MovieChat Forums > The 100 (2014) Discussion > So much change in just 97 years?

So much change in just 97 years?


Would so much change really happen in such a short amount of time? Let's start with the cultural changes. The people on the ark have a distinct culture with new religion, new cultural phrases (ie "May we meet again."), etc. The grounders and reapers have their own separate tribal cultures with a whole new languages, and seemingly no knowledge of the past.

And talk about the physical changes to earth. I know there was nuclear fallout but come on! They keep showing the Lincoln memorial, so we know they're in the middle DC, but absolutely no other signs of man-made structures??? No city ruins anywhere?

reply

That's also my biggest issue with the show. The book was set 300 years after the nuclear apocalypse so I'm not sure why Rothenburg accelerated the timeline so much.

Keep in mind that the grounders probably don't live very long so they would have had several generations within one century. Their language also didn't really begin organically, they were forced to create it in order to have a defense against the Mountain Men.

reply

I don't even know why people are complaining about this. We've seen same change in past 20 years of any rural area. With fall of government and society, with sharp decline in population and resources, where bare survival becomes best you can get, yea, remnants of human race would easily go feral in about years time

reply

This is something that bothers me too. There is no way that in 97 years the landscape would change that much and go back to such a dense forest so quickly. Even if we say thay the missiles or whatever destroyed all the buildings etc. there would still be debris everywhere, cement, metal, that stuff doesn't just breakdown into nothing.
On another note it also bothers me that the sky crew were there for like a week before they found a bunker full of weapons... the grounders have been wandering the same area for 97 years and didn't come across it. I know it's a work of fiction but you at least need to make it a little bit plausible to be believable!!

reply

Grounders don't use guns anyway.

reply

i think this is because guns have somehow fallen out of grounder knowledge. not simply that they just choose not to...

reply

They're right, the grounders didn't use guns for "religious"/superstitious reasons. The Mountain Men started the story about how any grounder who picks up a gun will die I think. Octavia said "you can't have your enemy fighting back" or something to explain it.

reply

I agree there would be far more rubble and remnants of buildings. And your point about the language is spot on. Survivors wouldn't suddenly forget how to speak English or whatever their native language was and invent a new one.

Lets not also forget that Mount Weather is suddenly within a short walking distance of the Lincoln Memorial.

But these are just a few of the many nagging issues I have with the show. I am currently binge watching from season 1 and to me its like car crash TV. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone but for some reason I keep on watching.

reply

You keep watching 'cause you like the show. Nothin' wrong in saying so. I have my problems with The 100, too, but those problems didn't stop me from enjoying it.

reply

I have just this minute finished season 2 and can safely say I don't watch it because I like it. There is nothing at all to like.
The people from the Arc are just a bunch of genocidal maniacs that the world would be better off without.
Who exactly are we supposed to be rooting for in this show if none of the characters have any redeemable factors about them.

The grounders were happily living out their lives until this bunch of murdering psychos from outer space turned up.

Sure the people in Mount Weather were a bad bunch but they didn't go around murdering infants and old people in a village just because someone thought their girlfriend was there. Or killing their allies just because someones mum was in danger.

If the Nuke that the AI had at the end was launched and it wiped out everyone from the arc, then i would find something to like about it.

Right now, I do not know if I will bother with season 3.

reply

The grounders were happily living out their lives until this bunch of murdering psychos from outer space turned up.

They weren't murdering psychos. They arrived on Earth believing it to be uninhabited and were immediately attacked by grounders who were hardly peace-loving pacifists. Their society is based on fighting and warfare. Remember Tris who was Anya's second in season 1? She was barely a teenager but Anya said she'd already killed five people in combat.

You can't see this show in black and white. Everyone has done bad things - both grounders and skycrew - but usually because they believed they were doing the right thing to protect themselves and their people.

reply

You can't see this show in black and white. Everyone has done bad things - both grounders and skycrew - but usually because they believed they were doing the right thing to protect themselves and their people.


I am sure if you were to ask Hitler, Stalin, etc, they would all give you this excuse as well. But you know how well history judges them don't you.

And Finn wiping out a village wasn't for his people but just for a girl he fancied. But they chose to forgive him and so all became complicit with his crime. Most of the crimes committed by the Arc crew have nothing to do with warfare, just cruelty. Wiping out the entire population of Mount Weather wasn't a questionable act of war, it was an unjustified act of genocide.

Yes the grounders (with their crazy traditions that seem to be way too ingrained to be just 97 years old) have committed cruelty, but they aren't meant to be the civilised people of the show. The Arc survivors are. This is where there writing is way too shabby, and this is why (after 3 episodes of season 3) I have given up and shall not be watching anymore.

reply

Wiping out the entire population of Mount Weather wasn't a questionable act of war, it was an unjustified act of genocide.


