# Lucifer (FOX) - First Season Thread *spoilers*



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Season thread for the new FOX show Lucifer. Spoilers allowed up to any show that has aired on FOX.

Here is the Pilot thread
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=536600


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

I'm surprisingly liking this show. Surprisingly because this isn't my genre (supernatural). But I'm a sucker for a good procedural (CBS loves me), so this works for me. And I like the characters, plus the writers are taking advantage of every Devil/Hell/Lucifer joke they can think of. :up:

Really like the female lead. Right mix of vulnerability and toughness.


----------



## DavidTigerFan (Aug 18, 2001)

:up:


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

I watched the first episode of this show when it leaked on the internet months ago. I don't remember anything about it, or if I even liked it. I see I've missed the second episode. I'll have to go out and watch it on Hulu or elsewhere and see what I think.


----------



## Cainebj (Nov 11, 2006)

The second episode really reminded me of Supernatural. It made me wonder if there is any correlation in the creators or show runners or writers...


----------



## Ereth (Jun 16, 2000)

I just LOVE this show and am sad when the episode ends. It probably wouldn't work if Lucifer weren't so darned appealing. Terrific casting.


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

Ereth said:


> It probably wouldn't work if Lucifer weren't so darned appealing. Terrific casting.


this, and i love the little girl and her interactions with lucifer, she is so darned cute! this is surprising for me, i generally loathe the introduction of forced child/main character interactions for cuteness.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

NorthAlabama said:


> this, and i love the little girl and her interactions with lucifer, she is so darned cute! this is surprising for me, i generally loathe the introduction of forced child/main character interactions for cuteness.


Here I think the fact that she IS so cute, and he is evil incarnate and thus uncomfortable in the face of such cuteness, makes the difference...


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

Laughed at"there is a reason it's called a devils threeway"


----------



## Graymalkin (Mar 20, 2001)

I'm enjoying the show way more than I thought I would. I must be a sucker for supernatural police procedurals. 

Tom Ellis, who plays Lucifer, was previously in a short-lived USA Network series, "Rush," where he played a concierge doctor with very good skills and also some very bad habits. I watched that one, too.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

The last thing I need is another show to watch. Yet I made the mistake of watching the pilot. So now I'm hooked on this show.


----------



## Ereth (Jun 16, 2000)

The devil you say!


----------



## andyw715 (Jul 31, 2007)

Ereth said:


> I just LOVE this show and am sad when the episode ends. It probably wouldn't work if Lucifer weren't so darned appealing. Terrific casting.


I hear ya. I was watching the latest episode on lunch yesterday and was so surprised zipping through the commercials that I was on minute 52. 
Time flew by and I wanted the next episode. Gotta wait a week


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

I caught most of the episodes of this series when it was airing, but had missed a good bit of the content from not devoting my full attention to the broadcast.

That said, what I had caught was pretty good and as the episodes had aired I caught more of the broadcasts.

Over the last few episodes I had been really enjoying the episodes that I was catching and found myself recommending the show highly to some co-workers that I thought would enjoy it. The co-workers wound up catching up on the series compliments of Hulu. After they started talking about the episodes it encouraged me to go back and rewatch all of the episodes that had aired so far (1-6). Definitely a lot of entertainment in those episodes.

Now I'm very much looking forward to the next episode. :up:


----------



## rharmelink (Dec 1, 2015)

On another group, someone noted the sign on Trixie's door:

No boys allowed
...except for Lucifer and Dad


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

rharmelink said:


> No boys allowed
> ...except for Lucifer and Dad


Yeah, that got a chuckle from me...although I don't really believe Mom would let it stay up for more than a few seconds.


----------



## dwit (May 5, 2004)

Just decided to take a gander at this show,

Ended up binging on all 6 episodes on hulu(Tivo HD been down for over a year).

The main is surprisingly good. The horny analyst too.


----------



## bobcarn (Nov 18, 2001)

Based on this thread, I took a look at the show and wound up watching the first three episodes. I've been loving it so far. I bust out laughing when he refers to Trixie as "little human" and tossed her doll down the hall expecting her to go fetch it.

There's a definite charm to the show.


----------



## dwit (May 5, 2004)

New epi tonight, 9pm est.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

I'm enjoying this one. Maybe not quite as much as others here seem to like it, but it's pretty good. The current few episodes seem to open up the mythology a bit more, which could be interesting. I wish there was more Trixie.


----------



## BrettStah (Nov 12, 2000)

So I initially thought he may have gone back for the fake wings, and burned those in front of his brother. But by the end, I changed my mind on that. That feather that his sidekick demon/bartender has will obviously play some role in subsequent episodes - maybe the wings can be regenerated as long as a single feather exists?


----------



## Jonathan_S (Oct 23, 2001)

BrettStah said:


> So I initially thought he may have gone back for the fake wings, and burned those in front of his brother. But by the end, I changed my mind on that. That feather that his sidekick demon/bartender has will obviously play some role in subsequent episodes - maybe the wings can be regenerated as long as a single feather exists?


Maybe. Or they did say the wings were infused with Heavenly Grace; which they implied had some power here on Earth. It's possible Maze kept the surviving feather just for its remnant of that power.

We'll just have to see I guess, since the rules for that haven't been revealed to us enough to have real confidence in our guesses.


----------



## bobcarn (Nov 18, 2001)

BrettStah said:


> So I initially thought he may have gone back for the fake wings, and burned those in front of his brother. But by the end, I changed my mind on that. That feather that his sidekick demon/bartender has will obviously play some role in subsequent episodes - maybe the wings can be regenerated as long as a single feather exists?


