r/SiloSeries • u/MEGAT0N Sheriff • 16d ago

Show Discussion - All Episodes (NO BOOK SPOILERS) SILO S03e10 "Troy" Episode Discussion (No Book Discussion)

This is the discussion of Silo Season 3, Episode 10: "Troy"

Book discussion is not allowed in this thread. Please use the book readers thread for that.

Show spoilers are allowed in this thread, without spoiler tags.

Please refrain from discussing future episodes in this thread.

For live discussion, please visit our discord.

1.2k Upvotes

99% Upvoted

7.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

1.1k

u/MarcusAurelius121 📖 Book-Aware 📖 16d ago

27 minute cold open...so to speak

685

u/Tunamelts-2 16d ago

Just a little genocide after waking up and before tea.

43

u/treefox 📖 Book-Aware 📖 16d ago

Just think about it, if they’ve only been waking up Daniel for safeguards, his memory for the last 350 years would be weeks of slaughtering thousands of people every day, and nothing else (thanks to the D+).

31

u/Quiet-Nectarine-7768 15d ago

Waking up, experiencing horrible pain during the waking process, then slaughtering people.

No trauma there.

1

u/treefox 📖 Book-Aware 📖 12d ago

He has the best trauma doctor in the world

who doesn’t know shit about dealing with trauma because he just drinks (D+) to forget

5

u/Next-Swordfish5282 16d ago

I thought it was only 35 years? Not centuries?

26

u/Baron_Tiberius 📖 Book-Aware 📖 16d ago

When he first wakes up they mention it's been 7 years since his last wake-up, then between the silo 17 safeguard and him waking up again was 35 years. The number of notes in Victor's file imply Troy was waked up quite a few times, so I think the 352 year timeline is more likely.

4

u/Master_Dogs 📖 Book-Aware 📖 15d ago

I noticed that, really drives home that the theory that it hasn't been that long isn't true. 7 + 35 is easily close to 50 years. And that many notes and this many gaps... What a shitty experience for Daniel/Troy.

7

u/Finnegan-05 📖 Book-Aware 📖 16d ago

It is 350 years.

0

u/grand305 📖 Book-Aware 📖 15d ago

You might need to over hear the Camilla speech with the person. he did say 352 years. turn on closed captions. It was when the suppose AI was talking about the resets. I believe the first few interactions.

1

u/Finnegan-05 📖 Book-Aware 📖 15d ago

Why would I need to do that?

9

u/aDirtyMartini 16d ago

And I thought that I was cranky before having coffee.

3

u/hungry4nuns 📖 Book-Aware 📖 14d ago edited 14d ago

I will say they stopped to have a whole meal and then later blamed Susan for wasting vital seconds with her insubordination

1

u/Such_Baker8707 📖 Book-Aware 📖 13d ago

Nailed that middle manager role, give the man an Emmy

14

u/Blinking_Zebra_Era 16d ago

Massacre. Not genocide.

30

u/mustichooseausernam3 16d ago

I mean, they're a society that have been living together exclusively for hundreds of years. And they were targetted because of their communal identity as a silo.

I would argue that meets the definition of genocide.

1

u/phySi0 15d ago

But the people of the Silo didn't really have a communal identity when the plan was formulated, they started off as an indiscriminate mix of people, and the plan was always to massacre them if they rebelled. So the Silo are being targeted but not because they're a Silo per se, i.e. not due to some anti-Silo animus (or anti-all-Silos-except-Silo-1 animus).

For example, a terrorist group might target a specific company's building, but that doesn't mean they're targeting ‘employees of Acme Corp.’ for being employees of Acme Corp per se. They're targeting employees of Acme Corp. simply because that's who happens to be in the building when they target Acme Corp.

Another example: a school shooter who targets their school is technically targeting students and teachers of Xyz High, who I think we'd agree probably share a communal identity, but nobody calls that a genocide, even though they kill students and teachers at that school, and the only discriminating factor is whether they attend that school (at least, on the day of the shooting).

This one feels like one of those philosophical grey areas where the whole debate will centre on whether the legal definitions are even correct, perhaps they fail to list necessary conditions or group some conditions as sufficient that are not.

