Mastodon Mastodon Mastodon Mastodon Mastodon Revolution - Season 2 - Series Regulars and Guest Roles - Snippets


    Enable Dark Mode!

  • What's HOT
  • Premiere Calendar
  • Ratings News
  • Movies
  • YouTube Channel
  • Submit Scoop
  • Contact Us
  • Search
  • Privacy Policy
Support SpoilerTV
SpoilerTV.com is now available ad-free to for all premium subscribers. Thank you for considering becoming a SpoilerTV premium member!

SpoilerTV - TV Spoilers

Revolution - Season 2 - Series Regulars and Guest Roles - Snippets

May 30, 2013

Share on Reddit
Some early casting news has just been sent through to us for Season 2 of Revolution.

Possible Series Regular
Gene : No-Nonsense Doctor in his 60's

Recurring Guest Stars
Cynthia : Beautiful 30's something mother to a young teenage boy.

Annabeth : Late 30's Femme Fatale. Hard core capitalist who runs a settlement

Titus : Intelligent, Devious and a little weird. Ex-Professor

Sheriff Gray : Good looking and likable, team player in his 30's

Source: SpoilerTV

34 comments:

  1. Jorge Castro SalinasMay 30, 2013 at 7:34 PM

    David Rees Snell for Sheriff Gray? Malcolm McDowell- Bob Gunton for Gene?

    ReplyDelete
  2. What about Monroe's son?

    ReplyDelete
  3. What about him? This is not a complete list,they will add on as the days/months go by.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think Nora is going to die in the finale :(
    She's the best female character so its a shame

    ReplyDelete
  5. I like her too, so I definitely hope she won't die.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Well, that sure sounds like Annabeth is going to be the leader of Texas.

    ReplyDelete
  7. There's alot of talk about her being the major character killed off in the finale.

    There's no way they would kill off Charlie, so there's no point in hoping its her...same goes for miles..

    So it's between Aaron, Rachel and Nora...I'd rather it was Aaron out of the three, but it looks like its going to be Nora

    ReplyDelete
  8. From those three I want to keep Aaron the most, then Nora. So if I had to choose one of them to die, it would be Rachel.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I want him to be leading an anti-Monroe group. Predictable, I know, but damn ... just make Monroe suffer.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Aaron seems to have gained some purpose to the SL in the past three eps. I doubt he's going. Rachel, she creates too much drama mama llama. As I've said before, I wouldn't care if Nora went. I know lots of people like her, but she's the one character I've never felt strongly one way or the other about.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Now you know that is exactly what is going to happen...at least i think it isn't just a red herring!



    What's pitiful on my part is i sorta feel for Monroe,he is so screwed up,and lost his way long ago.In the last episode when he told Rachel he had a son you could see it in his eyes,he knew he never would want his child to see him as the person he became,all the killing,the destruction he caused.. That has to put a heavy weight on his shoulders,regret an be such a bitch,and hellish...

    ReplyDelete
  12. I agree,Aaron isn't going anywhere its Nora!

    ReplyDelete
  13. I want it to be Rachel but that was wasted in the non-cliffhanger last week. Nora is my bet because to me she is the best character on the show and Kripke loves to mess with me. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  14. Nora is my favorite character bar none. I love that they have a kick butt female who can take charge too. I hope that they expand her part, but much like when they killed off my favorite character in the first half of the season, Maggie, I fear for Nora.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I think she will be a much smaller leader but in Texas. I don't think they would call it a settlement here when they have made it clear that Texas is it's own republic. I am looking forward to finding out more about this character. At least by the snippet here, she sounds very interesting and can get things done.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I am very happy that Aaron now has a purpose. He was always the lame duck character and they spent a lot of time making him seem incompetent. I'm glad they are reversing that. It should be interesting to see what his place is after Rachel throws a coup in the tower.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Agreed. I don't think they can kill off Rachel unless she has an evil twin. They don't seem to want to let Elizabeth Mitchell go, especially when they recast the pilot to get her.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Mine was Maggie. Kripke sucker punched me EARLY on in the series ... the ass.