I was thinking along the same line. I still wouldn't be surprised if it was the fakes that were burned. If they decide to bring back the wings for some reason, they'd always be able to excuse it as being the fakes we saw burning.


----------



## BrettStah (Nov 12, 2000)

bobcarn said:


> I was thinking along the same line. I still wouldn't be surprised if it was the fakes that were burned. If they decide to bring back the wings for some reason, they'd always be able to excuse it as being the fakes we saw burning.


I just thought of something else - why didn't his brother just pause things while the match was in the air? If you have super powers, you need to be ready to use them at any time!


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

bobcarn said:


> I was thinking along the same line. I still wouldn't be surprised if it was the fakes that were burned. If they decide to bring back the wings for some reason, they'd always be able to excuse it as being the fakes we saw burning.


Of course, since God apparently wants Lucifer back in Hell, he could always just make a new set!

(It's an interesting [apparent] shift in dynamic, since in the comic book


Spoiler



God is gone, and all the conflict erupts over everybody's reaction to his absence...including Lucifer's decision to abandon Hell. There's been no hint I've seen that they're going that route here, and I suspect they wouldn't dare.)





BrettStah said:


> I just thought of something else - why didn't his brother just pause things while the match was in the air? If you have super powers, you need to be ready to use them at any time!


Could be he just never in billions of years (literally) believed Lucifer would ever do such a thing...


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Of course, since God apparently wants Lucifer back in Hell, he could always just make a new set!
> 
> (It's an interesting [apparent] shift in dynamic, since in the comic book
> 
> ...


Wouldn't it only be a few thousand years?


----------



## Amnesia (Jan 30, 2005)

RE Rob's spoiler about comic book:


Spoiler






Rob Helmerichs said:


> There's been no hint I've seen that they're going [the god is gone] route here, and I suspect they wouldn't dare.)


Why not? The Christian god from _Supernatural_ is gone too...


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Amnesia said:


> RE Rob's spoiler about comic book:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> ...


Yeah, I was thinking that too.


Spoiler



In fact, from the Winchesters' perspective, except for one Deus Ex Machina, God has been absent for a very long time now and his absence is a key plot point currently.



Back to Lucifer, I'm still enjoying the show very much. 
The ongoing arcs are keeping me interested and Tom Ellis is great.


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

BrettStah said:


> That feather that his sidekick demon/bartender has will obviously play some role in subsequent episodes - maybe the wings can be regenerated as long as a single feather exists?


I had an additional take on that scene. From my perspective that scene was also meant to show that Mazikeen was part of the plot to steal Lucifer's wings. Meaning she is in with Amenadiel, for Lucifer's own good (from her perspective).


----------



## ej42137 (Feb 16, 2014)

ClutchBrake said:


> I had an additional take on that scene. From my perspective that scene was also meant to show that Mazikeen was part of the plot to steal Lucifer's wings. Meaning she is in with Amenadiel, for Lucifer's own good (from her perspective).


As you no doubt remember, there was a scene in an earlier episode where they began this collusion. I guess you can't expect a demon from Hell to be very trustworthy.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

ej42137 said:


> As you no doubt remember, there was a scene in an earlier episode where they began this collusion. I guess you can't expect a demon from Hell to be very trustworthy.


Although in her own way, she's being very trustworthy. She knows what's best for Lucifer, and she's going to make sure the best happens.

Lucifer just doesn't agree with her about what's best.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Well that was an interesting twist last night.


----------



## DavidTigerFan (Aug 18, 2001)

aaronwt said:


> Well that was a twist last night.


 what? I don't remember.


----------



## Unbeliever (Feb 3, 2001)

The husband was the one who shot the crooked cop, (oh, and the cop really IS crooked).

--Carlos V.


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

The biggest X factor for me at the moment is Amenadiel. He seems to be using bad cop as a means to his end goal, but how exactly he expects it to play out is what has me curious.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

I gotta say, I'm not sure where they are going with these plot developments but I'm liking how they are playing out.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

I was pretty sure it was the husband actually. It kind of had to work out that way. It's TV.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

madscientist said:


> I was pretty sure it was the husband actually. It kind of had to work out that way. It's TV.


I was thinking it might be the husband a couple episodes ago, but when he reported that there were no fingerprints found on the key, I knew for certain it was him. Actually, I was nearly certain when she gave him the key. The only reason she would do that is because the plot needed him to be able to cover his tracks.

What I still do not know is why he did it.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

madscientist said:


> I was pretty sure it was the husband actually. It kind of had to work out that way. It's TV.


It could have been Coma Cop's partner at first, since they hired a pretty recognizable actor for what seemed at the time a pretty inconsequential role. But when he became so obviously evil so fast, I started casting around for alternate suspects.


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> It could have been Coma Cop's partner at first, since they hired a pretty recognizable actor for what seemed at the time a pretty inconsequential role. But when he became so obviously evil so fast, I started casting around for alternate suspects.


Same way I knew coma cop was going to wake up as soon as I saw his picture on the memorial poster. He hasn't been around as long as Lochlyn Munro, and I don't know his name, but I know his face.


----------



## DavidTigerFan (Aug 18, 2001)

So amenadiel saves the bad cop...I bet he's none too pleased....or did he do it because he knew he was a bad cop and would cause problems for Lucifer.


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

DavidTigerFan said:


> So amenadiel saves the bad cop...I bet he's none too pleased....or did he do it because he knew he was a bad cop and would cause problems for Lucifer.


I don't think Amenadiel has any qualms about using up human lives to further his agenda. He and Mazikeen are the reason the security guard from an episode or two ago is dead.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Just caught up after some binge-watching sessions. I've got a question about his sudden-onset mortality that I don't think they've addressed...