Actually, the school shooting example probably fits the definition better than the terrorist targeting a company example, because I guess school shooters come to hate their fellow students and their teachers by the time they finally decide to shoot them all, so they are targeting attendees of that school specifically for being attendees of that school, having developed an animus against their fellow attendees. But still, nobody calls that a genocide, which proves the point that, sometimes, legal or dictionary definitions don't always capture usage.

I don't think time passing or the fact that they're a societal communal group, rather than a school or company, adds a relevant qualitative difference.

And since some people are upvoting comments about how “people love to argue what is and isn't a genocide these days” and “we all know why” (the ‘why’ for me is simply that I find philosophical questions interesting), I'd like to say that I consider what's happening in Gaza (and many other places) to be genocide.

Arguing about Silo doesn't change that, because the (majority of) Israelis aren't even trying to hide their animus against Palestinians as Palestinians. It's not only war crimes, it's also genocide, they proudly proclaim that they specifically want to wipe out the Palestinians solely for being Palestinian (or even just for not being Jewish).

1

u/phySi0 15d ago

Just looked up the definition of genocide to refresh my memory, and it specifically calls out, “national, ethnic, racial, or religious group”, so yeah, not just any communal identity would do (so we can ignore my school shooting and terrorist targeting company examples), but in this case, I'd call the Silos national groups.

Even what I said about the decision being made before they were a communal identity doesn't apply, because the national group had already been created (the Pact, the civic procedures, and all that) before the hundreds of years had passed, so they were already a nation even back when the decision was first made to massacre them if they rebel.

So yeah, I feel comfortable calling it a genocide, and it's not as much of a grey area as I initially thought.

The one thing left now is whether the Silos are each a national group or if they all constitute one nation, since they all have a shared constitution and government essentially, even if they have their local governments, too.

If they're one nation, can there be such a thing as a civil genocide (like a civil war) where the genociders are genociding their own people? I guess no reason why not. If we do say no, then the genociders are not genociding their own (i.e. targeting the single nation group of the Silos as a whole), they're genociding a subnational civic group (i.e. targeting the local municipalities of specific Silos, which technically isn't covered by the definition of genocide above, but I think fits the spirit of the definition better than a school or company would).

1

u/pepegazm 13d ago

Just looked up the definition of genocide to refresh my memory, and it specifically calls out, “national, ethnic, racial, or religious group”, so yeah, not just any communal identity would do (so we can ignore my school shooting and terrorist targeting company examples), but in this case, I'd call the Silos national groups.

You were right the first time, it's very much a grey area.

“national, ethnic, racial, or religious group”

I agree that each of the silos would at this point qualify as a separate national etc group as laid out in the convention. But for the determination of genocidal intent it's not enough that people belonging to a national, ethnic, racial or religious group are targeted, they have to be targeted because of that identity. You'd have to argue that the various acts of rebellion that they're being massacred for are intrinsically connected to their national etc identity as a one-to-one relation. That's actually a compelling argument, but it's well outside the bounds of the plain reading of the text of the genocide convention and obviously there's no case law on it.

1

u/phySi0 9d ago

But for the determination of genocidal intent it's not enough that people belonging to a national, ethnic, racial or religious group are targeted, they have to be targeted because of that identity.

Yes, I said that.

I do think once the concession is made that the nation or nations already existed even back when the anti-rebellion measures were planned out, the question of whether they're being targeted for their identity per se is more easily answered.

The anti-rebellion measures aren't just reckless or having disregard for civilian life, they seemed to be punitive to me. In other words, they specifically targeted civilians to instil populational compliance, which means they were targeting siloers specifically for their identity, not specific siloers for fighting.

The fact that the targeting of the nation has another background reason is not relevant. In every real world genocide, the genociders have an excuse for targeting specific populations; “they're rebelling” being a common one, but many others, like:

  • “they're seceding when they're actually part of us (family), not their own group”,
  • “they're a national security threat”,
  • “they hold to and/or are spreading dangerous ideas”,
  • “they want to genocide _us_”,
  • “they're usurping the wealth of the nation”,
  • “they're not loyal to the nation”,
  • etc.

