# Hell on Wheels - Season 3 all eps spoilers welcome



## sieglinde (Aug 11, 2002)

I haven't watched all the episodes yet but this show is continuing to be interesting. I love the fact the Swede is lurking about with the Mormon family and I fear for them.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

sieglinde said:


> I haven't watched all the episodes yet but this show is continuing to be interesting. I love the fact the Swede is lurking about with the Mormon family and I fear for them.


Are the rules of this thread that we can reveal, without spoiler tags, anything that has happened up to the current episode? If so, there is a huge spoiler in regards to your comment about the Swede.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Steveknj said:


> Are the rules of this thread that we can reveal, without spoiler tags, anything that has happened up to the current episode? If so, there is a huge spoiler in regards to your comment about the Swede.


Her statement about the Swede, in itself, is not a spoiler. But, yes, someone could comment here with a major spoiler for her. I don't know why she would start this thread, inviting spoilers, having NOT seen all the eps up to this point...


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Bierboy said:


> Her statement about the Swede, in itself, is not a spoiler. But, yes, someone could comment here with a major spoiler for her. I don't know why she would start this thread, inviting spoilers, having NOT seen all the eps up to this point...


That's why I am going to refrain from spoiling it, even though the thread rules as laid out by her, allow it.


----------



## VegasVic (Nov 22, 2002)

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=507526


----------



## JLucPicard (Jul 8, 2004)

I was just going to open a "Season 3 Discussion" thread where people could discuss the show without spoiling the "Anyone still watching" thread until I saw that *sieglinde* already had (thank you, by the way!). I am, in fact, still one episode behind myself, but my opinion is that the regular forum rules would apply in this thread and discussion of all episodes aired is fair game.

If I jump in early and something gets spoiled for me, that's on me at this point.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

I'm too confused to figure out which thread to read/post in right now...


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

The Swede needs killin'

Doo Rant needs killin'

What are the odds that US Grant would show up?


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

netringer said:


> The Swede needs killin'
> 
> Doo Rant needs killin'


The brother of that guy who Bohannan killed needs killin'

Oh, wait.


----------



## sieglinde (Aug 11, 2002)

Yeah, I don't mind spoilers. I have caught up. Oh boy what is with the killing of the Mormon family? Is the boy alive?


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

sieglinde said:


> Yeah, I don't mind spoilers. I have caught up. Oh boy what is with the killing of the Mormon family? Is the boy alive?


Last we saw, he was alive...how long he remains so is yet to be seen...


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Is the kid who "saved" Bohannon the one who escaped the Swede? I'm guessing it is...


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Bierboy said:


> Is the kid who "saved" Bohannon the one who escaped the Swede? I'm guessing it is...


Yes. That was all his family's stuff that the Swede unloaded from the wagon. The boy was playing that tune on their piano.

The Swede would have been smarter to have abandoned the wagon completely and come riding in on a horse. That would have been more consistent with his story of having been attacked by Indians.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

It is too bad they did not know that if they just boiled their water, it would probably have been safe to drink.

Louis Pasteur certainly knew, by that time, that boiling water would make it safe to drink. But perhaps it was not yet commonly known to laymen.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

john4200 said:


> Yes. That was all his family's stuff that the Swede unloaded from the wagon. The boy was playing that tune on their piano.
> 
> The Swede would have been smarter to have abandoned the wagon completely and come riding in on a horse. That would have been more consistent with his story of having been attacked by Indians.


Now we know the Swede's tie in with railroad gang. The boy is going to rat him out at some point.

I thought this was a strong episode. You know that baby daddy is going to be none too happy that his child is heading east.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Steveknj said:


> Now we know the Swede's tie in with railroad gang. The boy is going to rat him out at some point.
> 
> I thought this was a strong episode. You know that baby daddy is going to be none too happy that his child is heading east.


Except that he's NOT the baby's daddy...


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Bierboy said:


> Except that he's NOT the baby's daddy...


Adoptionist swine!

Or is that stepist swine? Whatever. Swine!


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Adoptionist swine!
> 
> Or is that stepist swine? Whatever. Swine!


Why, thank you!


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Right, I forgot, you're in Iowa. I guess calling somebody swine in Iowa is like calling somebody cheese in Wisconsin, or cattle in India.

How does one insult people in Iowa? For future reference.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> How does one insult people in Iowa? For future reference.


Corny? Oh, wait...


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Right, I forgot, you're in Iowa. I guess calling somebody swine in Iowa is like calling somebody cheese in Wisconsin, or cattle in India...


Actually, I'm on the Illinois side of the river....now you've REALLY insulted me...


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Bierboy said:


> Actually, I'm on the Illinois side of the river....now you've REALLY insulted me...


Can you see Iowa from your house?

If so, have you considered running for Vice President?


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Can you see Iowa from your house?


Not quite...



Rob Helmerichs said:


> If so, have you considered running for Vice President?


But I've inhaled....


----------



## DouglasPHill (Feb 10, 2005)

This show does not hesitate to kill off main characters. Glad to see what appears to be love developing between our hero and the preacher girl. And what was Sean about to say about his brother?


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

DouglasPHill said:


> This show does not hesitate to kill off main characters. Glad to see what appears to be love developing between our hero and the preacher girl. And what was Sean about to say about his brother?


On Bohanan and the preacher girl, I just don't get the connection, but I guess they had to find someone for his love interest (I thought it would be the reporter, but I guess not). I think Sean was shot by his brother so he WOULDN'T tell the secret. If I were guessing I'm betting his brother was the one who actually killed the girls and not Sean, but it was Sean's actions that made killing them "necessary".