So far, I think the only proof we've seen that Lucifer is mortal or susceptible to being injured is when Chloe shot him, right? From that point, Lucifer has been a little more careful (even as he's being more careless), like making a point of taking cover when there are gunshots flying.

I have a theory, and I don't think there's been any evidence yet to contradict it, seemingly because everyone else on the show has just assumed that Lucifer is mortal now and no one has tried to test it.

My theory is that the only reason that he was injured by the gunshot was because it was Chloe who pulled the trigger. Maybe whatever it is that is going on with her that makes her immune to his mystical charms and influence also gives her the ability to inflict damage on him.

The only thing I've observed so far that could even possibly suggest otherwise is the way Amenadiel beat his face bloody on the beach when he burned his wings. But I think that can be explained by the fact that Amenadiel is a celestial being just like Lucifer. As far as I can recall, no _human_ has been seen inflicting any kind of damage on him at all other than Chloe.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

I've been assuming the reason that Lucifer is losing some of his powers (like invulnerability) is because he cut off his wings. I thought they never discussed it because the cause was obvious once Lucifer knew that he was no longer invulnerable. I guess it would be something of a delayed reaction, since he cut them off years ago.


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

busyba said:


> Just caught up after some binge-watching sessions. I've got a question about his sudden-onset mortality that I don't think they've addressed...
> 
> So far, I think the only proof we've seen that Lucifer is mortal or susceptible to being injured is when Chloe shot him, right? From that point, Lucifer has been a little more careful (even as he's being more careless), like making a point of taking cover when there are gunshots flying.
> 
> ...


That is a really interesting theory! :up:


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

busyba said:


> My theory is that the only reason that he was injured by the gunshot was because it was Chloe who pulled the trigger. Maybe whatever it is that is going on with her that makes her immune to his mystical charms and influence also gives her the ability to inflict damage on him.


 I definitely agree with you. I was wondering that as well and I don't remember him taking any real damage from anyone else either. Even when he was immortal it wasn't like Superman where bullets bounce off of him: they impact him but he doesn't die. Remember when he was shot multiple times in the first or second episode by that guy who's now locked up, he seemed to feel it but it didn't really damage him.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

john4200 said:


> I've been assuming the reason that Lucifer is losing some of his powers (like invulnerability) is because he cut off his wings. I thought they never discussed it because the cause was obvious once Lucifer knew that he was no longer invulnerable. I guess it would be something of a delayed reaction, since he cut them off years ago.


It's been five years since he cut his wings off. He didn't start having issues until he met Chloe. Chloe seems to be the catalyst for him turning mortal.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

aaronwt said:


> It's been five years since he cut his wings off. He didn't start having issues until he met Chloe. Chloe seems to be the catalyst for him turning mortal.


Maybe. But it is also possible that he just did not notice he was losing his invulnerability until he met Chloe. Probably no one shot him during those five years. But it is a good point that he was not seriously hurt by the gunshots when he was next to Chloe and shot by someone else. He only bled sometime later when Chloe shot him. Which is a fine distinction. I hope the explanation is more along the lines of, once he began to have human emotions (made possible by cutting off his wings but induced by spending time with Chloe), he lost his invulnerability. If his invulnerability depends on who is holding the gun, then I will be disappointed.


----------



## Jonathan_S (Oct 23, 2001)

busyba said:


> Just caught up after some binge-watching sessions. I've got a question about his sudden-onset mortality that I don't think they've addressed...
> 
> So far, I think the only proof we've seen that Lucifer is mortal or susceptible to being injured is when Chloe shot him, right? From that point, Lucifer has been a little more careful (even as he's being more careless), like making a point of taking cover when there are gunshots flying.
> 
> ...


I had that same suspicion. They have been careful, since then, not to get him in firefights or other places where he might take damage from regular guys.

Of course the alternate theory is that it wasn't until he started changing himself due to continued interaction with Chloe that his mortality really kicked in. But now that he triggered it he might be vulnerable to anybody. Still my first thought was the same as yours; that he was injured only because she was the one who shot him.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Jonathan_S said:


> Of course the alternate theory is that it wasn't until he started changing himself due to continued interaction with Chloe that his mortality really kicked in. But now that he triggered it he might be vulnerable to anybody.


That's a possibility as well; there's just been a lack of evidence to push things towards one theory or the other.

I'm hoping that's because the writers know what they're doing and are keeping it ambiguous on purpose.


----------



## Graymalkin (Mar 20, 2001)

I'm thinking Chloe is _not what she seems._ But that's kind of obvious, isn't it?


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Graymalkin said:


> I'm thinking Chloe is _not what she seems._ But that's kind of obvious, isn't it?


I think so too, but I don't think she knows it. Are you saying she does?


----------



## rharmelink (Dec 1, 2015)

Does it bother anyone else that Chloe's eyes usually seem dark and sunken? I think it's because of the eye shadows they use on her, and I'm wondering if that is intentional or not?


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

rharmelink said:


> Does it bother anyone else that Chloe's eyes usually seem dark and sunken? I think it's because of the eye shadows they use on her, and I'm wondering if that is intentional or not?


That's just Lauren German. Google her and you'll see.

They could probably try to hide it better but I think it fits her character.


----------



## Graymalkin (Mar 20, 2001)

busyba said:


> I think so too, but I don't think she knows it. Are you saying she does?


No, I agree with you, I don't think Chloe knows.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

She's like Dawn from _Buffy the Vampire Slayer_.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

This show has turned into one of my favorite new shows. The writing is as crisp as anything currently airing. Witty, funny, dramatic... all mixed up.

