Looking back at reviews for the 100 feels like opening a time capsule from a decade of television that changed how young adult science fiction was made. The 100, based on the novels by Kass Morgan, followed a group of young people sent from a space station to a post-apocalyptic Earth, and it grew from a survival story into a sprawling saga about leadership, loyalty, and impossible choices. Critics and viewers did not always agree on every season, but the conversation in reviews for the 100 around the show stayed lively from its first episodes to its final season. This nostalgia trip gathers what reviewers praised, what they criticised, and why the show still sparks debate years after it ended.
It is worth saying at the start what this article is not. It contains no streaming or download links, and it does not tell readers where to watch the show. It is a review of the reviews: a look at how reviews for the 100 evolved, which seasons reviewers loved, which ones divided opinion, and which characters and themes kept audiences talking. Spoilers are kept light where possible, but a retrospective of this kind will touch on major story turns, so readers who have not finished the series may want to proceed with care.
Reviews for the 100 at First Glance
Early reviews for the 100 often began with a note of surprise. The premise sounded familiar: attractive young people in a dangerous wilderness, with a space station watching from above. Many reviewers expected a light teen drama with science fiction dressing. What they found, especially from the second half of season one onwards, was a show willing to make its characters pay for their decisions. Alliances broke, leaders failed, and victories came with costs that carried into later episodes. That willingness to let consequences linger became the show’s signature, and reviewers returned to it again and again.
The show also earned praise for its pace. Episodes rarely ended quietly. A reveal, a betrayal, or a sudden reversal often arrived in the final minutes, and reviewers noted that the show trusted its audience to keep up with shifting factions and moral arguments. Some critics found that pace exhausting, especially in seasons where new groups and new threats arrived in quick succession. Others saw it as the engine of the show, the reason it was hard to watch just one episode at a time.
Visually, reviewers were generally kind. The Earth sets, from forest camps to bunker interiors, gave the show a grounded and lived-in feel that set it apart from cleaner, glossier science fiction. The action sequences, particularly large battles and siege episodes, were often singled out as stronger than expected for a network show of its era. The production design helped sell the central idea: this was not a pristine future, but a world rebuilt from ruins, where technology was scarce and every resource mattered.
How Reviews for the 100 Changed Season by Season
Season one received a mixed-to-positive response. Reviewers for the 100 liked the energy, and reviews for the 100 note that energy and the young cast, but some found the early episodes uneven, with familiar teen drama beats sitting alongside darker survival material. As the season progressed and the story turned towards the conflict with the Grounders and the hard choices facing the young leaders, critical opinion warmed noticeably. Many retrospective reviews now treat season one as a promising start that only makes full sense once the later seasons are known.
Season two is widely remembered as a high point in reviews for the 100. The Mount Weather storyline gave the show a clear and chilling antagonist, raised the stakes for every faction, and forced the central characters into decisions with no clean outcome. Reviewers praised the tighter plotting, the stronger ensemble work, and the way the season balanced action with moral debate. For many fans and critics, and in reviews for the 100, season two is the season they recommend to newcomers who want to understand what the show could achieve at its best.
Season three divided opinion more sharply. The introduction of the City of Light and the artificial intelligence storyline split reviewers. Some admired the ambition and the philosophical questions about free will, memory, and happiness. Others felt the story moved too fast, or that beloved characters were sidelined by the new plot. The season also included one of the most debated episodes in the show’s history, and the reaction to it shaped coverage of the show for years afterwards. Even critics who disliked parts of season three often praised individual performances within it.
Later seasons continued that pattern of strong ideas and uneven execution. Season four, with its race against a new planetary threat, won praise for urgency and for giving the ensemble a shared, ticking-clock goal. Season five, set after a major time jump, was praised for its world-building and for the way it reconfigured old relationships, though some reviewers found its large cast hard to follow. Season six, which moved the action to a new planet, refreshed the visuals and the mythology, and reviewers often noted how rare it was for a long-running show to reinvent its setting so boldly. The final season drew the most divided reviews for the 100, with some viewers appreciating its attempt to close big philosophical questions, and others feeling that the ending did not honour the characters they had followed for years.
