Small Talk: The Quiver

[SonofaBiscuit]

I actually prefer these big long breaks all at one time rather than throwing reruns in the schedule every so often.  The Christmas break allowed me to catch up on all of my shows, so that was awesome.  Unfortunately, life got in the way and I'm soooo far behind on all of my shows now that I'm not sure I'll ever catch up again!

[Sakura12]

I guess for me it's the opposite, if they were on, I'd watch because I was used to watching them. The long breaks make me take note of the shows I'm not that interested in and could give up. 

[blixie]

 

Personally, having been a pretty obsessive TV watcher since I was a kid in the 80s, I always remember TV being like this.

 

For sure, but I think the whole landscape of television is SO different that these types of breaks stand out more starkly. You had three/four networks that all adhered to the same schedules, Dramas and sitcoms had between 23-25 episodes, and they had counter programming when they went into these "holes": TV movies and mini-series were a huge piece of every networks scheduling puzzle, both weekly and seasonally. I think that helped satisfy viewers, oh it's hiatus time let's watch Roots, or The Thorn Birds. Also they basically didn't tell you no new episodes were coming, they wanted people to watch re-runs (It's NEW to YOU!) and they hoped people would tune  in regardless. 

 

It does amaze me how married the networks and nielsens are to a system that doesn't really exist anymore (aka sweeps periods defined in 1954? OoohkAY). 

[BkWurm1]

Take about a hiatus - that's all summer was - just a huge never ending stretch of reruns.  I think we tend to forget just how often everything was in reruns.  I have to say we're better off today if for no other reason than it's a hell of a lot easier to figure out the schedule than it was before.  I remember for weeks on end rushing to see the TV Guide in the Sunday paper to see if FINALLY my shows were coming back only to be disappointed or worse yet, show up ready to watch only for it to be preempted by some crappy  special. 

[KirkB]

The thing is, I'll agree that months and months of reruns was disappointing, but at least there was a set schedule. You knew precisely when it was going to start and when it was going to come back. Now we get at least one, maybe two multi-month breaks during the season for every show, in addition to holidays and preempting for whatever other reason, and everything being on a different schedule it's harder to keep track of. I would much rather have X number of mostly solid weeks of full on new episodes, then a gap where I can find other stuff to watch or do before settling down for the new season.

Edited March 11, 2015 by KirkB

[BkWurm1]

I think it would be great if networks were way more open about their schedules.  I mean, if you go looking eventually you can find out the schedule but should we have to go searching?  And it's not like the networks are coordinating starts and stops anymore.  Still, I remember (faintly) the pre VCR days so even having other viewing options remains a positive for me, then again, had TV been better when I was a kid I might not go by the moniker BkWurm1.

It occurs to me that I'm probably feeling more lax about the scheduling since in recent years I've been relying on the DVR to remember so I don't have to.  I goofed and missed the first four episodes of season 6 Cougar Town over on TBS (I thought the show had been canceled and took it off my DVR) and I'm still annoyed, so I should be more sympathetic. 

Edited March 11, 2015 by BkWurm1

[blixie]

 

nd it's not like the networks are coordinating starts and stops anymore.

 

I think this is it more than anything, there is zero coordination across a single network's schedule much less the entire television landscape, and we're used to on demand binge watching.But definitely I think if you love tv, we have more of it than ever, and most of it is really really good. I mean even shows from the 80's that I used to think were great look terrible on Cozi now, the production values alone have improved 100 fold. I'm reminded of Louis CK's bit about how we're living in an AMAZING time. Given how much Arrow is underwhelming me this season I'm fine with it going away for a while, so I can catch up on Jane the Virgin, and watch The Americans.

[Carrie Ann]

For sure, but I think the whole landscape of television is SO different that these types of breaks stand out more starkly. [...] It does amaze me how married the networks and nielsens are to a system that doesn't really exist anymore (aka sweeps periods defined in 1954? OoohkAY). 

 

I totally agree that this is what's happening. Cable series seasons tend to be shorter, with no breaks, and start/stop any old time they please. We can binge whole seasons, even new seasons, on Netflix or whatever. So, yeah, I think breaks might feel more off-putting now, but I don't think the networks really are any worse about scheduling than they have ever been.

