# The 100 - Pilot (who are we kidding - full-season thread). Spoilers okay.



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

Anyone else watch this? I was impressed. They managed to cram in a lot of exposition without it being too awkward, the characters were developed quickly, and the plot is interesting and mysterious enough that I found myself hooked. I'm glad this is on The CW, because that pretty much insures it'll be picked up for at least 7 or 8 seasons.


----------



## jollygrunt777 (Feb 28, 2012)

Don't jinx it!


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Is there an ugly person on any CW tv show?

I gave up on this show after the first 10 minutes. Then I read this thread and decided to finish the episode. It wasn't as bad as I thought but I'm not sure how far I'll want to continue with a show where 90% of the characters appear to be a-holes.


----------



## squint (Jun 15, 2008)

I couldn't stand the obnoxious music and seemingly non-stop cheering and yelling.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

squint said:


> I couldn't stand the obnoxious music and seemingly non-stop cheering and yelling.


The only music I really noticed was the use of "Radioactive" by Imagine Dragons, which must be the single most over-used television series montage song in the last year. I was amused by it, though, because the lyrics literally made sense in the context of this show.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

I thought it was pretty good. I hadn't heard anything about this show.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

stellie93 said:


> I thought it was pretty good. I hadn't heard anything about this show.


It was advertized heavily on the CW and I watch entirely too many CW shows.


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

They could have at least pretended to try to give the "kids" some useful training before sending them into the unknown. 

That kid that swung across the river... with all that jumping and hollering and nobody following behind, it was obvious that he was going to die.

So I guess they are now The 99.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

Lucky for me the CW really is pushing this program and airing multiple repeats during the week. My schedule was too crammed to record the pilot on first airing, so my TiVo is grabbing the Tuesday showing.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

Hard to believe with all the tech they have that they can't tell what the radiation level on earth is. 

There are quite a few familiar faces here, but I don't think I've seen the blonde girl before--she's pretty good.


----------



## jollygrunt777 (Feb 28, 2012)

Another dystopian Sci fi production that is based on another YA book series. And, It's actually quite good. 

With The Flash also coming soon, they'll have a nice portfolio of science fiction TV shows. 

Maybe The CW should consider taking over the Sci Fi moniker from the syfy channel.


----------



## nyny523 (Oct 31, 2003)

scandia101 said:


> They could have at least pretended to try to give the "kids" some useful training before sending them into the unknown. That kid that swung across the river... with all that jumping and hollering and nobody following behind, it was obvious that he was going to die. So I guess they are now The 99.


97 (2 died during the landing).

Better than I expected - I'll keep my SP and see where it goes...


----------



## awsnyde (May 11, 2007)

cheesesteak said:


> Is there an ugly person on any CW tv show?


Ha, ha, no. Well, yes actually, but they're in a distinct minority, and the attractive ones are really, really attractive. Arrow easily has two of the most beautiful actresses on TV, in Katie Cassidy and Caity Lotz, and one of the prettiest in Emily Bett Rickards. And I don't think my wife objects at all when Stephen Amell is shirtless.


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

nyny523 said:


> 97 (2 died during the landing).


They're all just so... forgettable


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

hmm sounds interesting, I'll check it out, also had not heard about it


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

I was thoroughly fed up with the 98 crybabies by the time they became 97. What a bunch of complete idiots. If that's what's left of the human race, good riddance. If they even managed to survive with the 5 brain cells between the 97 of them, I can only hope one or two thousand years of evolution can help.

For people born in space, as the 3rd of 4th generation, they sure seemed determined to party like it's 1999.

Yeah, I'm completely sure they managed to put the space station together from disparate pieces, all without any additional help from the ground. Right.

The premise wasn't too bad, at least as it was advertised... up until the first 5 words out of anyone's mouth were aired. Then it entered turbo stupid mode. The had more space devoted to their little prison in space than they should've had for four times as many people to live. Which is all the more unreasonable considering it needed to be a closed ecosystem for almost 100 years.


----------



## Numb And Number2 (Jan 13, 2009)

Peter000 said:


> Lucky for me the CW really is pushing this program and airing multiple repeats during the week. My schedule was too crammed to record the pilot on first airing, so my TiVo is grabbing the Tuesday showing.


I watched it here tonight: http://www.cwtv.com/cw-video/the-100/pilot/?play=c1840010-670e-41da-b0ca-dfee657f0ab1

I agree with every poster on this thread. To contribute I will say I wish Abigail Griffin had been floated.


----------



## AeneaGames (May 2, 2009)

nyny523 said:


> 97 (2 died during the landing).
> 
> Better than I expected - I'll keep my SP and see where it goes...


98, they started with 101, the brother of that girl who shot the chancellor wasn't supposed to be on it I thought.


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

dswallow said:


> I was thoroughly fed up with the 98 crybabies by the time they became 97. What a bunch of complete idiots. If that's what's left of the human race, good riddance. If they even managed to survive with the 5 brain cells between the 97 of them, I can only hope one or two thousand years of evolution can help.
> 
> For people born in space, as the 3rd of 4th generation, they sure seemed determined to party like it's 1999.
> 
> ...


I agree, I'll give it a few more chances but this show is on probation already.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Oh, and duh, I'm sure you've got more than one doctor aboard capable of performing major surgeries. Surely the medical school aboard the space station churns out more than one qualified candidate every generation. Wouldn't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater, would we, by tossing the only doctor out the airlock?

They're just not even trying to make this show have any sense whatsoever.


----------



## Silverman (Jan 18, 2013)

Remember the 100 are juvenile delinquents so the way they act actually is proper. They are not explorers or science people. You all do realize this was really done when Australia was first settled and I bet they had little prep either and I bet the young ones were a lot like this. 

I do agree it's crazy they never sent anyone before or set up a monitoring station in all that time to keep tabs on the conditions below. I like their generous use of the death penalty but why not recycle? Either use the organs to fix other good folks bodies or use them for food, or both.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Silverman said:


> Remember the 100 are juvenile delinquents so the way they act actually is proper. They are not explorers or science people. You all do realize this was really done when Australia was first settled and I bet they had little prep either and I bet the young ones were a lot like this.
> 
> I do agree it's crazy they never sent anyone before or set up a monitoring station in all that time to keep tabs on the conditions below. I like their generous use of the death penalty but why not recycle? Either use the organs to fix other good folks bodies or use them for food, or both.


The 100 are people who've violated "the law" aboard the space station. If what we're told about the laws and shown by their almost tossing their doctor out the airlock, they're not cut a lot of slack or time to develop into delinquents before being imprisoned. If you can even get into that level of societal dysfunction aboard a space station with no external support that has no renewable resources, that is. I'm not really sure why they're so well fed and fit, either. I expect the group will be culled down to a small number pretty quickly, or that we'll be focused on a tiny splinter group that'll move some distance from the main group quickly.