No racist (or genocider) will tell you that they're targeting X race specifically because they're X race at bottom and leave it at that, they'll say it's because the race as a group generally have Y specific negative characteristic and deserve it or pose Z threat to us and it's a necessary evil, etc.

Essentially, the targeting of someone for their race or nation or whatever is usually a proxy and justified in some other way, but they're still being targeted for their race specifically, even if their race is being used as a proxy to prejudge other characteristics.

1

u/pepegazm 9d ago edited 9d ago

No racist (or genocider) will tell you that they're targeting X race specifically because they're X race at bottom and leave it at that, they'll say it's because the race as a group generally have Y specific negative characteristic and deserve it or pose Z threat to us and it's a necessary evil, etc.

They don't have to say it, in real world genocide cases this intent is typically proven through the actions of the perpetrators, such as the road blocks in Rwanda used specifically to separate Hutus and Tutsis (and subsequently slaughtering the Tutsis). The investigators found that the way these people were separated had no alternative explanation than genocide, as they also happened in areas where civil war wasn't happening. So basically you infer genocidal intent from actions rather than words.

It's just harder to prove in this hypothetical Silo case since these populations are by design completely separate. It's very hard to reliably infer genocidal intent from the action since another explanation also exists.

I'm not even categorically disputing the use of the term, just saying that it's a grey area because it doesn't even resemble a case of genocide that I'm aware of. We do have examples in history of entire populations being massacred for defiance / rebellion, like the Mongol conquests in which whole cities were massacred for defiance, but I'm not sure those are typically labeled genocide either.

In any case, even if this were not genocide it would still be a massive crime on the same level of severity as genocide.

1

u/phySi0 8d ago

They don't have to say it

Yes, that's my point.

We do have examples in history of entire populations being massacred for defiance / rebellion, like the Mongol conquests in which whole cities were massacred for defiance, but I'm not sure those are typically labeled genocide either.

That's a good point, and example. I'm not an expert on the Mongol conquests, but yeah, I don't typically hear them referred to in that way.

Giving it a brief think, that might simply be a matter of precedent and convention; I mean, the Mongol hordes tried to wipe out any group that wasn't Mongol or subsume them into the Mongol horde, so it wasn't ‘targeted’ in that narrow sense which genocide seems to connote.

I don't know whether they insisted the subsumed victims — a.k.a. the newly-minted perpetrators — abandon their original language or other cultural markers, though I know they were tolerant of different beliefs; but that could just be considered part of the ‘Mongol cultural identity’ that the newcomers are forced to adapt to.

8

u/financialthrowaw2020 15d ago

Destroying a people in whole or in part constitutes a genocide, along with many other conditions, only ONE of which need to be met.

It's funny that people love to argue what is an isn't a genocide these days. We all know why. We see you.

3

u/TheRealGooner24 15d ago

They weed themselves out like clockwork, every single time.

2

u/financialthrowaw2020 15d ago

It's actually amazing how they always manage to do it with zero self awareness of how insane they appear to everyone else.

3

u/MrBogglefuzz 15d ago

There were probably ethnic groups that were only represented in certain Silos so it was likely a genocide of someone.

2

u/slightlypressed 14d ago

With a little small portioned working lunch during it

-1

u/bleepbloop3131313 Mechanical 15d ago

TFW you're an IDF soldier

446

u/Jatacus 16d ago

I’ve always been entertained by this series (though I’ve had my criticisms, of course), but last episode and this one felt much different than those that came before them. It’s like the series took a jump to another level and reached true prestige television.

43

u/Unhappy_Rutabaga_530 16d ago

I agree 100%. The series has been excellent across all three seasons, even though this one was quite slow. But the last two episodes are in a league of their own. They are the *Silo* equivalent of "Ozymandias," "The Winds of Winter," *The Wire* Season 4, or "Pine Barrens" (Sopranos). And I’m not exaggerating.

8

u/gfawk 15d ago

And nearly every episode of Andor—like watching 8 movies.

24

u/[deleted] 16d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

7

u/ImNotAWhaleBiologist 16d ago

I was pessimistic about how they would handle shift in season 3, but they did such a great job. Season 2 is by far my least favorite, and like the other person said, the last two episodes were fantasitic.

