Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
In2You

The Grounder Gazette: the 100 in the Media

Recommended Posts

So his opinion on what he would done differently changed in two days and two days before WonderCon? Sorry but my sceptical side is calling this a PR-apology and not a sincere one. Very frustrating/depressing turn of events from the minute Lexa got shot until now.

 

I think I might go back to watching my sports teams full time now. They still disappoint me but at least I go into it knowing they'll disappoint me lol :)

Edited by kdm07
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

 

For those of you wondering about the series’ path ahead, The 100 is a show where people don’t get over things quickly.

 

Indeed - they get over things very quickly.

 

 

For many fans of The 100, the relationship between Clarke and Lexa was a positive step of inclusion.

 

Was being the operative word.

 

 

I promise you burying, baiting or hurting anyone was never our intention.

 

Oh, for crying out loud, just admit that you baited a specific group of fans and went for the good old shocking twist of killing a character in a way deliberately designed to be as painful for said characters' fans as possible.

 

Edited to add: Yes, indeed two days ago he would have told the same story and now he is saying things would have played out differently.

Edited by Jack Shaftoe
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

I actually like a lot of the content in this latest letter from Jason Rothenberg - but it should have come 2.5 weeks ago, and not after he first gave that atrocious TVInsider interview where he was still trying to dodge the most egregious of the issues.  And as we've already noted here with Wondercon coming up, timing-wise it makes it hard to believe in its full sincerity.  

 

"Clarke is experiencing the profound loss of someone she loved, and she’ll carry that loss with her forever. My sincerest hope is that any of our fans who saw a part of themselves in the relationship between Clarke and Lexa can take some small comfort in knowing that their love was beautiful and real."

 

I realize he's trying to validate the emotional weight of the relationship, but Clarke has already experienced multiple "profound losses" to scar her "forever," and knowing that the Clexa connection was "beautiful and real" makes its brutal end that much worse.  

Edited by wevel
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

That open letter, as PR, is actually not that great. Aside from the obvious transparency of it just being pre-con damage control and not actually sincere at all, JRoth states--in bold, no less!--that he would still kill Lexa, just do it differently. Which means a) he really actually doesn't get most of the issues involved and b) is not a good writer, because that statement is all people are going to latch onto, no matter the rest of the message. He and the other writers are coming across like the kids who got their hands caught in the cookie jar--they're not really sorry they did it, they're just sorry they got caught/it blew up in their faces so spectacularly.

 

Damn, but this show's PR disaster is like the gift that keeps on giving. Every time I think they've bottomed out and can't possibly be any stupider, they get stupider. It's actually amazing!!!

 

Don't know if everyone was already aware of this already, but I just read a long post about it, complete with screencaps, on Tumblr. One of the show's staff writers, Shawna Benson, went as far as posting in The 100 thread on a message board specifically created for a lesbian audience in order to court/bait those fans. When she shared a picture of a poster Alycia Debnam-Carey had signed and personalized for Jason Rothenberg while stopping by his office and fans were quick to figure out that her words could be read as a goodbye message, Benson went ahead and lied to them in order to keep pretending that Lexa wouldn't die this season (and they would keep watching). That in itself is mind-boggling stupid and unprofessional already, but she also publically confirmed on her Twitter that she is/was the person posting as "Your Friendly Neighborhood Lurker" on said message board.

Holy crap, I didn't know this, but that's NUTS. Who DOES that????? More to the point, how can JRoth say with a straight face that they didn't intend to bait anyone when he had his writers doing this?

 

Wow.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Damn these people have some terrible PR folks.  Would be interesting/amazing if WonderCon attendees planned a silent protest during the The 100 panel.  Maybe turning their backs or holding up Clexa masks every time JR speaks or something.  It's obvious he doesn't get it, but maybe in the future others will get it and will be more sensitive when writing LGBT characters.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
To get this back on topic re media coverage, I was another viewer who before 3X07 was fairly unaware of the social media interactions, and can't help shaking my head at HOW MUCH the show's creative team went out of their way to court LGBT viewers/those invested in Clarke/Lexa - seems unprecedented.

 

 

I've been reading through this thread and its links and - wow, this stuff is truly damning. What on EARTH were these people thinking? It's like inviting a bunch of glucose intolerant people to a special dinner in their honour and then only serving stuff they can't eat. You don't walk away from that scenario and NOT look like idiots, assholes, or both. 

 

If nothing else, you have to appreciate the irony that a show which based so much of its promotion on trumpeting its progressiveness has now left a permanent mark on fandom culture by being the exact opposite

Edited by Ravenya003
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

Damn these people have some terrible PR folks.  Would be interesting/amazing if WonderCon attendees planned a silent protest during the The 100 panel.  Maybe turning their backs or holding up Clexa masks every time JR speaks or something.  It's obvious he doesn't get it, but maybe in the future others will get it and will be more sensitive when writing LGBT characters.

 

Yes, hijacking the panel without communicating will totally make future writers more likely to do right by LGBT characters.  