    ReplyDelete
  19. She was my favorite character for the first half. Smart, quick on her feet, loyal even if she had no reason to be, courageous...what was not to love? I remember feeling sick that Maggie had died but Charlie was still alive and making everything about herself. At least Kripke listened and turned Charlie around as soon as he could. I think the Supernatural fandom prepared him for unhappy fans. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  20. Cool! Especially "Gene"! ;)

    Interesting that there is a Sheriff too. We haven't really seen non military law enforcement,...

    Just for fun dream casting guesses:

    Gene: John Noble, William Sanderson, Carl Lumbry, Andrew Divoff

    Cynthia: Diane Kruger, Summer Glau, Daisy Betts, Ali Larter, April Grace,

    Annabeth: Amanda Foreman, Jasika Nichole (I would like to see her play a f.f.), Rebecca Mader

    Titus: Sebastian Roche', Michael Cervis, Kirk Avecedo, Dominic Monoghan,

    Sheriff Grey: Jason O'Mara, David Call, Scott Speedman, Michael Trucco, Carter MacIntyre

    ReplyDelete
  21. She was suppose to be a series regular, but then everything seemed to change once they switched Mitchell for Roth,...But Nora is the one that seems likely die next Monday...It's not cool to let a metaphoric alligator hang on too long

    ReplyDelete
  22. I hope he's either nothing like his dad, like some dweeb scientist, or he's totally worse than his dad! :P

    ReplyDelete
  23. I liked Maggie too and was upset when I learned about the change, but I think they have used her death well so far. There are subtle parallels/contrast between a lot of the women characters and her including the theme she represents with "going home", and "plagued dogs" (Nora bit by metaphoric alligator - Maggie bit and killed by crazy dog--Rachel hurt her leg and put first gen nano tech in, Emma killed at "home", ect

    ReplyDelete
  24. I think he might have been, because he had NO real reason to not keep his promise and not kill Charlie or even use her to get to Miles. Plus, being out of his element, he didn't get all wishy-washy with his emotions, he didn't get all sympathetic and in the face of his victim --and he admitted to what he did and the blood that is on his hands. It doesn't mean he won't necessarily go back to his ways, but I do think we got see another side of him...

    ReplyDelete
  25. There was also no upside to killing Charlie. Her being around, I would see as a benefit. She makes both Rachel and Miles weaker, in the sense he can exploit their love for her.


    Use her as bait, threaten to kill her, being a source of information (she is privy to a lot more than a generic soldier/fighter) if she was ever captured.


    To this point I'm assuming her "position" in the rebels is largely influenced by her relationships and that if she was a "nobody" she would be a much "junior" person and not involved (not that kinda involved) with the leaders of the revolt. So you have someone with not a lot of experience up with the "A Team".


    It's like when Nora was captured. Her relationship with Miles made her a "catch".


    It costs nothing to spare her, and Charlie and others (i.e. Rachel) might hesitate in their next confrontation.

    ReplyDelete
  26. First, the upside would be to hurt Miles by killing all of his family too, before finishing him off, making Miles more vulnerable. For whatever reason the act of not turning around to kill Rachel and go back for Charlie and Aaron shows someone semi-honorable (To either Rachel or Miles), despite all the bad things he has done. Secondly, It should bother him that Rachel could stop Randall and it doesn't. Rachel alive is a threat. He's consumed by finding his son and having a "fair" fight with Miles. He could of grabbed Charlie and forced Rachel to tell him how to turn the lights on.


    He didn't have to keep anyone alive.I think he's afraid to kill people he knows well himself. He didn't have to admit learning about his son and he didn't have to appease to Rachel's demands about acknowledging what he did to Danny. He still could have got his way without doing some of these things.


