Angsty Archie, sex, and the supernatural: What to expect from Riverdale season 2

A CW teen drama centering on sexy Archie characters and their sexy murder mystery sounded downright laughable in the beginning, but Riverdale became the surprise hit of the 2017 TV season, and now fans are eagerly waiting to see what season two will have in store. We’ve solved the murder of Jason Blossom, but Cheryl went cray and set Thornhill Manor on fire, Hiram Lodge is headed back to town, Jughead got a cool jacket (and a burger!), and Archie’s dad got shot. What could possibly top that?

How about sex, new characters, and possibly the supernatural? Like the How to Solve a Murder Club (my nickname for Betty and Jughead’s amateur detective work), I’ve done my own amateur sleuthing and uncovered details that hint as to what’s in store when season 2 begins filming in June. Riverdale came out of the gate strong and showrunner/Archie Comics CEO Roberto Aguierre-Sasca shows no signs of slowing down, so perhaps Riverdale will avoided the dread sophomore slump—depending on if you think the season 2 changes are a good thing.

The article continues after these advertisements...

There will be coitus uninterruptus 

Riverdale has given us shirtless CW males, Cheryl Blossom stomping around in miniskirts and thigh high boots, a younger and prettier Ms. Grundy, and a Betty/Veronica kiss, but actual sex has been a pretty small part of the show. If my calculations are correct, there have only been two on-screen sex scenes: the season finale sex scene with Archie and Veronica, and the literally steamy car sex with Archie and Not!Ms.Grundy briefly seen in the pilot which, by the way, was more gross than “sexy” because of the statutory rape factor.

In an interview with Glamour magazine, Aguirre-Sasca explained that although he wants to keep “the integrity of the characters”, there are “some really sexy young people on the show, and they are starting to have relationships and they are starting to get older.” Camila Mendes, who plays Veronica Lodge, also theorized that since the mystery surrounding Jason’s death took up the bulk of the show’s first season, “season two will amp up the sex.” As stated earlier, the season finale featured a sex scene between Archie and Veronica, and Jughead and Betty almost went all the way too. Perhaps in the season two premiere, they’ll finally be able to do it without South Side Serpents knocking on the door to offer cool leather jackets. And if they do have to knock, perhaps they’ll offer a different kind of rubber, if you know what I mean.

A new actor is taking up the Reggie mantle

Ross Butler was cast as Archie’s douche-y rival Reggie Mantle, but the character was barely featured since most of the plot focused on Archie and the gang trying to figure out who Jason’s murderer was, and the writers really want that “Archie is an aspiring musician” plot to go somewhere. I don’t mind a musical interlude from Josie and the Pussycats once in a while, but if I had a choice between watching Archie sling out his guitar and sing an indie song about friendship and Reggie Mantle doing some douche-y thing like get up on the table at Pop’s and proclaim how much better he is than everyone, I would pick Reggie Mantle doing some douche-y thing.

Ross Butler is leaving Riverdale because he’s returning to the Netflix series Thirteen Reasons Why, so his part will be taken over by actor/model Charles Melton, who’s best known for his brief appearances on Glee and American Horror Story and a jawline that can cut glass. Melton’s acting resume is still too short to determine exactly what he’ll do with the Reggie character, but let’s hope he can inject enough charm into this delightfully unlikable character.

Hello, Hiram!

Hiram Lodge was was never seen in season one on account of the fact that he was still in jail, awaiting trial for his Bernie Madoff-like scheming, but he was still a major player on the show. Being behind bars didn’t stop Hiram from secretly buying out and tearing down the local drive-in, and possibly sending thugs to sabotage construction when he heard that Hermione was macking on Fred Andrews. Mark Consuelos of the the recently cancelled baseball drama Pitch will be the face of the mysterious and possibly deadly businessman.

I saw a couple episode of Pitch and I can’t really say much about Consuelos’ acting abilities. From what I remember, his character didn’t really have an active role in the series, but he apparently impressed Aguierre-Sasca by asking the “right questions” about the character. Only time will tell if he’s the right actor for the part.

A much more angsty Archie

Archie has had a pretty easy go of it this season: the new hot girl in town became his girlfriend, he developed his musical talents, and he helped save the day multiple times. Seeing his father get gunned down in the middle of Pop’s is definitely going to affect his happy-go-lucky nature, and in an interview with Glamour magazine, Aguirre-Sasca likened the shooting of Fred to be “the equivalent of Bruce Wayne seeing his parents gunned down and he vows to become a bat to fight crime.”

