that describes the situation pretty well, considering lexa's whole thing was her getting over costia's death and her "love is weakness" mindset, but as soon as she did and the love was reciprocated she died Nope.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2016 20:14
|
|
|
If the leader of a society is openly gay, then that is not an oppressive society in the BYG sense. The show goes out of its way to show how unremarkable it is to not be straight.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2016 20:16
|
|
|
Troposphere posted:and that is one person's opinion on what the trope means Gee you must have hated the 100 from day one then huh.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
Troposphere posted:what? no... But everyone is unhappy and tragic all the time? That's the reason that "gay people can't be unhappy or it's a trope" is loving stupid because it creates a separate class of character that is immune to the rules of storytelling, which are rules because they create compelling and interesting characters. What you are complaining about is actually better for LGBT representation than an absurd contextless moratorium on drama because the shipping echochamber on the internet has tried to appropriate another critical paradigm they understand at the most superficial level.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
Troposphere posted:hmmmmmm Yeah that's what I thought.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
The Iron Rose posted:it's kinda telling how literally all the people screaming "look at the crazy lesbians!" are (presumably) straight men Make the case then instead of trying to yet again make a subjective discussion objectively problematic.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2016 20:51
|
|
|
Hmmm pretty telling how all the people that don't agree with me are Literally Hitlers. Sad, imo.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2016 20:55
|
|
|
Monicro posted:In any case tho this is the post i was mainly referring to, in which a dude who apparently reads 4chan tells a lesbian what is best for representation Interesting that you mention case because this would be the second time you didn't make a case and instead tried to imply that I'm homophobic or something.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
Monicro posted:I'm still waiting for you to explain that follow-up btw Yeah I bet, I bet you have an amazing counterthesis just stacked with examples and empirical evidence but you just can't reveal it, not until your conditions are met. Well, bad news, I guess the world is just going to have to go without.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2016 22:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 22:33 |
|
|
MMM Whatchya Say posted:I think it's a little funny how on one side people are like "this is disappointing and I'm upset" and on the other side people are like "oh yeah? make a case for why you should be upset" No if they were saying that, I wouldn't give a poo poo. zoux fucked around with this message at 23:45 on Mar 10, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2016 23:43
|
|