I'm really liking this season. The show grows on my more and more.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

Steveknj said:


> On Bohanan and the preacher girl, I just don't get the connection, but I guess they had to find someone for his love interest *(I thought it would be the reporter, but I guess not).* I think Sean was shot by his brother so he WOULDN'T tell the secret. If I were guessing I'm betting his brother was the one who actually killed the girls and not Sean, but it was Sean's actions that made killing them "necessary".
> 
> I'm really liking this season. The show grows on my more and more.


It was mentioned that the reporter has other interests, which makes Eva's sleepover more intriguing from a dramatic standpoint.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

dianebrat said:


> It was mentioned that the reporter has other interests, which makes Eva's sleepover more intriguing from a dramatic standpoint.


Yes, which is why it didn't happen. I did find it interesting that they'd throw that kind of thing into the mix for this show.

And there seems SO much more to happen that it seems it cannot be done in two episodes. I am thinking the season is going to HAVE to end with some sort of confrontation with the Swede and Bohanan.

Any word on a renewal for this show?


----------



## fmowry (Apr 30, 2002)

The love interest is because there are only two women who aren't whores on the show, and one likes the whores.  Really liking this season and didn't see the brothers drama ending like that. I thought that arc was sort of over with the burning of the body.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

But we still don't really know which of the brothers was the Boston killer. The shooter didn't let the other finish sentence.

Eva should have simply said that she sent her baby away temporarily to keep it from getting cholera. But then it was probably breast fed and never drank the water.


----------



## fmowry (Apr 30, 2002)

Beryl said:


> But we still don't really know which of the brothers was the Boston killer. The shooter didn't let the other finish sentence.
> 
> Eva should have simply said that she sent her baby away temporarily to keep it from getting cholera. But then it was probably breast fed and never drank the water.


Sure we do. The shooter only shot to keep his secret because the other brother was going to spill the beans.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Not sure about any "love interest" between Bohannon and Ruth; when the season began there was an interview with the actor who portrays Bohannon, and he clearly stated there would be no love interest this season because Bohannon just had no time with everything going on. Now that could have been a misdirection, but he seemed pretty clear in the interview that there would be no love interest for him this season.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

That should really be in spoiler tags, since it relies on inside information that is not part of the actual show.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

john4200 said:


> That should really be in spoiler tags, since it relies on inside information that is not part of the actual show.


Did you even LOOK at the title of this thread?


----------



## fmowry (Apr 30, 2002)

Bierboy said:


> Did you even LOOK at the title of this thread?


If the article said Bohannon gets killed in the series finale would you think that was fair game?

"Spoilers welcome" means spoilers having happened in the shows up to and through the current episode, not outside information.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

For crying out loud...I'm sorry I SPOILED your day...


----------



## DouglasPHill (Feb 10, 2005)

The title says spoilers, I don't see the problem.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

DouglasPHill said:


> The title says spoilers, I don't see the problem.


Spoilers in the subject means things that already happened in the show. Any inside information about what will happen in future episodes is a spoiler for future episodes, and not allowed (unless in spoiler tags).

fmowry explains it concisely in his post


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Bierboy said:


> For crying out loud...I'm sorry I SPOILED your day...


Don't worry about apologizing, but you should go back and fix your post with spoiler tags.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

john4200 said:


> Any inside information about what will happen in future episodes is a spoiler for future episodes, and not allowed (unless in spoiler tags).


I think most readers enjoy the thread after seeing the latest episode. I don't mind reading a *guess* about something that might happen in the future without a spoiler tag but not something they *know* about an unaired episode.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

john4200 said:


> Spoilers in the subject means things that already happened in the show. Any inside information about what will happen in future episodes is a spoiler for future episodes, and not allowed (unless in spoiler tags).


Says who? The spoiler police?



john4200 said:


> Don't worry about apologizing, but you should go back and fix your post with spoiler tags.


Ain't gonna happen....go ahead and report me to the mods...


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Bierboy said:


> Says who? The spoiler police?


The rules of the forum.

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=3471424#post3471424



> Previews of Next Week and other spoilers:
> Anything shown on the previews of next week is considered a spoiler on this forum, and must be tagged as such, using spoiler tags. (See below for instructions.) Any spoiler information from other sources, such as articles, websites, webisodes, personal friendships with producers, etc., must also be tagged.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Bierboy said:


> ...go ahead and report me to the mods...


Done.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Bierboy said:


> If you seriously consider someone's love interest a "spoiler" than you've got WAY too much time on your hands...plus you're STILL ignoring the title of this thread which *invited* spoilers.


This is not a difficult concept. Spoilers in the subject does not mean that you are allowed spoilers for future unaired episodes.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

john4200 said:


> This is not a difficult concept. Spoilers in the subject does not mean that you are allowed spoilers for future unaired episodes.


Who says that anything I said will be in a future episode? Man you are REALLY grasping at straws here...


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

fmowry said:


> ..."Spoilers welcome" means spoilers having happened in the shows up to and through the current episode, not outside information.


How the heck do you know what the thread creator wanted?


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Bierboy said:


> Who says that anything I said will be in a future episode?


You quoted a source who is likely to have inside information on what will happen in future unaired episodes. That is addressed in the forum rules -- it must be spoiler tagged.