How can you say it was unjustified when 44 members of the original 100 were being drilled into for their bone marrow? Clarke tried her hardest to find a peaceful solution but Cage Wallace refused to negotiate.

Anyway, if you've given up watching the show there's no point in discussing it further.

reply

It was terrible, yes, I'm sure no one disagrees with that and especially horrible considering the people who were innocent. But hardly unjustified. The leadership was responsible for brutally torturing and killing who knows how many people, and had no qualms about draining the Arkers without a second thought. And the majority of the population, while maybe not directly responsible, were silently culpable as they all clearly knew what was going on. I'm not at all saying the all deserved to die. But I think "unjustified" is quite a stretch.

reply

The grounders with their inflexible taboos and traditions. All in under five generations. They behave as if these traditions are thousands of years old.
Doubtful that traditions could spread that far in such a short length of time and much less become so ingrained.

reply

absolutely, one of the main things I was getting at

reply

Totally agree. I watched all three seasons, enjoyed most of it, but this timeline was the biggest unrealistic aspect for me, especially given that it was much longer in the books (which I haven't read.. just saw the timeline in a review) and that there doesn't seem to be any reason for this altered timeline. The physical changes don't even bother me so much but all the religious stuff, the lack of history knowledge, the rituals, etc. -- it would be different if the Grounders were living somewhere on an isolated island or whatever and their ancestors hadn't been a part of Western civilization, but that's not the case here. 97 years is basically four generations, five at best. Even with modern technology gone, that's not enough to completely erase history and/or prevent mouth-to-mouth telling of what happened.

reply

This was bothering me too, particularly the geological changes. The season two intro includes an image of the Statue of Liberty buried to the crown, and a scene shows what appears to be the Golden Gate Bridge covered in soil or sand to the top of the towers, which is ridiculous if this is the nearish future. The only logical explanation is that this is set in the very distant future, but then it is unlikely that the twelve stations would all be from extant countries today. A couple of the nations, such as Uganada, are many decades, or more likely centuries, from this level of technology, so we know it is not set until at least 2100 C.E. but otherwise it is all just too familiar to us today for landmarks hundreds of feet high to be completely buried in just a few centuries from now.

reply

But there were nuclear bombs going off all over the world. Surely that would have caused enormous amounts of dust to be thrown up into the atmosphere which would then fall and bury a lot of the Earth's surface area.

reply

Yeah I thought about that but it doesn't hold up. The Statue of Liberty is about 275 feet to the crown while the Golden Gate Bridge is 746 feet high. The amount of rock that would need to be vaporized to evenly coat the entire NY and SanFran regions in that much sediment would require such huge nuclear detonations that NONE of the life on Earth would have survived, let along be as vibrant as the show depicts within 100 years of the apocalypse.

Add to that the fact that debris from nuclear explosions is fired high up into the stratosphere where it is spread over huge distances by hurricane force winds at that altitude before raining down as a fairly evenly distributed powder. If NY and SF were covered to the depth the show depicts the powder depth would drop off fairly gradually and you wouldn't be able to get within hundreds or even thousands of miles of them without seeing deep coverage. Since we know that the dropship came down in the general area of Washington D.C., which is 225 miles from NYC there should be powder deeply covering everything there too, but the fact that the Lincoln statue is still above ground (The entire monument including enclosing roof us just 100ft high) suggests that little debris has come down here.

Also, Earth's surface is about 75% ocean and most of the sediment would fall over water, not land. Again, I'm convinced that you couldn't vaporize that much of Earth's crust without killing ALL life, except possibly the extremophiles in the deepest parts of the oceans.

reply

Well just look how much has changed in the last 97 years even without a nuclear winter. Also this show IS set about 300 years from now. So its not like all of these changes have to have happened in 97 years realy. Some of it may have been underway well before that. We havent realy seen squat of the Earth the Skycrew left behind before the Nuclear Winter.

reply

Also this show IS set about 300 years from now


The nuclear holocaust took place in 2052 and The 100 landed 97 years later. So it's about the year 2149 or 133 years from now.

reply

Are you certain? I remeber this differently.

reply

The book was set 300 years into the future, the show was only 97 years.

reply

97 years after the bombs dropped yes. But to my memory they never specified what year that was. We know 12 nations had permanent spacestations so that definetly cant be today and must be at least somewhat in the future.

reply

Oh yeah you're right! I thought you were talking about the amount of time after the bomb dropped, not the amount of time after today. I'm not sure exactly what year it's supposed to be.

reply

97 years after the bombs dropped yes. But to my memory they never specified what year that was.

I'm pretty sure it was 2052. That was the date on the video that Murphy saw when he was trapped in the bunker and the guy on that said it was all his fault as he'd given Alie the launch codes.

reply