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, hijacking the panel without communicating will totally make future writers more likely to do right by LGBT characters.  

Um, the communicating is in the symbolic refusal to acknowledge anything more that JR says.  Communicating isn't just via written or spoken words, ya know.  Some examples of actions being a form of communicating - Con attendees held up lights in show of support  for Jared Padelecki suffering from depression, NYPD turning backs on Mayor deBlasio while he was speaking, my nephew kicking and screaming when I direct him to the bath tub.  

Edited by Lion
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

It's interesting watching the show without reading any of the behind the scenes stuff, because until looking at some of it I actually liked Lexa's death and didn't get the outrage. I thought it fit for the show, it was telegraphed so it wasn't completely out of the blue for me, and as a gay man I loved that there was no special immunity. Killing the main character's love interest so tragically is what I expect from soaps, Clarke was included in that and I appreciated it.

And, to me these weren't gay characters they were characters who happened to be gay, which I love. I also assumed she'd be back somehow later, though, between the AI stuff and the City of Light it's not implausible. I had faith in the writers to go that route because again- didn't know there were any backstage shenanigans suggesting I shouldn't.

But there are shenanigans, and seeing as they were out there courting an audience based on these characters... They probably should have made different choices. Since the actress was unavailable it would have felt to me like backburnering, which I think is worse than death, but maybe that was the smarter path given what they've done to sell the show.

Edited by phoenix780
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

Talk Nerdy With Us drags the writers for what they did on L Chat. some of my favorite quotes:

 

What has happened here, in this particular case, is absolutely, disgustingly unprofessional. It isn’t illegal—I don’t think so and I’m pretty sure it isn’t—but it is scandalous, exploitative, manipulative and cold. So cold. How cold must you be to deliberately post on a lesbian message forum (and if it’s a lesbian message forum, then surely it is amok with Clarke and Lexa fans) to essentially trick them into a false sense of security? To ensure that they are fully sucked into the frankly appalling game of PR and television business, knowing their beloved character is already dead, just to keep viewership levels up?

 

To round off, I want to go back to my question: when does social media go too far? I’ve talked of cyber-bullying on a general and very serious level. But when it comes to professionals using social media, such as writers, then in my humble opinion, this is the very definition of ‘too far‘. As a professional surely you cannot exploit a trusting and vulnerable LGBTQ fanbase like that. As a professional surely you cannot have the audacity to lie, bare-faced, like that. As a professional, you must be professional. And in the light of today’s reveals, I can say without a doubt—this went too far. It went so far that I think it’s actually shot out of the planet and is currently orbiting another galaxy.
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Recap of the last couple of weeks: 

 

--I loved Lexa

--(TWD spoiler)

I f'n LOVE Merritt Weaver

, even though I don't care too much for the show itself, was watching for (that person).

--I have a trans loved one 

--And I live in NC.

 

Seriously, this planet. 

 

On topic:

 

Autostraddle’s Ultimate Infographic Guide to Dead Lesbian TV Characters
http://www.autostraddle.com/autostraddles-ultimate-infographic-guide-to-dead-lesbian-tv-characters-332920/

Edited by kieyra
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

What love triangle are you referring to? I know there are a lot of shippers for two ships that include the same person, but I wouldn't say that it's been handled as a love triangle at any point on the show.

I guess I didn't express that well. I've found this season notable for the fact that Clarke's relationships feel like they are going to be an integral part of the structure of the show, where they were not last season. The focus was away from your classic YA romance, there was no telegraphing of imminent pairings. But in this season there was a boring sense of inevitability about Clarke and Lexa getting briefly together, Lexa getting killed and Clarke eventually being with Bellamy (expect developments on this front around the finale).

In other words I felt it very early on veering away from the progressive and unpredictable path (and I'm not even referring to the LGBT element there) they took last season towards the standard crappy romance that the CW is known for. So I was out.

Edited by Misty79
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Why Jason Rothenberg's apology fell flat with The 100's fans and the real lessons to learn

http://www.blastr.com/2016-3-27/why-jason-rothenbergs-apology-fell-flat-100s-fans-and-real-lessons-learn

 

 

The biggest thing that became clear was that fans were far more upset about the "infiltration" of fan spaces than they were about just Lexa's death.  “This has really been the worst case of a show exploiting its audience I’ve ever seen.”

 

 

 

Likely recognizing an opportunity to increase live viewership once Lexa's sexuality was confirmed, specific inroads were made on Twitter, Tumblr, and  very pointedly at LGBT-specific forums as well in order to garner not only more eyeballs, but also faith in The 100's commitment to do LGBT characters' stories justice.  "Strong presence online is great but when you are blatantly misleading or misdirecting fans, that crosses an ethical line. And especially if you're infiltrating the fandom. It's entirely unethical, especially when we're talking about a vulnerable population of young LGBT fans who trust you."

 

 

 

“To actively engage with your queer audience (even going so far as to seek them out in their own spaces), to have both you and your staff promise them that the character they rely upon for representation is safe, and then to pull the rug out from under them in the most hurtful way possible is burying, is baiting, is hurting.”