    It's not to say that Bass is some great guy or is necessarily turning over a new leaf, but if they're going to keep him around, they're going to have to show us something different and give him something different to live and/or fight for, otherwise there is no progression.

    ReplyDelete
  27. If his son comes into the picture i would hope he is a scientist or a person trying to survive,living off the land and always running from the Monroe Republic..

    ReplyDelete
  28. I think in both cases. Monroe has a son he can't relate to at all because they're golas and morals are different, or a son that is totally like him and some to a point where they become mortal enemies, I think would be great fun!

    ReplyDelete
  29. Agreed! There is more to Monroe that wanting to just have complete power,and this is a great way to explore him in another light.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Eric never wrote the penultimates. That "honor" usually went to Sera, which IMO is why they sucked.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Eric controlled how the pacing was going to go, as can be evidenced in the fact that he did the exact same thing here in Revolution. Sera was THE finest writer Supernatural ever had and even if people get upset about her as a show runner ( which I don't understand the hatred there either), I never understood why she was loved as a writer for 5 seasons and then retroactively got dumped on as a writer in the 6th and 7th year. She deserved a whole lot better.

    ReplyDelete
  32. I'll give you that Eric controled pacing but the quality of the episode was on Sera's shoulders and the emoangst and talking was her bread and butter. It's why she wrote them because those were the things she could be relied to do. Plot and story be damned.

    She wasn't loved as writer for 5 years by THIS fan who always found her to be THE weakest writer in the lot. She could write a killer brother moment, yes. But throwing one of those in the end of each episode does not a good writer make. She was the veteran the only one after Eric who was there from day one, but just because she could work under Eric's guidance doesn't mean she was good.
    Her better episodes were the one she wrote with a partner (i.e. Raelle in S1 an in the case of DaLDoM where she had the idea -probably did the first draft- but Kathryn wrote the screenplay). The only exception of her solid solo episode is JIB, but it is the exception to the rule. And even though it a great episode it does suffer from typical Sera problems (incessantly unnecessary and redundant bits to fill the time when you need to get to the point, then having to rush through things creating plot wholes and resorting to quick fixes).

    I credit people beating up on her in S6 & S7 because the flaws in HER OWN writing came to the forefront when she was calling the shots. Suddenly things one could overlook in the span of one episode and over the grand scheme of 21 other episodes were hard to look pass when the WHOLE season suffers from that kind of crappy, misguided and misdirected storytelling.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Sera didn't write the penulitmate episode of Revolution and that entire episode was one long monologuing emoangsting fest after another. The only character that did not get an overwrought, melodramatic monologue was Charlie. I think that says a lot about who was controlling what happened in the SPN penultimate episodes. I doubt it is coincidence. Kripke seems to love to separate the emo and the action at the end of each season.


    I think you give far too much credit to other people for Sera's writing. She had several solo acts besides just Jus in Bello that were awesome. While it is true that many of her episodes contain emotional scenes, I personally can't stand emoangsting and I thought she did a great job on most of her episodes. Quite frankly, I think she took one one of the hardest scripts with It's a Terrible Life. In it she had to make the characters different and yet still recognizable. It's one of my favorite episodes and one coincidentally that briefly stopped the never ending despair spiral that became season 4/5.


    As for the "drag some things out forever only to have to rush things at the end of the season" criticism, well that has been a problem every season. Kripke and Jeremy Carver are equally flawed in that. So much so that it is almost not Supernatural if they don't have a couple episodes a season where everything and the kitchen sink is thrown in just to move the plot from point A to point B in one fell swoop instead of gradually over several episodes.

    ReplyDelete
  34. I didn't think he was being genuine at all, just trying to manipulate Rachel.

    ReplyDelete

NOTE: Name-calling, personal attacks, spamming, excessive self-promotion, condescending pomposity, general assiness, racism, sexism, any-other-ism, homophobia, acrophobia, and destructive (versus constructive) criticism will get you BANNED from the party.