I notice you did not respond to fmowry's main point. What if someone in the production said that Bohannan was going to die in the season finale. Are you seriously claiming that is not something that should be spoiler tagged? Because what you posted is in the same class of spoiler, only different in degree (and possibly not even that, since some people consider the resolution of romantic tension to be very important).


----------



## DouglasPHill (Feb 10, 2005)

Spoiler



hmmmm, looks like the safest policy is to put everything inside a spoiler tag and then the spoiler police can move on.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

DouglasPHill said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> hmmmm, looks like the safest policy is to put everything inside a spoiler tag and then the spoiler police can move on.





Spoiler



Yes.


----------



## VegasVic (Nov 22, 2002)

Still enjoying the show, I wish it was 12 eps instead of 10.


----------



## DouglasPHill (Feb 10, 2005)

Spoiler



I'd go for 20 something episodes like the good old days.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

fmowry said:


> Sure we do. The shooter only shot to keep his secret because the other brother was going to spill the beans.


It seemed that way until I watched the scene again. The brother doing the shooting may have been a lot more involved in those Boston murders than helping to cover them up.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

DouglasPHill said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I'd go for 20 something episodes like the good old days.





Spoiler



Yes.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Bierboy said:


> Is the kid who "saved" Bohannon the one who escaped the Swede? I'm guessing it is...





Steveknj said:


> Now we know the Swede's tie in with railroad gang. The boy is going to rat him out at some point.


Yep. The drama is going to be if The Swede spots them before the kid or Bohannon spot the Swede.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

John, go away or I'll post more pictures of older women.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

netringer said:


> John, go away or I'll post more pictures of older women.


Huh? Post away...


----------



## DouglasPHill (Feb 10, 2005)

Spoiler



Good ep was really hoping for some hanky panky with Bohannon and the preacher girl


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

DouglasPHill said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Good ep was really hoping for some hanky panky with Bohannon and the preacher girl


Maybe next season.....


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Bohannon really is an old time Western hero. Brooding quiet type, dark past, quick shot, and always beats the big baddie. I really look forward to this show every week. I thought this was really a pretty good season. Any word on renewal? I'm so hoping that next week isn't a series finale.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Steveknj said:


> Bohannon really is an old time Western hero. Brooding quiet type, dark past, quick shot, and always beats the big baddie. I really look forward to this show every week. I thought this was really a pretty good season. Any word on renewal? I'm so hoping that next week isn't a series finale.


Yeah, I meant to add to my previous post "...if there is one". I certainly hope so. Haven't heard/read any news, though...


----------



## nyny523 (Oct 31, 2003)

I really enjoy this show.

And Anson Mount is a HOTTIE!!! :up:


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

nyny523 said:


> I really enjoy this show. And Anson Mount is a HOTTIE!!! :up:


Oh yes!! With Anson's fine azz and Common, we have serious eye-candy. Anson is finer with the mustache, IMO.


----------



## nyny523 (Oct 31, 2003)

Beryl said:


> Oh yes!! With Anson's fine azz and Common, we have serious eye-candy. Anson is finer with the mustache, IMO.


And Common has some SERIOUS abs!

Both quite yummy.

Yes indeed...


----------



## Jonathan_S (Oct 23, 2001)

john4200 said:


> It is too bad they did not know that if they just boiled their water, it would probably have been safe to drink.
> 
> Louis Pasteur certainly knew, by that time, that boiling water would make it safe to drink. But perhaps it was not yet commonly known to laymen.


The water in their tanks, yes boiling probably would have worked. But once those were drained I don't think you could make the water hole water safe by boiling.

That water appeared to have killed animals quickly enough that they died there at the water hole; which makes me think it's a chemical rather than biological contaminant. If so, well... you can't fix chemical contamination by boiling.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Jonathan_S said:


> The water in their tanks, yes boiling probably would have worked. But once those were drained I don't think you could make the water hole water safe by boiling.
> 
> That water appeared to have killed animals quickly enough that they died there at the water hole; which makes me think it's a chemical rather than biological contaminant. If so, well... you can't fix chemical contamination by boiling.


You realize I was talking about the water in their tanks, right? Bohannan had his men just throw that water away after the cholera was discovered and Bohannan saw a dead rat in one of the tanks.

I agree the water hole was not a good candidate, even for boiled water.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

nyny523 said:


> And Anson Mount is a HOTTIE!!! :up:


Came back to post after watching recorded Friday's Arsenio Hall Show where he was a guest. Anson brought plates of southern food (pork, greens, etc,) to share with Arsenio and Arsenio brought him bourbon. He didn't have his mustache on and he was still quite pleasant to behold. He talked about "porn" names and his is "Schroeder Pinewood" which isn't as provocative as his real name, IMO.

I'd never heard of this guy until Hell on Wheels but he has been acting for a while and was trained at my Mom's alma mater, Columbia U. IMO, he is one of those people who looks better with age.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Spoiler






Bierboy said:


> DouglasPHill said:
> 
> 
> > Good ep was really hoping for some hanky panky with Bohannon and the preacher girl
> ...








Spoiler



Ruth seems to have comes to terms just fine with her getting some from her Indian "brother."


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Beryl said:


> It seemed that way until I watched the scene again. The brother doing the shooting may have been a lot more involved in those Boston murders than helping to cover them up.


I think they're trying to have a mystery about which brother did the deed, but it looks to me like after the way his brother is talking to Ruth about it, Sean really was the psycho.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

netringer said:


> Ruth seems to have comes to terms just fine with her getting some from her Indian "brother."