 

 

“Fans told them about “Bury Your Gays”. The LGBT community made their fears explicit, and The 100 crew repeatedly said that they were listening. And when the writers had written the scene that killed Lexa off in precisely the way the queer community feared, they spent months pretending that they hadn’t, they continued engaging and issuing the same platitudes about representation and respect for the LGBT community.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

I guess I didn't express that well. I've found this season notable for the fact that Clarke's relationships feel like they are going to be an integral part of the structure of the show, where they were not last season. The focus was away from your classic YA romance, there was no telegraphing of imminent pairings. But in this season there was a boring sense of inevitability about Clarke and Lexa getting briefly together, Lexa getting killed and Clarke eventually being with Bellamy (expect developments on this front around the finale).

In other words I felt it very early on veering away from the progressive and unpredictable path (and I'm not even referring to the LGBT element there) they took last season towards the standard crappy romance that the CW is known for. So I was out.

Considering that Clarke fell in love with Lexa after Lexa betrayed her and sentenced the previous "love"of Clarke life to a horrible death, I see how Clexa took focus away from bring YA tropes.

 

ETA

 

"This is going to deeply affect her for a long time moving forward," Taylor said of Finn's (thomas McDonell) death, according to Entertainment Weekly. "In her mind, she has killed her one true love and I don't think that she's ever going to really fully bounce back from it. It's definitely going to take her into a darker frame of mind."

 

And look at that! The writers made Lexa/Clarke kiss happened like, a week after Clarke killed her true love because Lexa wanted him dead?

Edited by CooperTV
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

About the Shawna Benson mess; in the 3x07 thread that was one of the two things I was referencing when talking about that most people didn't know about some of the seriously fucked up things the writers have done when courting the lgbt fanbase.

 

Wondercon was this weekend and it was very interesting. It was tweeted (I think from 2 different people) at the panel that at the line for questions, people were told that if they asked about Lexa their mic would get cut.
 

They showed the 1st 13 minutes of the next episode at the beginning, which definitely took a healthy chunk away from panel questions.

After that Jason started with clearly rehearsed speech about Lexa and the mess, where he avoided using her name and at times made it about himself and his feelings with some clear PR lines. He managed to also talk more bullshit as Javi has specifically said that they did talk about the Lesbian Death Trope extensively + Javi is great friends with the actress for Tara (the death from the show they ripped off, and is the iconic example of the trope) + fans constantly talked about this to them +  voiced their concerns and they have replied more than once in regards of those concerns.

At several times he presented things like fans expected Lexa to stroll into the sunset, repeating that, while knowing that is exactly not what fans expected. But it works towards discrediting the side that been criticizing him as it paints them as having unreasonable expectations, which is just such an a-hole thing to do.
 

My favorite part is the last question. Props to that person for asking point blank about the excessive baiting and misconduct of the writers. Then there is Jason repeating/fumbling his PR lines and not actually answering the question. He did also know what Shawna did as Shawna herself mentioned having to talk to Jason about it after she initially revealed herself. That talk was not centered around reprimanding her misconduct, but about Bellarke shippers tweeting Jason that she was giving out spoilers on that forum. She wasn't. It was instead some Bellarke shipper that after her saying Goodbye/leaving, they started posing as her and posting fake shit. They then screen capped their own fake bs and with some other Bellarke shippers started spamming Jason with it hoping to get her fired 'cause they considered her to be showing preferential treatment to Clexa shippers over Bellarkers (dat entitlement).
 

Jason talked the most during the panel and really telling when asked about The Trevor project... If he thinks it is so great why hasn't he donated? Devon Bostick, numerous TV critics, writers affiliated with other shows, and even agents have donated. Yet he and Warner Brothers (such a subtle name drop there Jason) really support it!!!1

Another thing he claims not being very good at press, but notice how he totally controls the narrative and everything. He could be a politician with the way he does that shit.
 

No filming was allowed but some fans still filmed using Periscope
Part 1: (Spoiler warning in this as they do show a fair chunk of episode 9)
https://www.periscope.tv/caroline_belle/1rmxPVwqAkmGN
Part 2:
https://www.periscope.tv/caroline_belle/1YpJkMaVpMwKj

I'm really tired of the justification of Bellamy's action that they are trying to push. It is the equivalent of white people going "I've had like a dozen experiences with black people and most of them been bad. So yeah all black people are bad". Of course here Bellamy commits genocide and later on goes out to murder kids and disabled people so they can take over their homes/lands. The constant attempts at trying to present this blatant xenophobic view that is racially loaded as some big grey area/moral conundrum is disgusting and insulting. I would say I don't get how the writers could be so blind to this, but after the Lexa mess I have zero expectations of them understanding any socially complex matter.

Funny thing is some people predicted 95% of what was shown of episode 9 when the S3 trailer was released, and huge chunks of fandom then came to same conclusion after 3x04. 