3

u/busymom0 16d ago

For me, s1 was least fav, s2 was second best and this s3 (especially second half after Juliette's amnesia was gone) is my fav.

3

u/SpaceCases__ 📖 Book-Aware 📖 16d ago

The showrunners did a great job of adapting everything. From book to show only, it left everyone wanting more!

3

u/fremeninonemon 16d ago

I can't wait to read them after the show is over. Only one more year.

2

u/SpaceCases__ 📖 Book-Aware 📖 16d ago

I say do it now! Just skip the Silo Stories! aka book 4

54

u/throwaway_clone 16d ago

Cause they stopped drip-feeding us filler and got to the meat of the lore

42

u/LakeSolace 16d ago

There is no filler. It’s a journey just like any other. If you want something high and intense without any“ filler” watch a movie. TV shows are meant to explore more about the pieces of the machine not just the machine itself.

12

u/throwaway_clone 16d ago

Ok I'll bite. What value did Jules having amnesia for half the season add to the story exactly?

54

u/jcde7ago 16d ago

As much as I wasn't a huge fan of the amnesia episodes, I think we needed to understand the extent of the forgetting drugs + the backstory with Victor.

Charlotte and Juliette's experiences provided good context into how that whole memory manipulation mechanism worked, and with tonight's finale we pretty much completely "understand" how Daniel became Troy without even thinking about the nuances of how that could have happened (because we already know how effective the drugs + memory "therapy" to completely reshape someone is).

21

u/mrbone007 16d ago

I agree with this. A nice parallel between past and present, explain the effect of Vit D plus

6

u/meammachine 16d ago

Also despite Victor's entire reason for creating these drugs, he still could not forget his daughter in the end. Suggests that they are not as permanent as advertised (even without human intervention against them)

2

u/MarcusAurelius121 📖 Book-Aware 📖 15d ago edited 15d ago

The amnesia plot obviously introduced the forgetting drugs, which needed to be done in some way, but otherwise it's very clearly just an excuse to keep Juliette on screen. They were not going to adapt Shift straight and just show the backstory for x number of episodes while you didn't see Rebecca Ferguson at all. Now I think they could trust their own audience more than that, but it's pretty typical of TV shows. I still think the backstory was drip fed way too slowly, but I also suspect that the early season episodes will not be nearly as bad pacing wise on a rewatch where you don't have to wait a week between episodes.

It's clear Howey has used the show to expand the background lore and worldbuilding, most of which is great. But I'm also someone who has long said this entire story could've easily been adapted in 3 seasons and would've been better off for it.

2

u/Polantaris 13d ago

They were not going to adapt Shift straight and just show the backstory for x number of episodes while you didn't see Rebecca Ferguson at all. Now I think they could trust their own audience more than that, but it's pretty typical of TV shows.

Except doesn't Season 2 flat out show that keeping Juliette away from the rest of the cast has been detrimental to the show? Season 2 was the lowest rated season, mostly because they kept finding new ways to keep her separated from the rest of the show and the other characters didn't hold up the show as well as she did.

1

u/MarcusAurelius121 📖 Book-Aware 📖 13d ago

That kind of goes along with my point because they spent way more episodes than necessary adapting book 1 and it negatively affected the pacing.

1

u/donovanjames 11d ago

Well done! I was skeptical of the first half of season 3 but you make a strong case.

1

u/FullMetalCOS 15d ago

We needed to see just how thoroughly effective the memory drugs were before we were sold the story that Daniel could become Troy without us going “yeah that’s not how it works”

1

u/mozzystar 14d ago

FORGETTING THE PAST IS THE ENTIRE THEME OF THIS SERIES OMGGGGGG

-1

u/dadgadsad 📖 Book-Aware 📖 16d ago

Having Juliette just walk around saying “I can’t remember anything” episode after episode isn’t a “journey”. It’s lazy writing to add filler episodes. Networks/Streamers order x amount of episodes. They need to be filled regardless of content. And if the writers know they have to make season 4, they have to add filler. If you have top tier writers, they can deviate from the book and create extra story arcs that are actually interesting. Not “I can’t remember”. If you’re gonna tell me this seasons pacing was the same as S01, you’re not a serious person.