In another interview with Hollywood Reporter, Aguirre-Sascaa added that Archie will be on a season-long journey surrounding his desire for revenge before “turning to the light” to become a true hero. After boring subplots with Archie centering around talent competitions and stage fright, it’ll be exciting to see Archie get a more transformative story arc, even if it means he’s probably going to go through some serious angst. All I ask is that he doesn’t start doing faux-lisophical narrations at the beginning of episodes.

Maybe some really weird Archie’s mysteries?

Aguiree-Sasca wrote the Afterlife with Archie series, which sets the Archie characters in the middle of a zombie apocalypse, and he’s hinted before that he’d like to insert some supernatural elements in Riverdale, like maybe some plot points from Afterlife with Archie, or introduce Sabrina Spellman as a recurring character. Some fans have taken upon themselves to suggest Dove Cameron for the role. I have no idea what a Dove Cameron is, but Google tells me she was in some Disney sitcom called Liv & Maddie and played the lead role in the Disney Channel original movie The Descendants, which doesn’t really impress me much. Can’t Melissa Joan Hart reprise her role?

Riverdale has pitched itself as a teen Twin Peaks, and if they start adding magic to the mayhem, the description will finally be accurate. I was about to write that it might be tricky for Riverdale to blend supernatural elements in a show otherwise grounded in reality, but then I remembered that if Cheryl Blossom can show up to her brother’s funeral to delivery a eulogy in the exact outfit she wore when he went missing, anything can happen on Riverdale as long as it delivers excellent drama.

See you all whens season two premieres!

Susan Velazquez

Susan is a recent college grad and writer who enjoys all things from the 1980s, snarking on dumb television, and reveling in celebrity gossip. Oh, and she has serious interests like reading historical fiction, getting involved in social issues, and consuming French fries.

TV Show: Riverdale

You may also like...

  • Greenhornet

    Season 2 Riverdale: “Trying Too Hard”.
    I have to go back to the comics to disagree with you. Their diversity will kill the show.
    “Josie and the Pussycats”? Three TOKEN black girls. In the comics, they were two white girls who asked their friend ALEXANDRIA CABOT to join their group, The Pussycats, (They didn’t become JOSIE and the…. until the cartoon) explaining that they didn’t want to fight over top billing. Alexandria refused and they asked the new girl in school: Valery. Valery was black, but believe it or not, that had NOTHING to do with her character. This was quite unlike the “Chuck Clayton” character who was “the black character” for years before they really did something with him. Kevin was the same, except he’s “the gay character”. How many stories was HE in where they didn’t mention his sexual orientation?
    Honestly, was it REALLY necessary to have the Archie characters in it? If they wanted to put them in adult situations, let the grow up! Or at least make it a comedy in the style of “Soap”.
    And for God’s sake, writers! Stop making Veronica an idiot!

    • I fail to see how diversity will kill the show.
      Having minority characters is not a flaw. And if race/orientation was not a factor in characterization in the original work then changing the race or playing up the orientation of characters for the purposes of generating story elements hardly seems like something that would restrict or damage the show, it just grows the story.

      • Greenhornet

        “Diversity” by itself isn’t a bad thing; but what most shows and comics do these days is to present “diversity characters” as just that. In short, they are TOKEN characters. “We’re not bigoted! We have DIVERSITY!” As I pointed out in my post, it took several years for the comics to treat the Chuck Clayton character as something other than “the black character”. The comics around that era had also introduced an American indian character, but they had no idea what to do with him, so they dropped him without a second’s thought.
        I have no problem with “diversity”, but if such characters are introduced, they should either do something INTERESTING with their identity, or simply have them act as if their sexual orientation/skin color/nationality has no effect on anything and they are treated as just another HUMAN BEING.
        Honor Blackman didn’t like the way The Avengers writers handled her character, so she asked them to write as if she were a MAN and she would turn it into a WOMAN’S role. Because of that, her fans decided that her character was gay, but that didn’t effect the show at all.
        Lt. Uhura in Star Trek was just another crewman, but the actress gave a good reading, so they made the character a woman.
        In Night Of the Living Dead, “Ben” was not a “black” man in the script. His skin color had no effect on the story and was never mentioned.
        PS: A “racist” is someone who is OBSESSED with race and can’t think of people any other way. In short, BIGOT. I’m so tired of it all.