----------



## Shakhari (Jan 2, 2005)

I liked it for the most part, although the kids aren't that bright. "Yeah, you five guys hike 20 miles away, then another 20 miles back with enough food for 100 people while we sit around a bonfire doing whatever we want." Um, no. I'm going to go where the food is and staying put. You want to eat, come with. Otherwise, stay there and starve.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

awsnyde said:


> ...Arrow easily has two of the most beautiful actresses on TV, in Katie Cassidy and Caity Lotz, and one of the prettiest in Emily Bett Rickards...


I might agree about Cassidy, but I just can't get past Lotz's cleft chin..... But I totally agree with you about Rickards.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I did a mental "Yes!!!" when the giant river snake grabbed the annoying dark haired girl only to be disappointed when the dumbest giant river snake in the world let her go.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

cheesesteak said:


> I did a mental "Yes!!!" when the giant river snake grabbed the annoying dark haired girl only to be disappointed when the dumbest giant river snake in the world let her go.


I couldn't quite reconcile how violent the attack seemed versus how superficial her injuries appeared. I ultimately decided it was a toothless mutant giant river snake, and that the little bit of blood on her leg was just a scratch from the shore as she was getting pulled out of the water.


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

Bierboy said:


> I might agree about Cassidy, but I just can't get past Lotz's cleft chin..... But I totally agree with you about Rickards.


What a cleftist remark!  
I'd describe it more of as a "dimple" on her chin than a "cleft". 
And it's adorable!

And as far as "The 100", I deleted it after about 15 minutes, but based on the comments here, I may resurrect it and give it another shot.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

dswallow said:


> Oh, and duh, I'm sure you've got more than one doctor aboard capable of performing major surgeries. Surely the medical school aboard the space station churns out more than one qualified candidate every generation. Wouldn't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater, would we, by tossing the only doctor out the airlock?
> 
> They're just not even trying to make this show have any sense whatsoever.


So you won't be watching the show anymore?


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Peter000 said:


> So you won't be watching the show anymore?


Because it's not allowed to criticize a show and watch it? It just doesn't currently get my full attention. It'll be background while on the computer doing other stuff.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Peter000 said:


> So you won't be watching the show anymore?


We could only hope...


----------



## mm2margaret (Dec 7, 2010)

So, my opinion is the show has promise. But it could easily descend into nonsense. Some of the criticisms I've read so far are relevant but not necessarily deal breakers.

If, some of those excesses aren't corrected, or are allowed to grow, the show could end up being just another apocalyptic sci-fi pos.

But, for now, I'll keep the SP for a while.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Yeah, these days I will never abandon a show after one episode, because they no longer use pilots as pilots...that is, a proof-of-concept that will be reshot as necessary to bring it in line with what the actual series will be. These days, they usually just air it as shot and then make their adjustments in later episodes. I have to see at least the second episode, which is the first shot as part of the series order, to feel that I am making an informed decision.


----------



## Jonathan_S (Oct 23, 2001)

Shakhari said:


> I liked it for the most part, although the kids aren't that bright. "Yeah, you five guys hike 20 miles away, then another 20 miles back with enough food for 100 people while we sit around a bonfire doing whatever we want." Um, no. I'm going to go where the food is and staying put. You want to eat, come with. Otherwise, stay there and starve.


Yeah seriously. "Um, you guys do what you want. I'm going to get hungry, so I'm heading towards the food now. See you if/when I see you..."

Anyway, watched the first episode and decided it's not for me.
(Was amused by the guy floating around in freefall _after_ the capsule had hit the atmosphere; where it would be decelerating )


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Jonathan_S said:


> Yeah seriously. "Um, you guys do what you want. I'm going to get hungry, so I'm heading towards the food now. See you if/when I see you..."


I suppose if you want to make excuses, they've lived their entire lives in an environment where food is something that is brought to you, shelter is something that is provided for you, etc. So their complete inability to deal with reality could be simply the result of never having had to deal with reality before.

I doubt the show is that clever, but as I said, I'm waiting to see how the next couple episodes unfold (or unravel) before I make my judgement.


----------



## Numb And Number2 (Jan 13, 2009)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> they've lived their entire lives in an environment where food is something that is brought to you, shelter is something that is provided for you, etc. So their complete inability to deal with reality..


Um.


----------



## n548gxg (Mar 7, 2003)

Watched it last night.

I just could not get over the fact that this space station had 100 juvenile delinquents and they had a huge prison on the space station. 

How big is this space station? How many people live on it? Were this questions answered and I just missed it? 

Totally unbelievable. However, I will suspend belief and watch tonight's episode.

Also, I recognized the actor who played the teenager with the goggles but I just could not figure out from where. He was the older brother on the 'Diary of a Wimpy Kid' movie series.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

n548gxg said:


> Watched it last night.
> 
> I just could not get over the fact that this space station had 100 juvenile delinquents and they had a huge prison on the space station.


Apparently, they have a zero tolerance policy for just about everything. Just being a teenager seems like enough to get a Go Straight To Jail card in this universe. I'm surprised anybody makes it past puberty before being thrown out an airlock.


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

I found the show to be both entertaining and intriguing, even if not entirely realistic. This is TV so if you want it to be believable then stick with documentaries. Are there holes in the plot? Absolutely, but then just about every show on TV has plot holes big enough to drive a tank through it. Just watch a single season of 24 and tell me how believeable that is.  It's certainly not going to stop anyone from watching it.

It's an interesting twist on the post-apocalyptic world scenario, sort of like the original Planet of the Apes. The world changed, but the population from the space station wasn't there to change along with it or witness what took place in their absence. The life forms left on the planet following the nuclear holocaust will no doubt have mutated into all sorts of nastiness, which leaves the doors open for all sorts of things to come (mutant Bambi was a nice touch).

I'm sure the original 100 will definitely dwindle down to a handful of Abercrombie & Fitch teenagers as the show progresses. I must admit that I was disappointed that the river snake didn't cough up half a corpse instead of a few superficial scratches and scrapes. They could have at least sacrificed one of the A-hole juvenile delinquents for our amusement like they did with John Voight in Anaconda where he gets swallowed by the big snake.


----------



## JohnS-MI (Jan 25, 2014)

n548gxg said:


> Watched it last night.
> 
> I just could not get over the fact that this space station had 100 juvenile delinquents and they had a huge prison on the space station.
> 
> How big is this space station? How many people live on it? Were this questions answered and I just missed it?