How do you figure? She considers herself a fallen woman because of it.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

netringer said:


> I think they're trying to have a mystery about which brother did the deed, but it looks to me like after the way his brother is talking to Ruth about it, Sean really was the psycho.


Then why was Mickey so concerned about Sean not telling Ruth, so much so that he shot him just before he could explain about Mickey?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

john4200 said:


> Then why was Mickey so concerned about Sean not telling Ruth, so much so that he shot him just before he could explain about Mickey?


Yeah, I thought they made it about as clear as they could without having subtitles saying "Yes, he really did it."


----------



## nyny523 (Oct 31, 2003)

My take on the Mickey/Sean thing was that Sean did the murders, but Mickey helped him cover them up (dump the bodies, etc.).

If Sean confessed his part, Mickey would have hung with him. Mickey chose to stop him before he had the chance.

I thought it was pretty clear, especially after all the times Mickey told Sean he was ruining his life and to go away. mickey had enough of having to cover for his brother.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

john4200 said:


> Then why was Mickey so concerned about Sean not telling Ruth, so much so that he shot him just before he could explain about Mickey?


Clergy can't be compelled to testify, and Ruth wouldn't have said a thing anyway. Take it as face value that Mickey thought Ruth was about to be strangled by a flipping out Sean.


----------



## nyny523 (Oct 31, 2003)

netringer said:


> Clergy can't be compelled to testify, and Ruth wouldn't haver said a thing anyway. Take it as face value that Mickey thought Ruth was about to be strangled by a flipping out Sean.


Nope.

I'm telling you, Mickey was afraid Sean would take him down with him and had to shut him up!


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

nyny523 said:


> My take on the Mickey/Sean thing was that Sean did the murders, but Mickey helped him cover them up (dump the bodies, etc.).
> 
> If Sean confessed his part, Mickey would have hung with him. Mickey chose to stop him before he had the chance.


You could be right. But I got the impression that Sean was about to tell Ruth something that Mickey specifically did that was awful. So Mickey shot him before he could say it.

If it was only about cleaning up after Sean's mess, then Ruth would not have done anything to get Mickey in trouble (and the way Sean was starting to say it, it was not just about cleaning up after him), so Mickey would not care so much (if Sean were telling that lawman instead of Ruth, then maybe your explanation would fit better).


----------



## fmowry (Apr 30, 2002)

john4200 said:


> You could be right. But I got the impression that Sean was about to tell Ruth something that Mickey specifically did that was awful. So Mickey shot him before he could say it.
> 
> If it was only about cleaning up after Sean's mess, then Ruth would not have done anything to get Mickey in trouble (and the way Sean was starting to say it, it was not just about cleaning up after him), so Mickey would not care so much (if Sean were telling that lawman instead of Ruth, then maybe your explanation would fit better).


I'm with you. I thought it was pretty clear that Mickey shot Sean before he could tell Ruth that Mickey killed the women.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

fmowry said:


> I'm with you. I thought it was pretty clear that Mickey shot Sean before he could tell Ruth that Mickey killed the women.


Agreed...


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

nyny523 said:


> My take on the Mickey/Sean thing was that Sean did the murders, but Mickey helped him cover them up (dump the bodies, etc.).
> 
> If Sean confessed his part, Mickey would have hung with him. Mickey chose to stop him before he had the chance.
> 
> I thought it was pretty clear, especially after all the times Mickey told Sean he was ruining his life and to go away. mickey had enough of having to cover for his brother.


That fact that Mickey was so quick to shoot his brother makes me think he's capable enough to have shot the girls back in Boston too. So I'm not convinced that Sean was the only one to commit murder in Boston.


----------



## DouglasPHill (Feb 10, 2005)

Spoiler



All good theories but the writers could go whichever way they desire and there's no way to predict that.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

DouglasPHill said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> All good theories but the writers could go whichever way they desire and there's no way to predict that.


I don't think you need to spoiler that.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Steveknj said:


> I don't think you need to spoiler that.


He's making a political statement about spoilers.

See upthread.


----------



## DouglasPHill (Feb 10, 2005)

Yes, and probably just showing my ignorance. To me, if the title of the thread says spoilers welcome, then anything goes. Apparently there are different levels of allowed spoilers. I'm such a simple guy, I don't understand. Probably easiest to just block mr. spoiler police like I used to.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

DouglasPHill said:


> Yes, and probably just showing my ignorance. To me, if the title of the thread says spoilers welcome, then anything goes. Apparently there are different levels of allowed spoilers. I'm such a simple guy, I don't understand. Probably easiest to just block mr. spoiler police like I used to.


I skipped over the stuff not related to the show, so I missed it. While I agree with you to some extent, there's always been an accepted policy in this forum when discussion is in an episode or full season thread, the assumption is that anything not viewed but has been "leaked" or someone has inside knowledge, is still spoilerized. That said, I think if what is posted is "speculation" not based on any inside knowledge then I don't think tags are needed. For instance, if I said, "I speculate that Bohannon will eventually date the preacher girl", then I don't think tags are needed, but if I had read an article where the producers say that this will happen, then it should be tagged. It's just generally accepted practice here that we all try to abide by, title or no.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Steveknj said:


> I skipped over the stuff not related to the show, so I missed it. While I agree with you to some extent, there's always been an accepted policy in this forum when discussion is in an episode or full season thread, the assumption is that anything not viewed but has been "leaked" or someone has inside knowledge, is still spoilerized. That said, I think if what is posted is "speculation" not based on any inside knowledge then I don't think tags are needed. For instance, if I said, "I speculate that Bohannon will eventually date the preacher girl", then I don't think tags are needed, but if I had read an article where the producers say that this will happen, then it should be tagged. It's just generally accepted practice here that we all try to abide by, title or no.