Specifically Ontari killing the kids and aiming to become the Commander. But a lot of people coupled that with theories that included Lexa being somehow alive but temporarily out of action or somehow disposed because thanks to the writers... Lexa couldn't be dead already could she? It can't be Lexa's throne Ontari is sitting on could it ? It can't be Lexa's body Clarke is crying over could it? Lmao. The writers truly managed to pull the wool down.

Edited by Gabe Torres
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

 

I'm really tired of the justification of Bellamy's action that they are trying to push. It is the equivalent of white people going "I've had like a dozen experiences with black people and most of them been bad. So yeah all black people are bad". Of course here Bellamy commits genocide and later on goes out to murder kids and disabled people so they can take over their homes/lands. The constant attempts at trying to present this blatant xenophobic view that is racially loaded as some big grey area/moral conundrum is disgusting and insulting.

 

Killing envoys and targeting civilians are universally recognised as atrocities. You can write a story about someone fighting a regime as reprehensible as say the Nazis and these acts would still be considered vile. So even without the obvious racial undertones, Bellamy's arc would still be riddled with unfortunate implications. But apparently the writers have a real fetish for grim-dark stories, only with a hefty plot armour for certain characters because it wouldn't be realistic to have characters be punished for small matters like cold-blooded massacres, right? If you push for peace, though, you get killed, sometimes after being character assassinated first (see Finn). Sure, it's boring if the lofty ideas to always win in the end and people who champion them to always survive but I find the opposite extreme just as boring and implausible. The 100 isn't yet in that extreme end of the spectrum but it's edging ever closer.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

CooperTV aren't you misrepresenting things? Finn murdered 18 innocent people because he went crazy and paranoid. Lexa betrayed Clarke in favor of saving hundreds of her own people. Context matters and so does motivation, as it breeds understanding and possible reconciliation. That is part of what enabled Clarke to still fall for Lexa as she understood her actions, and as also shown on screen when given the choice between her allies and her own people she would chose her own. This was even more so emphasized by it being said out loud in 3x03. Also lets be real, Clarke been real quick at forgiving other people like Bellamy that tried to kill everyone on the Ark, and his reasons for that were utter selfish with no redeeming factor.

 

Finn faced a death penalty for his massacre based on Grounder Justice system, where the Sky People system had completely acquitted him. It was all the Grounders that wanted him dead, and it was explicitly stated on screen that there was no way Lexa could enable Finn to live as her own people would turn on her and "get rid of her" as she would be perceived as weak.

 

It is nonsense to say that "Clarke killed her true love because Lexa wanted him dead" as Lexa didn't make Clarke kill Finn. That was Clarke's choice and to present it otherwise is the rob her of agency and ignore canon. Unless I missed the part where Lexa threatened Clarke into killing Finn... What I saw was Clarke choosing to kill Finn so he could have as pain-free as possible death, and Lexa allowing Clarke to get away with it afterwards when the Grounders wanted to attack Clarke for - in their mind - undermining and robbing them of justice. The true love is also Eliza Taylor speaking from what she considers to be Clarke's perspective based on her mindset at that time. That is what she often does when asking to give opinions on story lines, and the quote you took is before S3 was ever made. Hell it is before 2x09 aired. At that time they haven't even shot 2x14 if I remember right.

 

Killing envoys and targeting civilians are universally recognised as atrocities. You can write a story about someone fighting a regime as reprehensible as say the Nazis and these acts would still be considered vile. So even without the obvious racial undertones, Bellamy's arc would still be riddled with unfortunate implications. But apparently the writers have a real fetish for grim-dark stories, only with a hefty plot armour for certain characters because it wouldn't be realistic to have characters be punished for small matters like cold-blooded massacres, right? If you push for peace, though, you get killed, sometimes after being character assassinated first (see Finn). Sure, it's boring if the lofty ideas to always win in the end and people who champion them to always survive but I find the opposite extreme just as boring and implausible. The 100 isn't yet in that extreme end of the spectrum but it's edging ever closer.

 

You are 100% right. It is a massive point of frustration that the show tries to not quite admit that because it is Bellamy that did these things. Also that the show is forgetting there needs to be some hope instead of just constant losing for the side or person that tries to do right. Now I can watch shows that are about bad guys, but this show isn't like those. It is one that at times does a really good job at looking at morally and ethically complex matters and themes, but then there is this. Reading interviews and also that con, it makes it quite clear that the writers are completely blind to how horrifying those actions are. They are atrocities no matter how you view the "enemy" or just how much man pain a character is in. The motivation is also causing a lot of discomfort or straight up anger from PoC's and Muslim fans. My favorite person (whom is a WoC) that analysis the 100 threw in the towel around episode 5, with the finale straw being Rothenberg trying to claim it wasn't genocide what Bellamy and his buddies did to the Grounders despite people straight-out throwing the Geneva convention definition at his ass.

 

One can hope the last episode was the darkest one and things will start looking up, but everything is such an utter mess be it plot-wise or character-wise that it will likely be very underwhelming.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

The panel was just as messy as I expected. I'm genuinely amazed at how badly they're handling this. Someone needs to hire some PR for them.