 

All of the cable nets, the streaming nets, and the rise of streaming or delayed viewing options (DVR/OnDemand), make the old Sep-May schedule and Nielsen system completely antiquated. It's really strange that the broadcast nets continue to adhere to it, or that advertisers haven't cottoned on that this system is not as effective as it once was. But I suppose that's a huge, multi-faceted beast to change, and it will be slow to do so.

[catrox14]

Goffman getting fired was pretty much a foregone conclusion, wasn't it?  Considering the complete suckfest Sleepy Hollow became throughout the majority of S2, I'm surprised he lasted as long as he did.

I don't think it was  foregone conclusion.  He was obsessed with Katia Winter/Katrina and the only reason he got fired IMO is that the ratings tanked.  So as a SleepyHead myself. DING DONG THE WITCHES ARE DEAD. 

[quarks]

I totally agree that this is what's happening. Cable series seasons tend to be shorter, with no breaks, and start/stop any old time they please. We can binge whole seasons, even new seasons, on Netflix or whatever. So, yeah, I think breaks might feel more off-putting now, but I don't think the networks really are any worse about scheduling than they have ever been.

 

All of the cable nets, the streaming nets, and the rise of streaming or delayed viewing options (DVR/OnDemand), make the old Sep-May schedule and Nielsen system completely antiquated. It's really strange that the broadcast nets continue to adhere to it, or that advertisers haven't cottoned on that this system is not as effective as it once was. But I suppose that's a huge, multi-faceted beast to change, and it will be slow to do so.

 

ABC appears to be at least testing the idea of breaking away from this model. It appears to have helped with Once Upon a Time in the second half of their season last year, and is working spectacularly well for Scandal.  So this is something that might (slowly) change.

[millennium]

For sure, but I think the whole landscape of television is SO different that these types of breaks stand out more starkly. You had three/four networks that all adhered to the same schedules, Dramas and sitcoms had between 23-25 episodes, and they had counter programming when they went into these "holes": TV movies and mini-series were a huge piece of every networks scheduling puzzle, both weekly and seasonally. I think that helped satisfy viewers, oh it's hiatus time let's watch Roots, or The Thorn Birds. Also they basically didn't tell you no new episodes were coming, they wanted people to watch re-runs (It's NEW to YOU!) and they hoped people would tune  in regardless. 

 

It does amaze me how married the networks and nielsens are to a system that doesn't really exist anymore (aka sweeps periods defined in 1954? OoohkAY). 

 

Your memory most closely resembles mine.   Sure, there were interruptions.   You knew there would be no new shows the week of Thanksgiving, or at all from the first week of December until January, but you barely noticed because there was all kinds of holiday programming to fill in the gaps.  Other times there were Miniseries.   Movies of the Week, etc.   But you could set your watch by it.   You knew when it would happen and you wouldn't be surprised.   Impatient for the shows to start again, yes -- but not flinging the TV Guide across the room in disgust.

 

Part of the problem may be that there is so little worth watching on a weekly basis anymore (it's almost as bad as trying to find something to watch on Netflix).  Finding a show you enjoy is like finding an oasis in the desert -- and then the well runs dry after just three weeks.   You wait around for another trickle, finally it comes ... then it cuts out again.   Maddening.

 

And it's not just cable pulling this either.   The networks are doing it too.   Two network shows I watch regularly are Revenge and Law and Order SVU.   Both of those shows are notoriously unreliable.   Each of them vanish for weeks at a time.  

 

I think it all goes back to Mad Men and Breaking Bad.   The scheduling stunts involved with those two programs -- a year between seasons, cutting seasons in half with months in between -- demonstrated to the industry that networks can treat viewers like dogs begging scraps from the table, like we'll just sit there and wait until they're damn good and ready to toss us a crumb.   And why not, right?  Because we do.   We're so grateful when they finally get their shit together and run new product.

 

I feel like the good faith of the viewing audience is being taken advantage of.   I guess that's what makes me angry.

Edited March 11, 2015 by millennium

[Sakura12]

I'd rather shows follow Breaking Bad, Mad Men and The Walking Dead. I like having the shows run mostly uninterrupted take a break then run the next string of episodes again with few interruptions . I'm aware that they are doing that and can plan accordingly. I watch a lot of British shows, I suppose that makes me used to long waits between seasons. 

 

The network shows just randomly air reruns for weeks then come back, then take another week break. I never know when the show is airing a new episode without looking it up. To me that is more annoying. 

