Anyone know when clarke’s birthday is? I looked on the wiki but it only said october and the year
I think the only mention of her birthday is in the pilot when they are gathering the hundred and she says “I don’t turn 18 for another month!” Im not sure if we were ever given a specific date.
Because I’m lost in the way you move, the way you feel.
So I watch The 100. The main leads on that show are in a “slow burn” relationship, and frankly we don't know if the writers will ever put them together. It’s been 5 seasons of watching two people that would qualify as “soulmates” never step over that edge into romance. People are frustrated because 5 seasons is a long time.
I’m sorry, but I watched JAG! That would be 9 seasons of slow burn, they care about each other, heck they both are in love with each other but can’t be together because “regulations,” will-they-won’t-they. NINE SEASONS. Only to be resolved in the last few episodes rather hastily. So yes, 5 seasons is a long time. But five 13 episode seasons is very different than 9 24 episode seasons.
Either way, it’s so painful!
Hey Morgane, do you know any other shows with ships like bellarke? or something you would suggest someone to watch based on that? I'm still kind of sad about it and I wish I could watch something else to take my mind out of it. Thank you for always being so kind! You're recaps are the best!
Sorry, but the best thing about Bellamy and Clarke’s relationship is that it’s unique. So that also means that the worst thing about Bellamy and Clarke’s relationship is that it’s unique. I don’t have any rec for you, sadly !
JAG. 9 season slow burn between “soulmates.” They were military lawyers though so it actually made sense why they couldn't be together.
Me, waiting to see which character the writers think they can use to solve all of the problems and question the morality of situations - now that they have killed off the most precious bean of them all:
Wouldn’t the logical character be his kid?
In peace, may you leave this shore.
In love, may you find the next.
Safe passage on your travels.
Until our final journey to the ground.
May we meet again
There’s either 4 or six depending on how you want to count them. Murphy, Octavia, Clark and Miller were in the 100 that were sent down. Bellamy was 101 and Raven was 102.
After 4 years in this fandom, I just now realized how little people worry about Murphy’s fate on the show. Never have I ever seen anyone speculate whether or not he was going to die. Not even during the time the finale rolls around. I guess John just really is a cockroach.
just imagine The 100 withouth Murphy… not possible… the end
It’s because he is John “I save my own ass” Murphy. He is 100% a consistent character.
sometimes……….. shows that aren’t cancelled…………. are worse
Oh its so true. There is a point in a story where it needs to reach a natural end. Novels tell a story, they go through an intro, rising action, climax, falling action and resolution. Shows should do the same and they should be okay with coming to an end. I’ve seen so many shows where the last few seasons the show is floundering and they should have just ended it.
Yikes. Also how is a 22 year old a teacher?
She’s a “teaching apprentice” which I guess is also supposed to make it feel less creepy? She’s been obsessed with boarding schools since she was 12, and after college instead of getting her masters right away, she decides to be an apprentice at a boarding school, but specifically chooses a boys’ boarding school because she’s obsessed with how “cool and unembarrassed” boys are. Aka she’s into teenage boys, which like, first of all WHY, and second of all, no.
First of all, I agree that this book sounds creepy, but a 22 year old first year teacher is not unrealistic. I personally took summer classes, graduated a semester early and landed my first teaching job right out of college. I turned 23 a couple of months into my first year of teaching. So it’s not out of the realm of possibility. That doesn’t make the book’s premise okay though.
I humiliated them. The two proudest people in the world and I humiliated them. I spoiled their plans. I took their fine upbringing in a world of comfort and opportunity and I threw it in their faces. I broke their hearts and they’ll never forgive me.
It probably meant more to them that they got to see this event (her graduating) at all. They had probably thought that the opportunity had passed.
My mom said that today in church her pastor said in the sermon that Jesus told us to help the poor, and taking money away from public schools to give to charter schools only widens the gap between the rich and the poor. She then added that Jesus spoke against adultery and lust and would not have approved of bragging about sexually assaulting women. According to my mom, people got up and walked out.
The pastor also started the sermon by noting that she’d heard of another minister who read the entirety of the Sermon on the Mount at the pulpit, to be told by the so-called Christian parishioners after the service that it was offensive and they didn’t agree.
The Sermon on the Mount is straight up the words of Jesus.
I recently read an article that said, hypocritical Christians in America don’t actually worship Jesus. They worship America, and even then, it’s a very specific, self-centered idea of America.
YES. EXACTLY.
My mom’s church talks almost every Sunday about how Christians are called to welcome strangers and foreigners and does tons of stuff to help refugees because HELLO, IT’S RIGHT THERE. IN THE RED TEXT, NO LESS.
I don’t believe everything they believe, but I REALLY like those people.
What a lot of these people are is idolators.
Not in terms of the realness or unrealness of who they worship, but in terms of how they’ve warped their focus away from the reality and turned it towards a fantasy of their own construction.
By definition, an idol is an image with no god behind it.
What they have done is taken the idea of Jesus and created a false image of him, nothing like the reality, to carry around in their back pocket, or to wave around on signs, and pull out and shove in people’s faces to justify all manner of unChristlike behavior.
It is a “worship” that is fundamentally self-centered rather than deity-centered, wherein the deity in question is more of a pocketbook get-out-of-jail-free card than directive to live by, and more of a status symbol than a guiding light.
That people will, without a shred of self-awareness, rest themselves assured that Jesus would want them to tip their waitress with a Jesus pamphlet made to look like folded-up money (to take only one example out of many) is the ultimate dismissal of everything the original stood for.
There is a line in the Bible about Jesus meeting his false worshipers and saying “I do not know you.” It seems like plenty of so-called Christians have beaten him to the punch with how quick they are to say they don’t know him.