I thought they said several national space stations from before the Global Nuclear War had been interconnected and population was circa 1200 in the intro sequence. However, I wasn't exactly riveted.


----------



## IDSmoker (Apr 11, 2004)

JohnS-MI said:


> I thought they said several national space stations from before the Global Nuclear War had been interconnected and population was circa 1200 in the intro sequence. However, I wasn't exactly riveted.


I heard them say that 12 (or maybe it was 14) individual nations had their own space stations at the time of the war, and afterwards all 12 (or 14) space stations were combined.

I didn't hear them provide a total population figure though.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

IDSmoker said:


> I heard them say that 12 (or maybe it was 14) individual nations had their own space stations at the time of the war, and afterwards all 12 (or 14) space stations were combined.


Some of which were basically small cities.


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

I'd like to see this as a limited run series or movie with a planned beginning middle and end. (And without Jaden smith)


----------



## n548gxg (Mar 7, 2003)

I have mixed emotions about this series. I like the kids on Earth part but hate the adults on the space station.

It would be a whole lot better if they launch the kids to Earth and then the space station ran out of air or exploded ( like Superman and Krypton).


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

n548gxg said:


> I have mixed emotions about this series. I like the kids on Earth part but hate the adults on the space station.
> 
> It would be a whole lot better if they launch the kids to Earth and then the space station ran out of air or exploded ( like Superman and Krypton).


I think the show would burn out quickly if we didn't have a balance of the adults on the station with the punks on earth....


----------



## Balzer (Nov 12, 2006)

I thought the pilot was a big pile of crap. At least everything on Earth was.. The stuff aboard the space station was mildly interesting..

So I might give a couple more episodes to be sure..


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

So do they have the capability of sending large numbers of people to earth or not? Why would they kill 210 people on the station rather than giving them whatever chance they have on the planet? And if they can't eventually send everyone to earth--they're done anyway. 

Problems aside, I like this show. :up:


----------



## randian (Jan 15, 2014)

stellie93 said:


> Why would they kill 210 people on the station rather than giving them whatever chance they have on the planet?


Because the writers are clueless? Far too many Hollywood writers who write for SF shows brag about not having an SF reading background. They say they'll "avoid cliches" and "bring a fresh take". If you don't have the reading background, how do you recognize the standard tropes?


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

randian said:


> Because the writers are clueless? Far too many Hollywood writers who write for SF shows brag about not having an SF reading background. They say they'll "avoid cliches" and "bring a fresh take". If you don't have the reading background, how do you recognize the standard tropes?


Perhaps we need to create a Trope-a-day calendar just for Hollywood/Network writers.


----------



## mm2margaret (Dec 7, 2010)

So, I think the femaie lead is quite strong (Eliza Taylor), the males, uhh, not so much, but it's all about material: the writing and the showrunner.

A good showrunner can make a bad show quite good, a bad one (I'm thinking of you "Intelligence") can make a show with talent seem clueless and can kill a show.

We need more time to see if the showrunner can pull this off.

Let me give you a for instance: they dump the kids on the planet with no communications - they have no way to communicate with them, except the tracking devices. EXCEPT, if the tracking devices work, chances are some kind of communicator could also work. A good showrunner can fix/adjust/adapt to that kind of inconsistency, and a bad one, just ignores it, thinking we're all stupid, don't care, or won't notice.

I recall reading an interview with Vince Gilligan who was the showrunner for Breaking Bad (and a fantastic writer), who commented that there were a number of times that the writers thought they had backed themselves into a corner they could not write themselves out of - and yet, we all know how that turned out.


----------



## JohnS-MI (Jan 25, 2014)

stellie93 said:


> So do they have the capability of sending large numbers of people to earth or not? Why would they kill 210 people on the station rather than giving them whatever chance they have on the planet? And if they can't eventually send everyone to earth--they're done anyway.
> 
> Problems aside, I like this show. :up:


Not clear they do. Did you see the heap of junk the lady doctor (or scientist) is planning to use to get to earth? And the last ship worked so well!

Your question is a good one. But it is not obvious they have the ability to send more groups to earth, although the 100 experiment must be to test whether they would survive if they got there. Perhaps they lack a solid plan


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

JohnS-MI said:


> Not clear they do. Did you see the heap of junk the lady doctor (or scientist) is planning to use to get to earth? And the last ship worked so well!
> 
> Your question is a good one. But it is not obvious they have the ability to send more groups to earth, although the 100 experiment must be to test whether they would survive if they got there. Perhaps they lack a solid plan


The writers probably think they can just land the space station


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

JohnS-MI said:


> Your question is a good one. But it is not obvious they have the ability to send more groups to earth, although the 100 experiment must be to test whether they would survive if they got there. Perhaps they lack a solid plan


The problem is, they'll run out of air in a matter of months...how many months depending on how many people they're willing to kill in the meantime. So if they don't go down to Earth, and relatively soon, they die anyway.

I'm really not sure they (the writers) have thought this through...


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

It seems they could establish at least one-way communication (kids to station) - one kid just has to regulate something that the band monitors, like body temp, in a morse-code rhythm - jump in cold water, warm up, etc - in a recognizable pattern. The more I type the more stupid this sounds, so I'll stop now.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> The problem is, they'll run out of air in a matter of months...how many months depending on how many people they're willing to kill in the meantime. So if they don't go down to Earth, and relatively soon, they die anyway.
> 
> I'm really not sure they (the writers) have thought this through...


The Council will come up with a compromise in that instead of killing those slated to be culled, they'll send them to the surface.

Or does that make too much sense?


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

danterner said:


> It seems they could establish at least one-way communication (kids to station) - one kid just has to regulate something that the band monitors, like body temp, in a morse-code rhythm - jump in cold water, warm up, etc - in a recognizable pattern. The more I type the more stupid this sounds, so I'll stop now.


I was just going to say it was kind of a cool idea (no pun intended) but how long would it take the station to get the pattern? that would be neat in itself.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

danterner said:


> It seems they could establish at least one-way communication (kids to station) - one kid just has to regulate something that the band monitors, like body temp, in a morse-code rhythm - jump in cold water, warm up, etc - in a recognizable pattern. The more I type the more stupid this sounds, so I'll stop now.


Makes sense to me.

What doesn't make sense is why the sent them down with NO COMMUNICATION DEVICES (other than the stupid wrist bands). Couldn't they have spared a two way radio or something? Nothing fancy.

Did I just miss them being destroyed or something?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

JYoung said:


> The Council will come up with a compromise in that instead of killing those slated to be culled, they'll send them to the surface.
> 
> Or does that make too much sense?


But they don't seem to have a way of getting to the surface...otherwise, Boss Lady wouldn't be risking a 130-year-old capsule renovated by a kid.