[statsgirl]

Life was different before taping and VCRs and streaming.  Everyone held the same schedule and you were pretty much a prisoner because if  you wanted to watch TV, there were no real alternatives so you sucked it up and watched or went outside. Now there are all sort of things you can do, like summer series and Netflix and downloading from Amazon so it's even more obvious when a show is in hiatus.

 

It does amaze me how married the networks and nielsens are to a system that doesn't really exist anymore (aka sweeps periods defined in 1954? OoohkAY). 

Even more surprising that they still rely on the demo of 18 - 49 rather than total number of viewers when there's never been any evidence that younger viewers are more open to changing brands.  And in fact, except for cars (which is now about even) and electronics, it's women who make more purchasing decisions so why the hunger for the young male demographic?

[dtissagirl]

I use http://www.pogdesign.co.uk/cat/ to keep track of when new episodes are airing. I watch A LOT of tv, there's no way I'd remember which night each show is on anyway, so I find it super helpful.

[Starfish35]

I use an old app called Episodes that I don't think is even in the App Store anymore. It's basic, but it's pretty useful for tracking what I'm watching. I haven't found anything comparable yet.

[BkWurm1]

Just finished watching the season 2 finale for The 100 and I won't spoil it for any that might want to catch up on this show (which I highly recommend) but all the buzz words that MG likes to throw around such as game changer and reshaping the landscape and epic and never be the same again, well these are words that really do apply in the second season of The 100 but they didn't wait 16 episodes for a finale to make sense of the season. 

 

The show carefully built up to the finale and in the course of reshaping relationships and insuring the show would never be the same again, every episode mattered, some more than others but there was always momentum and as awful as some of the choices made were, I never thought for a second that anyone was acting out of character or for plot or cause they needed to have their head up their butt...actually there was this one character that absolutely did but it was early on and as shocking as his actions were part of me found it plausible, he was held accountable and the show moved on, shedding some IMO dead weight. 

 

The second season ends in a way that seems to insure that some of the things people loved in season one can't be revisited, at least anytime soon, and for a moment I had a pang of nostalgia but then I let it go because the changes feel earned and like they matter not only to the overreaching plot TPTB were trying to tell but in the growth and change of each character.  MG wants us to accept what we need not what we want and I get it in principle because there is a part of me that would want to revisit some aspects of season 1 of The 100 but I have faith that if they actually get renewed, then the story I can't even imagine is going to be even more satisfying to watch than the one I'd love to see again. 

 

It's not the same with Arrow and when compared to a show that earned it's epic, game changing, shocking moments it's glaring obvious to me that MG isn't giving us the show we need or want. 

[DrSpaceman10]

MG wants us to accept what we need not what we want and I get it in principle because there is a part of me that would want to revisit some aspects of season 1 of The 100 but I have faith that if they actually get renewed, then the story I can't even imagine is going to be even more satisfying to watch than the one I'd love to see again. 

 

You know that The 100 was already renewed for Season Three, right?

[calliope1975]

You know that The 100 was already renewed for Season Three, right?

 

Yay! I was wondering about that because as soon as the finale finished, I was all excited to see what's going to happen next and hoped they would be renewed. I also thought that I'd be okay if they weren't renewed because it was such a great season, and I'm happy with where it left the characters.

 

What was so great was that The 100 is a pretty dark show. It deals with really harsh story lines, but I never feel like it's so grimdark that there's no hope. They have enough wins and losses that I'm not quite sure what's going to happen, but I trust it'll make sense. 

Edited March 12, 2015 by calliope1975

[tv echo]

I would have put Arrow and Sleepy Hollow in similar categories this season, with the executive producer determined to push through his agenda in spite of multiple criticisms of the show and complaints that what worked in s1 (Ichabod/Abbie banter, Jenny, Irving) wasn't getting enough attention. With Goffman, it was Katrina and Henry taking centre stage, with Arrow, it's writing for costumes and Laurel over Team Arrow.

Unfortunately, I don't think it will affect the Arrow EPs at all.  Arrow ratings haven't dropped as dramatically as SH ratings.  The Arrow show runner, MG, is backed up by AK and GB - the three of them have multiple projects on the CW and elsewhere, and they are riding high in Hollywood right now.

[manbearpig]

Do the Teen Wolf regulars have the easiest contracts to get out of...ever? I don't even watch the show but every time I hear about it another regular has left and gotten out of their contract. Oh well...not like I watch it anyway.

