قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home / Entertainment / It's a night of revenge and reunion on The 100

It's a night of revenge and reunion on The 100

TV Reviews All of our TV reviews in one convenient place.

The 1945 did not have anything left to say about what living in a post-apocalyptic world can tell us about our lives today. Some of that comes down to plotting, as the season has gone, with Clarke, Bellamy, and their friends once again encountering "other" that, over time, becomes a threat.

With that said, season six deserves some credit for going to different places, and playing with narrative storytelling in interesting ways. There's a slowburn quality to the reveals in Sanctum, with the true nature of the prima, and the consequences that come with that knowledge, rolling out over numerous episodes. Clarke's head and the early-season episode that saw the fall of the sun in the new year .

Still, The 100 is focused on the morality becomes a murky bit of business in times of chaos, violence, and survival. Clarke's people and those of Sanctum, but "Matryoshka" is the most distinct evidence yet, that the writers and showrunners want to see each other.

In essence, as we learn more about Sanctum, Russell, Josephine, and the Primes, The 100 Clarke, Bellamy, Murphy, and everyone else. It's an interesting premise. Past seasons have made the bad guys more, well, obviously bad, this season has waded into muddy waters. The show has been made to look at the Primes and The 100 are similar. They've both done what they need to do, and who's to say what's right and wrong in such situations?

Josephine and Clarke's strange, brain-sharing relationship has been a highlight, especially in this week's Episode as the two struggle to both come and go. Similar, the stories in Sanctum have made an interesting parallel, with Russell pictured as a Clarke-like figure, one who real bad about doing it.

In some ways, this gray area is fascinating. It complicates the relationships we see on screen, and it makes sure that we as viewers are always questioning the supposed protagonists. At the same time, that means that the show is refusing to take any sort of stand. By not drawing a line between the actions of each faction, The 100 implicitly endorses both.

The 1945 is letting the Primes off the hook, but in the show 's attempts to make a regular stand, it' s risking refusing to take a moral stand. Clarke's body comes to life. This is the episode that comes out of Murphy's head. Raven, the bearer of wisdom, tells Murphy that his fear of dying is complete, but the path that leads away from Hell is not through immortality, but rather morality. It's a great line and one country hard. Murphy clearly feels it, and we do too.

But the show itself does not seem to grasp that concept. This season, and this episode in particular, is too quick to "understand" the actions of the prime in an effort to establish some sort of moral complexity. But that complexity needs resolution of some sort. To make it clear that the primates are gods who need host bodies, is akin to Clarke keeping them alive in a time of was is simply ridiculous. And yet, The 100 wants to push that angle again and again.

This has been a compelling season, different from past seasons in ways that have felt refreshing and creatively inspired. But there's this lingering, uneasy feeling that the actions on both sides have taken the entire season to operate in a moral vacuum, refusing to take a stance one way or the other. Moral complexity is a good thing, and The 100 has traded in it since the beginning, but is there a cost? Thematic murkiness is admirable and intriguing, but at some point The 100 needs to be answered, rather than questions.

Stray observations

  • Henry Ian Cusick and then show me a "hatch" in the next episode! That's too many feelings!
  • "Your daughter is dead too."
  • Ryker remains a pivotal character to this season's arc, and yet totally uninteresting at the same time.
  • ] "I was not always like this." I did not enjoy this bit of moral murkiness. Josephine's past does not excuse her behavior, but it does clarify it in a way that feels meaningful, and not just a narrative trick to create moral conflict.

Source link