They've never explained how they plan on getting anybody else to the surface.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> They've never explained how they plan on getting anybody else to the surface.


Considering there have only been two episodes so far, I'm cutting the show some slack on that one. Presumably they do have a Plan. Somehow earth got all those people onto the stations (in the midst of nuclear Armageddon, no less) so all they need to do is reverse the process. Should be simple. ;-) Or did I misunderstand, and these are the descendants of astronauts, who already happened to be on their stations when hell broke loose below?

Also, now that I think about it - are we just seeing the American section of the station, or is everyone on the station American (even people who are supposed to be Scottish)?


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

Peter000 said:


> Makes sense to me. What doesn't make sense is why the sent them down with NO COMMUNICATION DEVICES (other than the stupid wrist bands). Couldn't they have spared a two way radio or something? Nothing fancy. Did I just miss them being destroyed or something?


There was a line of dialog in the pilot episode about everything having gone dark during re-entry. They were expecting to have communication but lost it, leaving the bands as their only means of monitoring.


----------



## AeneaGames (May 2, 2009)

Peter000 said:


> Makes sense to me.
> 
> What doesn't make sense is why the sent them down with NO COMMUNICATION DEVICES (other than the stupid wrist bands). Couldn't they have spared a two way radio or something? Nothing fancy.
> 
> Did I just miss them being destroyed or something?


I assumed they were going to use the lander for two-way communication but since that got destroyed by those kids who thought it cool to get out of their seats they lost that.


----------



## AeneaGames (May 2, 2009)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> But they don't seem to have a way of getting to the surface...otherwise, Boss Lady wouldn't be risking a 130-year-old capsule renovated by a kid.
> 
> They've never explained how they plan on getting anybody else to the surface.


And this I explained away that she doesn't want anyone else to know she is going and/or she doesn't want to use a lander/capsule/whatever that is meant for something else.


----------



## AeneaGames (May 2, 2009)

Still, I don't see why they aren't simply picking a couple 100 more people to send to earth since it does way more logical than just airlocking them. After all, the plan is that they all are going to return to earth one day which they've always assumed was after 100 years and this is what, 96 years later instead of 100? 

In any case they should have planned to have more landers/capsules to get them there!

I do hope I'm right about the other stuff I wrote above too otherwise it won't last long for me


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> The problem is, they'll run out of air in a matter of months...how many months depending on how many people they're willing to kill in the meantime. So if they don't go down to Earth, and relatively soon, they die anyway.
> 
> I'm really not sure they (the writers) have thought this through...


They've established that the life support will be fixed in 6 months, so they only need to kill enough people to get that far, that is how they are calculating how many to kill.


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

AeneaGames said:


> Still, I don't see why they aren't simply picking a couple 100 more people to send to earth since it does way more logical than just airlocking them. After all, the plan is that they all are going to return to earth one day which they've always assumed was after 100 years and this is what, 96 years later instead of 100?


Based on the dialogue in the last episode, I believe the plan was to return to earth 100 years after the current date.

They have been in space for 97* years.

* Corrected, thanks AG.


----------



## AeneaGames (May 2, 2009)

zordude said:


> Based on the dialogue in the last episode, I believe the plan was to return to earth 100 years after the current date.
> 
> They have already been in space for 140 years.


You sure? Not that my memory is all that great but I thought they said they wanted to send people back after 100 years and that sending those 100 kids now was a few years too early.

Just Googled it, the show is set 97 years after they left earth after a nuclear war.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

I believe in the pilot they mention how there's only enough resources for another 3-ish months -- that's MONTHS -- because of whatever error they made calculating things. Now at this point, just how many of whoever is left aboard the station would they need to get rid of in order for the resources available, which presumably includes some level of renewable ones, enable the remaining people and subsequent generations they produce, to survive for another 100 years.

So, in other words, they should be working to get most everybody to the surface now, as there's simply no choice, short of perhaps an alien-led rescue, or discovering they made yet another error calculating what remains. There's really not much alternative, unless there is some technology that will be available in the next few MONTHS that will be a game changer.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

They clarified in the second episode that the impending doom is not certain - the station engineers need six months to fix the issue (but it is fixable given that time). With the population at its current level, they will only survive for four. But if they kill enough people, they buy enough time for the engineers to fix the problem so the remaining survivors could stay on indefinitely. They also clarified that it's a problem with the O2 scrubbers, and that people are already showing signs of oxygen deprivation. Is there a separate "resources are running out" issue that's additional to the fixable O2 issue?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

danterner said:


> ...the station engineers need six months to fix the issue (but it is fixable given that time).


I suppose it's possible that this will be the first occasion in all of recorded history when the amount of time they estimate it will take to fix an issue is actually the amount of time it will take...


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

At least if they turn out to be wrong nobody will be around to say "I told you so"


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

I wonder if they give a window. "We can fix it between 8:00 and 12:00, or 12:00 and 4:00, in six months."


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> But they don't seem to have a way of getting to the surface...otherwise, Boss Lady wouldn't be risking a 130-year-old capsule renovated by a kid.
> 
> They've never explained how they plan on getting anybody else to the surface.


As stated by AG, I think that they do have other ships but Paige Turco needs this one because her operation is going to be clandestine.



danterner said:


> They clarified in the second episode that the impending doom is not certain - the station engineers need six months to fix the issue (but it is fixable given that time). With the population at its current level, they will only survive for four. But if they kill enough people, they buy enough time for the engineers to fix the problem so the remaining survivors could stay on indefinitely. They also clarified that it's a problem with the O2 scrubbers, and that people are already showing signs of oxygen deprivation. Is there a separate "resources are running out" issue that's additional to the fixable O2 issue?


By inference, resources are a continuing concern due to being a closed environment (which is why they are so liberal with the death penalty, wasting resources is a huge issue) but not a "running out" issue at the moment.



Rob Helmerichs said:


> I suppose it's possible that this will be the first occasion in all of recorded history when the amount of time they estimate it will take to fix an issue is actually the amount of time it will take...


Not dying is a great motivator.

Think how great your cable company service would be if the threat of death hung over them.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

JYoung said:


> Think how great your cable company service would be if the threat of death hung over them.


I'm more amused by the notion that they can determine how long it will take to fix it right down to the exact number of people they need to kill to keep enough air for that period. 208 dead just won't cut it. It MUST be 209, because that's how long it will take to fix the scrubbers. 210, of course, would be overkill.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I'm more amused by the notion that they can determine how long it will take to fix it right down to the exact number of people they need to kill to keep enough air for that period. 208 dead just won't cut it. It MUST be 209, because that's how long it will take to fix the scrubbers. 210, of course, would be overkill.