We finally got to spend some time with Mazikeen tonight. I thought at one point she was going to tell Lady Shrink she was a demon. Then Princess Trixie charmed her.:up:

And the way all humans keep using the word "God", just drives Luci crazy. Love it!


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

And we see Lucifer get injured again, but he was carrying Chloe when it happened, so we still don't really know if he's fully mortal, or if Chloe is some sort of kryptonite for him.


----------



## rharmelink (Dec 1, 2015)

I re-watched the first three episodes on Hulu last night and I think they are at least one notch better than most of the later shows.

Maybe because the whole Palmetto plot line is just too contrived.


----------



## jeepair (Apr 22, 2004)

busyba said:


> And we see Lucifer get injured again, but he was carrying Chloe when it happened, so we still don't really know if he's fully mortal, or if Chloe is some sort of kryptonite for him.


Agree. I sort of expect him to rapidly heal once he stopped carrying her.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

astrohip said:


> Then Princess Trixie charmed her.:up:


But not enough that she wasn't willing to serve her alcohol...or maybe that's just what you do for friends.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

I expect we won't know the situation with Lucifer's mortality until the assassination attempt... and maybe that will be the season finale (although with 3 episodes to go that seems like a long time to string it out).

Did love the Maze storyline this week. My only issue is she seemed to go from "same old Maze" to "touch-feely Maze" a little quickly there at the end. Also the mystery this week was boring, but Lucifer's attempts to align everything to his own situation are pretty funny.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Did Bad Cop kill Detective *****, or just render him unconscious?

I have to think it's the latter, because killing him seems way too dark, even for this show, but who knows?


----------



## rharmelink (Dec 1, 2015)

busyba said:


> Did Bad Cop kill Detective *****, or just render him unconscious?


The dialog there is bad cop saying, "Go to Sleep. There ya go."


----------



## Unbeliever (Feb 3, 2001)

It was supposed to be a "sleeper hold". Use your arms to pinch off the carotids to cut off bloodflow to the brain. It's not a choking/strangulation. Victim passes out for a spell.

But the victim wakes up relatively quickly after the hold is released, but is groggy for a while.

--Carlos V.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

I figured it was probably supposed to just be a blood choke, but they way he had the cuffs pulling against the guy's throat made me wonder.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

The show spelled it out so there was no question. They had the bad cop actually say what he was doing.

I really enjoyed the show last night. I got a lot of good laughs from it.


----------



## photoshopgrl (Nov 22, 2008)

When I first saw an ad for this show, I looked up the actor. Didn't recognize him but just seeing pictures I was "really?" about it and decided to skip it. About the second episode I saw bits of it after leaving the tv on after X-Files and was so charmed by him in like 5 minutes, I turned it off and downloaded the first episode. I'm so hooked. He's so smarmy and charming and the way he says "detective!" is so great. I like most of the cast. I like the irony of pretty much everything. My only complaint is them making him mortal. I liked it better when he could bounce 8 bullets. This is a must watch show for me though!


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

photoshopgrl said:


> I'm so hooked. He's so smarmy and charming and the way he says "detective!" is so great.


The only reason I might perhaps dislike this show on a subconscious level is the fact that he's so ridiculously good looking that I'm totes jeli.


----------



## photoshopgrl (Nov 22, 2008)

busyba said:


> The only reason I might perhaps dislike this show on a subconscious level is the fact that he's so ridiculously good looking that I'm totes jeli.


Funny because the actor just seeing his face did nothing for me but his acting and the character make him very appealing.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

photoshopgrl said:


> Funny because the actor just seeing his face did nothing for me but his acting and the character make him very appealing.


It's that devilish (pun not intended) smile when he's saying something wicked.


----------



## photoshopgrl (Nov 22, 2008)

busyba said:


> It's that devilish (pun not intended) smile when he's saying something wicked.


He has got that down to an art already for sure!


----------



## ACoolDude (Dec 11, 2001)

photoshopgrl said:


> I liked it better when he could bounce 8 bullets.


Or 2.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

busyba said:


> I have a theory, and I don't think there's been any evidence yet to contradict it, seemingly because everyone else on the show has just assumed that Lucifer is mortal now and no one has tried to test it.
> 
> My theory is that the only reason that he was injured by the gunshot was because it was Chloe who pulled the trigger. Maybe whatever it is that is going on with her that makes her immune to his mystical charms and influence also gives her the ability to inflict damage on him.
> 
> The only thing I've observed so far that could even possibly suggest otherwise is the way Amenadiel beat his face bloody on the beach when he burned his wings. But I think that can be explained by the fact that Amenadiel is a celestial being just like Lucifer. As far as I can recall, no _human_ has been seen inflicting any kind of damage on him at all other than Chloe.


Well, you may very well be right.
Much to the consternation of the victim's wife in the last episode.

So, what is it about Chloe that is "special"?
And will Lucifer try to get his coin back from Malcolm?


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

JYoung said:


> Well, you may very well be right.
> Much to the consternation of the victim's wife in the last episode.
> 
> So, what is it about Chloe that is "special"?
> And will Lucifer try to get his coin back from Malcolm?


Actually, he is not quite right. It seems that being near Chloe makes Lucifer vulnerable, since the knife cut him but Chloe was not wielding the knife.

Also, it is not something intrinsic to Chloe herself that is "special". We know that since when Lucifer first met her he took several bullets to the chest, while being right next to her, but it did not hurt him.

Unfortunately, it looks like they are trying to say that it is Lucifer's feelings for Chloe that makes him vulnerable when he is near her. That is why he was not vulnerable when they first met. It was only once he got to know her a little bit that he became vulnerable when she was near.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

JYoung said:


> And will Lucifer try to get his coin back from Malcolm?