What Critics Consistently Praised
Across seasons, reviewers returned to a few consistent strengths. The first was moral complexity. The show rarely allowed a hero to stay clean for long, and it rarely allowed a villain to be purely evil. Leaders made choices that saved their people at a terrible cost, and the show asked viewers to sit with those costs rather than explaining them away. The second strength was the ensemble. While Clarke and Bellamy anchored the story, supporting characters such as Octavia, Raven, Murphy, and Indra developed rich arcs of their own, and reviewers often singled out their performances. The third strength was ambition. Few network shows of its era attempted so many reinventions, from Earth politics to artificial intelligence to life on another planet, and reviewers respected the show for trying even when a reinvention did not fully land.
What Critics Consistently Criticised
The criticisms were equally consistent. Pacing was the most frequent complaint, especially in seasons where new factions appeared faster than viewers could learn their names. Character deaths were another flashpoint. Some reviewers felt the show killed major characters for shock rather than story, while others accepted the deaths as part of its bleak worldview but questioned the timing. A third complaint concerned the sheer number of apocalypses and resets. Each season raised the stakes higher, and some critics argued that constant escalation made it harder to feel the weight of any single threat. These criticisms did not stop people watching, but they shaped how the show is remembered: brilliant and frustrating in roughly equal measure.
Characters and Performances in Reviews for the 100
Clarke Griffin, played by Eliza Taylor, sits at the centre of most reviews for the 100. Reviewers followed her journey from a young prisoner sent to Earth to a leader forced to make decisions no one else would make. Her arc was praised for refusing easy heroism. Clarke saved lives and took lives, and the show kept returning to the toll that took on her. Taylor’s performance, particularly in quieter scenes where Clarke carried guilt without dialogue, earned repeated praise even from critics who were cool on a given season.
Bellamy Blake, played by Bob Morley, provided the show’s other anchor. His journey from a protective older brother with a rebellious streak to a co-leader learning to share power gave the show one of its most durable partnerships. Reviewers in reviews for the 100 often wrote about the Clarke and Bellamy dynamic as the emotional spine of the series, whether they were allies, rivals, or uneasy partners. Their relationship, built on argument and mutual respect rather than romance, was one of the show’s most discussed features.
The supporting cast drew some of the warmest review language. Marie Avgeropoulos as Octavia traced one of the longest transformations in the show, from a sheltered younger sister to a warrior and leader shaped by trauma and loyalty. Lindsey Morgan as Raven brought wit, engineering brilliance, and resilience, and reviewers frequently named her a fan favourite. Richard Harmon as Murphy turned a character introduced as an antagonist into one of the show’s most complex survivors, and his dry humour provided relief in dark stretches. Adina Porter as Indra gave the Grounder culture dignity and steel, and her presence grounded many of the show’s political storylines.
For readers who enjoy looking back at long-running television, our nostalgia look at another beloved series cast and our recent series review round-up offer similar retrospective reading, with the same focus on what reviewers noticed and what audiences remembered.
Themes That Kept Reviews for the 100 Talking
The show’s central question was never really about survival technology. It was about what people owe each other when survival is at stake. Every season asked a version of that question: how far can a leader go to protect their people before they become the threat themselves. Reviewers noted that the show returned to this question without offering a comfortable answer, and that refusal to preach made the debate around it livelier. Fans writing reviews for the 100 argued about Clarke’s hardest decisions for years, not because the show told them what to think, but because it refused to.
Identity and belonging ran through the show as well. Characters moved between groups: Sky People, Grounders, prisoners, settlers on a new world. Each move forced them to ask who they were and where they belonged. Octavia’s journey between cultures became a lens for that theme, and reviewers often used her arc to discuss the show’s interest in how identity is formed by community, conflict, and choice rather than by birth alone.