Edited March 12, 2015 by manbearpig

[Starfish35]

I quit watching the show after season two, and everything I've heard about it since then has made me glad I did. But yeah, I don't know. They lost Colton Haynes, Crystal Reed, and now apparently Tyler Hoechlin. From what I've heard though, Tyler H. wasn't getting much to do on the show anymore anyway.

[Sakura12]

Considering Derek turned into an actual wolf in the finale last season, I figured Hoechlin was out. 

[Starfish35]

Why would that mean he was out?

[Sakura12]

They don't need the actor if his character turned into a real wolf. 

 

They made it seem like he was dead, then he came back as a black wolf. I figured that was their way of getting rid of the actor and still giving him a chance to come back. 

Edited March 12, 2015 by Sakura12

[Starfish35]

Was it a permanent change?!? I didn't watch it, but I thought it just meant that he gained the ability to shapeshift completely into a wolf, not that he was trapped that way for the rest of his life.

[Sakura12]

It depends, his mother could shapeshift, but his cousin Malia didn't know how to change back into a human and now doesn't know how to change back into a coyote. I figured that was their way of giving Hoechlin a choice. If he wanted to come back he could change at will, if he wanted leave he was stuck in wolf form.

 

I also kind of had a feeling that Hoechlin wanted out, so I wasn't surprised by the announcement.  

Edited March 12, 2015 by Sakura12

[Carrie Ann]

I think most of the regulars on that show want out. I'm shocked DOB is staying, honestly.

[foreverevolving]

Take about a hiatus - that's all summer was - just a huge never ending stretch of reruns.  I think we tend to forget just how often everything was in reruns.  I have to say we're better off today if for no other reason than it's a hell of a lot easier to figure out the schedule than it was before.  I remember for weeks on end rushing to see the TV Guide in the Sunday paper to see if FINALLY my shows were coming back only to be disappointed or worse yet, show up ready to watch only for it to be preempted by some crappy  special. 

 

The American system of broadcasting shows always bewildered me. In my home country, when i was growing up, we had like four cable companies (now it's one cable- cause they merged into one- and one satellite) and they all aired the same channels, mostly. alot of our shows were imported from the US, you had the two major networks equivalent which you could get for free even if you didn't have cables, and for those who had cables there was like one channel for tv shows, one for movies, one for children one that was history/science/documentary shows and so forth. on the shows channel our year would get divided into two seasons: winter and spring/summer-the summer season would usually be the best of the two where all the big hit shows would air (our summers are super hot and humid so you tended to stay in). so the channel really only had 6-ish months to dedicate to each show, so breaks were shorter and would only be done if it was an holiday/memorial day. I miss that system, I mean you had to wait another 6 months for your show to come back, but in the meantime you had 6 months of other shows you liked- even if it that winter season were of shows that aired at the previous year in the US (so you were technically a year behind, but for those of us who had yet to discover the internet or had very slow speed and were not downloading on Napster, Kazza or Emule or browsing fan forums, we didn't care cause.. no spoilers- for example I had no idea George Clooney was leaving ER until i one day at the book store i was leafing through a magazine from the US and saw a picture from his last episode, this was back in early 1999).

 

so yea, wow, that ended up a much longer post. maybe i should edit it a bit?

Edited March 13, 2015 by foreverevolving

[Nanrad]

And it's not just cable pulling this either.   The networks are doing it too.   Two network shows I watch regularly are Revenge and Law and Order SVU.   Both of those shows are notoriously unreliable.   Each of them vanish for weeks at a time.  

 

I think it all goes back to Mad Men and Breaking Bad.   The scheduling stunts involved with those two programs -- a year between seasons, cutting seasons in half with months in between -- demonstrated to the industry that networks can treat viewers like dogs begging scraps from the table, like we'll just sit there and wait until they're damn good and ready to toss us a crumb.   And why not, right?  Because we do.   We're so grateful when they finally get their shit together and run new product.

Personally, I wouldn't attribute the scheduling changes to them. I feel like this occurrence happened before them. It's only been two years since BB did it and, although I only started watched MM two years ago, I got through two seasons and stopped for some reason, I think this has been years in the making. Way before MM pulled there stunt, I believe ABC and NBA were already unreliable or doing weird scheduling. I know they did it with Scrubs, which screwed up their ratings at NBC--I'm surprised they lasted so long. LAW:SVU was screwed up for a while as well.

 

I think part of the scheduling change has to do with actors being burned out as well as writers. The girl who plays Quinn on Scandal explained the change in scheduling somewhat. 