Judging from his sardonic smile when talking about him to Chloe, I suspect it will not work as advertised for Malcolm...


----------



## verdugan (Sep 9, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Judging from his sardonic smile when talking about him to Chloe, I suspect it will not work as advertised for Malcolm...


But does Lucifer need it back so that he can get back to hell? That might be a reason to take it back.


----------



## Fahtrim (Apr 12, 2004)

verdugan said:


> But does Lucifer need it back so that he can get back to hell? That might be a reason to take it back.


Maze still has that feather, plus writers Dues Ex Machina, they can do what they want.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

verdugan said:


> But does Lucifer need it back so that he can get back to hell? That might be a reason to take it back.


My point is, he's not the least bit concerned that Malcolm has the coin. Lucifer is up to something.


----------



## verdugan (Sep 9, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> My point is, he's not the least bit concerned that Malcolm has the coin. Lucifer is up to something.


Agreed. I was saying that too. Should've been clearer.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

busyba said:


> Just caught up after some binge-watching sessions. I've got a question about his sudden-onset mortality that I don't think they've addressed...
> 
> So far, I think the only proof we've seen that Lucifer is mortal or susceptible to being injured is when Chloe shot him, right? From that point, Lucifer has been a little more careful (even as he's being more careless), like making a point of taking cover when there are gunshots flying.
> 
> ...


BOOM! Called it.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

JYoung said:


> So, what is it about Chloe that is "special"?


Maybe she's Haitian.


----------



## photoshopgrl (Nov 22, 2008)

Can I explain to you how much I love this show? It's one of the few that I watch live no matter what. 

I'm so relieved that he's not really turning mortal! For me that was going to be a massive issue enjoying it. Chloe making him vulnerable however is interesting. As someone stated already why did this not happen when he took shots in the back to save her life? Didn't have feelings for her at that point. We kind of knew she was special from the start though right? She's the only person that seems to be immune to his "charms". 

Also so glad to see the renewal for this one!


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

busyba said:


> BOOM! Called it.


Except you called it wrong.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

john4200 said:


> Except you called it wrong.


Called it close enough.

If you want to instead explore the possibility that Chloe's effect on Lucifer is a result of her being a felonious drunk, have fun.

Hopefully she cuts her hair before the next episode to _really_ make it interesting.


----------



## Graymalkin (Mar 20, 2001)

Renewed? YAY!


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

busyba said:


> Called it close enough.


Missed it by a mile, actually.

There is a huge difference between "only a weapon wielded by Chloe can hurt Lucifer" and "Lucifer is only vulnerable when Chloe is near him". Since Chloe is unlikely to ever again try to inflict a serious wound on Lucifer, with the first, he is in little danger. But since Lucifer is around Chloe a lot, with the second he is in significant danger, since if she is nearby when someone takes a shot at him (or her), he could be injured.


----------



## ACoolDude (Dec 11, 2001)

and if she sleeps with him, he really does become mortal.


----------



## rharmelink (Dec 1, 2015)

Here's a question for ya -- why does Lucifer have a belly button?


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

rharmelink said:


> Here's a question for ya -- why does Lucifer have a belly button?


Lint catcher.


----------



## verdugan (Sep 9, 2003)

john4200 said:


> Missed it by a mile, actually.
> 
> There is a huge difference between "only a weapon wielded by Chloe can hurt Lucifer" and "Lucifer is only vulnerable when Chloe is near him". Since Chloe is unlikely to ever again try to inflict a serious wound on Lucifer, with the first, he is in little danger. But since Lucifer is around Chloe a lot, with the second he is in significant danger, since if she is nearby when someone takes a shot at him (or her), he could be injured.


As long as you're nitpicking, we don't know that he'll be injured if somebody else shoots him when he's around Chloe.

All we know is that Chloe can hurt him and he can hurt himself when he's close to her.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

verdugan said:


> All we know is that Chloe can hurt him and he can hurt himself when he's close to her.


And fire will burn him if she is near him.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

In the comics he doesn't. Nor a penis.

I guess there's only so far an actor is willing to go for a role...


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> In the comics he doesn't. Nor a penis.
> 
> I guess there's only so far an actor is willing to go for a role...


Some go farther, like Alan Rickman in _Dogma_.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

rharmelink said:


> Here's a question for ya -- why does Lucifer have a belly button?


Here's a question for you.

If Chloe is near Lucifer, but Lucifer does not know that she is there (eg., she snuck up behind him), then will Lucifer be vulnerable to injury or not?


----------



## dtle (Dec 12, 2001)

JYoung said:


> And will Lucifer try to get his coin back from Malcolm?


It seems like the one ironic thing about Lucifer is that he always keeps his word.


----------



## mlsnyc (Dec 3, 2009)

dtle said:


> It seems like the one ironic thing about Lucifer is that he always keeps his word.


Seems like they're downplaying the evil, lying, trickster traits and putting emphasis on his role being to punish wrongdoers and that he's really into tempting mortals into giving in to their most base desires. In fact in the earlier episodes he outright says he hates charlatans, though that's mostly about charlatans twisting around and distorting his mythology.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

dtle said:


> It seems like the one ironic thing about Lucifer is that he always keeps his word.


Although I suspect sometimes he keeps his word in a "be careful what you ask for" or "be careful how you phrase it" way...


----------



## AbbyDrinkin (Apr 18, 2016)

Just so disappointed in this show. The lead just has zero charisma.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

AbbyDrinkin said:


> The lead just has zero charisma.