I'm sure Councilor Kane added some extra people to those figures as a buffer because, well, he's just that kind of guy.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I laughed when they showed that some of the useless kids formed a drum circle.


----------



## Silverman (Jan 18, 2013)

Actually, having room for a prison space on a hundred year old station does make sense. There would have been supplies and spare parts that would be now used up freeing space. 

The need for super strong re-entry vehicles is also unnecessary as you need not do a fiery re-entry. Just get in low orbit, fire your rocket or even just compressed gas like waste CO2 against your orbital speed till you are not moving relative to the ground anymore, then gravity will let you descend. 

That is how those boosters would come back after a shuttle launch. You have to make a good parachute of course but that ought be doable on the station. Remember that guy who jumped from 40 miles up and lived, same idea.


----------



## JohnS-MI (Jan 25, 2014)

Silverman said:


> Actually, having room for a prison space on a hundred year old station does make sense. There would have been supplies and spare parts that would be now used up freeing space.
> 
> The need for super strong re-entry vehicles is also unnecessary as you need not do a fiery re-entry. Just get in low orbit, fire your rocket or even just compressed gas like waste CO2 against your orbital speed till you are not moving relative to the ground anymore, then gravity will let you descend.
> 
> That is how those boosters would come back after a shuttle launch. You have to make a good parachute of course but that ought be doable on the station. Remember that guy who jumped from 40 miles up and lived, same idea.


Uhh, no. Low earth orbital velocity is around 18000 mph, it takes as much fuel to stop from 18000 mph as it does to get up to 18000 mph (at least on a "per pound" basis, a lot of pounds of fuel are already burnt). Fiery reentry is used specifically to avoid that huge fuel burn. A little fuel is burnt to start the fall into atmosphere, friction does (most of) the rest of the braking.

Hence the heat resistant tiles on the shuttles. The boosters never make it to orbit and do fall back to earth.


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

I was amused at their chosen form of execution: blow people out of an airlock, along with a bunch of the air that you're so worried about preserving. I haven't seen the second episode yet, but based on the size of the airlock they were going to send Dr. Griffin out of in the pilot, "floating" enough people will put a healthy dent in their resources I'd imagine.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

madscientist said:


> I was amused at their chosen form of execution: blow people out of an airlock, along with a bunch of the air that you're so worried about preserving. I haven't seen the second episode yet, but based on the size of the airlock they were going to send Dr. Griffin out of in the pilot, "floating" enough people will put a healthy dent in their resources I'd imagine.


Either they depressurized the airlock first, or they did the math and figured out that what they saved by floating the person was by far more than they wasted.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

I don't get the CW but I saw this show up on Netflix (Canada, not US). Watched a bit of it last night. Only has two episodes up. It's not a Netflix Original, so not sure how it got there. Are they going to get all shows filmed in Canada showing up on Netflix Canada in real time?


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

Peter000 said:


> Either they depressurized the airlock first, or they did the math and figured out that what they saved by floating the person was by far more than they wasted.


I don't think they can depressurize first. If they did, then when they open the port her body wouldn't whoosh out into space - it'd just stay in the depressurized airlock.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

danterner said:


> I don't think they can depressurize first. If they did, then when they open the port her body wouldn't whoosh out into space - it'd just stay in the depressurized airlock.


Maybe they fill the airlock with CO2 instead of O2 so by expelling people through the airlock they help the station. This theory has all the necessary plot holes and scientific stupidity to be plausible within their Universe.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

danterner said:


> I don't think they can depressurize first. If they did, then when they open the port her body wouldn't whoosh out into space - it'd just stay in the depressurized airlock.


All it needs is a gentle push...


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Maybe they figured it was just a cool concept, and didn't think about the practicalities...


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

Peter000 said:


> Either they depressurized the airlock first, or they did the math and figured out that what they saved by floating the person was by far more than they wasted.


 It's clear that what they saved would be far more than they lost (people breathe the oxygen in about 400 cubic feet of air per day) But it's still pretty wasteful, especially if that's the way you're getting rid of everyone: it would definitely add up.

Although I guess if they said that the problem was the scrubbers (again I haven't watched the second episode) it's not so bad: the problem is not really lack of oxygen, it's too much CO2... and that would be helped by getting rid of a CO2 producer even if you lost oxygen.



Rob Helmerichs said:


> Maybe they figured it was just a cool concept, and didn't think about the practicalities...


 _That_ I refuse to believe. It's the CW!


----------



## JohnS-MI (Jan 25, 2014)

madscientist said:


> It's clear that what they saved would be far more than they lost (people breathe the oxygen in about 400 cubic feet of air per day) But it's still pretty wasteful, especially if that's the way you're getting rid of everyone: it would definitely add up.
> 
> Although I guess if they said that the problem was the scrubbers (again I haven't watched the second episode) it's not so bad: the problem is not really lack of oxygen, it's too much CO2... and that would be helped by getting rid of a CO2 producer even if you lost oxygen.
> 
> _That_ I refuse to believe. It's the CW!


I think they need a science adviser. They have farmers growing food. What do plants do - they photosynthesize. Plants use CO2, water and sunlight to produce sugars and oxygen. They shouldn't need CO2 scrubbers as growing the plants for more food will liberate as much oxygen as it took to metabolize the previous food. They should be running a closed cycle just as earth does.

Compared to that, blowing air out the airlock is pretty stupid. Any form of leak is going to tax their air supply. But then. it's the CW.


----------



## squint (Jun 15, 2008)

As mentioned above, CO2 build-up becomes a problem long before O2 depletion in an enclosed space.

I doubt they're getting their O2 from stored liquid O2 or from electrolysis so a safe assumption is they're using plants to recycle the CO2. There are a few plausible reasons they would still need CO2 scrubbers.

Night: plants may use O2 and produce CO2 at night or they simply don't produce O2 during the night and scrubbers would be needed to keep CO2 levels down until the sun shines on the greenhouses again.

It may be advantageous to scrub CO2 from living areas and transport it to the greenhouses. The decreased CO2 levels are good for the humans and increased CO2 concentrations will boost plant growth and O2 production.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

madscientist said:


> _That_ I refuse to believe. It's the CW!


Which means there's a 50-50 chance there'll be witches on this show eventually.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

cheesesteak said:


> Which means there's a 50-50 chance there'll be witches on this show eventually.


We already know that Octavia doesn't float.


----------



## bobino (Jul 24, 2002)

The doors to all the chambers that open to space should be on the floor of the hallway. That's the direction of centripetal force. That's how they create "gravity" on a rotating space station. De-pressurize the chamber, open the door and the body moves out of the chamber because of inertia. No push or "whoosh" needed. Added advantage is that inertia keeps the body moving away from the station instead of floating around outside windows.