 

But, MM and BB were able to schedule their shows the way they did because of the who their networks are. Ultimately, I think it's done to give the actors more of a break and keep the writing fresher. 

[millennium]

Ultimately, I think it's done to give the actors more of a break and keep the writing fresher. 

 

I don't think creativity or actors' well-being has ever been a consideration in programming.   It's strictly dollars and cents.

[kismet]

I don't think creativity or actors' well-being has ever been a consideration in programming.   It's strictly dollars and cents.

Similar to the Cable & British TV method that airs whole seasons without breaks, even if the series/seasons are shorter. The only time I have seen creativity take precedence is when the creative team has approached a network and said that their story works better in one complete airing with no breaks like they did with Lost. ABC decided to air Lost only in the Spring which gave the EPs on that show a way to tell a story without breaks which I think strengthen the show, until it ran into some other creative problems unrelated to scheduling. I do like what ABC has done with OUAT and lengthened the breaks to tell two distinct story arcs. It helps maintain both creativity & profits. Network TV will never have the luxury of cable or pay channels, but I do think there are creative ways that the EPs can tell stories that better accommodate the inconsistent scheduling as well as the known breaks just after sweeps.

[millennium]

I would have put Arrow and Sleepy Hollow in similar categories this season, with the executive producer determined to push through his agenda in spite of multiple criticisms of the show and complaints that what worked in s1 (Ichabod/Abbie banter, Jenny, Irving) wasn't getting enough attention. With Goffman, it was Katrina and Henry taking centre stage, with Arrow, it's writing for costumes and Laurel over Team Arrow.

 

I really enjoyed the first season of Sleepy Hollow.    Then came Season Two.   I lasted about three episodes before I was bored shitless.   It felt like a TV remake of National Treasure.   That, and apparently EVERYBODY in the American Revolution was dabbling in the occult.   Oh, and Henry.   Liked John Noble in Fringe; couldn't stand him in Sleepy Hollow.   I quit and never looked back.

Edited March 13, 2015 by millennium

[catrox14]

I'm hopeful with the current changes that SH will return to the fun of it's S1 glory days.  /fingers crossed

[millennium]

but I do think there are creative ways that the EPs can tell stories that better accommodate the inconsistent scheduling as well as the known breaks just after sweeps.

 

Bringing it back to Arrow: I wouldn't notice the gaps as much, probably, if the episodes were more of a stand-alone nature: Pop, pop, pop, break.  Pop, pop, pop, break.   And so on.    X-Files managed to maintain a tolerable mix of Monster of the Week and mythology arc.   But Arrow this season has been one long, rambling, meandering single storyline that feels like it's going nowhere.   And ironically, at the center of it all is the very character they wrote out of the stupid show: Sara.   The season could be summed up as "Who Killed Sara?" and "How Do We Conceal Who Killed Sara?"  Which only serves to keep reminding the viewers every single week that a character they liked a lot -- Sara -- is not on their screens anymore! 

 

The characters in the show are upset Sara is gone, the audience is upset Sara is gone, yet for some unfathomable reason, rather than move on, the show keeps rubbing our noses in it.    Madness!

Edited March 13, 2015 by millennium

[Sakura12]

I just lost another character I liked on another show. Why do I like the character that get killed off? At least she got to go out heroically, which is all I ask for is you are going to kill characters. 

[Danny Franks]

Back to Misfits: I'm sorry, but Future Simon is still the creepy bastard he always was. Creepier in fact, because he's using his knowledge of the future to make Alisha feel vulnerable and uncomfortable. So he's not staring at dead bodies while eating lunch or thinking about touching Kelly when she's passed out drunk, but his new behaviour is not an improvement.

 

I'm still really enjoying the show, but I'm not sure I'll watch past the end of season 2, if that's when Nathan leaves. He's the best thing about it by a mile.

[Sakura12]

I wouldn't watch past season 2, the replacement Nathan character is horrible.  I was never into Simon/Alisha, future Simon was only slightly better than first Simon. But it did give Iwan Rheon practice for his character on Game of Thrones who is 100% worse than both versions of Simon. 

[FurryFury]

I was OK with Simon/Alisha, actually, but god, the new character replacing Nathan was just SO BAD. I've managed to finish season 3 (I just wanted closure for Simon, Alisha and Kelly), and it wasn't horrible, but after that, nope.