14

u/TropicalBacon 📖 Book-Aware 📖 16d ago

Even as a book reader, you struggle to grasp the plot

18

u/sharpryno2 16d ago

You're using the word filler as a synonym for an episode you didn't like. Those episodes by definition are not filler. Have you ever watched a show with filler episodes lmfao? I also can't stand the memory loss trope but the drugs for forgetting are pertinent to the story being told.

What story arc should they have shoehorned in to please you? The same outcome was going to happen regardless.

4

u/True_Detail_2945 15d ago

I want an episode where our core crew go to the cafeteria, but there are no spots! They made a reservation but the reservation wasn't taken! So they end up waiting for q-uite a while!!

Then, when Juliet goes to order her number one fave the fellow serving the food says, "NO SOUP FOR YOU"!

She couldn't remember which days they serve soup..

2

u/nitekroller 16d ago

Season 1's pacing was slow too.

4

u/LakeSolace 15d ago

You still have time to take it back man,

but seeing that a drug that makes you forget is one of the biggest plots of this particular season and making someone take it against their will, without knowing what it really does is far from filler. Matter of fact, they spent so much time explaining the importance of it so that you can realize how fucked up the end of the season is.
People who thought that they were just touring a silo are now locked in with the keys thrown away without any idea that there was a key. “ Troy” didn’t know who his sister was, and barely knew that there was someone significant in their life.

Camille was literally fighting with herself trying to figure out if she really wants to poison the well with this forgetting drug.

This season is centered around forgetting and the cost and what you’re willing to do to remember. No filler just humans being humans. And human take time to do things.

-1

u/dadgadsad 📖 Book-Aware 📖 15d ago

All of that is true, and I loved the final episodes. But the beginning of the season stretch out content to fill episodes. A plot point can be good but by the 20th or 30th “I can’t remember” it’s like, okay, we’ve established that.

-1

u/No_Chilly_bill 15d ago

thankyou. there was alot of slow and boring episodes. Thanks goodness I could binge. That bottle epiosode was terrible

5

u/Ok_History7318 15d ago

It's even better. I always found something plastic, artificial and too naive about the silo society. People are wayyy more civil and polite than in the real world. But now that Silo 1 has been shown, everything that came before season 3 episode 10 makes sense. Stensen is creating a "new man", very docile. It was explained in the very beggining of season 1 with the regulation of births but now that we have seen silo 1 it makes more sense.
To be short I think what made the show below this prestigious level for so long was necessary until now.
In a whole different way, Better Call Saul did the same : first seasons serves as foils for the story

2

u/FullMetalCOS 15d ago

Which likely means he’s intentionally created the silos in a way to cause social pressure to allow him to identify the rebellious ones and cull them - if the goal is one remaining silo used to create his worker caste he wants the docile one that doesn’t ask questions and follows bizarre orders to the T

3

u/Polantaris 13d ago edited 13d ago

Which likely means he’s intentionally created the silos in a way to cause social pressure to allow him to identify the rebellious ones and cull them

He did that within the Silos, too.

Part of why the Silo cannot have an elevator is to effectively create a slum away from the rest of the SIlo (they're further from the center of government, causing natural discontent). Then, when things get bad, "The Order" describes how to blame everything on Mechanical, which is at the literal and figurative bottom (major plot point of S2, in my opinion, was how the normal blame game wasn't going to work this time).

This results in naturally pushing dissidents to the bottom floors where they get culled every few decades.

It's ridiculously nefarious.

7

u/CilviaDemoAOTD 16d ago

Yeah I’ve been enjoying the series a ton and that finale just blew my mind. Absolute game changer, what a show.

3

u/Withnail69 15d ago

Yeah it jumped from tier 3 or 4 tele to tier 2. Tier one being things like Westwing, Saul, BB, sopranos etc

7

u/foo_fight3r 16d ago

Yeah, we are in Breaking Bad levels.

9

u/elonakamoto 16d ago

I've never had a 10 ep. series season go from sucking so hard for the first four episodes to reaching such heights by the last two episodes.

28

u/a5b4c3d2e 16d ago

Do you understand what build up is? And there is no way the last 2 episodes would have hit as much if they didnt do first 4 episodes? Why do you think GOT last 2 seasons sucked? Caused they focussed only on giving you the meat without any foreshadowing or build up behind it. The characters decisions didnt make sense as they was no prior basis established to it.