I have to assume you mean the _female_ lead, because otherwise


----------



## AbbyDrinkin (Apr 18, 2016)

busyba said:


> I have to assume you mean the _female_ lead, because otherwise


No the guy playing Lucifer is just so meh to me. He is supposed to be ulta sexy and charismatic. I find him just so blah.


----------



## photoshopgrl (Nov 22, 2008)

AbbyDrinkin said:


> No the guy playing Lucifer is just so meh to me. He is supposed to be ulta sexy and charismatic. I find him just so blah.


I don't find the actor the least bit appealing as himself but in character has charisma off the charts and makes lucifer so damn appealing.


----------



## AbbyDrinkin (Apr 18, 2016)

photoshopgrl said:


> I don't find the actor the least bit appealing as himself but in character has charisma off the charts and makes lucifer so damn appealing.


I have high expectations for shows about Demons and Angels. I will cry when Supernatural ends. Nothing holds a candle to it. I was disappointed in Constantine and Dominion as well.


----------



## photoshopgrl (Nov 22, 2008)

AbbyDrinkin said:


> I have high expectations for shows about Demons and Angels. I will cry when Supernatural ends. Nothing holds a candle to it. I was disappointed in Constantine and Dominion as well.


Just going to say this and leave it be, not here to argue but IMO Tom's Lucifer is far far more entertaining and charming than Mark's Lucifer by a very wide margin.... and I say that having really enjoyed Mark. (now if we compared this lucifer to crowley you might have me)


----------



## AbbyDrinkin (Apr 18, 2016)

photoshopgrl said:


> Just going to say this and leave it be, not here to argue but IMO Tom's Lucifer is far far more entertaining and charming than Mark's Lucifer by a very wide margin.... and I say that having really enjoyed Mark. (now if we compared this lucifer to crowley you might have me)


We seem to have similar taste. I will agree to disagree on this one. xoxo


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Wow. The latest one was a BOOM episode.


And it looks like Khloenite works simply by proximity, even when Lucifer is unaware of it.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

busyba said:


> And it looks like Khloenite works simply by proximity, even when Lucifer is unaware of it.


That was an interesting theory he came up with, even if he dismissed it rather quickly...maybe she's a half-breed? We know angels can have sex, after all...


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> That was an interesting theory he came up with, even if he dismissed it rather quickly...maybe she's a half-breed? We know angels can have sex, after all...


By the way, POI...Mike Carey is the guy who wrote the comic book series.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> That was an interesting theory he came up with, even if he dismissed it rather quickly...maybe she's a half-breed? We know angels can have sex, after all...


I wonder if Trixie would have the same effect on him.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> That was an interesting theory he came up with, even if he dismissed it rather quickly...maybe she's a half-breed? We know angels can have sex, after all...


It is unlikely that the effect is due to something intrinsic to Chloe herself (like being half-angel) because Chloe had no effect on Lucifer in the first episode when he was right next to her and took several bullets to the back of the chest.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

john4200 said:


> It is unlikely that the effect is due to something intrinsic to Chloe herself (like being half-angel) because Chloe had no effect on Lucifer in the first episode when he was right next to her and took several bullets to the back of the chest.


I don't remember for sure now, but I think Chloe had herself been shot and seriously (mortally, even... Lucy had to use his abilities to keep her from dying, right?) wounded before Lucifer took any fire.

It's possible that whatever passive AOE debuff ability she has was disabled by her injuries.


----------



## Johnny Dancing (Sep 3, 2000)

I like this show, nice light dramady - great show to watch while on the elliptical because it doesn't make me think too hard. 

Reminds me of the Mentalist.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

busyba said:


> I don't remember for sure now, but I think Chloe had herself been shot and seriously (mortally, even... Lucy had to use his abilities to keep her from dying, right?) wounded before Lucifer took any fire.
> 
> It's possible that whatever passive AOE debuff ability she has was disabled by her injuries.


She was shot, but she was conscious and even talking to Lucifer when Lucifer got shot. That would be really lame if the dampening effect stopped just because she had a bullet wound.

Interestingly, when Chloe said she did not want to die in that scene, Lucifer responded that he would not let her die, his father would just have to wait. I find that promise to be a more compelling explanation for Chloe's effect on Lucifer. It could be a red herring, but it also could be that Lucifer's promise to Chloe created the effect that Chloe has on him.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

john4200 said:


> She was shot, but she was conscious and even talking to Lucifer when Lucifer got shot. That would be really lame if the dampening effect stopped just because she had a bullet wound.


It's also lame that instead of jumping up and down she just lay there on the ground just because she had a bullet wound, but alas, such is life.



> Interestingly, when Chloe said she did not want to die in that scene, Lucifer responded that he would not let her die, his father would just have to wait. I find that promise to be a more compelling explanation for Chloe's effect on Lucifer. It could be a red herring, but it also could be that Lucifer's promise to Chloe created the effect that Chloe has on him.


Maybe, but she already was "special" even before then, as evidenced by the fact that she was immune to both his sexual charms and his magic lasso abilities.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

busyba said:


> It's also lame that instead of jumping up and down she just lay there on the ground just because she had a bullet wound, but alas, such is life.


No, that is not "lame". Not jumping up and down is expected behavior when someone has been shot. Trauma and blood loss makes physical activity difficult.

Now, if people stopped emitting body heat the instant a bullet passed through any part of their body, or if vocal chords continued vibrating normally but did not create any sound waves the instant someone was shot in the arm or leg, then that would be lame. But alas, such is not life.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

john4200 said:


> No, that is not "lame". Not jumping up and down is expected behavior when someone has been shot. Trauma and blood loss makes physical activity difficult.
> 
> Now, if people stopped emitting body heat the instant a bullet passed through any part of their body, or if vocal chords continued vibrating normally but did not create any sound waves the instant someone was shot in the arm or leg, then that would be lame. But alas, such is not life.