Technology and its dangers formed a third theme, especially in the artificial intelligence storylines. The show asked whether a system designed to protect humanity could become a prison, and whether removing pain and memory was a gift or a theft. Those questions gave reviewers plenty to write about, and they remain the parts of the show most often cited in essays about science fiction and ethics. The show did not always resolve these questions neatly, but it asked them with unusual seriousness for a network drama.
The 100 and Its Audience: A Nostalgia Trip
Part of the nostalgia around the show comes from how audiences watched it. Many viewers discovered it late, through recommendations from friends or through binge-watching, and then joined online discussions that were already deep into debate. The show rewarded that kind of viewing, because its long arcs and returning consequences made more sense when watched in sequence. Fans created detailed timelines, debated moral choices, and defended favourite characters with an intensity that reviewers often noted with affection.
Conventions, fan art, and rewatch threads kept the show alive between seasons and after its finale. Viewers who had grown up with the show described it as a formative viewing experience, a series they watched through school, university, or early working life. That personal history explains why reviews for the 100 still appear years later. People writing reviews for the 100 are not only judging a television show. They are revisiting a period of their own lives, and the show’s themes of growing up, losing people, and making hard choices map neatly onto that experience.
Nostalgia also softens some criticisms and sharpens others. On a rewatch, viewers often notice foreshadowing they missed, appreciate a supporting performance more, or forgive a weak season because they know what comes next. At the same time, a rewatch can make pacing problems clearer, or make a controversial character decision harder to accept. That mix is part of why the show remains interesting to write about. It does not settle into a single verdict, and different viewers can honestly reach different conclusions about the same season.
| Season | General critical mood | What reviewers noted most |
|---|---|---|
| Season 1 | Mixed to positive, warming as it progressed | Energy, young cast, darker turn in later episodes |
| Season 2 | Widely praised, often called a high point | Mount Weather story, moral stakes, ensemble work |
| Season 3 | Divided | Ambitious AI story, pacing debates, major character turns |
| Season 4 | Mostly positive | Urgency, shared goal, strong ensemble episodes |
| Season 5 | Mixed to positive | Time jump, new world-building, large cast |
| Season 6 | Mostly positive | New planet, refreshed visuals, bold reinvention |
| Season 7 | Most divided | Big philosophical ending, debate over character conclusions |
Frequently Asked Questions
Is The 100 worth watching for new viewers?
Reviewers generally say yes, with a warning that the show changes tone and setting several times. Viewers who enjoy morally complex science fiction, ensemble casts, and long story arcs tend to enjoy it most. Those who prefer a single, stable setting may find its reinventions challenging.
Which season do reviewers rate highest?
Season two is the most frequently cited high point in reviews for the 100 in reviews for the 100. It combined a clear central conflict with strong character work and consequences that shaped later seasons. Season four and season six also receive frequent praise in retrospectives.
Why is the ending so debated?
The final season attempted to answer the show’s biggest philosophical questions about humanity, transcendence, and what makes life worth living. Some viewers felt that ambition was fitting. Others felt the answers did not match the characters they had followed, or that key relationships were not given the closure they deserved.
Does the show stay a teen drama?
Not for long. While it begins with young characters, its themes, violence, and moral dilemmas quickly move it into darker adult territory. Reviewers often note that the show outgrew its initial label within its first season.
Conclusion
Looking back through reviews for the 100 reveals a show that was rarely boring and never simple. It earned praise for moral complexity, a strong ensemble, and a willingness to reinvent itself, and it drew criticism for pacing, character deaths, and constant escalation. That combination is exactly why it still inspires nostalgia trips and fresh reviews years after its finale. Whether you remember it for season two at its peak, for a favourite character arc, or for an ending you still argue about, The 100 remains a useful example of what ambitious network science fiction could attempt, and how far audiences were willing to follow it.