I took high school physics class 30+ years ago and it's clear the writers did not take a similar class.

-Bob


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

I thought episode 3 was pretty strong. I'm definitely invested now. The last scene surprised me.


----------



## Johncv (Jun 11, 2002)

jollygrunt777 said:


> Another dystopian Sci fi production that is based on another YA book series. And, It's actually quite good.
> 
> With The Flash also coming soon, they'll have a nice portfolio of science fiction TV shows.
> 
> Maybe The CW should consider taking over the Sci Fi moniker from the syfy channel.


Nooo...They will start doing bug-eye movies.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

danterner said:


> I thought episode 3 was pretty strong. I'm definitely invested now. The last scene surprised me.


Very surprised they killed off the President's son.

Though the blonde girl is getting on my nerves. Just so damned self-righteous.


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

Peter000 said:


> Very surprised they killed off the President's son.
> 
> Though the blonde girl is getting on my nerves. Just so damned self-righteous.


Wait.. what? Did I miss something? Did the chancellor's son get killed? How?


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

Watch the end of episode 3 to find out


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

I watched and deleted the episode, maybe I missed a final scene after commercials.

Thanks for the help though.


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

The little girl killed him, because her nightmares that she saw each night was his dad killing her parents. So to stop the nightmares she killed him, it's why she was watching to see how Adam was killed. She killed him by stabbing him in the neck. She then hummed the tune that the blonde chick was humming too. 

It was kind of creepy and unexpected of course.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

danterner said:


> I thought episode 3 was pretty strong. I'm definitely invested now. The last scene surprised me.


Straight from the Walking Dead...


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I'm kinda ashamed to admit it but this show is growing on me.

I've seen the actor who plays Murphy on two shows and he's played a total dick on both. He's very good at it. He has a long career ahead of him playing villains.

Clarke is annoyingly self righteous but when she wears that low cut blouse, I forgive her.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

This show has about the most attractive female cast I've seen (I can't really speak to the men's attractiveness).

How many of the 100 are left now? 95?


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Peter000 said:


> How many of the 100 are left now? 95?


According to the latest recap on tv.com, 93.

http://www.tv.com/shows/the-100/com...-1-episode-4-murphys-law-review-139706154706/


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Peter000 said:


> This show has about the most attractive female cast I've seen (I can't really speak to the men's attractiveness).


I don't know, Arrow's cast is pretty magnificent itself...


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I don't know, Arrow's cast is pretty magnificent itself...


Yeah, the CW shows have a knack for casting the best looking, most mediocre actors around.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Oh sure, kill off the minority so that the two white people can get together.

If they have acid storms often enough, wouldn't the fauna show signs of it?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

JYoung said:


> If they have acid storms often enough, wouldn't the fauna show signs of it?


All that plants that are susceptible to acid rain are long dead. The plants we see today are the descendents of acid-rain-resistant plants.

Yay evolution!


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> All that plants that are susceptible to acid rain are long dead. The plants we see today are the descendents of acid-rain-resistant plants.
> 
> Yay evolution!


I would think the acid rain would affect the streams and rivers also, make them all acidy and possibly non-potable.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Is it "The Hundred"? or is it "The One Hundred"? This keeps me up at night...


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

Bierboy said:


> Is it "The Hundred"? or is it "The One Hundred"? This keeps me up at night...


According to the "Previously On..." spoken bit at the beginning of the episodes, it's "The Hundred." (I know this because it kept me up at night, too).


----------



## Numb And Number2 (Jan 13, 2009)

Bierboy said:


> Is it "The Hundred"? or is it "The One Hundred"? This keeps me up at night...


Ask some and they will tell you it's the "Ahundred."


----------



## sieglinde (Aug 11, 2002)

I have watched the first two episodes and am surprised that I like the show since, I am not into CW teen angst shows. There are plot holes you could drive the USN George HW Bush through but it is still entertaining.


----------



## Blackssr (Mar 4, 2004)

Peter000 said:


> This show has about the most attractive female cast I've seen (I can't really speak to the men's attractiveness).


For me, IMHO the Spartacus series had the best looking women in the history of TV.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Blackssr said:


> For me, IMHO the Spartacus series had the best looking women in the history of TV.


Of course, Spartacus had, shall we say, an unfair advantage...


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Of course, Spartacus had, shall we say, an unfair advantage...


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

There are a couple of women on Banshee that can be on my team.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

TV shows in general tend to have better-than-average looking women...


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> TV shows in general tend to have better-than-average looking women...


I hadn't noticed.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

They certainly aren't afraid to kill people on this show.


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

Kudos to the writers for not having a last minute reprieve.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Is there some reason they couldn't drop 325 people down to Earth instead of killing 325 people aboard the station? Lack of "drop ships"? Of course, if they have no drop ships what exactly are their plans to get there at any point in the future?

Did they tell everyone they dumped 100 of their prisoner kids to Earth, or is that still a dirty secret?

That place they saw the rocket flares from seemed pretty spartan compared to everyone's quarters... was that her cell? With a "skylight"? 

And speaking of rocket flares shot into space... Yeah. How convenient someone happened to be looking into just the right 5% of the planet during the 30-ish seconds they might be there, not to mention how convenient the station was in just the right place so that when they were finally ready to launch the rocket flares, they'd even be able to be in a useful location.

And I suppose since it's The CW there was simply no real question that the one person who'd make it down to the ground would be the girlfriend of the guy who just had sex with another girl the night before... just so they could create a jealousy triangle of some sort.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

There's reasonable explanations for all your nitpicks. 

They don't have dropsies ready. 
Even prison cells now have barred windows. (At least TV ones do)
Stationary orbit. 
What else are you supposed to do in a holding cel with one window with a spectacular view? Stare out where your daughter you miss horribly is.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

dswallow said:


> Is there some reason they couldn't drop 325 people down to Earth instead of killing 325 people aboard the station? Lack of "drop ships"? Of course, if they have no drop ships what exactly are their plans to get there at any point in the future?





Peter000 said:


> They don't have dropsies ready.


Was there dialog to that effect? 
Because I don't recall hearing any.

Otherwise, I have to agree with Doug that it was stupid.
Since that thought has been on my mind, I kept wondering why they didn't even think about sending some people to the surface.

You could have even kept the sacrifice theme even though I'd take probable death over certain death.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

JYoung said:


> Was there dialog to that effect?
> Because I don't recall hearing any.
> 
> Otherwise, I have to agree with Doug that it was stupid.
> ...


I can't remember specifically, but it seems to me there was something to that effect in the pilot... like they were x months away from it.