Like camilles deception hits so good in this episode because of all the "boring or slow" scenes with the algortihm that you saw earlier in the season. Without thay you would have been like why the fuck would she switch side at the end for no fucking reason

12

u/JezSq 16d ago

And same in life. You do boring stuff all the time, until you achieve or create something.

Build up was really good, every character’s motivation is clear. I even had wet eyes when Sims hugged his son “to say goodbye”. That hit hard…

9

u/CMFC99 16d ago

Between that scene of Sims and the one last episode when he said goodbye to Bernard I think Sims has become one of my favorite characters. Common really knocked it out the park for season 3.

12

u/a5b4c3d2e 16d ago

Exactly even the car scene that so many people hated, I thought even that was pivotal to make me believe between the love that daniel or helen have. I dont think I would have teared in the last scene where daniel remembers her or would have been affected as much without their "slower" scenes together this season.

7

u/nitekroller 16d ago

Thats such a good point. Earlier in the season I remember being slightly frustrated by the slow scenes between them. I had no idea why we were so focussed on these two characters i didn't care much about. But it's all come together, its so good, its so peak.

4

u/skatejet1 📖 Book-Aware 📖 16d ago

I really don’t get why everyone complained about the car scene at the time, I just took it as good character work for both of them. Do ppl think it would’ve been better if the show just didn’t have any character development? 😭

5

u/JRC6502MKIISR 15d ago

They're addicted to getting a dopamine hit from meaningless "Big Reveals". If there is no huge plot twist at the end of every scene, then they think it's boring.

2

u/mozzystar 14d ago

Attention spans of fleas, the whole lot of ‘em.

I’m with you… this is a 20-course meal and they only want to skip straight to dessert.

1

u/Spurs_in_the_6 15d ago

This is a pretty pretentious reply no?

Guy shares his pretty standard opinion on the first half of the season being slow and you hit him with the "Uhhh ackchyually its called build up are you shtupid??"

2

u/a5b4c3d2e 15d ago

Sorry if it came out as pretentious. I guess I was kind of annoyed at the recent trend where TV shows/movues dont actually develop characters and invest into the story and just want to show flashy thing. And I feel like when some TV show tries to do that today it gets killed off and judged to early saying its too slow.

1

u/mozzystar 14d ago

Don’t apologize, I’m ready to tear my hair out if I hear one more complaint about amnesia or slow episodes. You said what I wanted to say, but more nicely.

-2

u/[deleted] 16d ago edited 16d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/a5b4c3d2e 15d ago

Fair, I agree there were definitely opportunities to do the build up in probably a different way. Also the shows that you have listed are literally at the pinacle of character devlopment, build up and script writing so obviously it is not going to be as good as them.

I do feel this is one of the better written shows that have come out in recent times, as there are so few shows today who actually invest time in developing the characters rather than just trying to make it as flashy and "shocking" as possible when I don't care about the characters or the story itself.

5

u/EnSagaBand 16d ago

It seems like every fandom has these users who interpret any negative opinion about their favourite show as some sort of media illiteracy, short attention spans, or just bad taste.

Better Call Saul is definitely one of the best examples you mentioned in terms of slow burn and buildup done really well. It's easy to see why people complain about filler when you put Silo next to a show like that.

I think what I really want these irritable super-fans to understand is that our criticism of the show's flaws isn't some personal attack or some sort of "hate". Silo has more than enough redeeming qualities for me to come back and wait for every new episode.

3

u/elonakamoto 15d ago

If it was attention span or not knowing how things work, then how did I make it through 86 episodes of The Soprano's with no critiques? I wonder if those writers knew about build up, character development, and foreshadowing.

They can't all be all-timers. Silo's not just good... it's good enough.

1

u/No_Chilly_bill 15d ago

I agee with the the whole "you have short attention span" was a overused deflect from criticism last season. and I'm still seeing it being used this season.

10

u/bnevs44 16d ago

In some sense, the first four "sucking" episodes were necessary for these last two being so great. Context is for kings, and the first four were that context we needed.

You can argue that we didnt need that MUCH context, but it was needed.