On a slightly lighter note, one of my favourite Wondercon bits was from an individual interview with Bob M. The interviewer asked him about Bellamy and Raven and his face lit up but she said she misspoke and meant to ask him about Bellamy/Clarke and he was significantly less happy about that. I wish I could find the video again because it made me laugh. He is so not there for that particular ship.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

What's so interesting about this whole PR mess is that much of it goes back to the writers, staff writers just as much as Rothenberg himself, being incredibly active and involved in social media. Not only Twitter or Facebook, but also message boards or platforms like Tumblr. But at the same time they seem to have no real understanding how these things work or how fandom operates. At WonderCon Rothenberg claimed (I think it was even part of his rehearsed little speech about the Lexa issue) he wasn't fully aware of the "bury your gays" trope and how much Lexa's death mirrored Tara's on BtVS. That never sounded plausible to begin with, but the fandom was so quick to compile a very long, very detailed list of posts that have been made by Rothenberg himself and his staff writers about BtVS and how it influenced their writing, the tropes it played into, and how the details of Lexa's death were discussed in the writers room. I just don't get what these people are thinking. That no one cares what they said a couple of months ago? You don't lie about something like that when it's so very, very easy to call you out on it. Yet they keep doing it. They seriously need PR training. But then again whoever's running the show's official Tumblr account apparently spoiled one of the major reveals of last night's episode before it even aired so... CW is not handling things all that well either.

 

 

I wish I could find the video again because it made me laugh. He is so not there for that particular ship.

I only saw gifs of that, but yeah... had the same impression. And neither is Eliza Taylor, going by her interviews this season. I don't blame them. The dynamic has a certain amount of potential on a platonic level, but as a romance it just seems incredibly generic, a story that's literally been done a million times before, and doesn't support any sense of coherent, personal growth for either one of them as individual characters at this point. Not that this has ever stopped this show before. But as either one of the two actors, I could think of about three dozen other potential stories that I'd be more interested in for my character than pairing those two up as a romantic ship, too.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

CooperTV aren't you misrepresenting things? Finn murdered 18 innocent people because he went crazy and paranoid. Lexa betrayed Clarke in favor of saving hundreds of her own people. Context matters and so does motivation, as it breeds understanding and possible reconciliation. That is part of what enabled Clarke to still fall for Lexa as she understood her actions, and as also shown on screen when given the choice between her allies and her own people she would chose her own. This was even more so emphasized by it being said out loud in 3x03. Also lets be real, Clarke been real quick at forgiving other people like Bellamy that tried to kill everyone on the Ark, and his reasons for that were utter selfish with no redeeming factor.

Whitewashing everything Lexa did will never actually change what this character did in the show, no matter how her fans of JRoth want to think otherwise. Noone on this is perfect, and pretend like Lexa was an exception is really really misinterpreting her character.

 

But we were talking about failed YA tropes, and I guess trying to kiss girl whos boyfriend you ordered to kill the other day is a fair game. Damon Salvatore even killed Elena's brother that one time, and he was still the love of her life. *shrugs*

Edited by CooperTV

Share this post


Link to post

 

Whitewashing everything Lexa did will never actually change what this character did in the show, no matter how her fans of JRoth want to think otherwise. Noone on this is perfect, and pretend like Lexa was an exception is really really misinterpreting her character.

 

Who exactly is pretending that Lexa is perfect? I don't see anyone doing that in this thread. Seems like you are arguing against a convenient strawman.

 

Also, as mentioned above, Clarke has forgiven other people about as quickly and for arguably worse things, so it's not like her character underwent a radical change to make it possible for Clarke/Lexa to happen. Did I find it rushed and not entirely convincing? I sure did but Clarke not blaming Lexa for Finn's death is entirely in character for her.  She forgave her mother for causing her father's dead, after all. She forgave Bellamy, Murphy, Kane, Titus, etc. The grounders would have demanded Finn's death regardless if their leader was Lexa or anybody else. Lexa allowed Clarke to put Finn out of his misery quickly. I haven't watched The Vampire Diaries but from what I have read it sure sounds like Damon killed Elena's brother for shits and giggles. If that's the case you are comparing apples and oranges, really. Might as well get indignant on Lexa's behalf for hooking up with a mass murderer like Clarke - that is if you ignore the context completely as you seem to be doing with Finn's execution.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

 

larke has forgiven other people about as quickly and for arguably worse things,

 

She didn't have sex with them two days later though. And Lexa's betrayal was worse because it was done after she put the moves on Clarke romantically. Finn did a fucked up thing but he didn't do a fucked up thing TO Clarke, in his own mind he did it FOR Clarke. Same with Bellamy, Bellamy did a fucked up thing (throwing the radio in the lake) and because he had utility to the 100 survival going forward she forgave him. 

 

Politically I understand why she made peace with Lexa and Grounders, personally I find it bullshit she moved past the personal betrayal enough to bang her five minutes (relatively in show time) later.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Politically I understand why she made peace with Lexa and Grounders, personally I find it bullshit she moved past the personal betrayal enough to bang her five minutes (relatively in show time) later.