Right. If the information is from an episode that has already aired, and it is being written in an episode thread or season thread, then it is technically *not* considered a spoiler (people add the word "spoiler" to the title, but that word is not necessary for threads that are titled as episode or season threads).

Information about future unaired episodes that comes from a source that has inside information (not just viewer speculation), such as from show writers, actors, or producers (or critics that have seen unaired episodes) -- that is a spoiler and the rules say that it should be spoiler tagged.


----------



## fmowry (Apr 30, 2002)

A bit disappointed in the latest episode with Bohannon's incredible shooting. And then him being knocked out instead of killed reminds me of the Austin Powers conversation:

Dr. Evil: Scott, I want you to meet daddy's nemesis, Austin Powers
Scott: What? Are you feeding him? Why don't you just kill him?
Dr. Evil: I have an even better idea: I'm going to place him in an easily escapable situation involving an overly elaborate and exotic death.
&#8212; Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery 


So Bohannon has almost been burnt at the stake, died from cholera, shot in the face. Lucky dude! 

Is this the last season?


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

fmowry said:


> ...So Bohannon has almost been burnt at the stake, died from cholera, shot in the face. Lucky dude!
> 
> Is this the last season?


It did hit me that Bohannon has been in more peril than Pauline, and he always gets out of it.

How about "I told you, 'a life for a life?'" So those 7 or so guys that got shot in Cheyenne don't count?

How 'bout the Mormons shooting the help with no problem but leaving Durant and Mrs. Parker tied up? Of course. They have higher billing, sillies.

The railroad has to be done soon. The crew is in Utah, getting awfully close to Promontory Point, right?


----------



## Edmund (Nov 8, 2002)

People are forgetting that along with women being killed, there were Boston Coppers as well, so Sean killed the girls, Mickey helping him clean it up killed the Coppers. That's how I read it.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Mickey did tell Durant that he could make bodies disappear.


----------



## Jonathan_S (Oct 23, 2001)

john4200 said:


> You realize I was talking about the water in their tanks, right? Bohannan had his men just throw that water away after the cholera was discovered and Bohannan saw a dead rat in one of the tanks.
> 
> I agree the water hole was not a good candidate, even for boiled water.


Actually I _wasn't_ sure which water you were referring to; that's why I covered both scenarios in my post. (I'd initially written it only thinking about the water hole and expanded it to cover the water in the tanks )



netringer said:


> Clergy can't be compelled to testify, and Ruth wouldn't have said a thing anyway. Take it as face value that Mickey thought Ruth was about to be strangled by a flipping out Sean.


I'd taken it as Mickey had "saved" Ruth's life by killing Sean when he did _only because_ Mickey would have killed them both if Sean had blabbed before he died.

"Isn't it great that I killed him to keep my secret before you knew it and I'd have had to kill you too?"


----------



## DouglasPHill (Feb 10, 2005)

john4200 said:


> Right. If the information is from an episode that has already aired, and it is being written in an episode thread or season thread, then it is technically *not* considered a spoiler (people add the word "spoiler" to the title, but that word is not necessary for threads that are titled as episode or season threads).
> 
> Information about future unaired episodes that comes from a source that has inside information (not just viewer speculation), such as from show writers, actors, or producers (or critics that have seen unaired episodes) -- that is a spoiler and the rules say that it should be spoiler tagged.


There you go again.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

DouglasPHill said:


> There you go again.


Hahaha.....wow....you said it. Interesting that my post which started his tirade is still there...after his threats.


----------



## fmowry (Apr 30, 2002)

This was in the Hell on Wheels wiki regarding Mickey and Sean. From the pilot.

I guess I'm wrong about who killed whom.

While living in Boston, Mickey and Sean had some trouble, though they do not speak of the incident without great reluctance, especially on Mickey's part. Once, when Sean pressed Mickey about Boston, he blurted "I didn't mean to kill her". ("Pilot", "A New Birth of Freedom", "Viva La Mexico")


----------



## fmowry (Apr 30, 2002)

netringer said:


> Mickey did tell Durant that he could make bodies disappear.


Didn't they make the German butcher they killed disappear?


----------



## goblue97 (May 12, 2005)

fmowry said:


> I'm with you. I thought it was pretty clear that Mickey shot Sean before he could tell Ruth that Mickey killed the women.


Totally agree. It was brought up in season one or two when Mickey said he was tired of cleaning up after Sean. To me, that's clearly a reference to the murders in Boston.


----------



## Beryl (Feb 22, 2009)

Meh on the finale. Too many loose ends for my taste but I hope it is renewed. 

When Psycho-Swede showed up as a Bishop, I wanted to hear Will Smith's voice say, "Oh Hell to the Nah!" I settled for hear my own voice say, "the devil is a lie" when he claimed to be anointed by God.

Irish brother is too creepy to be the town's mayor. 

I won't be pleased if Elam is actually dead. Maybe Common has another gig.


----------



## caslu (Jun 24, 2003)

Wow, that season finale was.... terrible, just awful.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Beryl said:


> Irish brother is too creepy to be the town's mayor.


And I think the creepy look he gave the hooker goes a long way towards settling the question of which brother murdered the women in Boston...