A lot of churches and organizations in America that call themselves Christian churches are in fact Christianist cults. They no more represent Christianity than Daesh represents Islam. In addition to the usual nonsense of so-called Christians being pro-war, anti-immigrant, racist, and so forth, there are a lot of sects/movements that are just completely toxic and not Christian at all, even though they use that label. If you are Christian and want to have some fucking nightmares, google “christian dominionist,” or “prosperity gospel.”
Still think this is the most realistic diagram of the difference between the theological Jesus and the Comfortable Reinterpretation of Jesus.
American Christianity is, at this point, like the Cult of the Emperor in ancient Rome, which is simultaneously both ironic and appropriate given the history involved
I have been a Christian my entire life and I have several thoughts on this whole thread. First of all, I think that how Christ commands us to treat others falls into a more “liberal” mind set. We are supposed to help our neighbors, feed and clothe the poor, take care of orphans and widows, and show the love of Christ to everyone we encounter. We are supposed to remember that whatever we have done for the least of these, we have done for Christ. It is the Christian’s (and by extension the Church’s) job to take care of the people around them. HOWEVER it does not say anything about the government taking care of us. So I vote in favor of small government because I believe that it is not the federal government’s job to feed the hungry in my community-- it is the local church’s or the local government’s. I support my church’s efforts in this area (recently we have adopted a low income housing development and are providing assistance to this specific community in various ways). So I almost think it’s two separate conversations-- how should we treat those around us and what is the federal government’s responsibility and programs should be.
Second of all, I think a lot of people get hung up on the morality of the saved Christian versus the morality of an unsaved person. If you follow Jesus you will follow his commandments. If you have not yet accepted Christ, why would you be expected to follow Christian teachings (i.e. not to engage in homosexuality?). I personally view it as my job to share Christ’s love and the Gospel with others, and then if/when they accept Christ, the Holy Spirit will be the one to work in their hearts and guide their lifestyle choices. I have a much larger problem with people who claim to be Christians and then deliberately choose to go against the teachings of Christianity then I do with a non-Christian who does not follow Christianity. That would be as silly as expecting a Canadian citizen who lives in Canada to follow American law. So, in terms of someone living a homosexual lifestyle, God does not tell us to yell at them “God hates fags.” God tells us to share the Gospel with them and share with them the love of Jesus. And then we are expected to help teach and guide new believers, but that is a different discussion all together
I don’t know how much of this directly contributed to the discussion, but there’s my thoughts on it anyways.
They did well, really…but there was still no comparison to M & M
Just getting that out of the way…
I love that Mark made very specific changes to it. But the chemistry was definitely not there in the way it was with M & M. The execution was good though.
I just watched the video and I do think the “fire” was not there in Lindsey and Mark’s performance. If you remember, Meryl and Make were preforming stellar dances week after week and still not getting perfect scores, and they felt like they were striving for 11s. So they came out this week with something to prove. Every movement, every step and motion had the “Olympic Gold Medalist” effort and precision to it, because they were going to be perfect. Add their chemistry to it, and the passion they poured into that performance can’t be matched by someone else doing the same choreography. Because it was truly a performance where the two dancers left everything they had on the dance floor and you definitely did not get the same vibe from Lindsey and Mark because they weren’t in the same place doing this dance.
Why do parents not know how to apologise..?
They think it undermines their authority and exposes weakness.
I dunno, I apologize to my kid when it’s appropriate. I think modeling how to fix your mistakes and how to admit when you are wrong is just as important as modeling all sorts of other behaviors. There are times though where apologizing isn’t appropriate- for example, if I discipline him and he is upset with me I don’t say “I’m sorry I had to put you in time out.” because I’m NOT sorry I’m doing my job. I might say “I”m sorry that you are upset with me, but as your mom I love you enough to teach you right from wrong.” But when I yell when I shouldn’t or model a bad behavior, I do try to apologize and illustrate it was a mistake so hopefully he won’t model that behavior later! But he’s only two, so I’m not exactly a parenting expert over here.
They only recast her because they were not able to get the original actress back.
I like season 7. Idk why people hate it so much
I don’t dislike it as much as I once thought I did. But what is very obvious is that the “tone” is off. It is like a fanfiction where another writer took over and couldn’t quite match the first author’s ‘voice.’ They couldn’t match the quirkiness that Amy Sherman Palladino had and Lorelai went from ‘quirky’ to almost childish. Also, the cinematography isn’t quite the same-- the original writers were very specific about things like having the camera moving or still and the colors of the shots that didn’t transfer into Season 7. They did not have as much quirky town stuff in it as well.
However, the actual plot was decent, they cared about the characters, they made Rory more realistic in that she took a gamble on the New York times and lost out on another opportunity. They cleared up the Luke/Lorelai drama and had them actually communicate! They wrapped everything up in a nice neat bow at the end and gave us some decent closure while still sending the characters off in style. Compared to the revival, the storylines were so much better.
So the storylines were good but the show felt off. I am kind of glad that it ended after that and didn’t do too many more seasons.
I think it was an orange. I can’t be sure, but it looks like an orange.
No, it’s a grapefruit. They have an entire conversation about how “This grapefruit is sugared!” and it’s so ridiculous that it comes to mind every time I sugar a grapefruit.
You can read it here!
I felt like Lorelai had stunted maturity when it came to certain areas. It was as if, when she had a baby at 16, she focused on providing and raising the baby and she did not get a chance to grow emotionally and mature in her own areas, especially when it came to her relationship with her parents. So her power struggles and issues with her parents seem like they were frozen into how they were when she was 16.