So what, pray tell, is the _*expected*_ post-gunshot behavior of a mystical phenomenon that suppresses the immortality of a mythical creature on a fictional television show?

Also, are there any other factors that might adversely effect her effect on him? Maybe if she becomes an alcoholic, or if she cuts her hair? What if she commits a felony?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

busyba said:


> What if she commits a felony?


By giving Lucifer a ginger ale but letting him think it's booze?


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

busyba said:


> So what, pray tell, is the _*expected*_ post-gunshot behavior of a mystical phenomenon that suppresses the immortality of a mythical creature on a fictional television show?


Since Chloe is probably not a half-angel, for reasons I already explained, expected behavior post-gunshot is exactly what it would be for any other female of similar health who is shot in the same way.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

john4200 said:


> Since Chloe is probably not a half-angel, for reasons I already explained, expected behavior post-gunshot is exactly what it would be for any other female of similar health who is shot in the same way.


And what would the expected post-gunshot behavior be of the mystical immortality-suppression powers of any other female of similar health who is shot in the same way (assuming the other females also have similar BACs, hair lengths, and criminal records)?


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

busyba said:


> And what would the expected post-gunshot behavior be of the mystical immortality-suppression powers of any other female of similar health who is shot in the same way (assuming the other females also have similar BACs, hair lengths, and criminal records)?


The same as before the gunshot, obviously.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Why is that "obvious"?


----------



## ACoolDude (Dec 11, 2001)

I'm liking the way they are portraying Satan's motives.

"I'm not evil, I punish evil"

"A torturer maybe", "An inflictor of just deserts, sure", "But a senseless murderer, I am not"

Most people probably wouldn't think that is the devils raison d'etre.


----------



## photoshopgrl (Nov 22, 2008)

ACoolDude said:


> I'm liking the way they are portraying Satan's motives.
> 
> "I'm not evil, I punish evil"
> 
> ...


I do too. And this allows us to root for him as a "good guy".


----------



## Graymalkin (Mar 20, 2001)

ACoolDude said:


> I'm liking the way they are portraying Satan's motives.
> 
> "I'm not evil, I punish evil"
> 
> ...


They've left out the part where he tries to trick innocent humans into doing evil so that he can send them to Hell.

Which seems to contradict the entire "Jesus died for our sins, so redemption is available to everyone who believes in Him" concept...


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

But if they were truly innocent, they wouldn't fall for it. He's just giving them the opportunity to show what they're really made of.


----------



## Unbeliever (Feb 3, 2001)

"You're all individuals!"

"I'm not!"

--Carlos "was disappointed the 'I'm not' didn't get said" V.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

I keep thinking I should go read the Satan Wikipedia page after watching this show.. wondering how much if any follows the mythology. (All I know is him being a "fallen angel", and I think that's just a direct quote.)


----------



## DavidTigerFan (Aug 18, 2001)

Rob should be able to recite it all I believe. 

I think he has a degree in medieval literature


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

DavidTigerFan said:


> Rob should be able to recite it all I believe.
> 
> I think he has a degree in medieval literature


History. Specifically political and institutional.

Jeffrey Burton Russell was on my dissertation committee, though...


----------



## DavidTigerFan (Aug 18, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> History. Specifically political and institutional.  Jeffrey Burton Russell was on my dissertation committee, though...


 oops. I knew it was fancy. .

I bet you could give a good history on the devil.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Not so much...theology was never my strong suite.

I do know that most of what we "know" about the Devil is non-Biblical. He doesn't appear at all in the Old Testament (there are a few scattered references to different entities serving different purposes that were later retconned by early Christians). And the whole Lucifer/war in heaven/fallen angels thing was invented long after the New Testament was written (the only mention of Lucifer in the Bible is an Old Testament reference to a Babylonian king).

But as often happened, a whole theology of the Devil and of evil evolved over very...creative readings of various Biblical passages. Similar to modern "interpretation" of the Book of Revelation, which take a fairly obvious political critique of Roman rule and turn it into a prediction of how the world will end.

I've never read Jeff Russell's five-book history of the idea of the Devil...I probably should, but...five books...


----------



## dtle (Dec 12, 2001)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil_in_Christianity



> "Until John Milton created the character of Satan for his "Paradise Lost" the different attributes of Satan were usually ascribed to different entities. *The angel who rebelled in Heaven was not the same as the ruler in Hell.* The ruler of Hell was often seen as a sort of jailer who never fell from grace. The tempting serpent of Genesis was just a serpent. Milton combined the different parts of the character to show his fall from near-divine beauty and grace to his eventual skulking role as a jealous tempter."


----------



## photoshopgrl (Nov 22, 2008)

Ahhh from that wiki link I like this:


> When the Bible was translated into Latin (the Vulgate), the name Lucifer appeared as a translation of "Morning Star", or the planet Venus, in Isaiah 14:12. Isaiah 14:1-23 is a passage concerned with the plight of Babylon, and its king is referred, in sarcastic and hyperbolic language to as "morning star, son of the dawn".


----------



## Church AV Guy (Jan 19, 2005)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Not so much...theology was never my strong suite.
> 
> I do know that most of what we "know" about the Devil is non-Biblical. He doesn't appear at all in the Old Testament (there are a few scattered references to different entities serving different purposes that were later retconned by early Christians). And the whole Lucifer/war in heaven/fallen angels thing was invented long after the New Testament was written (the only mention of Lucifer in the Bible is an Old Testament reference to a Babylonian king).
> 
> ...