The finalé had the feeling of the writers throwing all the pieces up in the air, and when they start working on next season (assuming there is one) they'll worry about where they might land.


----------



## DouglasPHill (Feb 10, 2005)

Just like last season.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

DouglasPHill said:


> Just like last season.


Only last season I wondered what they had in mind. This season, I have no sense they have anything in mind.


----------



## fmowry (Apr 30, 2002)

Yeah, meh.


----------



## Big Deficit (Jul 8, 2003)

I've barely hung on this season and this series moved from a solid watch to a skip through when I have nothing else interesting to watch. I think this season, especially the finale killed this one off for me. Bring back Lilly from the dead and we'll talk.


----------



## fmowry (Apr 30, 2002)

Big Deficit said:


> I've barely hung on this season and this series moved from a solid watch to a skip through when I have nothing else interesting to watch. I think this season, especially the finale killed this one off for me. Bring back Lilly from the dead and we'll talk.


I thought this season was strong except for the finale. Much better than the rest of the westerns currently on TV.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

fmowry said:


> I thought this season was strong except for the finale. Much better than the rest of the westerns currently on TV.


I agree. They're not very good at season finalés, are they? Just beginnings, middles, and what the hell do we do nows?


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I agree. They're not very good at season finalés, are they? Just beginnings, middles, and what the hell do we do nows?


Me too.

It was not really a finale at all, was it? It seemed like almost any other episode. Did they even know they were supposed to make a season finale? Can you imagine if this is the last season and that turns out to be the series finale?


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

The only redeeming line: 
"What is that infernal noise? Somebody shoot that guy."
**BANG!**

The shocker was supposed to be Elam dying. _*yawn*_

I say the series is over.

The railroad is almost done anyway.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

netringer said:


> The only redeeming line:
> "What is that infernal noise? Somebody shoot that guy."
> **BANG!**


I did not like that. It seemed like they were going for slapstick comedy, which does not really fit with this show.


----------



## Edmund (Nov 8, 2002)

netringer said:


> The only redeeming line:
> "What is that infernal noise? Somebody shoot that guy."
> **BANG!**
> 
> ...


I loved that scene.


----------



## VegasVic (Nov 22, 2002)

Good season, not great finale. I'll be disappointed if the series ends this way.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

I agree with the gang here. The season was really good, but the finale, feh! I actually was ok with the Bohannan part, but as soon as Elam started wrestling with a bear, I was thinking "jump the shark" moment right there (or should we now say "wrestle the bear" instead of "jump the shark" now?).

I think Elam is gone, and I think they are, if there's another season, they are setting it up for the new black foreman "Psalm" to be the new Elam. 

Right now, if they just spun off the Bohannan vs. The Swede story line and forgot the rest, I'd be fine.

I loved the "Bang" scene. Yes it was a bit out of character for the show, but I think they did it well, where the cowboy pulled his gun slowly and shot the guy. It had Indiana Jones in the bazaar written all over it


----------



## nyny523 (Oct 31, 2003)

I agree with the majority here - good season, poor finale.

I really do hope this get renewed for another season - I like this show a lot!


----------



## DouglasPHill (Feb 10, 2005)

I just wish they did 20 episodes instead of 10 each season and just forget doing a special season ending show.


----------



## nyny523 (Oct 31, 2003)

DouglasPHill said:


> I just wish they did 20 episodes instead of 10 each season and just forget doing a special season ending show.


It doesn't even need to be "special".

But if you aren't sure if your show is being renewed, at least try to give us a little more closure. Or even a cliffhanger.

Here we got neither...


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

As I said, I think the Bohannan story was fine (I and I was guessing he was going to knock up that girl...I also thought she'd turn out to be a lot younger...she sure looks younger than almost 19). The Durant story was predictable, and the Elam story, was just ridiculous. There were so many better ways to handle that. Heck, it would have been better if the warriors killed him than a bear!!


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

I agree with everyone here; I liked the season, but the finale, meh. What's interesting about Naomi is that I searched and searched and couldn't find the birthdate of the actress who portrays her (Siobhan Williams)...

Also, I'm not convinced Elam is dead...


----------



## DouglasPHill (Feb 10, 2005)

Spoiler



My prediction next season: Bohannon's wife dies in childbirth or the Swede kills her and frames Bohannon. Lilly's twin sister comes out looking for Lilly.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

DouglasPHill said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> My prediction next season: Bohannon's wife dies in childbirth or the Swede kills her and frames Bohannon. Lilly's twin sister comes out looking for Lilly.


I agree with...


Spoiler



#1 prediction...#2 not so sure


----------



## Jeeters (Feb 25, 2003)

Bierboy said:


> I agree with everyone here; I liked the season, but the finale, meh. What's interesting about Naomi is that I searched and searched and couldn't find the birthdate of the actress who portrays her (Siobhan Williams)...


20 years old according to, and back when, this article on her was posted in March 2012.

http://www.avenuecalgary.com/articles/giddyup-with-siobhan-williams


----------



## Allanon (Nov 2, 2005)

I kept thinking that they were setting up a spin off. All the main characters seems to be settling down in or near Cheyenne. Mickey is running for Mayor, news paper lady has been offered a new job in town. Bohannan is living at the fort. Also, if Elam survives then he and Eva will probably have to stay in the town until he is healed. 