 

As I said, Clarke/Lexa was a rushed storyline, so I am not disputing that. The way I see it, Clarke moved past Lexa's betrayal primarily because if the roles were reversed she would have probably done what Lexa did. The two of them talked about their duty to their people over and over and over and their actions backed their words. Once Skaikru joined the coalition Clarke had no reason to think Lexa would be anything but devoted to her or that she would treat Skakru unfairly. Sure, Kane and Abby agreed to join said coalition way too quickly and easily but that's a different matter.

 

 

She didn't have sex with them two days later though. And Lexa's betrayal was worse because it was done after she put the moves on Clarke romantically. Finn did a fucked up thing but he didn't do a fucked up thing TO Clarke, in his own mind he did it FOR Clarke.

 

The fact that Finn thought he was murdering non-combatants for Clarke isn't really a reason for her to view his actions as any more acceptable than if he were murdering for say Raven or the lulz.

 

 

Same with Bellamy, Bellamy did a fucked up thing (throwing the radio in the lake) and because he had utility to the 100 survival going forward she forgave him.

 

Clarke doesn't treat Bellamy as someone whom she has forgiven only because he could be useful, though. Him destroying the radio might not have technically been intended to harm Clarke but in the long run it very nearly led to the deaths of everyone on the Ark which was probably going to be followed by the eventual deaths of the hundred themselves. And he did it for a completely selfish reason. In fact, come to think of it, it was in a way the opposite of what Lexa did at Mt. Weather - she could have decided that staying in Clarke's good books was worth the deaths of hundreds of people and pressed on with the attack. Mind you, I have no clue why Lexa didn't press on once the captive grounders were released but the point is Clarke has forgiven people for some horrible things, often done for selfish reasons. Why shouldn't she forgive Lexa?

Edited by Jack Shaftoe
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I follow quite a few TV critics on Twitter and almost amusing how angry they are with this show. So many of them praised the heck out of it during the hiatus and now they are watching it fall apart spectacularly in half a season. In fact, Mo Ryan (from Variety) and Ryan McGee actually voiced their concerns on their podcast before the season began after they had watched the first 4 episodes. Their worry over the terrible Pike/Bellamy storyline affecting the other major plots ended up being spot on.

 

The last show I remember falling off so badly was Glee but that show started off good and then completely lost the plot whereas this show started off bad, found some good to great middle ground, and now seems to be driving full steam off a cliff. Actually wait...Heroes fell off pretty badly as well didn't it?

Edited by kdm07

Share this post


Link to post

Afterbuzz TV interview with Ricky Whittle. He sings the praises of the cast, crew, and execs at CW. But reads Rothenberg for filth.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Quick note: why is it that Bellamy/Jasper get to express their grief in incredibly self-destructive (and mass murdering) ways but Clarke has to "suck it up"? Does anyone know the reasoning behind that?

Share this post


Link to post
why is it that Bellamy/Jasper get to express their grief in incredibly self-destructive (and mass murdering) ways but Clarke has to "suck it up"? Does anyone know the reasoning behind that?

 

This tumblr post expresses the same sentiments, extending the question also to other female characters on the show who have suffered significant losses (Abby, Raven, and now Octavia - although we haven't seen yet how Octavia will respond) and suggesting that it's a pretty gendered thing.  The thing is, I do like to see characters face challenges and, yes, suffer - to a degree.  But there needs to be some respite from the grimness of brutality and heartbreak, some hope.  And as I've commented elsewhere, the AI storyline is *not* doing it for me.

 

Afterbuzz TV interview with Ricky Whittle. He sings the praises of the cast, crew, and execs at CW. But reads Rothenberg for filth.

 

Thanks - that's a long interview which I didn't listen to, but here's Zap2it's report about it.  I thought Whittle made a good point about how Lincoln's execution was not just a poor way for that character to go out, but also flattens out Pike (even more) in terms of villainry.  I wonder what kind of storyline Rothenberg originally had planned for Lincoln?  Whether it was in Arkadia or would've involved him in Polis/more Grounder clan interactions somehow. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Quick note: why is it that Bellamy/Jasper get to express their grief in incredibly self-destructive (and mass murdering) ways but Clarke has to "suck it up"? Does anyone know the reasoning behind that?

Why Raven's suffering doesn't exist and only white women feelings should matter? Why Octavia should express her grief through abusing her own brother? Why Clarke's suffering and tragic feelings over murdering women and children were more important for the half of the season that Bellamy's or Jasper's?

 

I don't know. Do you?

Edited by CooperTV
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Why Raven's suffering doesn't exist and only white women feelings should matter? Why Octavia should express her grief through abusing her own brother? Why Clarke's suffering and tragic feelings over murdering women and children were more important for the half of the season that Bellamy's or Jasper's?

 

I don't know. Do you?