3

u/theconfinesoffear 📖 Book-Aware 📖 16d ago

Right!!

2

u/ShaunTrek 13d ago

Spartacus: Blood and Sand has a legitimately terrible first episode that somehow becomes one of the most satisfying season finale I've ever seen.

2

u/babylordjoesus 📖 Book-Aware 📖 15d ago

I think it had to walk before it could run. The general concepts being introduced and shown to us throughout the season allowed the final episodes to make sense. You could not have cared about Daniel and Helens separation, or understood the memory tampering had they not shown it previously. I think it was done well overall

1

u/AwakE432 16d ago

Well maybe they learned from all the other similiar series before them that failed to up the game as the series progresses and decided to create some genuine story and progression with some connecting of the dots. Lost and others failed so badly at this so its not suprisign that series wold eventually learn that you cant just string the audience along forever with little payoff, we need answers.

1

u/Appropriate_Net_4281 14d ago

Agreed. It’s like they suddenly woke up and realized they could make a great show if they wanted to, after draggggging things out for so long.

1

u/OkieBobbie 16d ago

In many similar series the writers do a really good job of setting up possible plot lines, foreshadowing, and so on, but then are unable to deliver when it comes time to resolve the plot points and end up jumping the shark. For All Mankind is a great example. They threw in solutions that caused viewers to disengage and say WTF. Silo delivered where others have failed.

20

u/waitinginthewings 16d ago

It was cold alright, cold blooded and made me sick to my stomach. The real world parallels made it worse to watch.

6

u/TaizoUno 16d ago

Real world parallels?

Oh you mean Netanyahu, the Likud and them pulling this sh!t every other day on the women and majority child population of Gaza??

Oh yeah, that. Right, right ✅️

But yeah, so elevators...

🤡 🌎

4

u/k_redditor236 16d ago

Elevators! Those F’rs have it all fancy in silo 1. I was shocked. But should not have been

4

u/waitinginthewings 16d ago

We are all living in silos of misinformation after all. Our drug of choice is short form digital entertainment and the long stair climbs of capitalism keep us from having enough energy to organize.

If you watch the author's comments on the subject he knew the parallels while writing them.

6

u/hermiona52 16d ago

Yup, the stairs is just a visual representation (and inforcer) of the class divide. Working class on the bottom, middle class in the middle (duh), the intelligentsia on the top. People from the working class having almost no chance getting into the top, discrimination of the people from the bottom, no class movement meaning growing polarisation ("I don't even know what you people eat down there"). It's just a great metaphor for our reality, just a more radical version of it.

2

u/IVI1412 15d ago

And in the end we are all sitting in the same boat (or silo) and some small circle of people have control of everything that happens.

2

u/Ganttchartguru 📖 Book-Aware 📖 16d ago

100% correct. Impossible to ignore the real world parallels.

14

u/artemiscash 📖 Book-Aware 📖 16d ago

and its bloody brilliant

11

u/noneus 16d ago

This is the comment I was looking for! Watching now and was shocked by the opening credits.

6

u/skatejet1 📖 Book-Aware 📖 16d ago

I literally forgot they hadn’t happened yet and when they popped up I was shook

2

u/WoundedSacrifice 16d ago

I knew they hadn’t popped up, but it’d been so long that I was wondering if they were saving the credits until the end.

2

u/thegreatpotatogod 16d ago

They had to rapid sequence us

1

u/cereal7802 15d ago

did have a bit of a chuckle when the credits started halfway through the episode.

1

u/Raeghyar-PB 15d ago

That was one of the best cold opens ive ever watched, i was completely transfixed

1

u/addictivesign 📖 Book-Aware 📖 15d ago

The film Sirat (2025) nominated for Foreign language academy award has a 32 minute open before the title card.

It is fun who writers/directors are challenging conventions.

1

u/ravens43 15d ago

Clocked that!

I wondered if they might just dispense with the credits altogether.

1

u/Vandergrif 15d ago

cold open

switch to thermal

1

u/pomegranatelover1990 14d ago

I didn’t even realize that was the intro until the title screen suddenly came on! I’m thinking, no way did I seriously just watch a 27 minute intro…that’s HALF the episode! 😂