I wonder if they will have a Cheyenne spin off which resolves the current Bohannan situation and then next season Bohannan and a few other main characters continue with Hell on Wheels but a lot of the semi main characters stay in Cheyenne and continue with a spin off.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Allanon said:


> I kept thinking that they were setting up a spin off. All the main characters seems to be settling down in or near Cheyenne. Mickey is running for Mayor, news paper lady has been offered a new job in town. Bohannan is living at the fort. Also, if Elam survives then he and Eva will probably have to stay in the town until he is healed.
> 
> I wonder if they will have a Cheyenne spin off which resolves the current Bohannan situation and then next season Bohannan and a few other main characters continue with Hell on Wheels but a lot of the semi main characters stay in Cheyenne and continue with a spin off.


I would say unlikely. I don't think the ratings are good enough to warrant a spin off. There's no reason they couldn't do exactly as you say and use the same series title and keep the continuity.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Steveknj said:


> I would say unlikely. I don't think the ratings are good enough to warrant a spin off. There's no reason they couldn't do exactly as you say and use the same series title and keep the continuity.


Which would probably mean more sets, fewer locations, and lower cost...


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Allanon said:


> I kept thinking that they were setting up a spin off. All the main characters seems to be settling down in or near Cheyenne.
> 
> I wonder if they will have a Cheyenne spin off which resolves the current Bohannan situation and then next season Bohannan and a few other main characters continue with Hell on Wheels but a lot of the semi main characters stay in Cheyenne and continue with a spin off.


And then Brett Maverick and Wild Bill Hickock and Wyatt Earp and Billy the Kid and... show up.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Interesting take on the final ep from TV Guide....


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Bierboy said:


> Interesting take on the final ep from TV Guide....


Good article. It did seem it was more of an end of season than an end of series.

The Elam thing REALLY bugs me. He's one of the more likable characters and to be killed off the way he was (if he's dead) just seems WAY too arbitrary. It would have been better if he got killed by the native american scouts, or he gets killed in the Morman town (we know that the Mormons of that era were probably even less tolerable of black people than most groups. It just doesn't seem a "noble" enough end for him.


----------



## Jon J (Aug 23, 2000)

I think you'll see Common back next season.


----------



## bengalfreak (Oct 20, 2002)

fmowry said:


> I thought this season was strong except for the finale. Much better than the rest of the westerns currently on TV.


Really? I thought this season wandered thru the wilderness and never found much of anything. They've got me for about three eps next season. If it doesn't improve, I'll be done.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

If there is a next season. I liked this season other than the exorbitant amount of time setting up the Swede as the Mormon leader-imposter. That could have been done in MUCH less time...


----------



## fmowry (Apr 30, 2002)

bengalfreak said:


> Really? I thought this season wandered thru the wilderness and never found much of anything. They've got me for about three eps next season. If it doesn't improve, I'll be done.


Most people in this thread seem to agree.


----------



## Jeeters (Feb 25, 2003)

I thought this season was the best of the 3.


----------



## speedcouch (Oct 23, 2003)

It's been quite clear there's a new showrunner this season. Too touchy freely and farfetched for me. Was ridiculous that Bohannon stopped everything to go after Eva's baby. Even sillier that Elam would keep calling it his baby when it was clearly white. Bohannon and Ferguson's "fight night" with Indians and escaping execution was absurd. Bohannon marrying the Mormon girl even more ridiculous. Introduction of "cute kid"...

In other words, nearly everything was unbelievable...

Cheryl


----------



## bengalfreak (Oct 20, 2002)

Jeeters said:


> I thought this season was the best of the 3.


Welcome back. Rehab must have been very successful.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

speedcouch said:


> It's been quite clear there's a new showrunner this season. Too touchy freely and farfetched for me. Was ridiculous that Bohannon stopped everything to go after Eva's baby. Even sillier that Elam would keep calling it his baby when it was clearly white. Bohannon and Ferguson's "fight night" with Indians and escaping execution was absurd. Bohannon marrying the Mormon girl even more ridiculous. Introduction of "cute kid"...
> 
> In other words, nearly everything was unbelievable...
> 
> Cheryl


It's been quite clear the new showrunner(s) this season had no idea where to take the show.


----------



## DouglasPHill (Feb 10, 2005)

I've never heard mention that the writers "have a plan".


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Finally watched the last four episodes in two days.

Nobody but Elam went to rescue Bohannon? Nobody? None of the railroad workers who wanted to form a posse? General Grant and Major Mohawk couldn't rustle up a rescue party?

I am so sick and tired of the Swede. The back and forth with Durant is tiresome too but at least Durant is interesting. The Swede is this silly boogie-man of a character they keep bringing back that nobody wants.

I doubt if Elam is dead but at least they didn't have him get in hand to hand combat with a bear and come out of it with a busted lip and a limp. If he is dead, maybe that's the only logical way they could get Eva back to whoring.

It was a long time ago when I watched the episode but I never did think that Bohannon and the Mormon girl actually did the nasty.

I wasn't mad at the season finale episode. I was just disappointed that nothing seem resolved and we're stuck with another season of the Swede. He's like Syler from Heroes. He should have been killed off a long time ago but somebody in charge like the character and is too lazy to create a new villain.

None of the Mormons were curious on how Bohannon knew the new bishop as a low down, dirty, woman killing bad guy by the name of Thor Gunderson?

Ezra continuing to be a mute and not telling Bohannon his story bordered on ridiculous.


----------



## speedcouch (Oct 23, 2003)

I was pretty sure he didn't do anything but kiss the Mormon girl, and that's why he looked so shocked that she was pregnant. But I guess the writers changed their mind to make it mire drammatic. 