        • “… they should either do something INTERESTING with their identity, or simply have them act as if their sexual orientation/skin color/nationality has no effect on anything and they are treated as just another HUMAN BEING.”

          So either do something or don’t do something?

          They are having them act like human beings. Again, I do not see how casting several characters as races other than white is a bad thing. Even if it was done just so that the show would not be mono-racial. Even if they do nothing with it immediately, it allows them to do things later.

          Also, why he PS? It seems out of place as I mentioned neither racist nor bigot in my original reply to you.

          • Greenhornet

            First, the “PS”.
            SOMEBODY’S going to bring it up, it never fails. I just wanted to get that out of the way.

            I am glad you replied, I was thinking about clarifying my post.
            The problem, in my experience, (Real life and fiction) is that some people think that “the minority” thing is all they need. There has to be more to people than being “gay” or whatever, What’s their profession? What’re their hobbies? What’s their background?. Particularly in fiction, a character should bring something to the story, if not, what was the reason to introduce them?

            “Even if they do nothing with it immediately, it allows them to do things later.”
            I agree 100%. But does it have to be about being something that’s a “fashionable” social issue at the time? Wouldn’t that date the episode? Writers should put a little thought into their work; for instance, “In a shocking reveal, Veronica admits that she’s a closet… Mad Scientist.”
            I’m just saying that they shouldn’t take the “easy” route. If they wanted to be bold and controversial, they should introduce a CONSERVATIVE character who isn’t a dumb cliché THAT’S something you don’t see every day on TV. In the story, the conservative is harassed and physically attacked for his/her beliefs. That would be a variation from “accepted” story lines and generate a lot of controversy.
            But it could also get the show canceled and black-ball everybody connected with it.
            Again, I have no problem with “minorities”, I just think that it’s trotted out just to be “with it” and “topical”, until it’s no longer “shocking” and “controversial” and the producers and writers will have to look for “the next fashionable thing”, whatever that may be.

          • You need to stop using quotation marks around words for emphasis.
            They indicate sarcasm and it comes off random and basically nonsense.

            I do not know what controversy or fashionable trend you think they are trying to capitalize on. And no one says “with it” even sarcastically.

            I cannot follow your train of logic, and you seem to be complaining about the presence of minority characters for no other reason than they are there.

          • Greenhornet

            I didn’t know that it would go this far; I didn’t want to start a controversy. The point I’m trying to make (In my bumbling way) is that I and others are tired of the identity politics thing.
            Let me explain:
            I object to the idea that certain people think they HAVE TO have such characters or there will be hell to pay. I have stated that I have no objection to “minority” characters, I just think that such PEOPLE should be treated AS people, rather than stuck into groups and expected to think and act a certain way. I use to write and I believe that it’s a sign of good writing if a reader/viewer says something like “Smith was GAY? I didn’t know that! Wow, that explains a few things”.
            Is it so bad to ask that a character’s skin or sexual orientation not matter? I think so. Can anyone imagine during a robbery investigation where someone says “Kevin, what do you think of this as a GAY MAN?” or “Josie, how does this affect you as a BLACK WOMAN?”. When Kevin and his gay lover were in the woods during the Blossom affair, they could have been MOONSHINERS and nothing would have changed!
            Sure, HAVE gay and ethnic characters in the show, but they should be treated as PEOPLE rather than STERIOTYPES.
            I’m going to let this drop, but don’t let that stop you from answering. You’re intelligent and I agree with you, but simply look at this from a different angle. I do want you to do just one little thing that may clear this up:
            Open your “Note Pad” and create a fictional character. Write a brief description, physical, background, likes, dislikes, education, possessions, hobbies, stuff like that. At the end, write “By the way, s/he’s Chinese”.
            THEN, delete that last part and write “By the way, s/he’s an American indian”. Delete that and write “By the way, s/he’s a White Russian”.
            Now ask yourself: “Does it make any difference?”. Certainly it would make SOME difference in social inter-actions, but it would still be the same character and not matter.

  • I like the show. Well more than I should based on what demographic they were aiming for and how old I am (30+). But, I like “Twin Peaks” I liked “Archie’s Weird Mysteries” and I like the idea of this strange quasi-timeless setting that blends smart phones, greasers, and drive-ins.

    I could see this show not being for everyone, not everyone likes melodrama, but it is so well produced that I will watch whatever they put out at this point.