But I'm just offering explanations/rationalizations for the nitpicks, whether they were offered by the the show or not.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Peter000 said:


> There's reasonable explanations for all your nitpicks.
> 
> They don't have dropsies ready.
> Even prison cells now have barred windows. (At least TV ones do)
> ...


But the whole point of sending the 100 kids down was to find out if it was habitable or not, because that was their answer to their environmental problem, to which, because they didn't have a definitive "it's-survivable," they had to kill another 300-ish people.

Even if it took a bit more time to ready a "dropsie," they did have over 100 more volunteers to die; I suspect if it were volunteering to potentially live on the surface, there could even have been more.

But if you're sending 100 people down (secretly or not), in the hopes you'll discover you can send more, and you know it takes time to ready additional dropsies, then certainly you'd start readying the dropsies as soon as you could do so.


----------



## aaronw (Apr 13, 2001)

So I'm just an episode and 1/3 in, but there are some things that just don't make sense. Why don't these magic wristbands (which they made from scratch) have radiation monitors on them? How do these kids (of which it's been 100 years since anyone lived on earth) that are living in 'marginally capable orbiting space stations' have time to learn about Apache indians? None of them have ever seen a real deer, so why would the mutated deer be that odd? Nobody has had go to camping for 100 years, and any of that knowledge would be 3 generations old. I mean, if nobody has had to pitch a tent in the entire time between today and world war I, that knowledge would get lost. How would they know what rain is? Although I suppose the space station would have to self-sustainable via agriculture/recycling of water, so maybe it could rain in a small area.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

FTR, I'm not going to go on debating what obviously has a simple explanation. If you want to let the inconsistency go on to drive you crazy, go ahead.

The radiation detector in the wristbands is a good point though. If even they build it into a couple of them they'd know it wasn't radioactive down there. But, there could be more stuff besides radiation down there that's a killer. Like maybe a virus, or other inhospitable conditions.

And I didn't intend to use the word "dropsies," It was a typo. DAMN iOS KEYBOARD!


----------



## squint (Jun 15, 2008)

Well, if this show made any sense they would have sent probes down there to monitor the earth the past few decades.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Peter000 said:


> I can't remember specifically, but it seems to me there was something to that effect in the pilot... like they were x months away from it.
> 
> But I'm just offering explanations/rationalizations for the nitpicks, whether they were offered by the the show or not.


I'm pretty sure that was the whole bit about how it would take 6 months to fix the air recyclers and they only had three months worth of air left.

I don't think that "they could have sent those people to the surface instead of suffocating them" thing is a nitpick.

I realize that the writers wanted to do the whole "noble humans who sacrifice their lives for others" and there were hard choices to make but like Bays and Thomas of HIMYM, they missed that that the story wasn't set up properly to support that goal.

Not when you consider I spent half the episode saying, "What about sending them to the surface".


----------



## Howie (May 3, 2004)

I saw the renegade Amish girl from Banshee on some mainstream network program the other night. I mean ABC, NBC, CBS or Fox. I just can't remember right now. TV overload.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

JYoung said:


> I don't think that "they could have sent those people to the surface instead of suffocating them" thing is a nitpick.... [snip]
> 
> Not when you consider I spent half the episode saying, "What about sending them to the surface".


See, YOU spend half the episode saying that. I didn't. I spent 5 seconds asking myself that and rationalizing that they couldn't get dropsies ready in time. And I was fine.


----------



## squint (Jun 15, 2008)

Howie said:


> I saw the renegade Amish girl from Banshee on some mainstream network program the other night. I mean ABC, NBC, CBS or Fox. I just can't remember right now. TV overload.


I think it was Hawaii 5-0.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Peter000 said:


> FTR, I'm not going to go on debating what obviously has a simple explanation. If you want to let the inconsistency go on to drive you crazy, go ahead.


Wait, you're debating?

No, wait, I don't think it's even close to driving anyone crazy. It started stupid. Nobody expected it to improve. This is just trying to make the best of all that stupid.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

You're not debating? Why are you still posting telling me everything I'm saying is wrong, then? 

I'll tell you one person it's driving crazy. ME.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Peter000 said:


> You're not debating? Why are you still posting telling me everything I'm saying is wrong, then?
> 
> I'll tell you one person it's driving crazy. ME.


Technically you're the one who posted that everything I said is wrong. I'm simply discussing further the points you attempted to make. (I was sort of just ignoring the "stationary orbit" one as that's pretty much exactly the same sort of non-science we've seen so far on this show. )


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

If this show made any sense, they would have sent 100 volunteers who had skills and were responsible human beings to Earth, not 100 a-holes. But it's a tv show. I try not to let illogical things bother me too much or I'd be down to watching about three shows per week.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

cheesesteak said:


> If this show made any sense, they would have sent 100 volunteers who had skills and were responsible human beings to Earth, not 100 a-holes.


IIRC, they didn't know the Earth was habitable yet (how they didn't know that is another question). They sent the convicts because they thought they were possibly/probably going to be fried by radiation anyway, so why send anybody valuable?


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> IIRC, they didn't know the Earth was habitable yet (how they didn't know that is another question). They sent the convicts because they thought they were possibly/probably going to be fried by radiation anyway, so why send anybody valuable?


I get that but they just got 300 people to sacrifice their lives simply by telling people the truth. Following that logic, if they had done that before sending 100 Lord Of The Flies juvenile delinquents to Earth they probably would have been able to round up 100 better candidates than they did.

Now that I think of it, all of the 100 prisoners were kids. Are there no adult prisoners? Why not kill however adult prisoners there are and save some fraction of the 300 good people who died?


----------



## zordude (Sep 23, 2003)

cheesesteak said:


> Now that I think of it, all of the 100 prisoners were kids. Are there no adult prisoners? Why not kill however adult prisoners there are and save some fraction of the 300 good people who died?


Adult criminals get spaced.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

cheesesteak said:


> I get that but they just got 300 people to sacrifice their lives simply by telling people the truth. Following that logic, if they had done that before sending 100 Lord Of The Flies juvenile delinquents to Earth they probably would have been able to round up 100 better candidates than they did.
> 
> Now that I think of it, all of the 100 prisoners were kids. Are there no adult prisoners? Why not kill however adult prisoners there are and save some fraction of the 300 good people who died?


Hindsight is 20/20. That was one of the points made in this episode is that the powers that be assumed people would freak out about the problems rather than self-sacrifice.

And there are no adult prisoners. It's capital punishment for any crime for anyone 18 and over, and they're floated.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Peter000 said:


> See, YOU spend half the episode saying that. I didn't. I spent 5 seconds asking myself that and rationalizing that they couldn't get dropsies ready in time. And I was fine.