Elam is not dead; he's one of the main characters...Of course Lilly Bell was too until they killed her off (which still makes no sense to me).

Cheryl


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

speedcouch said:


> I was pretty sure he didn't do anything but kiss the Mormon girl, and that's why he looked so shocked that she was pregnant. But I guess the writers changed their mind to make it mire drammatic.
> 
> Elam is not dead; he's one of the main characters...Of course Lilly Bell was too until they killed her off (which still makes no sense to me).
> 
> Cheryl


Or, this was a setup and they don't know who the real daddy was, and this was "convenient" to make an "honest" woman of her.

I don't mind the Swede. He's a real good baddie.

As for their not being a posse, I think they wanted to finish getting to Cheyanne as Bohannon ordered so that's why the railroad workers didn't go. I am not sure if Grant knew the true nature of Bohannan's journey or maybe just though he was dead. I think Grant's ulterior motive was a victory on the railroad and that's by whatever means. I don't think he really gave a hoot about him.

It was a weird ending if this was the series finale, but I guess it works if it's coming back next season.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> As for their not being a posse, I think they wanted to finish getting to Cheyanne as Bohannon ordered so that's why the railroad workers didn't go. I am not sure if Grant knew the true nature of Bohannan's journey or maybe just though he was dead. I think Grant's ulterior motive was a victory on the railroad and that's by whatever means. I don't think he really gave a hoot about him.


Yeah, but 20 minutes after reaching Cheyenne, the rail workers should have posse'd up to go after Bohannon. At least until somebody told them not to.

Grant wanted no parts of Durant. He could have been a bit more concerned that his chosen chief railroad engineer had been kidnapped.


----------



## AeneaGames (May 2, 2009)

speedcouch said:


> I was pretty sure he didn't do anything but kiss the Mormon girl, and that's why he looked so shocked that she was pregnant. But I guess the writers changed their mind to make it mire drammatic.


So you remember them only kissing in that barn? I already assumed they did more, not sure why exactly, but I did, so I wasn't really surprised she was pregnant...


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

I'm 99.9% positive they did more; in this final ep, Bohannon said something along the lines "I recall us having a bit of fun in the barn". I don't think kissing qualifies as "fun" for Bohannon...


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Bierboy said:


> I'm 99.9% positive they did more; in this final ep, Bohannon said something along the lines "I recall us having a bit of fun in the barn". I don't think kissing qualifies as "fun" for Bohannon...


I thought they showed them nekkid and kissing in the barn scene, but I think it was assumed they did more.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Didn't one of the Mormon boys catch them kissing or something like that? 

If Bohannon really did bang that girl then, man that was one serious breach of etiquette. I'd want to hang his ass too if I were her father.


----------



## jeff92k7 (Jan 18, 2006)

As I recall, they were going at it, but got interrupted by the little brother knocking stuff over outside the barn. In other words, they (he) didn't finish.

That's why I was shocked when she turned up preggo. It was a stupid writing twist that didn't fit the earlier story.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

jeff92k7 said:


> As I recall, they were going at it, but got interrupted by the little brother knocking stuff over outside the barn. In other words, they (he) didn't finish.
> 
> That's why I was shocked when she turned up preggo. It was a stupid writing twist that didn't fit the earlier story.


 How do YOU know he didn't "finish"? Did you see something the rest of us didn't?


----------



## jeff92k7 (Jan 18, 2006)

Bierboy said:


> How do YOU know he didn't "finish"? Did you see something the rest of us didn't?


I don't want to get vulgar, which is what I bet you are trying to get me to do. I'll just say I watched that episode a few days ago. I watched the whole third season in the last two weeks. The whole story arc is still fresh in my mind.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

jeff92k7 said:


> As I recall, they were going at it, but got interrupted by the little brother knocking stuff over outside the barn. In other words, they (he) didn't finish.
> 
> That's why I was shocked when she turned up preggo. It was a stupid writing twist that didn't fit the earlier story.


She had a concealed turkey baster.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

jeff92k7 said:


> I don't want to get vulgar, which is what I bet you are trying to get me to do. I'll just say I watched that episode a few days ago. I watched the whole third season in the last two weeks. The whole story arc is still fresh in my mind.


I'm not trying to get anyone to be vulgar. My point is this -- when they don't show graphic sex, there IS no way to tell....that's my point. Ah, heck, even if they DO show the actual sex act, you still don't know...


----------



## bengalfreak (Oct 20, 2002)

jeff92k7 said:


> As I recall, they were going at it, but got interrupted by the little brother knocking stuff over outside the barn. In other words, they (he) didn't finish.
> 
> That's why I was shocked when she turned up preggo. It was a stupid writing twist that didn't fit the earlier story.


LMFAO..You do know that the pull and pray method is a loser as a method of birth control right? I mean pregnancy can happen any time from the moment of penetration to the so called "finish". The Mormon girls bun in the oven fits the story just fine.


----------



## fmowry (Apr 30, 2002)

<Marion Barry> B**** set me up! </Marion Barry>


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

fmowry said:


> <Marion Barry> B**** set me up! </Marion Barry>


This thought crossed my mind. This could have been a setup by the Swede. But I wouldn't rule out that it's Bohanan's baby either. We really just don't know how far they actually got.

Let's hope we get the opportunity to find out. Any word on renewal?


----------



## fmowry (Apr 30, 2002)

According to this article S3 did pretty well but who knows:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/kateaurthur/hell-on-wheels-saturday-night-ratings-amc


----------