 

I mentioned Clarke because she's my favourite character, not Raven. If Raven was my favourite character I would've put her forward as the example. As for the thinly veiled insult of me only caring about a white woman, I'm a black male who doesn't have time to trade back and forths with you over this.

 

Have a great weekend!

Edited by kdm07
  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post

Wow, and that's how you appropriately respond to something like this. Good job, Grillo-Marxauch.

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe I'm getting cynical about this stuff, but that Forbes article didn't look any different from the rest of the party-line stuff, and fell way short of any sort of apology.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I honestly think Javi is actually one of the ones who gets it.  His wife, Sara Baker Grillo, co-produced a TV show called Her Story, which (from its IMDB page) "Looks inside the dating lives of trans & queer women as they navigate the intersections of desire and identity" and he discussed it at length on his FB page, talking about how under-represented the LGBT community is on TV and how little shows like this one help.

 

IIRC, he was the first one to apologize too, answering the angered and hurt fans, while Rothenberg was nowhere to be found.

 

I have followed Javi since Lost and I think he's one of the good ones.

Edited by WearyTraveler
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe I'm getting cynical about this stuff, but that Forbes article didn't look any different from the rest of the party-line stuff, and fell way short of any sort of apology.

It was way better than an "I'm sorry".  Javi acknowledges the problem, accepts the hurt as valid, recognizes his own fault in this, has gone on to educate himself, and has challenged himself to do better.  It was significantly different from the party line of "character had to die, we care so little about our audience that we'd do it all the exact same again."

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I'd be more inclined to think JGM was genuine if he wasn't in charge of the Xena reboot. Whether or not it's fair, and whether or not he's genuine to some degree, I suspect the biggest part of his motivation is saying what he believes he needs to say to make sure a good chunk of the viewership for a rebooted Xena doesn't dismiss the show out of hand. Because let's be real, queer fans have always been and will continue to be a driving force for that show. I'm sure he saw the Xena reboot going up in smoke before his eyes when the responses to 3x07 started pouring in, and immediately started scrambling to do damage control.

 

Now, even if he's not genuine, it still makes him smarter than Rothenberg, because JGM is apparently smart enough to at least figure out what he ought to be saying, as opposed to Rothenberg, who stubbornly won't. But being smarter than Rothenberg is...not all that hard, I don't think.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Devon Bostick has landed a movie gig where he will star alongside with Tilda Swinton, Jake Gyllenhaal, Paul Dano and Steven Yeun.

 

http://www.showbizjunkies.com/news/okja-cast-details-plot/

 

Marie, Lindsey and Eliza have all individually landed movie gigs as well. Eliza's being properly "the biggest" due to the people involved (Lena Headey, Daniel Webber, Brett Rice and Ben Feldman). From a writing view got Cary Fukunaga executive producing (Beast of No nation and True Detective S1), Matt Michnovetz (24 tv series) and more.

 

Adina has signed on as (I think) main cast in another TV show as well. Unlike Underground, the article (going by memory because read it like 10 days ago) she will have a much larger role.

A lot more side projects or main ones from the 100 cast this year than ever before (including RW with American Gods). Bob also wanted to guest star on iZombie but got denied by Rothenberg&Co according to some folks.

 

Edited to add: Jared Josep (Miller) has joined Canadian show Saving Hope as a cast member as well.

Edited by Gabe Torres
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Not sure if this the right spot, but anyone know when Season 3 should be on Netflix?

Starting watching a month or so ago, and am almost through the first two seasons there only to find out that Hulu only has the five most recent (NOOOOO!!!!) and wondering how long I'll have to wait to see season 3. Fingers crossed it's shortly after the season airs and not next fall.

Edited by STOPSHOUTING

Share this post


Link to post

If the pattern holds, it probably won't show up on Netflix until Fall. Sorry! It usually shows up around the time it's released on DVD.

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

https://www.outerplaces.com/science-fiction/item/13017-how-did-the-100-become-the-poster-child-for-homophobia

Pretty much encapsulates my reaction to the fandom shitstorm (I had to stay way from these boards while s3 was airing).

Sure, the controversy was overblown as these things tend to be but this article isn't all that convincing. Firstly, it doesn't say a word for all the lies of Rothenberg and co on social media prior to the scandal. It also mentions that there are no characters who are safe on the 100 other than Lexa and maybe Raven. In what world does Raven has more of a plot armor than say Bellamy?

Quote

But this isn't what happened to Lexa. She didn't die because she was expendable, or because the writers thought the viewers wouldn't care too much. She died because A) Alycia Debnam-Carey needed to leave for Fear the Walking Dead, B) the writers knew that she was important enough that an occasional guest spot wouldn't make sense or be satisfying, and C) it was a natural and fitting end to her character. Heda's entire role in the show is built around the idea that she will die and someone else will take her place (much like the Slayer on Buffy, who also died in the original ending to her hero's arc).

What kind of argument is that? We are all going to die someday, so using this logic any and all characters need to be killed off? How exactly is Buffy comparable? There is a world of difference between killing a character off midway through the show and killing a character in the (not really) final episode. or killing them only to promptly bring them back.