I certainly recall him mentioned in the book of Job.


----------



## ej42137 (Feb 16, 2014)

Church AV Guy said:


> I certainly recall him mentioned in the book of Job.


There was a guy called "The Adversary", but he wasn't identified as the king of Hell. Similarly the snake in Genesis has been retconned into Satan by modern readers but that was really more like a "Just So" story.


----------



## ACoolDude (Dec 11, 2001)

Graymalkin said:


> They've left out the part where he tries to trick innocent humans into doing evil so that he can send them to Hell.
> 
> Which seems to contradict the entire "Jesus died for our sins, so redemption is available to everyone who believes in Him" concept...


I haven't seen Jesus in this TV show yet. I wonder what interesting spin, if any, they could put on him. Life of Brian-esque, maybe.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

ACoolDude said:


> I haven't seen Jesus in this TV show yet. I wonder what interesting spin, if any, they could put on him. Life of Brian-esque, maybe.


Oh man, because the silly groups like OMM and AFA haven't lost their minds enough over the show...


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Great end to the season. I had read that the season finale had been filmed before it was renewed. Now that's a gamble!

So we're going from Daddy issues to Mommy problems. And why was dear Mum in hell in the first place?

Maze was missing at the end. 

This has become one of the few shows I try to watch the night it airs. :up:


----------



## ACoolDude (Dec 11, 2001)

busyba said:


> Oh man, because the silly groups like OMM and AFA haven't lost their minds enough over the show...


I had no idea who that was, but apparently 1,000,000 moms got 31,312 signers of a petition to ban the show. Guess the other 968,688 moms think Lucifer is hot 

After all can't "glorify Satan as a caring, likable person in human flesh.", cause then next thing you know teh gays will be allowed to marry. 

Oh, wait....



First we have God's sister*, now Satan's mum. What is the world coming to - Don't remember either of those in the Bible.

*Sister showed up in another show earlier this year:


Spoiler



Supernatural


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

ACoolDude said:


> I had no idea who that was, but apparently 1,000,000 moms got 31,312 signers of a petition to ban the show. Guess the other 968,688 moms think Lucifer is hot


I think perhaps when they say "One Million Moms" that they're just rounding up.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

ACoolDude said:


> now Satan's mum. What is the world coming to - Don't remember either of those in the Bible.


At least this one is literal... yet when he talks about "dad", he's being metaphorical, right?
Just like calling the other guy brother?


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

mattack said:


> At least this one is literal... yet when he talks about "dad", he's being metaphorical, right?
> Just like calling the other guy brother?


I try not to overthink this show (so why am I here?), but I always thought God was his Dad, and Amenadude was really his brother.

And it was "Mum" because all angels are British.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

ACoolDude said:


> I had no idea who that was, but apparently 1,000,000 moms got 31,312 signers of a petition to ban the show. Guess the other 968,688 moms think Lucifer is hot
> 
> After all can't "glorify Satan as a caring, likable person in human flesh.", cause then next thing you know teh gays will be allowed to marry.
> 
> ...


And then the petition talks about the show mischaracterizing Satan and things from the bible. Do these people not realize that TV does this with everything? That Tv shows are not real.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

aaronwt said:


> And then the petition talks about the show mischaracterizing Satan and things from the bible. Do these people not realize that TV does this with everything? That Tv shows are not real.


Umm, these people think the bible stories are real, so what do you exactly expect? 

Of course, with that in mind it's amusing to look at all the TV shows they don't complain about and to presume they must think all that stuff is real and correct.


----------



## ronsch (Sep 7, 2001)

Hopefully we will get more insight into Chloe's affect on him next season....


----------



## Jonathan_S (Oct 23, 2001)

busyba said:


> Why is that "obvious"?


"Obvious" might not be the best term. But in writing the mystery of why Lucifer is sometimes vulnerable having the effect be "proximity to an uninjured Chloe" seems like poor writing, at least when they've provided no hints that any "supernatural" effects are related to human health.
IOW introducing the plot device through it's non-activation due to a minor loophole isn't good practice.

Now if that's what they wanted to convey then there are ways to do that which would be better writing. But it would basically be to first establish Lucifer is vulnerable around her, and then have them shot, at which point he would be surprised to be uninjured.

It seems better writing if his vulnerability turns out to be due to his feelings or actions towards her, and not simply whether or not she's been injured.


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

ACoolDude said:


> ...
> First we have God's sister*, now Satan's mum. What is the world coming to - Don't remember either of those in the Bible.
> 
> *Sister showed up in another show earlier this year:
> ...


This Lucifer owes far more to the 17th Century epic poem Paradise Lost than the Bible.

In Paradise Lost Eve is referred to as the mother of all mankind, mother of all things living.

It is possible that Lucifer isn't referring to his own mother (but because it will provide a lot of material for his meetings with his therapist I think it will be his own mother).


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Mom!


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Is that Six?


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

busyba said:


> Is that Six?


A highly airbrushed version of her, yes.


----------



## TIVO_GUY_HERE (Jul 10, 2000)

Never seen Battlestar Galactica, I thought you were asking "6" from Blossom.. lol
I knew that couldn't of been her.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

ClutchBrake said:


> A highly airbrushed version of her, yes.


That explains why I had to ask. 

Something looks.... off.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

busyba said:


> Is that Six?


If she were a triplet, a sibling photo would be captioned: 666


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

astrohip said:


> mom!





busyba said:


> is that six?





clutchbrake said:


> a highly airbrushed version of her, yes.


----------