Of course I do.
Because they've already told us that the drop ships exist and they've already used one to send "The 100" to the surface.
They obviously have to have more if they are thinking of moving the rest of the population to the surface.

When dealing with something this big, a writer damn well better tell us why there are no other options otherwise our main characters will look like idiots.
It cheapens the drama that the writers have set up and what could have had a huge impact ends up looking kind of silly.

With the way the writers set this up, after the people died, I fully expected Alessandro Juliani to say to the Chancellor, "Say, why didn't we send those people down on the drop ships we still happen to have over there?"

And then the Chancellor would look like Sheldon did when Amy ruined Raiders for him.

It's not a nitpick.
It's a plot hole big enough to drive the _Enterprise_ through.

It doesn't drive me crazy.
It does cause me to do a lot of eye rolling though.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

Thanks to Indie's rant thread, I started watching this show last night. I'm 2 episodes in and enjoying it.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

zordude said:


> Adult criminals get spaced.


You mean floated....


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

I loved that they still said someone would get floated when the kids threatened to kill them on earth.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

stellie93 said:


> I loved that they still said someone would get floated when the kids threatened to kill them on earth.


Kind of like dialing a phone number.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Kind of like dialing a phone number.


Hey...some of us old farts still have rotisseries....


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

You mean a rotary? Or were you really referring to a device used to cook chickens and the like? Cause those are still around


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

vertigo235 said:


> You mean a rotary? Or were you really referring to a device used to cook chickens and the like? Cause those are still around


NEW! From RONCO! It COOKS CHICKENS! It DIALS PHONE NUMBERS!

It's the amazing ROTISSARY!

And you can have it now for the AMAZING LOW PRICE of $19.99!


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> NEW! From RONCO! It COOKS CHICKENS! It DIALS PHONE NUMBERS!
> 
> It's the amazing ROTISSARY!
> 
> And you can have it now for the AMAZING LOW PRICE of $19.99!


I'll take two...


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Will somebody please kill Bellamy soon?

I was hoping the grounder would break out a Cockney accent when Octavia was trying to talk to him.


----------



## aaronw (Apr 13, 2001)

Catching up via thecw.com online ... how in the world can they hide octavia for 13(?) years in their room and then one day 'hey, let's go to this party!'


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

cheesesteak said:


> Will somebody please kill Bellamy soon?


Two months later and I'm still hoping somebody kills Bellamy.

I definitely wasn't expecting the Mountain Men to be US troops.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

cheesesteak said:


> I definitely wasn't expecting the Mountain Men to be US troops.


Yeah, that was the best kind of twist...complete surprise, but obvious once you think about it. I even wondered earlier in the episode how the Grounders adapted their tactics so quickly and well to deal with military-grade weapons, but I guess it wasn't so "quickly" after all!

It was nice seeing the look on Dollhouse's face when she saw the charred remains of just about everybody she's ever known, and FINALLY realized that taking on people who can survive a century in space, even their children, is maybe not the best career move.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> It was nice seeing the look on Dollhouse's face when she saw the charred remains of just about everybody she's ever known, and FINALLY realized that taking on people who can survive a century in space, even their children, is maybe not the best career move.


When Anya(?) broke into the dropship, looking all threatening, I kept wondering why somebody didn't shoot her.

I know there's a difference between killing people in self defense is different than executing them but I laughed a little when Clarke yelled "We're not grounders!" to stop the redshirts from killing Anya only to open the door to a mass grounder barbecue.


----------



## Silverman (Jan 18, 2013)

I recall the arc said it had 7 drop ships left and could take abot 800 down. Then some rebelled and left on their own, wasting much of the air left, but now the arc claimed there were no drop ships left. Major inconsistency.

The 7 made sense since each original space station had to have a way to come and go, and the now lack of all those made little sense other than that one got used. What was their hurry to leave right then anyway?
You'd think they would have picked the best one to go in first and it would have landed.

It's renewed, and with this ending looks like Jericho is what we will have next year.


----------



## Jeeters (Feb 25, 2003)

Silverman said:


> I recall the arc said it had 7 drop ships left and could take abot 800 down. Then some rebelled and left on their own, wasting much of the air left, but now the arc claimed there were no drop ships left. Major inconsistency.
> 
> The 7 made sense since each original space station had to have a way to come and go, and the now lack of all those made little sense other than that one got used. What was their hurry to leave right then anyway?
> You'd think they would have picked the best one to go in first and it would have landed.


Before whats-her-name stole the first exodus ship, there was talk about it being prepared and having to charge its batteries. And that the charging would go slowly over several days so that the power grid of the ark wasn't impacted.

At the beginning of the second to last episode, the chancellor stated that the ark only had 51 hours of life support left. Presumably due to more air loss and major damage to the power grid that the separating exodus ship caused, that was mentioned in an episode before that.
At the end of the episode, the chancellor is reminded that there's "no more exodus ships". That's where the chancellor then says something like "yes we do. We have the ark", then proposes taking it down to Earth. It's never clarified what "no more exodus ships" means: that they were destroyed / damaged? Or that they're just not prepared/charged and there's no time/power to finish doing so.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Silverman said:


> Major inconsistency.


Yeah. Surprise surprise. You say that like there's only been four or five hundred so far.


----------



## Silverman (Jan 18, 2013)

Yeah, you are right but usually it's over science errors. Here I can't figure why writers would say they have all these ships and then later not, just say that there were the 2 or 3 to begin with!


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Silverman said:


> Yeah, you are right but usually it's over science errors. Here I can't figure why writers would say they have all these ships and then later not, just say that there were the 2 or 3 to begin with!


I'm not against the idea that it's not necessary to say anything about it, as long as everything they do henceforth is consistent with the thing they didn't actually tell us. Unfortunately they haven't established that sort of relationship with their audience by their actions so far.


----------



## GameGuru (Dec 12, 2003)

Perhaps only 2 or 3 were actually ready to go, you know fully charged and functional.


----------



## Tsiehta (Jul 22, 2002)

Bierboy said:


> You mean floated....


So, a 2019 bump because I just started this. My wife was walking through and asked why they were yelling "float him" and he was all wet before they hung Murphy.

Dropsies has me laughing.

I hate that I'm enjoying this show.


----------



## ufo4sale (Apr 21, 2001)

Tsiehta said:


> So, a 2019 bump because I just started this. My wife was walking through and asked why they were yelling "float him" and he was all wet before they hung Murphy.
> 
> Dropsies has me laughing.
> 
> I hate that I'm enjoying this show.


don't hate it just embrace the wonder of the show. For a CW show it sure has a lot of killing and when I mean alot I mean ALOT.


----------