Quote

And although she did die from a stray bullet rather than in battle, she still died a hero's death, imparting the wisdom and legacy of "Blood will not have blood" to her people.

Would that be the same people who promptly decided to follow a (moronic) leader who literally killed all other candidates for the throne? If it weren't for the evil computer, Lexa's death would have been followed by a bloody war and most likely with the utter extermination of Skykru. And a hero's death? Are we watching the same show?

Quote

But that being said, the fact that too many shows are killing off their gay characters doesn't necessarily mean that Lexa's death was a clear example of the Bury Your Gays trope. As I've written before, it was definitely insensitive, considering the cultural context, for the writers to kill off the character right after her first love scene with Clarke. The fact that they were not aware enough of this trope to avoid invoking it is their responsibility, and it's a completely fair criticism.

IIRC, Rothenberg and co stated that they knew about this infamous trope, they just thought their writing would transcend it.

Quote

it doesn't negate the fact that the strongest characters on the show are all women,

I guess Kane must be a woman then.

Edited by Jack Shaftoe
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

I don't find that article particularly convincing either. As Jack Shaftoe already explained, some of the arguments are weak at best and bordering on nonsensical at worst.

Quote

It can't be inherently offensive to kill off gay characters, since killing off a character after a genuine multi-season arc is exactly what writers do with straight white male characters. 

In what universe? It's rather telling, to me, to see that the author didn't use any examples to back up this assertion. It doesn't ring true to me, based on my experience as an avid fan of scripted drama television in general, and The 100 provides numerous examples of straight male characters being wrapped in various layers of plot armour while women, regardless of their sexuality, are getting a very different treatment as well. Jasper survived a friggin' spear to the chest in season 1, the same ordeal used to kill Queen Nia this year, and Rothenberg decided that it's his death that would have been "too dark" in season 3, making him change his mind about killing Jasper again. Bob Morley isn't white, but Bellamy's plot armour doesn't even need further explaining - the show speaks for itself on that level - and I really don't get where the idea comes from that Raven of all people is supposedly safer than he is either. Roan magically survived a rather fatal looking gun shot wound because the actor suddenly became more available to The 100 again while the Ontari character was assassinated and mutilated on more than one level. And that list goes on...

 

Quote

The response to Lexa's death was also the result of some unfortunate instances on social media, which made it appear that the show was queer-baiting.

It didn't only "appear" that way. The show and its writers went out of their way to court and, towards the end, flat out lie to a young, lesbian/bisexual audience. Any article that tries to downplay that very fact, all while Rothenberg's social media posts/interviews and undisputable evidence of some of his writers courting this particular fanbase by invading their spaces on a lesbian message board and sites like tumblr is still out there and easy to find, already loses credit with me.

 

Quote

If fans had this response to Lexa, it's partially as a result of mishandling, but it's primarily a problem with society in general and the fact that there's not enough representation. We can and should criticize The 100 for its missteps, but we shouldn't use them as a poster child for homophobia.

The discussion about the BYG trope isn't limited to The 100. It's moved well beyond that and lots of other, more popular shows have faced the backlash over killing off LGBT characters in a very tropish manner this season. But T100 sparked such an intense first reaction because Rothenberg and those involved readily accepted all the praise they got for their writing of LGBT/minority characters in season 2/early season 3 and promised time and again to avoid stereotypes, claiming they're aware of the harm tropes and (queer) baiting have caused in the past, and assuring vunerable audiences that they should trust them. Shawna Benson even told queer fans they should seek "professional help" if they still didn't trust The 100 and its writers long after 3x07 was in the can.

 

Quote

We should call them out for their mistakes, but not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Everyone's entitled to making their own decisions about whether or not they'll continue watching, obviously, but maybe the author should consider that this show's issues don't begin or end with Lexa/LGBT characters either? I'm sure for some viewers this particular aspect is the deal breaker, and that should be respected too, but it's neither the only major point of discussion they caused during s3, nor is the show creatively unaffected by some of the things that went down bts.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

I'm late to this party and discovered this show only recently, so I thought I'd see what this forum had to say about it. Whew.

While I can't say I enjoyed season three as much as one and two, I am surprised by how much the Internet lost its mind over Lexa being killed off. Like most people, I loved Lexa from the start, and she and Clarke together were fantastic. They were truly equals, and neither of them has another equal on the show so the loss really stings. But Lexa seemed like a goner from the moment she fell for Clarke. "Love is weakness," that's what she believed. Her power was that she did it anyway, but clearly one of them had to die. And since Clarke is the lead and Alycia got another job, Lexa had to go. The trope talk sounds to me like people looking for external melodrama that isn't there. Plus, Lexa wasn't the only badass LGBTQ gal on the show. Clarke is still here, and if she can ever get over losing Lexa, I imagine she'll find another girl to love, though I don't know that she'll find another equal, which, of course, makes it all the more tragic. I guess the showrunner could write her one, however...

Edited by madam magpie
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×