 

I just lost another character I liked on another show. Why do I like the character that get killed off? At least she got to go out heroically, which is all I ask for is you are going to kill characters.

 

Which show is that? And yeah, killing characters off is overrated nowadays. I'm not against it, but when you do it, think - has the character fulfilled their narrative purpose? Will their death make the show better and more interesting than them being alive? Will there be major consequences? And if the answer is no - then don't do it. Unless the character in question objectively sucks, then by all means, go for it.

Edited March 13, 2015 by FurryFury

[Nanrad]

I don't think creativity or actors' well-being has ever been a consideration in programming.   It's strictly dollars and cents.

That was misphrased, but I do believe that the short/long term is money--it's always about money. Big named/respected actors are being drawn more and more to shows with a shorter schedule like Viola Davis partly because it frees up time and the other reason is because they get to rest more. The only way they could get Viola to sign on was if she wasn't attached to the standard 9 months. 

 

The reason many shows get away with scatterbrained scheduling is because of the following it's already developed or execs don't believe/aren't trying to get the show to succeed (or it has a decline in viewers). They know it's either going to make money, so they can do whatever or it's going to fail, so give they let it die on its own. 

 

I guess my issue with the argument of it only being about money and nothing else is that, despite that being the end result either way, you can't just do whatever you want and expect to make money. I guess I'm not understanding something. I don't think AMC would've allowed that break if BB hadn't been such a hit with fans and critics--Mad Men as well. Even if network execs don't take this in mind (rating actors and creativity), I think it does factor in--maybe a bargaining chip. 

[SonofaBiscuit]

I decided to watch Empire this week after I saw a commercial with Jussie Smollett looking so freaking adorable while singing this song Conqueror with Estelle.  I really didn't know what was going on with most of the characters, but I'll probably watch the finale next week.  The finale is two hours, so it will be competing with Arrow for the first hour, haha.

[wonderwall]

Arrow is going DOWN with its ratings if it's competing with Empire which literally got a 5.8 last week

[SonofaBiscuit]

Arrow is going DOWN with its ratings if it's competing with Empire which literally got a 5.8 last week

 

This is my hope because I'm a petty petty bitch.

[calliope1975]

Empire is continuing to defy industry standards and gaining viewers each week. That's practically unheard of. I can't even imagine the number of meetings happening at studios who will try to replicate it's success. I predict a ton of Empire knock-offs next year, but if it gets more POC on my TV, I don't care.

Edited March 15, 2015 by calliope1975

[NumberCruncher]

If you want some seriously compelling TV, I highly recommend "The Jinx" on HBO.  The final episode of the documentary aired tonight and my jaw is still on the floor.  It's amazing that real life is truly stranger than fiction.

[Morrigan2575]

If you want some seriously compelling TV, I highly recommend "The Jinx" on HBO. The final episode of the documentary aired tonight and my jaw is still on the floor. It's amazing that real life is truly stranger than fiction.

I want to watch that, especially now that he's been arrested.

[NumberCruncher]

It's extremely well done, IMO. I was surprised to hear that he was arrested last night(?) because the timing was rather suspicious with the finale airing tonight, but then I saw that the big reveal at the end was not even discovered by the film makers until 2 years after it happened. Crazy!

Edited March 16, 2015 by NumberCruncher

[wingster55]

Amy Santiago GIF(s) of the week. 

  

 

  

Edited March 16, 2015 by wingster55

[Sakura12]

I started watching the 100 because people have told me it was good. While not the greatest acting wise which is expected for being on the CW, I am enjoying it. Lots of logic stuff I have to ignore but being a CW veteran I can. I'm almost done with season 1, I liked seeing the adult actors that I know from other shows (although what happened to Kelly Hu's character? I get that she was written out but are we supposed to pretend she was a figment of our imagination?). Seeing Delores Herbig from "Dead Like Me" (also a good show) as AmericanDesmond's mom was great. Dichen Lachman is popping up all over the place.

 

I heard Season 2 was better so I'm looking forward to that. 

Edited March 16, 2015 by Sakura12

[Carrie Ann]

The 100 is probably the show I enjoyed the most this year. I'm not sure it's the "best," or even my favorite, but I think I was more surprised, moved, impressed, and entertained by it than by any other show I watch.

[Coop33]

I'll second what Carrie Ann said. It is definitely the show that has impressed and surprised me the most this year. It's bold and unforgiving in all the right ways.